marbelladave Posted 29 July 2012 Posted 29 July 2012 It don't matter what I think mate, it's what Pearson does. 442 I would imagine, both at home and away. If that was the case with the same personnel I see know changes so far in the centre of the park i.e defensive midfielder than we will struggle big time to retain the ball and the opposition will cut through us. 4-4-fooking-2........ This for me is the problem. Last season (under NFP), teams routinely outnumbered us in midfield, put us under pressure which we could only deal with by giving the ball the hoof. Possession conceded, time and time again and by all accounts this is pretty much what happened at Shrewsbury. Plus ça change......
Wortho Posted 29 July 2012 Posted 29 July 2012 I quite agree with what Marbella Dave. Pearson has to change from 4-4-2, surely he can see that this is the problem and we will get outnumbered in midfield. We have numerous midfielders but without Wellens I can only name 2 definite starters, Danns and Marshall. King, Drinkwater and Dyer aren't bad but they lack any real quality. I don't pretend to know the answers, perhaps Koren could be. Come on City.
adamlcfcbevo85 Posted 29 July 2012 Posted 29 July 2012 I quite agree with what Marbella Dave. Pearson has to change from 4-4-2, surely he can see that this is the problem and we will get outnumbered in midfield. I disagree with that king is amazing had shit season last , but what about the season before he was brilliant by far 1 of our best players We have numerous midfielders but without Wellens I can only name 2 definite starters, Danns and Marshall. King, Drinkwater and Dyer aren't bad but they lack any real quality. I don't pretend to know the answers, perhaps Koren could be. Come on City.
ian the fox Posted 29 July 2012 Posted 29 July 2012 its fair to say last seasons midfield hadnt got a clue how to play to Beckford , throat-balls are no good for him , bore out in his frustrating body language
indierich06 Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 its fair to say last seasons midfield hadnt got a clue how to play to Beckford , throat-balls are no good for him , bore out in his frustrating body language Yeah, they should play it to his feet instead. A shot to the adam's apple must smart a bit. No wonder he's got such a bad attitude...
indierich06 Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 I quite agree with what Marbella Dave. Pearson has to change from 4-4-2, surely he can see that this is the problem and we will get outnumbered in midfield. We have numerous midfielders but without Wellens I can only name 2 definite starters, Danns and Marshall. King, Drinkwater and Dyer aren't bad but they lack any real quality. I don't pretend to know the answers, perhaps Koren could be. Come on City. I'll give you Marshall, but how is Danns a guarenteed starter? Can someone please explain what he brings to our game rather than a lot of huffing and puffing and not a lot of end product? I've heard a lot of people saying he's a great player, but all I see is an average - albeit, very industrious - midfielder who covers a lot of ground, is absolutely knackered after 60 minutes and doesn't really contribute anything of value to the game? Then you go on to say that Andy King hasn't got 'any real quality' - well in the last 4 seasons for us he's managed 38 goals and I'm convinced if he wasn't injured last season he would have added a few more to that tally. How many has Neil Danns managed in the last 4 seasons? 26. I'm sure people will say 'yeah, but he had a far better season than King last year' - did he really? Danns managed 5 goals in 26 appearances - King managed 4 in 26 in what was his worst season in a City shirt by his standards. So King's worst season is pretty much around the same as Danns first season with us. Hardly outstripped there, was he? Add to that the fact that Andy King is just 23 and still devloping as a player - at the same point in his career Danns was being shipped out on loan all over the place, hardly scoring any goals. King forced his way into our first team and kept himself there, which is more than any of our other lauded academy prospects have managed in recent years. King certainly has his flaws too, he can be a bit lightweight sometimes, but if we had the right players in midfield - the enforcer that everyone wants, it would give him more room to play and express himself and the weaker side of his game would be far less of an issue. He can't be the tough tackling brusier that everyone wants to see - it's not his game. The lack of appreciation for what is, IMO, our best academy graduate since Emile Heskey is absolutely astonishing to me. It would appear that if you're not sprinting around like a maniac, sweating your bollocks off and chasing every ball, you're not a good player. Give me Andy King over Neil Danns any day of the week. EDIT: And before anyone says, I know you can't just judge midfielders on goals, but I couldn't find any accurate assist records (although I still believe they would show King in a better light than Danns) but in terms of winning points for the team, goals are what win games.
Babylon Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 its fair to say last seasons midfield hadnt got a clue how to play to Beckford , throat-balls are no good for him , bore out in his frustrating body language Or perhaps he gets frustrated because when it does go to his feet he's incapable of controlling the ball half the time.
Guest Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 Or perhaps he gets frustrated because when it does go to his feet he's incapable of controlling the ball half the time. or because he can't do an overhead scissor kick, if it's to his feet.
dibbdroid Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 I'll give you Marshall, but how is Danns a guarenteed starter? Can someone please explain what he brings to our game rather than a lot of huffing and puffing and not a lot of end product? I've heard a lot of people saying he's a great player, but all I see is an average - albeit, very industrious - midfielder who covers a lot of ground, is absolutely knackered after 60 minutes and doesn't really contribute anything of value to the game? Then you go on to say that Andy King hasn't got 'any real quality' - well in the last 4 seasons for us he's managed 38 goals and I'm convinced if he wasn't injured last season he would have added a few more to that tally. How many has Neil Danns managed in the last 4 seasons? 26. I'm sure people will say 'yeah, but he had a far better season than King last year' - did he really? Danns managed 5 goals in 26 appearances - King managed 4 in 26 in what was his worst season in a City shirt by his standards. So King's worst season is pretty much around the same as Danns first season with us. Hardly outstripped there, was he? Add to that the fact that Andy King is just 23 and still devloping as a player - at the same point in his career Danns was being shipped out on loan all over the place, hardly scoring any goals. King forced his way into our first team and kept himself there, which is more than any of our other lauded academy prospects have managed in recent years. King certainly has his flaws too, he can be a bit lightweight sometimes, but if we had the right players in midfield - the enforcer that everyone wants, it would give him more room to play and express himself and the weaker side of his game would be far less of an issue. He can't be the tough tackling brusier that everyone wants to see - it's not his game. The lack of appreciation for what is, IMO, our best academy graduate since Emile Heskey is absolutely astonishing to me. It would appear that if you're not sprinting around like a maniac, sweating your bollocks off and chasing every ball, you're not a good player. Give me Andy King over Neil Danns any day of the week. EDIT: And before anyone says, I know you can't just judge midfielders on goals, but I couldn't find any accurate assist records (although I still believe they would show King in a better light than Danns) but in terms of winning points for the team, goals are what win games. Up until his sending off against C*vScum last season Danns had hit a run of form and was looking like he would be a shoe in every week. It is no coincedence that after his suspension and subsequent injury we were poor, only won 4 in 13 and never again looked likely of sniffing the playoff spots. As for Andy King he is an enigma and the jury is well and truly out. I hope he can show something but outside of his goals he contributes nothing so unless he scores we have better.
Guest Col city fan Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 Up until his sending off against C*vScum last season Danns had hit a run of form and was looking like he would be a shoe in every week. It is no coincedence that after his suspension and subsequent injury we were poor, only won 4 in 13 and never again looked likely of sniffing the playoff spots. As for Andy King he is an enigma and the jury is well and truly out. I hope he can show something but outside of his goals he contributes nothing so unless he scores we have better. Can't agree more. Danns absence corresponded with a dramatic downturn. I wasn't sure about him at the start but its clear we need Danns energy in the midfield. As for King? Perhaps if we had a more creative midfield, king wouldn't need to score as many goals. I'm not knocking him for scoring of course, that's great. Merely making the point that if the the supply was better from the midfield, the job of the forwards, to score goals, may be made easier?
MGLCFC Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 Wasn't Savage a similar player to Danns? If he's got the right players around him, he is very effective. I'd say Danns was our best central midfielder last year, although that doesn't say much. Unless Andy King can up his game, he's never going to be anything other than an average Championship midfielder. His career has regressed over the last couple of years IMO. King and Gallagher need to be sold. Wellens loaned out to a League 1 side like Donny when fit and Dyer used as an impact sub. The new midfield needs to be built around the following 5 players - Drinkwater, James, Danns, Marshall and Koren.
Guest Col city fan Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 Wasn't Savage a similar player to Danns? If he's got the right players around him, he is very effective. I'd say Danns was our best central midfielder last year, although that doesn't say much. Unless Andy King can up his game, he's never going to be anything other than an average Championship midfielder. His career has regressed over the last couple of years IMO. King and Gallagher need to be sold. Wellens loaned out to a League 1 side like Donny when fit and Dyer used as an impact sub. The new midfield needs to be built around the following 5 players - Drinkwater, James, Danns, Marshall and Koren. Spot on IMO.
Vlad the Fox Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 For me Danns was average though he did improve towards the end of the season. I agree he could play similar to how savage did for us but he has got to stop getting caught in possession and giving the ball away.
Mark_w Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 For three years we had people saying how great it would be if we could build are midfield around King for years to come, have a good talented young player remain with us for a long period of time. Now one injury hit season and suddenly he needs to go?
Ric Flair Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 For me Danns was average though he did improve towards the end of the season. I agree he could play similar to how savage did for us but he has got to stop getting caught in possession and giving the ball away. Agree with all of that. If he doesn't improve on his ball retention and passing then he's out weak link. King will find his form again this year, I'm confident of it.
MGLCFC Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 Well I hope King finds his form much sooner, rather than later, as his second half performance at Shrewsbury was woeful. He played like a player who thought he had the shirt and didn't need to put a shift in. He was totally ineffectual, much like he was for the most of last season.
Deucalion Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 When Richie Wellens and Matt Oakley were a couple of years younger, it gave King the freedom to play as an attacking midfielder and make those runs behind the front two which led to so many goals. Last season he had to play a much more defensive role which maybe didn't suit him and did not allow him to shine. It would be great to have the personnel at the club to be able to play King to his strengths. We might forget about Robert Koren then.
MGLCFC Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 When Matt Oakley and Richie Wellens were a couple of years younger we were in League 1. But I agree King is effective as an attacking midfielder and has not been allowed to solely play that role over the past 2 years and therefore he's not developed his game.
Mark_w Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 But I agree King is effective as an attacking midfielder and has not been allowed to solely play that role over the past 2 years and therefore he's not developed his game. Yeah it's not like he was our top scorer in one of those two seasons or anything...
MGLCFC Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 What concerns me about King, is that he should be approaching his peak years, but to me he has regressed over the last two seasons. Whether this is down to the role he is being asked to play, other teams being able to counter his game, the quality of our own midfield or just a huge dip in form and confidence, aligned with a serious injury, remains open to debate. I honestly thought after our return to the Championship and King's pivotal role in our play off season that we had truly found a Premiership standard midfielder. Things have gone awfully wrong.
Happy Fox Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 What concerns me about King, is that he should be approaching his peak years, but to me he has regressed over the last two seasons. Whether this is down to the role he is being asked to play, other teams being able to counter his game, the quality of our own midfield or just a huge dip in form and confidence, aligned with a serious injury, remains open to debate. I honestly thought after our return to the Championship and King's pivotal role in our play off season that we had truly found a Premiership standard midfielder. Things have gone awfully wrong. Only one bad season and he far outweighs Wellens.
Guest Col city fan Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 Yeah it's not like he was our top scorer in one of those two seasons or anything... I think it's all agreed from what I've read that King has his good and bad points: Good..... He has a great knack of timing his runs into the box, he is composed on the ball, he's a good passer of the football Bad..... He's physically light and gets bundled off the ball, he's not strong in a game where we are on the back foot, he sometimes goes missing in games. I've seen King play right from an early age, have met him and he's a great young bloke. However, IMO the above is true of him. It all depends whether you feel the former outweighs the latter. For me, I'd play him some games, but not others, for the reasons given.
Mark_w Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 What concerns me about King, is that he should be approaching his peak years, but to me he has regressed over the last two seasons. Two, Two? Where the **** is this coming from? He must have been pretty bad to get in the Championship team of the year two seasons ago.
MGLCFC Posted 30 July 2012 Posted 30 July 2012 Only one bad season and he far outweighs Wellens. King has not played well since Sousa took over IMO - I make this two seasons.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.