marbelladave Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 Marshall is far more productive inside that is one thing I have noticed I think playing 4-4-2 hampers our creativity. I've been saying, virtually all season, that Marshall and Knockeart are our most creative players and we need to get them both on the ball in critical (ie central) areas. Hence the reason 4-4-2 is so fooking useless for us, it's been obvious...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 I've been saying, virtually all season, that Marshall and Knockeart are our most creative players and we need to get them both on the ball in critical (ie central) areas. Hence the reason 4-4-2 is so fooking useless for us, it's been obvious...... Got to agree.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmayne7 Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 On a serious note, this kid is a little gem. He's a winger/attacking midfielder who can keep the ball, has a trick or two and is able to make a killer pass AT THE RIGHT TIME. My opinion is that it would be criminal of Pearson to keep him locked up on the wing. I think he's a player made for playing just behind the front two strikers, to create mayhem around the oppositions penalty area and to deliver intricate little passes in a 'give and go'. Most importantly last night, he had the confidence to take control of the final period of the game. He made himself available, he demanded the ball and was given it. Then he kept it. He could be a real asset to this team, but i do hope that Pearson plays him in a way that we can see the best out of him. Especially when playing away from home. You're spot on Col. Marshall is also better inside and thats why I think we'll have a much more fluid system when they both play out wide because they will shift about making it tricky for defenders to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbelladave Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 You're spot on Col. Marshall is also better inside and thats why I think we'll have a much more fluid system when they both play out wide because they will shift about making it tricky for defenders to deal with. Providing they do actually 'shift about' then thats fine, having Marshall stay wide as was the case for much of last night is not..... We need to set up in such a way that we get these two on the ball in areas that really matter, it's not rocket science! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 I made the point earlier that last night DD looked like he had a dual role... Both as a playmaker (most stuff came through him) AND as an energetic little ball winner. I think he's better at the latter. I don't think he's a playmaker. What I'd like to see, and I think this is more important away from home, is DD playing nearer the back four, in some kind of defensive, ball winning role, with Marshall and Knocky then adopting the playmaker role FURTHER FORWARD. We seem to orchestrate our creative play too deep, if that makes sense? Drinky to be the deep lying midfielder, to get the ball quickly from Kasper or the back four and then to give it quickly to Marshall or Knocky (both occupying a more central area) may enable us to produce counter attacking football which is more dangerous. We need creation in the final third.. We have it in those two. Let Drinky focus more on providing the defensive cover I so yearn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 I think technically they are both right. He's from Roubaix which is about 10 miles from the Belgian border in French Flanders, which used to be part of the Countship of Flanders which used to be part of the Southern Netherlands which is now modern day Belgium. Name change to WikiFox on the horizon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callabinho Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 The chant for him is simple, he flies down the left, he flies down the right, Anthony K(e)nockaert makes messi look shite...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbelladave Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 I made the point earlier that last night DD looked like he had a dual role... Both as a playmaker (most stuff came through him) AND as an energetic little ball winner. I think he's better at the latter. I don't think he's a playmaker. What I'd like to see, and I think this is more important away from home, is DD playing nearer the back four, in some kind of defensive, ball winning role, with Marshall and Knocky then adopting the playmaker role FURTHER FORWARD. We seem to orchestrate our creative play too deep, if that makes sense? Drinky to be the deep lying midfielder, to get the ball quickly from Kasper or the back four and then to give it quickly to Marshall or Knocky (both occupying a more central area) may enable us to produce counter attacking football which is more dangerous. We need creation in the final third.. We have it in those two. Let Drinky focus more on providing the defensive cover I so yearn. I am slightly encouraged by Shakespear explaining that they tried a different formation second half, not that I saw that much difference though ...... Drinkwater needs to do as you say, but so does his midfield partner be it King or James. Sure they can make forward runs, particularly King, but their primary function is to control midfield and shield the back 4. King apart, we will do better letting our fullbacks get forward, both provide a (different) threat going forward, let the centre mids provide the cover. While you are making these changes, make sure the whole of the defensive unit plays just a little further forward. Marshall and Knockeart play virtually as 'inside forwards' getting everywhere in attack and supporting a single striker, either Vardy or Nugent, not both. That should be the basic setup, the variation comes from the 5th midfielder, who can be attacking or more defensive as the situation requires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 I am slightly encouraged by Shakespear explaining that they tried a different formation second half, not that I saw that much difference though ...... Drinkwater needs to do as you say, but so does his midfield partner be it King or James. Sure they can make forward runs, particularly King, but their primary function is to control midfield and shield the back 4. King apart, we will do better letting our fullbacks get forward, both provide a (different) threat going forward, let the centre mids provide the cover. While you are making these changes, make sure the whole of the defensive unit plays just a little further forward. Marshall and Knockeart play virtually as 'inside forwards' getting everywhere in attack and supporting a single striker, either Vardy or Nugent, not both. That should be the basic setup, the variation comes from the 5th midfielder, who can be attacking or more defensive as the situation requires. Wellens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbelladave Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 Wellens Ah, the fragrant Ritchie, wondered when his name would crop up....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 He has played defensive midfielder before though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyFromLE Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 The chant for him is simple, he flies down the left, he flies down the right, Anthony K(e)nockaert makes messi look shite...... Quality, but Knockaert would need to be sung "Knock-ert" makes messi look.....to fit in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deucalion Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 I thought it was a Belgian name, but you might be right. You're definitely right about the French. They can't be arsed to say the last letter of any of their words. You might be right too, I'm not certain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stig the Lawnmower Posted 20 September 2012 Author Share Posted 20 September 2012 would love to hear the 'Knockeart is a frenchman' song in some form during the games. Remember when the Ewan version was sung with gusto allthe way through half time when we played derby. it was on telly and you could hear it during the summarys. it's got to be done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danno Posted 20 September 2012 Share Posted 20 September 2012 Oh Knockaert was a Frenchman, He wore a Frenchman's hat He lived next door to Wes Morgan in a Leicester Council Flat (Not sure about the next bit as don't know the words) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burmesefox Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 Wow. Where to start? "The Belgiums"? "A mixture of French, German, Flemish and Dutch"? Two of those are exactly the same language with small regional differences and I can assure that most Belgians speak either French and/or Flemish. You'd find odd dialects like Walloon (which can be described as separate language) in the south and Bruxellois in the capital. Your knowledge of French is quite appalling too. I appreciate what you're trying to do here, but that is quite embarrassing and erroneous. If I were you I'd delete it all. No person pronounces "Kn" as "Kern". It's very simple. Put the hard K-sound together with a N-sound and you get "Kn". Unlike in English where the K is just ignored so only the N-sound remains. Try saying K followed by N. It's almost rocket science, but not quite. In fact, maybe we should change the spelling of his name on here to 'Cnuck Art', to avoid that troublesome letter K... Oh, and from what I saw during the Wolves game, I'm very impressed with this fella. I understand why more reputable clubs were after him now. The fact he's playing for a very strong French U-21 team speaks volumes too. I'm beginning to think this was a major coup by NP and the recruitment staff! Shen, you really are a conceited twaat with little life skills. I have little interest in your self-congratulatory greater knowledge or "Kernowledge" but don't try twisting words and splitting hairs in an attempt to belittle. If you reread my post it states things such as "I believe" and "as I understand". I do not purport to be a linguistics expert, I am just someone with an interest in words/grammar/etymology, whilst at the same time being poor at spelling (given my erratic postings whilst attempting to earn a living). The secret to education is empowerment not beratement so think on my smorgasbord munching fascist. The "kern" is a hyperbolic phonetic to demonstrate the pronunciation. If you wish me to go into greater detail the word should be said very quickly - obviously not "kerrrn". Your "Kn" does little to demonstrate to a reading audience the pronunciation. Equally we both could have used "Kun" or even "Ken". The Germanic language has a strong influence here as it has on our language. Chaucerian English pronounced the word we now know as "knight" as "Kernikter". "Gnat" was originally prounced "Gernat" - if it pleases you more I could use "Gunat" or maybe even "Genat" to demonstrate the pronunciation. I can’t actually believe that I'm having an argument with someone online but bad manners deserves a response IMHO. You knew exactly what I meant but I guess it was your time of the month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 "Kernowledge" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 Pearson doesn't sign and can't handle flair players... oh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbelladave Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 Kerbollocks...... Just call him Tony......... And don't ever, ever call him Ant....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 Kerbollocks...... Tony Knocks is what I call him... or... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shen Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 Shen, you really are a conceited twaat with little life skills. I have little interest in your self-congratulatory greater knowledge or "Kernowledge" but don't try twisting words and splitting hairs in an attempt to belittle. If you reread my post it states things such as "I believe" and "as I understand". I do not purport to be a linguistics expert, I am just someone with an interest in words/grammar/etymology, whilst at the same time being poor at spelling (given my erratic postings whilst attempting to earn a living). The secret to education is empowerment not beratement so think on my smorgasbord munching fascist. The "kern" is a hyperbolic phonetic to demonstrate the pronunciation. If you wish me to go into greater detail the word should be said very quickly - obviously not "kerrrn". Your "Kn" does little to demonstrate to a reading audience the pronunciation. Equally we both could have used "Kun" or even "Ken". The Germanic language has a strong influence here as it has on our language. Chaucerian English pronounced the word we now know as "knight" as "Kernikter". "Gnat" was originally prounced "Gernat" - if it pleases you more I could use "Gunat" or maybe even "Genat" to demonstrate the pronunciation. I can’t actually believe that I'm having an argument with someone online but bad manners deserves a response IMHO. You knew exactly what I meant but I guess it was your time of the month. You nailed me there. Really. I'm not going to piss on the bonfire. I realise I was overtly harsh in that reply, which was probably down to a bad day. I took out frustrations on you and for that I'm sorry. It was hard to take your educating comments on languages seriously when you don't even know the correct demonym for the people of Belgium, nor what languages they actually speak. Funny translation of French and ker-nowledge on French pronunciation too. This whole Knockaert thing has been done in many threads already, and I simply don't understand the over-complication of the pronunciation. However, if your explanation helped then who am I to belittle it? Apologies, good sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 You nailed me there. Really. I'm not going to piss on the bonfire. I realise I was overtly harsh in that reply, which was probably down to a bad day. I took out frustrations on you and for that I'm sorry. It was hard to take your educating comments on languages seriously when you don't even know the correct demonym for the people of Belgium, nor what languages they actually speak. Funny translation of French and ker-nowledge on French pronunciation too. This whole Knockaert thing has been done in many threads already, and I simply don't understand the over-complication of the pronunciation. However, if your explanation helped then who am I to belittle it? Apologies, good sir. Kerrrnobhead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesbrothers Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 Alright kids, calm down. In other news... KNOCKAERT IS BLOODY BRILLIANT. That's the real reason this thread is here. Deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 21 September 2012 Share Posted 21 September 2012 To be honest, being English we are fvcked phonetically as our language is so inconsistent, if you were describing phonetically you would probably use the schwa sound, Kənockaert. but most people don't know the phonetics so it wouldn't be much help. Although for Knorr they don't /ˈknɔr/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burmesefox Posted 22 September 2012 Share Posted 22 September 2012 You nailed me there. Really. I'm not going to piss on the bonfire. I realise I was overtly harsh in that reply, which was probably down to a bad day. I took out frustrations on you and for that I'm sorry. It was hard to take your educating comments on languages seriously when you don't even know the correct demonym for the people of Belgium, nor what languages they actually speak. Funny translation of French and ker-nowledge on French pronunciation too. This whole Knockaert thing has been done in many threads already, and I simply don't understand the over-complication of the pronunciation. However, if your explanation helped then who am I to belittle it? Apologies, good sir. Au up chap, no worries. all good in the hood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.