Happy Fox Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Danns instead of King what are you smoking? Danns wasn't that good really at any of his duties in the center of the pitch all hustle and bustle to no avail, Drinkwater has been far better overall than Danns has, King has improved his game and has more potential than Danns ever will have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambert09 Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Danns was class at the end of last year, the only reason he hasn't been great this season is fittness and now his confidence will be well shot. Can't believe what I'm reading from some people. Support the lad, if he starts to prove himself for the under 21's he will get his chance. He is by no means 'shit' as you all put it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Just to add to this there are players in and around our team (Waghorn, Vardy) etc that are not pulling up any trees but are getting game time. Listen it's up to Pearson what he does, it's his job and his neck on the line. Over Danns I disagree with the man, but I still respect him as our gaffer. it just seems some players get plenty of time to prove their worth whereas Danns has got very little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyFromLE Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 All these people claiming that Pearson doesn't like Danns and he's got some kind of problem with him... aren't you forgetting he played him dozens of times last season? If he's out of the team now it's because a) Pearson doesn't think he's good enough (probable) b) his poor performances early in the season mean he's out of the team (fair enough) c) he's done something we don't know about to convince Pearson that he doesn't want him anywhere near the first team, be it a poor attitude, not wanting to play for the club... whatever. To all the people saying he should be on the bench - Pearson, for whatever reason, prefers James. There's no point in having two CMs on the bench. At the minute, our bench is usually: Logan - fair enough Moore - defensive cover Marshall - wing cover James - cm cover Waghorn - fw cover who offers something different to Futacs Futacs - fw cover who offers something different to Waghorn Schlupp - utility man There's no-one on there I'd swap for Danns, especially when I think what he does bring to our side is absolutely minimal. EDIT: If anything, I'd rather we had another defender on there than another CM. This is spot on. TEAM game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Just to add to this there are players in and around our team (Waghorn, Vardy) etc that are not pulling up any trees but are getting game time. Listen it's up to Pearson what he does, it's his job and his neck on the line. Over Danns I disagree with the man, but I still respect him as our gaffer. it just seems some players get plenty of time to prove their worth whereas Danns has got very little. Vardy is playing because there's no one better in his position, Waghorn got in for a bit because Vardy was ill. Futacs and Shlupp have had less time on the field, presumably because Pearson doesn't rate them enough. Danns is not comparable because he is evidently being outclassed by Drinkwater, King, Knockeart, James - and I suppose you could say Marshall as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indierich06 Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Few quick points 1) Ian the Fox - to comment on your earlier post (with respect) - they didn't play with 2 banks of 4, Palace played with 2 holding midfield players, 3 attacking midfield players (including their 2 wide men) and one up front. This is why Pearson brought James on to replace Dyer - to enable us to cease getting over-run. Personally, I would have taken Vardy off and put Marshall on and played Knocky behind Nugent. 2) Neil Danns was consistantly one of the best holding midfield players in the Championship with Palace. Pearson (in this particular case) has allowed his head-strong tendancy to rule football logic. I would have started with Danns & Drinkwater this season. However, Kings surprise burst of good form, coupled with some good solid team performances have - for the time being - rendered Danns as being outside the starting line up. I agree with previous posts, why he is not on the bench is beyond me. 3) We didn't need to sign James during the summer. You get promoted from the Championship with a few genuine quality players and a strong team structure. Even the old school Micky Adams understood this (he did loose the plot after promotion). In my view, Danns fits into this criteria perfectly well. 4) Although I am really happy with the start we've made, currently, I don't feel we will sustain it unless we take a good look at our attacking options. We didn't need to sign Vardy, Waghorn isn't good enough and on Saturday at 2-0 down, Futaks was still unused - which says to me that the Manager isn't sure if Futaks is good enough to come off the bench and make an impact - which in itself is concerning. Pearson has pushed Beckford out the picture but left himself open to fair criticism by leaving us with a collection of strikers who are not going to get us promoted. Some of you might also agree that Pearson appears to be quite awkward when questioned about possible loan striker signings. I can sympathise with Nugent if he might be feeling a bit isolated. In short, Danns should be included back in the fold, he's got a lot to contribute. Whilst I support Pearson and can totally see the development of a more passing game this season etc etc, I still feel he needs to be honest with himself over some of the signings he's made. Walshie (Snr) is clearly an excellent scout, but they cannot get it right all of the time. Nice essay, but could you please explain what Neil Danns would bring to this team over the players ahead of him? From what I've seen of Neil Danns, he is quite rightly out of the team, he has a couple of good qualities, but that's about it: Energy & engine: Good Passing: Poor Ball Retention: Poor Tackling: Poor Discipline: Poor Off the ball work: Poor Footballing brain: poor He's a very energetic player, but he's no use in a midfield that likes to play quick-passing football with a focus on keeping posession and picking out quality passes. I'm not saying our current midfield do this perfectly every time, but Danns just doesn't do the simple things well consistently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coatsworthstache Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 I know that once Pearson makes a decision on a player the majority of this forum follows suit and states that he was hopeless anyway. But I honestly don't remember Danns being that bad last season. His sending off against Hull was stupid and reckless, but generally I thought he did ok. I would think that NP may have to bring Danns in to the squad this weekend as midfield/full back cover. On a side note I think it's crazy that people think of Schlupp as some kind of left-back cover. He's a striker and deserves a start in that position soon if Waghorn and Vardy continue to misfire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 I know that once Pearson makes a decision on a player the majority of this forum follows suit and states that he was hopeless anyway. But I honestly don't remember Danns being that bad last season. His sending off against Hull was stupid and reckless, but generally I thought he did ok. I would think that NP may have to bring Danns in to the squad this weekend as midfield/full back cover. On a side note I think it's crazy that people think of Schlupp as some kind of left-back cover. He's a striker and deserves a start in that position soon if Waghorn and Vardy continue to misfire. Getting a game in the development squad might be aimed at just that. He was OK last season, his energy & enthusiasm was great, other areas not always so much. Can't see how his style will fit too well with pressing, passing game but I too think he's worthy of backup despite not being over the moon about the constant fouls he gives away (giving the opposition chance to get balls in our box) or losing possession when we're on the attack. But the team has performed well & James looks a good fit for cover for now. I would like to see Schlupp run out, but Nuge+Vardy offer something good to the team even if they're not on the scoresheet themselves and their partnership & play compliment others. I'm unsure on waggy Baffling that you stand up for two signings who had us midtable, yet deem those who have got us in the top two, and actually performing at a much higher level unnecessary. You claim we have strikers who will not get us promoted when we actually already sit in the top two. You blame Pearson over Beckford (who was given more than a fair chance) when Beckford stated he wanted to leave. People who stand up for players who never looked forming a team and getting near the top over players who do play as a team and are giving promotion push a really good go is bizarre. and people will never get the Beckford issue, they'll never see that unlike the man who signed him, NP preferred Becks to Schlupp, they don't see he failed to score in something like 80% of his games and they fail to see he didn't contribute to the team much outside of those 10 games he scored in... they don't see that NP backed him, picked him, celebrated his successes often with him on the touchline... They just see Beckford leaving as NP's fault despite the fact its obvious its not worked out for him here and he obviously wants a fresh start elsewhere... Even at his one time rivals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian the fox Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 ? ok fair enough im behind the goal low level with poor eye-sight .... Its been a great season so far so , im not having a pop ............. But I stand by my beliefs ....... 1........Dyer contributes nothing defensivley especially when hes out of ear- shot from the dug-out 2...... Although King is good going forward doesnt offer much defensively 3.......Knockeart was ineffectual wide left compared to his free role he played recently 4.......2 anchor men ??? yes please , then let Knockeart play the free role & lose a winger ( Dyer ) 5 ... .Pre international break we looked unstoppable ............... COYB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 2...... Although King is good going forward doesnt offer much defensively Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 I know that once Pearson makes a decision on a player the majority of this forum follows suit and states that he was hopeless anyway. But I honestly don't remember Danns being that bad last season. His sending off against Hull was stupid and reckless, but generally I thought he did ok. I would think that NP may have to bring Danns in to the squad this weekend as midfield/full back cover. On a side note I think it's crazy that people think of Schlupp as some kind of left-back cover. He's a striker and deserves a start in that position soon if Waghorn and Vardy continue to misfire. He wasn't that bad, he was just average a lot of the time. If he comes back into the fold and does well then great, the manager has another in-form player to choose from. So far we haven't missed him. We might need him soon, and I hope he plays well and contributes. But Pearson has given him enough game time since he returned to make a judgement, this isn't ignoring someone after a couple of games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coatsworthstache Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 3.......Knockeart was ineffectual wide left compared to his free role he played recently 4.......2 anchor men ??? yes please , then let Knockeart play the free role & lose a winger ( Dyer ) I thought this after the Palace game. Everyone comes down to the King Power and plays 4-5-1. So match up with them, play an extra midfielder, don't get overrun in the middle of the park whilst knowing that with Knocky playing inside we've got that something special to open a defensive team up. I got my white board out to explain this to my girlfriend a couple of days ago but after 10 minutes of patient explanation of the system she started crying and left the room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian the fox Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5waller5 Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 He wasn't that bad, he was just average a lot of the time. If he comes back into the fold and does well then great, the manager has another in-form player to choose from. So far we haven't missed him. We might need him soon, and I hope he plays well and contributes. But Pearson has given him enough game time since he returned to make a judgement, this isn't ignoring someone after a couple of games. And during the latter half of last season he was our stand out player .... He then gives him two cameo appearances this season and relegates him to the youth squad. Pearson can be criticised and you still be a Leicester fan, it's really not necessary to defend everything the guy does even when there is no logic behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 ? ok fair enough im behind the goal low level with poor eye-sight .... Its been a great season so far so , im not having a pop ............. But I stand by my beliefs ....... 1........Dyer contributes nothing defensivley especially when hes out of ear- shot from the dug-out 2...... Although King is good going forward doesnt offer much defensively 3.......Knockeart was ineffectual wide left compared to his free role he played recently 4.......2 anchor men ??? yes please , then let Knockeart play the free role & lose a winger ( Dyer ) 5 ... .Pre international break we looked unstoppable ............... COYB Defensively we don't have a problem, we consistently limit teams to 2 or 3 chances a game, we have the second best defensive record in the league, apart from Palace and Burton, we have dominated and controlled the majority of the games, carving out numerous chances and conceding very few. We don't need to change things defensively, we just need to put more of our chances away and we would be winning this league comfortably, even against Palace we created 4 clear cut chances, 2 were cleared off the line and 2 were saved by the keeper when the attacker should have done better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 And during the latter half of last season he was our stand out player .... He then gives him two cameo appearances this season and relegates him to the youth squad. Pearson can be criticised and you still be a Leicester fan, it's really not necessary to defend everything the guy does even when there is no logic behind it. So? We were a crap team. King was injured, Drinkwater has upped his game, we've bought Knockaert and James. He's now not good enough for the squad. A run of decent games in the second half of the season doesn't mean you're automatically good enough to get in a much better team/squad the following season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FantasticMrFuchs Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 FFS I gave the honest and truthful answer to why Danns and others were not in the squad last month. There was an enquire about him going to Palace on loan before Freedman left. I wouldn't be surprised to see him in Charlton or Sheff Utd shirt before xmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettsj2 Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Because Matty James is just ok, there's not much point replacing him with Danns because Danns is just, well ok. The difference is that we've seen the best of Danns but I cant believe we've seen the best of James. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daddylonglegs Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 now we've lost he may get a game, which would be good-Drinkwater was awful last game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 And during the latter half of last season he was our stand out player .... He then gives him two cameo appearances this season and relegates him to the youth squad. Pearson can be criticised and you still be a Leicester fan, it's really not necessary to defend everything the guy does even when there is no logic behind it. Ok latter half of the season, you mean the last 23 league games, so match 24-46, lets look at those matches. He started 12 of those matches, came on as sub twice, so this magical half a season he had is actually less than a third of the season. In that 12 (+2) games he got booked 5 times (2 in the same match resulting in a red) and got a straight red once. He also scored 4 goals in that period and got no assists. In these 14 games we won 6, drew 3 and lost 5 = 21 points out of 42. Currently we are on 25 points from 13 games without him in the side. Of course the stats don't tell the whole story and I haven't mentioned the cup run in all of this, which of course Danns was a big part. The first thing is though to dispel this myth he had a good half a season, he didn't he had a good third, it could have and should have been more but for his suspensions. This period also included the Barnsley game where the whole team was roundly booed off, and disastrous defeats to Watford and Bristol City at home, which nobody came out with any credit. Yes he improved over that period, yes it was no coincidence that it came after a spell in the team in his preferred position, but at the start of this "purple patch" we played Barnsley and were gash, in the middle we were gash against Bristol City and at the end of it he got sent off for the second time this season. He did not have a good second half of the season, he had a good 10 game spell in between sendings off, where he still gave the ball away too much and gave away too many fouls. That is not enough to deserve a starting place, especially when you factor into it his chances so far this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 And during the latter half of last season he was our stand out player .... He then gives him two cameo appearances this season and relegates him to the youth squad. Pearson can be criticised and you still be a Leicester fan, it's really not necessary to defend everything the guy does even when there is no logic behind it. You don't have to defend him all the time, you can criticise him, I won't this time because our midfield has, generally, been impressive this season- Drinkwater and King in the main, well supported by James. If our midfield was contributing nothing then Danns probably would get a chance, he has been given a chance this season (albeit small I know) and didn't impress. It might be something further than just football, we don't know, but on footballing grounds so far I can see why Pearson is preferring the midfielders he's using. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxfromburbage Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 He was in the Highcross near Debenhams at 1.30pm on Saturday - obviously not required at the KP. Does me in the salary we pay out for him to go shopping on a match day - obviously debatable why this is happening , but his weekly salary v our fans yearly salaries annoys me ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluetintedspecs Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Danns does not lack in effort, infact he reminds me of the Energiser Bunny unfortunately I feel he is too wayward with his passes and reckless with his challenges, leaving us exposed to breakaways and free kicks in dangerous positions and ultimately goals conceded. I don't dislike the lad I just think NP has better options and feels the same way by picking them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Because Matty James is just ok, there's not much point replacing him with Danns because Danns is just, well ok. The difference is that we've seen the best of Danns but I cant believe we've seen the best of James. I agree that both are 'ok'. The difference is that one is on probably 15k less per week and also is much younger and presumably more likely to improve / is more teachable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 31 October 2012 Share Posted 31 October 2012 Vardy is playing because there's no one better in his position, Waghorn got in for a bit because Vardy was ill. Futacs and Shlupp have had less time on the field, presumably because Pearson doesn't rate them enough. Danns is not comparable because he is evidently being outclassed by Drinkwater, King, Knockeart, James - and I suppose you could say Marshall as well. Maybe there isn't anyone better than Vardy at the club currently, however the loan window is open.... Back to the point and you cant say the Danns is being outclassed by anyone as he has not been given the game time James etc have to prove that point one way or the other. This is a principled non footballing decision, and given our relatively small squad for me we are cutting off our nose to spite our face. However I am not the Manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.