Danns off to Bristol City on loan

[Jimmy]

You serious?

yes, he tweeted about it earlier

[Craig]

yes, he tweeted about it earlier

Oh, okay, sorry.

[Corky]

Pearson does pissed me off sometimes he's twice the player James is!

Based on what?

[Captain...]

He was our best player end of last season. Most people seem to have forgotten that fairly quickly though.

He didn't play the end of last season or have you forgotten that, he missed the last 12 games or so.

Admittedly not playing was probably enough to qualify for best player last season.

[Tevez]

Love Danns, will give his all for the club but he is not good enough in a 2 man midfield and not good enough in wide positions.

[Babylon]

Interesting that once gain you have a dig at those who have doubts about Pearson.

Is it part of the job description that you have to pull up everyone who has the slightest dount about Pearson or the players he picks?

Don't you get a bit bored of it?

Forums like this are made interesting by the differing opinions, having an admin pull up every post/poster that is perceived to be 'anti' gets boring.

I much prefer this place when both the NFP 'bummers' and 'haters' are posting, although I dislike the actual labels.

First and foremost what the hell does my position as moderator have to do with anything? Have I banned you for anti Pearson posts? Do I delete them? Do I edit them? The answer is no. I'm allowed my opinion as much as the next man, and the moment I'm not allowed it because of being an mod Mark can find someone else to do the job.

Secondly. Thousands and thousands of posts are made on this forum expressing doubts in players and managers alike. They pass by without being "pulled up" by me or anyone else. So lets not go down that route again because it's clearly not true.

What is true is that I will pull up people making needless, factless, childish, pointless digs and comments about players and managers. Doesn't matter whether it's been Pearson in charge or Craig Levein, doubt is find, the rest in my book is not.

To my original post about correlation. Whether you like it or not, there is a small group on this board whose default position is that Pearson is wrong. Pearson signs someone, they are shit. Pearson lets someone go, they are great. Rumour of an argument, Pearson is the problem. Pearson picks the starting 11, it's wrong. Pearson makes a sub, it's the wrong sub.

You see it at work in this thread where someone claims Pearson is stubborn for loaning out Danns. When picked up on why he's supposed to be stubborn, the answer was that they think Danns is better than Wellens and James. Now my problem here is not him thinking Danns is better, but that he thinks Pearson is stubborn because of it, when reality all he is guilty of is not thinking the same as the poster.

There was no need for the dig, but these are the types of needless character assassinations that go on with every decision and I will pick up on them. Just as I believe I picked you up last year when your default position was that Pearson was at fault when there were rumours of arguments last year.

Even though players and management have all denied any arguments, certain people still maintain that there is a problem with Pearson not being able to manage certain players. Yet not once did I see those people question whether the players were at fault, or even entertain the thought that Pearson might actually be doing what's good for the club. They have no idea on what's gone on but have made their mind up that it's a problem with Pearson and nobody else. Things like this are what I have a problem with, as they are baseless and factless comments.

[Mack]

First and foremost what the hell does my position as moderator have to do with anything? Have I banned you for anti Pearson posts? Do I delete them? Do I edit them? The answer is no. I'm allowed my opinion as much as the next man, and the moment I'm not allowed it because of being an mod Mark can find someone else to do the job.

Secondly. Thousands and thousands of posts are made on this forum expressing doubts in players and managers alike. They pass by without being "pulled up" by me or anyone else. So lets not go down that route again because it's clearly not true.

What is true is that I will pull up people making needless, factless, childish, pointless digs and comments about players and managers. Doesn't matter whether it's been Pearson in charge or Craig Levein, doubt is find, the rest in my book is not.

To my original post about correlation. Whether you like it or not, there is a small group on this board whose default position is that Pearson is wrong. Pearson signs someone, they are shit. Pearson lets someone go, they are great. Rumour of an argument, Pearson is the problem. Pearson picks the starting 11, it's wrong. Pearson makes a sub, it's the wrong sub.

You see it at work in this thread where someone claims Pearson is stubborn for loaning out Danns. When picked up on why he's supposed to be stubborn, the answer was that they think Danns is better than Wellens and James. Now my problem here is not him thinking Danns is better, but that he thinks Pearson is stubborn because of it, when reality all he is guilty of is not thinking the same as the poster.

There was no need for the dig, but these are the types of needless character assassinations that go on with every decision and I will pick up on them. Just as I believe I picked you up last year when your default position was that Pearson was at fault when there were rumours of arguments last year.

Even though players and management have all denied any arguments, certain people still maintain that there is a problem with Pearson not being able to manage certain players. Yet not once did I see those people question whether the players were at fault, or even entertain the thought that Pearson might actually be doing what's good for the club. They have no idea on what's gone on but have made their mind up that it's a problem with Pearson and nobody else. Things like this are what I have a problem with, as they are baseless and factless comments.

I agree with the opinion that you are like some sort of club party line enforcer.

I also disagree with the statement you make that anyone who disagrees with a decision the manager makes is anti Pearson.

I like Pearson and think he is a good manager, but I also think he has missed a trick letting Beckford and Danns go to other championship clubs, and guess what, I'm entitled to have that opinion!!

[Babylon]

I agree with the opinion that you are like some sort of club party line enforcer.

No, I'm a bullshit reducing common sense enforcer.

I also disagree with the statement you make that anyone who disagrees with a decision the manager makes is anti Pearson.

Errrrr I should probably get into my bullshit enforcer role here. Please kindly point out where I have said that? You will find that was never said, so perhaps go back and read it again. In fact, here you go... "Interesting correlation appearing between those who have been against NP from day one and those who think Danns and Beckford are grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreat."

There is no statement there that everyone thinking releasing them is a bad idea makes them a Pearson hater.

but I also think he has missed a trick letting Beckford and Danns go to other championship clubs, and guess what, I'm entitled to have that opinion!!

Who said you weren't? Who has tried to stop you?

All people have done to you is constantly point out Beckford asked to leave. He wasn't forced to "train with the kids" as you keep banging on.

I don't mind Danns and think he is useful enough to play a part for us. (Shock horror, wonder if someone will pull me up on that!!!!!)

But on the flip side of that, I have no idea of what has gone on at the club, I don't know Neil Danns, I don't know what his attitude is, I don't know if he's committed and really wants to be here. So I find it hard to slam a manager about it when he's made a large point of late to point out how many bad eggs we had around.

Mark Bright made an interesting comment to Danns on Twitter when he came up to interview Pearson.

MB "Oyyyy @dannzy1 'slippery Jim' where were you today when I needed a cup of tea? Keep well..."

ND "@Mark__Bright ha ha sorry lad, had to shoot off had a meeting , otherwise ya know I would of made ya a cuppa :-)"

MB @dannzy1 mind yourself, I'll give ya meetings, Proritise.. do what you do best while you can still do it, plenty of time later for business!

Made me wonder at the time as it seemed an odd comment, many people on here have brought up his spitter2 stuff. Perhaps Pearson had the same kind of thoughts as MB regarding his business stuff. As I said seemed an odd comment from someone who is seemingly friends with him.

[Col city fan]

No, I'm a bullshit reducing common sense enforcer.

Errrrr I should probably get into my bullshit enforcer role here. Please kindly point out where I have said that? You will find that was never said, so perhaps go back and read it again. In fact, here you go... "Interesting correlation appearing between those who have been against NP from day one and those who think Danns and Beckford are grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreat."

There is no statement there that everyone thinking releasing them is a bad idea makes them a Pearson hater.

Who said you weren't? Who has tried to stop you?

All people have done to you is constantly point out Beckford asked to leave. He wasn't forced to "train with the kids" as you keep banging on.

I don't mind Danns and think he is useful enough to play a part for us. (Shock horror, wonder if someone will pull me up on that!!!!!)

But on the flip side of that, I have no idea of what has gone on at the club, I don't know Neil Danns, I don't know what his attitude is, I don't know if he's committed and really wants to be here. So I find it hard to slam a manager about it when he's made a large point of late to point out how many bad eggs we had around.

Mark Bright made an interesting comment to Danns on Twitter when he came up to interview Pearson.

MB "Oyyyy @dannzy1 'slippery Jim' where were you today when I needed a cup of tea? Keep well..."

ND "@Mark__Bright ha ha sorry lad, had to shoot off had a meeting , otherwise ya know I would of made ya a cuppa :-)"

MB @dannzy1 mind yourself, I'll give ya meetings, Proritise.. do what you do best while you can still do it, plenty of time later for business!

Made me wonder at the time as it seemed an odd comment, many people on here have brought up his spitter2 stuff. Perhaps Pearson had the same kind of thoughts as MB regarding his business stuff. As I said seemed an odd comment from someone who is seemingly friends with him.

I personally find your posts good stuff and funny...

You seem to take on the world on here which is very commendable.

However, I do think that when you're in a stubborn mood, you tend to just dismiss any posts which can be construed as being negative toward the current manager. I've seen you do it under a number of different managers.

So what if you're a mod though? That doesn't make any difference at all! I'm sure you'd say the same things if you weren't a mod.

[indierich06]

First and foremost what the hell does my position as moderator have to do with anything? Have I banned you for anti Pearson posts? Do I delete them? Do I edit them? The answer is no. I'm allowed my opinion as much as the next man, and the moment I'm not allowed it because of being an mod Mark can find someone else to do the job.

Secondly. Thousands and thousands of posts are made on this forum expressing doubts in players and managers alike. They pass by without being "pulled up" by me or anyone else. So lets not go down that route again because it's clearly not true.

What is true is that I will pull up people making needless, factless, childish, pointless digs and comments about players and managers. Doesn't matter whether it's been Pearson in charge or Craig Levein, doubt is find, the rest in my book is not.

To my original post about correlation. Whether you like it or not, there is a small group on this board whose default position is that Pearson is wrong. Pearson signs someone, they are shit. Pearson lets someone go, they are great. Rumour of an argument, Pearson is the problem. Pearson picks the starting 11, it's wrong. Pearson makes a sub, it's the wrong sub.

You see it at work in this thread where someone claims Pearson is stubborn for loaning out Danns. When picked up on why he's supposed to be stubborn, the answer was that they think Danns is better than Wellens and James. Now my problem here is not him thinking Danns is better, but that he thinks Pearson is stubborn because of it, when reality all he is guilty of is not thinking the same as the poster.

There was no need for the dig, but these are the types of needless character assassinations that go on with every decision and I will pick up on them. Just as I believe I picked you up last year when your default position was that Pearson was at fault when there were rumours of arguments last year.

Even though players and management have all denied any arguments, certain people still maintain that there is a problem with Pearson not being able to manage certain players. Yet not once did I see those people question whether the players were at fault, or even entertain the thought that Pearson might actually be doing what's good for the club. They have no idea on what's gone on but have made their mind up that it's a problem with Pearson and nobody else. Things like this are what I have a problem with, as they are baseless and factless comments.

My thoughts, summed up perfectly.

I agree with the opinion that you are like some sort of club party line enforcer.

I also disagree with the statement you make that anyone who disagrees with a decision the manager makes is anti Pearson.

I like Pearson and think he is a good manager, but I also think he has missed a trick letting Beckford and Danns go to other championship clubs, and guess what, I'm entitled to have that opinion!!

Jesus Christ, did you even read his post? Where is he calling 'anyone who disagrees with a decision the manager' anti-Pearson? Where has he said you're not entitled to your own opinion? The problem is when you make up bollcoks about fictional fall-outs and players being banished to the under-18's to back up your opinion - it's bullshit.

[FantasticMrFuchs]

There was an altercation after the Burton game between player(s) & coaching staff.

Danns tweeted and quickly deleted his thoughts/opinions on said events, that got back to the management. Which is why he rarely tweets lcfc related info since the game.or has any "banter" with other players in the squad. This has resulted in the club bringing in new rules for twitter/social media because NP doesn't like it basically.

Bristol City & Crystal Palace both came in (Season long loan) for him on deadline day but the club rejected both offers.

Danns not happy he is not in the starting 11 / first team regular, Nor is he allowed to leave on loan.

Will we see him back in a blue shirt?? Unlikely unless he is required due to injurys.

[Bayfox]

I agree with the opinion that you are like some sort of club party line enforcer.

I also disagree with the statement you make that anyone who disagrees with a decision the manager makes is anti Pearson.

I like Pearson and think he is a good manager, but I also think he has missed a trick letting Beckford and Danns go to other championship clubs, and guess what, I'm entitled to have that opinion!!

Or by sending them to ipswich, drizzle city and uddersfield, maybe he has learnt from the DJ Campbell Incident. Afterall they are all short term loans and he has never openly come out and said he wants them gone or they are finished, just he want's players who want to play for the club, read into that what you will.

[Mack]

Jesus Christ, did you even read his post? Where is he calling 'anyone who disagrees with a decision the manager' anti-Pearson? Where has he said you're not entitled to your own opinion? The problem is when you make up bollcoks about fictional fall-outs and players being banished to the under-18's to back up your opinion - it's bullshit.

OK this needs to be cleared up.

I have never made up anything about a fall out or anything else for that matter, all I have done is given my opinion on the situation.

I have too much work on to bicker on here, but I will say this.

Our squad was small, now it is tiny, and that worries me.

[indierich06]

OK this needs to be cleared up.

I have never made up anything about a fall out or anything else for that matter, all I have done is given my opinion on the situation.

I have too much work on to bicker on here, but I will say this.

Our squad was small, now it is tiny, and that worries me.

You've said several times that he's 'not a Pearson player', he's leaving because of Pearson's 'principles' and you've said many times that Danns and Beckford were forced to 'train with kids' - all I've done is say that all of these things are absolutely unfounded. If you think it's a bad idea to lose those players, fine by me, but when you invent imaginary reasons for WHY we're losing these players, I take issue.

[Mack]

You've said several times that he's 'not a Pearson player', he's leaving because of Pearson's 'principles' and you've said many times that Danns and Beckford were forced to 'train with kids' - all I've done is say that all of these things are absolutely unfounded. If you think it's a bad idea to lose those players, fine by me, but when you invent imaginary reasons for WHY we're losing these players, I take issue.

I did'nt invent anything, if you check your facts it was Stringer who first reported that the two of them were sent to train with the stiffs, not me.

The statement about them not being Pearson players is pretty obvious as they have both been shown the door to play elsewhere, so it's hardly 'invention'

The prinicples statement is also from the media around the club, not me. So I cant take the blame for that also, although I would agree at times Nigel is stubborn over his principles.

All I have stated are opinions on matters that have been reported in the media, and guess what, I'm allowed to do that and even have an opinion that differs to yours without being bullied by you and others or being ridiculed for having an opinion that doesn't follow the mainstream opinion on this message board!

[indierich06]

I did'nt invent anything, if you check your facts it was Stringer who first reported that the two of them were sent to train with the stiffs, not me.

Oh well, if Ian Stringer says it's true, then it must be. The thing is, you've been banging on about for ages despite it being blatantly a load of rubbish and several people correcting you. Did you miss this article?

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/19746559

Pearson told BBC Radio Leicester: "It's normal practice for players who are not in the squad not to train with us." ... "Rumours start and I don't know where they come from. I always have the squad who are playing the following day."

So they weren't sent to train with the kids, they just weren't training with the match squads when they weren't included in them. End of.

The statement about them not being Pearson players is pretty obvious as they have both been shown the door to play elsewhere, so it's hardly 'invention'

Well it isn't obvious, not at all. If they're not Pearson players, why not sell them over the summer? If they're not Pearson players, why play them in so many matches last season? If Beckford's not a Pearson player, why did he start the season as first choice? Why did he base entire training sessions around trying to get the best out of Beckford last season? If Danns isn't a Pearson player, why did he try to sign him when he was manager of Hull City? This 'Pearson player' rubbish is just another way of trying to explain away these players' obvious deficiencies by criticising the manager - by all means criticise the manager if you want, just don't use your baseless 'Pearson-player' nonsense to back up your opinion.

The prinicples statement is also from the media around the club, not me. So I cant take the blame for that also, although I would agree at times Nigel is stubborn over his principles.

Where has this ever been reported? Where has it been said that Neil Danns isn't in the side because of Pearson's 'principles'? because I've certainly never seen it printed anywhere, but you say that's why Neil Danns isn't in the Leicester squad. If you're going to make bold statements like that, be prepared to be asked for proof.

All I have stated are opinions on matters that have been reported in the media, and guess what, I'm allowed to do that and even have an opinion that differs to yours without being bullied by you and others or being ridiculed for having an opinion that doesn't follow the mainstream opinion on this message board!

Right, so as far as I can see, the 'training with kids' thing was quashed pretty much immediately after Stringer reported it, but you still take this as gospel. I still don't think the 'Danns is a victim of Pearson's principles' thing has been published anywhere I've seen, but if you can provide me with an article then I'll be happy to retract my comments on that. As for the 'Pearson player' thing - you act like it's obviously true - it might be your opinion, but my opinion is that it's rubbish, for the reasons that I've stated above.

I don't care if you don't agree with my opinion, I'm not particularly bothered what your opinion is either, but if you start to make bold, baseless statements like the ones I've discussed here, then you can't get all defensive and accuse people of being bullies or ridiculing you when they call you up on it.

[Babylon]

indierich06 > Babylon

[seenitall]

Danns was derided by the fans on the message boards for being a mobile phone using waste of money before he kicked a ball for us. Personally I thought he was OK on the few times I saw him play, certainly no worse than any of our current midfielders but perhaps with a bit more of an attacking spirit than the sideways passers we usually have.

I think his haircut choice let him down, personally.

[Corky]

What is a "Pearson player"?

I've seen it written on here before, but not quite sure who it covers.

[seenitall]

What is a "Pearson player"?

I've seen it written on here before, but not quite sure who it covers.

One who does as he is told by Nige

[Kitchandro]

One who does as he is told by Nige

In other words a mature professional footballer then.

[Corky]

One who does as he is told by Nige

One that follows instructions you mean?

[Bettsj2]

Danns was derided by the fans on the message boards for being a mobile phone using waste of money before he kicked a ball for us. Personally I thought he was OK on the few times I saw him play, certainly no worse than any of our current midfielders but perhaps with a bit more of an attacking spirit than the sideways passers we usually have.

I think his haircut choice let him down, personally.

I think you sum him up very well. He is ok. Just as Matty James is ok. Personally I think DD and King are more than ok and have formed a decent partnership so no point in disrupting that with someone unless they are significantly better than ok. James has the time for potential to grow whereas Danns realistically wont get any better so given the options, Danns going out on loan is fair dinkum.

Christ its slow news at the minute if a Danns thread has 9 pages.

[indierich06]

What is a "Pearson player"?

I've seen it written on here before, but not quite sure who it covers.

I don't think the people who use it are quite sure who it covers either. It would appear to be 'average players who can't get in the Leicester team'

[indierich06]

I think you sum him up very well. He is ok. Just as Matty James is ok. Personally I think DD and King are more than ok and have formed a decent partnership so no point in disrupting that with someone unless they are significantly better than ok. James has the time for potential to grow whereas Danns realistically wont get any better so given the options, Danns going out on loan is fair dinkum.

Christ its slow news at the minute if a Danns thread has 9 pages.

That about sums it up for me - Danns would be a decent squad player, but I doubt he's happy to sit on the bench and bide his time, whereas James is prepared to do that. Pearson obviously sees James as the better choice as backup too, which leaves Danns as fourth in the pecking order at the minute. Whether James is better than Danns, well I'm not too sure as I haven't seen enough of him and what I've seen from Danns leads me to believe he would be quite ineffective in this side, but all that matters is that Pearson feels Danns is the 4th best CM at the club and I'm inclined to trust his opinion as he sees them day in, day out on the training pitch.

If Danns wants to go out and get some games under his belt, fair play to him. I've got much more respect for players who want to play, rather than just collect their wages.