Dickov22 Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 So your evidence is one miss? 12 goals in 27 starts and 16 substitute appearances is 'not very good'? The player who was voted young player of the year in a season by our fans was 'not very good' during the whole of that season, despite us finishing 5th in the League? For the record, this season Vardy has made 25 starts (two fewer than Waghorn in his loan spell) and has 9 goals. Hardly a world of difference then in terms of goals scored between Vardy this season and Waghorn during his loan spell. For the record I was also defending Vardy last season, had a lengthy (and somewhat boring) debate with Bert about it. I felt that Vardy and Waghorn were at pretty similar levels last year and I stand by that. Clearly Jamie has improved an awful lot and credit to him. But you're suggestion that Waghorn has never been any good for us however, is absolutely ridiculous. I could give you 50 misses Waghorn has been responsible for. Your stats about his loan season do surprise me, I'll admit. Still don't remember him ever being any good though. Vardy isn't in the team to score a load of goals- he's in the team because he wins penalties, he defends from the front, he's lightening quick, he's great at link up play etc. Waghorn does none of the above. I'm delighted Waghorn has finally gone. Awful player.
Guest Col city fan Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Want to pick it apart? Nah, you're ok, I need to go and take a dump.. Just kiddin Mark.. to be honest with you and Waghorn I wouldn't know where to start. You know more about him than I do.
Dickov22 Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Nah, you're ok, I need to go and take a dump.. Just kiddin Mark.. to be honest with you and Waghorn I wouldn't know where to start. You know more about him than I do. I think Mark IS Martyn Waghorn. Can be the only explanation for this level of adoration
Mark_w Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 I could give you 50 misses Waghorn has been responsible for. Your stats about his loan season do surprise me, I'll admit. Still don't remember him ever being any good though. Vardy isn't in the team to score a load of goals- he's in the team because he wins penalties, he defends from the front, he's lightening quick, he's great at link up play etc. Waghorn does none of the above. I'm delighted Waghorn has finally gone. Awful player. I also don't buy this suggestion that his all round game is poor either. He certainly wasn't voted player of the month for November last year by Foxes Talk poster because of his goal scoring record (http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/83954-mom-overview-player-of-the-month-201213/) and his all round contribution has always been very good, he's not as fast as Vardy and he certainly can't win as many penalties. He's not as good as Vardy clearly, but he does still add a lot to the team when he plays. His work rate is second only to Vardy in terms of the strikers at the club right now. I think Mark IS Martyn Waghorn. Can be the only explanation for this level of adoration I love it when people resort to this.
Guest Col city fan Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 I think Mark IS Martyn Waghorn. Can be the only explanation for this level of adoration Well he could be? Mark for Martyn? And we all know what the w would stand for.
Dickov22 Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 I also don't buy this suggestion that his all round game is poor either. He certainly wasn't voted player of the month for November last year by Foxes Talk poster because of his goal scoring record (http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/83954-mom-overview-player-of-the-month-201213/) and his all round contribution has always been very good, he's not as fast as Vardy and he certainly can't win as many penalties. He's not as good as Vardy clearly, but he does still add a lot to the team when he plays. His work rate is second only to Vardy in terms of the strikers at the club right now. He doesn't jump for headers- never ever challenges. Have you noticed that? It's odd. He just never ever challenges or even makes it difficult for the defender. Inexcusable. His first touch is atrocious- it's just awful- did you go to Stoke away? He kicked the ball out twice for a throw in when we were on the attack. He can't finish! He can only finish generally if its a snap shot. If he has too long to think about it, all composure goes out the window. He works harder than Nugent??!!! Are you sure? Jesus. He adds nothing to the team apart from a decent free kick. He really doesn't. If he's so good, how come Nigel Pearson chooses SIX other strikers infront of Waghorn? Wouldn't you think if anyone knows, Pearson does? Like I said, lets see how he fares at Wigan. I love it when people resort to this.
Dickov22 Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 He doesn't jump for headers- never ever challenges. Have you noticed that? It's odd. He just never ever challenges or even makes it difficult for the defender. Inexcusable. His first touch is atrocious- it's just awful- did you go to Stoke away? He kicked the ball out twice for a throw in when we were on the attack. He can't finish! He can only finish generally if its a snap shot. If he has too long to think about it, all composure goes out the window. He works harder than Nugent??!!! Are you sure? Jesus. He adds nothing to the team apart from a decent free kick. He really doesn't. If he's so good, how come Nigel Pearson chooses SIX other strikers infront of Waghorn? Wouldn't you think if anyone knows, Pearson does? Like I said, lets see how he fares at Wigan. I love it when people resort to this.
Mark_w Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 I imagine he chose six other strikers ahead of Waghorn because he knew he was going out on loan shortly after and is then leaving in the summer when his contract runs out. So playing him would be pretty silly when we could use that time focusing on players who are going to be here in the next few years. His work rate is better than Nugent's. His finishing isn't, neither are many other aspects of his game, otherwise he'd be ahead of him. He does add a lot to the team other than a decent free kick. Got a lovely corner. He's a confidence player. He doesn't play well when he comes on as a sub every now and then. When he gets a prolonged run in the team like during his loan spell and in that run of about ten games last year he has an awful lot to offer. And if he gets regular game time at Wigan, I'm sure you'll see that.
Dickov22 Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 I imagine he chose six other strikers ahead of Waghorn because he knew he was going out on loan shortly after and is then leaving in the summer when his contract runs out. So playing him would be pretty silly when we could use that time focusing on players who are going to be here in the next few years. His work rate is better than Nugent's. His finishing isn't, neither are many other aspects of his game, otherwise he'd be ahead of him. He does add a lot to the team other than a decent free kick. Got a lovely corner. He's a confidence player. He doesn't play well when he comes on as a sub every now and then. When he gets a prolonged run in the team like during his loan spell and in that run of about ten games last year he has an awful lot to offer. And if he gets regular game time at Wigan, I'm sure you'll see that. No, there's 6 strikers ahead of him because they're all better. Good players force Managers to give them a run in the team. Lets see how many games he gets at Wigan, and how many goals.
Guest Col city fan Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 I imagine he chose six other strikers ahead of Waghorn because he knew he was going out on loan shortly after and is then leaving in the summer when his contract runs out. So playing him would be pretty silly when we could use that time focusing on players who are going to be here in the next few years. His work rate is better than Nugent's. His finishing isn't, neither are many other aspects of his game, otherwise he'd be ahead of him. He does add a lot to the team other than a decent free kick. Got a lovely corner. He's a confidence player. He doesn't play well when he comes on as a sub every now and then. When he gets a prolonged run in the team like during his loan spell and in that run of about ten games last year he has an awful lot to offer. And if he gets regular game time at Wigan, I'm sure you'll see that. I hate arguing with you Mark, you know I do, but this post makes little sense? If Nige rated Waggy why a. Would he let him go out on loan? and b. not want to renew his contract? Admit it, he's not really very good is he? Perhaps you rate him a lttle too highly?
Mark_w Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 I hate arguing with you Mark, you know I do, but this post makes little sense? If Nige rated Waggy why a. Would he let him go out on loan? and b. not want to renew his contract? Admit it, he's not really very good is he? Perhaps you rate him a lttle too highly? Because Nugent, Wood and Vardy are all better players (I never said he was our best player). I assume that comments Pearson has made recently about keeping the whole squad happy have had to do with, as well as some other players, Martyn Waghorn. I imagine Waggy wasn't happy with being fourth choice and that's why he's ended up going out on loan. Don't know that for sure of course, but during his loan spell he was constantly going on about wanting to start games so I assume he's simply not very happy here.
Babylon Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 The last time I saw Waghorn he looked massively unfit and demoralised, and that was after a loan spell at Millwall. I could not believe how slow he looked. I don't think it's impossible for him to get back to his form in the first season, but it will be very hard work for the lad. His career has been ruined with Pearsons departure, a season plus of being on the bench or being played out wide and later on injuries. I know why Mark W backed him at the time, I did myself to a point. But with hindsight he was never going to play regularly enough to get his form back with the positions we have been in the last two years. He should have gone last season.
Guest Col city fan Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Because Nugent, Wood and Vardy are all better players (I never said he was our best player). I assume that comments Pearson has made recently about keeping the whole squad happy have had to do with, as well as some other players, Martyn Waghorn. I imagine Waggy wasn't happy with being fourth choice and that's why he's ended up going out on loan. Don't know that for sure of course, but during his loan spell he was constantly going on about wanting to start games so I assume he's simply not very happy here. That makes sense buddy. Good post, I getcha...
Dickov22 Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Because Nugent, Wood and Vardy are all better players (I never said he was our best player). I assume that comments Pearson has made recently about keeping the whole squad happy have had to do with, as well as some other players, Martyn Waghorn. I imagine Waggy wasn't happy with being fourth choice and that's why he's ended up going out on loan. Don't know that for sure of course, but during his loan spell he was constantly going on about wanting to start games so I assume he's simply not very happy here. Fourth choice? Nugent Vardy Wood Phillips Schlupp Taylor Fletcher. = Waghorn 7th choice
Mark_w Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Fourth choice? Nugent Vardy Wood Phillips Schlupp Taylor Fletcher. = Waghorn 7th choice Phillips and GTF are unlikely to start that many games, off the bench Phillips at least would clearly be ahead of Waggy. Schlupp has done nothing to prove he's any better than Martyn Waghorn. Nothing at all.
Dickov22 Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Phillips and GTF are unlikely to start that many games, off the bench Phillips at least would clearly be ahead of Waggy. Schlupp has done nothing to prove he's any better than Martyn Waghorn. Nothing at all. You really are blinkered. Waghorn has barely featured at all- GTF and Phillips have both recently been signed by Pearson whilst Waghorn was at the club. Of course he's seventh choice. Schlupp's talent remains to be seen. If Pearson picks him ahead of Waghorn (which he's done for ages), then I'd suggest he's probably a better player.
Mark_w Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 You really are blinkered. Waghorn has barely featured at all- GTF and Phillips have both recently been signed by Pearson whilst Waghorn was at the club. Of course he's seventh choice. Schlupp's talent remains to be seen. If Pearson picks him ahead of Waghorn (which he's done for ages), then I'd suggest he's probably a better player. IF he wasn't in the last year of his contract and wanted to be at the club, then he'd be fourth choice to start for us. Waghorn is better than Schlupp, Jeff has only recently got back on the bench because we've got no one else who can provide any cover at the back.
Manwell Pablo Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 IF he wasn't in the last year of his contract and wanted to be at the club, then he'd be fourth choice to start for us. Waghorn is better than Schlupp, Jeff has only recently got back on the bench because we've got no one else who can provide any cover at the back. Think I'd rather start Phillips to be honest. Looks great for his age.
AKCJ Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Care to tell us how you know that Waghorn hasn't spent time working on his game? He's clearly regressed as a footballer. Whether through a lack of confidence, not working hard enough or just not being arsed. The proof is in the pudding mate.
Mark_w Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 He's clearly regressed as a footballer. Whether through a lack of confidence, not working hard enough or just not being arsed. Over the course of the ten or so games in a row he played around November/December last year, the consensus on here was that he was our best player. He had his appendix out and he's barely played for us since then, Millwall fans praised him and wanted him back. Hardly conclusive proof that he's regressed as a footballer.
AKCJ Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Over the course of the ten or so games in a row he played around November/December last year, the consensus on here was that he was our best player. He had his appendix out and he's barely played for us since then, Millwall fans praised him and wanted him back. Hardly conclusive proof that he's regressed as a footballer. I don't recall anybody considering him our best player during that time despite an absolutely awesome 20 minutes against Derby. Yes he's had injuries and a lack of opportunities, but do you think he could score 12 goals in a Championship side again? I sure as hell don't. He's not looked anything like the player we knew and loved. Pearson knows this which is why he's 7th choice. I don't think the fact Millwall fans praised him is much of an argument. We're on a different level to them. We're likely to be two leagues apart come May.
Mark_w Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 I don't recall anybody considering him our best player during that time despite an absolutely awesome 20 minutes against Derby. The MOTM voting done on Foxes Talk last year had him as our Player of the Month for November (we had 6 games in November). So certainly he was viewed as one of our better players during that run.
AKCJ Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 The MOTM voting done on Foxes Talk last year had him as our Player of the Month for November (we had 6 games in November). So certainly he was viewed as one of our better players during that run. Could you give me the link for this? He certainly profited with Nugent's injuries with a couple of goals but I can't remember him being that good (although I suppose we did only win two games in that month). Willing to be proved wrong. Either way he's definitely not good enough for a side looking to be in the Premier League. He'd proven that over the last few years rather than an alleged good month.
Unabomber Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 The MOTM voting done on Foxes Talk last year had him as our Player of the Month for November (we had 6 games in November). So certainly he was viewed as one of our better players during that run. I voted for him because I thought everyone was voting ironically.
Mark_w Posted 5 February 2014 Posted 5 February 2014 Could you give me the link for this? He certainly profited with Nugent's injuries with a couple of goals but I can't remember him being that good (although I suppose we did only win two games in that month). Willing to be proved wrong. Either way he's definitely not good enough for a side looking to be in the Premier League. He'd proven that over the last few years rather than an alleged good month. I also don't buy this suggestion that his all round game is poor either. He certainly wasn't voted player of the month for November last year by Foxes Talk poster because of his goal scoring record (http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/83954-mom-overview-player-of-the-month-201213/)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.