lgfualol Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 I love Jeffers. He was amazing at Watford, I didnt even think he was that bad at QPR. I want him to get more gametime.
Guest Col city fan Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Yay he's brilliant next Ronaldo. You've got to win the FT Award for sarcasm!!
dayday Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Just to clarify, you don't think that was my opinion do you? Because it's not Sorry for that,just a bit quick on the the quote reply without taking in what you said
Bert Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 You've got to win the FT Award for sarcasm!! we're all splitting sides!
dannythefox Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 He came off the bench and scored a good goal and nailed us the 3points why cant people just be pleased ffs!
Bert Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 He came off the bench and scored a good goal and nailed us the 3points why cant people just be pleased ffs!That's Keyboard warriors for you.
Guest Col city fan Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 we're all splitting sides!I know... Babs has made me pee my pants a few times too...
Charl91 Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Not if it had been a penalty - at least to some! Honestly, this 'joke' is getting old now. No-one is saying that scoring penalties doesn't count, but scoring 8 penalties is not the same as scoring 8 goals from open play. I don't know why people try and make out that it's a ridiculous point, when really it's quite a sensible one. No one is saying "Omgz open play goals are worth more!!!11oneone". It's just a barometer of how players are performing. Someone who scores 20 goals from open play in a season is probably playing better than someone who has scored 20 penalties (unless they won the penalties themself). Edit: And well done Schlupp! (And to pre-empt people's responses, no, I'm not saying Nugent is shit.)
Thracian Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 In yet another blink-and-you-miss-it, outing and on a swampy pitch, Schlupp does what some say he can't do and scores. Yet even then the goal's downgraded as "not convincing". Whatever next. Brilliant shot hit the bar and flies over but we'll count it because it deserved a goal and the 'keeper wouldn't have got near it. Waggy should do great! Or shall we have "graded goals" in future. Ten points each for any Knocky or Drinkwater score, one point each for any by Kingy or Schlupp and other goal ratings decided on the basis of how "convincing" the shot was. Some have already decided penalties don't count. How about tap-ins? Anything scored with a player's "wrong" foot should presumably earn double points and any deflections nothing at all! Honestly! Today's Schlupp goal proved nothing and his cameo was so short it probably told us nothing either. But the goal deserved credit and another goal or two at Stoke won't hurt one bit. Good luck son, you're going to need it. Because breaching the Stoke defence should be a bit easier than convincing a section of the City fans whatever you do.
theessexfox Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Didn't get the criticism he was getting before his goal for not working hard, he was running his socks off but their defenders were passing it round him, with him the only one closing down. Impossible job. Good composure for his goal.
Babylon Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 In yet another blink-and-you-miss-it, outing and on a swampy pitch, Schlupp does what some say he can't do and scores. Yet even then the goal's downgraded as "not convincing". Whatever next. Brilliant shot hit the bar and flies over but we'll count it because it deserved a goal and the 'keeper wouldn't have got near it. Waggy should do great! Or shall we have "graded goals" in future. Ten points each for any Knocky or Drinkwater score, one point each for any by Kingy or Schlupp and other goal ratings decided on the basis of how "convincing" the shot was. Some have already decided penalties don't count. How about tap-ins? Anything scored with a player's "wrong" foot should presumably earn double points and any deflections nothing at all! Honestly! Today's Schlupp goal proved nothing and his cameo was so short it probably told us nothing either. But the goal deserved credit and another goal or two at Stoke won't hurt one bit. Good luck son, you're going to need it. Because breaching the Stoke defence should be a bit easier than convincing a section of the City fans whatever you do. Well he did have the benefit of not having to run about much before hand.
Charl91 Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 In yet another blink-and-you-miss-it, outing and on a swampy pitch, Schlupp does what some say he can't do and scores. Yet even then the goal's downgraded as "not convincing". Whatever next. Brilliant shot hit the bar and flies over but we'll count it because it deserved a goal and the 'keeper wouldn't have got near it. Waggy should do great! Or shall we have "graded goals" in future. Ten points each for any Knocky or Drinkwater score, one point each for any by Kingy or Schlupp and other goal ratings decided on the basis of how "convincing" the shot was. Some have already decided penalties don't count. How about tap-ins? Anything scored with a player's "wrong" foot should presumably earn double points and any deflections nothing at all! Honestly! Today's Schlupp goal proved nothing and his cameo was so short it probably told us nothing either. But the goal deserved credit and another goal or two at Stoke won't hurt one bit. Good luck son, you're going to need it. Because breaching the Stoke defence should be a bit easier than convincing a section of the City fans whatever you do. Again, you're acting as though some goals aren't better than others. They might be all worth the same, but someone that scores 10 goals by dribbling through their entire defence is a lot more impressive than someone who scores 10 penalties, and shows they are probably the better player. No-one has ever said 'goals don't count', and I'll take any goal we can get, no matter how. However, some goals are just more impressive than others. There's a word that describes it. It's called 'Context'.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 I think it's abit kneejerk to think he's the best thing since slice bread just because he scored one goal.
Bert Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Again, you're acting as though some goals aren't better than others. They might be all worth the same, but someone that scores 10 goals by dribbling through their entire defence is a lot more impressive than someone who scores 10 penalties, and shows they are probably the better player. No-one has ever said 'goals don't count', and I'll take any goal we can get, no matter how. However, some goals are just more impressive than others. There's a word that describes it. It's called 'Context'. A penalty that wins the game 1-0 is a lot more important than a wonder goal that sees you lose a game 2-1 though. There's a different kind of context for you.
Johnny Cash Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 He has the physical tools, that much is clear. He needs to spend serious time watchimg how other strikers conduct themselves, take notes - all that jazz. Once he learns the position he will be a decent player. He cannot just rely on his strength and speed, I'd tell him to watch Kevin Phillips and learn movement and slight traits that would improve his game.
The God Emperor Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 He has the physical tools, that much is clear. He needs to spend serious time watchimg how other strikers conduct themselves, take notes - all that jazz. Once he learns the position he will be a decent player. He cannot just rely on his strength and speed, I'd tell him to watch Kevin Phillips and learn movement and slight traits that would improve his game. agree with this. always thought of him as a poor mans (maybe financially crippled, he is playing for Leicester after all) Danny Wellbeck. quick, strong but needs to improve effort and the technical side of his game.
dayday Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 He has the physical tools, that much is clear. He needs to spend serious time watchimg how other strikers conduct themselves, take notes - all that jazz. Once he learns the position he will be a decent player. He cannot just rely on his strength and speed, I'd tell him to watch Kevin Phillips and learn movement and slight traits that would improve his game. Interesting you mentioned that,do we actually have a strikers coach down there?
Dickov22 Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Pleased for Jeff. The moaners really must be dying inside this season. Tried with Schlupp as a scapegoat, tried with GTF and both doing the bizzo today! It's all positive
MC Prussian Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 I think it's abit kneejerk to think he's the best thing since slice bread just because he scored one goal. Don't wake Thracian again.
MC Prussian Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 In yet another blink-and-you-miss-it, outing and on a swampy pitch, Schlupp does what some say he can't do and scores. Yet even then the goal's downgraded as "not convincing". Whatever next. Brilliant shot hit the bar and flies over but we'll count it because it deserved a goal and the 'keeper wouldn't have got near it. Waggy should do great! Or shall we have "graded goals" in future. Ten points each for any Knocky or Drinkwater score, one point each for any by Kingy or Schlupp and other goal ratings decided on the basis of how "convincing" the shot was. Some have already decided penalties don't count. How about tap-ins? Anything scored with a player's "wrong" foot should presumably earn double points and any deflections nothing at all! Honestly! Today's Schlupp goal proved nothing and his cameo was so short it probably told us nothing either. But the goal deserved credit and another goal or two at Stoke won't hurt one bit. Good luck son, you're going to need it. Because breaching the Stoke defence should be a bit easier than convincing a section of the City fans whatever you do. Will you ever drop that bias and stop acting as if you were the one and only protégé of all things LCFC Youth Academy concerned? Schlupp scored a goal. Good for him (seriously). Compared to King or Knockaert, he was on the pitch for about twenty minutes in total and thus had a lot more energy to waste towards the late stages of the game. How about giving Knockaert the majority of the credit for Schlupp's goal? Wasn't it him who won the ball, setting up Schlupp in the process?
Dickov22 Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Will you ever drop that bias and stop acting as if you were the one and only protégé of all things LCFC Youth Academy concerned? Schlupp scored a goal. Good for him (seriously). Compared to King or Knockaert, he was on the pitch for about twenty minutes in total and thus had a lot more energy to waste towards the late stages of the game. How about giving Knockaert the majority of the credit for Schlupp's goal? Wasn't it him who won the ball, setting up Schlupp in the process? How about just being positive, and giving both players credit?
MC Prussian Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 How about just being positive, and giving both players credit? I did. :xmassmile:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.