Guest ttfn 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. Were you at the game Thrac? Because if not, let me tell you that Schlupp - much as I like him - was poor. And his goal was set up by Anthony Knockaert. The same Knockaert who you routinely criticise and never have a good word for won the ball back in midfield and sent Schlupp through on goal with an inch perfect pass. It was a classic example of a goal being more about the architect than the scorer but you've attempted to use it as justification for a player who is not showing any signs of fulfilling your potential. If Schlupp put as much energy into his game as you do for sticking up for him, he'd be starting every week. He must do better if he has pretensions of featuring regularly.
theessexfox Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Were you at the game Thrac? Because if not, let me tell you that Schlupp - much as I like him - was poor. And his goal was set up by Anthony Knockaert. The same Knockaert who you routinely criticise and never have a good word for won the ball back in midfield and sent Schlupp through on goal with an inch perfect pass. It was a classic example of a goal being more about the architect than the scorer but you've attempted to use it as justification for a player who is not showing any signs of fulfilling your potential. If Schlupp put as much energy into his game as you do for sticking up for him, he'd be starting every week. He must do better if he has pretensions of featuring regularly. How was he poor? The other 9 outfield players were sitting deep, he had to chase the ball around the whole Millwall defence, an impossible task. He ran hard, he couldn't have done much more, and he scored.
Guest ttfn Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 How was he poor? The other 9 outfield players were sitting deep, he had to chase the ball around the whole Millwall defence, an impossible task. He ran hard, he couldn't have done much more, and he scored. He didn't run hard at all. He loped around, barely put in a challenge in 20+ minutes and then took the one chance had well. I've acknowledged that the conditions were hard but that didn't stop 13 other players in grey putting in the hard yards.
Lobsterboyuk Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 He didn't run hard at all. He loped around, barely put in a challenge in 20+ minutes and then took the one chance had well. I've acknowledged that the conditions were hard but that didn't stop 13 other players in grey putting in the hard yards. Knockaert etc showed if you pressed them their lack of quality became apparent and we could win possession quite deep, I didn't that Schlupp showed that level of commitment to pushing them despite coming on quite late
katieakita Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Sent on to do a job and did it and got the goal that killed the game off. If Waggy had got that goal there would be some on here calling for him to be a starter for the next few months.
sdb Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 That lad on twitter is a proper nob. really glad for JS - I rate him highly
Stadt Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 That retard's twitter name is "Abdou's work rate" and the last time I checked Abdou was black. Stupidity level maximum. What an ignorant, racist pillock.
Finnaldo Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Again Millwall prove that Neanderthals never did go extinct.
ADK Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 Obviously just doing it for a reaction. Best to just ignore him. As for Schlupp. He should start vs Stoke.
Arriba Los Zorros Posted 1 January 2014 Posted 1 January 2014 i'm pleased he scored as it sealed the win for us, but still think he's not good enough for us, sorry. would like to be wrong though and for him to develop a lot, he;s going to need to though
TJB-fox Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 People at the game today seemed to base jeffs performance on his work rate, now players like van persie berbatov and yakubu don't run around but would certainly get into out team. He blocked a few clearances which slowed the pace down, showed their centre backs through the middle (which made it easier for us to defend against) and of course scored the goal. He was sent on to do a job and he certainly did that
Dan Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 Took his goal well I guess but he was still not good enough for me today. One goal doesn't make him good enough. Apologies if this has already been posted. Probably another 16 year old living off his Dad's reputation after he's been locked up. Pathetic, pathetic fanbase. An utter embarrassment.
fleckneymike Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 Thought he did well. Thankless task as a lone man against a back four. At one stage he was tracking back in our own box. Ran round like a loon (as per the demands of the fans) and finished cooly.
Dickov22 Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 What more do we want the lad to do? He came on in a game where we were under the cosh, in terrible conditions. He's gets us a goal that sealed a brilliant away win for us. It was a very well taken goal also. If he did that every game does it really matter how much he 'ran around'.
harpendenfox Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 Well Stoke provides the ideal opportunity to give the lad a start. I suspect we will rest Nuge for Saturday, rightlyin my opinion, leaving Jeff to play up front with GTF or Vardy, depending on whether Vardy is fully recovered from his shoulder problem.
Thracian Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 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? I'd give Knockaert more than just credit for that. I think he's trying to improve his game in other ways, particularly defensively where being responsible is more important than being spectacular. As for my comments on Schlupp they have nothing to do with the Academy. I've long said Schlupp should leave to develop his career and have thought so since he went to Brentford. He just hasn't and won't get the match time here and I don't think there's a single one of us knows for sure either which position is his best or whether or not he can genuinely sustain a career at Championship level or beyond. I think he can. I may be wrong. But, either way, I don't think his current situation offers him the best way of proving it.
Thracian Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 Were you at the game Thrac? Because if not, let me tell you that Schlupp - much as I like him - was poor. And his goal was set up by Anthony Knockaert. The same Knockaert who you routinely criticise and never have a good word for won the ball back in midfield and sent Schlupp through on goal with an inch perfect pass. It was a classic example of a goal being more about the architect than the scorer but you've attempted to use it as justification for a player who is not showing any signs of fulfilling your potential. If Schlupp put as much energy into his game as you do for sticking up for him, he'd be starting every week. He must do better if he has pretensions of featuring regularly. Were you at the game Thrac? Because if not, let me tell you that Schlupp - much as I like him - was poor. And his goal was set up by Anthony Knockaert. The same Knockaert who you routinely criticise and never have a good word for won the ball back in midfield and sent Schlupp through on goal with an inch perfect pass. It was a classic example of a goal being more about the architect than the scorer but you've attempted to use it as justification for a player who is not showing any signs of fulfilling your potential. If Schlupp put as much energy into his game as you do for sticking up for him, he'd be starting every week. He must do better if he has pretensions of featuring regularly. a) I've spoken no more about Schlupp than lots of other players. As for fulfilling his potential he's little chance of doing that in the current situation and should probably have stayed at Brentford, given the chance. b) I've praised Knockaert on countless occasions, including his pass to Schlupp, but criticised his risk-taking defensively and his unwillingness to see and pass to the runners. It's Interesting that Pearson seems to have focused on those very things and that he seems to be working hard on both aspects.
Thracian Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 Sent on to do a job and did it and got the goal that killed the game off. If Waggy had got that goal there would be some on here calling for him to be a starter for the next few months. Haha, that's for sure.
Dan Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 I'd give Knockaert more than just credit for that. I think he's trying to improve his game in other ways, particularly defensively where being responsible is more important than being spectacular. As for my comments on Schlupp they have nothing to do with the Academy. I've long said Schlupp should leave to develop his career and have thought so since he went to Brentford. He just hasn't and won't get the match time here and I don't think there's a single one of us knows for sure either which position is his best or whether or not he can genuinely sustain a career at Championship level or beyond. I think he can. I may be wrong. But, either way, I don't think his current situation offers him the best way of proving it. No doubt about it. I've said a loan to a Barnsley/Doncaster type side may be the answer where he'll regularly play at this level. A good test to see just how good he really is. He shows glimpses of looking very decent, but not enough of them for me. Not going to complain at him yesterday but I'm still not completely won over.
Guest shearfox Posted 2 January 2014 Posted 2 January 2014 No doubt about it. I've said a loan to a Barnsley/Doncaster type side may be the answer where he'll regularly play at this level. A good test to see just how good he really is. He shows glimpses of looking very decent, but not enough of them for me. Not going to complain at him yesterday but I'm still not completely won over. I agree with this, at the moment though he is needed... he is a good impact player and can play in various positions, unless we sign a couple of players Pearson isn't going to loan him out.
conLAD logan Posted 3 January 2014 Posted 3 January 2014 been linked with a loan move to wigan according to sky, personally think it would suit everyone involved.
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 3 January 2014 Posted 3 January 2014 Schlupp is a good quality player in my book, for what it's worth.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.