Hungry Hungry Fox Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Players get slated for being happy sitting on the bench whilst collecting their wages and also get slated for being unhappy at not being selected I think they can't win somtimes
J.Lisemore Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 he played him against man city. And looked our most dangerous player. Seriously? As others have said, I'm not sure has the right attitude, if he can honestly say he's given his all when he's had gametime then I'd be tempted to let him jump ship, because at the moment he's average at best. Wouldn't surprise me if he were still living off that hat trick at Rotherham.
RobHawk Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 To be fair to Jeff he's at the age where to continue his development he needs regular games. If it wasn't for his versatility being able to play left back im sure he would be out on loan somewhere and that is something that would be beneficial to him. It may not be beneficial to the team though which is why it may not happen. I'd rather he be upset and angry than being happy he gets a week off. The key is how he reacts, hopefully he will get his head down and work even harder to get himself back in contention. You've got to trust Nig and the rest of the management team to handle it especially considering he had a big week with the birth of his son. He's still young and is clearly talented, hopefully he will continue to work hard so he's not just another promising player that never really hit the heights he should of done!
Benji Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 How do you run off an elbow injury? Hope De Laet is fit for Boro who rely heavily on their two wide men.
MC Prussian Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 The danger here is the way in which the media (the Mercury here, for instance) are misinterpreting what has being said and then spin a different story altogether. Players being disappointed because they weren't selected for a match is one thing (and we don't know how "very disappointed" both Schlupp and Taylor-Fletcher really were or if it was just one of these cases where both of them just got along with it in the end and no offense was taken), interpreting Pearson's quote of "very disappointed" as "bitterly disappointed" implies a different (and highly fictitious) scenario. It's a case of a newspaper reading too much into one single statement, then fabricating a "story" out of it. Very poor standards, really.
ealingfox Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Can see us making a few changes for Birmingham. There'll be chances for everyone, still all of 20 games to go remember.
Hungry Hungry Fox Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 I don't think shlupp would be at the club still if his attitude was wrong
PaulW Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 "The problem is that NP has a clear idea of who his first 11 is, that is not saying it doesn't change, but when it changes, eg James coming in for King and it works, it's almost as though we have to lose before King gets another chance, or James has a stinker and King comes in and changes the game." Errr, yes that the way team selection works! Pearson got a huge amount of stick when he changed a winning team unnecessarily last season.
smudgerfox Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 It pains me to say it but I think Schlupp's Leicester career is over, Phillips' arrival marks the end as surely as Kane's arrival marked the end for Waghorn. The players know that. Nugent and Vardy are a given now up front and will probably be given a chance to repeat their efforts in the Prem (if we get there) and to have another go in the Champ (if we don't). From now till the end of season Phillips will be the next option, followed by Wood, then GTF (who has little to complain about as he knows we were only offering him a one-season bolt-hole). So Schlupp only gets a run-out in his favoured up front position if we suffer injury carnage. That said he's useful cover for wide left and left back and on that basis (especially as Konch is so erratic and seems to have a low-level injury) - I'm surprised JS doesn't get a place on the bench. What's different here is that JS can't really complain that he's been displaced by KP whereas giving so many opportunities to Kane was completely incomprehensible last season when he was not obviously better than Schlupp or Waghorn who could have both benefitted from an extended run as striker sub.
Nalis Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 If players aren't happy to be playing then its a small price to pay for success and just part of the game. Prime PL example of this is Mata at Chelsea.
Captain... Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Interesting points but I wholeheartedly disagree. We should be playing our most in form players regardless of a few whiny bitches Not say we should change it because people are whining, but I undestand why they would be upset as NP doesn't change things round much, picking the most in form players doesn't always equate to the best 11 to win a match. We picked our in form 11 against Leeds and played shit, yes we won, but only because Leeds were awful in front of goal. "The problem is that NP has a clear idea of who his first 11 is, that is not saying it doesn't change, but when it changes, eg James coming in for King and it works, it's almost as though we have to lose before King gets another chance, or James has a stinker and King comes in and changes the game." Errr, yes that the way team selection works! Pearson got a huge amount of stick when he changed a winning team unnecessarily last season. Not from me I've never ever criticised him for changing a winning team, I wish he would do it more often, as I said above the best team to win the match is not necessarily the best 11 players at the club. Schlupp certainly has something to offer, and if Boro are looking to soak up the pressure and hit us on the counter attack you could argue his extra pace would be better than calamity Konch at LB, expecially if RDL isn't fit. Or bringing in Hammond as a screen to protect from the counter and cover the full backs going forward. I'm not actually criticising NP, but we know how we will line up against Boro, and more importantly Schlupp and GTF know and seeing as we line up in the same we whenever we can they must also know they probably won't get a game for the rest of the season.
Guest Col city fan Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 The problem is that NP has a clear idea of who his first 11 is, that is not saying it doesn't change, but when it changes, eg James coming in for King and it works, it's almost as though we have to lose before King gets another chance, or James has a stinker and King comes in and changes the game. I know NP rotated for the Millwall game, but it was clear that was a keep the first 11 fit plan, and even though some of the fringe players played well it was back to the current first 11 for Derby and Leeds, now we have no cup commitments we couls well see the same starting 11 until the end of the season. That is why I would be annoyed if I was Schlupp or GTF, I know some will disagree, and say we shouldn't play weakened team, but when the weaker team is King instead of James, or Wood instead of Nugent or Was or Miquel instead of Moore or Morgan it should be enough to see off most in the championship. I know if he started genuinely rotating and we lost he would be crucified on here, but it is not just about keeping fringe players happy, it is about keeping them fit and sharp and ready to play and influence a game should they be needed it would also make us harder to predict, we saw at Leeds, they picked Dyer to double up on, gave James and DD no time and space, if that was their plan and we had lined up with a 433. Vardy, GTF, Schlupp up top, Hammond, DD, King in the middle. God knows if it would have worked but their plan would be out the window, then we would have Dyer and Knocky and Nuge to bring on to change the game. The point is not saying that we should have gone with that starting line-up, but that if we become predictable they can and will make plans to nullify us. When everyone is fit, you should always play your best side. Always. Keeping the others happy is part of your managerial remit. Schlupp has not shown enough to warrant a first 11 spot. End of IMO.
Dr The Singh Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Regular trips to the brothel will keep em happy!!
Pegosteve Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Look we all know Phillips will be on the bench if he is fit. If we make the Premiership the GTF and Schlupp are not good enough so will fall by the wayside. Let's face it if we make it we will need a complete new strike force u can only see Nugent and Vardy as squad players.
TrentFox Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 The problem is that NP has a clear idea of who his first 11 is, that is not saying it doesn't change, but when it changes, eg James coming in for King and it works, it's almost as though we have to lose before King gets another chance, or James has a stinker and King comes in and changes the game. I know NP rotated for the Millwall game, but it was clear that was a keep the first 11 fit plan, and even though some of the fringe players played well it was back to the current first 11 for Derby and Leeds, now we have no cup commitments we couls well see the same starting 11 until the end of the season. That is why I would be annoyed if I was Schlupp or GTF, I know some will disagree, and say we shouldn't play weakened team, but when the weaker team is King instead of James, or Wood instead of Nugent or Was or Miquel instead of Moore or Morgan it should be enough to see off most in the championship. I know if he started genuinely rotating and we lost he would be crucified on here, but it is not just about keeping fringe players happy, it is about keeping them fit and sharp and ready to play and influence a game should they be needed it would also make us harder to predict, we saw at Leeds, they picked Dyer to double up on, gave James and DD no time and space, if that was their plan and we had lined up with a 433. Vardy, GTF, Schlupp up top, Hammond, DD, King in the middle. God knows if it would have worked but their plan would be out the window, then we would have Dyer and Knocky and Nuge to bring on to change the game. The point is not saying that we should have gone with that starting line-up, but that if we become predictable they can and will make plans to nullify us. Good post. I felt that last season's slump was partly down to not having enough 'battle-hardened / match-fit' players who could come off the bench or out of the stiffs and enable us to change formations / personnel effectively. We ended up stuck with what was a losing team or selecting people who would need a run of games to be of real use. It is the downside of a settled side. Not an issue whilst we are winning, but highly relevant when we do lose a few - which in this league is almost guaranteed at some point.
Sharpe's Fox Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Feel for GTF because he has obviously been replaced with a similar but more quality player in KP, however I I couldn't care less about Schlupp. I thought he would be useful before Jan but with KP and Mahrez signing he needs to go elsewhere.
Merging Cultures Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Not a story. Players will be disappointed if they are not in the squad. Hopefully, the players will not get complacent and will strive harder to make the team. If they don't, Nigel will move them on. I am a terrible player but I remember being disappointed at school for not being picked. Unfortunately, for me I wasn't taking home thousands a week.
ealingfox Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 NP has showed no signs that he will stick with the same 11 for the rest of the season. He has been adaptable this campaign, we will face different challenges with almost everyone still to play. Also something to be said for protecting the younger players from burnout. Moore has profited from a couple of rests during the season so far, I would expect Wasyl will see a fair amount of minutes yet. To be honest, the player I feel for and worry about most is Wood. This is a guy who scored 20 goals in this division last season, he wasn't getting enough of a look-in before January and now with Phillips here, I can easily see him not getting another game for the rest of the season. This is troubling both in terms of him kicking up a fuss (scored most Champ goals last season of all our forwards) and in terms of stunting his development. Is he above being loaned out to see if he still has quality, and to get him playing again?
Captain... Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 When everyone is fit, you should always play your best side. Always. Keeping the others happy is part of your managerial remit. Schlupp has not shown enough to warrant a first 11 spot. End of IMO. Have I said Schlupp deserves a first team spot? I get why he is pissed off though as his limited chances of getting a match have been drastically reduced, because he knows how NP operates, based on the last few seasons, that once you are out the squad it is very hard to get a chance to prove you are worth a place in the squad. As Trent Fox said above at times last season we struggled as the best 11 weren't performing and the fringe players had played so little they couldn't make an impact. If being a manager was as simple as picking the best 11 players it wouldn't be such a well paid job. Some of the best managers in the world employ a rotation system, because there are many good reasons to do it, such as preventing fatigue, keeping the fringe players fit and sharp, keeping up morale, not being predictable and easy to plan against, being able to pick the right players tailored to expose the opposition's weaknesses or nullify their strengths. Of course it may not always work, and I'm not saying what NP is doing is wrong, I'm not even saying he should change it as he has done fantastic so far, just that his system will leave the fringe players feeling frustrated at the lack of opportunities, hopefully that will motivate them to play out their skins if/when they are needed and get a chance and not feel under such pressure to take their chance, or demoralised that they fvck up, or just can't get into the game because they have barely kicked a competitive ball in anger in the previous weeks/months.
ealingfox Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Have I said Schlupp deserves a first team spot? I get why he is pissed off though as his limited chances of getting a match have been drastically reduced, because he knows how NP operates, based on the last few seasons, that once you are out the squad it is very hard to get a chance to prove you are worth a place in the squad. As Trent Fox said above at times last season we struggled as the best 11 weren't performing and the fringe players had played so little they couldn't make an impact. If being a manager was as simple as picking the best 11 players it wouldn't be such a well paid job. Some of the best managers in the world employ a rotation system, because there are many good reasons to do it, such as preventing fatigue, keeping the fringe players fit and sharp, keeping up morale, not being predictable and easy to plan against, being able to pick the right players tailored to expose the opposition's weaknesses or nullify their strengths. Of course it may not always work, and I'm not saying what NP is doing is wrong, I'm not even saying he should change it as he has done fantastic so far, just that his system will leave the fringe players feeling frustrated at the lack of opportunities, hopefully that will motivate them to play out their skins if/when they are needed and get a chance and not feel under such pressure to take their chance, or demoralised that they fvck up, or just can't get into the game because they have barely kicked a competitive ball in anger in the previous weeks/months. Decent posts on this topic so far, mostly logically consistent apart from the highlighted. Do we really know how big a chance they get? We don't get to see any training sessions, or group discussions, or anything else behind closed doors. We don't know that much about how Pearson operates in these respects. For all we know at the end of each training session NP might say that anyone who didn't play any minutes in the last match gets a shot at a target, and if they hit it, they play the next match. Would certainly explain why Waghorn's not had a look-in
Monk Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Article reads like Jeff and Gary had a baby together. .
Captain... Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Decent posts on this topic so far, mostly logically consistent apart from the highlighted. Do we really know how big a chance they get? We don't get to see any training sessions, or group discussions, or anything else behind closed doors. We don't know that much about how Pearson operates in these respects. For all we know at the end of each training session NP might say that anyone who didn't play any minutes in the last match gets a shot at a target, and if they hit it, they play the next match. Would certainly explain why Waghorn's not had a look-in We don't but Jeff does, so does GTF, and if they felt that this was a one off and they would be in the next squad, or if they felt they would be given a fair chance to stake a claim for their spot on the bench, they probably wouldn't be so upset, but they know, as we all do really, that barring injuries their seasons are more or less over.
foxes4e4 Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 wasnt jeff looking after his missus after she had a emergency c section??
Kitchandro Posted 21 January 2014 Posted 21 January 2014 Good post. I felt that last season's slump was partly down to not having enough 'battle-hardened / match-fit' players who could come off the bench or out of the stiffs and enable us to change formations / personnel effectively. We ended up stuck with what was a losing team or selecting people who would need a run of games to be of real use. It is the downside of a settled side. Not an issue whilst we are winning, but highly relevant when we do lose a few - which in this league is almost guaranteed at some point. The problem was we didn't have anyone on the bench good enough to come in for our out of form first 11. Nothing to do with them needing game time, they just weren't good enough. That is the case for the likes of Schlupp now I'm afraid. GTF is a player to bring on if we want to see out the game, he's not a match winning goalscorer. I can see what CPF means but I don't agree. The team we are playing is our best starting 11, our most in form 11 and with us being top of the league and capable of beating anyone that means it's the right 11 for the next match. Do you really think we'd have played better against Leeds with Schlupp and GTF in the team? There's no logic behind that. We had an off day. Had we played to our best, that 11 would have beaten Leeds quite convincingly. Picking the best 11 to win a match is how it works. Picking a weaker team for the sake of it makes no sense.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.