Thracian Posted 9 April 2014 Posted 9 April 2014 King again... Even Thracian seems to think he's top drawer. I can't see it, never have done, like the lad but think he's no more than a good Championship player. We need to improve the centre midfield for the Prem. If Drinky and James arent fit, we'll struggle. HAPPY TO BE PROVEN WRONG... (hope that's clear).. I don't think he's top drawer. He's become too much of a Jack-of-all-Trades but doesn't have the athleticism for it. Andy King is a one-(gentle)-paced footballer with a good brain and an incredibly cool mindset when it comes to finishing. He's also a fast, accurate passer who too often neglects to make the pass that would emphasise his ability in favour of the percentage pass that avoids any risk of losing the ball. For me he usually plays to a fraction of his ability (for various reasons) instead of having the courage to make a difference. King should watch as many videos of Paul Scholes as he possibly can because he'll see what a player with all his own weaknesses in terms of pace and tackling can achieve by playing to his strengths.
GingerrrFox Posted 9 April 2014 Posted 9 April 2014 I don't think he's top drawer. He's become too much of a Jack-of-all-Trades but doesn't have the athleticism for it. Andy King is a one-(gentle)-paced footballer with a good brain and an incredibly cool mindset when it comes to finishing. He's also a fast, accurate passer who too often neglects to make the pass that would emphasise his ability in favour of the percentage pass that avoids any risk of losing the ball. For me he usually plays to a fraction of his ability (for various reasons) instead of having the courage to make a difference. King should watch as many videos of Paul Scholes as he possibly can because he'll see what a player with all his own weaknesses in terms of pace and tackling can achieve by playing to his strengths. We've already got a carbon copy of Paul Scholes. His name is Danny Drinkwater. He's the conductor for us and everybody plays to his tune. That's why James and Drinkwater work so well because they complement each other perfectly. King can't perform James's job at the same standard and when in a midfield with James he doesn't do Drinkwater's to the same standard. If he wants to play regularly next season he's at the wrong club. We tried a midfield 3 at the start of season and it didn't work with the Drinkwater/James/King combination. I can't see what will change at a higher level.
morris1234 Posted 9 April 2014 Posted 9 April 2014 Bring in another player. Fair enough. But as nige often says, he won't bring anyone in unless they are better than what we have. So you bring in someone better than king, does that mean they are still worse than drinky or James? Because if not then they aren't going to want to be on the bench. But then you can say if he's better than those two, then start him...start him over arguably the two best centre midfielders in this division all year.... Difficult decisions to make I agree we need to buy players depending on how we want to set up and play but not because someone whose been leicester through and through for years and kept us challenging at the right end of the table had a few iffy games...
Fox Ulike Posted 9 April 2014 Posted 9 April 2014 I think people under estimate King. I can see him establishing himself as a decent Prem player over the next couple of years. Either here or elsewhere. The problem is that he and Drinkwater are not a good partnership. They are our Lampard/Gerrard conundrum. Great individually but not good together. It's no coincidence that Drinkwater has prospered this season once Matty James was brought into the team.. King is our best player when he plays alongside James - (but unfortunately for him, so is Drinkwater. )
theessexfox Posted 9 April 2014 Posted 9 April 2014 King was one of the best on the ball last night, not saying much but I'd like to see him here next year.
little Brian Posted 9 April 2014 Posted 9 April 2014 Wake up ......King was rubbish against Brighton & his bullet header that nearly hit the corner flag was truly shocking ......
pazzerfox Posted 9 April 2014 Posted 9 April 2014 It's no coincidence that our recent run of good form has come from King not being in the side. He is not a bad midfielder but not consistent enough. His contribution does not impact the game enough and he can go unnoticed. James and Drinkwater have been absolutely brilliant this season, however I don't think we would or have ever said that about Andy King.
LAprice_ Posted 9 April 2014 Posted 9 April 2014 Wake up ......King was rubbish against Brighton & his bullet header that nearly hit the corner flag was truly shocking ...... At least he had a chance. I can't remember many others getting close. His freekicks were promising as well. Also, as mentioned before, it would be wrong to judge anyone based on last nights match. Why not judge him on the recent Wigan game, or maybe Blackpool away. We're quick to judge a player when we lose.
adamlcfcbevo85 Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 Wake up ......King was rubbish against Brighton & his bullet header that nearly hit the corner flag was truly shocking ...... so what he might if had one bad game , get a grip remember he's not match sharp like the other 2 if your going to blame anyone blame your self for being a cvnt !!
MC Prussian Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 Am I getting this right? People are slagging off King because he is apparently "not consistent enough"? Do these people know how many games he's featured this season? We have Drinkwater and James in the middle keeping him out and because Pearson puts more faith in them two carrying the team. It's not because King has gone sour in the space of a few months, it's because the two other ones have hit the peak of their form so far. You don't just break up such a successful partnership (unless one is injured or lacking fitness). It is really astonishing how some folks need someone, anyone to put all the blame on after a defeat. It's ridiculous. The complete team played badly against Brighton, King was just one of them. King is our highest-scoring midfielder of all times and has plenty to offer, even in the Premier League.
Monsell1976 Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 Fed up of beating the same drum about King. He's a good Top 6 Championship player and that's his level. It's no coincidence since James and Drinkwater have come to the side we have looked much more solid in the midfield as well as being creative and winning games. It's also no coincidence that with them 2 playing regularly this season we have gained promotion. I'm not going to slag Kingy because he has been massive in turning this club around but sometimes it becomes obvious that players have reached their level. James is a lot younger than King and has plenty more scope for progression and as for Drinkwater he is our Scholes and without him we don't look half the side we are with him. People say King would be better in a 3 man midfield but I remember Sousa playing him in a 3 man midfield and gave him a role further forward with less defensive duties and people were saying "he's not good playing with his back to goal, it's not his game". As clubs progress so does the talent level at the club and it's only a matter of time before players like King, Hammond etc are replaced with better players to challenge for the starting 11. Good post, and agree, massive hole left when James didn't play, a hole king is just not good enough to fill.
RizLCFC Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 Andy King has been an excellent player for us over the years, he's probably one of the best finishers at the club and does more than his fair share of defending, which always goes unnoticed hence why some people think he's shit. Granted he's not as good as Drinkwater or James, and not as creative either. But, when he does push on from central midfield he's shown what he can do on many occasions. He also has a great shot on him. For me, he's a very handy squad player and I can see us using him next season more or less the same way we have this season. Unless we get a good bid for him, I'd happily have him here and he deserves a season (at least) in the Premiership.
Thracian Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 It's no coincidence that our recent run of good form has come from King not being in the side. He is not a bad midfielder but not consistent enough. His contribution does not impact the game enough and he can go unnoticed. James and Drinkwater have been absolutely brilliant this season, however I don't think we would or have ever said that about Andy King. It's no coincidence that our recent run of good form has come from King not being in the side. He is not a bad midfielder but not consistent enough. His contribution does not impact the game enough and he can go unnoticed. James and Drinkwater have been absolutely brilliant this season, however I don't think we would or have ever said that about Andy King. How do you know it's no coincidence? We had decent spells at the top of the league with King playing and this recently ended unbeaten run of City's has been by the grace of good fortune - or even Kasper - on occasions and we have not always played well by any means as Leeds and Forest might testify, just for a start. I'm not for a moment having a go at Drinkwater or James but there are lots more factors which testify to our resilience and improved results - Kasper not making major cock-ups, the much-improved form of Vardy and arrival of Mahrez, the consistency of Schlupp at left-back and all sorts of marginal events that have helped when other marginal events might have gone a different r way. We've not played always played convincing football during our unbeaten spell and our success has certainly not been down to the number of goals we've suddenly scored from central midfield - goals which we may well need in the future even assuming Drinkwater and James maintain their influence. King slipped below his best at a time when Drinkwater and James came good. But king's record over a long time remains outstanding and I'm quite sure that, not only can he do an excellent job in the Premiership with the right application and guidance, but that a change of club will reinvigorate the lad. To me he's done no more than to go a bit stale and start playing the averages rather more than he needs to instead of taking responsibility, risking more incisive passes and continuing to trust in his ability to score. That ability is more than emphasised by the respective records: of our attacking (or at least King used to be attacking) central midfielders. http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=51500 http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=47450
AdamN Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 I thought King was better than Drinkwater on Tuesday, so I'm not sure why he seems to be being singled out for that performance. He wasn't pulling up trees but his pass completion and ball retention seemed to be far better than most (I'd love to see the individual stats), and nearly bagged himself a free kick or two as well. The entire back four/five, Knockaert, Nugent and Phillips are far more deserving of criticism than he is for Tuesday's antics...
Grandad. Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 I thought King was better than Drinkwater on Tuesday, so I'm not sure why he seems to be being singled out for that performance. He wasn't pulling up trees but his pass completion and ball retention seemed to be far better than most (I'd love to see the individual stats), and nearly bagged himself a free kick or two as well. The entire back four/five, Knockaert, Nugent and Phillips are far more deserving of criticism than he is for Tuesday's antics... I agree with the majority of that but the free kick was lame, the keeper fumbling it for a corner didn't half make it look better than it was.
AdamN Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 I agree with the majority of that but the free kick was lame, the keeper fumbling it for a corner didn't half make it look better than it was. Yeah I didn't have the best angle of it but his other free kick could well have crept in but for the legs of Kuszczak. Not saying they were absolute worldies or anything but it was nice to see he could actually hit the target consistently.
HitchinFox Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 King is going nowhere. Pearson likes him and we need him as backup. Also, I'm more than confident that he's good enough to do a job for us next season. He plays international football and hasn't been showed up too badly at that level - or he would no longer be picked for the squads. The teams he plays against for Wales are certainly as good as the bottom half of the Premier League – the likes of Norwich, Sunderland, West Brom and Palace.
CPW22 Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 He's third choice in midfield, can have an impact as a sub and also seems like the sort of player who will accept being part of a squad and not go running off the press if he doesn't get his own way. He'll stay, but I also think we'll sign another CM. Spot on.
Thracian Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 We've already got a carbon copy of Paul Scholes. His name is Danny Drinkwater. He's the conductor for us and everybody plays to his tune. That's why James and Drinkwater work so well because they complement each other perfectly. King can't perform James's job at the same standard and when in a midfield with James he doesn't do Drinkwater's to the same standard. If he wants to play regularly next season he's at the wrong club. We tried a midfield 3 at the start of season and it didn't work with the Drinkwater/James/King combination. I can't see what will change at a higher level. Carbon copy of Scholes? I should take a look at Scholes' scoring record.
GingerrrFox Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 Carbon copy of Scholes? I should take a look at Scholes' scoring record. Over his 20 year career Scholes scored an average of 7.75 goals a season. Danny's scored 7 this season so far. Looks to me like he's on target for that.
little Brian Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 Just doesn't have enough impact on games, he's neat and tidy but he offers little defensively - the opposition midfield literally just run past him. yes he is poop
MC Prussian Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 Over his 20 year career Scholes scored an average of 7.75 goals a season. Danny's scored 7 this season so far. Looks to me like he's on target for that. As much as I like Drinkwater and I admire your efforts and comparisons, we'll have to see whether Danny can keep this record up for the next 350+ games. Only then will we be able to compare the two of them fairly.
GingerrrFox Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 As much as I like Drinkwater and I admire your efforts and comparisons, we'll have to see whether Danny can keep this record up for the next 350+ games. Only then will we be able to compare the two of them fairly. Have a look at Paul Scholes as a player and then look at Danny Drinkwater and it's not hard to see who he moulded his game on and aspired to play like coming up through the United academy. He's clearly never going to be on the same level as Scholes but the similarities in their technique and playing style is obvious.
Guest Col city fan Posted 10 April 2014 Posted 10 April 2014 As much as I like Drinkwater and I admire your efforts and comparisons, we'll have to see whether Danny can keep this record up for the next 350+ games. Only then will we be able to compare the two of them fairly. This...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.