orbison Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 the above post is gospel I second that well said, how refreshing to read a really sensible and informed post, unlike most of the utter anal garbage on here.
Grewks Posted 25 November 2014 Author Posted 25 November 2014 20 minutes on the pitch in two games and he's still getting the blame on here. priceless, and people deny that this is a witch hunt. Not once have i 'blamed' nugent for a result. I have simply said that he shouldn't be anywhere near any squad in this league, as he simply isn't good enough. How any of you can honestly watch his performances and suggest otherwise doesn't disappoint me, in fact it angers me. He doesn't just have one or two weak attributes, but a shit ton. Woeful touch, poor decision making, slow decision making etc..... He doesn't even put a shift in anymore, and his finishing currently the worse since peter taylor's star signing. Did anyone see his efforts during the warm-up on saturday? Three in a row he sliced over when trying to put it in the net. At the start of the season Dave wanted to make a point, unfortunately he is only continuing to make mine for me.
benpicko Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Not really sure you quite understand what a defensive midfielder is. It just means a midfielder whose main strength is to in preventing the opposition from attacking. It doesn't mean he's not allowed to shoot or get forward. Not sure how many more ways this can be explained to you Mister. Can you understand the differences between David Silva and Gareth Barry, for example? Or do you just see them as interchangeable midfielders? Not sure you do either if you think Matty James is one
Fox Ulike Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 A defensive midfielder is someone like Dean Hammond, who sits back and supports the defenders - not a box to box midfielder. Of course, Silva is a playmaker, Barry is a centre mid. That's like trying to compare Knockaert and King to show that King is a defender. King is not a defender!! You're just on the wind up now surely?
MC Prussian Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 King is not a defender!! You're just on the wind up now surely? It's safe to say you don't get it. If you look closely, the D was speaking in relative terms (putting Knockaert in comparison to King).
The Doctor Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 King is not a defender!! You're just on the wind up now surely? Prussian has got it - no, king is not a defender, but compared to to a maverick no10 like Knockaert, he's far more defensively minded. If we consider knockaert to just be a centre midfield with an attack bias (the David silva of your example) then king is practically a makelele. Of course, he's not. Just as James is not a makelele, but more of a gerrard - someone who pitches in in both boxes.
Fox Ulike Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 It's safe to say you don't get it. If you look closely, the D was speaking in relative terms (putting Knockaert in comparison to King). Really? Well then my question is ‘why’?? We’re having a footy debate about Matty James. Why is my opinion on him comparable to calling Andy King a defender? My original point was that Saturday’s line-up did not contain sufficient attacking intent from the centre midfield. The fact that we drew a blank against a team that conceded EIGHT at Southampton would indicate that this is an opinion worthy of discussion, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. And I’m told that this makes as much sense as making a cricket bat from a table. You point to Matty James as the potential source of that attacking intent. OK, that’s a fair opinion that needs investigating: James has scored 0 goals this season James has 0 assists this season We scored 0 goals with him in this role on Saturday He missed two good chances from in the area He has scored 6 league goals in 108 career appearances: That’s one every 18 games!! This is the man we’re relying on to unlock opposition defences from centre midfield. A man who scores twice per season? The response I get is that Andy King is a defender. And MC Pruss, you’re defending this. I certainly wouldn’t have pegged you as defending the WUMs. Doctor, if you’re not on the wind-up, then it’s a poor show. Your debating skills are about as potent as our attack over the last few games…
MC Prussian Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Really? Well then my question is ‘why’?? We’re having a footy debate about Matty James. Why is my opinion on him comparable to calling Andy King a defender? My original point was that Saturday’s line-up did not contain sufficient attacking intent from the centre midfield. The fact that we drew a blank against a team that conceded EIGHT at Southampton would indicate that this is an opinion worthy of discussion, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. And I’m told that this makes as much sense as making a cricket bat from a table. You point to Matty James as the potential source of that attacking intent. OK, that’s a fair opinion that needs investigating: James has scored 0 goals this season James has 0 assists this season We scored 0 goals with him in this role on Saturday He missed two good chances from in the area He has scored 6 league goals in 108 career appearances: That’s one every 18 games!! This is the man we’re relying on to unlock opposition defences from centre midfield. A man who scores twice per season? The response I get is that Andy King is a defender. And MC Pruss, you’re defending this. I certainly wouldn’t have pegged you as defending the WUMs. Doctor, if you’re not on the wind-up, then it’s a poor show. Your debating skills are about as potent as our attack over the last few games… Obviously, you have troubles using the "quote" function, too. Seeing that you're responding to the D's post for most part, yet only use my quote. You answer your own questions: Matty James is a potential source of attacking intent - citing stats doesn't work here. He's a box-to-box midfielder who can add something to our attack, but he's no proven goalscorer (but that was never the argument, anyway). Another question you fail to answer in your reply: How often has James featured in the starting eleven this season? Four times! He missed the first four games and came on against Manchester United as a substitute, then had another three substitution roles. All in all, he's probably played about five full matches! This pretty much covers all your somewhat twisted stats about Matty James - a player who needed to find his feet after coming back from injury. A 23-year old midfielder who's never played in the Premier League before. You cite Southampton's thrashing of Sunderland as a point in case against our team (alluding to our inability to do the same) - look where Southampton are right now in the table, how long they've been able to build their squad and how lucky they were with player sales and acquisitions. You also fail to acknowledge that that same Sunderland side, coming back from an 8-0 defeat certainly has a lot to make up for - no team wants to see a repeat of such a scoreline ever again. They fought well on Saturday and had a few great goalscoring chances. On a sidenote: If the D is a WUM to you, imagine what you are to the rest on here. Your last sentence tries to divert from the fact that your own argument is pretty poor, actually.
Fox Ulike Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Obviously, you have troubles using the "quote" function, too. Seeing that you're responding to the D's post for most part, yet only use my quote. You answer your own questions: Matty James is a potential source of attacking intent - citing stats doesn't work here. He's a box-to-box midfielder who can add something to our attack, but he's no proven goalscorer (but that was never the argument, anyway). Another question you fail to answer in your reply: How often has James featured in the starting eleven this season? Four times! He missed the first four games and came on against Manchester United as a substitute, then had another three substitution roles. All in all, he's probably played about five full matches! This pretty much covers all your somewhat twisted stats about Matty James - a player who needed to find his feet after coming back from injury. A 23-year old midfielder who's never played in the Premier League before. You cite Southampton's thrashing of Sunderland as a point in case against our team (alluding to our inability to do the same) - look where Southampton are right now in the table, how long they've been able to build their squad and how lucky they were with player sales and acquisitions. You also fail to acknowledge that that same Sunderland side, coming back from an 8-0 defeat certainly has a lot to make up for - no team wants to see a repeat of such a scoreline ever again. They fought well on Saturday and had a few great goalscoring chances. On a sidenote: If the D is a WUM to you, imagine what you are to the rest on here. Your last sentence tries to divert from the fact that your own argument is pretty poor, actually. Losing… will…. to… live. All joy draining from Foxestalk...
MC Prussian Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Losing… will…. to… live. All joy draining from Foxestalk... Sorry, but I expected a bit more. Maybe give it another try after your midday nap.
Carl the Llama Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Fox Ulike, please go learn how metaphors and analogies work, as well as what words mean, then come back to this thread and have another try. Your English teacher appears to have a lot to answer for.
Fox Ulike Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Fox Ulike, please go learn how metaphors and analogies work, as well as what words mean, then come back to this thread and have another try. Your English teacher appears to have a lot to answer for. I asked my English teacher why questioning Matty James' attacking role in Saturday's line-up was analogous to making a cricket bat out of a table. She didn't know. So I asked her why contrasting the styles of David Silva and Gareth Barry is analogous to saying that Andy King was a defender. She told me to stop bothering her. Can you help?
Manwell Pablo Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Not once have i 'blamed' nugent for a result. I have simply said that he shouldn't be anywhere near any squad in this league, as he simply isn't good enough. How any of you can honestly watch his performances and suggest otherwise doesn't disappoint me, in fact it angers me. He doesn't just have one or two weak attributes, but a shit ton. Woeful touch, poor decision making, slow decision making etc..... He doesn't even put a shift in anymore, and his finishing currently the worse since peter taylor's star signing. Did anyone see his efforts during the warm-up on saturday? Three in a row he sliced over when trying to put it in the net. At the start of the season Dave wanted to make a point, unfortunately he is only continuing to make mine for me. Vardy and Ulloa have been shit since Man U as well, I don't see making OTT and needlessly insulting threads about them. You've got a vendetta and it's really, really sad. The fact you think he was "carried" last season despite hitting 20 goals and setting up others (mainly Vardy) 11 times says it all really. He probably isn't good enough for the Premier League but I still think he's worthy of a place on the bench as I don't think we've got that many players that are better than him, sadly it is becoming increasingly obvious that the team isn't good enough for the Premeir League (up top more than anywhere else) and that is one of the reasons Nugent, a player who isn't good enough for this league continues to get in the 18.
The Doctor Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Really? Well then my question is ‘why’?? We’re having a footy debate about Matty James. Why is my opinion on him comparable to calling Andy King a defender? My original point was that Saturday’s line-up did not contain sufficient attacking intent from the centre midfield. The fact that we drew a blank against a team that conceded EIGHT at Southampton would indicate that this is an opinion worthy of discussion, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. And I’m told that this makes as much sense as making a cricket bat from a table. You point to Matty James as the potential source of that attacking intent. OK, that’s a fair opinion that needs investigating: James has scored 0 goals this season James has 0 assists this season We scored 0 goals with him in this role on Saturday He missed two good chances from in the area He has scored 6 league goals in 108 career appearances: That’s one every 18 games!! This is the man we’re relying on to unlock opposition defences from centre midfield. A man who scores twice per season? The response I get is that Andy King is a defender. And MC Pruss, you’re defending this. I certainly wouldn’t have pegged you as defending the WUMs. Doctor, if you’re not on the wind-up, then it’s a poor show. Your debating skills are about as potent as our attack over the last few games… It's quite clear you don't understand it. A defensive midfielder sits in front of the defence and protects them, they don't join in attacking play. James works in both boxes, he goes from box to box. He is a box to box midfielder, not a defensive midfielder. Likewise cambiasso - he plays deep, but he's not a defensive midfielder, he's a deep lying playmaker. Think more Pirlo than Lucas. We didn't play with two defensive midfielders, who can't be creative or support the attack, like you claimed. With regards to the last line, if my arguments are as good as our attack the past six games, does that make yours the equivalent of Akinbiyi?
Guest Col city fan Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Really? Well then my question is ‘why’?? We’re having a footy debate about Matty James. Why is my opinion on him comparable to calling Andy King a defender? My original point was that Saturday’s line-up did not contain sufficient attacking intent from the centre midfield. The fact that we drew a blank against a team that conceded EIGHT at Southampton would indicate that this is an opinion worthy of discussion, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. And I’m told that this makes as much sense as making a cricket bat from a table. You point to Matty James as the potential source of that attacking intent. OK, that’s a fair opinion that needs investigating: James has scored 0 goals this season James has 0 assists this season We scored 0 goals with him in this role on Saturday He missed two good chances from in the area He has scored 6 league goals in 108 career appearances: That’s one every 18 games!! This is the man we’re relying on to unlock opposition defences from centre midfield. A man who scores twice per season? The response I get is that Andy King is a defender. And MC Pruss, you’re defending this. I certainly wouldn’t have pegged you as defending the WUMs. Doctor, if you’re not on the wind-up, then it’s a poor show. Your debating skills are about as potent as our attack over the last few games… I getcha.. And agree completely. .
Babylon Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 James has scored 0 goals this seasonJames has 0 assists this season King has scored 0 goals this season King has 0 assists this season Drinkwater has scored 0 goals this season Drinkwater has 0 assists this season Cambiasso has scored 1 goal this season Cambiasso has 0 assists this season You specifically mentioned feeding the wingers. Well they De Laet fed Vardy for the first goal against Man U, he Fed Vardy again for his goal from open play. Nugent playing as a striker fed Schlupp for the cross against Arsenal. Schlupp fed Mahrez for the cross to Wood against Everton. Drinkwater fed Konch for the goal against Stoke. Whether James is the right man to unlock defences remains to be seen, but the contribution of the others is hardly screaming out for them to be the attacking midfielder. At least James has so far actually got into those positions which I don't remember too much from the others.
Fox Ulike Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 King has scored 0 goals this season King has 0 assists this season Drinkwater has scored 0 goals this season Drinkwater has 0 assists this season Cambiasso has scored 1 goal this season Cambiasso has 0 assists this season You specifically mentioned feeding the wingers. Well they De Laet fed Vardy for the first goal against Man U, he Fed Vardy again for his goal from open play. Nugent playing as a striker fed Schlupp for the cross against Arsenal. Schlupp fed Mahrez for the cross to Wood against Everton. Drinkwater fed Konch for the goal against Stoke. Whether James is the right man to unlock defences remains to be seen, but the contribution of the others is hardly screaming out for them to be the attacking midfielder. At least James has so far actually got into those positions which I don't remember too much from the others. I think the more important stat is that James has scored, on average, a goal every 18 games. (In the Championship and League One). Even Dean Hammond has averaged a goal every 10 games. You might be right about James in the future, but you're not right about him in the past, and you're not right about him at the moment. For me, it's another example of Pearson playing a player out of his best position. We know King can score goals. My general point, upon which we seem to agree, is the lack of an attacking contribution from our CMs. From what I've seen this season, the wingers have played fairly well, particularly Mahrez, and the attackers have done well considering that they have had very few chances. I think we can all agree that something's wrong with our attacking play, if it wasn't we wouldn't be getting used to hearing "Leicester City nil" when the results are read out on a Saturday evening. My opinion is simply that Matty James is not the 'missing piece' in our quest for goals. The answer lies elsewhere. A midfield two of King and James against Sunderland would have been a much better choice. (As an aside, I really can't see why this has caused such a hullabaloo with some folk!!)
LAprice_ Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 During his United days, Matty James was often considered to be the attack-minded player in a midfield three that also included Tom Cleverley and Danny Drinkwater. However, I was also under the impression that he can cover in more defensive roles. Therefore, describing him as a box-to-box midfielder is probably a fair comment. I'm a huge Matty James fan but it's difficult to defend him too much for missing the second chance (the one-two with Ulloa) but some credit should be given to Pantilimon who, in my opinion, was very good. Interestingly, this so called defensive midfielder, Dean Hammond, has covered the 8th longest distance in a single game in the Premier League so far this season (vs Arsenal). Surely that makes him a box to box midfielder? To put into a bit of context, Hammond's distance was the same as Flamini (coincidentally vs Leicester) and George Boyd of Burnley appeared 3 times in the top 7. Oh and as for the actual topic of this thread. David Nugent. I think he's good enough for the bench HOWEVER I think Vardy can also impact a game more dramatically when being brought on after 60+ mins, in an almost Lloyd Dyer-like fashion. Ulloa was at his best when playing alongside Nugent, I've not seen any kind of partnership between Ulloa and Vardy. So yeah, bench Vardy, bench Nugent. Meh. Just start Chris Wood.
MC Prussian Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 I think the more important stat is that James has scored, on average, a goal every 18 games. (In the Championship and League One). Even Dean Hammond has averaged a goal every 10 games. You might be right about James in the future, but you're not right about him in the past, and you're not right about him at the moment. For me, it's another example of Pearson playing a player out of his best position. We know King can score goals. My general point, upon which we seem to agree, is the lack of an attacking contribution from our CMs. From what I've seen this season, the wingers have played fairly well, particularly Mahrez, and the attackers have done well considering that they have had very few chances. I think we can all agree that something's wrong with our attacking play, if it wasn't we wouldn't be getting used to hearing "Leicester City nil" when the results are read out on a Saturday evening. My opinion is simply that Matty James is not the 'missing piece' in our quest for goals. The answer lies elsewhere. A midfield two of King and James against Sunderland would have been a much better choice. (As an aside, I really can't see why this has caused such a hullabaloo with some folk!!) If you're going by goalscoring record only, many (now successful) midfielders under 21 must look like a failure to you. Dean Hammond didn't start scoring goals up until his fourth season and scored most of those goals at Championship level, plus he hasn't scored more than five per season in roughly six years. In addition, James is only 23 years old, Hammond eight years his senior. At least be patient with Matty, he still has his best years ahead of him.
Corky Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 King has scored 0 goals this season King has 0 assists this season Drinkwater has scored 0 goals this season Drinkwater has 0 assists this season Cambiasso has scored 1 goal this season Cambiasso has 0 assists this season And people said we should've given up on signing him.
Charl91 Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 That post wasn't even aimed at you, swear I even quoted Inickley fox in it! EDIT: Ha seems I somehow inadvertently quoted you in it as well I doubt he'll get 5 full stop never mind from open play given he's not even playing upfront. I'll stick with it though on the off chance we get a good FA cup draw (cup goals not counting wasn't specified by your good self) Well, if it comes to pass (i'll allow cup goals), then just donate it to the forum. I'll do the same.
Grewks Posted 25 November 2014 Author Posted 25 November 2014 Vardy and Ulloa have been shit since Man U as well, I don't see making OTT and needlessly insulting threads about them. You've got a vendetta and it's really, really sad. The fact you think he was "carried" last season despite hitting 20 goals and setting up others (mainly Vardy) 11 times says it all really. He probably isn't good enough for the Premier League but I still think he's worthy of a place on the bench as I don't think we've got that many players that are better than him, sadly it is becoming increasingly obvious that the team isn't good enough for the Premeir League (up top more than anywhere else) and that is one of the reasons Nugent, a player who isn't good enough for this league continues to get in the 18. There is a large difference between being shit, and looking totally out of their depth. Ulloa and vardy are the only reason we have any points on the board this season. Ulloa has not been poor at all, not in any game, he lacks service, and often the only player in the side looking to have any quality going forward. The recent results have been disappointing, but I have yet to see us play against a side with a better defence than ourselves, as we have been extremely solid. We lost 2-0 at Southampton for instance, but we were great defensively. So far the only outfield players apart from the defence, who look like they belong at this level are Ulloa, Mahrez, king (after his performances against Chelsea and everton) and james (after his performance against sunderland). Nugent got 8 goals in open play last season...that is not good enough. Players like King have got criticism in the past, which is laughable when he has scored more goals in open play in multiple seasons. I would rather put a kid with potential on the bench than a guy who isn't even championship standard anymore.
Dan Posted 26 November 2014 Posted 26 November 2014 I can't deal with this place anymore CAN WE PLEASE SCORE
LCFCCKEANO Posted 26 November 2014 Posted 26 November 2014 There is a large difference between being shit, and looking totally out of their depth. Ulloa and vardy are the only reason we have any points on the board this season. Ulloa has not been poor at all, not in any game, he lacks service, and often the only player in the side looking to have any quality going forward. The recent results have been disappointing, but I have yet to see us play against a side with a better defence than ourselves, as we have been extremely solid. We lost 2-0 at Southampton for instance, but we were great defensively. So far the only outfield players apart from the defence, who look like they belong at this level are Ulloa, Mahrez, king (after his performances against Chelsea and everton) and james (after his performance against sunderland). Nugent got 8 goals in open play last season...that is not good enough. Players like King have got criticism in the past, which is laughable when he has scored more goals in open play in multiple seasons. I would rather put a kid with potential on the bench than a guy who isn't even championship standard anymore. I also feel like Schlupp deserves some recognition, against the bigger clubs his overall contribution was fantastic, and he does work up and down and in general has done well at lm. I think he is another one who looks like he has a Premier League career, even if his technicals are a tad stinky
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.