Tom17LCFC Posted 2 November 2014 Posted 2 November 2014 How? And Morgan's chance was from a corner. No one marking him and it went just wide. Should have hit the target. you were explaining earlier in the thread the difference between a chance and a sitter and described vardy's overhead attempt as a chance. there's no way you believe that was a sitter. king should have scored no question. I wouldn't expect vardy to score from the position he was in. a good chance yes, a sitter no.
GingerrrFox Posted 2 November 2014 Posted 2 November 2014 How? And Morgan's chance was from a corner. No one marking him and it went just wide. Should have hit the target. An overhead kick has never been and will never be a sitter. He had no time to do anything else, if Vardy tried to get that ball under control before shooting the defence would have recovered and the chance would have been lost. He had no option but attempt the overhead. King's miss was a free header from 6 yards out, zero pressure on him and he placed it straight at the keeper. Anywhere else and it was a goal.
Captain... Posted 2 November 2014 Posted 2 November 2014 The chance was made a lot harder by the deflection just before it came to King, he didn't have a bad game, but that is not his favoured position, he played the same way as he plays at CM but that meant we were lacking real creativity behind the front 2.
Osavo Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 An overhead kick has never been and will never be a sitter. He had no time to do anything else, if Vardy tried to get that ball under control before shooting the defence would have recovered and the chance would have been lost. He had no option but attempt the overhead. King's miss was a free header from 6 yards out, zero pressure on him and he placed it straight at the keeper. Anywhere else and it was a goal. I'm sorry but Vardy definitely had enough time to chest that ball down and take a volley at goal. Maybe that still wouldn't be a sitter but it would have been a far better chance than the overhead kick, which was surely nothing more than a rush of blood to the head. To be fair to him he probably thought he was offside. I'm not sure I agree with you when you say anywhere else and it was a goal either. King's header was poor but Foster's positioning was excellent, and he would probably have saved it almost anywhere to his right, the way he was moving, and certainly a couple of yards to his left. King was heading from a standing position, after a cross that had little power on and had travelled a long way and had also taken a deflection, it was a much harder chance than you make it out to be.
Dan Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 I rate King but Thrac must seriously see something I miss because I'm not feeling that he was even close to being our best player v WBA.
Dickov22 Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 How? And Morgan's chance was from a corner. No one marking him and it went just wide. Should have hit the target. Ha ha you're not suggesting Vardy's overhead kick was a sitter surely
StanSP Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 Ha ha you're not suggesting Vardy's overhead kick was a sitter surelyNo but using Tom's logic it should be classed as one because he was unmarked and had the goal right in front of him.
Dickov22 Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 No but using Tom's logic it should be classed as one because he was unmarked and had the goal right in front of him. The goal was behind him. He had his back to it, king maybe could have done better but I don't think it was a sitter. There perhaps wasn't enough pace on the cross to enable him to get much power behind it. I don't blame the players for sat. I blame Pearson entirely. Monday morning has arrived and I'm still angry about it!
Babylon Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 I'm sorry but I have to question how on earth you came to the conclusion that King was our man of the match? He comes to that conclusion because he does nothing but bum him on here. He'd have given Alan Sheehan MOTM if he was still here.
chris_lcfc_85 Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 It was a sitter for sure but why is everyone slating him? If he keeps getting in those positions he'll score. He was also the only player to force a save against Fabianski last week..... Maybe the strikers need to start getting in there and doing the business as well
AyewJoking Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 I have to question the idea of four year deals all round without any signs the players are going to be up to it in this league. ties them to the club even when we go down.
Dickov22 Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 It was a sitter for sure but why is everyone slating him? If he keeps getting in those positions he'll score. He was also the only player to force a save against Fabianski last week..... Maybe the strikers need to start getting in there and doing the business as well Good point. When did Nugent last even have a shot?
Tommy G Posted 3 November 2014 Posted 3 November 2014 Thracian have you hit the Whiskey hard? I need to find a post where you have criticised King, there won't be one. He missed a sitter as everyone is saying, you cant defend a player to the hilt every week because he is your favourite. How can a man be MOTM when he did absolutely nothing of note?
Tom17LCFC Posted 4 November 2014 Posted 4 November 2014 No but using Tom's logic it should be classed as one because he was unmarked and had the goal right in front of him. what?! haha I explained how the two were different. your original point was ridiculous.
chapero82 Posted 4 November 2014 Posted 4 November 2014 The chance was made a lot harder by the deflection just before it came to King, he didn't have a bad game, but that is not his favoured position, he played the same way as he plays at CM but that meant we were lacking real creativity behind the front 2. i didn't even know he was playing until that point
Stevosevic Posted 4 November 2014 Posted 4 November 2014 i didn't even know he was playing until that point Really? Was always in the game from where i was watching - was always available for a pass and had plenty of the ball.
bellind Posted 4 November 2014 Posted 4 November 2014 We are weakened when King is in the team, does not no what a tackle is, is light weight when with the ball, and Stringer always reckons he produces more passes than any other player, he doesn't say they are 99% backwards. Not for me and never will be.
Dan Posted 4 November 2014 Posted 4 November 2014 I think that's a bit harsh but if King should be in a diamond then it's without a doubt as one of the middle two rather than at the tip. The tip should be someone with FLAIR like Knockaert or Mahrez. I know Mahrez has never played centrally but I've no doubt he could. We don't have the full backs anyway. Konchesky on his own is suicidal.
Corky Posted 4 November 2014 Posted 4 November 2014 I think that's a bit harsh but if King should be in a diamond then it's without a doubt as one of the middle two rather than at the tip. The tip should be someone with FLAIR like Knockaert or Mahrez. I know Mahrez has never played centrally but I've no doubt he could. We don't have the full backs anyway. Konchesky on his own is suicidal. It's completely wrong.
Thracian Posted 4 November 2014 Posted 4 November 2014 We are weakened when King is in the team, does not no what a tackle is, is light weight when with the ball, and Stringer always reckons he produces more passes than any other player, he doesn't say they are 99% backwards. Not for me and never will be. I'd happily see the stats. Including the number of times King wins possession - or headers - compared with others. Our midfield was often forced to play safe to retain position because of our lack of width, Konchesky's inability to support down the left and the fact that everything was channelled down a far too narrow channel through the centre. Shots on goal would be another stat worth noting. It's funny how King gets stick for missing chances while others avoid criticism for hardly having any between them. As for Babs' dig about Sheehan the fact that we've never signed or produced anyone with even half his ability to deliver an aggressive, accurate free kick sums up the lack of attention to detail that Pearson is forever pretending is important to him. I said pre-season that we'd need to get goals from set-pieces but there's no evidence we've improved in that area for years.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.