Burbage Fox Posted 19 January 2015 Author Posted 19 January 2015 Did you give him a medical/fitness test when you met him on Friday? Only a Prostate exam and that was fine
Manwell Pablo Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Did you give him a medical/fitness test when you met him on Friday? Why would he do that there is nothing wrong with him.
Spanner73 Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Personally I think pearson tactically went another way and tried to match Stoke the best way he thought instead of thinking what we could do again he concentrated too much on the opposition and possibly thought he couldn't beat them in the air so went for the total passing game as he thought we'd fair best that way and they would struggle but it backfired terribly ESP as we found out late on shawcross wasn't playing , basics are you don't change personnel that has worked for you and got you a good result in the previous match .
Mark_w Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 But that's just stupid. your basically saying we are naming two wingers on the bench, one of which "isn't quite up to it" in case of both wingers having to go off, could of been the case? Deary me. What if both CB's had to go off? Then I assume he would have brought Moore and De Laet on. Of course with no other CM available, he may have been left in a position where he had to put Lawrence there as he did during the cup game, there are of course only seven substitute slots, so he'd have had to have weighed up which positions it was most important to have cover for. You could be right, and he may have dropped someone who's started a couple of games all season for a player who's been a key part of the side. Bastard. But you don't actually know the reasoning.
iamafox Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 What I don't understand is if Albrighton was fit enough for the bench, why didn't he come on? Instead we replace Schlupp with a player who isn't a winger.
LCCFox96 Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 It cost us tactically not playing both Albrighton and Ulloa on Saturday. Stoke have a big and physical back line so Ulloa was the best option to counter that and we know Albrighton can pick him out so it baffled me when they both didn't start. That is if we are excluding any likelihood of knocks and illness as discussed above.
lgfualol Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Pearson knew he would be a good option to bring on against Stoke but that would make sense. So instead he brought on Lawrence.
Leeds Fox Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Then I assume he would have brought Moore and De Laet on. Of course with no other CM available, he may have been left in a position where he had to put Lawrence there as he did during the cup game, there are of course only seven substitute slots, so he'd have had to have weighed up which positions it was most important to have cover for. You could be right, and he may have dropped someone who's started a couple of games all season for a player who's been a key part of the side. Bastard. But you don't actually know the reasoning. Pretty much what you said at the start. Defenders are brought off because of injury 9/10 times. Where as wingers and forwards are brought off for tactical reasons rather than just injuries. Hence more forward players on the bench than defenders. Also, Schlupp should have played, as he's been better consistently. The question is (or should be) why wasn't Albrighton brought on instead of Lawrance. Nigel rolled the dice, and his number didn't come up. The same could've happened if he brought Albrighton on. Also, as was mentioned earlier in the thread, it's not just a case of, put the better player in each position in the team. You have to make sure the players all work together in a system, both going foward and defensively.
Manwell Pablo Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Then I assume he would have brought Moore and De Laet on. Of course with no other CM available, he may have been left in a position where he had to put Lawrence there as he did during the cup game, there are of course only seven substitute slots, so he'd have had to have weighed up which positions it was most important to have cover for. You could be right, and he may have dropped someone who's started a couple of games all season for a player who's been a key part of the side. Bastard. But you don't actually know the reasoning. I'm not saying he's wrong to play Schlupp merely standing up for people's rights to discuss why Marc Albrighton was dropped for footballing reasons without you rolling out stupid reasons for people not being able to discuss it. As I've pointed out there is over whelming evidence to suggest he's fine. And on top of that someone else has now come in and informed us he's been training all week. It might not be "impossible" but using that logic we may as well close the forum. It's not impossible that any player at any time could be carrying some sort of ailment so no one can ever have an opinion on players, it's also not impossible that Pearson is actually a dog shit manager and all his success is down to his back room staff so you aren't allowed to have an opinion that he's a good manager. It's also possible the Thai's are 1000's of year old from another galaxy and have traveled here after watching one of our games on a giant telescope from the planet Xong and really quite enjoying it. Back in the real world VS is not an extraterrestrial and there was absloutley sod all wrong with Marc Albrighton
MrSpaM Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Ulloa wasnt playing so Albrighton wasnt going to as Albright best qualities are crossing and with Nugent and Vardy getting on to crosses isnt there strong point Makes you wonder why we were launching pointless long balls all game then, especially considering our midfield were incapable of passing the ball to the front two.
Tommy G Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 In the second half did lawrence try and control the ball then kick it out of play? It was near the bench. I just want to check I wasnt dreaming or got him mixed up. Thanks
BlueJoe Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 This. Although i wouldnt have minded seeing Albrighton and Ulloa start ahead of Schluup and Vardy but hindsight is a wonderful thing This isn't an issue of hindsight it's the fact Pearson loves playing Schlupp, Vardy and Nugent yet they keep on not performing! Albrighton played well in the two previous games yet was dropped to the bench. Ulloa, Kramaric and Albrighton should have started and if they needed to the should have come off in the second half. Pearson clearly likes to be very prudent in his selection but he should be setting the team up to run out of the blocks not bringing on £17m of talent on at 70 mins putting pressure on them to pull us into the game. I still believe it was James's absence on Saturday that cost us in the middle. Because we were organised for 89 mins and it was only an exceptional player that hurt us. Yet we didn't create enough... AGAIN
Silverdaz Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Well I think he has learnt to drive and got a few qualifications when he left school
MooseBreath Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Schlargent vs Krambrightoa Who starts, u decided.
Kitchandro Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 We don't see them train, we don't know what's going on in their personal lives, we don't how fit they are, we don't know whether they're mentally and physically in a position to play well. Put simply, we know **** all about why decisions were made and because of that we are not really in a position to decide how good/bad the decisions were. Certainly we don't know enough to say that Pearson doesn't understand what it takes to stay in the Premier League, and as you're posting on a football forum rather than managing a football team, I imagine it's fair to assume that you don't understand what it takes to keep a football team in the Premier League, especially one that is the second cheapest in the division. Well, that's why the question was asked. 'What has Marc Albrighton done?' It's an interesting question, because he certainly shouldn't have been dropped for football reasons.
Kitchandro Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 He's not made a reason up he's just said it's possible, which it is. The bloke could have had the sniffles all week for all we know. I doubt it, the better player so far this season in Schlupp came in for him. Hardly crime of the century. If we'd lost and had Schlupp on the bench we'd have the other side of the forum slating him for not starting Schlupp. The better player based on what? He's played about 20 matches more than Albrighton and has had a handful of decent performances at best.
hesapeepingtom Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 We don't see them train, we don't know what's going on in their personal lives, we don't how fit they are, we don't know whether they're mentally and physically in a position to play well. Put simply, we know **** all about why decisions were made and because of that we are not really in a position to decide how good/bad the decisions were. Certainly we don't know enough to say that Pearson doesn't understand what it takes to stay in the Premier League, and as you're posting on a football forum rather than managing a football team, I imagine it's fair to assume that you don't understand what it takes to keep a football team in the Premier League, especially one that is the second cheapest in the division. Jesus Christ you really do want to drain pearsons clock of every last drop of spunk.
Babylon Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 The better player based on what? He's played about 20 matches more than Albrighton and has had a handful of decent performances at best. Based on my eyes and my opinion. He was fantastic against Liverpool in his last game, far better than Albrighton in either the Newcastle or Villa games and has been improving in to one of our better performers over the season. Knockaert got given MOTM by a lot of people against Villa, so it would have been harsh to drop him in a lot of peoples minds. Just as it would have been harsh to relegate Schlupp to the bench when he's been doing very well himself. Someone had to lose out.
goose2010 Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 He played ok against a poor Villa side, and ok against a poor Newcastle side. Jeff was on fire, probably the best he has ever played for us before he got injured and Knockeart had probably his best game ever against Villa so would of been harsh to drop him. If Jeff is fit (which he was) he starts its a no brainer. Albrighton should of come off the bench on Saturday instead of Lawrence but was right to be dropped.
Manwell Pablo Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Based on my eyes and my opinion. He was fantastic against Liverpool in his last game, far better than Albrighton in either the Newcastle or Villa games and has been improving in to one of our better performers over the season. Knockaert got given MOTM by a lot of people against Villa, so it would have been harsh to drop him in a lot of peoples minds. Just as it would have been harsh to relegate Schlupp to the bench when he's been doing very well himself. Someone had to lose out. Ok now make the point for Tom Lawrence.........
kingfox Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 The way Jeff had been playing prior to his injury, as soon as he became fit again he had a right to come back in. First half at the weekend he was our most dangerous outlet, had the beating of players and he set up our best chance. Knockaert put in a good shift against Villa, his defensive work was pretty impressive, and on his performance I wouldn't of dropped him. Therefore Albrighton deserved to be on the bench, if there was something wrong he wouldn't of even been on the bench, and Wood would of been included.
Kitchandro Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 Based on my eyes and my opinion. He was fantastic against Liverpool in his last game, far better than Albrighton in either the Newcastle or Villa games and has been improving in to one of our better performers over the season. Knockaert got given MOTM by a lot of people against Villa, so it would have been harsh to drop him in a lot of peoples minds. Just as it would have been harsh to relegate Schlupp to the bench when he's been doing very well himself. Someone had to lose out. He's been good recently, but as I said with far more appearances and starts than Albrighton he's still had very few good displays. I'm thinking of about 4 or 5. How can you say he's been better this season when Albrighton has barely started 4 or 5 matches? Let's be honest now, Schlupp was an absolute pile of cack until the last month, and was cack again on Saturday.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.