suffolk fox Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Totally baffled and mystified. Why pay 9.5 million for a striker we then have a proverbial six pointer at home against one of our so called rivals in the bottom six? The man must have been raring to go with a full 90 minutes in a home fixture. The messiah (as alluded too by some on here) decides not to play him? Why? for gawds sake why? He then comes on with about fifteen minutes left and appears to be playing in midfield? pro pearson people please explain to me why?
Fox92 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Nugent played well at Old Trafford, made a difference. Ulloa is our top goalscorer. And nobody refers to Pearson as the "messiah". This is why some of us get frustrated because quotes like that are made up.
Dickov22 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 I'm pro Pearson but I can't understand it. Crazy decision to sign him then revert back to Nugent who has 1 goal this season. Fed up with his team selections now
chapero82 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 How many times has Nugent played this season and played well but nearly scored?
hejammy Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Could this thread have just been added to the Kramaric thread?
cjslcfc Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 I'd play Nugent behind Kramaric for the rest of the season.
Nalis Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Its been said by our Croatian friends that he would take a while to adapt but I'm struggling with this one also. Looked dangerous v Spurs, maybe Pearson is thinking over time he'll develop an understanding in training with Ulloa and that will transfer to matchday when selected/ready. Could this thread have just been added to the Kramaric thread? It probably will be..
Fox92 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 How many times has Nugent played this season and played well but nearly scored? A lot. He creates a lot of chances. He isn't a number ten who will score 20 goals a season. He plays behind.
chapero82 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 A lot. He creates a lot of chances. He isn't a number ten who will score 20 goals a season. He plays behind. That is my point mate, I think he should play in front of 2 strikers, he could do the CAM role
Rocket-Ron Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 I'd play Nugent behind Kramaric for the rest of the season. karmaric likes to play deep. That is obvious of what bits we have seen of him. You'd have to put Nugent in midfield
cjslcfc Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 karmaric likes to play deep. That is obvious of what bits we have seen of him. You'd have to put Nugent in midfield Yes I suppose. However, I could see the two interchanging a lot. Nugent is capable of running the line if needs be. I just want to see a more mobile front line as when we play with that energy we look a much more threatening attacking force by far. People are ready to get the knives out straight away, aren't they!? (Edit: this comment isn't aimed at you Ron)
Webbo Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Pearson picked the team he thought had the best chance of winning. If he'd have picked him and we had lost you'd all be saying he only picked him because he cost £9,5 million.
Dickov22 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 A lot. He creates a lot of chances. He isn't a number ten who will score 20 goals a season. He plays behind. That's ok then. Good idea to continue playing him. Working well so far this season, creating all these chances isn't it
Dan Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Appalling decision from Pearson and even said it before the game.
Sharpe's Fox Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 I would play Nugent behind Kramaric. Harsh on Leo but I think it will bring the best out of both Andrej himself as well as the team.
stuartn27 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Pearson a joke.o well leicester mercury will read Monday.i still believe in the players Wake up mate..
josh_baskin Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 I know what a joke, he must have seen it as a gamble starting him yesterday but wasn't it a gamble signing him anyway? Must have felt it was a safer option starting a striker who is already established as incompetent at premiership level! The mind boggles!
dogadug Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Nugent played better yesterday than Kramaric has played in any of his matches so far...
Dickov22 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Nugent played better yesterday than Kramaric has played in any of his matches so far... Did you miss Nugent's gifted chance through on goal? Pathetic
ARTY_FOX Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 People have accused him of being too light weight and palace are a physical side.
Naylor118 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 So because we paid 7m for Ulloa and 9.5m for Kramaric we have to play them because they were a bit pricey?
st albans fox Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 People have accused him of being too light weight and palace are a physical side. Well that's a problem then as all the teams we will have possession against are physical and the others - we don't have the ball anyway. Tuesday night will be interesting in this regard
Webbo Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Did you miss Nugent's gifted chance through on goal? Pathetic Nugents pathetic because he didn't finish a chance he made himself and Kramaric isn't because he never got anywhere near goal to miss?
Dan Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 So because we paid 7m for Ulloa and 9.5m for Kramaric we have to play them because they were a bit pricey? Or because Kramaric might actually shoot after rounding the keeper or might actually control the ball when given to him. I'm not saying it based on his price, the price hints to me that he was signed with the hope of being the difference between survival and relegation, and we're not even playing him?
kingfox Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 He said he will need time to settle in, but the goals will come. No mate we need January signings to come in and make an instant impact. Kramaric isn't going to do that if we have him on the bench, and he only comes on for 15-20 minutes but instead of playing to his strengths, we lump the ball up and hope for the best. Some of you lot can love Pearson all you like, but for me from what I've seen so far, he isn't playing Kramaric correctly.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.