Babylon Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Again. .why sign a striker who 'needs time to settle'? We don't have time. This for me is the main argument. Krammy could become a City legend. If it don't start happening VERY soon, it will be too late. I'm amazed people can't see this. 9 odd million quid on POTENTIAL wasn't what this club needed in the dire situation we are in. Unless that potential is realised very very quickly. Because your options are limited. Were you expecting us to sign a proven premier league striker? That's just not going to happen is it, the fees alone would be massive and the wages way out of our league.
MooseBreath Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 1) Of course he thinks they are better than what we have... but his will also know better than you or I when he's ready. 2) How can Pearson possibly know how long it will take him to settle. The bloke could be crying himself to sleep because he misses his fecking cat for all we know. Some people hit the ground running, some take a bit of time. It might take him 4 games to settle, it could take him 14 who knows. You get that with every foreign signing. The other options are buy an overpriced striker from the champ (would get moaned at for doing that and could still take time to adapt) or try and get someone from the premier league. Most teams don't want to sell, if they do they are often out of our price range. Do we just not bother at all? 3) Well yes he could have been less effective. Nugent created multiple chances for himself and others. You don't know we'd have even got that just yet. It's perfectly possible to make an objective assessment of the amount of time a player is likely to need before reaching the required form in a new league based on his personality, his attributes as a player and how well they fit with this country and this style of football. If Pearson hasn't bothered to do that, or has got it wrong, then it's poor management. You don't gamble £9.5m on a player who you know nothing about. Again, we scored no goals yesterday. As a striker, it was impossible for Kramaric to be any less effective.
Lcfc_1995 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Pearson clearly thought nugent and Ulloa would play better together yesterday. But ulloa was awful and somehow stayed on for the whole match, I reckon nugent and kramaric, should possibly play vs arsenal, we tend to create more chances when nugent is in the team
Babylon Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 It's perfectly possible to make an objective assessment of the amount of time a player is likely to need before reaching the required form in a new league based on his personality, his attributes as a player and how well they fit with this country and this style of football. If Pearson hasn't bothered to do that, or has got it wrong, then it's poor management. You don't gamble £9.5m on a player who you know nothing about. Again, we scored no goals yesterday. As a striker, it was impossible for Kramaric to be any less effective. You can guess, but you don't know do you. Of course the scouting reports will have been done, we all know that. We aren't dealing with Robots though. The role Kramaric and Nugent play isn't just about goals. They link the midfield with the attack and the build up play is just as important. So yes, he could have played worse and you know that.
Babylon Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Pearson clearly thought nugent and Ulloa would play better together yesterday. But ulloa was awful and somehow stayed on for the whole match, I reckon nugent and kramaric, should possibly play vs arsenal, we tend to create more chances when nugent is in the team If Pearson had taken Ulloa off he'd have got slated for that also. Unfortunately we're at a point where common sense is no longer applied to many critisisms.
Charl91 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 It's crazy. Yes, maybe he would have been no better than Nugent, but we know Nugent isn't good enough, where as this guy has potential and looks much more comfortable with the ball.
RedSoxUK Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Pearson clearly thought nugent and Ulloa would play better together yesterday. But ulloa was awful and somehow stayed on for the whole match, I reckon nugent and kramaric, should possibly play vs arsenal, we tend to create more chances when nugent is in the team I'd like to start seeing Nugent / Kramaric for games vs the lower half teams, and Kram/Ulloa in the games where we'll most likely need a tall man to be a bastard when we go full hoof mode.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.