THAT Kent ‘pass’

[RedM]

I’ve seen a couple of comments on other threads but maybe we could have some discussion here as I need help. Someone please explain to me how our team benefits by him playing?

Before I start, yes I realise he is young, away from home, only on loan (thank God). He maybe a brilliant player one day, for someone else as he obviously has ‘something’ as Liverpool have picked him up, but for us here and now, it’s a no from me.

I’ve not seen him put one good shift in yet, nothing to include him in the squad never mind starting or a place on the bench. He came on yesterday and almost immediately when we were in possession made a cross field ball instead of being played forward played backwards and when most of our players were advancing we were suddenly on the backfoot. It wasn’t a badly hit ball that was intercepted, it was a deliberaly played pass, I honestly think he forgot which colour we were playing in, saw a free player wearing red and passed the ball! It was that bizarre!! Barnsley very nearly had the ball in the net from that. 

I’m sure he is a lovely lad and I wish him well, at another club. I’m sure we have youngsters who are at least equal in what he offers, hopefully better. He STILL doesn’t look up, he STILL wants to take on three players and dazzle them with ‘tricks’ .

Waste of time for him being here, waste of time for us being here. But that’s pretty standard with our other loans too this season. Shocking use of the loan system.

Rant over.

[EmissionImpossible]

With hindsight yes a poor loan signing but at the time I was very excited. 

[red panda]

Possibly clutching at straws, but here goes ....  He often seems to dribble without getting much closer to goal.  Does this help create space for other players?  Perhaps the opposition don't know about him and might actually be scared when he starts running with the ball?

Still, the good thing about both Kent and Diony is that they are only loans

[samo II]

Second away game I’ve been to after Preston where his arrival on the pitch did absolutely nothing to improve us.

I echo much of what RedM has said in that I don’t think he’s utterly terrible or that he won’t end up a good player, but right here right now he is not contributing in a positive way.

Genuinely have seen Eliasson show more when brought on to try and improve us, so at a loss as to why Kent is getting minutes above him.

Hope Kent smashes a hat trick next game to prove me wrong, of course, but don’t see that happening. 

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

5 minutes ago, EmissionImpossible said:

With hindsight yes a poor loan signing but at the time I was very excited. 

Me too. 

Reminds me of when Michael Bridges signed for us in how you feel you aren’t seeing the player you thought you were getting.

Was brilliant against us, obviously got talent but something isn’t working for him at AG and that’s not helping City.

[Midred]

7 minutes ago, red panda said:

Possibly clutching at straws, but here goes ....  He often seems to dribble without getting much closer to goal.  Does this help create space for other players?  Perhaps the opposition don't know about him and might actually be scared when he starts running with the ball?

Still, the good thing about both Kent and Diony is that they are only loans

Wasn't  he at Barnsley last season before they sent him back? Their forum seemed to imply "lots of tricks with no end product."

[AshtonPark]

I think he will go on to be a great player at some point in his career, but he really isn’t what we need at the moment 

[Ivorguy]

He's one for the future !

[GrahamC]

Think the time has come to pay Liverpool whatever the penalty clause is and send him back.

We have Eliasson kicking his heels, O’Dowda on his way back, this chap adds absolutely nothing to us & won’t be with us next season.

Personally I think he is greedy & not a team player and the flak Diony has got has spared him more stick.

[CyderInACan]

The commentator on Radio Bristol said  "Ryan Kent's run comes to nothing"  and I text it to a few mates. Sums him up. 

[mozo]

After his disappointing loan spell in Germany I'm surprised we thought he'd be better here.

[havanatopia]

24 minutes ago, EmissionImpossible said:

With hindsight yes a poor loan signing but at the time I was very excited. 

Did you know much about him then?

Kent and Diony have done sweet FA since they have arrived. They were supposed to be impactful according to LJ. Eliasson also nothing but since he is City's player he is another for the future I suppose.

We will probably look back on January as when we lost out on promotion. Play offs or not we are nowhere near strong enough. 

[RedM]

5 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Think the time has come to pay Liverpool whatever the penalty clause is and send him back.

We have Eliasson kicking his heels, O’Dowda on his way back, this chap adds absolutely nothing to us & won’t be with us next season.

Personally I think he is greedy & not a team player and the flak Diony has got has spared him more stick.

In a way I can understand the greed, he is desperate to prove himself and the more he tries the worse he seems to get unfortunately. I think more work has to be done on the training ground, obviously it is being done but if he cannot replicate what he is learning to being in a match situation, it has to be a major flaw in a footballer surely.

He certainly hasn’t hit the ground running like many other loans, and as you say players like  Eliasson are not getting game time. Don’t forget we have already had Leko here this season too.

[Super]

I dont believe that him and Leko are poor players. Maybe they just dont fit our style of play. Both are miles better than Paterson though who has done nothing now for months and crazily still gets a starting place.

[Olé]

"What did Eliasson write in Lee Johnson's Xmas Card" is right up there with the Bermuda Triangle, James Corden's success, and Shergar's whereabouts.

He was a regular, rarely disgraced feature from the bench until then - even against Man Utd - and then suddenly the bloke has become persona non grata.

I bet the Discovery channel will make documentaries about this in years to come.

[Tin Soldier]

Eeee awwww!

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

16 minutes ago, havanatopia said:

Did you know much about him then?

Plenty of people were very impressed with him when he played against us last season, myself included. Why shouldn’t we have been excited when we signed him on loan in January especially when we’ve tried to bring him in before?

 

 

[Offside]

His pace and trickery would be a real asset if there was an end product, but there hasn’t been one. Maybe he’s trying too hard, or maybe he just doesn’t fit into our style of play. Whatever the reason, the purpose of loan signings is to make an impact but both Kent and Diony have been disappointing.

[Clevedon Red]

1 hour ago, EmissionImpossible said:

With hindsight yes a poor loan signing but at the time I was very excited. 

Me too was a stand out player against us last season shame it hasn’t worked out though.

[Tin Soldier]

3 minutes ago, Clevedon Red said:

Me too was a stand out player against us last season shame it hasn’t worked out though.

Plenty of players stood out against us last season!

[Charlie BCFC]

He started off very well against Sunderland, QPR and Leeds but other than that not much else.

 

Hes a fantastic dribbler of the ball but his decision making in the final third is very poor.

[Charlie BCFC]

5 minutes ago, tinman85 said:

A real shame we didn't sign Jamie Murphy. He was clearly our first target in Jan. 

I like him great player but obviously he’s a Rangers fan so you can’t really fight that

[EmissionImpossible]

3 hours ago, havanatopia said:

Did you know much about him then?

Kent and Diony have done sweet FA since they have arrived. They were supposed to be impactful according to LJ. Eliasson also nothing but since he is City's player he is another for the future I suppose.

We will probably look back on January as when we lost out on promotion. Play offs or not we are nowhere near strong enough. 

Yes, from what I had seen of him with Barnsley and all Liverpool fans had positive things to say about him.

i wouldn’t have said I was excited otherwise!

[Dr Balls]

A large part of the problem would appear that he is trying so hard, too hard to impress, that he is not playing as a member of the team, but rather as an individual wanting to show off his skills. LJ intimated as much after the Sunderland game. And if anything it's getting worse rather than better when he comes on as a sub with limited game time, rather than being an integral starting team player. Plus his experience in Germany may have exacerbated things compared to his previous season at Barnsley where he was a key player in their team & system.

[swanker]

4 hours ago, EmissionImpossible said:

With hindsight yes a poor loan signing but at the time I was very excited. 

You seem to get excited about a lot of things. 

[havanatopia]

4 hours ago, RedM said:

In a way I can understand the greed, he is desperate to prove himself and the more he tries the worse he seems to get unfortunately. I think more work has to be done on the training ground, obviously it is being done but if he cannot replicate what he is learning to being in a match situation, it has to be a major flaw in a footballer surely.

He certainly hasn’t hit the ground running like many other loans, and as you say players like  Eliasson are not getting game time. Don’t forget we have already had Leko here this season too.

I am trying to think of which loan's have hit the ground running for us this season?

From memory:-

Diony, Kent, Leko, Woodrow; to be respectful they have all been exceedingly poor.

And with regards to January I had forgotten the forgotten man, Liam Walsh. Firstly, why buy him, secondly, why throw him in immediately for 2 or 3 games only for him to be banished ever since to the reserves? Do we call this in depth analysis of a player before he is bought? I can understand gradually bringing someone in step by step but the way this has panned out so far it smacks of desperation, realisation he is a miss and relegate the fella down the pecking order. To varying degrees you could use the same analysis to a lot of the players brought in recently. You seriously have to question our recruitment and yet, at the same time, give the coaching staff huge credit for getting it right with the majority of 'existing' players in the squad.. crudely, you could say this is ALL because we switched from a Cotterill 3 at the back to a 4. or, at the very least, this is where it all began. 

Get our recruitment right then and we would have stayed in touch with Wolves; that is what I strongly contest.

[old_eastender]

3 hours ago, Olé said:

"What did Eliasson write in Lee Johnson's Xmas Card" is right up there with the Bermuda Triangle, James Corden's success, and Shergar's whereabouts.

He was a regular, rarely disgraced feature from the bench until then - even against Man Utd - and then suddenly the bloke has become persona non grata.

I bet the Discovery channel will make documentaries about this in years to come.

Perhaps he didn't send LJ a Xmas card at all - that could be it!

Seriously it is baffling how he has not been given a chance given our mainly woeful form since beating QPR at home, especially now Djuric is back and we have someone who will get his head on the end of any decent crosses, as he showed against Ipswich. Pato has been consistently poor, Kent shown no end product, but Eliasson still not given a chance, even off the bench. Now I know some LJ 'lover' will say we don't see them in training and LJ does, but with Pato & Kent failing to deliver in matches where it counts, surely Eliasson should be given a chance?

 

[New Dazzler]

3 hours ago, JonDolman said:

Kent has all the fancy tricks, pace and delivers a good corner, but that's pretty much it. Lack of intelligence, poor movement and vision. Poor shot on him, poor crosses in open play, poor passer, he is lightweight, poor at tracking back. He keeps onto the ball too long, wanting too many touches. He can't tackle and does not press like others in our team. 

Apart from all that, he's a fine player!!

[havanatopia]

3 hours ago, Olé said:

"What did Eliasson write in Lee Johnson's Xmas Card" is right up there with the Bermuda Triangle, James Corden's success, and Shergar's whereabouts.

He was a regular, rarely disgraced feature from the bench until then - even against Man Utd - and then suddenly the bloke has become persona non grata.

I bet the Discovery channel will make documentaries about this in years to come.

Perhaps it was a copy and paste from the one from Liam Walsh?

3 hours ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

Plenty of people were very impressed with him when he played against us last season, myself included. Why shouldn’t we have been excited when we signed him on loan in January especially when we’ve tried to bring him in before?

Ok noted thanks.

1 hour ago, EmissionImpossible said:

Yes, from what I had seen of him with Barnsley and all Liverpool fans had positive things to say about him.

i wouldn’t have said I was excited otherwise!

Thanks, maybe reaching the heights of Bristol City has gone to his head or the coaching staff are actively encouraging him to be selfish knowing that in one of our remaining games he is going to go on a 100 miles an hour mazy run beating 5 players and score a screamer that clinches our play off berth. Because if they do not have this crystal ball future knowledge I am not sure what he is doing here ahead of Walsh and Eliasson. 

[RedM]

2 minutes ago, havanatopia said:

I am trying to think of which loan's have hit the ground running for us this season?

From memory:-

Diony, Kent, Leko, Woodrow; to be respectful they have all been exceedingly poor.

And with regards to January I had forgotten the forgotten man, Liam Walsh. Firstly, why buy him, secondly, why throw him in immediately for 2 or 3 games only for him to be banished ever since to the reserves? Do we call this in depth analysis of a player before he is bought? I can understand gradually bringing someone in step by step but the way this has panned out so far it smacks of desperation, realisation he is a miss and relegate the fella down the pecking order. To varying degrees you could use the same analysis to a lot of the players brought in recently. You seriously have to question our recruitment and yet, at the same time, give the coaching staff a huge pack on the back for getting it right with the majority of 'existing' players in the squad.. crudely, you could say this is ALL because we switched from a Cotterill 3 at the back to a 4. or, at the very least, this is where it all began. 

Get our recruitment right then and we would have stayed in touch with Wolves; that is what I strongly contest.

Although we were spoilt with Tammy last year, he was a hard act to follow, we seem to have used the loan system very poorly. Other teams seem to do much better. Personally I don’t like loans, unless you can secure a Tammy-type, I would much rather develop what we have in house.

I don’t understand how Walsh has been used either. I guess to justify why he was bought in, he had little impact so have been labelled ‘one for the future’ and gone to the reserves, along with others.

I can only think we didn’t secure our main targets and these were purchased/loaned because we had so many injured players who were returning later than hoped, not exactly panic buy but someone better than no one.  I can’t see Championship quality never mind Premiership quality in any of them, not from what I’ve witnessed anyway.

[Mr Popodopolous]

The problem with LJ is that he has his system, then seems to try to shoehorn people in.

He needs to tweak his system so we can move forward in a different way- Walsh and Kent weren't decently rated for no reason. Kent is clearly trying too hard, but LJ's inflexibility plays its part here.

[havanatopia]

14 minutes ago, RedM said:

Although we were spoilt with Tammy last year, he was a hard act to follow, we seem to have used the loan system very poorly. Other teams seem to do much better. Personally I don’t like loans, unless you can secure a Tammy-type, I would much rather develop what we have in house.

I don’t understand how Walsh has been used either. I guess to justify why he was bought in, he had little impact so have been labelled ‘one for the future’ and gone to the reserves, along with others.

I can only think we didn’t secure our main targets and these were purchased/loaned because we had so many injured players who were returning later than hoped, not exactly panic buy but someone better than no one.  I can’t see Championship quality never mind Premiership quality in any of them, not from what I’ve witnessed anyway.

I had forgotten about Tammy as a comparison; a once in ten gem perhaps. 

If one fails on targets and goes for 2nd or 3rd choices though you end up with a bunch of players that are simply not going to be considered for the first team or thrown in because we have no choice as we perhaps witnessed; that backs up my desperation remark and i would far rather we bring no one under those circumstances not least because it takes time to manage someone whom, in quick fashion, you know is not good enough. Management time that is diverted from where it needs to be; with the players that count. 

Could these signings have not only pulled scarce resources from where it is needed most, with the requisite fall in standards, but also upset the entire dressing room? Doing nothing would have been far better; Looking back we should not have signed Diony, Kent or Walsh in my view. They have brought absolutely nothing when we needed it most.

[REDOXO]

Engvall not very good

Diony Pony

Kent Simply awful

They all may turn into something brilliant but something needs to change fast!

[You Do The Dziekanowski]

A brick wall

Bas Savage

A crane

A mop

Stern John

A wet flannel 

A bowl of salad

 

a list of things with a better end product and attacking threat than Ryan Kent

[Carey 6]

He had 1 assist in about 40 games for Barnsley. I had no idea at the time why everyone was so excited about signing him. 

I’d send him back to Liverpool & give Eliasson his minutes. 

[BCFC Grim]

Three additions to our squad in January that offer absolutely nothing.

Cracking job City.

[Garland-sweden]

Kent, no no and no. Cant for my life see that he have been in the starting eleven. Last game on the bench and came on. Shows nothing, absolutely nothing. Wonder how LJ thinks when he picking the team and Kent are in it. Eliasson is miles better and Kent takes his place on the bench, dont know what to say.

[Lrrr]

I get the impression Kent is the sort of player who will move to Celtic 'tear up' the SPL, get a bigish move to the premier league and get exposed for how poor the SPL is in making him look good. 

[GrahamC]

6 hours ago, havanatopia said:

I am trying to think of which loan's have hit the ground running for us this season?

From memory:-

Diony, Kent, Leko, Woodrow; to be respectful they have all been exceedingly poor.

Leko’s best games for us were his early ones, scroll back far enough on otib and I bet you can find some early performances being lauded.

Early on too Woodrow had an excellent game (and scored a cracker) in what could yet be a vital win over Derby. Obvious he will be leaving this summer & not a popular view this I know, but I’ll bet anyone his career will have more Championship goals in it than that of the woeful Matty Taylor.

The other two clearly haven’t worked out, some loans don’t- since we returned to The Championship Peter Odemwingie, Dave Cotterell & ahem, Lee Tomlin have all made an impact for us as loan players, so I doubt our average is too much different to many others..

[CiderHider]

Some moments of brilliance, but needs to grow up a bit

[cidered abroad]

11 hours ago, AshtonPark said:

I think he will go on to be a great player at some point in his career, but he really isn’t what we need at the moment 

I doubt it. He doesn't have a football brain. 

[CiderHider]

3 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

I doubt it. He doesn't have a football brain. 

What is a football brain? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Kent Paterson

     Reid

Inside forwards...They can play this way for sure. It isn't a hard concept to grasp, more than likely get more out of them both that way too as Paterson likes to play as a 10, and Kent isn't an out and out winger.

 

[redsquirrel]

13 hours ago, samo II said:

Second away game I’ve been to after Preston where his arrival on the pitch did absolutely nothing to improve us.

I echo much of what RedM has said in that I don’t think he’s utterly terrible or that he won’t end up a good player, but right here right now he is not contributing in a positive way.

Genuinely have seen Eliasson show more when brought on to try and improve us, so at a loss as to why Kent is getting minutes above him.

Hope Kent smashes a hat trick next game to prove me wrong, of course, but don’t see that happening. 

that hatrick after diony gets 4 in the first half

[redsquirrel]

8 hours ago, You Do The Dziekanowski said:

A brick wall

Bas Savage

A crane

A mop

Stern John

A wet flannel 

A bowl of salad

 

a list of things with a better end product and attacking threat than Ryan Kent

no pond full of frog spawn?

[EmersonsRed]

He cost us 2 points against Sunderland by being greedy. Not liked him since then. Shocker of a footballing brain.

[Cowshed]

On ‎31‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 08:59, RedM said:

I’ve seen a couple of comments on other threads but maybe we could have some discussion here as I need help. Someone please explain to me how our team benefits by him playing?

Before I start, yes I realise he is young, away from home, only on loan (thank God). He maybe a brilliant player one day, for someone else as he obviously has ‘something’ as Liverpool have picked him up, but for us here and now, it’s a no from me.

I’ve not seen him put one good shift in yet, nothing to include him in the squad never mind starting or a place on the bench. He came on yesterday and almost immediately when we were in possession made a cross field ball instead of being played forward played backwards and when most of our players were advancing we were suddenly on the backfoot. It wasn’t a badly hit ball that was intercepted, it was a deliberaly played pass, I honestly think he forgot which colour we were playing in, saw a free player wearing red and passed the ball! It was that bizarre!! Barnsley very nearly had the ball in the net from that. 

I’m sure he is a lovely lad and I wish him well, at another club. I’m sure we have youngsters who are at least equal in what he offers, hopefully better. He STILL doesn’t look up, he STILL wants to take on three players and dazzle them with ‘tricks’ .

Waste of time for him being here, waste of time for us being here. But that’s pretty standard with our other loans too this season. Shocking use of the loan system.

Rant over.

Weeks ago I pointed out he would not fit the way Bristol City were playing but could fit the way they might. He was added with another loan to add a cutting edge (opinion!) and move towards a more traditional 4-4-2. That was not the style City were playing. His skill level means he could add a differing aspect to play, he does beat a man but his skill does not lead to a pass, shot, or importantly crosses to that bigger two in 2 v Reid and Patterson. 

The loans made should have added verticality into play leading to balls into the final third and the box quicker. It has not. 

[redsfan]

You are seeing all the same issues with Kent that I saw last season at Barnsley. It seems he has not addressed any of his failings at all re: lack of end product.

The problem you will have though is that, like with us, Liverpool will have insisted on an agreed percentage of time that he is available he must be on the pitch otherwise you will have big penalty clauses to pay. He picked up for us at Oakwell towards the back end of the season but in the middle section of the season he was complete gash but was undroppable.

[Major Isewater]

13 hours ago, CiderHider said:

What is a football brain? 

It's a stupid phrase that means a bloke isn't very smart .

Footballer or not , if you keep doing the same thing and keep getting a bad result then an intelligent person tries something else.

Ergot , poster thinks Kent is not that bright .

 

[havanatopia]

1 hour ago, redsfan said:

You are seeing all the same issues with Kent that I saw last season at Barnsley. It seems he has not addressed any of his failings at all re: lack of end product.

The problem you will have though is that, like with us, Liverpool will have insisted on an agreed percentage of time that he is available he must be on the pitch otherwise you will have big penalty clauses to pay. He picked up for us at Oakwell towards the back end of the season but in the middle section of the season he was complete gash but was undroppable.

Quite stupid if we had to agree to certain minutes per game. An appearance per game perhaps is manageable. I hope City really do their homework better before they take such a deal again. They got it right with Tammy but seems they lacked thoroughness with Kent.

[CHIPLEY RED]

I'm no expert but I actually like Kent. At Bolton away I thought he was one of our better players, loads of energy, all over the pitch and look dangerous - only thing he lacked was taking a shot.

On Saturday at Barnsley I thought the whole team played poorly. Our passing was poor and we relied on lumping it forward too often. 

Kent made a couple of shocking passes but he wasn't the only one. Pack, who you'd think was David Beckham  if you read this forum, also made a number of very poor passes when in a good position.

Football is all about opinion and thats mine, I don't expect you to agree with me.

 

[RedM]

3 hours ago, havanatopia said:

Quite stupid if we had to agree to certain minutes per game. An appearance per game perhaps is manageable. I hope City really do their homework better before they take such a deal again. They got it right with Tammy but seems they lacked thoroughness with Kent.

We agreed minutes for Tammy. Standard in many loans but Liverpool are well known to drive very hard bargains when they let their players out, they want more than most for their young talent and many clubs won’t touch their players because of this.

We had the same with a youngster we had on loan a few years ago (can’t remember his name, think he went to Scotland in the end, was it Wilson, Danny Wilson maybe? And no not the manager). He was on huge money at Liverpool for his age and experience. Hardly played here if at all, but Liverpool clawed back a huge chunk of money from us. 

[RedM]

1 hour ago, CHIPLEY RED said:

I'm no expert but I actually like Kent. At Bolton away I thought he was one of our better players, loads of energy, all over the pitch and look dangerous - only thing he lacked was taking a shot.

On Saturday at Barnsley I thought the whole team played poorly. Our passing was poor and we relied on lumping it forward too often. 

Kent made a couple of shocking passes but he wasn't the only one. Pack, who you'd think was David Beckham  if you read this forum, also made a number of very poor passes when in a good position.

Football is all about opinion and thats mine, I don't expect you to agree with me.

 

Bolton is one of the few games I’ve missed, so fair comment.

I’d love nothing more to log onto this forum tomorrow and be able to start another ‘THAT pass’ thread for all the right reasons.

[Red-Robbo]

Kent is far too young and new to this club and system to write off as a crap player.

However he isn't the loanee I'd have brought in this January.

[Mr X]

He may end up as a good player but at the moment he just tries to beat as many players as he can instead of looking up and passing the ball to another player who could be in a better attacking position 

[Davefevs]

7 hours ago, CHIPLEY RED said:

I'm no expert but I actually like Kent. At Bolton away I thought he was one of our better players, loads of energy, all over the pitch and look dangerous - only thing he lacked was taking a shot.

On Saturday at Barnsley I thought the whole team played poorly. Our passing was poor and we relied on lumping it forward too often. 

Kent made a couple of shocking passes but he wasn't the only one. Pack, who you'd think was David Beckham  if you read this forum, also made a number of very poor passes when in a good position.

Football is all about opinion and thats mine, I don't expect you to agree with me.

 

I can see why you could form that opinion.  For what it’s worth I thought he had a good game against Sunderland.  Yes he should’ve passed to Pato at 3-1, but he was really unlucky to shave the post with a volley too.

However, as a team mate of Kent, you’re never sure when he’s going to release it.  You make a run, expecting to get it and you don’t get it.  He loses it and you’re committed beyond your line.  You do it again, ditto.  You stop making runs for him.  That us why he often gets caught on the ball, because his team-mates have stopped making runs for him.  When he goes down the left, he always does that check-back onto his right, losing momentum of the attack, and as a forward your clever run off the Centre-Back is spoiled, having to check to retain onside position.  As a defender you know he’s gonna do this.  Once in a while Kent must go on the outside if only to make his opponent second-guess.  He has the pace, and gas two decent feet.  The way he currently plays, is predictable (for someone meant to be unpredictable and skillful), and doesn’t fit the way we play.  He might be more effective alongside Fam or Bobby.

I remember in the 15/16 season, v MKD, people had a right go at Litts for letting Powell come inside him and curl one into the far corner (but like Fam’s goal on Saturday).  The problem was that one minute before Powell has got him 1 on 1 and done him down the line and whipped in a ball that we scrambled clear.  Of course 1 minute later, same scenario, Litts shows him inside (Agard slow to react) and it’s 1-1.

Even Freeman, on the rare occasion he went down the right, past his marker, on his wrong foot, caused problems.  All defenders expected step-over followed by bring it back onto his left peg....I just wish he’d trusted his right foot swinger more often.

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

8 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

It's a stupid phrase that means a bloke isn't very smart .

Footballer or not , if you keep doing the same thing and keep getting a bad result then an intelligent person tries something else.

Ergot , poster thinks Kent is not that bright .

 

I have always thought that "a football brain" is meant to have a prefix of either good or bad, as it simply means ability to read the game. 

[1bristolcity]

8 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

It's a stupid phrase that means a bloke isn't very smart .

Footballer or not , if you keep doing the same thing and keep getting a bad result then an intelligent person tries something else.

Ergot , poster thinks Kent is not that bright .

 

Sorry Major you don't understand the term.

[cidered abroad]

I think that "football brain" means an instinctive idea of whether to pass or not, to whom, and when. An awareness of where team mates are without having more than a quick glance. 

A bit like a top snooker player who is looking not for the next pot but the one or two thereafter. 

I could forgive Kent if he passes it when he could have gone past a defender or held it instead. But he just keeps it until he loses it to a pack of defenders.

He is a talented controller of the ball but little else at present. I would prefer Eliasson as the winger sub. 

 

[Son of Fred]

On 31/03/2018 at 09:32, GrahamC said:

Think the time has come to pay Liverpool whatever the penalty clause is and send him back.

We have Eliasson kicking his heels, O’Dowda on his way back, this chap adds absolutely nothing to us & won’t be with us next season.

Personally I think he is greedy & not a team player and the flak Diony has got has spared him more stick.

Adds nothing more than our own players are capable of,in fact probably a hindarance..no point him being played-give our own blokes those minutes of possible progression....