Chicken With A Banjo Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Do you think you know better than Nigel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatlesaint Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 He isnt as bad as some think, its as simple as that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWD Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 It's just because people are so quick to jump on his mistakes. No-one ever seems to say he has a quiet game, he's either very good or total ****. This is because if he doesn't do something superb, people will only remember the mistakes he made. Defensively I think he's actually very good but gets no credit for it. Sometimes we do carry him, but sometimes we carry Lallana and people don't moan then. That's the risk you take with luxury, flair players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crawlmatth Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Good player. Good manager. End of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red&white56 Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 (edited) He just seems to be one of those players that people either love or hate. Whenever I've seen him play he's been OK, but he doesn't have a stand out charateristic that fans know they are going to get from him and thus endear himself to them. Like Lallana (can dribble), Chaplow (runs like crazy), spiderman (confidence on the ball, moves us forward), etc, so when he's on the puitch you are not quite sure what he's going to do and how he will effect the team and the performance. What I don't understand about him is that he's a Brazilian but he doesn't seem to like to take on players, to use his feet to go around players, he always seems to opt for the square ball. I thought these guys spent hours learning how to dribble and trick their way past people? I'd like to see this from Guly. Edited 1 April, 2012 by red&white56 typo removal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodles34 Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Nige picks him because he has to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobM Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Nige picks him because he has to Does he, though? Guly plays in two positions where we have cover. Barnard came on and looked good yesterday, he's available to replace Guly as a forward, so we have an option there even with our current injuries to other forwards. We have numerous players who can play at RM, Guly's other common position. So NA doesn't have to play him, he clearly chooses to. I think it simply comes down to the fact NA is an experienced football professional and people on this forum are not, never will be, never have been and don't see the game in the same way as somebody who truly understands it at a professional level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexstar Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 There were far worse performances than his yesterday. As soon as he misplaces a pass or doesn't win a header people notice because it's him. Did give away some stupid fouls though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintstr1 Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Nige picks him because he has to This , I think it has something to do with his contract , If he is fit he has to play ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Did give away some stupid fouls though Most of which replays showed were not fouls, simply referee making basic mistake. NA picks Guly because he is the best option in most cases and because he makes things happen. Currently not at his best but his workrate is excellent and he brings a bit of flar to the team. Clearly has much more about him than Barnard for instance, who is clearly struggling now with fitness, and subsequent lack of pace. Would rather have Guly in the team any day than Billy Sharp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pingwing Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 This , I think it has something to do with his contract , If he is fit he has to play ?? In what world would this exist?!!? Clearly too many people have been playing football manager and making things up as no footballer has a "I have to be picked" condition on their contract. That would be beyond stupid. He's picked because he's a decent, skilful player. Not the best in the air, which is why he plays where he is and we shouldn't hoof it towards him, but a good player. Much better player over the course of 45, 60 or even 90 than most the bench we have. Dull thread is dull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Does he, though? Guly plays in two positions where we have cover. Barnard came on and looked good yesterday, he's available to replace Guly as a forward, so we have an option there even with our current injuries to other forwards. We have numerous players who can play at RM, Guly's other common position. So NA doesn't have to play him, he clearly chooses to. I think it simply comes down to the fact NA is an experienced football professional and people on this forum are not, never will be, never have been and don't see the game in the same way as somebody who truly understands it at a professional level. No its the myth that a term of Guly's contract is that he must play. Some mugs on here have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Of course, for someone so obviously lazy and uncommitted, you would he think he would be quite happy to warm the bench and do nothing for his pay packet each week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 This , I think it has something to do with his contract , If he is fit he has to play ?? Have you any evidence for this? I can't believe that any manager would accept a situation where he has to play a certain player every game. This forum is full of successful football managers who could do a much better job than Nigel Adkins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 This , I think it has something to do with his contract , If he is fit he has to play ?? Some people are so gullible. Why would anyone believe such nonsense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouchi Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Look at his goal scoring record, the flexibility he can offer to the formation, his height and skill levels. He'll be just the same in the Premier League, whereas other current members of the squad may find it a level too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 This , I think it has something to do with his contract , If he is fit he has to play ?? Oh Jesus, I was wondering how long it would be before someone came out with that line. Nobody has a must play when fit contract, even Wayne Rooney or Robin Van Persie. Why would you sign an unknown player from an obscure Italian team and give him a contract whereby he must play every game? That would be a complete kick in the nads for the rest of the squad who all have to fight for their spot in the side. It would also mean Guly didn't have to go the extra mile in training and could turn up for a game not caring how crap he was because he knew his place was secure. 'Must play when fit' contracts are a myth, especially for players as unremarkable as Guly. Nigel is picking him because he rates him, simple as. It's like his very own Jermaine Wright, except nowhere near as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintstr1 Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Some people are so gullible. Why would anyone believe such nonsense? Remember it was Cortese who signed him not Adkins , Wasn't there a similar situation with the boy Cortese signed from the Italian side Fiorentina? a couple of seasons ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 The crap about him having to play ''as it's in his contract' is almost as bad as the rumour of Arsenal buying Morgan for us, and we're just looking after him until they want him back. He plays because he gives us a good option and he offered a shed load more than Sharp did by the way. He drops off and allows us to play a couple of different systems, his versatility is why he's in the team. He wasn't great yesterday, but he wasn't the worst at all - he actually made an effort and was positive with the ball. Some of the criticism that is directed at him is just vile and pointless, some fans have made their minds up and that's that - they'll never have those views changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lethallee Posted 1 April, 2012 Share Posted 1 April, 2012 Guly was probably was one of our better players yesterday. He is not lazy at all in fact he worked really hard yesterday. Some of the fouls he gave away yesterday were because he was tracking back to cover our midfield players who were caught out of position. Yes he should of scored at start of game but imo we would of been even more toothless attacking wise without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now