|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381 |
I am absolutely shocked to see Adam leading instead of Hendersen in that catagory. First of all Adam cost us 7m, basically half of what Hendersen has cost us, he has more goals and assists then Hendersen, in fact he has more than Downing too. He started nicely, had a terrible spell but is no way the Flop of the year. Have to disagree here. Adam was bought for set pieces, and he took penalties for Blackpool. Come January he had demonstrated an utter lack of ability at kicking a stationary ball, including missing the target in each of his 3 penalty kicks (maybe one was saved, can't quite remember). If he can't do that, his speciality, then what can he do? Henderson by comparison has been played out of position practically all season, and actually does good things on the pitch more often than Adam. He's not been excellent, which is why he finds himself on the flop list, but Adam wouldn't get into the reserves right now. Whilst his set pieces might have caught the eye, no decent manager in the world would sign someone to occupy a first team place just for their set pieces. At least we know Adam 'can' produce quality from set pieces even though it hasn't worked out for him this season. Henderson on the other hand......what 'can' he do which any of us have seen on a regular basis????? He cost twice as much and has contributed much less - FLOP of the season by a country mile! Oh, and can we stop making excuses for henderson saying he is always getting played out of position? He regularly played at right midfield for coventry and sunderland - he can play both rightmid and centremid - neither very well mind you, but those are his positions. Putting him on the right instead of the middle hardly makes him a fish out of water - if he was asked to play in goal I could understand the problem. If Hodgson had signed him would there be as much support or excuses for him? Hmmmm, I wonder......Yes, that is my opinion. You will have a hard time convincing anyone Adam was signed for his dynamic play in the centre of a midfield that got relegated, and who was fairly pivotal in many of the goals scored by their opposition due to his lack of defensive ability. Henderson did indeed play on the right at his other clubs. Well done for spotting that. Did it ever looked like he belonged there while playing for Liverpool? Not once. Yet he was consistently picked there ahead of players like Kuyt and Bellamy. If you're going to use the wrong tool, don't blame the tool, I say. And what on earth are you doing bringing Hodgson up? You want him back, I guess? No one has said that Kenny was right to play Henderson on the right (except you, ironically), and most people have criticised him for it. But you're carrying on like we blindly supported the manager? Or maybe you think that Poulsen and Konchesky were hard done by and should still be at the club? I agree with most of this, but you CANNOT blame Adam for most of the goals blackpool conceded due to him not being very good defensively. That wasn't his job, that isn't how the manager set the team up. Suggesting he was at fault for most of them is ludicrous. Also I don't think Henderson should be completely free from blame. The fact that he looked good on the right for Sunderland means that was potentially in his locker (the ability to play him right I think was instrumental in us signing him personally) so the fact that he has been one of the worst players we've had there in many a year must be partly down to him no? I do however agree it was clear he was failing miserably a long time ago yet Kenny still chose to persist with him so fault lies there too. But Henderson has looked a waste of space in the centre too however. So do you just not play him? No you would try him to see he could turn it around I'm guessing, or sell him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,046
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,046 |
Poulsen is no worse than henderson
You expect anyone to take your argument seriously with a statement like that! You sound like your throwing your dolls out the pram to me. There's obviously some previous animosity between yourself and the king bow to the king!
|
|
|
|
|
|
thundyr
Unregistered
|
|
thundyr
Unregistered
|
I agree with most of this, but you CANNOT blame Adam for most of the goals blackpool conceded due to him not being very good defensively. That wasn't his job, that isn't how the manager set the team up. Suggesting he was at fault for most of them is ludicrous.
Also I don't think Henderson should be completely free from blame. The fact that he looked good on the right for Sunderland means that was potentially in his locker (the ability to play him right I think was instrumental in us signing him personally) so the fact that he has been one of the worst players we've had there in many a year must be partly down to him no? I do however agree it was clear he was failing miserably a long time ago yet Kenny still chose to persist with him so fault lies there too. But Henderson has looked a waste of space in the centre too however. So do you just not play him? No you would try him to see he could turn it around I'm guessing, or sell him. Hmm, so Adam's job at Blackpool did not require him to defend, then? In a 3-man midfield 2 of the players must have some positional sense, and given that Adam was not the furthest forward of the 3 that responsibility is his. It's ironic actually, because Adam's tackling improved quite a lot at Liverpool, but when you're signing a guy you need to know he can do the job. At Blackpool he looked very much a hit-and-miss player, and that's not the kind of thing we should have been looking at signing. The "argument" was whether we signed him for his set piece prowess or because he was a good midfielder, and while I may have exaggerated his defensive inability the point remains that we signed him for the wrong reasons. His loss of form at dead ball situations has made him unpickable for Liverpool - and that's no coincidence. I never said that Henderson was free from blame. But he can certainly not be blamed as much as he has been by people like CarheeX on this forum because he has been poorly managed as well. You don't let a struggling player continue to struggle - you take him out of the spotlight and let him work on his game. In some cases that isn't possible because of injuries, but this season, where we have had one of Kuyt or Bellamy (usually both) available for every game, Henderson should have been occasionally "rested". What has been apparent to me is that Henderson is not in the correct place mentally to be playing for Liverpool - something that can probably be said of all Kenny's signings except for Suarez, possibly Enrique, and lately Carroll. Once he gets his head right he should be able to play with more freedom, and then there is a chance he may be able to play on the right once more. The psyche of a young player is very fragile - Flanagan looks a mess now even though he's not done a great deal wrong in a red shirt, because the mistakes he has made have been very costly. I think we could all ease up on the guy and give him the chance to come good, and he's certainly not been a worse performer than others in the squad.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381 |
I agree with most of this, but you CANNOT blame Adam for most of the goals blackpool conceded due to him not being very good defensively. That wasn't his job, that isn't how the manager set the team up. Suggesting he was at fault for most of them is ludicrous.
Also I don't think Henderson should be completely free from blame. The fact that he looked good on the right for Sunderland means that was potentially in his locker (the ability to play him right I think was instrumental in us signing him personally) so the fact that he has been one of the worst players we've had there in many a year must be partly down to him no? I do however agree it was clear he was failing miserably a long time ago yet Kenny still chose to persist with him so fault lies there too. But Henderson has looked a waste of space in the centre too however. So do you just not play him? No you would try him to see he could turn it around I'm guessing, or sell him. Hmm, so Adam's job at Blackpool did not require him to defend, then? In a 3-man midfield 2 of the players must have some positional sense, and given that Adam was not the furthest forward of the 3 that responsibility is his. It's ironic actually, because Adam's tackling improved quite a lot at Liverpool, but when you're signing a guy you need to know he can do the job. At Blackpool he looked very much a hit-and-miss player, and that's not the kind of thing we should have been looking at signing. The "argument" was whether we signed him for his set piece prowess or because he was a good midfielder, and while I may have exaggerated his defensive inability the point remains that we signed him for the wrong reasons. His loss of form at dead ball situations has made him unpickable for Liverpool - and that's no coincidence. I never said that Henderson was free from blame. But he can certainly not be blamed as much as he has been by people like CarheeX on this forum because he has been poorly managed as well. You don't let a struggling player continue to struggle - you take him out of the spotlight and let him work on his game. In some cases that isn't possible because of injuries, but this season, where we have had one of Kuyt or Bellamy (usually both) available for every game, Henderson should have been occasionally "rested". What has been apparent to me is that Henderson is not in the correct place mentally to be playing for Liverpool - something that can probably be said of all Kenny's signings except for Suarez, possibly Enrique, and lately Carroll. Once he gets his head right he should be able to play with more freedom, and then there is a chance he may be able to play on the right once more. The psyche of a young player is very fragile - Flanagan looks a mess now even though he's not done a great deal wrong in a red shirt, because the mistakes he has made have been very costly. I think we could all ease up on the guy and give him the chance to come good, and he's certainly not been a worse performer than others in the squad. Like I said in my post, Henderson was managed poorly. Never suggested otherwise. But Henderson HAS (in my opinion) been as terrible as anyone else. Certainly (just take a look at his stats) worse than Adam. I don't think I said anywhere that he didn't have any defending to do, I said that wasn't his job. I think it's clear that refers to his primary role, as we're all intelligent enough to know you want 10 players defending and attacking over the course of a game. No one is free from either side of things completely. That's obvious. But like I said it's silly to blame Adam for Blackpools conceded goals? I mean it just doesn't make any sense. You have 11 players trying to stop the opposition team from scoring for a start, and even if you do narrow it down to the midfield 3 you were talking about, if Adam was incapable of doing that defensive role then isn't that bad management like you claim should keep henderson free from 'too much' criticism. For what its worth I actually agree on the two main points. 1. Adam was NOT the kind of player we should have signed. 2. Henderson is young etc etc and has shown enough at Sunderland for me to think better management could get something out of him. Certainly enough to give him more of a chance. It's just the stuff surrounding the players I disagree with. Henderson has been our joint worst player this season in my opinion. And I actually think you are way too hard on Adam.
|
|
|
|
|
