Skirge Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 HE stuck a foot in the ball broke lose.. did nothing else all game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest andrew Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 he was decent today. to say he did "nothing else all game" is untrue. hes also clearly not match fit Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 His movement was good, that's why he got the important touch for the goal. But...other than that he could hardly kick the ball in the right direction. Still, him and Shola did show they can offer a threat of sorts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlacknWhiteArmy Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 HE stuck a foot in the ball broke lose.. did nothing else all game That's pretty much what I was getting at, people write him off whereas if Ranger had done that, he'd be getting praised for movement and such. Loven was fairly good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 He had a decent first half, but faded completely in the second. It's an improvement over most of the performances that I've seen this season, where he's struggled to get involved at all. I'd still like to see Ranger given a chance though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfmag Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I know he's not Champions League or anything but I think his movement causes teams problems. Realise this is not the Championship but thought the link ups between him and Routledge last season was a key factor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I don't remember him and Routledge linking up much at all. We played against the worst team in the league today and he still didn't look a goal threat, that's what it comes down to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 People keep going on about how shite Lovenkrands is and how Ranger should start, and yet Ranger has had more games than Lovenkrands and has scored none. Lovenkrands may have scored only 1 goal but it's more than Ranger and despite what people say he was in the right place for the attempt which came of the post for Shola to tap in today. People need to stop making out that Nile Ranger is fabulous, he has proved nothing so far and if he has a bad attitude to training and discipline which I have heard for a long time now, why should he start? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 People keep going on about how shite Lovenkrands is and how Ranger should start, and yet Ranger has had more games than Lovenkrands and has scored none. Lovenkrands may have scored only 1 goal but it's more than Ranger and despite what people say he was in the right place for the attempt which came of the post for Shola to tap in today. People need to stop making out that Nile Ranger is fabulous, he has proved nothing so far and if he has a bad attitude to training and discipline which I have heard for a long time now, why should he start? Similar reasons to the Krul argument. Only one of them has the potential to improve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlacknWhiteArmy Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Lovenkrands certainly has got good movement as proven today, I think his feet will improve with confidence/match fitness. Obviously not the long term answer, and I'm not saying he's up to standard either, but he can do a job for us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 People keep going on about how s**** Lovenkrands is and how Ranger should start, and yet Ranger has had more games than Lovenkrands and has scored none. Lovenkrands may have scored only 1 goal but it's more than Ranger and despite what people say he was in the right place for the attempt which came of the post for Shola to tap in today. People need to stop making out that Nile Ranger is fabulous, he has proved nothing so far and if he has a bad attitude to training and discipline which I have heard for a long time now, why should he start? Shockingly transparent misrepresentation of the stats. Lovenkrands has started 3 or 4, compared to Nile's 0. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 People keep going on about how s**** Lovenkrands is and how Ranger should start, and yet Ranger has had more games than Lovenkrands and has scored none. Lovenkrands may have scored only 1 goal but it's more than Ranger and despite what people say he was in the right place for the attempt which came of the post for Shola to tap in today. People need to stop making out that Nile Ranger is fabulous, he has proved nothing so far and if he has a bad attitude to training and discipline which I have heard for a long time now, why should he start? Lovenkrands is playing at the end of his career and is unlikely to improve, he ran about today and never looked like scoring and that is what he's in the side to do when playing up front. He wasn't bad today and he wasn't good either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 People keep going on about how shite Lovenkrands is and how Ranger should start, and yet Ranger has had more games than Lovenkrands and has scored none. Lovenkrands may have scored only 1 goal but it's more than Ranger and despite what people say he was in the right place for the attempt which came of the post for Shola to tap in today. People need to stop making out that Nile Ranger is fabulous, he has proved nothing so far and if he has a bad attitude to training and discipline which I have heard for a long time now, why should he start? Similar reasons to the Krul argument. Only one of them is going to improve with experience. Krul is actually on a par with Harper. Nile Ranger didn't exactly set the Championship alight, and hasn't shown much this season. Would prefer to see Lovenkrands in before him any day tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfmag Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I don't remember him and Routledge linking up much at all. We played against the worst team in the league today and he still didn't look a goal threat, that's what it comes down to. They sure did last season. Diagonal run from lovelypants and ball either side of the full back from Routledge for him to run on to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Krul is actually on a par with Harper. Nile Ranger didn't exactly set the Championship alight, and hasn't shown much this season. Would prefer to see Lovenkrands in before him any day tbh. Ranger is at least as good as Lovenkrands, certainly no further away than Krul is from Harper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 People keep going on about how s**** Lovenkrands is and how Ranger should start, and yet Ranger has had more games than Lovenkrands and has scored none. Lovenkrands may have scored only 1 goal but it's more than Ranger and despite what people say he was in the right place for the attempt which came of the post for Shola to tap in today. People need to stop making out that Nile Ranger is fabulous, he has proved nothing so far and if he has a bad attitude to training and discipline which I have heard for a long time now, why should he start? Shockingly transparent misrepresentation of the stats. Lovenkrands has started 3 or 4, compared to Nile's 0. He's still scored none. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Krul is actually on a par with Harper. Nile Ranger didn't exactly set the Championship alight, and hasn't shown much this season. Would prefer to see Lovenkrands in before him any day tbh. Ranger is at least as good as Lovenkrands, certainly no further away than Krul is from Harper. Based on what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 People keep going on about how shite Lovenkrands is and how Ranger should start, and yet Ranger has had more games than Lovenkrands and has scored none. Lovenkrands may have scored only 1 goal but it's more than Ranger and despite what people say he was in the right place for the attempt which came of the post for Shola to tap in today. People need to stop making out that Nile Ranger is fabulous, he has proved nothing so far and if he has a bad attitude to training and discipline which I have heard for a long time now, why should he start? Similar reasons to the Krul argument. Only one of them is going to improve with experience. Krul is actually on a par with Harper. Nile Ranger didn't exactly set the Championship alight, and hasn't shown much this season. Would prefer to see Lovenkrands in before him any day tbh. Lovenkrands should be given a couple of games to make his case but he has to be more consistent. For me he's like Guthrie, seems to disappear all too easily. Ranger, disciplinary issues aside can't really be judged on a few cameo performances as sub. Let's see him start a couple of games before we decide he's useless. Personally I like him and think he's got a future if he keeps his head right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Based on what? Based on what they've all done this season when playing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlacknWhiteArmy Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 No shit Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Must say, Lovenkrands just edges it for me based on the fact that he's a different 'type' of striker. The rest of them are in the Carroll 'mould' and so don't really offer much more to the team. We're desperate for a quick, play it on the floor striker to add to the squad like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Krul is actually on a par with Harper. Nile Ranger didn't exactly set the Championship alight, and hasn't shown much this season. Would prefer to see Lovenkrands in before him any day tbh. Ranger is at least as good as Lovenkrands, certainly no further away than Krul is from Harper. Based on what? based on not falling over if he's sneezed at by a defender. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 People keep going on about how s**** Lovenkrands is and how Ranger should start, and yet Ranger has had more games than Lovenkrands and has scored none. Lovenkrands may have scored only 1 goal but it's more than Ranger and despite what people say he was in the right place for the attempt which came of the post for Shola to tap in today. People need to stop making out that Nile Ranger is fabulous, he has proved nothing so far and if he has a bad attitude to training and discipline which I have heard for a long time now, why should he start? Shockingly transparent misrepresentation of the stats. Lovenkrands has started 3 or 4, compared to Nile's 0. He's still scored none. Neither of them are going to get goals at this level, so it comes down to which one troubles defenders more and which one is a better partner for the other striker. There's only one answer to those questions, and it most certainly isn't Peter Lovenkrands. The other thing, he's nearly 31. If he was capable of playing at this level, why hasn't he demonstrated it yet? Ranger will be a PL class player within 2 or 3 years if we use him the right way, Lovenkrands will never be that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Based on what? Based on what they've all done this season when playing. What has he done, that has resulted in anything? He's given the ball away a couple of times in dangerous areas which have resulted in goals for the opposition, once in the league cup against Accrington. He's got himself into some good areas, but has he scored any? Has he set up any? Ok so he hurries the defence a bit, but he's hardly set the league alight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Must say, Lovenkrands just edges it for me based on the fact that he's a different 'type' of striker. The rest of them are in the Carroll 'mould' and so don't really offer much more to the team. We're desperate for a quick, play it on the floor striker to add to the squad like. At least that's an argument. To slag a forward off because he's scored no goals coming on as a sub is just plain ignorant. Players like Ranger can hold the ball up, knock defenders about and win balls in the air for a start. Not aimed at you btw, more at blefescu. Link to post 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