Jump to content

Lloyd Kelly


Recommended Posts

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I think he'll be this team's Aaron Hughes. And I'm fine with that.

 

The Spurs game underlined why he was a sensible signing.  Had Botman not been quite ready or hanging out his arse after 60 minutes he's a solid option to bring on, the same could be said if Hall had been injured. He was signed as a versatile back io let's not pretend like we thought we were bringing in a starting LB/CB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cubaricho said:


:lol: Exactly.
 

Eddie’s track record is great when it comes to developing players. It’s like people would’ve learned that by now instead of saying dumb shit like they know anything. :lol: 

Theres a difference developing young players / playing good players, and what Kelly is. Like Burn before he joined us was a very good defender. He didn’t suddenly become better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Geordie_once_removed said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I think he'll be this team's Aaron Hughes. And I'm fine with that.

 

The Spurs game underlined why he was a sensible signing.  Had Botman not been quite ready or hanging out his arse after 60 minutes he's a solid option to bring on, the same could be said if Hall had been injured. He was signed as a versatile back io let's not pretend like we thought we were bringing in a starting LB/CB.


Aaron Hughes was pretty much a nailed on starter for more than 3 seasons. In what universe is Kelly ever going to be that for us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Ronaldo said:


Aaron Hughes was pretty much a nailed on starter for more than 3 seasons. In what universe is Kelly ever going to be that for us?

He's not and Hughes was a solid starter but one of the weakest links in that team, but he also was rarely embarrassed. You're missing my point that people are being critical of Kelly ignoring the fact he was clearly signing for depth.  Good teams need players like him. People need to stop being so binary about players. Burn, Murphy and now Kelly are all singled out for criticism because of this. Should all of them be starting when all players are fit and we've addressed the weaknesses of the team, no. Does that mean that they useless, also no.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically all of his appearances have come in games where virtually every team mate has been - at best - below par and frequently a shadow of their former selves. Unless we're saying Kelly was personally responsible for making them all terrible, I'm not going to single him out as being beyond hope.

 

But yes, he's probably going to be playing a game of patience for a few months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

His marking on the corner for West Ham's first goal is genuinely one of the worst bits of individual defending I've seen from someone with more than 10 senior games under their belt. Frightens the life out of me going into the Arsenal game but I'd rather play him than risk losing Botman by overdoing it with him. Got to hope he just had a bad day and he's better than that showing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Holloway said:

Burn is 32, he could be holding it all together for 3 years yet


i can’t imagine how slow he’ll be at 34-35 y/o. If Kelly sticks around he outlasts him. Just hope Kelly develops into the type of defender we can rely upon when needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lotus said:


i can’t imagine how slow he’ll be at 34-35 y/o. If Kelly sticks around he outlasts him. Just hope Kelly develops into the type of defender we can rely upon when needed.

Burn probably won't get any slower for the duration of his stay. Neither of them will be in the equation in a couple of years imo 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Geordie_once_removed said:

He's not and Hughes was a solid starter but one of the weakest links in that team, but he also was rarely embarrassed. You're missing my point that people are being critical of Kelly ignoring the fact he was clearly signing for depth.  Good teams need players like him. People need to stop being so binary about players. Burn, Murphy and now Kelly are all singled out for criticism because of this. Should all of them be starting when all players are fit and we've addressed the weaknesses of the team, no. Does that mean that they useless, also no.

Aaron Hughes was underrated on Tyneside the entire time he played for us.  He was the best defender in that Robson side other than Woodgate.  We missed him when he went.
 

Kelly is a back-up.  They’re not comparable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Groundhog63 said:

I'm old enough to remember that video the 2 Bournemouth lads did on Kelly. Lads who'd seen far more of him that you knacker's on here. 

He'll be fine. 😂😂😂😂

 

 


Yeah I think it’s far too early to write him off. He had a bad game against West Ham but has been ok before that. Hes certainly not shite and people are too quick to write players off in general. That said he’s firmly a back up player.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ExiledGeordie said:


Yeah I think it’s far too early to write him off. He had a bad game against West Ham but has been ok before that. Hes certainly not shite and people are too quick to write players off in general. That said he’s firmly a back up player.

 

It's like people need a scapegoat to bash even if they not even fucking playing 😂😀

 

He's not been signed to be the next Baresi and, like all of Eddie's new lads, is being nursed into his squad position. 

Using his performance against West Ham isn't all that fair either, given everyone was shite 😂

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said:

 

It's like people need a scapegoat to bash even if they not even fucking playing 😂😀

 

He's not been signed to be the next Baresi and, like all of Eddie's new lads, is being nursed into his squad position. 

Using his performance against West Ham isn't all that fair either, given everyone was shite 😂

 


Football fans are very reactionary I guess, make swift statements. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's Dan Burn's replacement in the squad. Solid second choice LCB who is also comfortable playing LB.

 

Issue is that Dan Burn is still here, and is still playing quality football.

 

His wages are exorbitant for that role in the squad, the fact that he cost us nothing in terms of his transfer fee helps but if the rumoured 150k p/w is accurate then it's pretty steep for someone that doesn't really appear to have a clear path to significant playing time long term outside of injury to Botman.

 

I guess eventually Burn will move on but I thought they rated Alex Murphy, who is another player with very much the same profile?

 

It's also possible that they brought him in as someone that we thought could be the starter at LB but Hall has just gone and completely made the spot his own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...