Jump to content

Lloyd Kelly


Guest

Recommended Posts

Just now, TheBrownBottle said:

All probably a bit harsh on the lad - I’d assumed when we picked him up that he’d been brought in as a squad player

 

If he’s been brought in as a first teamer, then I’d be a bit more concerned. 

He's been on about nailing down the lb slot for England recently 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What was that about coming in to shore things up defensively? Let crosses get by him all the time. In al likelyhood he’s a good player, but should not have taken Hall’s place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Upthemags said:

Poor marking on the goal which he played on. But, arguably more importantly, he was a true passenger on the attack. Less progressive than BDB, somehow, on the left.


Sorry but that goal came from Livramento switching off and letting Tavernier waltz into the box unchallenged, on the other side of the pitch to where Kelly was. He was deeper that the other defenders, but that’s not how Tavernier's goal happened

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ghandis Flip-Flop said:


Sorry but that goal came from Livramento switching off and letting Tavernier waltz into the box unchallenged, on the other side of the pitch to where Kelly was. He was deeper that the other defenders, but that’s not how Tavernier's goal happened

Semenyo played a free pass into the box because Kelly was forcing him inside despite being a meter from being out of bounds. At best, it was unimpressive marking. Hall came on and transformed that left side with Barnes. There's a reason one player fetched 30m at 18 years old, and the other was allowed to run down his contract in the prime of his career.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Upthemags said:

Semenyo played a free pass into the box because Kelly was forcing him inside despite being a meter from being out of bounds. At best, it was unimpressive marking. Hall came on and transformed that left side with Barnes. There's a reason one player fetched 30m at 18 years old, and the other was allowed to run down his contract in the prime of his career.


Aye definitely, I bet Semenyo would’ve gotten no change at all out of Hall if he'd started too 🤦🏻‍♂️ and by your "Logic" Antony is one of the best wingers in global football.

 

Honestly some people just love to be negative and piss and moan. I bet your nickname is Sad Sack at work like 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez people are harsh on here, he wasn't amazing by any stretch, but he wasn't particularly poor, he was very "Meh". 

 

Its his first game, and looks defensively solid, if a bit unimaginative going forward, him and Hall will be a horses for courses thing, in fact we've already seen it to be honest. Last week at home against a team we're fancied against, we start Hall to offer an extra attacking dimension, then when we need to be defensively solid and are backs to the wall, Kelly comes on and he shores us up, and does a good job. Today, we are away against a dangerous team that has pace, and Kelly starts as he's quicker, and can offer extra protection, then when we are behind, Hall comes on and offers that extra attacking threat. Its all about the situation and the game state, and having two full backs that have different strengths is a good thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ghandis Flip-Flop said:


Aye definitely, I bet Semenyo would’ve gotten no change at all out of Hall if he'd started too 🤦🏻‍♂️ and by your "Logic" Antony is one of the best wingers in global football.

 

Honestly some people just love to be negative and piss and moan. I bet your nickname is Sad Sack at work like 

No need to get tickled, its my opinion mate. Ad hominem is childish.

 

I'll stick to what we all saw with our own eyes - side was much better once Hall and Trips came on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Upthemags said:

No need to get tickled, its my opinion mate. Ad hominem is childish.

 

I'll stick to what we all saw with our own eyes - side was much better once Hall and Trips came on.

 

We were much better when Longstaff and Murphy went off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, The Butcher said:

Give him a wee bit of time maybe?:lol:

 

Tell that to Howe. Should have started Hall. 

 

I have a lot of patience for Howe and his coaching up is brilliant. But I thin he is in his own head. Hall was not half bad last week and it gives you more going forward.

 

I thought Kelly was meh to poor. Just didnt contribute and as not particularly strong at the back. He seems unprepared/scared. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NobbySolano said:

Hall was not half bad last week.

He was like, especially in the second half, and we looked better when Kelly came on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually thought he was one of our better players from the first half. Yes he probably should have cut out the cross leading to the goal, but he was solid overall and kept their biggest threat quiet. If we managed to keep the ball better, rather than treating it like a bomb, then he would have not received the stick from some on here. 

 

It didn't help that Burn's first touch was probably the worst I'd seen since he joined and the right hand side just pumped it long most of the time. Hall would definitely have struggled when they had the momentum in the first 45. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CPL said:

Actually thought he was one of our better players from the first half. Yes he probably should have cut out the cross leading to the goal, but he was solid overall and kept their biggest threat quiet. If we managed to keep the ball better, rather than treating it like a bomb, then he would have not received the stick from some on here. 

 

It didn't help that Burn's first touch was probably the worst I'd seen since he joined and the right hand side just pumped it long most of the time. Hall would definitely have struggled when they had the momentum in the first 45. 

 

I really admire the honesty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

should never have been purchased and he was bought due to some of his affiliations. Should have saved the wages and tagged them on to Tosin's offer or to actually get the defender we wanted.

 

As somebody said above, his team at the time seemed all but content to let their injury prone defender go out of contract and leave for free. He wasnt in the market we should be shopping from.

 

None of this is his fault and I will always back him when he plays

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Tonalis Bookie said:

should never have been purchased and he was bought due to some of his affiliations. Should have saved the wages and tagged them on to Tosin's offer or to actually get the defender we wanted.

 

As somebody said above, his team at the time seemed all but content to let their injury prone defender go out of contract and leave for free. He wasnt in the market we should be shopping from.

 

None of this is his fault and I will always back him when he plays

 

He turned down their contract offer, and is highly rated there. And he is a good player, who you've obviously never seen previously, but here you are making wild assertions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, KaKa said:

 

He turned down their contract offer, and is highly rated there. And he is a good player, who you've obviously never seen previously, but here you are making wild assertions.

 

yep, never seen him play, obviously.

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...