Husband and Watkins

[daisy 145]

Should never play for our club again, ever. The changes yesterday were wrong but if these are two of the best we can come up with then god help us.

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

[quote user="daisy"]Should never play for our club again, ever. The changes yesterday were wrong but if these are two of the best we can come up with then god help us.[/quote]Seems like a fair and proportionate response to a poor performance. What about a public flogging before we give them free transfers?

[king canary 8,749]

Watkins has looked awful all season to be fair.

[DDD In The Fine City 1]

Didnt look awful when he came on against Sheffield Wednesday, in fact I''d argue it was him that mainly changed the game

[JayNCFC 14]

Scored a blinder in pre-season, but these two when it matters have really been lacking

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

Husband was terrible for the first couple of months, but had put in a few much improved appearances just before he got injured. I would imagine Lewis will be first choice unless he really struggles, but Husband is a decent squad player. Watkins has been bang average and shouldn''t be in the team, but he did have a good 45 minutes against Wednesday.

[Salopian 1]

Husband arrived with a reputation of "better going forward than defending" (- in the Pinto tradition), which seemed to suit the Farke philosophy of three at the back and wing backs. In fairness to him, he game after a season out for much of the time through injury.

Some of us thought that he would need a few months to produce his best, but he has not played so much for us.

Ditto Watkins. He may have played last season, but he has been in and out this season, and when he plays it''s sometimes as a winger sometimes as a striker. How far the presence of Pinto far up the pitch was a help for Watkins we may never know.

What we paid for each may be an indication that we we didn''t sign top quality, as with several of our signings, because of the financial straitjacket. If we were not also so deficient in other parts of the team, the two of them might have established themselves and be playing better now.

Steaperman also failed at LB, but now we have the youngster who seems very good. If he lasts, and especially if Murphy becomes more consistent, it is difficult to see Husband playing very much in the future.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

In isolation, (not withstanding the bloody dive) why oh why, did Husband not shoot? What on earth was going through his mind, at that point? Inexplicable.

[kingsway 101]

Husbands looked better when he''s briefly played further upfront on the left, while being below par most of the time at left back!

I like Watkins tenacity but overall his end product has been virtually non existent. Watkins seems to me an "odd job" player who can play in a few positions without being very good in any of them. I also think he''d of been better of going to a team of sloggers like Burton or Ipshut where the hustle bustle/ high work rate, low quality football would of suited him better!

Along with Vrancic and Franke poor signings this season!

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

Watkins needs a sustained run. Like 5 or 6 starts in a row to get into form.

The odd start here and there is not doing him any favours.

Watkins is a good player. He proved that last year at a supposedly weaker team.

Husband on the other hand, not good enough.

[lake district canary 4,820]

[quote user="Crabbycanary3"]In isolation, (not withstanding the bloody dive) why oh why, did Husband not shoot? What on earth was going through his mind, at that point? Inexplicable.[/quote]Looking at his movement, he was trying to get the ball on to his left foot and in the process, crossing in front of the defender.  I presume he felt a touch from behind and went over, as we are kept being told by the wise and wonderful that a player is entitled to do under those circumstances.  Quite why Wes was getting so irate about it when he won a penalty a year or two ago without even being touched, I don''t know.

[Herman 11,135]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]Watkins needs a sustained run. Like 5 or 6 starts in a row to get into form.

The odd start here and there is not doing him any favours.

Watkins is a good player. He proved that last year at a supposedly weaker team.

Husband on the other hand, not good enough.[/quote]I am sure, as you have shown over the years, that you, and many City fans, will have enough patience to give a player 5 or 6 games to get up to speed.

[Making Plans 957]

[quote user="lake district canary"]Looking at his movement, he was trying to get the ball on to his left foot and in the process, crossing in front of the defender.  I presume he felt a touch from behind and went over, as we are kept being told by the wise and wonderful that a player is entitled to do under those circumstances.  Quite why Wes was getting so irate about it when he won a penalty a year or two ago without even being touched, I don''t know.

[/quote]Jesus, can''t you ever be honest for once even though that may mean that you have to criticise our Club or our players every now and again.There was no touch, he should have had a shot, he should have scored but he decided, not very convincingly, to dive.Not surprised that Wes had a pop at him because it was easier to score than fall over and there was no gaurantee that we would have got a pen or converted it.It was an absolute shocking act that probably cost us 2 points.He should never be allowed to wear the shirt again.Oh, and BTW, who was it who posted this just a couple of weeks ago.[quote user="lake district canary"]Have watched MOTD for last few weeks

after not having watched it since we were relegated from the PL.  What

strikes me even more than ever is the cheating that goes on every week,

every match - players going down too easily, on their way down before

even touched, running into an outstretched boot and falling over, etc

etc.   Yes, I know it''s been there for years, but now the numerous

camera angles and slow motion show these up in ever more

detail.........yet the pundits still say  "he''s entitled to go down" or

whatever.  Football will ever be the game it was while such blatant

cheating is deemed acceptable.  The obvious dive or the badly timed dive

is lambasted, yet the subtle ones are not - even though under close

scrutiny they are just as obvious.   [/quote]

[Samwam27 605]

The thing is, when you get picked you have to show the gaffer you''re undroppable, with a great performance. That gets you a run in the team.

Husband has had plenty of chances this season and has looked poor most of the time, one of our worst left backs for some time.

So Watkins had a good 45mins against Wed. Whoopedoo. Against all the times he''s played he hasn''t shown the undustrious energy that we thought we were getting. IMO hasn''t added anything to secure a run, and even more frustrating to see him getting, and wasting, chances, when Wildschut doesn''t.

There are many better and affordable players that would do better for ncfc. Two very bad signings

[lake district canary 4,820]

Don''t know why you''re getting your knickers in a twist, Making Plans, there is no contradiction in my views on diving.  For the record, I was going in what I could see, not what I am being told. Do you know for certain he didn''t get a touch?  It doesn''t make any difference - a dive is a dive, but when week in week out we are told that it is acceptable for a player to go down in those circumstances, then it is not surprising to see it happen. Do you know for sure he didn''t get a touch from behind?

[ron obvious 1,711]

Looking at the highlights Husband certainly seemed to be clipped from behind.

But that was from only one angle - the back; did anyone get a good look at it from a better angle?

[Making Plans 957]

[quote user="lake district canary"] I presume he felt a touch from behind and went over,[/quote]So you, either watching on iFollow or looking at the highlights, "presume" that he felt a touch from behind and went over and you are happy with your presumption.Presumably, the ref and our very own Wes Hoolahan, who were 5 yards away, saw quite clearly that he didn''t get a touch from behind but nevertheless Husband decided to take the easy option of falling over when it was easier to score - presumably because he was scared of missing an easy opportunity and he thought he could pass the responsibility to somebody else.And as for there not being any contradiction in your 2 posts then I think you need to read them again.Or is it not ok for players in the PL to dive but perfectly ok for Husband to dive.You are a fraud LDC.You always twist your arguments to favour NCFC rather than being totally honest with yourself.That''s why the majority of your posts are held in such contemp by other posters.

[0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

[quote user="daisy"]Should never play for our club again, ever. The changes yesterday were wrong but if these are two of the best we can come up with then god help us.[/quote]Worrying thought is that this is the second time Webber has signed Husband he signed him on loan at Huddersfield.

[JF 694]

Anyone have a link to this dive? It’s not in sky’s highlights

[lake district canary 4,820]

[quote user="Making Plans"][quote user="lake district canary"] I presume he felt a touch from behind and went over,[/quote]So you, either watching on iFollow or looking at the highlights, "presume" that he felt a touch from behind and went over and you are happy with your presumption.Presumably, the ref and our very own Wes Hoolahan, who were 5 yards away, saw quite clearly that he didn''t get a touch from behind but nevertheless Husband decided to take the easy option of falling over when it was easier to score - presumably because he was scared of missing an easy opportunity and he thought he could pass the responsibility to somebody else.And as for there not being any contradiction in your 2 posts then I think you need to read them again.Or is it not ok for players in the PL to dive but perfectly ok for Husband to dive.You are a fraud LDC.You always twist your arguments to favour NCFC rather than being totally honest with yourself.That''s why the majority of your posts are held in such contemp by other posters.[/quote]

I am no fraud and I never said it was ok for Husband to dive.....so where did you get that from?  And I asked you the question whether you were certain he had not been touched from behind, which you haven''t answered. That Wes seemed to think he had dived is fine if he had a good view - but he was also looking from behind and would not have been certain there was no contact. I would vastly have preferred Husband to have gone on and scored, but he WAS cutting back across the defender to get the ball on his left foot - and there is no angle to prove he wasn''t clipped from behind. 

[danielsroundabout 9]

LDC, by claiming that your two posts do not contradict one another, you are making yourself look a prize plonker. Just admit that you are talking complete garbage in one or other (maybe both) of the posts.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

I''m not condoning Hoolahan''s dive, but Husband was nailed on to score from there (Wes wasn''t) , and Husband''s (non) reaction to getting booked, made him look as guilty as hell. IF he did feel a touch from behind (no innuendos intended) then he would (should) have been up on his feet, protesting to the ref. He did not do any such thing

[lake district canary 4,820]

[quote user="danielsroundabout"]LDC, by claiming that your two posts do not contradict one another, you are making yourself look a prize plonker. Just admit that you are talking complete garbage in one or other (maybe both) of the posts.[/quote]Then read the f****g posts again and tell me where I said it was ok for Husband to dive. 

[Making Plans 957]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="danielsroundabout"]LDC, by claiming that your two posts do not contradict one another, you are making yourself look a prize plonker. Just admit that you are talking complete garbage in one or other (maybe both) of the posts.[/quote]Then read the f****g posts again and tell me where I said it was ok for Husband to dive. 

[/quote]I agrre that you did not say in so many words that it was ok for Husband to dive but you did say "I presume he felt a touch from behind and went over, as we are kept

being told by the wise and wonderful that a player is entitled to do

under those circumstances" which implies that you thought it was ok.Conversely, and correct me if I''m wrong, but at no time have you taken the other view and said that if he was not clipped from behind then it was a dive and that he was trying to cheat.In other words all the benefit of the doubt in your eyes is with Husband who as far as you are concerned was doing everything that you thought in your earlier post was so bad.And that is where the contradiction is.

[danielsroundabout 9]

LDC

The fact is, you condemn diving in one post yet construct an excuse for Husband when everybody, including himself and his teammates fully accept what he did. Farke also.

[lake district canary 4,820]

[quote user="danielsroundabout"]LDC

The fact is, you condemn diving in one post yet construct an excuse for Husband when everybody, including himself and his teammates fully accept what he did. Farke also.[/quote]I was not aware he had accepted he had dived.  Could you tell me where he said that?  I am quite happy to condemn his action if he dived, but have seen nowhere where he has said that.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,035]

Husbands lack of quality is perhaps unsurprising considering he was playing at Doncaster on loan and having only played a handful of games at Middlesbrough. ....Watkins is more surprising as a player who supposedly scored 10 and had 12 assists at barnsley last season??.....we can''t have signed the same player?

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Herman"][quote user="lincoln canary"]Watkins needs a sustained run. Like 5 or 6 starts in a row to get into form.

The odd start here and there is not doing him any favours.

Watkins is a good player. He proved that last year at a supposedly weaker team.

Husband on the other hand, not good enough.[/quote]I am sure, as you have shown over the years, that you, and many City fans, will have enough patience to give a player 5 or 6 games to get up to speed.[/quote]

Zzzzzzzzzzz......

[canarydan23 4,758]

LDC, do you think Husband dived?

Yes or no.

[lake district canary 4,820]

[quote user="canarydan23"]LDC, do you think Husband dived?

Yes or no.[/quote]No. A dive for me is someone who goes down without being touched and I think he got some kind of clip or touch from behind.  Whether it was enough to make him go down or not, there was imo some contact.  To go down in that situation without being touched would have been nigh on ridiculous - and I don''t think he is that stupid. So no, for me not a dive, but only he knows for sure.