Replace Fer with Lansbury?

[# 0]

If we do sell Fer, would that work?

 

I always rated him.

[morty 0]

Where does he play now?Is he for sale?

[Move Klose 303]

Rumoured that N.Forest rejected £3m from Burnley for him.Will be hard to get him as Pearce rates him highly, always picked him in his England U21 squads.

[Trevor Hockey's Beard 526]

I imagine that Lansbury would be less reticent about playing one of the northern sides away on a wet Tuesday night.

We could do worse.

[# 0]

[quote user="CJRV 2014"]Rumoured that N.Forest rejected £3m from Burnley for him.Will be hard to get him as Pearce rates him highly, always picked him in his England U21 squads.[/quote]

 

Everyone has a price and we would have the money.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

I like Lansbury, but I can''t help but feel that quite alot of fans overate him based on one (admittedly excellent) pass against Ipswich.

It sort or reminds me of Pacheco and how many fans overate him because of one very good performance against Scunthorpe. 

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Oh dear Wiz.

I won''t waste time explaining this one to you, because all I''ll get is smug remarks and vitriol.

Lansbury is nowhere near as good as Fer.

[Move Klose 303]

Oh i dont doubt that we have the money, but i wouldn''t expect us wanting to be paying £3m plus for someone like him. Suprised Lambert didnt sign him when we got promoted to the prem. Good player but no way worth over £3m.

[# 0]

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Oh dear Wiz. I won''t waste time explaining this one to you, because all I''ll get is smug remarks and vitriol. Lansbury is nowhere near as good as Fer.[/quote]

 

I know but we may have no choice if the offer is huge.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I like Lansbury, but I can''t help but feel that quite alot of fans overate him based on one (admittedly excellent) pass against Ipswich.

It sort or reminds me of Pacheco and how many fans overate him because of one very good performance against Scunthorpe. 

[/quote]

Really?  Lansbury was a key member of the squad when he was here imo - one of our most consistent performers and scored some important goals.   Always looked competetive and able to upset a defence and looks the business at this level.   Would think he would be an asset to have here - but would still prefer Fer to stay.

[KeiranShikari_2 0]

Would rather we got Simo and Pachinko back.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I like Lansbury, but I can''t help but feel that quite alot of fans overate him based on one (admittedly excellent) pass against Ipswich.

It sort or reminds me of Pacheco and how many fans overate him because of one very good performance against Scunthorpe. 

[/quote]

Really?  Lansbury was a key member of the squad when he was here imo - one of our most consistent performers and scored some important goals.   Always looked competetive and able to upset a defence and looks the business at this level.   Would think he would be an asset to have here - but would still prefer Fer to stay.

[/quote]

As I said, I like Lansbury. I think he''s a decent player with a very competitive attitude. But I think people overate his technical ability. From what I saw of him this season, and a quick look at some statistics easily shows this, he is average technically with a low pass completion rate. He''s an agressive, combative, player who makes alot of interceptions and tackles and has a relatively good goal-scoring record for Forest (about one every five games). Essentially, he''s a right-footed Bradley Johnson who is slightly more technically refined and has a goal-scoring aspect to his game. As a replacement to Johnson, he''d be great but he is too lacking technically to replace a player like Howson or Fer.

[? 0]

A bit hot and cold for me, but having said that he would be an improvement on what we''ve got. Is he available though?

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I like Lansbury, but I can''t help but feel that quite alot of fans overate him based on one (admittedly excellent) pass against Ipswich.

It sort or reminds me of Pacheco and how many fans overate him because of one very good performance against Scunthorpe. 

[/quote]Really?  Lansbury was a key member of the squad when he was here imo - one of our most consistent performers and scored some important goals.   Always looked competetive and able to upset a defence and looks the business at this level.   Would think he would be an asset to have here - but would still prefer Fer to stay.[/quote]

As I said, I like Lansbury. I think he''s a decent player with a very competitive attitude. But I think people overate his technical ability. From what I saw of him this season, and a quick look at some statistics easily shows this, he is average technically with a low pass completion rate. He''s an agressive, combative, player who makes alot of interceptions and tackles and has a relatively good goal-scoring record for Forest (about one every five games). Essentially, he''s a right-footed Bradley Johnson who is slightly more technically refined and has a goal-scoring aspect to his game. As a replacement to Johnson, he''d be great but he is too lacking technically to replace a player like Howson or Fer.

[/quote]Agree with that, exactly what a good team needs at this level.   Johnson/Lansbury would be a good  pair to compete with each other for that position in the team.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I like Lansbury, but I can''t help but feel that quite alot of fans overate him based on one (admittedly excellent) pass against Ipswich.

It sort or reminds me of Pacheco and how many fans overate him because of one very good performance against Scunthorpe. 

[/quote]Really?  Lansbury was a key member of the squad when he was here imo - one of our most consistent performers and scored some important goals.   Always looked competetive and able to upset a defence and looks the business at this level.   Would think he would be an asset to have here - but would still prefer Fer to stay.[/quote]

As I said, I like Lansbury. I think he''s a decent player with a very competitive attitude. But I think people overate his technical ability. From what I saw of him this season, and a quick look at some statistics easily shows this, he is average technically with a low pass completion rate. He''s an agressive, combative, player who makes alot of interceptions and tackles and has a relatively good goal-scoring record for Forest (about one every five games). Essentially, he''s a right-footed Bradley Johnson who is slightly more technically refined and has a goal-scoring aspect to his game. As a replacement to Johnson, he''d be great but he is too lacking technically to replace a player like Howson or Fer.

[/quote]Agree with that, exactly what a good team needs at this level.   Johnson/Lansbury would be a good  pair to compete with each other for that position in the team.

[/quote]

Tettey is a better combative midfielder than both. He is not only an equal to Johnson in terms of his tackling but is also far more mobile (meaning he can play as the solo holder in a diamond or 4-3-3) has a greater interception rate (as his mobility allows him to dart in front of players) and, whilst not an ambitious passer, is incredibly efficient and accurate.

We already have Bradley Johnson, why replace him with Bradley Johnson 1.5 when the other 3 players competing for a central midfield role will still be superior to them?

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

With Wes now regaining his appetite and effectively filling the ACM role, do we really need to spend money on another?

[Katie Borkins 1]

Yes, because Hoolahan is good about 33% of the time and we can and should get better quality in that position - plus more physical strength in the bargain.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

I''d rate Henri Lansbury as no more than 1/3rd of Leroy Fer as a player. Therefore a £3m fee to Forest would require a £9m+ sale price for Fer. I guess that could happen!

 

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Lansbury is the business! I was surprised we never signed him and assumed arsenal wanted to use him. I hope we don''t lose fer at least until Jan as now he is injury free, I could see him really take the piss in this league as we march on to 100 points. I''d like a season where we give it a real go anyway. if he does go, Lansbury would be high on my list of signings.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I like Lansbury, but I can''t help but feel that quite alot of fans overate him based on one (admittedly excellent) pass against Ipswich.

It sort or reminds me of Pacheco and how many fans overate him because of one very good performance against Scunthorpe. 

[/quote]Really?  Lansbury was a key member of the squad when he was here imo - one of our most consistent performers and scored some important goals.   Always looked competetive and able to upset a defence and looks the business at this level.   Would think he would be an asset to have here - but would still prefer Fer to stay.[/quote]

As I said, I like Lansbury. I think he''s a decent player with a very competitive attitude. But I think people overate his technical ability. From what I saw of him this season, and a quick look at some statistics easily shows this, he is average technically with a low pass completion rate. He''s an agressive, combative, player who makes alot of interceptions and tackles and has a relatively good goal-scoring record for Forest (about one every five games). Essentially, he''s a right-footed Bradley Johnson who is slightly more technically refined and has a goal-scoring aspect to his game. As a replacement to Johnson, he''d be great but he is too lacking technically to replace a player like Howson or Fer.

[/quote]Agree with that, exactly what a good team needs at this level.   Johnson/Lansbury would be a good  pair to compete with each other for that position in the team.[/quote]

Tettey is a better combative midfielder than both. He is not only an equal to Johnson in terms of his tackling but is also far more mobile (meaning he can play as the solo holder in a diamond or 4-3-3) has a greater interception rate (as his mobility allows him to dart in front of players) and, whilst not an ambitious passer, is incredibly efficient and accurate.

We already have Bradley Johnson, why replace him with Bradley Johnson 1.5 when the other 3 players competing for a central midfield role will still be superior to them?

[/quote]

Our best performance (arguably) last season was against Spurs  which had Tettey and Johnson in it as well as Fer.  Midfield looked very solid that day.   A midfield of Tettey, Fer and Lansbury could be dynamite, Johnson of course playing a part too.  Three of those four with three pacy/skilful players in front of them could be terrific.

[GJP 79]

Agree with what P J Fry said about Lansbury being a little overrated but also think he''s still a decent player.

Got a bit more natural flair for the game than Johnson but wouldn''t have him in ahead of Fer or the still somewhat underrated Howson.

[morty 0]

[quote user="GJP"]Agree with what P J Fry said about Lansbury being a little overrated but also think he''s still a decent player.

Got a bit more natural flair for the game than Johnson but wouldn''t have him in ahead of Fer or the still somewhat underrated Howson.[/quote][Y]

[Zachariah Lovespoon 0]

Not for me OP. Showed good promise while here but never pushed on. Would rather look for someone still on the up than someone stagnating.

[Salopian 1]

I am sure that we could do this from a financial point of view, but it would not be a replacement. Fer has a strength and atheliticism which make him more effective defensively than Lansbury could ever be.

In my view Fer is the complete central midfielder, while Lansbury is a useful threader of passes around the box, and arguably we already have Surman and Howson for this.

[Katie Borkins 1]

[quote user="Wiz"]

If we do sell Fer, would that work?

 

I always rated him.

[/quote]I agree.  And when my Audi A3 finally packs in, I''m going with a Citroen 2CV.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I like Lansbury, but I can''t help but feel that quite alot of fans overate him based on one (admittedly excellent) pass against Ipswich.

It sort or reminds me of Pacheco and how many fans overate him because of one very good performance against Scunthorpe. 

[/quote]Really?  Lansbury was a key member of the squad when he was here imo - one of our most consistent performers and scored some important goals.   Always looked competetive and able to upset a defence and looks the business at this level.   Would think he would be an asset to have here - but would still prefer Fer to stay.[/quote]

As I said, I like Lansbury. I think he''s a decent player with a very competitive attitude. But I think people overate his technical ability. From what I saw of him this season, and a quick look at some statistics easily shows this, he is average technically with a low pass completion rate. He''s an agressive, combative, player who makes alot of interceptions and tackles and has a relatively good goal-scoring record for Forest (about one every five games). Essentially, he''s a right-footed Bradley Johnson who is slightly more technically refined and has a goal-scoring aspect to his game. As a replacement to Johnson, he''d be great but he is too lacking technically to replace a player like Howson or Fer.

[/quote]Agree with that, exactly what a good team needs at this level.   Johnson/Lansbury would be a good  pair to compete with each other for that position in the team.[/quote]

Tettey is a better combative midfielder than both. He is not only an equal to Johnson in terms of his tackling but is also far more mobile (meaning he can play as the solo holder in a diamond or 4-3-3) has a greater interception rate (as his mobility allows him to dart in front of players) and, whilst not an ambitious passer, is incredibly efficient and accurate.

We already have Bradley Johnson, why replace him with Bradley Johnson 1.5 when the other 3 players competing for a central midfield role will still be superior to them?

[/quote]

Our best performance (arguably) last season was against Spurs  which had Tettey and Johnson in it as well as Fer.  Midfield looked very solid that day.   A midfield of Tettey, Fer and Lansbury could be dynamite, Johnson of course playing a part too.  Three of those four with three pacy/skilful players in front of them could be terrific.

[/quote]

If Johnson is in the team, those pacy and skillful players won''t get anywhere near the service they need to influence the game... 

Also, what about Howson? He is a better player than both Johnson and Lansbury (I won''t compare him to Tettey, as their games are so different and specialised that it would be a disservice to both of them).

And (for me) our best midfield last season was during that period when we played a 4-1-4-1/4-3-3 hybrid, with Tettey as the solo holder (something which Johnson can''t do) and Howson and Fer playing as central midfielders with a strong licence to break forward. With that midfield, we looked secure in defence and were able to maintain possession. The Spurs midfield you mention was purposely physical and defensive as it was in order to counter-act a potential top 4 side. There shouldn''t be any need for Norwich to play such a defensive or physical midfield in a much more balanced Championship, one holding midfielder should be more than enough.  

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Phillip J Fry"]I like Lansbury, but I can''t help but feel that quite alot of fans overate him based on one (admittedly excellent) pass against Ipswich.

It sort or reminds me of Pacheco and how many fans overate him because of one very good performance against Scunthorpe. 

[/quote]Really?  Lansbury was a key member of the squad when he was here imo - one of our most consistent performers and scored some important goals.   Always looked competetive and able to upset a defence and looks the business at this level.   Would think he would be an asset to have here - but would still prefer Fer to stay.[/quote]

As I said, I like Lansbury. I think he''s a decent player with a very competitive attitude. But I think people overate his technical ability. From what I saw of him this season, and a quick look at some statistics easily shows this, he is average technically with a low pass completion rate. He''s an agressive, combative, player who makes alot of interceptions and tackles and has a relatively good goal-scoring record for Forest (about one every five games). Essentially, he''s a right-footed Bradley Johnson who is slightly more technically refined and has a goal-scoring aspect to his game. As a replacement to Johnson, he''d be great but he is too lacking technically to replace a player like Howson or Fer.

[/quote]Agree with that, exactly what a good team needs at this level.   Johnson/Lansbury would be a good  pair to compete with each other for that position in the team.[/quote]

Tettey is a better combative midfielder than both. He is not only an equal to Johnson in terms of his tackling but is also far more mobile (meaning he can play as the solo holder in a diamond or 4-3-3) has a greater interception rate (as his mobility allows him to dart in front of players) and, whilst not an ambitious passer, is incredibly efficient and accurate.

We already have Bradley Johnson, why replace him with Bradley Johnson 1.5 when the other 3 players competing for a central midfield role will still be superior to them?

[/quote]

Our best performance (arguably) last season was against Spurs  which had Tettey and Johnson in it as well as Fer.  Midfield looked very solid that day.   A midfield of Tettey, Fer and Lansbury could be dynamite, Johnson of course playing a part too.  Three of those four with three pacy/skilful players in front of them could be terrific.

[/quote]

If Johnson is in the team, those pacy and skillful players won''t get anywhere near the service they need to influence the game... 

Also, what about Howson? He is a better player than both Johnson and Lansbury (I won''t compare him to Tettey, as their games are so different and specialised that it would be a disservice to both of them).

And (for me) our best midfield last season was during that period when we played a 4-1-4-1/4-3-3 hybrid, with Tettey as the solo holder (something which Johnson can''t do) and Howson and Fer playing as central midfielders with a strong licence to break forward. With that midfield, we looked secure in defence and were able to maintain possession. The Spurs midfield you mention was purposely physical and defensive as it was in order to counter-act a potential top 4 side. There shouldn''t be any need for Norwich to play such a defensive or physical midfield in a much more balanced Championship, one holding midfielder should be more than enough.  

[/quote]

I still don''t "get" Howson. People say he''s good, but from what I''ve seen, he often seems to get bypassed out of the game when trying to defend -  and doesn''t always offer much going forward.   Tettey as a lone holding defensive  player I understand and if that frees Howson to get forward, all well and good - but I''d like to see more from him. I''m surprised you say that we won''t need such a defensive or physical midfield in the championship, I would prefer us to be physical and boss other teams.  But, we have a good selection of midfielders on paper and hopefully all will contribute, whether its one or two holding midfielders.