Surman

[shaunieboy77 73]

Always thought he was one of our better players and was sad to see him leave. Pleased for him that he is playing regular football in a team looking more than capable of promotion. Its a shame he''s not in our colours..

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

Class player, really wanted him to stay.

Most numpties on here classed him lightweight and not good enough for us. LOL.

Strangely enough the same numpties who don''t rate players like Hooper or Hoolahan. Perhaps a team full of Bradley Johnsons will get us promoted.

[whoareyou? 0]

Have no idea why we sold him. One of the more gifted players at the club, played lots pre-season and then sold. In fact we sold both our left sided midfielders and replaced neither.

[FCC 76]

One of many let go to accommodate inferior replacements.

[Herman 9,754]

He hardly set the world alight while he was here. A few good games in our promotion push but not one that will be anywhere near a hall of famer.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

Too lightweight.... apparently. Actually a decent technical footballer with a good pass on him.

Considering all this talk pre-season of playing attractive attacking football, it seemed ludicrous to let a decent passer of the ball go for nothing.

[Katie Borkins 1]

Eleven appearances so far this season.

Cody Macdonald scored for the Gills today, Adams should never have let him go either.

[Guest]

I like Surman, excellent footballer with good vision and was disappointed to see him go.

I like Bradley as well, and I reckon that if more of our squad showed his commitment and had scored 7 goals we would be sitting in the top 2.

[Guest]

I like Surman, decent footballer with good vision.

I like Bradley as well, and I reckon that if more of our squad showed his commitment and had scored 7 goals we would be sitting in the top 2. Sad that people still try and slate him given he''s one of the few players who has actually rolled his sleeves up and battled this season.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]Eleven appearances so far this season.  [/quote]

Surman has 18 starts in the league as a central midfielder this season, 2 goals, 3 assists, 88.3% passing accuracy.  

[daly 501]

Eleven appearances so far this season.

Cody Macdonald scored for the Gills today, Adams should never have let him go either.

Are you really a NCFC supporter Adams had nothing to do with Cody going no more than Adams had anything to do with my wife getting pregnant.

GET REAL

[Katie Borkins 1]

Your kid does look like Adams though.

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]Class player, really wanted him to stay. Most numpties on here classed him lightweight and not good enough for us. LOL. Strangely enough the same numpties who don''t rate players like Hooper or Hoolahan. Perhaps a team full of Bradley Johnsons will get us promoted.[/quote]

 

Perhaps the club reacted to your wishes of a couple of years ago Lincoln. Now that they see how he is doing with Bournemouth perhaps they think you''re one of these numties you''re speaking of.

 

21/04/2012, 12:13 PM
lincoln canary Joined on 07/08/2008 Posts 3,555	Re: Oh very dear
	And Russell Martin, andrew surman, Elliot ward, Steve Morison are not good enough

[morty 0]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]Class player, really wanted him to stay. Most numpties on here classed him lightweight and not good enough for us. LOL. Strangely enough the same numpties who don''t rate players like Hooper or Hoolahan. Perhaps a team full of Bradley Johnsons will get us promoted.[/quote]

 

Perhaps the club reacted to your wishes of a couple of years ago Lincoln. Now that they see how he is doing with Bournemouth perhaps they think you''re one of these numties you''re speaking of.

 

21/04/2012, 12:13 PM
lincoln canary Joined on 07/08/2008 Posts 3,555	Re: Oh very dear
	And Russell Martin, andrew surman, Elliot ward, Steve Morison are not good enough

[/quote][:D]

[Guest]

Brilliant. Troll outed.

[King Klose 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]Class player, really wanted him to stay.

Most numpties on here classed him lightweight and not good enough for us. LOL.

Strangely enough the same numpties who don''t rate players like Hooper or Hoolahan. Perhaps a team full of Bradley Johnsons will get us promoted.[/quote]

Yep. Same way as Chris Martin was lazy... apparently.

[Len 74]

One of the reasons we''re doing badly is that we never replaced Surman after he was sold. Hence early in the season we tried to rely on playing it down the wing and putting countless crosses into the box. When this didn''t work and we kept getting caught on the break we tried playing four central midfielders. This was all well and good but the players weren''t used to trying to pass the ball and play their way through the middle of the park.In essense we''ve suffered through going into the season with an unbalanced midfield and had to chop and change because of the problems this has caused. Injuries in this area resulted in a lack of options and compounded the problem. So instead of having a relatively settled way of playing with players able to slot in if we have injuries or need to change tactics, we''ve been inconsistent. All too often we see the team taking the easy way out. Playing it long

to get out of trouble, playing the cross because the midfield isn''t

practiced enough to play the incisive pass, playing it backwards or sideways instead of forwards.If we take short cuts instead of doing the hard task, which is rebuilding the side to play with technical quality, then we risk ending up with very little to show for all the parachute money. In a couple of years time trying to lump the ball up to Jerome or get the ball out early to Murphy on the wing will be the extent of our gameplan unless we replace Adams with a manager that is committed to high quality football. Turning round Hughton''s shambles probably meant that the playoffs were the most realistic objective, and raising the quality should have been a priority instead of going out all guns blazing and hoping for the best.We''re now half a season behind and no higher in the table than where we could have been if we had taken the quality football approach. We might not have been higher if we''d decided to do the hard yards, but we''d almost certainly have a team more capable of promotion next season than we have now. At the moment we risk players becoming disillusioned, the best ones leaving and having to rebuild the team in the summer.Surman undoubtedly saw Bournemouth''s quality first hand and knew that they weren''t far off being promotion contenders. He therefore chose to move based on the quality of the football, not wanting to be part of a technically poor side having to re-adjust under a novice management team.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]Class player, really wanted him to stay. Most numpties on here classed him lightweight and not good enough for us. LOL. Strangely enough the same numpties who don''t rate players like Hooper or Hoolahan. Perhaps a team full of Bradley Johnsons will get us promoted.[/quote]

 

Perhaps the club reacted to your wishes of a couple of years ago Lincoln. Now that they see how he is doing with Bournemouth perhaps they think you''re one of these numties you''re speaking of.

 

21/04/2012, 12:13 PM
lincoln canary Joined on 07/08/2008 Posts 3,555	Re: Oh very dear
	And Russell Martin, andrew surman, Elliot ward, Steve Morison are not good enough

[/quote][:D][/quote]

Not good enough for the premiership, d1ck.

More than good enough at this level, and far superior to a lot that play instead of him!

[morty 0]

Oh dear, someone is a bit grumpy that he got caught out.[:(]

[Year of the tiger 54]

Do tell Lincoln which players is he better than, I''m interested

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="morty"]Oh dear, someone is a bit grumpy that he got caught out.[:(][/quote]

Caught out? I think it''s great you wasted your life trying to find a post to catch me out. Sad man.

And I stand by the point the players mentioned were not good enough for the premiership, and my post was proved correct.

I take it you ignored all my positive posts regarding Surman. As you''d have stumbled across many of these in the hours it took you to find a negative one.

[morty 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="morty"]Oh dear, someone is a bit grumpy that he got caught out.[:(][/quote]

Caught out? I think it''s great you wasted your life trying to find a post to catch me out. Sad man.

And I stand by the point the players mentioned were not good enough for the premiership, and my post was proved correct.

I take it you ignored all my positive posts regarding Surman. As you''d have stumbled across many of these in the hours it took you to find a negative one.[/quote]If you look it was Yankee not me.No need to apologise.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Year of the tiger"]Do tell Lincoln which players is he better than, I''m interested[/quote]

Well he can play on the Left for a start. He is far more creative than O''neil, BJ, Howson and Tettey put together.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Year of the tiger"]Do tell Lincoln which players is he better than, I''m interested[/quote]

Well he can play on the Left for a start. He is far more creative than O''neil, BJ, Howson and Tettey put together.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="morty"]Oh dear, someone is a bit grumpy that he got caught out.[:(][/quote]

Caught out? I think it''s great you wasted your life trying to find a post to catch me out. Sad man.

And I stand by the point the players mentioned were not good enough for the premiership, and my post was proved correct.

I take it you ignored all my positive posts regarding Surman. As you''d have stumbled across many of these in the hours it took you to find a negative one.[/quote]If you look it was Yankee not me.No need to apologise.[/quote]

Well you agreed with the content. So makes you just as stupid.

Yankee for today, you take Morty''s sad man award. Find a hobby quickly.

[morty 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="morty"][quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="morty"]Oh dear, someone is a bit grumpy that he got caught out.[:(][/quote]

Caught out? I think it''s great you wasted your life trying to find a post to catch me out. Sad man.

And I stand by the point the players mentioned were not good enough for the premiership, and my post was proved correct.

I take it you ignored all my positive posts regarding Surman. As you''d have stumbled across many of these in the hours it took you to find a negative one.[/quote]If you look it was Yankee not me.No need to apologise.[/quote]

Well you agreed with the content. So makes you just as stupid.

Yankee for today, you take Morty''s sad man award. Find a hobby quickly.[/quote]Oh dear, seriously lol?Still, better than admitting that you cocked up[Y]

[Year of the tiger 54]

That would be 5 goals in the 5 games he''s played on the left BJ would it? I suppose Surmans prowess will increase as have Pilkington & Bassong as they are stick to beat Adams with.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="Year of the tiger"]That would be 5 goals in the 5 games he''s played on the left BJ would it? I suppose Surmans prowess will increase as have Pilkington & Bassong as they are stick to beat Adams with.[/quote]

Today BJ also had less than 50% pass completion rate, out of 53 attempted passes he gave the ball to Reading 27 times.  For comparison, today Surman gave the ball away 7 times in his 53 passes.

I don''t think anyone is increasing Surman''s prowess, he has always been a top level championship player.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"][quote user="Year of the tiger"]That would be 5 goals in the 5 games he''s played on the left BJ would it? I suppose Surmans prowess will increase as have Pilkington & Bassong as they are stick to beat Adams with.[/quote]

Today BJ also had less than 50% pass completion rate, out of 53 attempted passes he gave the ball to Reading 27 times.  For comparison, today Surman gave the ball away 7 times in his 53 passes.

I don''t think anyone is increasing Surman''s prowess, he has always been a top level championship player.

[/quote]So why didn''t we keep him, or make him an offer he couldn''t refuse?Despite being light in his position?I think, regardless of anyones opinion of him, he had clearly decided that he wanted to go. So I find the whole discussion a bit moot, like its somehow he slipped through our fingers.

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="morty"]Oh dear, someone is a bit grumpy that he got caught out.

[:(]
[/quote] Caught out? I think it''s great you wasted your life trying to find a post to catch me out. Sad man. And I stand by the point the players mentioned were not good enough for the premiership, and my post was proved correct. I take it you ignored all my positive posts regarding Surman. As you''d have stumbled across many of these in the hours it took you to find a negative one.[/quote]

 

Actually, lincoln, it took me thirty seconds ( quite honestly ) to find your post. You know why too, don''t you....because you are the most prolific negative poster on this forum. You do realize that every time you post something negative all the history just sits there, ready and waiting for all to see. Now, you could take a look as well all the way back to 2008 although, I feel obligated to warn you, you should not do so without taking a couple of tranquilizers first. It could be more than any man should have to face alone.