Liam Kelly (1 Viewer)

GaryMabbuttsLeftKnee

Well-Known Member
I don't really know how to word what I am about to say without it sounding like a criticism, but do we not think we are overplaying the Kelly factor just a little bit? We had a great run of form in that period he was playing but most the opposition were teams I would expect to get something out of. We beat Wycombe away, something we always tend to do, Rotherham at home, a result I imagine most of us would expect and Cardiff at home, which came off the back of a 3-2 home win against Reading without Kelly. We drew with Blues and Derby (both relegation rivals, good points all the same) and we got a good draw with Norwich who I believe had 7 players out at the time. I don't want this to come across at all like I don't like/rate Kelly, I do, but I am not as confident he is the lord and saviour some are thinking he is to our play. The guy we have replaced him with (James), is considerably more accomplished than Kelly. I tend to think our form issues are stemmed from much bigger factors than Kelly being out
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
This is spot on. Trys to do too much every time. Count next match how many blind one touch passes he does infield to no one.

Absolutely. As a team we're sometimes too pedestrian with our passing but Hamer is the opposite. His ball retention could be so much better, it's his one major weakness at the minute, almost trying too hard to make things happen. I think it was the Reading game where he gave the ball away 3 times in & around our own penalty area - can you imagine the reactions if Sheaf did that?
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
I don't really know how to word what I am about to say without it sounding like a criticism, but do we not think we are overplaying the Kelly factor just a little bit? We had a great run of form in that period he was playing but most the opposition were teams I would expect to get something out of. We beat Wycombe away, something we always tend to do, Rotherham at home, a result I imagine most of us would expect and Cardiff at home, which came off the back of a 3-2 home win against Reading without Kelly. We drew with Blues and Derby (both relegation rivals, good points all the same) and we got a good draw with Norwich who I believe had 7 players out at the time. I don't want this to come across at all like I don't like/rate Kelly, I do, but I am not as confident he is the lord and saviour some are thinking he is to our play. The guy we have replaced him with (James), is considerably more accomplished than Kelly. I tend to think our form issues are stemmed from much bigger factors than Kelly being out

James is a better player than Kelly without question, we definitely need one or the other though.
 

steve101

Well-Known Member
I don't really know how to word what I am about to say without it sounding like a criticism, but do we not think we are overplaying the Kelly factor just a little bit? We had a great run of form in that period he was playing but most the opposition were teams I would expect to get something out of. We beat Wycombe away, something we always tend to do, Rotherham at home, a result I imagine most of us would expect and Cardiff at home, which came off the back of a 3-2 home win against Reading without Kelly. We drew with Blues and Derby (both relegation rivals, good points all the same) and we got a good draw with Norwich who I believe had 7 players out at the time. I don't want this to come across at all like I don't like/rate Kelly, I do, but I am not as confident he is the lord and saviour some are thinking he is to our play. The guy we have replaced him with (James), is considerably more accomplished than Kelly. I tend to think our form issues are stemmed from much bigger factors than Kelly being out
I agree James is an all-round more accomplished player, but some players have more about them than physical and technical attributes. Their presence on the pitch - hence why he is captain. He is not a shouter which is probably a good thing with such a young team. He leads by example and sets the pace. A past leader who was a quiet captain and lead by example was Trevor Peake.
 

Saddlebrains

Well-Known Member
I don't really know how to word what I am about to say without it sounding like a criticism, but do we not think we are overplaying the Kelly factor just a little bit? We had a great run of form in that period he was playing but most the opposition were teams I would expect to get something out of. We beat Wycombe away, something we always tend to do, Rotherham at home, a result I imagine most of us would expect and Cardiff at home, which came off the back of a 3-2 home win against Reading without Kelly. We drew with Blues and Derby (both relegation rivals, good points all the same) and we got a good draw with Norwich who I believe had 7 players out at the time. I don't want this to come across at all like I don't like/rate Kelly, I do, but I am not as confident he is the lord and saviour some are thinking he is to our play. The guy we have replaced him with (James), is considerably more accomplished than Kelly. I tend to think our form issues are stemmed from much bigger factors than Kelly being out


Look back at our results from the day he joined when hes in the starting 11.

Need to find the tweet but i asked Jim Brown a while back and our win rate with Kelly in the starting 11 compared to without is night and day. As i say il have to find the tweet but off the top of my head it was something obscene like 60 odd % win rate in games hes started since we signed him.

He's been our most understated player for a very very long time.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
I see no reason why Kelly, Sheaf and Hamer couldn't play together, either as a three with O'Hare in front or with Sheaf and Kelly a bit deeper and Hamer slightly more advanced to try and do more playing in the strikers. He's also not afraid to have a pop at goal.

How to fit all of them and James in does become a question if Kelly gets fit, with my preference being the experience of James and Kelly and Sheaf dropping to the bench.
 

cc84cov

Well-Known Member
I see no reason why Kelly, Sheaf and Hamer couldn't play together, either as a three with O'Hare in front or with Sheaf and Kelly a bit deeper and Hamer slightly more advanced to try and do more playing in the strikers. He's also not afraid to have a pop at goal.

How to fit all of them and James in does become a question if Kelly gets fit, with my preference being the experience of James and Kelly and Sheaf dropping to the bench.
James Kelly Hamer is the 3 I would opt for
 

Skybluedownunder

Well-Known Member
Has anybody thought that maybe Robins signed James so we don’t sign Sheaf?

Sheaf has to hit certain milestones for us to make his contract with us permanent, maybe one of them is the amount of games. Perhaps Robins thought Sheaf doesn’t cut the mustard so brought in James so he doesn’t have to take up signing Sheaf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Has anybody thought that maybe Robins signed James so we don’t sign Sheaf?

Sheaf has to hit certain milestones for us to make his contract with us permanent, maybe one of them is the amount of games. Perhaps Robins thought Sheaf doesn’t cut the mustard so brought in James so he doesn’t have to take up signing Sheaf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh, I do like a good conspiracy.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Has anybody thought that maybe Robins signed James so we don’t sign Sheaf?

Sheaf has to hit certain milestones for us to make his contract with us permanent, maybe one of them is the amount of games. Perhaps Robins thought Sheaf doesn’t cut the mustard so brought in James so he doesn’t have to take up signing Sheaf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No.

Since James arrived:

Norwich: Sheaf started, James came on
Reading: James started, Sheaf came on
Wednesday: Both started
Brum: Both started
Forest: Both started
Watford: Sheaf injured
Cardiff: Sheaf unused, though just back from injury.
 

Skybluedownunder

Well-Known Member
No.

Since James arrived:

Norwich: Sheaf started, James came on
Reading: James started, Sheaf came on
Wednesday: Both started
Brum: Both started
Forest: Both started
Watford: Sheaf injured
Cardiff: Sheaf unused, though just back from injury.

Thanks for the useful info

I really not sold so far on Sheaf, his performances haven’t wow’d me yet


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the useful info

I really not sold so far on Sheaf, his performances haven’t wow’d me yet


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like him a lot but thought the same as you, hence why I went and found out. I think if we stay up well sign Sheaf, he’s played in 24 games already so I expect we’ll meet and requirements on that front.
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
Has anybody thought that maybe Robins signed James so we don’t sign Sheaf?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. Different type of player & have played together more often than not.

James was to cover Kelly's injury but end of season could be interesting if we manage to take James permanently. Would Kelly accept a lesser role?
 

skyblueinBaku

Well-Known Member
No. Different type of player & have played together more often than not.

James was to cover Kelly's injury but end of season could be interesting if we manage to take James permanently. Would Kelly accept a lesser role?
I don't think that Kelly would just 'accept' a lesser role, he's not that kind of bloke. I'm sure he would fight tooth and nail to win back the shirt.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top