• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Hugo Lloris

Kingdawson said:
He was excellent on that occasion but a few minutes later he did a really poor throw that could have been costly.
Click to expand...

Mumorn said:
yeah, i agree, he saved us from being embarrassed but then should have embarrassed us with that.

he did the same against Villa at home iirc and it almost cost us a goal!!
Click to expand...

I wish more of our players tried to start counter attacks instead of being so happy playing sideways and backwards passes just after winning the ball.

Sure he could have rolled the ball out to a defender and watched us pass it around for 10-15 seconds as QPR got back and got organized so that we could attack against them after they got organized... Low risk, no chance of looking silly. I prefer him taking a slight risk to try to start a counter attack so that we could perhaps get a goal.
 
braineclipse said:
I wish more of our players tried to start counter attacks instead of being so happy playing sideways and backwards passes just after winning the ball.

Sure he could have rolled the ball out to a defender and watched us pass it around for 10-15 seconds as QPR got back and got organized so that we could attack against them after they got organized... Low risk, no chance of looking silly. I prefer him taking a slight risk to try to start a counter attack so that we could perhaps get a goal.
Click to expand...

Ah ok going by that i assume you prefer Dawson's forward thinking passes today to perhaps get a goal? personally i think there's a difference but still.
 
Kingdawson said:
Ah ok going by that i assume you prefer Dawson's forward thinking passes today to perhaps get a goal? personally i think there's a difference but still.
Click to expand...

I think Dawson sometimes overdoes it with those cross field passes when there isn't really space for the player he's aiming at. But it's only a slight thing, nothing big.

Today I thought Dawson did well.

Point is that when a counter attack is on you're talking seconds to get going before they get back. Snap crackle fudging pop, go go go, semper fie, do or die, run mothafudgeas... Two sideways passes and the chance to attack on the break is gone. Counter attacking chances are limited and when we struggle as much as today to break down the opposition when they're organized we need our players to snap into action when we win the ball. That involves taking a few risks once in a while, that's fine by me.
 
I don't know why there is heated debate, when it seems to simple as to what is right and what is wrong.

Hugo is the better keeper, he looks really good. All of this earning a spot is nonsense, if he is the better of the 2 (which he is) then you play him. He has earnt the place with his performances prior to joining, the performances that saw us pay a huge amount for him.

By not playing the better man you only harm the team. Who cares if he takes the place of another good player, this happens all the time. We wouldn't keep an outfield star player on the bench for months if we signed one.

As for AVB, he got it wrong, he was getting many things wrong. He stopped tinkling around and started doing the right thing in many areas of our team (selecting Hugo one of them). There is a fine line in football but as a result of these changes we've done much better. Forget the negative side of it, to me this is a positive sign from AVB as it is what he is doing now that counts.
 
Golfball said:
I don't know why there is heated debate, when it seems to simple as to what is right and what is wrong.

Hugo is the better keeper, he looks really good. All of this earning a spot is nonsense, if he is the better of the 2 (which he is) then you play him. He has earnt the place with his performances prior to joining, the performances that saw us pay a huge amount for him.

By not playing the better man you only harm the team. Who cares if he takes the place of another good player, this happens all the time. We wouldn't keep an outfield star player on the bench for months if we signed one.

As for AVB, he got it wrong, he was getting many things wrong. He stopped tinkling around and started doing the right thing in many areas of our team (selecting Hugo one of them). There is a fine line in football but as a result of these changes we've done much better. Forget the negative side of it, to me this is a positive sign from AVB as it is what he is doing now that counts.
Click to expand...

Had it never occurred to you that AVB might always have intended to make Hugo his no. 1 but that he understood that Hugo had:

a) never played in the Premier League before - hugely significant, given how different the game is in England, as any goalkeeper who has moved here from abroad will tell you

b) joined the club two weeks into the season, with no pre season during which to get to know his team mates or to become familiar with the team's pattern of play

....and that, consequently, he wanted to ease Hugo gently into the first team rather than throwing him in at the deep end and exposing him to the risk of making rookie (in England) mistakes which could have led to the players, the fans and even Lloris himself losing confidence in his abilities? Certainly, with a keeper as solid as Brad as an alternative, there was no need to take that risk.

Had it also never occurred to you that when AVB summarily dropped a couple of popular, senior players at Chelsea last season, it triggered dressing room unrest (if not outright player revolt) that led to their patchy form and his ultimate dismissal? Learning from past mistakes, rather than mindlessly repeating them, is a good thing.

You ask why there is a heated debate. The answer is because there are some people who are determined to find fault, even where it doesn't exist. Some found fault with AVB for not putting Lloris in the first team straight away. Some found fault with AVB for dropping Brad. The bloke can't win. It's pathetic. We're supposed to be on the same side (not that you'd know it) and, rather than bitching endlessly, we should all rejoice in the fact that we have a brilliant keeper like Hugo in the first team and the best possible no. 2 that any club could hope to have.
 
Last edited:
Golfball said:
I don't know why there is heated debate, when it seems to simple as to what is right and what is wrong.

Hugo is the better keeper, he looks really good. All of this earning a spot is nonsense, if he is the better of the 2 (which he is) then you play him. He has earnt the place with his performances prior to joining, the performances that saw us pay a huge amount for him.

By not playing the better man you only harm the team. Who cares if he takes the place of another good player, this happens all the time. We wouldn't keep an outfield star player on the bench for months if we signed one.

As for AVB, he got it wrong, he was getting many things wrong. He stopped tinkling around and started doing the right thing in many areas of our team (selecting Hugo one of them). There is a fine line in football but as a result of these changes we've done much better. Forget the negative side of it, to me this is a positive sign from AVB as it is what he is doing now that counts.
Click to expand...

Brilliantly said Golfball =D> A lot won't listen to me, I hope they'll listen to you.
 
jimmyb said:
Had it never occurred to you that AVB might always have intended to make Hugo his no. 1 but that he understood that Hugo had:

a) never played in the Premier League before - hugely significant, given how different the game is in England, as any goalkeeper who has moved here from abroad will tell you

b) joined the club two weeks into the season, with no pre season during which to get to know his team mates or to become familiar with the team's pattern of play

....and that, consequently, he wanted to ease Hugo gently into the first team rather than throwing him in at the deep end and exposing him to the risk of making rookie (in England) mistakes which could have led to the players, the fans and even Lloris himself losing confidence in his abilities? Certainly, with a keeper as solid as Brad as an alternative, there was no need to take that risk.

Had it also never occurred to you that when AVB summarily dropped a couple of popular, senior players at Chelsea last season, it triggered dressing room unrest (if not outright player revolt) that led to their patchy form and his ultimate dismissal? Learning from past mistakes, rather than mindlessly repeating them, is a good thing.

You ask why there is a heated debate. The answer is because there are some people who are determined to find fault, even where it doesn't exist. Some found fault with AVB for not putting Lloris in the first team straight away. Some found fault with AVB for dropping Brad. The bloke can't win. It's pathetic. We're supposed to be on the same side (not that you'd know it) and, rather than bitching endlessly, we should all rejoice in the fact that we have a brilliant keeper like Hugo in the first team and the best possible no. 2 that any club could hope to have.
Click to expand...

=D>
 
jimmyb said:
Had it never occurred to you that AVB might always have intended to make Hugo his no. 1 but that he understood that Hugo had:

a) never played in the Premier League before - hugely significant, given how different the game is in England, as any goalkeeper who has moved here from abroad will tell you

b) joined the club two weeks into the season, with no pre season during which to get to know his team mates or to become familiar with the team's pattern of play

....and that, consequently, he wanted to ease Hugo gently into the first team rather than throwing him in at the deep end and exposing him to the risk of making rookie (in England) mistakes which could have led to the players, the fans and even Lloris himself losing confidence in his abilities? Certainly, with a keeper as solid as Brad as an alternative, there was no need to take that risk.

Had it also never occurred to you that when AVB summarily dropped a couple of popular, senior players at Chelsea last season, it triggered dressing room unrest (if not outright player revolt) that led to their patchy form and his ultimate dismissal? Learning from past mistakes, rather than mindlessly repeating them, is a good thing.

You ask why there is a heated debate. The answer is because there are some people who are determined to find fault, even where it doesn't exist. Some found fault with AVB for not putting Lloris in the first team straight away. Some found fault with AVB for dropping Brad. The bloke can't win. It's pathetic. We're supposed to be on the same side (not that you'd know it) and, rather than bitching endlessly, we should all rejoice in the fact that we have a brilliant keeper like Hugo in the first team and the best possible no. 2 that any club could hope to have.
Click to expand...

Great post, Sir. Debate ended =D>
 
jimmyb said:
Had it never occurred to you that AVB might always have intended to make Hugo his no. 1 but that he understood that Hugo had:

a) never played in the Premier League before - hugely significant, given how different the game is in England, as any goalkeeper who has moved here from abroad will tell you

b) joined the club two weeks into the season, with no pre season during which to get to know his team mates or to become familiar with the team's pattern of play

....and that, consequently, he wanted to ease Hugo gently into the first team rather than throwing him in at the deep end and exposing him to the risk of making rookie (in England) mistakes which could have led to the players, the fans and even Lloris himself losing confidence in his abilities? Certainly, with a keeper as solid as Brad as an alternative, there was no need to take that risk.

Had it also never occurred to you that when AVB summarily dropped a couple of popular, senior players at Chelsea last season, it triggered dressing room unrest (if not outright player revolt) that led to their patchy form and his ultimate dismissal? Learning from past mistakes, rather than mindlessly repeating them, is a good thing.

You ask why there is a heated debate. The answer is because there are some people who are determined to find fault, even where it doesn't exist. Some found fault with AVB for not putting Lloris in the first team straight away. Some found fault with AVB for dropping Brad. The bloke can't win. It's pathetic. We're supposed to be on the same side (not that you'd know it) and, rather than bitching endlessly, we should all rejoice in the fact that we have a brilliant keeper like Hugo in the first team and the best possible no. 2 that any club could hope to have.
Click to expand...

That is one of the best posts I've seen on the issue yet.
 
This is a very very funny thread only because some of us on here are still harping on about this so called 'issue'...

I mean what the fudge? Why are we still bringing it up when it is evident that it doesnt bother Lloris now? he is number one now so what the fudge
 
DHSF said:
This is a very very funny thread only because some of us on here are still harping on about this so called 'issue'...

I mean what the fudge? Why are we still bringing it up when it is evident that it doesnt bother Lloris now? he is number one now so what the fudge
Click to expand...


Er. People are still arguing about harry despite him no longer being here.


Why does people still arguing about lloris surprise you? It really shouldn't.
 
True happiness is measured by the insignificance of the things you're unhappy about. At least I hope people don't go around feeling as miserable as they come off in some of the threads on here.
 
Noticed Friedel having a few friendly words with AVB during the match. Wonder what Friedel was telling AVB. Or is Friedel now a coach or something ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back