Ted Hughes wrote:
The question re City would be how we fit him into the team plan; if he is a non scoring 'Scholes' then he's got to play deep & can he be strong enough to oust any of the competition ? Will he be powerful enough defensively ? Of course if he adds goals to his game then he's cracked it imo.
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:I've seen this kid play at Kevins a few times, he was in my nephew's class in school too. I would've said he's more a Xavi than a Scholes but one thing is for sure he's an extremely gifted footballer, fingers crossed he realises his potential at City.
Moonchesteri wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:
The question re City would be how we fit him into the team plan; if he is a non scoring 'Scholes' then he's got to play deep & can he be strong enough to oust any of the competition ? Will he be powerful enough defensively ? Of course if he adds goals to his game then he's cracked it imo.
Sounds like Fernandinho to be honest so I'm sure he'll do fine if he keeps on developing!
Ted Hughes wrote:Moonchesteri wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:
The question re City would be how we fit him into the team plan; if he is a non scoring 'Scholes' then he's got to play deep & can he be strong enough to oust any of the competition ? Will he be powerful enough defensively ? Of course if he adds goals to his game then he's cracked it imo.
Sounds like Fernandinho to be honest so I'm sure he'll do fine if he keeps on developing!
Fernandinho is stronger in the air & faster, more of a runner, where as this lad is more 'Xavish' as stated by FIBD.
Douglas Higginbottom wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:Moonchesteri wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:
The question re City would be how we fit him into the team plan; if he is a non scoring 'Scholes' then he's got to play deep & can he be strong enough to oust any of the competition ? Will he be powerful enough defensively ? Of course if he adds goals to his game then he's cracked it imo.
Sounds like Fernandinho to be honest so I'm sure he'll do fine if he keeps on developing!
Fernandinho is stronger in the air & faster, more of a runner, where as this lad is more 'Xavish' as stated by FIBD.
He does have real potential.He has played deep when I have seen him but he is more of a creative player in that role rather than a destroyer
Douglas Higginbottom wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:Moonchesteri wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:
The question re City would be how we fit him into the team plan; if he is a non scoring 'Scholes' then he's got to play deep & can he be strong enough to oust any of the competition ? Will he be powerful enough defensively ? Of course if he adds goals to his game then he's cracked it imo.
Sounds like Fernandinho to be honest so I'm sure he'll do fine if he keeps on developing!
Fernandinho is stronger in the air & faster, more of a runner, where as this lad is more 'Xavish' as stated by FIBD.
He does have real potential.He has played deep when I have seen him but he is more of a creative player in that role rather than a destroyer
Burt wrote:Why are we putting up with the bollox rhetoric of comparing this kid to that dirty, can't tackle, devilworshipping cunt?
Compare him to a former City player butfor fucks sake stop comparing one of ours to a red cunt!
“Jack is really young and not afraid – he really wants to play. He has taken the responsibility, and is a strong boy.
“Physically he is not impressive at all, but his technique and first touch are excellent and he always likes to play forwards.
Cocacolajojo wrote:You who've seen him, can you explain this quote from the article:“Jack is really young and not afraid – he really wants to play. He has taken the responsibility, and is a strong boy.
“Physically he is not impressive at all, but his technique and first touch are excellent and he always likes to play forwards.
So he's tiny but strong? Tiny and weak? Strong in that he's tiny but doesn't get kicked of the ball? Strong for his age? Strong for a football player?
Cocacolajojo wrote:You who've seen him, can you explain this quote from the article:“Jack is really young and not afraid – he really wants to play. He has taken the responsibility, and is a strong boy.
“Physically he is not impressive at all, but his technique and first touch are excellent and he always likes to play forwards.
So he's tiny but strong? Tiny and weak? Strong in that he's tiny but doesn't get kicked of the ball? Strong for his age? Strong for a football player?
Cocacolajojo wrote:You who've seen him, can you explain this quote from the article:“Jack is really young and not afraid – he really wants to play. He has taken the responsibility, and is a strong boy.
“Physically he is not impressive at all, but his technique and first touch are excellent and he always likes to play forwards.
So he's tiny but strong? Tiny and weak? Strong in that he's tiny but doesn't get kicked of the ball? Strong for his age? Strong for a football player?
Dameerto wrote:Cocacolajojo wrote:You who've seen him, can you explain this quote from the article:“Jack is really young and not afraid – he really wants to play. He has taken the responsibility, and is a strong boy.
“Physically he is not impressive at all, but his technique and first touch are excellent and he always likes to play forwards.
So he's tiny but strong? Tiny and weak? Strong in that he's tiny but doesn't get kicked of the ball? Strong for his age? Strong for a football player?
i took it to mean he is strong mentally considering his age. That fits with the first line of quotation too.
Return to The Maine Football forum
Users browsing this forum: carolina-blue, Majestic-12 [Bot], Nickyboy, Pretty Boy Lee, ruralblue, Two's Kompany and 147 guests