Popular Post Pez1974 Posted January 20, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted January 20, 2014 I can't believe people are having a pop at a player because the manager brought them on! Gabby had a great game, but got injured. The reason Gabby was ripping them apart was becuase of his pace - nothing else. We have no-one else with his pace, so a like-for-like replacement was out of the question. Lambert choose to change the formation when Holt came on, and personally I thought Holt did a decent job (whether Lambert should have changed the formation is not a question for this thread). He put himself about, helped marshall the team, and held up the ball a few times, which has been a problem over the past 18 months, as the ball can bounce off Benteke. When he had the ball he got his head up and tried to play others in - it went wrong a few times but that will come down to him training with his team mates and understanding how they play. I also thought his introduction allowed Benteke more room, as before Skrtel and Toure we're simply sitting on him. He certainly did not look fat or unfit (albeit for only 40 minutes) but maybe lacked a bit of sharpness, but as we all know, if Benteke breaks his leg tomorrow, we will have a problem as Holt is nowhere near as good. But as an option off the bench - he looked just fine. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 He put a couple of decent crosses in too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danishlad Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I actually think he played at about 70% of his max. There is more to come. He needs to get in shape though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordSepulchrave Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 His backheel created a clear chance, and whenever the ball was lumped towards him he did an alright job of winning the header or holding it up. Worked hard and created space for Benteke and contributed to slowing the play down. it looks like he'll be able to do a good job towards the end of matches, holding up play and such when we're winning tight games. I keep reading about his hold up play. In nearly a half of football he held the ball up and kept it 5 times. Is five times that bad? How many times would you expect? Especially when you consider most of the passes he received were in the air and he generally had to fight for a header, it seems like holding up the ball five times in 40(ish) minutes is pretty useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Thought he did ok. He looked like he was blowing but he got involved in some good play and put in some good crosses. Useful addition I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 His backheel created a clear chance, and whenever the ball was lumped towards him he did an alright job of winning the header or holding it up. Worked hard and created space for Benteke and contributed to slowing the play down. it looks like he'll be able to do a good job towards the end of matches, holding up play and such when we're winning tight games. I keep reading about his hold up play. In nearly a half of football he held the ball up and kept it 5 times. Is five times that bad? How many times would you expect? Especially when you consider most of the passes he received were in the air and he generally had to fight for a header, it seems like holding up the ball five times in 40(ish) minutes is pretty useful. Five times is about 4-5 times more than Benteke did in those few matches over Christmas. It's the mouthpiece factor that's his real strength to our side I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I thought he did OK. Better than my expectations. Held up ball well and was very good in air, liked his back heel at one point too showed he has a bit about him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I think it was a wise decision to bring him on, he came on held the ball up well and played it simple. Thought he should of had a crack at goal a few times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) I can't belive the buzz about Holt.. So he had a nice back heel pass, other than that he slowed our tempo and attack down. I mean what are our expectations? 1 or 2 successfull backward passes and suddently a player is unbelivable ? I don't rate Holt, not at all. He's a pub player Edited January 20, 2014 by villalad21 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordSepulchrave Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) I can't belive the buzz about Holt.. So he had a nice back heel pass, other than that he slowed our tempo and attack down. I mean what are our expectations? 1 or 2 successfull backward passes and suddently a player is unbelivable ? I don't rate Holt, not at all. He's a pub player Who said he was unbelievable? A lot of the reaction seems to be extremely negative. He looks decent cover, and like a not bad alternate option for Lambert to bring on. I'd be surprised to see him starting I suspect he's mainly a signing for the dressroom rather than the pitch. Edited January 20, 2014 by LordSepulchrave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Opinions seem divided on here about his performance. I thought he did ok, no better, no worse. He is just lacking a bit of fitness. Could be useful as a sub but not a starter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 20, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted January 20, 2014 I'd also wager his "holding up" stat, if that's even a thing, is skewed by flick ons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I can't belive the buzz about Holt.. So he had a nice back heel pass, other than that he slowed our tempo and attack down. I mean what are our expectations? 1 or 2 successfull backward passes and suddently a player is unbelivable ? I don't rate Holt, not at all. He's a pub player What do you mean? Who has stated he was/is "unbelievable"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbojames Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Yeah did ok, thought he could have shot on one or two occasions but did well in taking care of the ball. Would have preferred Albrighton on for Gabby meself or another perhaps Gardner to get another body in midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I can't belive the buzz about Holt.. So he had a nice back heel pass, other than that he slowed our tempo and attack down. I mean what are our expectations? 1 or 2 successfull backward passes and suddently a player is unbelivable ? I don't rate Holt, not at all. He's a pub player What do you mean? Who has stated he was/is "unbelievable"? Maybe i were a little farfetched with the "unbelieveable" quote, but people has stated he were very good or good, what other than the back heel pass maked him good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I can't belive the buzz about Holt.. So he had a nice back heel pass, other than that he slowed our tempo and attack down. I mean what are our expectations? 1 or 2 successfull backward passes and suddently a player is unbelivable ? I don't rate Holt, not at all. He's a pub player What do you mean? Who has stated he was/is "unbelievable"? Maybe i were a little farfetched with the "unbelieveable" quote, but people has stated he were very good or good, what other than the back heel pass maked him good? Is this a wind up? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I think he was just ok, but I do think we would have been better to have brought on Albrighton or Helenius, although I have reservations about both of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I can't belive the buzz about Holt.. So he had a nice back heel pass, other than that he slowed our tempo and attack down. I mean what are our expectations? 1 or 2 successfull backward passes and suddently a player is unbelivable ? I don't rate Holt, not at all. He's a pub playerWhat do you mean? Who has stated he was/is "unbelievable"?Maybe i were a little farfetched with the "unbelieveable" quote, but people has stated he were very good or good, what other than the back heel pass maked him good?He were ok .Probably not magnificent as others has stated but he were alright and maked some flick ons. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 he did an alright job of winning the header or holding it up He won 1 header.Is five times that bad? Yes I think it's very poor for a half. He passed the ball to a member of his own team 5 times in 40 minutes. I think people are saying he played OK because of how poor he is. If any of our front 3 had put that performance it, it would rightly be classed as poor. Its almost like he did OK for a out of shape championship striker rather than judging his performance the same as everyone else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoony Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) Edit. Really not worth it. Edited January 20, 2014 by Spoony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts