Jump to content

Scott Sinclair


The_Rev

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, NurembergVillan said:

He's our top scorer this season.

No real suprise we're in the brown stuff is it?

Without going OT, I can't remember a time when our front line has been quite so poor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

It seems to be the trend on VT at the moment. if you don't like a player you call them the worst player evaaarrrrrr.

Scott isn't even the worst player in his position in the current squad.

Nah, if you're alluding to N'Zogbia he is comfortably worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Nah, if you're alluding to N'Zogbia he is comfortably worse.

I wholeheartedly disagree.

Not that it matters as they're both crap and shouldn't be in the team. But I'd rather have Sinclair in the team than N'Zogbia.

In fact I'd rather have Guzan on the wing than N'Zogbia.

Edited by Stevo985
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Sinclair has all of N'Zogbia's negative traits (like decision making and dribbling into blind alleys, not realeasing the ball quick enough) but not even half of his football brain or technical ability.

Half of nothing is nothing.

N'Zogbia's biggest weakness is he doesn't have a footballing brain. I'm surprised you've listed them as strengths as they would be top of my list for reasons why he is so shit.

I think they're very similar players. They both have speed as pretty much their only asset. Both run down blind alleys, both don't look up and both don't have a footballing brain.

The only difference between them is Sinclair has shown he knows where the net is sometimes

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

Half of nothing is nothing.

N'Zogbia's biggest weakness is he doesn't have a footballing brain. I'm surprised you've listed them as strengths as they would be top of my list for reasons why he is so shit.

I think they're very similar players. They both have speed as pretty much their only asset. Both run down blind alleys, both don't look up and both don't have a footballing brain.

The only difference between them is Sinclair has shown he knows where the net is sometimes

And Sinclair wants to play...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Half of nothing is nothing.

N'Zogbia's biggest weakness is he doesn't have a footballing brain. I'm surprised you've listed them as strengths as they would be top of my list for reasons why he is so shit.

I think they're very similar players. They both have speed as pretty much their only asset. Both run down blind alleys, both don't look up and both don't have a footballing brain.

The only difference between them is Sinclair has shown he knows where the net is sometimes

I don't think his game was ever about speed, more dribbling and cutting inside and shooting. I mean he's still boneheaded, but he can pick clever through balls, play one twos around the box etc (all very occasionally of course). These are things that are not even in Sinclair's vocabulary. 

I'll give an example, last season in the FA Cup against West Brom he got an assist for Delph's goal. It was a very simple pass, but it needed a vision and awareness to play that Sinclair just doesn't have in his locker (it's not even particularly impressive). Or his assist for Gabby's and our 3rd goal (I think) against Sunderland away last season. Nutmegged the defender on the halfway line and played a quick one-time through ball to Gabby perfectly in his stride. Sinclair can't even do that in a FIFA game. His failure to play an obvious pass to Bacuna against Wycombe sums him up. Zog is still a horrendous player mind, but that puts into perspective how bad Sinclair really is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Sinclair versus N'Zogbia isn't even a debate.

There are club(s) after Sinclair, there are not clubs after N'Zogbia.

Well said bobzy, I for one really hope he stays. He's another option and as someone said earlier he's scored a few goals OK not for a while but he got it in his locker. Obviously we don't see what happens on the training ground and RG does, maybe he's one of the players that isn't buying into his ways as RG was saying the other day?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bobzy said:

Sinclair versus N'Zogbia isn't even a debate.

There are club(s) after Sinclair, there are not clubs after N'Zogbia.

That is not purely down to ability though. If N'Zogbia wasn't on such a fat contract (not his fault) among other things, I'm sure things would be dofferent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

That is not purely down to ability though. If N'Zogbia wasn't on such a fat contract (not his fault) among other things, I'm sure things would be dofferent.

It's still not even a debate.  N'Zogbia hasn't done anything for Villa over the vast amount of time he's spent here.  In my opinion, he's been one of our worst signings in history.  The guy is a complete and utter waste of space.

Sinclair may not have set the world alight, but he's done more in his brief (and comparatively cheap) spell at Villa than N'Zogbia has.  If you gave me the choice of either player, I'm picking Sinclair 100% of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easily one of the worst in the past decade (stiff competition there though). Up there with Richardson and Tonev. I used to like him at Swansea and was excited to see if he could recapture that form, but he's just become this meek, ineffective, powderpuff nothing of a player since his move to City.

He's scored 9 goals in 20 odd games for the club. He has been most of the thinks you say I agree, but Tonev? Come on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still think he would be decent for us if he crossed the ball every now and again. Never known a wide player who refuses to cross the ball into the box. Bizarre.

He doesn't have much physical strength, but he is capable of making half a yard. Albrighton has been great for Leicester this year, and he is no quicker, stronger or more technically gifted than Sinclair. What Albrighton does do though - is get the ball into the box early, with varying degrees of success. But if you put the ball into the box 5-10 times in a game, then odds are at least one of them will find your strikers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here's an analogy for you to help with the sinclair v nzogbia debate

You go to the bog and have a shit.  It is nice and firm comes out nicely and you wipe your ass.

Next day you have a bad stomach,  dodgy curry perhaps,  go and have a right old runny shit maybe close to diorrhea. But after your stomach feels better.

Now , which shit is better than the other?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to know where the real Scott Sinclair has gone.  Is he being used incorrectly?  I don't think so.  I had him tipped as this season's star player.  Not a star.  The star.  On his day he can be.  But he's a shadow of his former self.  It's a damn shame because the real Sinclair could help us immeasurably.  There's a reason Man City bought him, and he showed us on a few occasions last season as a loanee.  When we got him permanent and he felt settled (and didn't he have a baby too IIRC?) I thought we had a gem on our hands, but he has completely flattered to deceive.

I wouldn't get rid though.  Two relegation rivals are sniffing around. That's reason enough to keep him.  Secondly as Demitri points out, the money probably wouldn't be re-invested, and thirdly he might still come good for us and any strength in depth, even sitting on the bench, can be beneficial to our cause however intangibly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the only reason City bought him was because they needed an English quota and he went for the money as everybody knew he wasnt good enough, he was crap at West Brom and has been shameful here. We are better off with 10 men than this "footballer"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â