This Could Be Rotterdam Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Damned if you do and damned if you don't. Okore wasn't playing because PL who watches him every day I am sure, didn't deem him to be ready. He now does, and he has shown it in his performances. Who is to say if he chucked him in a month ago he wouldn't have broke down/not been fit enough/up to speed and had a mare? This place man. I'm sure lambert didn't think he was ready, and I wasn't one who was pushing and wondering why he wasn't back. But do you really think he'd have dropped vlaar, baker or senderos for okore if they were all fit to give him a chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 3, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2014 Why would he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonno_2004 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Why would he? Well, we were in a bit of a stinker at the back and he surely could have come in before the injuries, however Lambert told all that he wasn't ready. Looks ready to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 3, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2014 But the centre backs weren't playing badly. And how do we know Okore was ready at that point? How come his good performances now are evidence that he was ready all along and not evidence that he was eased back in correctly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelboyVilla Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 But the centre backs weren't playing badly. And how do we know Okore was ready at that point? How come his good performances now are evidence that he was ready all along and not evidence that he was eased back in correctly? Not saying it for sure but he only brought in Okore when he was the last and only choice? He couldn't have planned to have 3 other CB's injured just at the week when JK was ready? No one's that brilliant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonno_2004 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 But the centre backs weren't playing badly. And how do we know Okore was ready at that point? How come his good performances now are evidence that he was ready all along and not evidence that he was eased back in correctly? I can remember many a person on here slating Clark/Baker and calling for Okore when Vlaar was out injured and since then too - I also wouldn't say being 'eased back in' is playing a full game 3 times in the space of 9 days because we have no other option. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelboyVilla Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 But the centre backs weren't playing badly. And how do we know Okore was ready at that point? How come his good performances now are evidence that he was ready all along and not evidence that he was eased back in correctly? I can remember many a person on here slating Clark/Baker and calling for Okore when Vlaar was out injured and since then too - I also wouldn't say being 'eased back in' is playing a full game 3 times in the space of 9 days because we have no other option. I think 4 games ago Okore was Lamberts 5th choice CB? Nothing wrong with that is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 But the centre backs weren't playing badly. And how do we know Okore was ready at that point? How come his good performances now are evidence that he was ready all along and not evidence that he was eased back in correctly? Not saying it for sure but he only brought in Okore when he was the last and only choice? He couldn't have planned to have 3 other CB's injured just at the week when JK was ready? No one's that brilliant? I think Stevo's point - certainly mine anyway - is that there's no scandal here. He didn't play, either because he wasn't ready or because other people were playing well in his position (which they were). Then we needed him to play, and he played well. I'm missing the outrageous scandal that should have me dusting off the pitchfork. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody1000 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 But the centre backs weren't playing badly. And how do we know Okore was ready at that point? How come his good performances now are evidence that he was ready all along and not evidence that he was eased back in correctly?Because that would mean giving the manager some credit, and you know full well that is not allowed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stockport_Villain Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Successful centre back partnerships don't always come from pairing the two best players at a club. Whether by design or chance Clark and Okore look very comfortable together and cover each other's short falls. 2 goals conceded in 3 games when they are under constant pressure for at least 45 minutes at a time is very good form. I hope when the others are fit it is the form players who keep their places, not those with a reputation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTTERDAM1982 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 A few things worry me about PLs decisions Stevo. Okores was 5th choice, mainly because PL didn't obviously rate him.Sometimes he was out of the squad entirely.Now as you say that is his right, but having seen Okores twice, not only is he obviously ready, but you could argue, given a few games, he could turn out to be our best CH.Now that in my view is bad judgement. Then you have his treatment of Sanchez,Westwood, Gabby, Grealish, and maybe the fact that after 3 seasons in charge, we play the kind of dirge from last night, then i think i have good reason to question PLs decisions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 What treatment of Sanchez? What treatment of Westwood? Ah so because you rate Sanchez and not Westwood, that means playing one of the other is an incorrect decision? Even though Westwood has been one of our mosh consistent players for 3 years now and Sanchez still doesn't look up to speed. As Hanoi put quite fantastically, Okore wasn't playing because others were playing well in front of him. He's playing now and he's impressing. No conspiracy and those who are making it into one are just looking for more reasons to slag lambert off (when there's more than enough valid ones because I want him gone too) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 There seems to be some revisionism at work here. Before Southampton, Ciaran Clark hadn't been playing well and that's exactly why many have wondered why Okore couldn't get into the team sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonno_2004 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 There seems to be some revisionism at work here. Before Southampton, Ciaran Clark hadn't been playing well and that's exactly why many have wondered why Okore couldn't get into the team sooner.Yeah I agree, I'm struggling to buy into this notion all CBs were playing well before they got injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 3, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2014 They were doing well. Not amazing, but certainly weren't playing badly. They've all been playing for the past year. They're way more experienced. Why wouldn't they be picked before Okore. And what people keep not mentioning is that Okore got a chance in ore season and wasn't very good at all. I don't see the scandal. Again, if we were playing people out of position to keep Okore out of the team then you'd have a point. But we didn't. He was 5th choice centre back a few weeks ago. I don't see what's wrong with that. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 It's simply s-GANdalous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 They were doing well. Not amazing, but certainly weren't playing badly. Clark was playing badly. You only have to check his thread pre-Southampton to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 3, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) They were doing well. Not amazing, but certainly weren't playing badly. Clark was playing badly. You only have to check his thread pre-Southampton to see that. Apart from a couple of very brief substitute appearances, he'd only played twice all season before Southampton. So yes he was in front of Okore. But it's not like he was putting in a string of terrible performances with Okore sat on the bench. Experience probably meant he was higher in the pecking order. HIndsight is a wonderful thing. Southampton was lose lose for Lambert with Okore. If he'd been crap then Lambert would have been slated because he signed him. If he'd been good he gets slated because he should have been playing him sooner. Edited December 3, 2014 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I was thinking more over a wider spell with Clark. He hasn't produced performances like the last few for a long while. So no, I don't quite understand why he remained ahead of Okore in the pecking order. And experience in itself means nothing by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heid3ster Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I'll just reiterate here what I said in the Hutton thread (which I thought was the Okore thread at the time, whoops): Jores suffered a very bad injury last season. This summer in pre-season games he looked tentative and nervous, exactly as you'd expect from a young guy coming back from a very bad injury (possibly his first one?). I think it was the right choice to re-introduce him to the first team slowly, and he's playing well now. I don't see the problem in this case. I'm glad he's back and he's playing well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts