Why the hell would you make O'neil csptain Supers? Insane comment he has done nothing as yet and has a limited shelf life here. Howson maybe.
Not sure a captain in football is that important any more. All players should help get each other up for a match and offer encouragement during it. Senior players should be able to unite the players, offer advice and encouragement.
It may put a few noses out of joint being skippered by a guy with less than a handful of games for the club.
Whatever 'it' is, Bassong lacked it completely and Russ Martin doesn't seem to be able to galvanise / chivvy / organise his colleagues during the games - though, as with many fellow canaries, he can 'talk the talk' before and after matches.
of course you're right. although it doesn't matter how many games a player has played for a club (i believe holt was made captain on arrival?) it would be total madness to make a natural leader, possibly our only natural leader, captain of our football club. silly me.
Can't argue with any of that Supers and for me, GH has to start against Reading instead of Grabban. I could see how gutted Jerome was when his header went over the bar from I think it was a Redmond cross, as he had been putting them away quite regularly. and BOY do we need a leader on the pitch!!!!!
i agree its not actually a vital role in football anymore and actually don't really have too many problems with martin carrying on, just saying what i would do. there are different types of captain. you get those who lead by example (drury), those who lead through character (fotheringham, sorry, only joshing - let's say bryan gunn), and you get those who can do both (holt). o'neil does both as far as i can see. he might not have the hustle and bustle of a holt; instead he's a calming presence with his ability on the ball; but i've seen him dictate strongly towards players who he clearly didn't feel were pulling their weight and he's good for a soundbite too. he should be playing every week, we look far more composed when he sits in that midfield. his age is irrelevant. he could play for us for at least three more years if we and he wanted. about as far from 'insane' as you could get, unless 'ideal' means the same thing.
A natural leader who rarely plays of course , also Holt had pre season with us and started the season as captain. What oh wise one makes O'neil a natural leader? Granted he played well in the play off final but he missed part of the game as he was sent off, if Zamora hadn't scored at the death he could have cost the team promotion. O'neil may turn out to be a good player but with only s few games surely the manager and coaching staff don't rate him as highly as you but what do they know?. They only see him on a daily basis.
When I say a captain is not important clearly leaders are. I think the sort of players we are lacking are organisers. Those who will shout at others to get in the right positions, hold a line, push out etc.
yes, that's right. i would make o'neil captain based on the play off final. i certainly wouldn't make it based on his actual suitability for the role. i also think the fact he's been injured is irrelevant and he should have played through it. meanwhile, the managers inability to ever field a team which actually works (in which o'neil's inclusion would likely have helped) is also irrelevant. seriously, like i say, i don't mind martin as captain - that's not really the issue. we need leaders on the pitch and we've got one in o'neil but we don't have enough - adams has even admitted this much.
After Martin's goal of the season and 200 games for us stripping him of the captaincy may be a tad harsh and counter productive.
You must have watched way more QPR games than me Supers , he looks very average and we keep getting reminded that the side that went down should walk this league with their superior traits.
Regarding O'Neil, if everyone was fit I'd select him and Tettey every time - home and away in this division. His awareness, close control and quick distribution (for me) would render Bradley Johnson obsolete - or at best, a watching brief from the bench.
you've obviously watched loads of qpr then, whatever the hell that means! but yes, i agree completely. he's a cut above bradley johnson in all departments (though johnson has his merits, just not enough to be playing regularly imo). can tackle, when he gets it he plays it simple and maintains possession. lets the more creative players operate to a higher standard.
This is one of our major faults recently, giving the ball away cheaply - and not pressing, having done so, to try and win it back. Retaining possession enabling us to get on the front foot is pretty fundamental at any level - but we're too slow and ponderous in possession and not 'aggressive' enough in trying to win the ball back when we lose it. Too much standing off.
Watched QPR means wstched O'neil as he has only played a handful of games for us and started 2 or 3 games. He was at QPR last season so i am guessing you are judging him on those games. Hardly that difficult to fathom.
