Kent...

Neither Winnall or Hammill have an assist this season and Winnall is by definition a goal scorer so shouldn't really be applauded for scoring more than a winger, not having a knock at anyone but you need to take it into context

 

It's your own opinion about Kent and your entitled to that, I doubt anyone on here thinks he's a world beater and if so they would be very silly to think that, him being 19 is a reason because for one he hasn't had long in the professional game and at a young age it can be hard to adapt to things, also he's probably still very impressionable and if we all begin slagging him off then his head will drop and then he won't be as motivated he won't learn as well and certainly won't want to perform for fans that take every little mistake, while ignoring other people's, and then attacking him for it

 

Hammill and Winnall both contribute goals and have a promotion with us. Scowen is more defenaive minded and isn't in the team for his goals and assists like Kent is. He's one of many down the years we've had like Kadeem Harris who end up here because they don't have the end product to get in their own teams squad.

 

Winnall has 4, Hammill has 3 and Kent has 1. Winnall has been in and out of the side for spells this season and had to recover from an injury so he can be excused as he's our joint top scorer, but Hammill is lauded as being a class above and by some as the best player in our team yet this season except for a few small periods has been pretty poor, probably on average worse than Kent, he's also experienced at this level and is alot older. To compare Kent and Harris is just silly really; Kent is 19, playing in the Championship and can't get into the Liverpool team (none of our players would), Harris was 22, played in League and couldn't get into the Cardiff side. That's 3 years, one league and a hell of better parent club difference between the two.

 

I have no doubt in years to come he will be a top player. To play in this league at 19 is a big achivement in its self. Hope he proves me wrong but surley would have had less game time had Janko been here or maybe not with that clause that he has to play so many games

 

We don't know what Janko would have been like so we can't comment on that and I doubt the clause would keep him in the team if he was playing as bad as some people are alleging.

 

Kent is an attacking threat. He plays on the edge. And loses it , eventually, most times.

He's talented enough for us to suffer this.

If he doesn't track back then he needs to be ditched.

He needs on balance to be a positive.

 

He has to play or they is some fine or so I'm told. How do you think he has performed over the cause of the season?

 

It's a clause that he has to play 75% of games or we have to pay some money towards it, still doubt that we have would adhere to that if hasn't been playing well. Personally I'd give him a 6 out of 10 this year, he's quick, skillful causes problems when we counter-attack and creates alot more opportunities than people give him credit it for, but like I've said before he does lack the end product in some cases and often his decision making is often a bit off but thats more down to him being 19 than him being a bad player.

 

If he was rubbish he wouldn't be in the team. This or any team. If he was rubbish I'd expect abuse but this thread is ******* bonkers. The lad was decent enough 2 weeks ago when I last saw him at Brentford and by all accounts was alright against Bristol. staggers me (although we should be used to it by now) how quickly some are to A. Have a go at our own team and B. Then spend the rest of the night trying to justify themselves.

Our players are fallible, that why they play for us!!

 

Isgrove didn't win me over until the last couple of months of the season. You couldn't fault his commitment though.

 

I've not said he is rubbish. I've said he becomes a liability in the second half, presumably when he tires. He did the same last Saturday for example.

I think he's got a lot of potential and by and large I'm happy with him but can point point where he struggles without saying he's ****.

 

Kent was good first half, completely out the game second. Still streets ahead of Hammill though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Hammill can produce that bit of magic and make a goal from nothing his passing,crossing and shooting is miles ahead of Kents.

 

I would pick him every week.

What is staggering is your mistaken assumption that I and others think he's crap.

But he isn't beyond criticism.

 

Kent seems incapable of playing more than a good half. I remain unconvinced. He creates little. Doesn't put the same defensive work in as Isgrove and loses the ball too much. There's talent in there certainly as his performance at Bristol showed but for me a better impact sub than starter.