[Archived] Lucas Neill

[JamieUK]

He started off playing very well but the nearer we've come to the transfer window opening he's been prone to the odd mistake. Unfortunatley at least 2 of those mistakes have led to goal - that pen and last week the free-kick for Arsenal's first goal.

[Scotty]

It's absolutely true, hindsight and his recent performances on the pitch have shown you've been wrong in your unstinting support of Neill but you won't admit that's the case.

Ok, if we're getting personal, let's have a history lesson.

For years now you've slagged Neill off, whether he's played well or not. This all stems from your irrational support of Curtis and the fact that Neill, quite rightly, took his place in the team. Just like you have other favourites who, come what may, you continue to support e.g. Gray, anyone under the age of 23, etc. Frankly, I learned to stop trusting your judgement on players a long time ago.

Personally, I prefer to judge the players on what they do on the pitch. Neill started off the season poorly, then went on a run of games where he was excellent, and has been no worse than average for the last month or two. He's made the odd mistake that have led to goals, but he's also created, and scored, some goals too. Overall he's worthy of his place in the team and all the recent speculation over his future doesn't seem to have affected his performance, or committment to the team, at all.

You're simply making it up.

[CAPT KAYOS]

Personally, I prefer to judge the players on what they do on the pitch. Neill started off the season poorly, then went on a run of games where he was excellent, and has been no worse than average for the last month or two. He's made the odd mistake that have led to goals, but he's also created, and scored, some goals too. Overall he's worthy of his place in the team and all the recent speculation over his future doesn't seem to have affected his performance, or committment to the team, at all.

Rev as you are aware we tend to see things from the same perspective, but I have to agree with Scotty here and as per others cannot see how Neill has been poor. In fact for a guy that seemingly wants to leave for ' a challenge' he has done alright for me and has arguably been our best defender. Yes he makes mistakes and has conceded alot of penalties but I haven't seen anything to make me think he has not been commited to the Rovers.

He does seem to think he is better than he actually is, but for us he could prove to be a big loss when he eventually does leave - if at all, but if he does I wish him well and thank him for his time at the Rovers.

As I have said before, if a player does not want to play for a club anymore they should let them go, but there appears to be more to this scenario and as previously posted it all appears a bit 'Miss Marple'.

Overall I think the issue of him being Captain (not his fault) and his reaction in the Euro game is clouding the judgements of some people.

Edited January 19, 2007 by CAPT KAYOS

[rover_groo]

I may be wrong but imo warnock is a poorer player than Neill and more injury prone.

I think Warnock is equal in terms of defending ability.

Very resolute in tackle, but lacks a slight wee bit of experience and communication but that wil only come with age. Going forward Warnock is very promising, but would say that Lucas excells with this attribute. In fairness Warnock seems to be more injury prone and I stuggle to name an injury when Lucas spent more than 3 weeks on the sidelines.

I think the only real substantial period of time away, was when the club allowed him extra leave after returning from the World Cup. As biased as it seems, I would like to see Baird sign as a replacement to right back. He can also slide into centre-half and as a anchor man in midfield very successfully. Mark my words, if we don't sign him then you will see him progress onto another club in 2 years and become a highly-rated defender in the Premisership (if he avoids injury).

[RevidgeBlue]

Ok, if we're getting personal, let's have a history lesson.

Frankly, I learned to stop trusting your judgement on players a long time ago.

Who's the one getting personal?

You simply can't accept that anyone could possibly have a different opinion than you on a player.

[Neil Weaver]

Personally, I prefer to judge the players on what they do on the pitch. Neill started off the season poorly, then went on a run of games where he was excellent, and has been no worse than average for the last month or two. He's made the odd mistake that have led to goals, but he's also created, and scored, some goals too. Overall he's worthy of his place in the team and all the recent speculation over his future doesn't seem to have affected his performance, or committment to the team, at all.

I'd go along with that almost exactly Scotty. I'm baffled by some folks' views, but hey it's a subjective game so we'll all see things a bit differently. I'd suggest that Hughes' view isn't too close to Rev's. Some things just aren't worth getting worked up about though.

[bellamy11]

Who's the one getting personal?

You simply can't accept that anyone could possibly have a different opinion than you on a player.

Rev he definitely has a point.

You've never liked Neill ever since he came in for Curtis, and you're talking about him giving away penalties and amking bad challenges as though they're a new thing since he "lost interest". He has always had that one in his locker.

Lucas is playing averagely at the moment, just as he has had patches of in every season for us. As Scotty says, he started off abysmally but got an awful lot better. People now actually WANT him to look disinterested just so they can slate him. Jogging, misplaced passes, conceeding fouls. They're part of the game for every player, but if you're Lucas Neill it's because you don't care and are trying to throw the game.

[Scotty]

Who's the one getting personal?

You simply can't accept that anyone could possibly have a different opinion than you on a player.

God, if I replied every time someone on here says something I don't agree with I'd never do anything else. Everyone's entitled to their opinions on a player, I couldn't care less whether it agrees with mine or not.

What does annoy me though is when people make judgements on player's based on their own prejudicies, rather than what they do on the field. And it's even more annoying when they repeat those judgements on virtually every post they make.

[SouthAussieRover]

God, if I replied every time someone on here says something I don't agree with I'd never do anything else. Everyone's entitled to their opinions on a player, I couldn't care less whether it agrees with mine or not.

What does annoy me though is when people make judgements on player's based on their own prejudicies, rather than what they do on the field. And it's even more annoying when they repeat those judgements on virtually every post they make.

I'm with you on this one Scotty.

I think it's patently obvious that Rev sees fit to ignore the commitment and effort that Neill applies to his performances.

4 years of berating Neill has become rather tedious.

[Jim Royle]

Things I reckon.............

Mark Hughes rates him as a player

Mark Hughes appreciates his versatility

Mark Hughes appreciates his leadership capabilities

Mark Hughes will miss him

Also it seems that

Benitez rates him

Curbishley rates him

etc

All the above confirms my own thoughts that he is a highly effective player, very rarely injured and one much underestimated

Also he has shown a great deal of professionalism these last few months when all he seems to be doing is playing the system.

[speeeeeeedie]

It looks like we are still in for Warnock. Is he a left back? We don't need a right back as Super Emerton has made that spot his own.

I think Neill has done well. He used to be useless but Hughes turned him into an all action defender. His distribution can be suspect, his tackling a bit industrial, but overall he's been very good for us since Hughes took over and has been very professional all season long. If he wants to leave for silly money I won't hold a grudge, I don't for any player that leaves Ewood, after all if I was offered the same job at a different firm for double the money, I'd be off.

[RevidgeBlue]

What does annoy me though is when people make judgements on player's based on their own prejudicies, rather than what they do on the field. And it's even more annoying when they repeat those judgements on virtually every post they make.

I don't want to turn this into a personal "yah -boo" session but I am basing it on what I have seen on the field over the last couple of months. I think he's been poor. More in terms of mind not being fully on the job and lapses of concentration and defensive application.

And yes, that's even allowing for the fact I agree I'm probably half looking for it with him leaving.

Is it due to him leaving? Is it a normal run of the mill dip in form? Who knows? - probably only the player himself? Is there a risk it is because he's leaving? I think so. Can we afford to take the risk of keeping him on until the death and his performances dipping even further?. I don't think so.

You disagree, that's fine. I don't mind that at all. I was more annoyed about the fact that you think it's quite all right to dismiss what I said out of hand (and I'd agree) but when I retorted in kind you accused me of being "personal". I didn't take what you said to me (initially) as being personal in any way nor did I think was my response to you.

[Wolverine]

He has been a very good player for us, and excellent value for money.

But, it would appear to me that his refusal to sign our contract offer, and his refusal to join Liverpool with thier offer suggests he is following his wallet rather than his heart. I can't see any other reson why you would choose West Ham over Liverpool or stay put.

Good luck Lucas.

[cravenblue]

i see he is tomorrows squad. how can hughsey play him when he has decided to go, agreed terms with a team of no hopers. i dont understand it

[bubblerrovers]

More worrying if he gets injured.

[joey_big_nose]

i see he is tomorrows squad. how can hughsey play him when he has decided to go, agreed terms with a team of no hopers. i dont understand it

The only logic I can see in playing Niell is to show West Ham that we are willing to keep him if they don't provide the cash. Sensible move if we really are in the position where we simply cannot afford a replacement without adequate funds.

If he got injured we would be in trougble though.

[Ste B]

The only logic I can see in playing Niell is to show West Ham that we are willing to keep him if they don't provide the cash. Sensible move if we really are in the position where we simply cannot afford a replacement without adequate funds.

If he got injured we would be in trougble though.

More worrying would be the negative effect on the rest of the team, as I'm sure he's going to get crucified by the fans if he plays tomorrow.

[gumboots]

Hughes has said that he would have no problem playing him if he's still at rovers tomorrow, because he's never let him down in terms of committment in any game he's played so far.

[T4E]

So Lucas needs a new challenge. Fair one, I think we can all respect that.

Does a player who is all about the challenge of the game demand a release clause upon signing for a new club in case they are relegated? Any tiny bit of respect I still had left for Lucas Neill will completely evaporate if that turns out to be true.

[RoyRover]

He's still one of our best players, even if he is on the verge of joining West Ham. I'd play him because getting a result for Blackburn is more important than keeping West Ham happy in transfer talks.

[den]

-->

QUOTE(Ste B @ Jan 19 2007, 14:56 ) 480959[/snapback]

More worrying would be the negative effect on the rest of the team, as I'm sure he's going to get crucified by the fans if he plays tomorrow.

That would be clever wouldn't it! Nothing the Mancs would like more.

Don't think he'll play though. I assume Warnock will be signed before then.

[sussexrover]

Would warnock not have to have signed already to be able to be registered in time?

[Lathund]

Would warnock not have to have signed already to be able to be registered in time?

That depends on whether the rule states Noon the day before, or 24 hours before kickoff. I believe it's noon, but I'm not 100% sure.

[den]

Would warnock not have to have signed already to be able to be registered in time?

It might be too late for Warnock to play, but if he's signed then Lucas will sign for Wham. He wont play tomorrow.

So we might not have Warnock or Neill tomorrow.

[joey_big_nose]

So Lucas needs a new challenge. Fair one, I think we can all respect that.

Does a player who is all about the challenge of the game demand a release clause upon signing for a new club in case they are relegated? Any tiny bit of respect I still had left for Lucas Neill will completely evaporate if that turns out to be true.

Cmpletely agree with that. I think Niell has every right to move on if he likes to where he likes, but the relegation release clause just shows a lack of commitment and a lack of belief in the club.

If it's accurate it is absolutely astonishing that West Ham have written it in. Surely the kind of players they are looking for are ones who are absolutely behind the cause.

It just occured to me that the reason WH might have offered such massive wages is in the expectation that Rovers would take a reduced fee once they are resigned to losing him. We could effectively be engaged in a game of chicken until the window closes wating to see who crumbles first. This would be bad for us, but makes a lot of sense from a West Ham perspective.

If thats the position then it is going to be very hard to get the money in for Warnock or whoever else.