Neil Warnock plots biggest signing of his Cardiff City reign.........................

[Lawnmower]

And if Harris was fit would Feeney be here?

No.

He was brought in precisely due to Harris being injured, nothing more. I've no problem with Warnock not spunking major cash on a backup for a backup.

And Harris is now injured again.

Feeney has done OK when called on.
In fact at both Fulham and Reading away he did really well and helped us get points we weren't going to get.

I think most of the criticism is from reputation rather than his performances here.

Also for those questioning the logic. Players who are just back up need to be a certain type.
They mustn't be Ines who are disruptive or unprofessional for these players how they are off the pitch is as important as how they are off it.

These factors you won't find on FIFA and are often missed by football fans who think it's 'oh so easy' to manage.

I'd recommend Warnock's book as a read to understand why he brings these type of players in. It's very informative.

[Nick]

And Harris is now injured again.

Feeney has done OK when called on.
In fact at both Fulham and Reading away he did really well and helped us get points we weren't going to get.

I think most of the criticism is from reputation rather than his performances here.

Also for those questioning the logic. Players who are just back up need to be a certain type.
They mustn't be Ines who are disruptive or unprofessional for these players how they are off the pitch is as important as how they are off it.

These factors you won't find on FIFA and are often missed by football fans who think it's 'oh so easy' to manage.

I'd recommend Warnock's book as a read to understand why he brings these type of players in. It's very informative.

There’s probably a fair number who can’t even read to be fair.

[jamieccfc]

And Harris is now injured again.

Feeney has done OK when called on.
In fact at both Fulham and Reading away he did really well and helped us get points we weren't going to get.

I think most of the criticism is from reputation rather than his performances here.

Also for those questioning the logic. Players who are just back up need to be a certain type.
They mustn't be Ines who are disruptive or unprofessional for these players how they are off the pitch is as important as how they are off it.

These factors you won't find on FIFA and are often missed by football fans who think it's 'oh so easy' to manage.

I'd recommend Warnock's book as a read to understand why he brings these type of players in. It's very informative.

ThatsThat's fair enough but let's be honest he's just not good enough and especially when we've loaned out okeef and Kennedy is he really worth having on loan because I would rather recall Kennedy and send him back to Blackburn

[Lawnmower]

ThatsThat's fair enough but let's be honest he's just not good enough and especially when we've loaned out okeef and Kennedy is he really worth having on loan because I would rather recall Kennedy and send him back to Blackburn

Do you think Kennedy would have played any more games than Feeney has ?

I don't.

What good will that have done him.

He's getting much more football at Pompey now and hopefully improving as a result whereby he could be an asset to us in the future.

Besides which we've had ad issues with his attitude and he won't be a good player to have around if he's not getting games.

I'd like a more exciting player in than Feeney, but I can also see the logic.

If we've have limited funds to spend then cover for a position where we have 2 very good starters and some other options ( although one is injured) isn't priority for our money..

Centre mid where we've really struggled and have a starter out long term and striker where we have our 2nd choice be out long term and our 1st choice is erratic and only just coming back to fitness is also a priority.

[dembethewarrior]

Do you think Kennedy would have played any more games than Feeney has ?

I don't.

What good will that have done him.

He's getting much more football at Pompey now and hopefully improving as a result whereby he could be an asset to us in the future.

Besides which we've had ad issues with his attitude and he won't be a good player to have around if he's not getting games.

I'd like a more exciting player in than Feeney, but I can also see the logic.

If we've have limited funds to spend then cover for a position where we have 2 very good starters and some other options ( although one is injured) isn't priority for our money..

Centre mid where we've really struggled and have a starter out long term and striker where we have our 2nd choice be out long term and our 1st choice is erratic and only just coming back to fitness is also a priority.

Yeah...BUT on fifa you can have backup players JUST AS GOOD as the first team.

I think as a backup he's adequate. Fits the budget too (id imagine) and the right attitude and temperament to sit on the bench

[J R Hartley]

John

Let’s face it, you are not really a fan of the club are you? All you ever do is criticise the manager, the players etc. You are as bad as that a Jack on here.

Whittingham 4

[jamieccfc]

Do you think Kennedy would have played any more games than Feeney has ?

I don't.

What good will that have done him.

He's getting much more football at Pompey now and hopefully improving as a result whereby he could be an asset to us in the future.

Besides which we've had ad issues with his attitude and he won't be a good player to have around if he's not getting games.

I'd like a more exciting player in than Feeney, but I can also see the logic.

If we've have limited funds to spend then cover for a position where we have 2 very good starters and some other options ( although one is injured) isn't priority for our money..

Centre mid where we've really struggled and have a starter out long term and striker where we have our 2nd choice be out long term and our 1st choice is erratic and only just coming back to fitness is also a priority.

He's 23 now he's not a youngster you can keep loaning out hoping he'll improve, if he's not ready now then he'll probably will never be. Unless Warnock is to stubborn I think he would've had more time than feeney has he offers a lot more than a player running down a blind alley

[J R Hartley]

How the hell did Feeney get us a point at Reading that we wouldn’t otherwise have gained?

He wasn’t involved in the build up to either of the goals we scored.

[Lawnmower]

How the hell did Feeney get us a point at Reading that we wouldn’t otherwise have gained?

He wasn’t involved in the build up to either of the goals we scored.

He came on and started making runs into the channel that weren't being made before. He linked well with NML and Hoillet where before Bogle was just trying flicks and tricks.
It put Reading in the back foot.

He played a big part in the turnaround.

Didn't have to be directly involved in the goal to change the way the game was going.

[Lawnmower]

He's 23 now he's not a youngster you can keep loaning out hoping he'll improve, if he's not ready now then he'll probably will never be. Unless Warnock is to stubborn I think he would've had more time than feeney has he offers a lot more than a player running down a blind alley

That's EXACTLY what they are trying to do. He's pretty much on his last chance now as he hasn't done enough on his 2 previous loans to persuade his managers otherwise.

By his own admission his attitude has been all wrong.

He's not even starting every week for Pompey, so it's not looking good for him.

On his day he's a decent player , but he's got to show that he can do it week in week out and so far it doesn't seem he has.

[life on mars]

bugger its not Court's, Liverpool have sold him for £142 m at least there are more open windows in Barcelona .

[J R Hartley]

He came on and started making runs into the channel that weren't being made before. He linked well with NML and Hoillet where before Bogle was just trying flicks and tricks.
It put Reading in the back foot.

He played a big part in the turnaround.

Didn't have to be directly involved in the goal to change the way the game was going.

We were the better team 2nd half long before we got the actual goals.

Tomlins quality got us that point not Feeney.

[Lawnmower]

We were the better team 2nd half long before we got the actual goals.

Tomlins quality got us that point not Feeney.

Feeney was a part of the come back. We improved after he came on.

Not just him by any stretch, but he helped

He came on in the 81st, we scored our first in the 83 rd

We'd had plenty of ball for the 10-15 minutes before that but Bogle was giving it away.
That stopped when Feeney came on.

It was all right in front of me.

Doesn't make him a world beater, but he deserves credit where he's earnt it.

Just cos you've made your mind up you don't want him here shouldn't mean you try to belittle any contribution he makes.

[Badly Ironed Shirt]

Feeney was a part of the come back. We improved after he came on.

Not just him by any stretch, but he helped

He came on in the 81st, we scored our first in the 83 rd

We'd had plenty of ball for the 10-15 minutes before that but Bogle was giving it away.
That stopped when Feeney came on.

It was all right in front of me.

Doesn't make him a world beater, but he deserves credit where he's earnt it.

Just cos you've made your mind up you don't want him here shouldn't mean you try to belittle any contribution he makes.

Hartley is right on this one. The tide was turning from the start of the second half, indeed I posted that the game was not over 10 minutes into second half. You say Feeney was a part of the turn around - I'd say all 10 outfield players and subs were. Some more than others. Feeney was not a major contributor, I can't remember anything he did and I was looking out for him hoping he'd do well because a colleague of mine slates him constantly.

[Lawnmower]

Hartley is right on this one. The tide was turning from the start of the second half, indeed I posted that the game was not over 10 minutes into second half. You say Feeney was a part of the turn around - I'd say all 10 outfield players and subs were. Some more than others. Feeney was not a major contributor, I can't remember anything he did and I was looking out for him hoping he'd do well because a colleague of mine slates him constantly.

I doubt either of you were there live, you don't see the whole picture on TV.

He was involved in a lot of the interplay around the box with Hoillet and NML which we discussed at the ground at the time.

We had been on top for 25 minutes before he came on but Bogle was trying to be too flash and giving the ball away.

Feeney didn't and was involved in creating several chances. Maybe not the ones that produced the goals, but Ines that helped pile the pressure on. Bogle, the player he replaced, in contrast, kept letting them off the hook by losing the ball.

You and Polo may not have noticed whilst watching on the TV, but I did as the last 20 minutes was played out right in front of us, so it was easier to pick players out than when it was at the other end in the first half.

[J R Hartley]

Haha so the TV, with all the camera angles and replays these days, did not pick up on all the chances we created because of Feeney?!?!?

I suppose Feeney anonymous performances against Birmingham and Preston were also down to the TV as well as there were pieces of magic not picked up by the cameras.

[J R Hartley]

IMO the way we play with very few attacking options, then for the wing positions we need more than just a back up, some guy who is happy to sit on the bench and not cause the manager a headache.

If he was a left back fair enough but we play with 2 wingers and so we at the very least need someone capable of making an impact off the bench, and as NML is struggling for form someone who is capable of starting ahead of him.