Demitri_C Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Still sceptical based on his tactical abilities, but he's young and still learning his trades. Next season will certainly be interesting. What has he done wrong tactically since he's been here? Let Stoke and Qpr control the game vs us after they made tactical changes and he didn't respond and left us too open vs Swansea and didn't see the warning signs down the flanks. Im willing to forgive such instances as he is basically just starting out as a manager and has showed a lot of promise in most games for us to date. He's hardly the finished article and I hope you're not suggesting he is perfect? You cant win them all, give him a break Was just pointing out when I thought he looked bad tactically and wasn't even having a dig, overall he has been a success and if he can keep doing what he has done so far I'll be more than happy with him. Fair enough mate ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonoridge91 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 So interesting reading this thread from the start. Seeing some people angry at this appointment. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 What Tim Sherwood has finally proved is that second best does not have to be accepted at this club. I don't want to get ahead of myself....but Managers do make a difference and we have accepted second best in managers for too long. We all know money is important, but not to the same degree as some fans claim, there are plenty of other things of importance. I know Mark who writes some good stuff on here has always claimed these players were better than we were getting from them....We still have a bit to prove and of course new signings are necessary as well as keeping our better players....but the signs are very good. Congrats to Tom Fox for having the Nous and balls to sign Tim. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonoridge91 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 What Tim Sherwood has finally proved is that second best does not have to be accepted at this club. I don't want to get ahead of myself....but Managers do make a difference and we have accepted second best in managers for too long. We all know money is important, but not to the same degree as some fans claim, there are plenty of other things of importance. I know Mark who writes some good stuff on here has always claimed these players were better than we were getting from them....We still have a bit to prove and of course new signings are necessary as well as keeping our better players....but the signs are very good. Congrats to Tom Fox for having the Nous and balls to sign Tim. The thing I like about Sherwood, even though he is bound to get the tactics wrong in matches from time to time he'll make sure our team give it their all. He won't accept anything but 100% effort and commitment. That is all us, as fans have always asked for. We understand we won't be winning the league or anything but we KNOW that these players are better than relegation contenders and we damn sure want to see them make a go of every game. We certainly have done that since Sherwood has been in charge. Even when we've lost, the last few minute goals at least we were trying to win it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raymond Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Now removed a bit from the glory, the two changes were really bad, and that has been a theme with Sherwood so far. Hope he can improve his ability to make changes on the fly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Now removed a bit from the glory, the two changes were really bad, and that has been a theme with Sherwood so far. Hope he can improve his ability to make changes on the fly. I don't think they were that bad - they seemed to coincide with Liverpool stepping up a gear but I think that was more down to them than us. It's easy to forget that there's another team sometimes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regular_john Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Now removed a bit from the glory, the two changes were really bad, and that has been a theme with Sherwood so far. Hope he can improve his ability to make changes on the fly. By changes I assume you mean Sinclair and Cole coming on? I thought they were quite sensible. The formation was working so it made no sense to make too radical a change. Sinclair coming on gave us some fresh legs up front and gave them something to think about, which limited their ability to bomb forwards and press for an equaliser. Cole, while past his best, is an experienced head who is used to playing in big, big games, and it's a good idea to have a level head on the pitch to keep things calm and simple in the closing moments of such a big game. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myb Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Now removed a bit from the glory, the two changes were really bad, and that has been a theme with Sherwood so far. Hope he can improve his ability to make changes on the fly. By changes I assume you mean Sinclair and Cole coming on? I thought they were quite sensible. The formation was working so it made no sense to make too radical a change. Sinclair coming on gave us some fresh legs up front and gave them something to think about, which limited their ability to bomb forwards and press for an equaliser. Cole, while past his best, is an experienced head who is used to playing in big, big games, and it's a good idea to have a level head on the pitch to keep things calm and simple in the closing moments of such a big game. Completely agree with this. The Cole change was about getting an experienced head on the pitch for the last few minutes. Said exactly that at the time of the change. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daweii Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Sherwood didn't do a whole lot wrong on Sunday. Just because Liverpool's only real sustained period of attack coincided with Sinclair and Cole coming on does not mean it was due to that, Liverpool were always going to have a go at some point. Personally we should be praising Sherwood for not altering anything despite going a goal down, something Rodgers did a lot on Sunday. We may actually have Rodgers to thank for some of our fortunes as when they went 1-0 up he changed formation which screwed them over, he went on to change formation I believe three times over the course of the match. Sherwood had a game plan and he stuck to it through thick and thin and it worked for us as we're in the final and Liverpool aren't. As they say correlation does not imply causation, just because Liverpool's mounted offensive coincided with our substitutions does not imply it was due to that in any way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 He said after the game that we knew we were outplaying them because they had to resort to punting the ball into the box from range. So for me, we let them do that it seems for that last 15 minutes, it wasn't Sherwood being tactically naive, he and the team just knew we could hold out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I thought the change for cole was a great one, for one reason only. I've read scousers crying into their cheerios about their team being shown up by "tactic Tim" and something glory Cole. Brilliant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Now removed a bit from the glory, the two changes were really bad, and that has been a theme with Sherwood so far. Hope he can improve his ability to make changes on the fly. By changes I assume you mean Sinclair and Cole coming on? I thought they were quite sensible. The formation was working so it made no sense to make too radical a change. Sinclair coming on gave us some fresh legs up front and gave them something to think about, which limited their ability to bomb forwards and press for an equaliser. Cole, while past his best, is an experienced head who is used to playing in big, big games, and it's a good idea to have a level head on the pitch to keep things calm and simple in the closing moments of such a big game. Completely agree with this. The Cole change was about getting an experienced head on the pitch for the last few minutes. Said exactly that at the time of the change. Yeah, I actually thought his changes on Sunday were the best - or at least the most logical - that I've seen since he joined the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raymond Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I completely disagree. Jack and Nzog were able to carry the ball forward and remove pressure all day, and they were playing well when the change happened. After Cole and Sinclair came on we had no outlet, and that is why the pressure level changed IMO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I completely disagree. Jack and Nzog were able to carry the ball forward and remove pressure all day, and they were playing well when the change happened. After Cole and Sinclair came on we had no outlet, and that is why the pressure level changed IMO. Completely? Not even a part of you thinks they were the right changes? Cole came on a week earlier against Tottenham and did a fantastic job. So hard to argue with the decision. I think the game would have developed the same regardless. N'Zogbia had certainly ran out of steam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisVillan Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Jack looked knackered to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 21, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted April 21, 2015 N'Zogbia did pretty much nothing all game. I'm surprised people think he was doing well. Our weakest player (although not bad) on the day and he was the obvious choice to be brought off for the first change. I was calling for Sinclair to come on to replace him long before the change actually happened. As for Jack, he was knackered, and we wanted some experience to see the game out. And we did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I thought the weakest player for me....made the most important save....funny old game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I just knew all along there was a manager out there that could do this for us....Just didn't KNOW it was Tim Sherwood, but did have a sneaky suspicion.....He does remind me of Gregory....not in looks, but mannerisms /persona Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 All managers get tactics wrong. but all managers can't necessarily get the best out of players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daweii Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I'd argue that tactics are secondary if you have most of the team giving 110% to the cause. Yes it helps to have them all pulling in the same direction as well, but the biggest battle is morale and confidence and Tim Sherwood has had that conquered for a while now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts