Jump to content

The Tim Sherwood Thread


OutByEaster?

Recommended Posts

i bet the same people who are saying gil shouldnt be subbed would be saying he should have been subbed if leicester scored from a shlupp cross. He was getting exposed pretty badly down that side before he got subbed off. 

Why do people keep saying ayew is a striker? Hes played both wide and at front in his carear. Hes played the role he was supposed to play yesterday before (played it a lot iirc), it isnt some totally new position. The pace of shlupp needed nullified at that moment of the game so trying to nullify that by having someone keep up with his pace and bringing on fresh leg who would also be able to exploit the FB getting so far forward seemed fine to me. (dont get me wrong, ayew didnt do anything, that doesnt make the reasoning behind the sub bad though)

Think everyone could see that bacuna lost his head and needed to be sub'd pretty quickly. Was too late on that sub.
Also agree to those who think gestede shouldnt have come on and veretout instead to give less space to their AM's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having watched the second half of that game, I now get the 'Tactics Tim' jibe.  If it ain't broke Tim, if it ain't f**kin' broke.

Out hope the opponents dont change it

83103f35d5b39708475c2f102bc3d081.png

 

That second table in particular tells its own story. This sadly simply continues a trend we saw at the end of last season as well. His in-game management is just dreadful. If that was all there was to it, you'd simply say get rid of him. But the sad thing is, he seems very able to set the team up before the game and someone behind the scenes has got our midfielders to work really well together and create good penetration and attractive attacking patterns, so his mistakes in this area undo all the good work he or his team put in during the week. 

Sherwood seems to me to be excellent at half of the job and dreadful at the other half. 

Edited by HanoiVillan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that scenario you only bring on Gestede if you're chasing the game.  As for Ayew, I know he has played that role but he is primarily a striker in the same way that Sinclair; whilst able to play up front; is fundamentally an attacking mid.  The reasoning (pace) may have been right but the personnel was wrong.  Also, Bacuna should have been long gone by the time he was subbed.  Every time the ball came down his side there was a huge gaping orifice where a #7 should have been.  He is positionally useless as a defender because of his attempts to get forward and as has been said, he put our centre backs under more pressure than was necessary.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i bet the same people who are saying gil shouldnt be subbed would be saying he should have been subbed if leicester scored from a shlupp cross. He was getting exposed pretty badly down that side before he got subbed off. 

Why do people keep saying ayew is a striker? Hes played both wide and at front in his carear. Hes played the role he was supposed to play yesterday before (played it a lot iirc), it isnt some totally new position. The pace of shlupp needed nullified at that moment of the game so trying to nullify that by having someone keep up with his pace and bringing on fresh leg who would also be able to exploit the FB getting so far forward seemed fine to me. (dont get me wrong, ayew didnt do anything, that doesnt make the reasoning behind the sub bad though)

In a purely positional sense, perhaps. But that doesn't take into account the performances we've seen from Ayew so far, which have been unimpressive. Perhaps Sherwood thought that a two goal lead made this a good time for Ayew to get some more experience, but given the way that Leicester were attacking us - and I think it's important to recognise how much more the Leicester team fought for the win than we did - a more defensive substitution would have made more sense, rather than someone who doesn't yet seem up to the pace of the league.

Edited by Villanun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't really blame Ayew and Gestede for their roles in this, the midfield was being over run, we needed ball winners and fight. We didn't even play long to Gestede which though not a tactic i like might have earnt some respite if he had held the ball up. Ayew was running into three of their players every time he go the ball and there was nothing going on ahead of him, so he was trying to do too much when all we needed was possession and composure. He should have replaced Sinclair who did so little in the second half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, forgot what the hell was that arm waving he was doing on the touchline. Was he having a laugh or what looked ridiculous 

It was laughable but to be fair he's not the only manager who looks a tit on the sidelines.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having watched the second half of that game, I now get the 'Tactics Tim' jibe.  If it ain't broke Tim, if it ain't f**kin' broke.

Out hope the opponents dont change it

83103f35d5b39708475c2f102bc3d081.png

 

Interesting reading that! He doesn't have much experience, you'd probably expect Ranieri and Advocaat to have something extra tactically after all their time in the game. I'd hesitate before putting Pardew in that company though?

Edited by romavillan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got to take the blame for recent defeats, due to his baffling substitutions. Yesterday, if Gil really was injured he should've bought Veretout on and strengthened the midfield to my mind

At that point we had a whole host of players doing absolutely nothing of note (Grealish, Sinclair, Gabby for starters)

Could've changed the formation and ground out the win no problem, but chose to go oddball and gift em the 3 points

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having watched the second half of that game, I now get the 'Tactics Tim' jibe.  If it ain't broke Tim, if it ain't f**kin' broke.

Out hope the opponents dont change it

83103f35d5b39708475c2f102bc3d081.png

 

Easy then... Attack the players viciously but fairly and make sure they are forced into all of their subs in the first half!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i bet the same people who are saying gil shouldnt be subbed would be saying he should have been subbed if leicester scored from a shlupp cross. He was getting exposed pretty badly down that side before he got subbed off. 

Why do people keep saying ayew is a striker? Hes played both wide and at front in his carear. Hes played the role he was supposed to play yesterday before (played it a lot iirc), it isnt some totally new position. The pace of shlupp needed nullified at that moment of the game so trying to nullify that by having someone keep up with his pace and bringing on fresh leg who would also be able to exploit the FB getting so far forward seemed fine to me. (dont get me wrong, ayew didnt do anything, that doesnt make the reasoning behind the sub bad though)

This would be absolutely fine reasoning if Ayew had come on and played on the right hand side of our team - he didn't though.

Schlupp was up against Sinclair and Bacuna whilst Amavi and Ayew (assumed) had to deal with the raw pace of De Laet and Albrighton.

It was a ridiculous substitution which has been covered enough.  Sherwood lost the game for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no need to panic yet chaps.

 

This team is good. No we're not world beaters but we'll do fine this season. Most of us predicted this shaky start given the number of new signings. We'll be fine come May.

we never used to agree. I miss arguing with you :( ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i bet the same people who are saying gil shouldnt be subbed would be saying he should have been subbed if leicester scored from a shlupp cross. He was getting exposed pretty badly down that side before he got subbed off. 

Why do people keep saying ayew is a striker? Hes played both wide and at front in his carear. Hes played the role he was supposed to play yesterday before (played it a lot iirc), it isnt some totally new position. The pace of shlupp needed nullified at that moment of the game so trying to nullify that by having someone keep up with his pace and bringing on fresh leg who would also be able to exploit the FB getting so far forward seemed fine to me. (dont get me wrong, ayew didnt do anything, that doesnt make the reasoning behind the sub bad though)

This would be absolutely fine reasoning if Ayew had come on and played on the right hand side of our team - he didn't though.

Schlupp was up against Sinclair and Bacuna whilst Amavi and Ayew (assumed) had to deal with the raw pace of De Laet and Albrighton.

It was a ridiculous substitution which has been covered enough.  Sherwood lost the game for us.

the point obviously still stands whether its ayew there or sinclair. Albrighton got subbed

Edited by gharperr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sherwood had managed a lower league club before us he'd have made these mistakes and got away with them, hopefully learning from them. Make the same mistakes in the Prem and you'll get punished. Gestede and Ayew coming on was absolutely absurd at that point in the game, Leicester had already started playing and we needed to crowd them out in the middle of the park. Absolute disaster. If he shows the same naivety again he's lost me as a fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes the 2 subs look poor seeing as we didn't ge tthe third goal he thought they might bring, seemed to have been the turning point for Leciester to press on to us much much more. It's all very well shouting keep the ball at them, but even when Hutton came on had we introduced Veretout for a forward we may have saved a point.

Going to be very interesting now what reaction Sherwood can get from these players, after that post match interview you would think the team have got a massive bollocking today that may well continue in to tomorrow ;) 

Depends how well they react I suppose, are they still on double training? 9 - 3?

 

Shame there is no one to give Sherwood a massive bollocking, as he was more at fault for that defeat than the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â