Lessons learned . Away to Cambridge Tues, 26th Nov. 1745.

[BWFC_Insane]

If we're critical of the poor mentality of our players, there's a guy who's quite highly rated next to Sheehan who lets other teams midfielders kick 7 shades out of his teammates and who gets a suspension every 5th game for mistimed tackles, or dissent

And we've given him the feckin captaincy!!

His team mates need to be able to look after themsleves a bit too. Do we only employ one cnut who can tackle? I know tackling isn't very popular anymore.

Sheehan won the most tackles of any of our players last season.

There seemed to be an expectation from Boris post, that Thommo should be saving all his mates. I'd expect a 6 to win the volume tackle count, he was 6th on tackles per 90 last season, same as Thommo, with 3 CDs higher, which if your defensive patterns are working well, probably shouldn't be the case.

I don't expect that... BWFCI suggests that.

He's suggesting somehow, that Thomason carried Sheehan to his player of the year award and team of the year award, as voted by players from other teams.

But that's because he's hyperbolic and talking bolics. Both players have their shortfalls, but I'd wager that if both players went to Bristol City tomorrow, Sheehan would get more minutes. Again, I'm not saying I don't like Thomason, quite the opposite, but BWFCI has this view of football, like it's a 1980's war played on mud and only chest beating foulers have room in our team.

Sheehan is a fantastic footballer and I think he's being asked to do too much. Break up play, win tackles, win interceptions, be the play maker, be the passer and often his fellow midfielders are 20 yards ahead of him being marked - Sometimes that works, but not often

I think people are massively unrealistic tbh. City won the treble effectively with a bunch of big hulking centre backs protected by Rodri. They have outstanding technical players like Silva etc but their most successful period was built around height and power with quality in front.

To accommodate Sheehan a small, non combative, defensively light player at 6 you’ve got to be outstanding and he needs to be outstanding. Neither is the case. I don’t see many sides playing him there. And the issue is not he’s small or whatever. It’s that he doesn’t cover the ground and doesn’t have the athleticism imho for the championship. And I think the fundamentals you need as you go up levels Thomason has - maybe a lack of pace - but has most of them. Sheehan doesn’t. IMHO. He’s a billion miles away from Holden who was a similar stature and played the same position for example.

[Worthy4England]

If we're critical of the poor mentality of our players, there's a guy who's quite highly rated next to Sheehan who lets other teams midfielders kick 7 shades out of his teammates and who gets a suspension every 5th game for mistimed tackles, or dissent

And we've given him the feckin captaincy!!

His team mates need to be able to look after themsleves a bit too. Do we only employ one cnut who can tackle? I know tackling isn't very popular anymore.

Sheehan won the most tackles of any of our players last season.

There seemed to be an expectation from Boris post, that Thommo should be saving all his mates. I'd expect a 6 to win the volume tackle count, he was 6th on tackles per 90 last season, same as Thommo, with 3 CDs higher, which if your defensive patterns are working well, probably shouldn't be the case.

I don't expect that... BWFCI suggests that.

He's suggesting somehow, that Thomason carried Sheehan to his player of the year award and team of the year award, as voted by players from other teams.

But that's because he's hyperbolic and talking bolics. Both players have their shortfalls, but I'd wager that if both players went to Bristol City tomorrow, Sheehan would get more minutes. Again, I'm not saying I don't like Thomason, quite the opposite, but BWFCI has this view of football, like it's a 1980's war played on mud and only chest beating foulers have room in our team.

Sheehan is a fantastic footballer and I think he's being asked to do too much. Break up play, win tackles, win interceptions, be the play maker, be the passer and often his fellow midfielders are 20 yards ahead of him being marked - Sometimes that works, but not often

I'll stick with "Sheehan is great going fowards with space, less so when it's a bit more cramped." Defensively, it's not what he does that's a problem, it's when he doesn't. I'll try and explain by reference to Stockport's opening goal...

STK 1st goal.jpg (129.77 KiB) Viewed 2925 times

Frame 1 (top left), Schon loses ball - it's a bad loss, but not irrecoverable as a potential goal.

Frame 2 - move develops moves out to the flank.

Frame 3 - the scorer and Josh are running within bumming distance of each other, 40 yards out. So Josh is going to stick with this dude, obviously.

Frame 4 - by the time we get here, pretty much all of Schon, JDC, McAtee have all covered more pitch than (either) of the defensive mids, Sheehan has just let the scorer womble into space he's now 5/6 yards away, must be Santos problem eh?

Frame 5 - Szabo tried to tackle the scorer - he started out much wider and further up the pitch. Sheehan fannies about looking like shit is important.

He does this type of thing plenty. Not a DM.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

IMHO. He’s a billion miles away from Holden who was a similar stature and played the same position for example.

That's like berating McGinlay for not being like Bergkamp. I mean, they played a similar position

Completely different types of players except you expect Sheehan to be the same

[Worthy4England]

Just to be clear, I'm not blaming Sheehan for Stockport's goal - there were plenty of people nearer the ball to effect a tackle. But as a BM you gotta track your man in case what happened, happens.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

It all comes back to the manager. The type of football we’re trying to play requires total conviction and I really don't think it's helpful he is clearly doubting himself, saying he doesn't have the answers. That translates and snowballs. Our current best formation is whichever of 352 or 343 we weren't paying the last time we feebly collapsed. I have no particular animus against him, and I hope rather than expect he turns a corner. But I don't know what the plan is, we aren't improving, we somehow have a negative goal difference and are liable to complete collapse at any point. A team that goes 1-0 up away to ten men and surrenders all control isn't going up. Of course Cambridge have to come at you and that's the point good teams make their quality and extra men count and score a second. Of course every now and then it doesn't happen and a good ball hits you, but the alarming thing was we never looked like scoring the second, or believing we could.

This, again.

I’m 8hrs behind GMT, travelling around, spotty wifi. Managed to log on in time to see the news come through that we’d scored, and Iles soon after said we were chasing a second. Had to move on, out of wifi, but I was uneasy. Half an hour later, chance to check again, completely unsurprised to hear we’d conceded. After leading against 10 men in the bottom three. And we think we can make up 11pts on Wycombe?

I don’t think Evatt is the worst manager possible and I don’t think Sheehan is a “million times” worse than Thomason or a “billion times” worse than Holden - those things are just my dear friend BWFCi’s hyperbolic pathology: now that Evatt out is more widely accepted he has to find a fringe view to froth from. I also don’t think it all needs wiping and restarting. Evatt is definitely underperforming with this group of players and I still don’t think it’s too late for a new man to take us up, albeit increasingly likely to have to rely on the playoffs. I worry that Ilesy has now serially mentioned January “busyness” - are we going to fix it, or just throw good money after bad?

[irie Cee Bee]

Sheehan is a decent player. He is really good when he has space, not good when he has little space. Signing him up for 2 more years is to protect our investment in him because at the moment he has value now that Wales is playing him rather than him sitting on the bench. We are hoping someone comes in for him in January or the summer with a good offer. On the other hand, signing him signals to me that we are content in being a L1 club because midfielders in the Championship would eat him alive.

[Harry Genshaw]

I don't think it would bring anything final from the board if we lost, so long as we weren't hammered.

1-1 draw.

[officer_dibble]

It would be fecking madness to let whoever is in charge of what players we spend money on spend more money in January. It’s getting worse and it’s not working.

[Prufrock]

"Man City's most successful period was built around height and power with quality up front."

Ok.

[BWFC_Insane]

"Man City's most successful period was built around height and power with quality up front."

Ok.

I mean it was. How many centre halves did he play with Rodri in front? How good to city look when Rodri isn’t available?

[Worthy4England]

"Man City's most successful period was built around height and power with quality up front."

Ok.

I mean it was. How many centre halves did he play with Rodri in front? How good to city look when Rodri isn’t available?

About as good as they used to look when Fernandinho was absent. (He's not huge)...

Show ponies can only put icing on a cake, (This next bit is pretty important) if there's a fcuking cake!

[TANGODANCER]

Just to be clear, I'm not blaming Sheehan for Stockport's goal - there were plenty of people nearer the ball to effect a tackle. But as a BM you gotta track your man in case what happened, happens.

I did think Baxter was less than mobile for the goal. He's a very decent keeper who makes great saves, but in the replays he looks flat-footed and routed and his dive is way late. He's a big lad but that shouldn't stop him being flexible. I doubt their keeper would have been as slow to react. In effect, it was a soft goal.

[Worthy4England]

Just to be clear, I'm not blaming Sheehan for Stockport's goal - there were plenty of people nearer the ball to effect a tackle. But as a BM you gotta track your man in case what happened, happens.

I did think Baxter was less than mobile for the goal. He's a very decent keeper who makes great saves, but in the replays he looks flat-footed and routed and his dive is way late. He's a big lad but that shouldn't stop him being flexible. I doubt their keeper would have been as slow to react. In effect, it was a soft goal.

Agree mate, there were lots of problems during the course of that move, starting with Szabi getting turned over.

The convo was about Sheehan and my point is, he's not good defending as a 6. He improved his tackling last year. Tackle counts only show the ones you try. The fact he's running next to their scorer and lets him drift into the area unmarked, whilst three of our team who were further upfield get our goalside of him (and Matete) was woeful. When I say he's not a great 6, it's things like this I'm looking at. What he's not doing, rather than what he is.

[BWFC_Insane]

"Man City's most successful period was built around height and power with quality up front."

Ok.

I mean it was. How many centre halves did he play with Rodri in front? How good to city look when Rodri isn’t available?

About as good as they used to look when Fernandinho was absent. (He's not huge)...

Show ponies can only put icing on a cake, (This next bit is pretty important) if there's a fcuking cake!

Yeah it’s less about height and more about the fact that I don’t think man city would anchor their midfield in an ideal world with a relative to the level Josh Sheehan type.

City won the champions league with a team that had Akanji, Dias, Ake, Stones and Rodri starting. Gundogan and De Bruyne to link, Grealish, Silva and Haaland to do the business at the top end.

Thats a pretty clear 5 physical players in there to do the dirty work. Height is a proxy but be the same with Fernandinho in there instead. They won the champions league. Yes they had huge quality - nobody denying that. But ultimately my point is for all the talk about modern football and everything success seems to still be about a solid core that stops other teams scoring. Primarily.

[TANGODANCER]

I did think Baxter was less than mobile for the goal. He's a very decent keeper who makes great saves, but in the replays he looks flat-footed and routed and his dive is way late. He's a big lad but that shouldn't stop him being flexible. I doubt their keeper would have been as slow to react. In effect, it was a soft goal.

Agree mate, there were lots of problems during the course of that move, starting with Szabi getting turned over.

The convo was about Sheehan and my point is, he's not good defending as a 6. He improved his tackling last year. Tackle counts only show the ones you try. The fact he's running next to their scorer and lets him drift into the area unmarked, whilst three of our team who were further upfield get our goalside of him (and Matete) was woeful. When I say he's not a great 6, it's things like this I'm looking at. What he's not doing, rather than what he is.
[/quote]

Aye, I agree, All fair points, but my comment re- Baxter was based on if the ball hadn't finished up in the net we wouldn't be quite as eager to ask "who dunnit?" . Unfortunately, it did !

[Worthy4England]

Agree Insano. For me it's the job rather than the height. Interesting Stones gets a mention, because he was a car crash and got dropped for 12? months pretty much because he was defending poorly. When he came back. Much better. For me half our coaches/analysts generally only look in one direction. Endemically poor.

As to the "why did he make the team of the year," that's pretty straightforward. When you see him 90/180 minutes over a season, in the middle of 21 other players, he will pick (more often than not) some decent passes. He's generally given the fcking ball, of course you might notice him. Much less likely to spot he's all over the place in a defensive transition, because you're watching the ball. Not rocket science.

[BWFC_Insane]

Agree Insano. For me it's the job rather than the height. Interesting Stones gets a mention, because he was a car crash and got dropped for 12? months pretty much because he was defending poorly. When he came back. Much better. For me half our coaches/analysts generally only look in one direction. Endemically poor.

As to the "why did he make the team of the year," that's pretty straightforward. When you see him 90/180 minutes over a season, in the middle of 21 other players, he will pick (more often than not) some decent passes. He's generally given the fcking ball, of course you might notice him. Much less likely to spot he's all over the place in a defensive transition, because you're watching the ball. Not rocket science.

And as much as I think Hill is an idiot he’s right about the fact that when we put Matete in at 6 we look more solid. We need a screen for the back three. Someone who does that job.

[Worthy4England]

I did think Baxter was less than mobile for the goal. He's a very decent keeper who makes great saves, but in the replays he looks flat-footed and routed and his dive is way late. He's a big lad but that shouldn't stop him being flexible. I doubt their keeper would have been as slow to react. In effect, it was a soft goal.

Agree mate, there were lots of problems during the course of that move, starting with Szabi getting turned over.

The convo was about Sheehan and my point is, he's not good defending as a 6. He improved his tackling last year. Tackle counts only show the ones you try. The fact he's running next to their scorer and lets him drift into the area unmarked, whilst three of our team who were further upfield get our goalside of him (and Matete) was woeful. When I say he's not a great 6, it's things like this I'm looking at. What he's not doing, rather than what he is.

Aye, I agree, All fair points, but my comment re- Baxter was based on if the ball hadn't finished up in the net we wouldn't be quite as eager to ask "who dunnit?" . Unfortunately, it did !

I would and our coaching staff are paid to be interested in it, whether the ball ends up in the net or not!

[Worthy4England]

Agree Insano. For me it's the job rather than the height. Interesting Stones gets a mention, because he was a car crash and got dropped for 12? months pretty much because he was defending poorly. When he came back. Much better. For me half our coaches/analysts generally only look in one direction. Endemically poor.

As to the "why did he make the team of the year," that's pretty straightforward. When you see him 90/180 minutes over a season, in the middle of 21 other players, he will pick (more often than not) some decent passes. He's generally given the fcking ball, of course you might notice him. Much less likely to spot he's all over the place in a defensive transition, because you're watching the ball. Not rocket science.

And as much as I think Hill is an idiot he’s right about the fact that when we put Matete in at 6 we look more solid. We need a screen for the back three. Someone who does that job.

Haven't quite worked Jay out yet, tbh. He's not looked too bad at times defensively, but often doesn't get a pass off after beating 2 players 4 times. If pressed, I'd say no fcuking different overall in shambolic clueless defending.

So I thought I'd go have a look and if you look at it as a couple of 6's with Matete, Thomo and Sheehan

Matete and Thomo only graced the Huddersfield match, never to be mentioned. 0-4
Sheehan/Thomo have done 8 games, W4, D2, L2 F12, A10, PPG 1.75
Sheehan/Matete have done 6 games W3, D1, L2 F11 A11, PPG 1.67

[Prufrock]

"Man City's most successful period was built around height and power with quality up front."

Ok.

I mean it was. How many centre halves did he play with Rodri in front? How good to city look when Rodri isn’t available?

No one is saying the defensive side isn't important. And the best players will have everything. He also won the treble at Barca with Mascherano at CB, and Xavi and Iniesta in midfield. That City team was *built* around technical and tactical quality. But of course physicality doesn't hurt and you'd have both if you could. If you think Pep would pick Karl Henry over Sheehan you're off your head.

All of that is an aside. We aren't city. The issue is tactical. We consistently set up in a way that puts too much defensive and physical responsibility on Sheehan and it isn't his strength.

Can you win a league 1 title with a midfield built around Josh Sheehan? Absolutely IMO. Can you do it by leaving him alone in central midfield when we give the ball away? I sincerely doubt it, not without being amazing elsewhere.