Shakespeare - The Poll

[Callabinho]

It's a no from me, simply because I'm not confident in him being a manager......he's a top coach but I'm not sure he can handle everything as a manager...we need a top manager in my opinion otherwise we slip backwards rather than forwards....

 

However I totally agree with his decision to remove Benny last night....he was being pulled about like an accordion....

[Buce]

 

No, from me.

 

There is a big difference between steadying a sinking ship, and moving on to the level that we aspire to.

 

 

[Thracian]

9 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

If Shakespear, with a relatively injury free squad, can replicate the first half of his tenure it's a no brainer.

 

It's a pity he doesn't have more games. It's hard to tell if there was a post-Ranieri boost and if injuries aside he could have maintained it though Man City and Spurs.

 

His subbing Benny has again made me question his decision making. He does need to improve but the question is whether he can do that in time for a decent mid table finish next season.

 

Bournemouth will seal his fate I suspect. If we fail to bounce back and beat a mid table team then you'd want him more of a coach than a manager.

 

 

The Bournemouth game won't  change the target he was set and achieved and it won't change our personnel, our injury problems or the fact that several of our squad are clearly below Premierships standard and need to be gone. 

 

Bournemouth is largely an irelevance. Sure Shaky would have liked a winning finish but he will also know our thinnish squad was aching these last few weeks and longing for some rest and recuperation . 

 

Shakeseare was asked to save us from relegation and, presumably, fly our flag with some pride in the Champions League. He did that with matches to spare as far as The Premiership as concerned.

 

I don't recall winning every other match as being part of his remit and, if it had been, he might have reconsidered the job.

 

Next season will be different, with new targets to achieve and his own players in place if he finally gets the job. If not, well there'll be another upheaval for sure.  

[foxy boxing]

see how he starts next season, he needs to hit the league running and we need to get to forty points as quickly as possible and then build on that

[Babylon]

Sick of hearing about this moving on to the next level nonsense, I seriously think people are deluding themselves. The owners are currently NOT putting in the money to move on to the next level, if they do then fair enough. But until that point we're no more than a Saints, West Brom, Stoke all milling around that middle area of the league. To ever break past that takes cash, lots of it. It's no coincidence the top teams and the ones who spend the most on wages. 6th / 7th / 8th on a regular basis is almost the best you can hope for without it.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

1 hour ago, Tuna said:

You could have at least deleted the part where I said 'and get it right'.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

13 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Sick of hearing about this moving on to the next level nonsense, I seriously think people are deluding themselves. The owners are currently NOT putting in the money to move on to the next level, if they do then fair enough. But until that point we're no more than a Saints, West Brom, Stoke all milling around that middle area of the league. To ever break past that takes cash, lots of it. It's no coincidence the top teams and the ones who spend the most on wages. 6th / 7th / 8th on a regular basis is almost the best you can hope for without it.

They'll start putting the money in once a bigger name is charge.  

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

They'll start putting the money in once a bigger name is charge.  

Why will they? The recruitment team are in charge of picking players, the managers influence is nothing like what it used to be in terms of signing players and it looks like that's how they want it.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Why will they? The recruitment team are in charge of picking players, the managers influence is nothing like what it used to be in terms of signing players and it looks like that's how they want it.

They're thirsty to relive those European nights and they know they wont get them with following the transfer pattern they have.  They'll learn from their mistakes and sanction big money signings.

 

I'm predicting we break the £40m mark for a player this summer.

[LCCFox96]

Yes for the following 3 reasons:

 

1) Done his job - asked to steady the ship and keep us up. He's done that comfortably, with the added bonus of CL Quarters. Unfair to deny him the reward of the job as, last night aside, he's very much delivered. 

 

2) Positive Performances - notable performance improvements with a few obvious tweaks to bring us up another gear. He seems to recognise this and want to fix it. That plus I think I've seen enough tactical nous to assure me he can keep this squad as a Top 10 team.

 

3) Squad Harmony - the key players in the squad (i.e. Kasper, Wes, Drinky, Vardy) won't like it if we bin off Shakespeare altogether or the guy Shakespeare works under isn't as popular. This could undo a lot of the positive form Shakespeare has rediscovered transitioning in from Ranieri. Not losing this is essential going into next season.

 

My only concern with Shakespeare is recruitment. Whilst I doubt Shakey is a complete tool in the transfer market, I do think the club need to use Macia to best effect or allow Shakespeare to pick his own recruitment team. Getting the right people out will be just as key as getting the right people in - like Shakey said, it's intricate minor surgery. That being said, hearing reports we're already in advanced talks with some targets is promising. 

[Livid]

I really am undecided, but thinking if not him, then who?

 

He obviously has the respect of this group of players and has guided us to safety.

 

He has made some tactical mistakes IMO, we were too cautious against Arsenal and Man City and Injuries aside we were far too Gung-Ho last night. If he does get the job hopefully he will learn from those mistakes.

 

 

 

[Rob1742]

I think they will give it to him, as he was key to our survival. He has guaranteed the club millions.

 

But because of his lack of experience in the number one position, as in he is 50 odd and not done it before, I don't think he should get it.

 

Its a completely new set of challenges, so it is a NO from me.

 

However, it would take someone with a massive set of balls not to give him the job after saving us from the inevitable. As cut throat as the owners are, I just can't see them binning him after guaranteeing us survival. 

[EnglishOxide]

No.

 

The players took the piss out of him with that performance.

 

That sort of performance shouldn't happen, and perhaps wouldn't under a more authoritive figure.

 

I know there were selection and tactical mistakes from Shakey but the players really did stop trying after the third goal.

[Thracian]

11 minutes ago, Rob1742 said:

I think they will give it to him, as he was key to our survival. He has guaranteed the club millions.

 

But because of his lack of experience in the number one position, as in he is 50 odd and not done it before, I don't think he should get it.

 

Its a completely new set of challenges, so it is a NO from me.

 

However, it would take someone with a massive set of balls not to give him the job after saving us from the inevitable. As cut throat as the owners are, I just can't see them binning him after guaranteeing us survival. 

If top football managers are to be written off at 50 I don't know where they'll get their experience. I don't even see it as a "new"! set of challenges. Just a continuation of previous challenges in the main - and minus any mistakes made being repeated if possible.

I can't think of anyone who knows our club, with it's strengths and weaknesses, better than Shakespeare and who should be better equipped to keep it progressing.

I don't know that our owners are "cut-throat" either.

They left the sacking of Ranieri far later than I'd have dared and probably for all the right reasons of not actually wanting to do it.

They could easily have sacked Pearson too just before the Great Escape so, overall, I'd say our owners were quite considered, quite rational and quite sensitive to their responsibilities as well as being the kind of focused businessmen who keep their employees in a job.       

They also seem to set out our aims for each season and I've never thought them to be wildly unrealistic or as placing undue expectations on the management. Indeed, I'm not sure I'd want to swap our owners for anyone else's and would give them close to 10/10 for the way they've run us so far and for the way they've treated the fans too.

Yes, they've made millions and I hope they make more so long as they continue to look after our club.. In doing so they've taken risks, invested and paid a lot of people a lot of money to help realise their dreams - including Shakespeare - so good luck to them, despite the fact that "Top" must be way past 50!  .        

 

[Thracian]

23 minutes ago, EnglishOxide said:

No.

 

The players took the piss out of him with that performance.

 

That sort of performance shouldn't happen, and perhaps wouldn't under a more authoritive figure.

 

I know there were selection and tactical mistakes from Shakey but the players really did stop trying after the third goal.

Be interest to know how many managers would survive if they were sacked for having a five-goal drubbing and if the lack of such a defeat was a requirement for future Premiership bosses. Haha, I might get to manage Leicester after all - although being way past 50 wouldn't help!     .  

[Babylon]

41 minutes ago, EnglishOxide said:

No.

 

The players took the piss out of him with that performance.

 

That sort of performance shouldn't happen, and perhaps wouldn't under a more authoritive figure.

 

I know there were selection and tactical mistakes from Shakey but the players really did stop trying after the third goal.

Someone like Big Sam?

 

 

Or Fergie

 

 

Or Poch

 

 

Sometimes shit happens, what you don't want is for it to happen all the time.

[Foxxed]

4 hours ago, Thracian said:

 

 

The Bournemouth game won't  change the target he was set and achieved and it won't change our personnel, our injury problems or the fact that several of our squad are clearly below Premierships standard and need to be gone. 

 

Bournemouth is largely an irelevance. Sure Shaky would have liked a winning finish but he will also know our thinnish squad was aching these last few weeks and longing for some rest and recuperation . 

 

Shakeseare was asked to save us from relegation and, presumably, fly our flag with some pride in the Champions League. He did that with matches to spare as far as The Premiership as concerned.

 

I don't recall winning every other match as being part of his remit and, if it had been, he might have reconsidered the job.

 

Next season will be different, with new targets to achieve and his own players in place if he finally gets the job. If not, well there'll be another upheaval for sure.  

He may reach a target, but if we lose against lower mid table teams it implies another relegation scrap next season, a season where we may have fewer of our top players. 

 

Lose against Bournemouth and I'd prefer him to stay on as an assistant manager, an assistant manager who the players still want to play for but who is ultimately subordinate to a manager he himself wants to work for.

 

I'd really love for us to develop him as a manager but I worry about our ability to do that: a season is a long time to watch him do things like sub our only proven central defender, move in completely untested one 3-1 down in a match, while removing their midfield protection.

 

I'm edging towards keep him. He's made a mistake for sure. He can learn from that. He can improve. But he has to prove that. And, for me, he only has one game left to prove he can lead us to mid table next season.

[CosbehFox]

4 hours ago, Babylon said:

Sick of hearing about this moving on to the next level nonsense, I seriously think people are deluding themselves. The owners are currently NOT putting in the money to move on to the next level, if they do then fair enough. But until that point we're no more than a Saints, West Brom, Stoke all milling around that middle area of the league. To ever break past that takes cash, lots of it. It's no coincidence the top teams and the ones who spend the most on wages. 6th / 7th / 8th on a regular basis is almost the best you can hope for without it.

Was literally about to type the same thing. Be weary of the 'next level'. So many clubs fall on their sword trying to chase some fantasy level. 

 

For starters we need to work on the foundations a bit again. Some continuity is needed when a few players leave. There needs to have a vision what goes from the mistakes this season to the next. 

 

Most importantly, if someone comes in. He needs to start immediately. We have signings to chase etc. It's a common moan that we take forever signing players and it takes until August before we take our first signing. A pre season ruined.

[john ridley]

Was only last season Newcastle  thumped Spurs 5.1,it happens ,I'd  give him a rolling contract. 

[AKCJ]

People talking about mid table being Shakey's ceiling...

 

In his 12 games (We've played the 5 of the current top 7 in that time) we've accumulated 22 points. That's 1.8 points per game. Stretch that out over a season and we'll be in Europe again.

[Thracian]

10 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

He may reach a target, but if we lose against lower mid table teams it implies another relegation scrap next season, a season where we may have fewer of our top players. 

 

Lose against Bournemouth and I'd prefer him to stay on as an assistant manager, an assistant manager who the players still want to play for but who is ultimately subordinate to a manager he himself wants to work for.

 

I'd really love for us to develop him as a manager but I worry about our ability to do that: a season is a long time to watch him do things like sub our only proven central defender, move in completely untested one 3-1 down in a match, while removing their midfield protection.

 

I'm edging towards keep him. He's made a mistake for sure. He can learn from that. He can improve. But he has to prove that. And, for me, he only has one game left to prove he can lead us to mid table next season.

Anyone can lose against mid-table teams but you could as easily talk about us beating Liverpool or Sevilla.

 

Who knows why Benny was subbed. He wasn't playing well so Shaky may have taken the chance to try Amartey there. Benny might even have been injured because he was stretched all over the place at times, or there may have been other reasons given that the game was as good as lost anyway.

 

I really fail to see why the Bournemouth game's so important. We know we'll have a weakened side whatever and that reflects a shortage of squad options I don't imagine Shakespeare had anything to do with.   

 

For the third time against decent opposition Benny looked iffy. Amartey wasn't the answer either in midfield or further back. Shaky's not the problem here but the victim because I've seen it all before.

 

But I'd agree with you regarding your last paragraph in that if Shaky doesn't think he can lead us to a mid-table finish next season then he shouldn't bother trying. We're pretty much there as it stands so it's not a big ask. And he should know enough players by now to bring in others to replace any leavers. Most of our top names are on lengthy contracts so we shouldn't have to, or need to, sell til we've sorted replacements. And, no I don't think anyone's irreplaceable.         

[Babylon]

20 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

People talking about mid table being Shakey's ceiling...

 

In his 12 games (We've played the 5 of the current top 7 in that time) we've accumulated 22 points. That's 1.8 points per game. Stretch that out over a season and we'll be in Europe again.

It's not his ceiling for me, it's the clubs. It doesn't have to be with the right investment, but without it we won't establish ourselves as anything other than that. Of course it's possible to get the odd great season, but if people are talking long term then it's just not realistic.

[Foxxed]

12 minutes ago, Thracian said:

Anyone can lose against mid-table teams but you could as easily talk about us beating Liverpool or Sevilla.

 

Who knows why Benny was subbed. He wasn't playing well so Shaky may have taken the chance to try Amartey there. Benny might even have been injured because he was stretched all over the place at times, or there may have been other reasons given that the game was as good as lost anyway.

 

I really fail to see why the Bournemouth game's so important. We know we'll have a weakened side whatever and that reflects a shortage of squad options I don't imagine Shakespeare had anything to do with.   

 

For the third time against decent opposition Benny looked iffy. Amartey wasn't the answer either in midfield or further back. Shaky's not the problem here but the victim because I've seen it all before.

 

But I'd agree with you regarding your last paragraph in that if Shaky doesn't think he can lead us to a mid-table finish next season then he shouldn't bother trying. We're pretty much there as it stands so it's not a big ask. And he should know enough players by now to bring in others to replace any leavers. Most of our top names are on lengthy contracts so we shouldn't have to, or need to, sell til we've sorted replacements. And, no I don't think anyone's irreplaceable.         

My main worry is that there was a post Ranieri-boost around the time of Liverpool and Sevilla. The players didn't like the way Ranieri wanted them to play. Shakespeare came along and was exactly what they wanted to hear: keep on as you did last season. But that boost will only last so long. Lose against Bournemouth and you can clearly mark the honeymoon and post honeymoon period. It'd be - post-Athletico - won 2 lost 4. 

 

It's not enough matches to show a post honeymoon trend, especially with an injuried side, nothing to play for, and the fact three of those loses were against the top 6, but I would be less confident. The Watford match convinced me previously that he should stay - since we are showing we can beat mid table teams - and the same will be true for Bournemouth. 

 

There's wiggle room since we're injuried. As long as he makes no major managerial mistakes and motivates the team then I'll be happy.

[C.J]

Not for me.  He's had what, 15 games now and in that time yes he's got us safe but I'd keep him on as number 2 for the new manager.  He's a good coach, but you don't learn your managerial trade in the premiership.  If we did take him on and things went pear shaped next season,  then they'd be no option but to get rid of him.  At least at the end of this season we can say thanks, and have your old job back.

Some of his substitutions have been odd, tactics in games too (like playing for a draw at Arsenal), plus I don't think he's got the bottle to drop a player like Mahrez who has been underperforming for weeks now.  If he does want the job, then he's got to show he can make big decisions like that.  That's where he's still a bit to friendly with the players (as you can be being a coach), a manager is completely different.  You have to be ruthless, and I'm sorry but I can't see that in him.

[Suzie the Fox]

Arsene wenger? Really. No thank you he would be awful for us.