Is Shakespeare the right man for the job?

[Ric Flair]

19 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

If what people want is a different style of football, possibly even different formations. The squad is as much of a problem as the coaching. 

Or is it that all the signings we make that struggle is because they aren't suited to our 4-4-2 game. The likes of Mendy, Kramaric, Inler, Slimani and I'm sure Iborra and Iheanacho are all accustomed to playing a more possession based style of football that allows them to get on the ball and dictate play. For Kramaric he wasn't a player who pressed or was particularly explosive so he looked a little limited and Slimani is a classic example of not suiting our style of play. He on paper appears to be very good in the air but only at attacking crosses where he's found space off the defenders, when he's up against a defender for a long ball he's pretty ineffective which is odd but there you go.

 

Our rags to riches success with a team of scruffs has been magical but it's becoming quite clear that we're losing our grip on it and the players we bring in to supposedly improve just don't settle in to the team, we should be looking at why and if there's another approach we can take that's better. Plus, I do believe we're no longer playing the same way we did in our title winning season. We put together some exceptional passages of play where we retained the ball and opened up teams like a tin of beans but now we are no longer interested at pressing from the front, nor do we want to put together any passing moves. It's all about getting the ball lumped up and trying to win the 2nd balls, a disturbing tactical approach to take in this day and age at this level.

 

Our club talks about how we're buying young players for the future to build a lasting dynasty but if you look at Ndidi, Chilwell, Gray, Iheanacho, Maguire and a couple of others I've probably missed I'd say every one of them is crying out for being in a formation that's not 4-4-2 with the style of play selected as " treat the ball like it's a red hot potato ". I think it's the old guard of Morgan, Simpson, Huth, Albrighton and possibly Vardy that might be resistant to change, which is why when we have their mate as a manager who's vastly inexperienced it's clear to see he's shown absolutely no identity to what his managing style might be, he's just keeping things exactly the way they were before and that's a dangerous act.

[Fridgechef]

I like Shakey, but I am worried that we are not looking clinical, as we should be. The question is is there more he could be doing? Does he have enough experience? I have my reservations, but am willing to be proved wrong.

[Collymore]

I think it's a toss of a coin if he'll be here still at Christmas. I'm not saying that I want him out, but I'm sure the right decision will be made by our owners whatever they choose to do. 

 

 

Edited 26 September 2017 by Collymore

[lgfualol]

29 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Or is it that all the signings we make that struggle is because they aren't suited to our 4-4-2 game. The likes of Mendy, Kramaric, Inler, Slimani and I'm sure Iborra and Iheanacho are all accustomed to playing a more possession based style of football that allows them to get on the ball and dictate play. For Kramaric he wasn't a player who pressed or was particularly explosive so he looked a little limited and Slimani is a classic example of not suiting our style of play. He on paper appears to be very good in the air but only at attacking crosses where he's found space off the defenders, when he's up against a defender for a long ball he's pretty ineffective which is odd but there you go.

 

Our rags to riches success with a team of scruffs has been magical but it's becoming quite clear that we're losing our grip on it and the players we bring in to supposedly improve just don't settle in to the team, we should be looking at why and if there's another approach we can take that's better. Plus, I do believe we're no longer playing the same way we did in our title winning season. We put together some exceptional passages of play where we retained the ball and opened up teams like a tin of beans but now we are no longer interested at pressing from the front, nor do we want to put together any passing moves. It's all about getting the ball lumped up and trying to win the 2nd balls, a disturbing tactical approach to take in this day and age at this level.

 

Our club talks about how we're buying young players for the future to build a lasting dynasty but if you look at Ndidi, Chilwell, Gray, Iheanacho, Maguire and a couple of others I've probably missed I'd say every one of them is crying out for being in a formation that's not 4-4-2 with the style of play selected as " treat the ball like it's a red hot potato ". I think it's the old guard of Morgan, Simpson, Huth, Albrighton and possibly Vardy that might be resistant to change, which is why when we have their mate as a manager who's vastly inexperienced it's clear to see he's shown absolutely no identity to what his managing style might be, he's just keeping things exactly the way they were before and that's a dangerous act.

This is spot-on. The situation is annoying. 

[Countryfox]

45 minutes ago, Collymore said:

I think it's a toss of a coin if he'll be here still at Christmas. I'm not saying that I want him out, but I'm sure the right decision will be made by our owners whatever they choose to do. 

 

 

Somehow I don't think the owners will sit round a table and discuss what tactics and formations we are playing but, as businessmen, look purely at the results.   I feel a little sorry for Shakey in that respect as a potential game changing player is still in the stands watching and he also (maybe) has to keep showcasing a want away player who is, at the moment, just a passenger.  I really hope he turns it round cus if he goes ...   Well then we really are tossing a coin as to where this club goes next ...

[Finnegan]

Spot on Flair. 

 

Particularly regards our attacking approach. We used to go back to front quickly but it involved carrying the ball forwards with DD, Kante and Shinji linking up to Riyad and Vards through the middle of the park and down the channels. 

 

Somewhere we stopped doing that and started lumping it hopelessly at Shinji, Vardy and Slimani hoping for them to knock it back for our midfield when that doesn't suit anyone. 

 

Or defenders are shit at those passes, our forwards aren't target men (when will we realise that being good at scoring headed goals is different to being good at receiving long balls?) and our midfielders aren't dynamic enough to be running on to knocks. 

 

It's just awful to watch. For heavens sakes just pass it to a ****ing midfielder and let them build something. 

[notnow john]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

Or is it that all the signings we make that struggle is because they aren't suited to our 4-4-2 game. The likes of Mendy, Kramaric, Inler, Slimani and I'm sure Iborra and Iheanacho are all accustomed to playing a more possession based style of football that allows them to get on the ball and dictate play. For Kramaric he wasn't a player who pressed or was particularly explosive so he looked a little limited and Slimani is a classic example of not suiting our style of play. He on paper appears to be very good in the air but only at attacking crosses where he's found space off the defenders, when he's up against a defender for a long ball he's pretty ineffective which is odd but there you go.

 

Our rags to riches success with a team of scruffs has been magical but it's becoming quite clear that we're losing our grip on it and the players we bring in to supposedly improve just don't settle in to the team, we should be looking at why and if there's another approach we can take that's better. Plus, I do believe we're no longer playing the same way we did in our title winning season. We put together some exceptional passages of play where we retained the ball and opened up teams like a tin of beans but now we are no longer interested at pressing from the front, nor do we want to put together any passing moves. It's all about getting the ball lumped up and trying to win the 2nd balls, a disturbing tactical approach to take in this day and age at this level.

 

Our club talks about how we're buying young players for the future to build a lasting dynasty but if you look at Ndidi, Chilwell, Gray, Iheanacho, Maguire and a couple of others I've probably missed I'd say every one of them is crying out for being in a formation that's not 4-4-2 with the style of play selected as " treat the ball like it's a red hot potato ". I think it's the old guard of Morgan, Simpson, Huth, Albrighton and possibly Vardy that might be resistant to change, which is why when we have their mate as a manager who's vastly inexperienced it's clear to see he's shown absolutely no identity to what his managing style might be, he's just keeping things exactly the way they were before and that's a dangerous act.

Quality post.

[CosbehFox]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

Or is it that all the signings we make that struggle is because they aren't suited to our 4-4-2 game. The likes of Mendy, Kramaric, Inler, Slimani and I'm sure Iborra and Iheanacho are all accustomed to playing a more possession based style of football that allows them to get on the ball and dictate play. For Kramaric he wasn't a player who pressed or was particularly explosive so he looked a little limited and Slimani is a classic example of not suiting our style of play. He on paper appears to be very good in the air but only at attacking crosses where he's found space off the defenders, when he's up against a defender for a long ball he's pretty ineffective which is odd but there you go.

 

Our rags to riches success with a team of scruffs has been magical but it's becoming quite clear that we're losing our grip on it and the players we bring in to supposedly improve just don't settle in to the team, we should be looking at why and if there's another approach we can take that's better. Plus, I do believe we're no longer playing the same way we did in our title winning season. We put together some exceptional passages of play where we retained the ball and opened up teams like a tin of beans but now we are no longer interested at pressing from the front, nor do we want to put together any passing moves. It's all about getting the ball lumped up and trying to win the 2nd balls, a disturbing tactical approach to take in this day and age at this level.

 

Our club talks about how we're buying young players for the future to build a lasting dynasty but if you look at Ndidi, Chilwell, Gray, Iheanacho, Maguire and a couple of others I've probably missed I'd say every one of them is crying out for being in a formation that's not 4-4-2 with the style of play selected as " treat the ball like it's a red hot potato ". I think it's the old guard of Morgan, Simpson, Huth, Albrighton and possibly Vardy that might be resistant to change, which is why when we have their mate as a manager who's vastly inexperienced it's clear to see he's shown absolutely no identity to what his managing style might be, he's just keeping things exactly the way they were before and that's a dangerous act.

 

And this is in part my point. 

 

The owners made a decision in the summer to keep with what we do rather than changing things up. I am assuming with Shakespeare they see mid-table at least which would provide some comfort financially. Stability. 

 

The club has no medium-term leadership. The owners are good but naive in a footballing sense. By allowing Rudkin to have his role you have no-one with foresight or experience. His contacts book is no good for a Premier League club and he appears genuinely scared should we have a manager of serious status. I wouldn't trust him to have an awareness of good managers across Europe like a Les Reed at Southampton does. 

 

Shakespeare has sat as no.2 to see Ranieri and Pearson try to diversify from 4-4-2 with this group of players. It was rancid. Worse than it is now. 

 

In the meantime, our fanbase should get behind the team rather than the current negativity before each game. I think Saturday was the first genuine time that Shakespeare could made a major change with Iborra and Dragovic fit. Instead he went with the same tactics which Liverpool repeatedly struggle against. 

Edited 26 September 2017 by Cardiff_Fox

[Nugent]

2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Or is it that all the signings we make that struggle is because they aren't suited to our 4-4-2 game. The likes of Mendy, Kramaric, Inler, Slimani and I'm sure Iborra and Iheanacho are all accustomed to playing a more possession based style of football that allows them to get on the ball and dictate play. For Kramaric he wasn't a player who pressed or was particularly explosive so he looked a little limited and Slimani is a classic example of not suiting our style of play. He on paper appears to be very good in the air but only at attacking crosses where he's found space off the defenders, when he's up against a defender for a long ball he's pretty ineffective which is odd but there you go.

 

Our rags to riches success with a team of scruffs has been magical but it's becoming quite clear that we're losing our grip on it and the players we bring in to supposedly improve just don't settle in to the team, we should be looking at why and if there's another approach we can take that's better. Plus, I do believe we're no longer playing the same way we did in our title winning season. We put together some exceptional passages of play where we retained the ball and opened up teams like a tin of beans but now we are no longer interested at pressing from the front, nor do we want to put together any passing moves. It's all about getting the ball lumped up and trying to win the 2nd balls, a disturbing tactical approach to take in this day and age at this level.

 

Our club talks about how we're buying young players for the future to build a lasting dynasty but if you look at Ndidi, Chilwell, Gray, Iheanacho, Maguire and a couple of others I've probably missed I'd say every one of them is crying out for being in a formation that's not 4-4-2 with the style of play selected as " treat the ball like it's a red hot potato ". I think it's the old guard of Morgan, Simpson, Huth, Albrighton and possibly Vardy that might be resistant to change, which is why when we have their mate as a manager who's vastly inexperienced it's clear to see he's shown absolutely no identity to what his managing style might be, he's just keeping things exactly the way they were before and that's a dangerous act.

 

Top post, I've agreed with everything you've said on Shakespeare so far.

[Foxy-Lady]

4 hours ago, Countryfox said:

Somehow I don't think the owners will sit round a table and discuss what tactics and formations we are playing but, as businessmen, look purely at the results.   I feel a little sorry for Shakey in that respect as a potential game changing player is still in the stands watching and he also (maybe) has to keep showcasing a want away player who is, at the moment, just a passenger.  I really hope he turns it round cus if he goes ...   Well then we really are tossing a coin as to where this club goes next ...

Agree 100%. I think we all know its not Shakey who is responsible for either of these two issues...!

[volpeazzurro]

12 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Or is it that all the signings we make that struggle is because they aren't suited to our 4-4-2 game. The likes of Mendy, Kramaric, Inler, Slimani and I'm sure Iborra and Iheanacho are all accustomed to playing a more possession based style of football that allows them to get on the ball and dictate play. For Kramaric he wasn't a player who pressed or was particularly explosive so he looked a little limited and Slimani is a classic example of not suiting our style of play. He on paper appears to be very good in the air but only at attacking crosses where he's found space off the defenders, when he's up against a defender for a long ball he's pretty ineffective which is odd but there you go.

 

Our rags to riches success with a team of scruffs has been magical but it's becoming quite clear that we're losing our grip on it and the players we bring in to supposedly improve just don't settle in to the team, we should be looking at why and if there's another approach we can take that's better. Plus, I do believe we're no longer playing the same way we did in our title winning season. We put together some exceptional passages of play where we retained the ball and opened up teams like a tin of beans but now we are no longer interested at pressing from the front, nor do we want to put together any passing moves. It's all about getting the ball lumped up and trying to win the 2nd balls, a disturbing tactical approach to take in this day and age at this level.

 

Our club talks about how we're buying young players for the future to build a lasting dynasty but if you look at Ndidi, Chilwell, Gray, Iheanacho, Maguire and a couple of others I've probably missed I'd say every one of them is crying out for being in a formation that's not 4-4-2 with the style of play selected as " treat the ball like it's a red hot potato ". I think it's the old guard of Morgan, Simpson, Huth, Albrighton and possibly Vardy that might be resistant to change, which is why when we have their mate as a manager who's vastly inexperienced it's clear to see he's shown absolutely no identity to what his managing style might be, he's just keeping things exactly the way they were before and that's a dangerous act.

You've got 23 thumbs up because this is all just so right.

 

I've just read an article about Shakespeare commenting on how Iborra is now getting much sharper, how he has been adapting to the pace of our Premiership game etc, this is all good news of course. However, it's the next bit that wrankles with me when he says how Iborra,  albeit he's played different roles, he's used to playing in a midfield 3 and that there having to teach him positioning and how to play in our 442. Firstly, for the many that believe that our players may be best suited to a different formation, think on, because by the sounds of it there aren't going to be many changes soon. Basically it doesn't matter whether your a 3 times cup winning Seville player who excels playing in a three (or any other new aquisition for that matter, whatever they're good at ), we're going to cramp your style and shoehorn you into that one 442 system we know and we're going to damn well make it work! I thought this man had been a coach, is there only 442? What happened to all the other formations, can't he teach them? Have we forever got to stay in a time warp regardless of what players we've got and their capabilities are?

[volpeazzurro]

11 hours ago, Countryfox said:

Somehow I don't think the owners will sit round a table and discuss what tactics and formations we are playing but, as businessmen, look purely at the results.   I feel a little sorry for Shakey in that respect as a potential game changing player is still in the stands watching and he also (maybe) has to keep showcasing a want away player who is, at the moment, just a passenger.  I really hope he turns it round cus if he goes ...   Well then we really are tossing a coin as to where this club goes next ...

That man in the stands is not going to be that much of a game changer. Even if he was, what if he got injured,  do we just soldier on in the same merry old way regardless of who we're playing and the caperbilities of the players we've got available?  Not a very healthy recipe for success is it?

[GaelicFox]

This is it 3 games to save his career 

 

4pts or more and he will stay 

 

Any less and Craig will be leaving LCFC 

 

I hope it turns for him soon , he needs some luck 

[Lestoh1]

Does nothing whatsoever to suggest he will give us a good season or that hes even a manager.

[cecchini]

For what it's worth, The difference between a Champions League manager and a championship manager is the following:

 

1  Baseline experience of running a successful team at the highest levels (man management skills).

2 Track Record of success at those levels (tactical nous) 

3 Global network of contacts to bring in players with the relevant skills and experience

 

Outside of that the team needs a sponsor with deep pockets and be close to a cool place to live.

 

What is missing right now?

[jim5000]

On 9/26/2017 at 08:07, Lionheart10 said:

Also if Vardy had scored open goal at Huddersfield and penalty against Liverpool he would be Leagues leading goalscorer.

And if my auntie had balls she's be my uncle. He didn't score them, and he's not the leading goalscorer....

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, jim5000 said:

And if my auntie had balls she's be my uncle. He didn't score them, and he's not the leading goalscorer....

Point is that clearly it's fine margins at the moment, far from the hopeless case some people on here would have you believe.

[Lestoh1]

52 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Point is that clearly it's fine margins at the moment, far from the hopeless case some people on here would have you believe.

And if salah hadnt missed an open goal wed have lost by more to Liverpool and if we hadnt pissed away two leading positions wed have beaten Arsenal so shove your fine margins when youre on the wrong side of them each game.

 

No one does plucky little loser like foxestalk

[Lestoh1]

Badly outplayed in large parts of a game

 

Final result is a one goal defecit

 

FINE MARGINS

 

not.

[Babylon]

40 minutes ago, Lestoh1 said:

And if salah hadnt missed an open goal wed have lost by more to Liverpool and if we hadnt pissed away two leading positions wed have beaten Arsenal so shove your fine margins when youre on the wrong side of them each game.

 

No one does plucky little loser like foxestalk

You think Burnley out played the opposition in their games? People are bumming them for their wonderful lets not accept defeat attitude... bullshit... they had a slice of luck half the time and were mostly on the end of a battering.

 

Possession

Liverpool 71% Burnley 29%

Leicester 43% Liverpool 47%

 

Shots

Liverpool 35 Burnley 5

Leicester 12 Liverpool 23

 

Shots on target

Liverpool 9 Burnley 4

Leicester 7 Liverpool 6

 

Burnley got mullered in one of the most one sided games you'll see... yet we're meant to aspire to their attitude. Laughable.

 

Edited 27 September 2017 by Babylon

[CosbehFox]

Just now, Babylon said:

You think Burnley out played the opposition in their games? People are bumming them for their wonderful lets not accept defeat attitude... bullshit... they had a slice of luck half the time and were mostly on the end of a battering.

 

Possession

Liverpool 71% Burnley 29%

Leicester 43% Liverpool 47%

 

Shots

Liverpool 35 Burnley 5

Leicester 23 Liverpool 12

 

Shots on target

Liverpool 9 Burnley 4

Leicester 7 Liverpool 6

 

See Stoke their results against Manchester United and Arsenal also. 

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

See Stoke their results against Manchester United and Arsenal also. 

What annoys me is that it's the same people saying ooooh look at Stoke and Burnley, who also say "We're too defensive". They barely attempted to get out of their own half in those games, would people be happy with that?

 

If anything we're too easy to play against because we're not defensive enough, we take risks those teams often don't and leave ourselves open to a sucker punch.

Edited 27 September 2017 by Babylon

[Lestoh1]

Just now, Babylon said:

What annoys me is that it's the same people saying ooooh look at Stoke and Burnley, who also say "We're too defensive". They barely attempted to get out of their own half in those games, would people be happy with that?

 

If anything we're too easy to play against because we're not defensive enough, we take risks those teams often don't and leave ourselves open to a sucker punch.

I dont say were too defensive.

 

I say our formation is poor, we cant pass, we dont try anything different and then we all find excuses afterwards. All facts.

[Lestoh1]

2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

What annoys me is that it's the same people saying ooooh look at Stoke and Burnley, who also say "We're too defensive". They barely attempted to get out of their own half in those games, would people be happy with that?

 

If anything we're too easy to play against because we're not defensive enough, we take risks those teams often don't and leave ourselves open to a sucker punch.

Play 3 central midfielders and dont be sucker punched then.

 

Dont have a marauding centre back overplaying in the wrong part of the pitch

 

Sign players to have different options (and actually register them on time)

 

Learn to put 3 passes together

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, Lestoh1 said:

Play 3 central midfielders and dont be sucker punched then.

 

Dont have a marauding centre back overplaying in the wrong part of the pitch

 

Sign players to have different options (and actually register them on time)

 

Learn to put 3 passes together

You can do all of those things and still lose you know?

 

The much lauded Burnley did those things and faced far more shots, more on target, more corners against, a shit load more possession. Which takes me back to the point of fine margins. On another day they could have been mullered, yet people are holding them up as some kind of beacon of what's possible.

 

I'm not overly happy with how things are going, not convinced about CS. But quite frankly we've got pretty much the amount of point I thought we'd have when the fixtures were announced.

 

Do I think we could make it more difficult for teams by being as boring as fook? Yes, I think we'd pick up more points. But I'd rather watch games like Liverpool and Arsenal and be excited by the game, rather than scraping a 0-0 and taking two extra points whilst being completely bored to feck watching the oppo play it around us whilst we have 20% possession and don't get out of our half.