Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Ian Nacho

Is Shakespeare the right man for the job?

By Ian Nacho, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

suffolk fox

suffolk fox

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Babylon said:

It shows that peoples comments about Burnleys positive attitude being something to do with the results is bunkem. You think he's only just started with a positive attitude that people are alluding to?

 

They picked up a few points against the big teams last season, just as they have done this (and just as we did last season). The results last season are a far bigger sample and they show in the main, like everyone else Burnley will mostly lose those games. Whether they are defensive or attacking or have a positive attitude or not... they lose those games because the other teams have spent huge amounts on their teams.

 

Lets see what their record is come the end of the season shall we. Happy to wager anything you like they don't keep it up.

Interesting analogy regarding Burnley.  Everton fans are currently going ballistic regarding their recruitment, who is responsible and how much money they have spent.  Burnley since they sold Keane have so far conceded less goals.  The man responsible for Keane going to Everton?  Who else but the great Steve Walsh.  Everton fans are not happy want him and Koeman out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, suffolk fox said:

Interesting analogy regarding Burnley.  Everton fans are currently going ballistic regarding their recruitment, who is responsible and how much money they have spent.  Burnley since they sold Keane have so far conceded less goals.  The man responsible for Keane going to Everton?  Who else but the great Steve Walsh.  Everton fans are not happy want him and Koeman out.

Everton fans are as stupid as some Leicester fans, you don't buy 8 players and get them all working together overnight.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
49er

49er

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, suffolk fox said:

Interesting analogy regarding Burnley.  Everton fans are currently going ballistic regarding their recruitment, who is responsible and how much money they have spent.  Burnley since they sold Keane have so far conceded less goals.  The man responsible for Keane going to Everton?  Who else but the great Steve Walsh.  Everton fans are not happy want him and Koeman out.

I for one wasn't convinced with the signings they had made, so it's pleasing to see them struggling when some of the so-called 'experts' were wondering whether they could break into the top four. They don't have a proper striker, and Rooney was past his sell by date three years ago at this level Not impressed with Keane, Williams and Baines are over the hill. Thank god we didn't shell out £45m on Gylfi

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dickov22

Dickov22

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, suffolk fox said:

Interesting analogy regarding Burnley.  Everton fans are currently going ballistic regarding their recruitment, who is responsible and how much money they have spent.  Burnley since they sold Keane have so far conceded less goals.  The man responsible for Keane going to Everton?  Who else but the great Steve Walsh.  Everton fans are not happy want him and Koeman out.

 

Keane is brilliant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sly

Sly

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Great Boos Up said:

Appointed by Pearson, left with Pearson and came back with Pearson and is now our Manager. Knows our core players balls to bones and I'll blindly sing his name till my guts spill out.

Could argue that he’s to close, so picks his favourites, has limited tactical ability, no experience to challenge the people above as it isn’t the norm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
inckley fox

inckley fox

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, Sly said:

Could argue that he’s to close, so picks his favourites, has limited tactical ability, no experience to challenge the people above as it isn’t the norm. 

I've not decided yet whether he's managing us like an Assistant Manager. A lot depends on how well the dynamic works with him and Appleton. Normally the no-nonsense guy is at the top and the friendly arms-round-the-shoulder type is closer to the players. If there are major questions about our DoF, perhaps we can remedy it that way (if it needs remedying). Or perhaps we could expand the chain of command by bringing in a further coach.

 

I'd always prefer to see a club making changes within its existing structure before it opts for a more severe change. We don't need to lurch into action just yet, but it is a concern that last year we made no serious attempt to change the shape of the wider management structure, we simply waited until February and sacked the boss. Hopefully we can do things in a more proactive, helpful and less abrupt manner this time round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vanity

vanity

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

There's a lot of merit in what you say and I get your point. Do you not think though that whilst waiting for those pieces of the jigsaw to fall in place, he could shuffle his pack and address certain tangible issues. A change of formation for example to counter the problem of our constantly overrun midfield. 

 

Whether Ndidi , James or King played in a 2, it hasn't worked but I can't personally fault their effort and yet despite that, each one of them have individually taken a bit of a slagging which is a bit unfair really. For the type,  mix and abilities of these players, they can't really be expected to complete the task set them. Despite their best efforts they can neither fully protect their backline or supply our talented forward players with suitable opportunities. 

 

There surely has to always be a plan B in formation in case of injury or even for mid game circumstances in order to nullify , contain or attack a given opposition due to prevailing circumstances on a given day. Players have to be fully briefed on such potential changes and fully aware, trained and comfortable with their own role within them. Shakespeare has been a coach down here for a long time now so you like to think that the latter would be a formality.

 

Whilst your points are entirely valid, Shakespeare and the team have to be prepared to change on a game to game basis until we are in a position to be able to field a regular unchanged side with a distinctive winning style of play like before but even then, sometimes tweaks have to be made.

 

You say you want to see him address issues, and you reference the midfield. What formation would you like to see with the players we had at Brighton? Drinky was gone, Silva unavailable, Iborra unavailable, Matty James unavailable. Is there a formation that doesn't require talented, Prem-quality midfielders? The team is comfortable in a 4-4-2. The team is comfortable in a 3-4-3. Some of us would like to see a 3-5-2, but then we don't really have anywhere to put Mahrez and Gray. Do you want to play a formation that excludes two of your best offensive players? 

 

Sometimes there is no magic pixie dust to sprinkle. Sometimes you simply have to play your squad players. I think it was more effort than formation vs. Brighton, and we easily could've won that game if Vardy doesn't fluff it. 

 

Further, expecting Shakey to make these shifts, you are expecting changes very quickly. The first time we were overrun was against Man U., but we were out Drinky and Iborra and the window was still open. We played for a draw, 0-0, 1-1, ended up not working. I hated that plan, but I understood it. 

 

Next game was Chelsea, it became clear we had a situation. That was genuinely the first game you could look and see a real problem in the midfield for the second game in a row. But we made it a game in the second half, and it wasn't like we got routed. So the real question becomes: was the game vs. Brighton the time to try something new? We needed a result in the worst way, and while we were overrun, we were overrun by elite teams. Brighton isn't elite, and they out-efforted us more than anything else. 

 

Ultimately, Shakey didn't make the change, and I completely understand why he didn't deviate. He wanted 3 points, and he didn't want to risk blowing a winnable game at this point with something new, considering how we have already lost games this season due to confusion. 

 

Listen, Shakey is clearly trying to evolve the team. It is bloody obvious based on the personnel coming into the squad. He absolutely wants us to play a 3-4-3 at times, and with either Silva or Iborra, that makes sense, probably slotting Mahrez behind Vardy/Nacho. But I don't know how any of these formations work with the midfielders we had available against Brighton. Sure, we could've gone 3-5-2 and played King-Ndidi-Amartey in the middle, Chilwell and Albrighton on the outside. But again, that leaves us with mahrez and Gray sitting on the bench. 

 

It is all well and good to say "well, he's the manager, he needs to figure it out." But sometimes, there are no moves to make that will flip the script, and you simply have to field your best team as you wait out injuries and registration issues. I believe that is what is happening here. And it had only been two games, against Man U. and Chelsea, where our MF was overrun. To decide on a new formation due to a one week stretch of play against two elite teams, eh, that strikes me as premature. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CosbehFox

CosbehFox

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

but you cant really compare teams over two seasons either, case and point being Winning the league results - against the following seasons results.

Plus that was their first season back, Im sure there players will be feeling a lot more positive about the season ahead given their good start.

 

Time will tell how it pans out

So why are people using the results of last season against Shakespeare ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
volpeazzurro

volpeazzurro

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, vanity said:

You say you want to see him address issues, and you reference the midfield. What formation would you like to see with the players we had at Brighton? Drinky was gone, Silva unavailable, Iborra unavailable, Matty James unavailable. Is there a formation that doesn't require talented, Prem-quality midfielders? The team is comfortable in a 4-4-2. The team is comfortable in a 3-4-3. Some of us would like to see a 3-5-2, but then we don't really have anywhere to put Mahrez and Gray. Do you want to play a formation that excludes two of your best offensive players? 

 

Sometimes there is no magic pixie dust to sprinkle. Sometimes you simply have to play your squad players. I think it was more effort than formation vs. Brighton, and we easily could've won that game if Vardy doesn't fluff it. 

 

Further, expecting Shakey to make these shifts, you are expecting changes very quickly. The first time we were overrun was against Man U., but we were out Drinky and Iborra and the window was still open. We played for a draw, 0-0, 1-1, ended up not working. I hated that plan, but I understood it. 

 

Next game was Chelsea, it became clear we had a situation. That was genuinely the first game you could look and see a real problem in the midfield for the second game in a row. But we made it a game in the second half, and it wasn't like we got routed. So the real question becomes: was the game vs. Brighton the time to try something new? We needed a result in the worst way, and while we were overrun, we were overrun by elite teams. Brighton isn't elite, and they out-efforted us more than anything else. 

 

Ultimately, Shakey didn't make the change, and I completely understand why he didn't deviate. He wanted 3 points, and he didn't want to risk blowing a winnable game at this point with something new, considering how we have already lost games this season due to confusion. 

 

Listen, Shakey is clearly trying to evolve the team. It is bloody obvious based on the personnel coming into the squad. He absolutely wants us to play a 3-4-3 at times, and with either Silva or Iborra, that makes sense, probably slotting Mahrez behind Vardy/Nacho. But I don't know how any of these formations work with the midfielders we had available against Brighton. Sure, we could've gone 3-5-2 and played King-Ndidi-Amartey in the middle, Chilwell and Albrighton on the outside. But again, that leaves us with mahrez and Gray sitting on the bench. 

 

It is all well and good to say "well, he's the manager, he needs to figure it out." But sometimes, there are no moves to make that will flip the script, and you simply have to field your best team as you wait out injuries and registration issues. I believe that is what is happening here. And it had only been two games, against Man U. and Chelsea, where our MF was overrun. To decide on a new formation due to a one week stretch of play against two elite teams, eh, that strikes me as premature. 

442 perfectly adequate against Brighton, no problem. We should be beating them with our better players in a 442 and we did, so can't see the problem there?

 

But Man United really? Ndidi and James up against Pogba, Matic and Mata?  Can't you see any potential better alternatives than that?  Same against Chelsea, renowned for there formation with such another talented midfield,  yet Mr 442 thinks he can outsmart them with two not so talented players? Really, you can't see either the problem or potential alternatives? Sadly, with Conte and Mourinho ,  when it comes down to a battle of wits with Shakespeare it's unfair, as seemingly he's an unarmed man.

Yes, I would have favoured a 352 against those two oppositions and think we've got an ample choice of players to fill the requisite roles. Yes at that point in time he had lost Drinkwater and not got Silva or Iborra so you rearrange what you have available to you and set up accordingly.  Managers have been doing that and altering tactics to suit a particular opposition or reacting to specific situations during a game for years, that's what half decent managers do.

If you want to develop a new style of play you can only do so when all required players to fulfil such a dream are present (see Paulo Sousa re this).

 

By the way, our midfield was also overrun by Arsenal (we only scored because of their make shift crap defence, don't even mention the substitutions) and also against newly promoted Huddersfield. 

Edited by volpeazzurro
Link to comment
Share on other sites
vanity

vanity

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

442 perfectly adequate against Brighton, no problem. We should be beating them with our better players in a 442 and we did, so can't see the problem there?

 

But Man United really? Ndidi and James up against Pogba, Matic and Mata?  Can't you see any potential better alternatives than that?  Same against Chelsea, renowned for there formation with such another talented midfield,  yet Mr 442 thinks he can outsmart them with two not so talented players? Really, you can't see either the problem or potential alternatives? Sadly, with Conte and Mourinho ,  when it comes down to a battle of wits with Shakespeare it's unfair, as seemingly he's an unarmed man.

Yes, I would have favoured a 352 against those two oppositions and think we've got an ample choice of players to fill the requisite roles. Yes at that point in time he had lost Drinkwater and not got Silva or Iborra so you rearrange what you have available to you and set up accordingly.  Managers have been doing that and altering tactics to suit a particular opposition or reacting to specific situations during a game for years, that's what half decent managers do.

If you want to develop a new style of play you can only do so when all required players to fulfil such a dream are present (see Paulo Sousa re this).

 

By the way, our midfield was also overrun by Arsenal (we only scored because of their make shift crap defence, don't even mention the substitutions) and also against newly promoted Huddersfield. 

So who? You aren't providing the players. Who would you have started?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ZeGuy

ZeGuy

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

So why are people using the results of last season against Shakespeare ?

Because they absolutely want him to go and this season's fixtures as well as the main midfielders not being avalaible don't help their agenda.

 

They also conveniently forget the fact that he took a team that was going straight to the Championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ZeGuy

ZeGuy

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

442 perfectly adequate against Brighton, no problem. We should be beating them with our better players in a 442 and we did, so can't see the problem there?

 

But Man United really? Ndidi and James up against Pogba, Matic and Mata?  Can't you see any potential better alternatives than that?  Same against Chelsea, renowned for there formation with such another talented midfield,  yet Mr 442 thinks he can outsmart them with two not so talented players? Really, you can't see either the problem or potential alternatives? Sadly, with Conte and Mourinho ,  when it comes down to a battle of wits with Shakespeare it's unfair, as seemingly he's an unarmed man.

Yes, I would have favoured a 352 against those two oppositions and think we've got an ample choice of players to fill the requisite roles. Yes at that point in time he had lost Drinkwater and not got Silva or Iborra so you rearrange what you have available to you and set up accordingly.  Managers have been doing that and altering tactics to suit a particular opposition or reacting to specific situations during a game for years, that's what half decent managers do.

If you want to develop a new style of play you can only do so when all required players to fulfil such a dream are present (see Paulo Sousa re this).

 

By the way, our midfield was also overrun by Arsenal (we only scored because of their make shift crap defence, don't even mention the substitutions) and also against newly promoted Huddersfield. 

While I'm firmly convinced that a 4-4-2 isn't actual anymore against any decent opposition (I'm not only speaking about the top 6) and the transition to a 3-4-3, 3-5-2 or even 4-5-1 is at the end of the road, tell me please who you would have put against in a 3-5-2 against ManU or Chelsea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
foxfanazer

foxfanazer

Posted
Posted

I really like him and would love him to be a success here. My worry is the relationship he had with the players before could be hindering his authority with them now. He was always the go between with the players and management and was quite the joker from what I've read.

 

does he have enough of the fire to demand more from the squad and put a rocket under the players not performing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Col city fan

Col city fan

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, foxfanazer said:

I really like him and would love him to be a success here. My worry is the relationship he had with the players before could be hindering his authority with them now. He was always the go between with the players and management and was quite the joker from what I've read.

 

does he have enough of the fire to demand more from the squad and put a rocket under the players not performing?

Ive had exactly the same thoughts mate.

It's mirrored in all forms of industry. Does the lad on the factory floor necessarily make the best foreman at the same factory?

Does the nurse who has worked all his or her life on the same ward necessarily make the best ward manager on that ward?

I think it's always difficult when people have seen you in one way, to them expect those SAME people to see you in another way.

With Shakey, it might be fine. I dunno. But it has made me wonder.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...