Is Shakespeare the right man for the job?

[Kitchandro]

1 hour ago, Gerard said:

 

I've no problem being negative in Madrid. We were relatively successful there as apart from the first 20 mins they never really threatened us and they only won with a penalty that should never have been.

 

Going into the second leg 1-0 down it was more beneficial for us to keep the score at 0-0 for as long as possible than it was them. 0-0 would only start swinging in their favour after the 60-70 minute mark. When we did go 1-0 down we did everything we could to score and considering I thought the tie was dead when they scored I thought we really had them a bit worried at some point.

 

I would have brought on Gray rather than Amartey as at that point tactics were out the window and Gray can do something out the ordinary but I'm sure Shaky had his reasons.

We lost, so obviously it didn't work, and frankly was never going to work.

 

Your argument is pretty poor because of the fact we didn't cause them any problems for 3 quarters of the tie. That passive approach was never going to pan out. Needing 3 goals in 45 minutes means you've obviously cocked things up. You cannot possibly argue with that. 

 

If you have no problem being negative then you obviously don't tactically understand our game nor can you really like football for what it is supposed to be.

Edited 30 July 2017 by Kitchandro

[reynard]

29 minutes ago, FIF said:

 

That would be a disaster. Brighton and Huddersfield and Bournemouth are in those 7 fixtures, we should be getting 7 or 9 from those 3 fixtures alone and Liverpool at King power really should be a win.

 

If we don't get minimum 7 from the first 7 that's poor. I'd hope we'd be getting double figures. We were league champions by 10 points just the season before last!!!

Why on earth would that be a disaster?  5 points from those games could well be ambitious. Huddersfield and Bournemouth are both away aren't they? We haven't beaten Bournemouth in the Premier League yet and haven't really looked like doing so. Anyone taking Huddersifeld as a given is plain silly. Thye will have more possession than us and play decent football. Personally can easily see us losing those games. In fact we could quite easily have 0-3 points after 7 matches and a terrible goal difference. That would be a disaster, but hopefully we will do better when it comes to the real thing  than our woeful pre-season efforts suggest.

[Gerard]

Just now, volpeazzurro said:

By that time he had no choice in the matter, too little too late.

 

It wasn't too late. At 0-0 in Leicester we were very much still in the tie.

 

That home leg it was more important that we kept a clean sheet than scored for at least the first hour. Atletico scoring obviously more or less ended the tie for us but that was always going to be the case. Our best chance was always going to be keeping it tight and hopefully scoring the first goal.

[Kitchandro]

31 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

bitter Ranierites coming out the woodwork after a pre-season friendly game smh go and support Nantes please

Go support Forest if you don't appreciate what Ranieri did for this club.

 

This has nothing to do with him yet you still use any excuse to slate him when it's Shakespeare's failings that are under the microscope.

Edited 30 July 2017 by Kitchandro

[volpeazzurro]

2 minutes ago, Gerard said:

 

It wasn't too late. At 0-0 in Leicester we were very much still in the tie.

 

That home leg it was more important that we kept a clean sheet than scored for at least the first hour. Atletico scoring obviously more or less ended the tie for us but that was always going to be the case. Our best chance was always going to be keeping it tight and hopefully scoring the first goal.

As Kitchandro says, needing 3 goals in 45 minutes = balls up. We'd hadnt got the players to play such a defensive game with the tactics Shakey employed.

[Kitchandro]

5 minutes ago, Gerard said:

 

It wasn't too late. At 0-0 in Leicester we were very much still in the tie.

 

That home leg it was more important that we kept a clean sheet than scored for at least the first hour. Atletico scoring obviously more or less ended the tie for us but that was always going to be the case. Our best chance was always going to be keeping it tight and hopefully scoring the first goal.

That's stupid, at 1-0 down we needed 2 goals to go through already.

 

When you defend for 90 minutes you're always likely to be reliant on a bit of luck and even in the first half of the second leg we were always vulnerable since our defence is weaker than our attacking.

 

Leicester need to put emphasis on scoring goals in order to win,

keeping it tight doesn't work with us yet Shakespeare was too stupid to realise this.

 

Passive management is the hallmark of failing managers and that was a perfect example.

Edited 30 July 2017 by Kitchandro

[Gerard]

4 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

We lost, so obviously it didn't work, and frankly was never going to work.

 

Your argument is pretty poor because of the fact we didn't cause them any problems for 3 quarters of the tie. That passive approach was never going to pan out. Needing 3 goals in 45 minutes means you've obviously cocked things up. You cannot possibly argue with that. 

 

If you have no problem being negative then you obviously don't tactically understand our game nor can you really like football for what it is supposed to be.

 

WOW 

 

You're talking like this tie was a 50/50 from the off, it wasn't.

 

Up until Atletico scoring at the KP we had done pretty well in the tie up to then. When you're an 80% chance of going through before a ball is kicked you've under performed if the tie is still in the balance going into the second half of the second leg away from home and we weren't that far from taking Atletico to that place.

 

You're biggest mistake is judging this as a 50/50 tie when it was always an 80/20 tie in Atletico's favour.

[volpeazzurro]

4 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

Go support Forest if you don't appreciate what Ranieri did for this club.

 

This has nothing to do with him yet you still use any excuse to slate him when it Shakespeare's failings that are under the magnifying glass.

Yes Kitchandro, amazing really,  Ranieri who won us the Premiership is long gone yet it will still be his fault in some eyes. A bit like the bias that any good transfers were down to the god like Walsh and any bad one's were down to Ranieri. They all took the plaudits when they win and should all take the criticism when they lose.

[Gerard]

13 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

That's stupid, at 1-0 down we needed 2 goals to go through already.

 

When you defend for 90 minutes you're always likely to be reliant on a bit of luck and even in the first half of the second leg we were always vulnerable since our defence is weaker than our attacking.

 

Leicester need to put emphasis on scoring goals in order to win,

keeping it tight doesn't work with us yet Shakespeare was too stupid to realise this.

 

Passive management is the hallmark of failing managers and that was a perfect example.

 

We didn't need two goals to go through, we needed one and we'd have done brilliantly to take the tie to a penalty shoot out.

 

Our best tactic was always to keep it tight and get more attacking and gung ho as the game progressed. Hardly anyone scores three against Atletico so the onus had to be keeping a clean sheet as one goal gets us back in the tie. A goal from Atletico at any point was likely to be game over for us.

 

If we got to 0-0 at half time we were more likely to go through than before the game, do you not agree with that?

Edited 30 July 2017 by Gerard

[UniFox21]

I feel once again it might be a case of him trying to make to best out of what he has, recruitment has seemed iffy again. 

[Jimmy]

12 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

I feel once again it might be a case of him trying to make to best out of what he has, recruitment has seemed iffy again. 

he could get the best out of what he has by ditching 442 and publically telling any player that bitches about the change to shut up if they want to play and win games.

442 has only worked for us in the prem when we had Kante, who did the job of 2 or 3 midfielders on his own

[Bugg]

.

Edited 30 July 2017 by Bugg
Didnt read the conversation properly - idiot lol

[Gerard]

1 minute ago, Bugg said:

You're wrong there, we definitely needed 2 goals to go through as we would have lost the tie had it finished 2-2 due to the away goals rule.

 

FFS, at 0-0 we only needed one goal to keep ourselves alive.

 

Obviously as soon as they scored at the KP they dynamics of the match changed and we needed at least three goals from that point onwards and to be fair to Shaky he went all out attack second half.

[Bugg]

Just now, Gerard said:

 

FFS, at 0-0 we only needed one goal to keep ourselves alive.

 

Obviously as soon as they scored at the KP they dynamics of the match changed and we needed at least three goals from that point onwards and to be fair to Shaky he went all out attack second half.

Yep i just realised my mistake, ignore me

[Rigga]

2 hours ago, Gerard said:

 

It was the right tactic though. Remember Atletico were heavy favourites to qualify as soon as they got paired with us in the draw.

 

After losing the first leg 1-0 which wasn't a terrible result for us it was more beneficial for us rather than them to keep the score 0-0 up until the hour point in Leicester. I remember thinking I'd be more than happy to go in 0-0 at half time and still keep the tie alive. The onus was on them to qualify as the heavy favourites and I'd happily turn it into a crapshoot in the last half hour or so.

We sat back, let them come on to us and we never looked like scoring at our place until they scored and we then came out of our shells..

 

we we would have had a better chance of winning with the tie 1-0 down and then straight on the attack.

once Madrid score, we were never scoring 3 goals..

[UpTheLeagueFox]

In answer to the OP... we don't know.

[mozartfox]

Shakespeare will live and die by the results of our recruitment.. If has no chance of succeeding with old guard.. We need fresh ifeas and the players to change things around.. Same old same old, and he will be gone before Christmas.

 

If this window turns out to be another disaster, then the entire recruitment team, scouts and Rudders need replacing.

[Trav Le Bleu]

3 hours ago, GaelicFox said:

But I'm not asking for anyone to be sacked you eijit

No, but you were pointing out the fairly short odds.

[LcFc_Smiv]

Genuinely think we are on for a good season, don't understand how we can be so negative over a period that is simply used for getting players match fit

[Manwell Pablo]

I think it's a legit question tbf. But it's not one I'd be looking to our pre season performances for answers though. 

 

Ultimatley you can make your own individual judgement on the matter but he's going to be in charge for the first 10 games at the very least and he has earned the right to be, so may as well get behind him. I think we could struggle a bit again esp early doors but Hoping we don't.

[Fox92]

Said all along he wasn't. Still not convinced.

 

Style of play and inability to change is worrying. Too defensive in big games last season.

[Guest ttfn]

5 hours ago, Vacamion said:

 

There has been a stalinesque rewriting of history in some of the descriptions of the end of last season in here.

 

We were robbed of a few points by some dire reffing decisions.

 

We were a bawhair away from finishing 8th.

 

Shakespeare took charge with us in the bottom 3 and in free fall. He worked wonders.

 

With a few acquisitions, who knows what he can achieve this season.

Or to put a totally different spin on it, results wise we regressed to the mean at the back end of last season but plenty of the performances were just as shit as under Ranieri.

 

We were extremely fortunate to beat both West Ham and Sunderland in that 5 game run, were an absolute shambles against Everton and Spurs, chucked away a 2 goal lead at a fellow relegation struggler and barely turned up away at Arsenal or Man City, not even pretending to look like we were interested in winning those games until it was too late.

[weller54]

First 6 fixtures :

Arsenal A..loss 

Brighton H..win 

Manure A...loss 

Chelsea H..loss 

Huddersfield A..draw 

Liverpool H..loss.. 

4 points... In the bottom 3?

[Guest]

I suspect that the issue is the fans are dreaming for another run at the Champions League positions whilst the club are happy to make gradual progress. The recruitment this year - assuming Iheanacho joins - is clearly better than last year's. It may not be enough to push us into Europe but should be enough for a decent mid table position without the trials of last season. What I hope to see is our team learning to use the ball better and not just booting it down the pitch this year. The club may well be happy with a top ten position, improvement in ball retention and use and a continual and gradual improvement to the playing staff. If we improve 3/4 players each year we will get closer to the European places. 

As for whether Shakey is the man for the job - we will find out but his willingness to state that we are better on the front foot when taking the job and the better signings mean we should be giving him ample time to get what he wants from the team. Don't get too carried away with friendlies. 

[Fox92]

36 minutes ago, toddybad said:

I suspect that the issue is the fans are dreaming for another run at the Champions League positions whilst the club are happy to make gradual progress. The recruitment this year - assuming Iheanacho joins - is clearly better than last year's. It may not be enough to push us into Europe but should be enough for a decent mid table position without the trials of last season. What I hope to see is our team learning to use the ball better and not just booting it down the pitch this year. The club may well be happy with a top ten position, improvement in ball retention and use and a continual and gradual improvement to the playing staff. If we improve 3/4 players each year we will get closer to the European places. 

As for whether Shakey is the man for the job - we will find out but his willingness to state that we are better on the front foot when taking the job and the better signings mean we should be giving him ample time to get what he wants from the team. Don't get too carried away with friendlies. 

Yeah but I have seen no evidence of this.

 

I never ever get carried away with friendlies, however I expect the basics to be in place - improvement in ball retention, I agree is vital, yet we're playing the same shite that was churned out last season. The same old long ball to Vardy. It's boring. At least De Boer has gone to Palace with a clear aim of playing football and keeping the ball.

 

Shakespeare has changed very little. Keeping us up was the relatively "easy" task compared to this summer where I expected him to rebuild and change yet I've seen no evidence of that. And as for improvement of playing staff - where? Maguire, a good signing and we needed a centre half, Iborra I didn't expect that one, and Ihenacho will be a superb signing yet on the other hand he's given Ulloa a new contract. We should be looking to move certain players on to get better players in to push on for Europe.

 

We've got a long way to go yet and like I've said all summer I expect nothing this season. I don't even think Shakespeare will last the season.