Alan Sheehan

[moseeds]

You don't seem to accept anything else but perfection and expecting anything resembling the football we played in the 60's or 70's is silly

One of the reasons why City haven't done too well i the last few years or in previous times is precisely becuase the fans do not expect much and are content with mediocrity.

For example, Ipswich are known for playing the passing game. Why? Because the fans demand it and won't stand for anything less. Man U fans started the chant of "Attack Attack Attack". I am not comparing us to Man U, but it just shows how the fans can play a big part in how the club play their football.

If we are content with mediocrity and general rubbishness then that's what we'll get. Aiming for perfection is the only way to move up.

[Thracian]

It may surprise you but I too have doubts about Sheehan.

But most seem to agree that we need an attacking left back.

Nils/Tiatto/Maybury don't fulfil that role.

Many months ago I thought Sheehan was a certainty for the role.

Now I don't know. He has rarely reproduced the consistent performances of that time and his loss of form goes back to his dropping after Sheffield Wednesday and his dismissal at Crewe.

The problem for me is:

Do we abandon the guy as not good enough?

Do we find out first by showing some faith in him?.

If we had an alternative attacking left-back it would be a harder question.

But as we don't I would rather find out than continue playing people we know cannot fulfil the role. Although I've selected him in my preferred team I would understand Kelly starting him on the bench

And if you're not convinced I've become more guarded about Sheehan I would say that of the Academy players I've mentioned as deserving or immediately challenging first teamers, that is Sheehan, Stearman, Wesolowski, O'Grady, Porter, Logan, Gradel, Dodds, I believe Sheehan is presently the one in most danger of falling short.

I just think it might be worth the effort - given how hard it is to find good attacking left-backs - to go the extra mile.

[Shipman Out]

I think Sheehan should be our left back from what i have seen, he is a good attacking option to and would give us more balance.

RK obviously doesnt think he is ready or rate him but id rather see Sheehan developing and settling as a first choice left back than have NEJ, Tiatto or Maybury play there.

I was hoping Sheehan might start the season because the position was not filled during the summer business i thought "he's not going to play NEJ there...is"

RK had a perfect opportunity to play Sheehan against Macclesfield but opted for Maybury at LB, this is a big shame and a opportunity missed for me.

[The People's Hero]

Don't take half a quote and try to make it sound like something I've not said.

Twelve months ago Sheehan looked an extremely promising attacking left back, a good passer who made goals and hit dangerous free-kicks. Our management thought him promising too. They invariably made him captain of the Reserves, selected him seven times for the first team and extended his contract. Why would you do that after years of watching him if you didn't think he was any good?

Since then Sheehan was dropped from a winning first team for no reason I could figure, clearly affecdting his confidence. He then appeared to be exiled from the first team after getting sent off on his return (a consequence never meted out to anyone else) and then, after injury, he returned looking anything but himself.

All seemed rosier in the close season when he seemed to be back under consideration. But still, his performances weren't quite as complete, quite as confident, quite as incisive as they were last season.

Why's that Babylon?. Perhaps you have a plausible theory.

I believe it is in his mind. I believe he's trying too hard and is unsure of what will impress his masters. The coaches should tackle this, and presumably they've tried. But if nothing has worked then the second part of my statement comes into play - that I don't understand the reason.

Coaching is not all about ball-play sequences etc. It is also about putting people in the right frame of mind to be successful. Sheehan has shown he has ability already. The club think he has ability.

But he's not showing it to the full right now - at least not on the odd ocasion I've managed to see him - and there must be a reason. Fitness, confidence, self-belief, fear, lack of match practise ... it could be anything or a combination of various things.

But the sooner we find out the better to my mind.

I imagine that they agree with you that he has potential. Having said that, we spent a lot of last season battling relegation and may face a similar battle this year. His rash sending off just can't have done him many favours. Then there is the issue that none of us on here know his temperament, attitude, how he approaches training and many other factors. Sure, he has talent, I don't think anyone is disputing that.

The two points which people are trying to make are that:

- The coaches see him week in, week out and evidently do believe he has some potential but evidently do not believe he is the man to play left back for the club at the moment. Your point are usually sensationalist, claiming he has been frozen out or that the management is not approaching games in the right way. Whilst that may or may not be correct, all people are saying to you against that argument are that these people are football people with years of experience who have made these decisions.

- There is always a middle ground. There is always a need for squad players. You cannot employ the argument that if someone is not in the first 16 then they are being frozen out. We can't play all 11 (16 inc subs) every week.

I personally would like to see Sheehan play a few games at left back simply because no one else there has convinced me.. although Kenton has looked good at the back, I just haven't seen him at left back yet. I can see however that him not playing is not necessarily a sign that he is being frozen out, Kelly doesn't like him, the club doesn't like players who can pass etc etc etc.

[Thracian]

With respect I think you're missing the point of what I have consistently said about Sheehan.

I think much of the problem to do with his form stemmed from the way he was treated or, I might accept, from the way he thought he was treated.

He had a sound game against Sheffield Wednesday, we won, he got dropped. He would probably have been dropped whatever he'd done but HE might have failed to understand it.

Same after the Crewe game. The team played well, he made a reasonable contribution then his treatment after a sending off appears totally at odds to that meted out for anyone else.

I don't KNOW that these factors are important but it certainly seems the case because first he seemed disheartened by them and by his groin injury and upon rcovery seems to be trying to hard instead of playing his natural game.

And that's what I'd like to see. Sheehan with his confidence back playing his natural game. Cos at his best - at least from what I saw for weeks early last season - he's easily our best attacking left back and right now I wonder if he'll ever reporduce that form again.

PS: That's not to suggest he's any sort of star. He's raw. I just don't rate the left-backs we've got apart from their being fairly solid defensively.

[Fez of Mahrez]

Oh good, another thread about Alan Sheehan.

[The People's Hero]

With respect I think you're missing the point of what I have consistently said about Sheehan.

I think much of the problem to do with his form stemmed from the way he was treated or, I might accept, from the way he thought he was treated.

He had a sound game against Sheffield Wednesday, we won, he got dropped. He would probably have been dropped whatever he'd done but HE might have failed to understand it.

Same after the Crewe game. The team played well, he made a reasonable contribution then his treatment after a sending off appears totally at odds to that meted out for anyone else.

I don't KNOW that these factors are important but it certainly seems the case because first he seemed disheartened by them and by his groin injury and upon rcovery seems to be trying to hard instead of playing his natural game.

And that's what I'd like to see. Sheehan with his confidence back playing his natural game. Cos at his best - at least from what I saw for weeks early last season - he's easily our best attacking left back and right now I wonder if he'll ever reporduce that form again.

PS: That's not to suggest he's any sort of star. He's raw. I just don't rate the left-backs we've got apart from their being fairly solid defensively.

I take your points and it's not easy to argue with any of that.

But you can make a similar case to this for a number of players who at one point of another appear to have been treated either 'unfairly' or in a way which they might consider 'unfair'. It is the measure of a man and of a professional how one reacts to knockbacks, difficult times, doubt etc.

If he's good enough, he'll make it, here or elsewhere. If he IS good enough, I'd like him to make it here. If not, I'd like to see him go out on loan, find his level and then leave.

[Bert]

With respect I think you're missing the point of what I have consistently said about Sheehan.

I think much of the problem to do with his form stemmed from the way he was treated or, I might accept, from the way he thought he was treated.

He had a sound game against Sheffield Wednesday, we won, he got dropped. He would probably have been dropped whatever he'd done but HE might have failed to understand it.

Same after the Crewe game. The team played well, he made a reasonable contribution then his treatment after a sending off appears totally at odds to that meted out for anyone else.

I don't KNOW that these factors are important but it certainly seems the case because first he seemed disheartened by them and by his groin injury and upon rcovery seems to be trying to hard instead of playing his natural game.

And that's what I'd like to see. Sheehan with his confidence back playing his natural game. Cos at his best - at least from what I saw for weeks early last season - he's easily our best attacking left back and right now I wonder if he'll ever reporduce that form again.

PS: That's not to suggest he's any sort of star. He's raw. I just don't rate the left-backs we've got apart from their being fairly solid defensively.

The point you're missing here is, when Sheehan got dropped, Levein was in charge and not Kelly who is now.

[Fox in a Box]

hasnt alan shearer retired?

[Thracian]

The point you're missing here is, when Sheehan got dropped, Levein was in charge and not Kelly who is now.

I'm not sure it matters in respect of what it did to his confidence - and RK was involved with the side anyway.

Whatever the truth it's gone now and all I'm saying is that different people take setbacks in different ways and I wouldn't want City to lose a good left-back because they couldn't latch on to what makes him tick and what frame of mind he needs to be in to bring out his best football.

[Micky]

Don't take half a quote and try to make it sound like something I've not said.

Twelve months ago Sheehan looked an extremely promising attacking left back, a good passer who made goals and hit dangerous free-kicks. Our management thought him promising too. They invariably made him captain of the Reserves, selected him seven times for the first team and extended his contract. Why would you do that after years of watching him if you didn't think he was any good?

Since then Sheehan was dropped from a winning first team for no reason I could figure, clearly affecdting his confidence. He then appeared to be exiled from the first team after getting sent off on his return (a consequence never meted out to anyone else) and then, after injury, he returned looking anything but himself.

All seemed rosier in the close season when he seemed to be back under consideration. But still, his performances weren't quite as complete, quite as confident, quite as incisive as they were last season.

Why's that Babylon?. Perhaps you have a plausible theory.

I believe it is in his mind. I believe he's trying too hard and is unsure of what will impress his masters. The coaches should tackle this, and presumably they've tried. But if nothing has worked then the second part of my statement comes into play - that I don't understand the reason.

Coaching is not all about ball-play sequences etc. It is also about putting people in the right frame of mind to be successful. Sheehan has shown he has ability already. The club think he has ability.

But he's not showing it to the full right now - at least not on the odd ocasion I've managed to see him - and there must be a reason. Fitness, confidence, self-belief, fear, lack of match practise ... it could be anything or a combination of various things.

But the sooner we find out the better to my mind.

But what about his tackling, heading, strength, positional play? These are surely much more important as a defender? I watched him at Lincoln and thought he looked distinctly average. I wonder if some people have overlooked a lack of natural talent and seen the energy, enthusiasm and aggression in his game?

[Thracian]

But what about his tackling, heading, strength, positional play? These are surely much more important as a defender? I watched him at Lincoln and thought he looked distinctly average. I wonder if some people have overlooked a lack of natural talent and seen the energy, enthusiasm and aggression in his game?

I didn't see the Lincoln game - but if you take it to its logical conclusion Douglas should never have played in goal for anyone from what I read of that performance.

I am happy to take your word about his display but how many other times have you seen him? Not many I would guess if you think he lacks natural talent.

In the only pre-season game I saw him play - at Hinckley - he rashly dived into a couple of tackles but an ordinary first half was followed by much better and more positive second half which suggested he was getting back to his best.

You see I don't see Sheehan's strengths as being aggressive at all. He is far better concentrating on being a cultured full-back, biding his time for tackles, playing the ball simple to feet, providing the outlet ball for goalkeeper and defenders and supporting attacks with his excellent crosses, through balls and free kicks.

And that is what seems to have gone - together with his confidence. He's stopped being simple. Has got himself too wound up and anxious and the loss of composure has let him down.

What would I do? I would give him videos of Denis Irwin and tell him that's what I want and that's the guy he should model his game on. I would base all my coaching on that sort of end product.

Irwin was no flamboyant fancy dan. Irwin was thoughtful, efficient and consistently suppoortive in the simplest of ways... quietly ruthless if you like. Sheehan can do that if he's encouraged. But he has to relax and not try to over impress.

Porter is another he might use as a role model. Porter, I am sure, has all the ambitions anyone else does. But he plays for the team, first, last, simply and always above himself.

[Bert]

I'm not sure it matters in respect of what it did to his confidence - and RK was involved with the side anyway.

Whatever the truth it's gone now and all I'm saying is that different people take setbacks in different ways and I wouldn't want City to lose a good left-back because they couldn't latch on to what makes him tick and what frame of mind he needs to be in to bring out his best football.

Yes he was, but who made the final decisons?? CL. As said in a previous thread RK was in the stands for most games as CL preferred Houston and Black as his right hand men.

I don't want to lose Sheehan either.

[Thracian]

Yes he was, but who made the final decisons?? CL. As said in a previous thread RK was in the stands for most games as CL preferred Houston and Black as his right hand men.

I don't want to lose Sheehan either.

Me neither - at least not until I'm certain he's not going to be as good as I think he can be - which is one of the most cultured left-backs we've ever had.

If, given the chance, he fails, I'll accept it. But right now he deserves his chance because the alternatives are just not what's needed (Kenton excepted cos I've not seen enough of him as an attacker).

[lookwhaticando]

Yes he was, but who made the final decisons?? CL. As said in a previous thread RK was in the stands for most games as CL preferred Houston and Black as his right hand men.

I don't want to lose Sheehan either.

Both of them on one side? I'd have thought they'd have taken a side each, balance things out.

Always knew there was something fishy about them three.

[maccfox]

That could well be it - although it seems strange then that he should be selected as a captain.

Might just be a way of encouraging a young immature player to grow up a bit without doing too much damage