Extra time pays for Sheehan

[Ric Flair]

All players need support overlapping. Generally full-backs wouldn't be enouraged to "take people on" even if they're fast enough and Mattock/Sheehan certainly aren't, nor were Clarke, Nils, Kenton, Maybury.

Sheehan is probably less risky with 5-3-2 than 4-4-2 because the defensive cover remains but, as I say, apart from his loosish marking and vulnerability when run at and turned quickly - like most others including Mattock - his supposed defensive frailties are exagerrated.

In a 5-3-2 there's not room for both Mattock and Sheehan and there lies my problem. I look at who brings more to the team as a whole and i'm afraid to say it's Mattock. I agree, Joe hasn't the set piece ability as Sheehan does at present and you cannot argue with 2 goals and 3 assists in just 8 starts, i'm impressed. But i'm looking beyond that and I believe a wingback needs to be fluent at the back and going forward in as quick time as possible, the wingback must get up pitch to support the narrow midfield. Mattock does that superbly, Sheehan i'm yet to see being capable of that. There lies another problem for us in this formation.

Sheehan set two goals up last game so he deserves to keep his place for now anyway. Mattock will get the place back if Sheehan proves to be a liability, he certainly wasn't that against Sheffield Wednesday.

The question is, without Sheehan would we flatter to deceive? As in, look more strong going forward with Mattock in the team but still not score and win matches? But when Sheehan plays, lose the natural wingback play of Mattock but have a player who can provide us actual goals that win matches? I'd have to say i'm not 100% sure yet. So that's why Sheehan should keep his place until he has another shocker.

[Fez of Mahrez]

All players need support overlapping. Generally full-backs wouldn't be enouraged to "take people on" even if they're fast enough and Mattock/Sheehan certainly aren't, nor were Clarke, Nils, Kenton, Maybury.

Sheehan is probably less risky with 5-3-2 than 4-4-2 because the defensive cover remains but, as I say, apart from his loosish marking and vulnerability when run at and turned quickly - like most others including Mattock - his supposed defensive frailties are exagerrated.

Go to Stoke! Go on! Off you go!

(Some player ratings would be nice )

[The People's Hero]

Go to Stoke! Go on! Off you go!

(Some player ratings would be nice )

You're on dangerous ground there - I picked up on the 'loosish marking' comment and my post was deleted.

It appears we're not allowed to argue with idiotic statements any more.

[Staf]

Sheehan has been quality this season in my opinion. At the start of the season i thought we would struggle down the left hand side. I know we could do with another left sided player but Sheehan is doing awesome so far

[Ultra]

Flair is right to be honest. Sheehan is too slow and too lazy to get forward effectively from full-back. Mattock may not have the same delivery but at least he gets there to put the crosses in and support the midfield.

But how many times does he find his man?

Flair is wrong and Thracian is right, no matter how painful it may be for some of you to admit it.

Mattock's time may come, but right now Sheehan's way ahead of him.

And Sheehan's defensive shortcomings can be covered under 5-3-2, as those of us who watched Steve Guppy can confirm.

[The People's Hero]

But how many times does he find his man?

Flair is wrong and Thracian is right, no matter how painful it may be for some of you to admit it.

Mattock's time may come, but right now Sheehan's way ahead of him.

And Sheehan's defensive shortcomings can be covered under 5-3-2, as those of us who watched Steve Guppy can confirm.

Ultra and Thracian.

Foxestalk's Chuckle Brothers Tribute Act since 2006.

[Bryn]

In all fairness, we have the best defence in the league right now so Sheehan can't be doing that bad. And you can't argue that he's currently our most dangerous player based on the stats.

[Fez of Mahrez]

But how many times does he find his man?

Flair is wrong and Thracian is right, no matter how painful it may be for some of you to admit it.

Mattock's time may come, but right now Sheehan's way ahead of him.

And Sheehan's defensive shortcomings can be covered under 5-3-2, as those of us who watched Steve Guppy can confirm.

The cavalry has arrived then.

I would suggest that the lack of midfielders getting into the box and lack of effective targetmen has a lot to do with why Mattock isn't finding men with his crosses. It's not like anyone else is doing any better from wide positions at the moment.

[Jonbluefox9]

Whatever way you look at it, Mattock isn't far behind Sheehan/is as good as Sheehan/is slightly better than Sheehan and he's only 17. If he keeps going the way he is, imagine how good he will be when he's Sheehan's age! In my opinion he's as good as Sheehan already so in 4 years time we should have a very good player on our hands, if he's still at Leicester City by then.

[Guest]

But how many times does he find his man?

Flair is wrong and Thracian is right, no matter how painful it may be for some of you to admit it.

Mattock's time may come, but right now Sheehan's way ahead of him.

And Sheehan's defensive shortcomings can be covered under 5-3-2, as those of us who watched Steve Guppy can confirm.

And you have the audacity to tell me that I am incapable of formulating my own opinion? Hilarious.

[Koke]

At the end of the day, we produced these two ****ers. There is room for improvements for both of them and hopefully they will improve. Most of us prefer Mattock at the moment though.

Each to his own I suppose.

[Bert]

There was one time when all Thracian could talk about was Joe Mattock!

Now it seems like he's his worst enemy.

[Head Honcho]

Typical last year of a contract player!

Can we have a refund on the lack of effort he's put in for the past two seasons?

I'm all for players staying behind and working on their game but I'd like to see them doing it from the off-not when they want to put themselves in the shopwindow!

[Daggers]

At the end of the day, we tollerate these two ****ers. There is room for improvements for both of them and hopefully they will improve. Most of us prefer Thracian at the moment though.

Each to his own I suppose.

Poor Ultra.

[Milky]

There was one time when all Thracian could talk about was Joe Mattock!

Now it seems like he's his worst enemy.

Are you sure? I always though Mattock was the only young horse Thracian didn't back, and funnily enough he's looked the most promising!

[Geo V]

There was one time when all Thracian could talk about was Joe Mattock!

Now it seems like he's his worst enemy.

Thracian likes to say good things about everyone that has come through in the academy so he can say "I told you so" somewhere down the line. He may have turned on Mattock so he can hype up Sheehan as the latter has managed to score goals and have a couple of assists and thinks he is the best to follow for now.

[Thracian]

Thracian likes to say good things about everyone that has come through in the academy so he can say "I told you so" somewhere down the line. He may have turned on Mattock so he can hype up Sheehan as the latter has managed to score goals and have a couple of assists and thinks he is the best to follow for now.

I've never turned on Mattock or Sheehan. And despite any criticisms have always believed them to be good players. They are also totally different players. And which one you use depends on what you want to achieve. Unless you use both. Could anything be clearer?

As for saying "I told you so" I'm sorry but I couldn't give a shit. I don't need some sort of shallow morale booster.

I've mentioned various people, as have others, when I have thought them ready because I have never liked seeing City bringing in signings who were often no better than the young players we already had. Last half of last season was awful in that way with the exciting arrival of Horsfield and company.

It's not much of a problem now because we seem to be picking our strongest side or arguably so.

And having just seen your star choice Kaebi in action again I'm amazed you could criticise anyone who said "I told you so" anyway.

[Thracian]

The cavalry has arrived then.

I would suggest that the lack of midfielders getting into the box and lack of effective targetmen has a lot to do with why Mattock isn't finding men with his crosses. It's not like anyone else is doing any better from wide positions at the moment.

That pass of Sheehan's for Campbell sounded pretty incisive.

[Thracian]

Typical last year of a contract player!

Can we have a refund on the lack of effort he's put in for the past two seasons?

I'm all for players staying behind and working on their game but I'd like to see them doing it from the off-not when they want to put themselves in the shopwindow!

Hardly. Apart from being apparently exiled after his sending off against Crewe, Sheehan finished that season with a fairly serious groin injury.

Last season he was again left out of the first team reckoning despite playing in several of the pre-season wins and was sent out on loan to Mansfield.

On his return our lack of a reserve side meant there weren't many opportunities for him to play at all - or Dodds. It was hardly their fault.

Kelly made it clear he preferred the experience of Nils, Maybury and Horsfield.

But then Kelly lost his job, didn't he!

[Ric Flair]

But how many times does he find his man?

Flair is wrong and Thracian is right, no matter how painful it may be for some of you to admit it.

Mattock's time may come, but right now Sheehan's way ahead of him.

And Sheehan's defensive shortcomings can be covered under 5-3-2, as those of us who watched Steve Guppy can confirm.

But it's not just his defensive shortcomings, it's the fact he's slow and can't beat a man either. So unless his crossing is as good as Guppy's and therefore never needs to beat his man before getting the cross in, then he's going to be fairly in-effective there.

Anyway, Sheehan set two goals up on Saturday. So it would be unfair on him to be dropped for the S****horpe game. He's now got his chance again, he needs to take it with both hands because there is a lad 4 years his junior who's got the more complete game for that position. Sheehan's set pieces will be hard to resist though, unless Clemence can do it on a regular basis.

Any chance of a Fire Certificate?

[The People's Hero]

Did Ultra just compare Alan Sheehan to Steve Guppy?

Guppy got pilloried for his capacity when we were on the backfoot but he always got close to the player and made a nuisance of himself.

Sheehan isn't fit to be mentioned in the same sentence.

Behave, Ultra.

[Manwell Pablo]

In all fairness, we have the best defence in the league right now so Sheehan can't be doing that bad. And you can't argue that he's currently our most dangerous player based on the stats.

Grrrrr

We don't concead many beacuse we have a team full of defenders, one of which is covers him for 90 minutes, he's not that much of an attacking threat to warrant playing him and a minder!

[The People's Hero]

Grrrrr

We don't concead many beacuse we have a team full of defenders, one of which is covers him for 90 minutes, he's not that much of an attacking threat to warrant playing him and a minder!

Exactly.

5 defensive players in the 3 centre backs and 2 wing backs and then another couple of defenders in the middle of the park!

We should start a rival version to Foxestalk where you need to pass an 'I'm not an idiot' test to get in.

[Geo V]

I've never turned on Mattock or Sheehan. And despite any criticisms have always believed them to be good players. They are also totally different players. And which one you use depends on what you want to achieve. Unless you use both. Could anything be clearer?

As for saying "I told you so" I'm sorry but I couldn't give a shit. I don't need some sort of shallow morale booster.

I've mentioned various people, as have others, when I have thought them ready because I have never liked seeing City bringing in signings who were often no better than the young players we already had. Last half of last season was awful in that way with the exciting arrival of Horsfield and company.

It's not much of a problem now because we seem to be picking our strongest side or arguably so.

And having just seen your star choice Kaebi in action again I'm amazed you could criticise anyone who said "I told you so" anyway.

You do need that morale booster as its teh only reason why I think that you come on forums like this. You like to get off on the fact that you know more because you have the spare time to watch the academy and the reserves and seem to think that you are an employee of the club because you hover around talking to the players who you think have become friends (image of an Alan Partridge show when he is taken back to a crazed fans house who has a million photos of AP on his walls springs to mind)

Anyway, Kaebi could score 5 you`ll still find criticism. McKay could miss ten but he will still get plaudits. That is basically the problem with your analysis, you make your mind up on someone and thats it.

[harry]

Just thought I'd add a point regarding the comment that Sheehan and Guppy shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence, and regarding those sneaking suspicions that some of these youngsters aren't as good as we'd like them to.

Steve Guppy was, I believe, 27 when he joined us from Port Vale. He was one of my all-time favourite City players, but he was also reasonably one-dimensional - a quality crosser of the ball essentially. Possibly the best English left foot of his day, but he was also widely underrated by city fans. He had critics in his first half-season 96-97, then the fans really turned on him in the second half of 99-2000. I even remember Robbie Savage, while defending Guppy, conceding that his work-rate might not be the best. I´m not even sure that's a fair criticism, but nonetheless many of our fans booed him.

Let's not forget that, and let's not forget that Guppy had anonymous spells with teams like Newcastle before making a limited impact at Wycombe. When he joined us from Vale there were lots of question marks about him, but he improved immensely. I'm not saying Sheehan will do the same, but he's helped us to a lot of goals both directly and indirectly this year and often at times when we've not conceded too many either. He's a bit erratic, but he's also effective and he has nearly 7 years to reach the age at which Guppy finally fulfilled his potential. I don't want to insult the guy too readily.

I remember a time when any City player under the age of 25 was deemed a big prospect, eg Stef Oakes who we clung on to for years as a symbol of a promising youthful element to the squad. This lad's 21, some of the others are a lot younger. Some will make it, some won't, but it is true that Sheehan has - in this short spell - looked like he could become one of our more dangerous left-flankers since Mr. Guppy. And at this stage in his career, while we're into direct comparisons, he's probably more advanced than the aforementioned was at the same time.

Question is, will he go the way of Stef Oakes or of Steve Guppy? Who knows, but I certainly don't think we could pinpoint Sheehan as one of the major 'flaws' in our team at the moment.