Jump to content

Jason Shackell

North_Stand_Ram

By North_Stand_Ram
in Transfer Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Albert

Albert

Posted
Posted

Our defence (of which Keogh is the mainstay) has cost us promotion the last two seasons

Hopefully McClaren has realised we need a clear out in this department

​Horrific over simplification. Our defence has never been that bad. Concentration and ability to hold their nerve from the whole side on the big occasions is what has cost us. 

Our defensive record in both seasons was actually not bad in the slightest. It could definitely have been better, but a lot of that has to do with how we play. We weren't the top scorers last season simply on the quality of the forwards, and we didn't better than figure this season so simply either. The way we play can leave gaps in the midfield to let people run at us, and it's no surprise that without a proper defensive midfielder it made our defense look ordinary. The problem isn't as simple as "bad defenders, get rid", it's a complex issue to do with how we set up the squad, the options for that crucial "Eustace" role, as well as team confidence, which looked fragile based on the evidence of the end of the season. 

Whilst I completely agree that the aim next season should be to concede under 46 goals (which would be an improvement of 11+ from this season), with the way that we've operated under McClaren I'd honestly expect what we'll see is us going for scoring 90+ instead. If we can get Thorne and Eustace fit, and ideally a third option to battle for the role, then our defense will look much better. Without a natural for that position, we are always going to look shaky and error prone, regardless of the back pairing, regardless of the fullbacks. If teams are allowed to run at them with pace for 90 minutes each game, they aren't going to be able to cope, nobody would. But it seems to be the point that's lost in all of this. 

Personally I think we do need another defender to be the primary partner of Keogh, ideally left footed, but it's a wait and see kind of time right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hinzy9

Hinzy9

Posted
Posted

Keogh's main faults are his lapses in concentration, poor positional sense, rash challenges and non existent leadership....

Having a steady 'Eustace type player' sat in front of him will help a bit but is only really papering over the cracks.

I guess we'll have to wait and see how Steve sees it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scott129

Scott129

Posted
Posted

Forsyth is a better player than Gareth Roberts, and definitely better than Stewart or Jay Mac. A season ago many rated him as one of the best in the division, it's amazing how quickly perception of some players change.

​Personally, I still rate him very highly. Defensively, he's probably one of the best full backs in the league.

It's just a shame he's so useless with the ball at his feet. If he could just make simple 10 yard passes, I'd have no doubt in saying Prem clubs would be sniffing around him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PistoldPete2

PistoldPete2

Posted
Posted

​Horrific over simplification. Our defence has never been that bad. Concentration and ability to hold their nerve from the whole side on the big occasions is what has cost us. 

Our defensive record in both seasons was actually not bad in the slightest. It could definitely have been better, but a lot of that has to do with how we play. We weren't the top scorers last season simply on the quality of the forwards, and we didn't better than figure this season so simply either. The way we play can leave gaps in the midfield to let people run at us, and it's no surprise that without a proper defensive midfielder it made our defense look ordinary. The problem isn't as simple as "bad defenders, get rid", it's a complex issue to do with how we set up the squad, the options for that crucial "Eustace" role, as well as team confidence, which looked fragile based on the evidence of the end of the season. 

Whilst I completely agree that the aim next season should be to concede under 46 goals (which would be an improvement of 11+ from this season), with the way that we've operated under McClaren I'd honestly expect what we'll see is us going for scoring 90+ instead. If we can get Thorne and Eustace fit, and ideally a third option to battle for the role, then our defense will look much better. Without a natural for that position, we are always going to look shaky and error prone, regardless of the back pairing, regardless of the fullbacks. If teams are allowed to run at them with pace for 90 minutes each game, they aren't going to be able to cope, nobody would. But it seems to be the point that's lost in all of this. 

Personally I think we do need another defender to be the primary partner of Keogh, ideally left footed, but it's a wait and see kind of time right now. 

Albert I'm sorry but our defence this season has been horrific. If we are talking about stats , well sure the number of goals conceded isn't that bad. But we are team that until the very end of the season tended to dominate possession. We could have 55 per cent , 60 per cent even 70 per cent possession. Almost every single game. Yet we didn't win those games. Why not? Our defence. The Birmingham game. The wolves game. Incredible how we got only one point out if those games ... Down to terrible defending. Millwall... Reading... What a crazy goal the first goal... Etc etc etc .. We need to sort the defence out big time, and I think Keogh is the only one I would keep. Christie, shotton, warnock, albentosa , Forsyth, none of them good enough and grant needs to be replaced too imo. Plus we need a new CDM . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie

eddie

Posted
Posted

Anyone tell me how many goals we conceded in Shackells year at the club?

​58 in the league.

2 more than this season

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ramblur

ramblur

Posted
Posted

One of the 'benefits' of my crawling download speed causing constant freezes was that it often froze our defensive positions , the ball being with the opposition on the flanks.I have to say that what I often saw were our defenders positioned completely side on,and gawping out to the wing like a bunch of meerkats. How on earth they could be aware of any movement behind them I just don't know,and it's no wonder there were so many last ditch tackles.

Now I don't know enough about Shackell to comment,as I saw far less of him than the majority of you,but I seem to remember his positional sense wasn't too bad,and I don't remember him particularly as a ball watcher.He also seemed an unflustered,calming influence to me,with a distinctive method of jumping,which didn't involve him grappling an opponent.Hey,just my memories though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DEL

DEL

Posted
Posted

Someone that can lead, defend, score a goal or two, and doesn't end up on the floor constantly, should probably be a prerequisite of a promotion winning central defender. IMO. 

 

Not Swann then ????? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mafiabob

Mafiabob

Posted
Posted

​58 in the league.

2 more than this season

Thank you Eddie... Wonder if Shackell got "blamed" for any goals conceded?

*waits for reasons why it wasn't his fault

Link to comment
Share on other sites
May Contain Nuts

May Contain Nuts

Posted
Posted

Number of goals alone does not indicate quality of defence, it might show defensive capability of a team as a whole but even then it doesn't show nature or timing of goals conceded and the impact on a match.

What does it matter how many goals we conceded in 2011 when our aspirations back then were 'top ten' and our team set up to try to hold onto leads for the final 20 minutes of every match by a manager who wasn't tactically astute enough to implement the right set-up to do so?

What matters is that for the past two seasons our defending at key times has not been good enough to achieve our aspirations of promotion - it's not about how well it's played in 70% of our matches, it's how awful it has been in the other 30%, the defining difference between success and failure.

The notion put out above that 'no team can defend for 90 minutes with people running straight at them' is true, but I could count on one hand of a Forest fan the number of games in the past 2 seasons where that's happened. - that hasn't realy been our major downfall or cause of most goals conceded, that would be making stupid errors through a lack of judgement, lack of concentration, lack of organisation and leadership

Nobody is saying they should have to defend for 70-90 minutes per match!

We can't rely on our defence / defending to last 20 minutes of an opposition being on top of us - we can't cope with the pressure and give in to errors of the above nature -  and that is just not good enough for a team looking to gain automatic promotion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
May Contain Nuts

May Contain Nuts

Posted
Posted

We're masters of the old adage "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" but some people have managed to build up such a loyalty to our existing players that they are almsot frightened of change.

The only valid opinion of Jason Shackell is one given by fans who've watched him in the last 2 seasons, Burnley fans.

His time here is almost an irrelevance - much like people judging John Eustace as crap, unwanted, offering nothing based on his loan spell with us a few years back.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...