cannable Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 6 minutes ago, NottsRam77 said: So true, which is why I think there was a general feeling that a move to 442 was needed as the 433 had become worked out to a certain extent. stick someone on Thorne to stop him playing out and all of a sudden were in a bit of trouble, get someone to smash into Martin a few times and all of the sudden the balls not sticking and there's double trouble and more and more teams had clocked this. this is what concerns me slightly going back to Mac and the 433, it's only a small concern mind as I'd take anything over the previous weeks of dire drudgery I think it could have been worked out but Shacks was pretty dire on the ball before they started marking George and Keogh. Personally I'd have had Butters/Hughes doing Thorne's on the ball job and left him to just sit in - much like when Eustace was starting. Teams start marking Hughes? Have Thorne doing it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NottsRam77 Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 1 minute ago, cannable said: I think it could have been worked out but Shacks was pretty dire on the ball before they started marking George and Keogh. Personally I'd have had Butters/Hughes doing Thorne's on the ball job and left him to just sit in - much like when Eustace was starting. Teams start marking Hughes? Have Thorne doing it again. I miss big John, he was excellent for us, what he lacked in mobility he more than made up for in experience a real leader and organiser too, we've missed that even when George has played, no slight on him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hintonsboots Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 21 minutes ago, cannable said: That's the problem though. Mark Thorne and Keogh and Shackell hasn't a clue what to do with it. Needs to give it back to Carson in that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 5 hours ago, Ninos said: True. He's actually majestic back there - but he's a deer in headlights with the ball at his feet ... I (rightly or wrongly) trace Pearson's bother with him to a long forward pass to nobody that shacks did v Blackburn I think it was. It was a wasteful ball. It was in front of the west stand and Pearson went absolutely ape %#*% screaming at him ... could be a coincidence but he never played again after that game. 5 hours ago, RIMBAUD said: And the incredulity exhibited by the player at his substitution during one of the home games. (The same one?) we've now got rid of the gorilla, so no reason why shacks should not come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 10 hours ago, NottsRam77 said: So true, which is why I think there was a general feeling that a move to 442 was needed as the 433 had become worked out to a certain extent. stick someone on Thorne to stop him playing out and all of a sudden were in a bit of trouble, get someone to smash into Martin a few times and all of the sudden the balls not sticking The problem is, we just removed the holding midfielder without actually trying to implement anything else, and the same with removing Martin. So now we've got the situation we can't ever play out through the holder and the ball never sticks at the strikers feet. Instead of fixing a problem that occurs sometimes, we've manufactured the situation where the problem occurs 100% of the time. It's literally the most set of stupid tactical decision I've ever seen. Regarding Shackell, the problem really isn't the 40-yard hollywood passes that go straight out of play. Yeah they aren't great, but the bigger issue is how slowly he moves the ball on and his lack of pace. If you're going to play a proper possession system (i.e. not Clements 'everybody camps on our own 18 yard box and passes slowly to each other'), you need your backline to push up, to reduces the spaces between your lines. This brings your players closer together and makes it much easier to keep the ball as you're making 10 yard passes each time, instead of 20 yard passes with 2 defenders in the gap between you. Shackell's lack of pace makes doing this difficult. Also, there's no point passing for passing's sake, you need to pull opposing players out of position to create holes. If you pass it slowly, they will just get into shape and hold position, and you'll just end up passing it around in front of them without really creating anything. If you move it quickly and make runs off the ball, you will eventually create gaps to play through. A big part of that is when the ball goes into the back 4. With Bucko in there, the ball would go into the back 4, and within 3 or 4 touches would have been moved across the back 4 and out to the fullback and we're attacking again. It takes Shackell 3 or 4 touches to get control of the ball and open his body up to attempt the pass and all of the momentum has been lost. None of that is to say Shackell's a bad player, he's just completely unsuited to the way we want to play. Burnley suited him because they tended to be a bit more direct, he could take a touch or 2 and then go direct to Gray and the ball would stick and they can play from there. And they tended to sit a bit deeper as they were less concerned with keeping the ball in midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AutoWindscreens Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 I think dropping Shackell was about the only thing Pearson got right. His painfully ponderous and predictable passing got me all alliterative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodleyRam Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 I miss Bucko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 3 hours ago, duncanjwitham said: None of that is to say Shackell's a bad player, he's just completely unsuited to the way we want to play. Burnley suited him because they tended to be a bit more direct, he could take a touch or 2 and then go direct to Gray and the ball would stick and they can play from there. And they tended to sit a bit deeper as they were less concerned with keeping the ball in midfield. Quoting this bit as the key rather than the whole thing but you've echoed my thoughts on the whole Shackell situation, minus the fourty yard passes. I don't mind that he tries those once in a while, it becomes an issue when he's forced to do so too frequently through lack of options and that he does it so slowly as to telegraph it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MackworthRamIsGod Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 3 hours ago, AutoWindscreens said: I think dropping Shackell was about the only thing Pearson got right. His painfully ponderous and predictable passing got me all alliterative. I have a real dislike for him, I have no reason to dislike him either, it isn't like he slept with my wife or ought? Rotherham away did it for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
europia Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 3 hours ago, AutoWindscreens said: I think dropping Shackell was about the only thing Pearson got right. His painfully ponderous and predictable passing got me all alliterative. Since he returned to DCFC Shackells distribution has been poor. Or was it always like that? I cant remember that much about his first stint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Ram Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 It's a bloody difficult ask, isn't it, being a CB at this club? You're either labelled as error prone and a defensive liability, like Keogh and Bucko, even if you are good with the ball at your feet or you're a waste of time because you can't pass the ball out quick enough or accurately enough, like Shackell, even if you are absolutely solid defensively. It astonishes me that the majority of people on this forum, who are most likely between 18 and 80, have had all that time in their lives to figure out that even the best championship players are flawed. It's why they're in the championship! "Get rid of Shackell ASAP, can't pass the ball out, ludicrously slow" Yeah, we know, because if he was decent with the ball at his feet, he'd be playing for a decent Premier League like Stoke or Southampton, not bloody Championship Derby "Don't want Martin back, he's been found out and he's crap unless you play to his strengths" Yeah, we know, because if he was quick and scoring overhead kicks, he'd be playing for Arsenal, not bloody Championship Derby Shackell's a bloody good defender for this level, one of the best. He's intelligent defensively and can completely match that intelligence physically. At 33, he still looks strong as an ox and he's not that slow. Him and Keogh suit each other down to the ground and make each other look like better players. Yeah, he's not great at passing it out but maybe with a decent coach he would be and I'm fairly certain we wouldn't have been having 3-3's at Rotherham and Millwall or 4-4's at Huddersfield if we'd had him back in Mac's last tenure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 1 minute ago, Leicester Ram said: It's a bloody difficult ask, isn't it, being a CB at this club? You're either labelled as error prone and a defensive liability, like Keogh and Bucko, even if you are good with the ball at your feet or you're a waste of time because you can't pass the ball out quick enough or accurately enough, like Shackell, even if you are absolutely solid defensively. It astonishes me that the majority of people on this forum, who are most likely between 18 and 80, have had all that time in their lives to figure out that even the best championship players are flawed. It's why they're in the championship! "Get rid of Shackell ASAP, can't pass the ball out, ludicrously slow" Yeah, we know, because if he was decent with the ball at his feet, he'd be playing for a decent Premier League like Stoke or Southampton, not bloody Championship Derby "Don't want Martin back, he's been found out and he's crap unless you play to his strengths" Yeah, we know, because if he was quick and scoring overhead kicks, he'd be playing for Arsenal, not bloody Championship Derby Shackell's a bloody good defender for this level, one of the best. He's intelligent defensively and can completely match that intelligence physically. At 33, he still looks strong as an ox and he's not that slow. Him and Keogh suit each other down to the ground and make each other look like better players. Yeah, he's not great at passing it out but maybe with a decent coach he would be and I'm fairly certain we wouldn't have been having 3-3's at Rotherham and Millwall or 4-4's at Huddersfield if we'd had him back in Mac's last tenure. Great post, you're absolutely right. My thoughts are we should be looking for a centre half who is more comfortable on the ball than Shackell, and I'd be willing for him to not be as good defensively as Shackell. I just think it's important to way we play. Until we find such a player though, Shackell starts for me. Also part of me thinks Shackell's ability on the ball wouldn't matter as much if we were only 'carrying' him in possession but unfortunately during Shackell's second tenure at Derby we have been carrying somebody who is even worse on the ball in Johnson (in position where it matters more as well). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
europia Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 6 minutes ago, Leicester Ram said: At 33, he still looks strong as an ox and he's not that slow. Him and Keogh suit each other down to the ground and make each other look like better players. Yeah, he's not great at passing it out but maybe with a decent coach he would be and I'm fairly certain we wouldn't have been having 3-3's at Rotherham and Millwall or 4-4's at Huddersfield if we'd had him back in Mac's last tenure. See your point and yes he can defend very well at championship level. Learn to pass a ball at 33yrs of age ? Not so sure on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 Just now, europia said: See your point and yes he can defend very well at championship level. Learn to pass a ball at 33yrs of age ? Not so sure on that one. This may seem a radical suggestion, but maybe we could oh I dunno, play to the players strengths rather than their weaknesses? He's a good centre-half who captained Burnley to the Prem. Do we really have to play like Burnley to get the best from him, I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilsonram12 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 SM was praised with improving Bucko so maybe he can spark shacks back into being the defender we remember first time around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r4derby Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 This is only a minor observation, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Shackell has never played with Andre Gray...Danny Ings yes, in both 2013-14 and 14-15, but Gray arrived at Burnley after Shackell joined us. Not really adding much, but several people talking about Burnley tactics to ours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 1 hour ago, europia said: Since he returned to DCFC Shackells distribution has been poor. Or was it always like that? I cant remember that much about his first stint. It was always like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 1 hour ago, Leicester Ram said: It's a bloody difficult ask, isn't it, being a CB at this club? You're either labelled as error prone and a defensive liability, like Keogh and Bucko, even if you are good with the ball at your feet or you're a waste of time because you can't pass the ball out quick enough or accurately enough, like Shackell, even if you are absolutely solid defensively. It astonishes me that the majority of people on this forum, who are most likely between 18 and 80, have had all that time in their lives to figure out that even the best championship players are flawed. It's why they're in the championship! I certainly agree with championship players being flawed hence why they're championship players. But that just emphasises the need to get the right blend of players in a squad. You need to make sure the players have the 'right' flaws. Some people seem to have this mindset where they only care about the obvious things for each position - centre halves get judged purely on how many clearances and tackles they make, strikers on how many goals they score, wingers on how many assists they get and so on. But in modern football you can't just look at that, you need to look at how all these players are fitting together and the jobs they are being asked to do for the team. Strikers don't just score goals, they link up play as well, centre halves don't just defend, wingers don't just cross and so on. If you're going to play possession football, you're going to need centre halves that can pass and strikers that can receive the ball to feet and hold it up. And at championship level, that will probably mean players having issues elsewhere - your centre halves might be slightly mistake prone, your striker might be lacking pace, or not score loads of goals, but what matters is the overall blend of the team and that everyone can do the fundamental things that their job in the team requires of them. You take Keogh and Bucko making the odd mistake because the other 99% of the time their distribution allows the whole team to tick. If you put a Shackell in there, the team gets stretched out and the passing slows down and the whole thing breaks down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 ALL our players are rubbish... Never forget this... We've been very lucky in recent years and just need to be thankful for that... If we finish outside the bottom three then McClaren has performed wonders Probably... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteHorseRam Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 3 minutes ago, cheron85 said: ALL our players are rubbish... Never forget this... We've been very lucky in recent years and just need to be thankful for that... If we finish outside the bottom three then McClaren has performed wonders Probably... Wow, that's a bit harsh. Burnley paid a lot of chocolate buttons for Jeff. I would rather Mac sorted what we had rather than Mel go super generous and give him a Man City type war chest for Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.