tim sherwood

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
442 does seem to be working for us in most matches. I'd say the difference with it against Arsenal is that both our fullbacks let us down to gift them soft goals(not their only chances, I know) and too many players generally underperformed. Like, Eriksen really has to perform if we're to make it work and so does at least one of the strikers and when they were letting us down it's very difficult for the others around them to pick up the slack. 442 at Arsenal isn't necessarily suicide but I agree it's more of a risk and we'd probably have been better off going 4231 or 433. Sherwood didn't have a lot of options to him playerwise though, did he?

As for Soldado, I don't think it's confidence, you have to be confident to score penalties and he does that everytime. I do think he needs to relax a bit though, everytime he takes a shot he seems to be trying to bury it in one of the 4 corners of the goal when he could probably do with just trying to get a few on target and see what happens. Fabianski isn't exactly a great 'keeper so make sure he's kept busy and we might get lucky with him spilling a shot or missing it altogether. It was a crime how little we tested him on Saturday.
 
As you say YV, Fabianski's ****. The reserves put 5 past him a while ago.
 
"Blind belief or sheer insanity? You decide."

I will keep asking when Sherwood will dare try a proper 4-3-3.
The U21s have played it often enough under his charge.

He has a decent enough senior squad to play it without too much trouble.
 
I think Tim's done well.

The football has improved and we've had some impressive performances too which is nice.

I honestly felt the 4-4-2 days were long gone at Spurs but Tim clearly sees otherwise and for the most part he's been spot on. The Stoke game was probably my favourite performance of the season, everything clicked. Wins at Utd and Soton, fantastic results. The loss to them lot was hard to take but knowing that we lost due to errors, it's not an actual reflection of Tim's management in my opinion. Rose will never (hopefully!) **** up like that again and the defence for the first goal just had a mare. I do think he should've started Capoue though, even if he's still not entirely match fit. Bentaleb's been a breath of fresh air but giving him his first start in the NLD... Bit too much to ask in my opinion.

When more players return it'll be interesting to see if Tim sticks with 4-4-2. With a lot of midfielders due to return, it'll be tough to leave so many out. Paulinho, Sandro, Townsend, Holtby, Sigurdsson are all set to return now or in the near future and with the form of Lennon, Dembele and Eriksen, it'll be hard to displace any of them. A nice headache to have!

Overall though, as I've said, think Tim's done well.
 
The first Arsenal goal was surely the fault of the midfield. There was no-one covering the inside run from Gnabry so Walker had to move across to cover. None of the midfield were even in the picture.
 
I think Sherwood thinks 4-4-2, Harry-esque, have a go football is his mandate, and that his best chance of prospering (not to say surviving) is to stick to it. I can't say I disagree.

As I mentioned elsewhere, the 4-4-2 against the top team in the league on a bad day for our team would have gotten a draw or a win if we'd finished as well as they did. By contrast the 4-3-3 in the same situation with a team playing decently never got a clear cut chance. Sort of agreeing with PowerSpurs (and sort of not), we've looked better in a 4-4-2, so let's stick to it. It seems to me our creative players are perking up, we're scoring goals, getting points and playing decent football. We've looked poor defensively, but arguably have the quality to be at least decent when players return. A more controlled approach, with this (relatively inexperienced) manager and team is likelier to do worse, and much likelier to be less entertaining.
 
redwhiteandermblue said:
I think Sherwood thinks 4-4-2, Harry-esque, have a go football is his mandate, and that his best chance of prospering (not to say surviving) is to stick to it. I can't say I disagree.

As I mentioned elsewhere, the 4-4-2 against the top team in the league on a bad day for our team would have gotten a draw or a win if we'd finished as well as they did. By contrast the 4-3-3 in the same situation with a team playing decently never got a clear cut chance. Sort of agreeing with PowerSpurs (and sort of not), we've looked better in a 4-4-2, so let's stick to it. It seems to me our creative players are perking up, we're scoring goals, getting points and playing decent football. We've looked poor defensively, but arguably have the quality to be at least decent when players return. A more controlled approach, with this (relatively inexperienced) manager and team is likelier to do worse, and much likelier to be less entertaining.
Click to expand...

I very much agree with this. Let's continue to play with freedom and improve our game from there. That's what Rogers has done at Liverpool. All this control and formation game is far to restrictive and defensive let's frighten the opposition and let them worry. If our strikers hit form and they will if they keep getting decent chances, we will bury many teams. City are doing just this.
 
Alot of talk about Sherwood and him trying to be Redknapp and while Redknapp did play a simple system, he also knew how to make tactical changes and make them work, an example was away to AC Milan.

However if Sherwood is going down the route of giving players freedom and asking them to be creative then for that he has my support but if he actually wants to be a good manager he will need to learn that tactical changes also have their place and aren't always negative to creativity.

Early days in his management so not an attack, just hoping he actually starts learning from these previous games for future matches as there will come a time when he has to switch a system or make adjustments.
 
Boss said:
Alot of talk about Sherwood and him trying to be Redknapp and while Redknapp did play a simple system, he also knew how to make tactical changes and make them work, an example was away to AC Milan.

However if Sherwood is going down the route of giving players freedom and asking them to be creative then for that he has my support but if he actually wants to be a good manager he will need to learn that tactical changes also have their place and aren't always negative to creativity.

Early days in his management so not an attack, just hoping he actually starts learning from these previous games for future matches as there will come a time when he has to switch a system or make adjustments.
Click to expand...

I always think of Venables as the one who could get players to play with freedom but at the same time make tactical changes that really changed games around. He's up there with the best for me.

I don't think this was Redknapps strongest suit he just used years of experience, Sherwood should be capable of reaching that level, just a question of will there be enough time for him to get there.
 
I might not agree with a particular managers decision (redknapp; jol; sherwood) but I at least get what they are trying...with ramos and avb I had no idea most of the time...the constant changes, the set ups, the non use of expensive players, the mystifying obsession with stats....

from what I have seen I think that we have taken a step or two forward so that is a cause for optimism
 
Spurf said:
I always think of Venables as the one who could get players to play with freedom but at the same time make tactical changes that really changed games around. He's up there with the best for me.

I don't think this was Redknapps strongest suit he just used years of experience, Sherwood should be capable of reaching that level, just a question of will there be enough time for him to get there.
Click to expand...

Venables was another manager I rated highly so no disagreement there but re Redknapp, yes the experience helped but his tactical knowledge was overlooked as he got us out of tricky situations on numerous occasions.

Avb on the other hand seemed to make situations worse with his changes or lack of them during a game.

One of the most enjoyable summers of football was euro 96 and Venables England team, but he wasn't perfect yet like Redknapp he had a personality that engaged the players and public and if Sherwood bases himself on those two he should do Ok....... Even with the 'dodgy' ' tag!!
 
Boss said:
Venables was another manager I rated highly so no disagreement there but re Redknapp, yes the experience helped but his tactical knowledge was overlooked as he got us out of tricky situations on numerous occasions.

Avb on the other hand seemed to make situations worse with his changes or lack of them during a game.

One of the most enjoyable summers of football was euro 96 and Venables England team, but he wasn't perfect yet like Redknapp he had a personality that engaged the players and public and if Sherwood bases himself on those two he should do Ok....... Even with the 'dodgy' ' tag!!
Click to expand...

I think what I am saying is that Redknapp is more intuitive in his changes than clip board considerations. More to do with seeing the need for a particular player than let's change our formation type decisions.
 
The trouble with guesswork is that one doesn't know when things go right or wrong, so (a) replicating the things that go right and (b) avoiding the things that go wrong tend to be nigh on impossible, and those managers who overly rely on guesswork tend, eventually, to get found out.
 
We know from recent NLDs that 4-4-2 does not work well against the Goon MF.
Especially at the Library.
 
Hoddle Is A God said:
The trouble with guesswork is that one doesn't know when things go right or wrong, so (a) replicating the things that go right and (b) avoiding the things that go wrong tend to be nigh on impossible, and those managers who overly rely on guesswork tend, eventually, to get found out.
Click to expand...

Who mentioned guesswork?
 
Sherwood is obviously stuck with the players AVB/Baldini/Levy brought in, but a simple change in strategy and formation seems to have improved Spurs' outlook considerably.

Why was an attacking looking 4-4-2 beyond the contemplation of AVB yet is the first thing a rookie manager turns to?
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
Sherwood is obviously stuck with the players AVB/Baldini/Levy brought in, but a simple change in strategy and formation seems to have improved Spurs' outlook considerably.

Why was an attacking looking 4-4-2 beyond the contemplation of AVB yet is the first thing a rookie manager turns to?
Click to expand...


That's my point, Little Luke. It's probably guesswork on Sherwoodie's part. He doesn't know or understand any other way to play.
 
Spurf said:
Rather depends on who is playing in the 442
Click to expand...

Exactly. if you play 4-4-2 with the correct personnel then you can perform agaisnt any team, as players aren't glued to their respective positions, often a 4-4-2 will branch off into a 4-4-1-1 or a 4-1-3-2 but the best system in football is the one which suits the squad, and right now Sherwood believes that is 4-4-2 and he can't change system every other game, how else is a team going to get used to a system if its constantly changed?

I think some fans think this is football manager (computer game) where you click a button and change formation each game and it just works, be nice if that was reality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back