Fleck or Mcsheffery (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter suddsy101
- Start date
Dimi_Konstantflapalot
Well-Known Member
McSheffrey. He was the one who looked most likely to create something (albeit little) vs. Spurs. Although we had little attacking threat, there was a glimmer of McSheffrey's prem experience there.
CCFC_Charlie
Well-Known Member
I liked to see a place in the team found for Fleck as in terms of technical ability he's probably the best we've got. However he is very poor defensively making it increasingly difficult to accommodate him.
CCFC_Charlie
Well-Known Member
Why is it Fleck or McSheffrey? Judging by the position that Fleck has played in recently it's much more likely to be Fleck or Jennings
Astute
Well-Known Member
Jennings. Fleck too lightweight against a team like them. Jennings is one of if not only player we have that can give them back some of what they hand out. We did well against them last time until he got booked.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
In that scenario neither. I hope we get another defensive midfielder from somewhere. Jennings is not good enough.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
It is clear who I'd prefer to start, Fleck, clearly a better player in terms of technical ability and if you look at an objective criteria, it's got to be Fleck, more goals, more assists, less games.
However, if it was a straight swap, Fleck for McSheff on the LM, I would prefer McSheff, Fleck is NOT a winger, he doesn't have the pace, nor should he restricted to a given jurisdiction on the pitch.
If we were to shuffle the midfield slightly, put Moussa on the LM, and Fleck in a 'free role', that would be best IMO. I think Moussa will offer a better defensive option on the wing - let's face, Sheff is shit defensively, worse than Fleck, easily! - a better option on the wing as he is more skilful, and possibly just as good at crossing. Also, I think Fleck is a good player technically, as someone previously said, the best we've got. I feel he is that 'creative' midfielder CCFC fans have been asking for, for years, now, ironically, the majority (or very vocal minority) don't think he should start
in the league, despite playing a lot less games than Baker and Bailey and 2 less than Sheff, AS WELL as being played out of position, is still our top assister in the league for CCFC, whilst not having a good run in the team. McSheffrey also hasn't delivered on the goalscoring front and I think Fleck could out score, as well as our assisting him. Fleck also can dictate the tempo of which he play at as he has a very good range of passes.
However, if it was a straight swap, Fleck for McSheff on the LM, I would prefer McSheff, Fleck is NOT a winger, he doesn't have the pace, nor should he restricted to a given jurisdiction on the pitch.
If we were to shuffle the midfield slightly, put Moussa on the LM, and Fleck in a 'free role', that would be best IMO. I think Moussa will offer a better defensive option on the wing - let's face, Sheff is shit defensively, worse than Fleck, easily! - a better option on the wing as he is more skilful, and possibly just as good at crossing. Also, I think Fleck is a good player technically, as someone previously said, the best we've got. I feel he is that 'creative' midfielder CCFC fans have been asking for, for years, now, ironically, the majority (or very vocal minority) don't think he should start
in the league, despite playing a lot less games than Baker and Bailey and 2 less than Sheff, AS WELL as being played out of position, is still our top assister in the league for CCFC, whilst not having a good run in the team. McSheffrey also hasn't delivered on the goalscoring front and I think Fleck could out score, as well as our assisting him. Fleck also can dictate the tempo of which he play at as he has a very good range of passes.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Who would get dropped?
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Random question, because I don't think I was raving that he was good enough for the prem.
Nonetheless, I'll answer, he was attracting interest from us and Sheff U, 2 teams who, should get promoted, so it isn't like it's a lowly L1 side. We don't know for sure who else was interested although Norwich were supposedly in for him, again I don't know.
I think CCFC is a good move for Fleck, we are a good L1 club who should gain promotion, also, if we get promoted, he could use us as a 'stepping stone' to enhance his career, to go to the 'promised land' that is the EPL.
I do think however, he could be a player who could do well in the Championship, possibly even the Prem, before you jump on this comment, I think if you would've asked Norwich fans, if you got promoted to the Prem, would Holt be good enough, I think A) they'd question your sanity to think they'd get the Prem, B) I think they'd doubt if Holt could cut it in the Championship, let alone the Prem, C) I bet they didn't think Holt was going to do as well as they would've thought last/this season. I think the same applies to Lambert as well.
We may have unearthed a diamond in the rough. Wait and see Grendel.
For Blackpool, he was played on the LW in a 4-3-3 not in his natural position, depends which way you look at it.
Stevec189
New Member
Fleck is ok but not as great as some people seem to think. Capable of a good ball but equally capable of a bad one. Not great at tackling. Needs to be more consistent as does Barton. Shelf fears definitely better and doing well. Was very unlucky with shot against the crossbar Vs Shrewsbury. PUSB
Neither - both have pretty much failed this season.
Sheffers (classed a striker by the club) 1 goal
Fleck (a supposed prodigy) 2 goals.
Sheffers has proven that a player should NEVER go back to a former club. There is a great chance that any rep achieved first time round well be undone on his return. This seems to have happened to Sheffers.
A MASSIVE disappointment both of them
Sheffers (classed a striker by the club) 1 goal
Fleck (a supposed prodigy) 2 goals.
Sheffers has proven that a player should NEVER go back to a former club. There is a great chance that any rep achieved first time round well be undone on his return. This seems to have happened to Sheffers.
A MASSIVE disappointment both of them
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Shame you keep returning. Your first ever post on here was tripe. It's been downhill ever since.
CJparker
New Member
This. I was going to post this.
Ignore Grendel, he thinks AT was a bad manager and that the sun shines out of SISU's arse!
Grendel
Well-Known Member
And you think thorn was the next best to jimmy hill. Is he still coming back to rescue us like he did 2 years ago?
CJparker
New Member
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Ah, so you didn't get hacked to death at tonight's Trust meeting then?
No there was only 3 blokes in the pub. One had a Soft Cell T Shirt on so I left pretty sharpish.
CJparker
New Member
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Anyone know anything about Neil Moxley, is he a sky blues fan?
Thorn sacking is one of many strange decisions by Coventry
By NEIL MOXLEY
PUBLISHED: 11:06, 30 August 2012 | UPDATED: 11:12, 30 August 2012
There have been some strange decisions at Coventry City over the years.
Selling Highfield Road might have been one. Sacking Eric Black certainly fell into that category.
Current owners SISU handing over their cash to Ray Ranson? Ouch.
Dismissed: Andy Thorn was axed by Coventry after three league draws
And so it was with a resigned air of acceptance that it was business as unusual when news broke on Sunday lunchtime that Andy Thorn had been sacked.
Yes, after an unbeaten start to the season with his heavily-changed squad.
I accept that it must have been gut-wrenching to see a two-goal lead slip away at the Ricoh against Bury, just 24 hours before that decision was made.
Just as I accept it must have been galling to see a hatful of chances go begging at Yeovil.
And I know also that the performance - as admitted on Radio Five afterwards by goalscorer Kevin Kilbane - wasn't up to scratch against Dagenham and Redbridge.
But the good news is that the Sky Blues progressed in the Capital One Cup. And were able to beat Birmingham City on Tuesday night.
Five matches with the same players and undefeated to boot.
At a time when managers, we are told, are accountable through results, Thorn was in credit this season.
The players have been put through their paces in pre-season. Systems have been worked upon.
And with the sacking, all of that goes out of the window.
When Coventry City end their due diligence on their prospective manager, they are likely to have to adapt to the new guy's method of working. He may want to bring in his new players.
Another period of transition and change.
Now, I have no particular support for Thorn. He had a difficult job last year but I'm not convinced that relegation was a natural consequence for Coventry City when the campaign kicked off 12 months ago.
Thorn's record over 57 games was poor. Did it change that much over 60?
However, my problem is this: If you are going to back him during the close-season and allow him to bring in his own players, then surely he needs more than 270 minutes to put his plans into operation?
At this point, I know there will be supporters pointing to Bryan Gunn's sacking at Norwich City and Paul Lambert's subsequent appointment.
New squad: Thorn had several new players to manage
But the Canaries actually had played two matches - winning at Yeovil and then drawing at Exeter before the Scot's arrival was confirmed. Who knows what might have happened had Gunn stayed? And, ergo, had Thorn.
Off-the-field Tim Fisher, Coventry City's de facto chief executive, appears to be heading in the right direction. Negotiations with various parties over the rent, Ricoh Arena ownership issue and the city council are on-going.
But he needs to be mindful of the fact that of the 'big' clubs who have dropped into League One, only Leicester City have made it out at the first time of asking. Leeds United, Nottingham Forest, Charlton Athletic, the two Sheffield clubs - none of those jumped straight back into the Championship.
It is not an easy league to escape.
In fairness, Fisher suggested there were 'other factors' in the statement which followed Thorn's. One day, when the legalities have no doubt been sorted out, we might find the truth.
And, I suppose the point is this: If Coventry do end in the top six - as was the stated aim at the start of the season - then the board's decision will be vindicated.
If not, supporters will point to Thorn's sacking and ask why he wasn't given time.
As possibly we all expected prior to last Sunday's announcement, results will determine all come May next year.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ing-strange--The-Midlander.html#ixzz2HKrvw7MJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Thorn sacking is one of many strange decisions by Coventry
By NEIL MOXLEY
PUBLISHED: 11:06, 30 August 2012 | UPDATED: 11:12, 30 August 2012
There have been some strange decisions at Coventry City over the years.
Selling Highfield Road might have been one. Sacking Eric Black certainly fell into that category.
Current owners SISU handing over their cash to Ray Ranson? Ouch.
Dismissed: Andy Thorn was axed by Coventry after three league draws
And so it was with a resigned air of acceptance that it was business as unusual when news broke on Sunday lunchtime that Andy Thorn had been sacked.
Yes, after an unbeaten start to the season with his heavily-changed squad.
I accept that it must have been gut-wrenching to see a two-goal lead slip away at the Ricoh against Bury, just 24 hours before that decision was made.
Just as I accept it must have been galling to see a hatful of chances go begging at Yeovil.
And I know also that the performance - as admitted on Radio Five afterwards by goalscorer Kevin Kilbane - wasn't up to scratch against Dagenham and Redbridge.
But the good news is that the Sky Blues progressed in the Capital One Cup. And were able to beat Birmingham City on Tuesday night.
Five matches with the same players and undefeated to boot.
At a time when managers, we are told, are accountable through results, Thorn was in credit this season.
The players have been put through their paces in pre-season. Systems have been worked upon.
And with the sacking, all of that goes out of the window.
When Coventry City end their due diligence on their prospective manager, they are likely to have to adapt to the new guy's method of working. He may want to bring in his new players.
Another period of transition and change.
Now, I have no particular support for Thorn. He had a difficult job last year but I'm not convinced that relegation was a natural consequence for Coventry City when the campaign kicked off 12 months ago.
Thorn's record over 57 games was poor. Did it change that much over 60?
However, my problem is this: If you are going to back him during the close-season and allow him to bring in his own players, then surely he needs more than 270 minutes to put his plans into operation?
At this point, I know there will be supporters pointing to Bryan Gunn's sacking at Norwich City and Paul Lambert's subsequent appointment.
New squad: Thorn had several new players to manage
But the Canaries actually had played two matches - winning at Yeovil and then drawing at Exeter before the Scot's arrival was confirmed. Who knows what might have happened had Gunn stayed? And, ergo, had Thorn.
Off-the-field Tim Fisher, Coventry City's de facto chief executive, appears to be heading in the right direction. Negotiations with various parties over the rent, Ricoh Arena ownership issue and the city council are on-going.
But he needs to be mindful of the fact that of the 'big' clubs who have dropped into League One, only Leicester City have made it out at the first time of asking. Leeds United, Nottingham Forest, Charlton Athletic, the two Sheffield clubs - none of those jumped straight back into the Championship.
It is not an easy league to escape.
In fairness, Fisher suggested there were 'other factors' in the statement which followed Thorn's. One day, when the legalities have no doubt been sorted out, we might find the truth.
And, I suppose the point is this: If Coventry do end in the top six - as was the stated aim at the start of the season - then the board's decision will be vindicated.
If not, supporters will point to Thorn's sacking and ask why he wasn't given time.
As possibly we all expected prior to last Sunday's announcement, results will determine all come May next year.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ing-strange--The-Midlander.html#ixzz2HKrvw7MJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Pretty much every now agrees it was right to ask Thorn, the thing they did wrong was dally about getting a replacement in. Having said that had they rushed the decision and brought someone in who hadn't had the impact Robins has had we'd be slamming them for rushing the appointment.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Shaw should've been able to he at least 1-2 wins and a draw IMO. A loss at Tranmere wasn't too unreasonable.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
It was when you watched it. Tranmere were shite if you pardon my French.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
That might of been torchy
Thought he was a Pet Shop Boy.
Then again he was drinking Tenants....
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So we're Bury.
