Belfast Mags Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Sherwood is awesome. I like him more and more everytime i hear his interviews, proper ballsy b******! You seem to have a thing for cuntish managers http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZWQ3YOMtJaM/UEsnJKgjdkI/AAAAAAAACo0/miO-N7XEaFA/s320/black-kid-oh-snap.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Purely because Shearer was in his team? That's silly. Shearer was a magnificent striker then and got 34 goals in 42 games which is obviously fantastic but come on. They were obviously a decent side but certainly the best example of a one-man team to have won the title in the PL era. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Wullie, man. Suppose I can't talk. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Sherwood was the epitome of bang average. He was however 5 times the player of Pardnut. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Purely because Shearer was in his team? That's silly. Shearer was a magnificent striker then and got 34 goals in 42 games which is obviously fantastic but come on. They were obviously a decent side but certainly the best example of a one-man team to have won the title in the PL era. Well, yeah, goes without saying. Takes far more than one man to play the type of football they did, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Tim Sherwood picked Kyle Walker to play right wing, as some ridiculous attempt to "nullify" hazard, and so should look at himself first IMO. Absolute joker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Tim Sherwood picked Kyle Walker to play right wing, as some ridiculous attempt to "nullify" hazard, and so should look at himself first IMO. Absolute joker. Funny you say that. One of Hazard's most ineffective games for a while. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 And how did it work out for Spurs going forward? It was a silly thing to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Chelsea concede very few goals at the best of times and Spurs were averaging less than 1 a game before Sherwood took over anyway. Just seems like you're trying to manufacture blatant errors when overall he's done a good job for them so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Thought Sherwood's comments were pretty funny really. The results have been similar to AVB's. Generally scraping victories against teams below them and getting thoroughly outclassed by teams above them. He's done alright with them given his lack of experience. Not that that represents progress currently for Spurs, they obviously need a better manager if they're going to get back into the Champions League anytime soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Think CL has been and gone for Spurs. They failed to spend the Bale money properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_Taylor Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Think CL has been and gone for Spurs. They failed to spend the Bale money properly. Buy all the midfielders! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Purely because Shearer was in his team? That's silly. Shearer was a magnificent striker then and got 34 goals in 42 games which is obviously fantastic but come on. They were obviously a decent side but certainly the best example of a one-man team to have won the title in the PL era. Well, yeah, goes without saying. Takes far more than one man to play the type of football they did, though. Hendry, Ripley & Wilcox were just as important imo. Those two wingers were made for that strike force. Just skin the full back & whip in a cross. Made for Shearer that. And Hendry was a fucking beast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 And Flowers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Wasn't Sherwood quoted as recently saying he likes his attackers to attack and his defenders to defend, or words to that effect? IIRC, it's quite an antiquated view of football that will automatically impose a glass ceiling on him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Wasn't Sherwood quoted as recently saying he likes his attackers to attack and his defenders to defend, or words to that effect? IIRC, it's quite an antiquated view of football that will automatically impose a glass ceiling on him. He's that annoying guy in the pub who preaches 'common sense' and somehow he's got the job. Being a bit OTT he's not been disasterous (as I presumed he might be) but how do you get so arrogant and bullish about how you've done so soon in a job you're lucky to have Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varadi Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Purely because Shearer was in his team? That's silly. Shearer was a magnificent striker then and got 34 goals in 42 games which is obviously fantastic but come on. They were obviously a decent side but certainly the best example of a one-man team to have won the title in the PL era. Well, yeah, goes without saying. Takes far more than one man to play the type of football they did, though. Hendry, Ripley & Wilcox were just as important imo. Those two wingers were made for that strike force. Just skin the full back & whip in a cross. Made for Shearer that. And Hendry was a fucking beast. They were certainly important, but i wouldn't say as important. Shearer in those days thrived on crosses but he was also scoring all kinds of goals from all over the place, remember him belting in loads from distance in particular. Anyway, back on topic, I think Sherwood comes across as a complete nob and I'm looking forward to him disappearing back into obscurity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Put it this way, 12 months later, I reckon we'd have won the title if we'd had Flowers rather than Shaka, or Hendry alongside Albert, yet still won it minus Shearer. If you put Shaka or Peacock (I know he did a job for us) in for either of those two, I doubt they'd have won it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettNUFC Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Wasn't Sherwood quoted as recently saying he likes his attackers to attack and his defenders to defend, or words to that effect? IIRC, it's quite an antiquated view of football that will automatically impose a glass ceiling on him. He's that annoying guy in the pub who preaches 'common sense' and somehow he's got the job. Being a bit OTT he's not been disasterous (as I presumed he might be) but how do you get so arrogant and bullish about how you've done so soon in a job you're lucky to have It was that 'arrogant and bullish' attitude that got him the job in the first place? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRD Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 More like the AVB sacking and a lack of available candidates that got him the job. Could certainly see Levy waiting for the WC to end before appointing van Gaal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Sherwood's done okay like. Chelsea aren't the best at breaking defensive sides down. All of their best chances 11 vs. 11 came from genuine horrendous defensive individual mistakes. A 0-0 would've been a good result for them. Silly mistakes cost them then a capitulation which would make any manager very mad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Put it this way, 12 months later, I reckon we'd have won the title if we'd had Flowers rather than Shaka, or Hendry alongside Albert, yet still won it minus Shearer. If you put Shaka or Peacock (I know he did a job for us) in for either of those two, I doubt they'd have won it. I think we'd have won it in 95/96 if we'd have had Shearer instead of Sir Les. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Could say same with Le Saux rather than Beresford I guess. Think it's a moot argument in the end but Rovers weren't a one-man team. Far from it. Anyway, Sherwood is a knob who won't be Spurs manager come July. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Nah not at all. Shearer's mentality put him a cut above Ferdinand. Ferdinand's arse fell out whereas Shearer's wouldn't have done in the same situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Wasn't Sherwood quoted as recently saying he likes his attackers to attack and his defenders to defend, or words to that effect? IIRC, it's quite an antiquated view of football that will automatically impose a glass ceiling on him. Are there any English managers working today who don't share this viewpoint to some extent? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now