Jump to content

Jonjo Shelvey


Recommended Posts

Interesting comparison between Vurn & Jack is while Anita has a greater number of forward passes, Wearside Jack has created more chances.

 

Does that mean Vurn's forward passes are safe ones, 5yrds forward from the centre circle, or maybe Colback's set pieces count as creating a chance?

It's a bit like asking if you'd rather drink a glass of diarrhoea or eat a bowl of shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 184
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

I can't even read some of the figures on there because of the colours but I can see Anita atempts more forward passes but creates less chances. He might make more forward passes but not real progressive forward passes. He seems to position himself between the centrebacks most of the time so pretty much every pass he makes will have to be forward from there.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I think we can agree neither are of the required quality. It's no coincidence we've failed to control so many games over the past couple of years given who's been starting at CM in most of those games.

Aye I agree completely. My asked me the other why are we signing more midfielders. The answer was obvious to me, the ones we have never control the game because they aren't good enough.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Centre midfield has been absolutely dire for a few seasons now. I agree that neither Colback nor Anita are good enough, they've got no ability to get us on the front foot when we've got possession and, for two supposedly defensive midfielders, they're consistently very easy to play through. Colback is slow as owt and doesn't seem to read the game that well, which I think is a big reason he gets so many yellow cards. The sooner neither of them are first choice players the better. It's a pity like because it's always nice to have local lads in the side, but it looks like Colback's never going to be good enough. I didn't realise he was 26 until just checking his Wikipedia page either - I'd assumed he was still 22-23 so was giving him the benefit of the doubt in the hope he could still develop.

 

My hope for Shelvey is that he will help us to use the decent amounts of possession we've been having in most games this season more effectively, take some of the onus off Sissoko and Janmaat to create chances, and get the ball into Wijnaldum's feet a bit more often in the opposition half.

Link to post
Share on other sites

colback isn't as bad as dummet. though to be fair to dummet, colback isn't being asked to play out of position at left wing. he'd probably be just as shit there as dummet is at left back.

 

anita and colback are squad players. decent enough second or third choice holding midfielders, but not quite up to starting every week, and they certainly shouldn't be playing together. fuck knows why mcclaren has persevered with that this season - his biggest mistake, for me, along with thinking dummet is a left back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While we definitely need better midfielders, part of the problem is the limited outlet they have with no outlet on the left. If Sissoko isn't free it's a case of sideways or backwards.

 

As soon as we add the same ability to attack down the left as we have on the right, the whole pitch will open up allowing better performances from Mitrovic / Perez / de Jong etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While we definitely need better midfielders, part of the problem is the limited outlet they have with no outlet on the left. If Sissoko isn't free it's a case of sideways or backwards.

 

As soon as we add the same ability to attack down the left as we have on the right, the whole pitch will open up allowing better performances from Mitrovic / Perez / de Jong etc.

 

Think if Perez gets a rest he'd be a useful option on the left.

 

Also, Thauvin and Aarons should benefit from an improved centre.

 

We'd be better off improving the defensive side of our left flank, rather than the attacking

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the lack of options explains his decisions

 

true but i still think he could have managed those limited options better. it's been obvious for ages that colback/anita doesn't work as a centre mid pairing. he could have put wijnaldum or sissoko in the middle and tried someone else out wide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

He was last night. They are both good at nothing, really. Colback is a bit more powerful and keeps possession slightly better but neither of them are good enough. And when both are playing we get over run.

Colback doesn't keep possession better like.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pass completion means nothing without context. A few years ago Leon Brittain had a better one than Xavi because all he did was pass sideways or backwards, exactly like Colback does.

 

Anita is far from the answer but at least he tries to be positive and go forwards when he has the ball.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say there's not much between them. Anita was a strange one from the start, mainly because of his size. Athleticism seems to count for so much these days and neither colback nor Anita have any at all. To get away with being Anita's size and still be able to have some influence on a midfield I think you have be unbelievable technically and positioning wise, and I don't think Anita is either of those - he just seems to be fairly neat and tidy, pretty "meh" really. I think we all assumed he would have some pedigree, coming from Ajax, but I haven't really seen it. With the two of them together it's shocking. However I don't blame mclaren for that, I don't see what other options he's had really. We know that sissoko can't play there (even if he thinks he can) from last season, the game just passes him by. Plus he's probably been our most consistent threat while he's been playing on the right - I can understand why mclaren wouldn't want to lose that

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.umaxit.com/index.php/columns/swansea-city-jonjo-shelvey-an-uncharacteristic-mess

 

 

Swansea are currently in the process of make a perplexing series of decisions. Having dismissed Garry Monk in the second week of December, chairman Huw Jenkins was expected to appoint a successor before Christmas. With the club plummeting towards the relegation places and at risk of negating all the stability acquired during their Premier League years, acting quickly and decisively was a necessity—and, in first few weeks it seemed as if Jenkins would do just that, with press reports placing him in one continent or another, sounding out weird and wonderful names from the management ether.

 

But nothing materialised. The rumours melted away and here they are, in January, with caretaker Alan Curtis in charge for the rest of the season, having been outplayed and beaten by a League Two side in the FA Cup and sitting perilously in 17th place.

 

It’s a difficult situation to understand because it’s been so at odds with the club’s character. Swansea have thus far been one of the division’s most logical organisations and part of their natural appeal is derived from being a sane voice in a crazy world. Managerial appointments have been logical and well reasoned, profit from sales has been healthy, and the incoming recruitment strategy hasn’t diluted the team’s governing ideology.

 

It’s a cliche but it’s true: Swansea have been a breath of fresh air—they offer clarity in an increasingly opaque environment.

 

Now though, the warning sirens are sounding from the Liberty Stadium. With the greatest respect to Alan Curtis, by all accounts a capable coach and a dexterous tactician, that he is still in charge is indicative of the muddle in which Swansea find themselves. They’ve panicked and, although they may publicly now back Curtis and stress their faith in his abilities, that they initial sought an alternative betrays them.

 

There were some very good arguments which supported Monk’s sacking and, even in hindsight, it’s a decision which can easily be explained. But the aftermath cannot. Between September and December, Monk’s side had struggled and the pressure on him had intensified. It’s strange, therefore, that no cohesive contingency plan was developed during that period, even when a managerial change looked like it would be a necessary evil.

 

And on Tuesday, it was announced that a fee had been agreed with Newcastle for the transfer of Jonjo Shelvey.

 

Shelvey is a divisive player, a polarising blend of talent and trouble. He is gifted, though, and fulfils a function at Swansea that none of their other midfielders are able to replicate. Gylfi Sigurdsson is a highly capable playmaker, Ki Sung Yeung provides a dependable deep platform, and Jack Cork offers his own set of attributes, but Shelvey possesses a passing range and a mind for the build-up phases which will be difficult to replace—maybe almost impossible within the current transfer window.

 

So Swansea are, in a single deal, weakening themselves and strengthening a relegation rival.

 

Shelvey will make Newcastle stronger. He will vary their points of attack reliably and diversify their midfield. Steve McClaren’s attacking unit has been underwhelming so far this season, but that has been partly caused by the absence of a genuine deep-lying playmaker. They are strong out-wide—increasingly so with the signing of Henri Saivet—and in Ayoze Perez, Aleksandar Mitrovic, and the currently injured Papiss Cisse, they have an eclectic range of forwards.

 

 

 

There’s a very reasonable counter-argument to that, one which centres on Shelvey’s personality and his diminishing level of performance. But, while an entirely valid point, it’s hard to rationalise the club’s determination to sell this player to this buyer at this time.

 

£12 million is still a lot of money and maybe, depending on the options which exist, Jenkins believes that he can reinvest the money in a way which solves several of the side’s other problems. Swansea need goals, they could do with an extra full-back and they must urgently find a way of making better use of Andre Ayew, but that amounts to football prospecting and the success of it hinges on a series of assumptions made about an unpredictable market.

 

Clubs behave in the same way all the time and it’s not unusual for those threatened by relegation to take calculated risks in January. The difference, however, is that Swansea don’t usually fit into that grouping; they are not one of them. They are the team of steady reasoning and method and who, up to this point, have risen on their admirable ability to make smart decisions at the right time.

 

The absence of that quality, the lack of an obvious method, is the most troubling detail within this saga. Shelvey’s departure and Monk’s sacking are, in isolation, relatively incidental, but together—and combined with the failure to properly remedy the latter—they suggest a mild form of chaos behind the scenes and a worrying departure from what has become Swansea’s normal operating procedure.

Edited by The Fish
Link to post
Share on other sites

A year ago Shelvey was a top Premier League player,rated by everyone .For whatever reason,him and Swansea have gone to pot.shelvey has the ability to run our midfield and will make things happen for the forward players.I'd give him the captains armband.

I'd give you a space bar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...