jambo191 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68643514 As the title says. What a clown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indianajones Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Strange article at times. Almost as if he's never watched Shankland before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Maybe too much emphasis on having to score that chance but rest of the article was pretty accurate IMO. Which part(s) did you find embarrassing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrT Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Hard to argue really. Although I think the subs had more of an impact on what happened next rather than that miss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Maybe just me but, I don't see anything embarrassing in the article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GinRummy Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 I don’t see the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Thought it was fine. 🤷 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paris 84 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Embarrassing where in the article exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chat Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 I think he's over-egged how bad a miss it was, but other than that, I found the rest of the article quite complimentary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PortyJambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 I don't see anything wrong with the article, he praises Shanks for doing the stuff that Clarke would be looking for. Maybe saying the miss was "catastrophic" was a little hyperbole but, like everyone else, he's only saying that he doesn't usually miss those chances. And, on a night when we missed quite a few good chances, that really needed to go in to cement what was a good performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger Rudi Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 10 minutes ago, Poseidon said: Maybe too much emphasis on having to score that chance but rest of the article was pretty accurate IMO. Which part(s) did you find embarrassing? Yes that's how I read it. Hardly embarrassing or scathing, in fact quite complimentary in places. I don't think Shanks has done his chances any harm at all. English actually agrees with that tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingantti1874 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 (edited) His flaws become strengths? Putting aside the comment on the miss do these flaws only exist in Tom’s empty head. Does he not do these things for us when he needs to? Pretty sure he does Edited March 23 by kingantti1874 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK-1 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Aside from harping on about the miss I see nothing wrong with it, overall, miss aside, he said Shankland had a great game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger Rudi Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 And another downside. I actually think Shanks performance will have alerted other clubs to him. He didn't look out of place, his hold up play and linking were excellent. It's going to be even harder to keep him unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 6 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said: His flaws become strengths? Putting aside the comment on the miss do these flaws only exist in Tom’s empty head. Does he not do these things for us when he needs to? Pretty sure he does I think it is a perception that many, outside of most Hearts supporters, have of Shanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_HMFC Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 The article is spot on. The article states that Shankland played well - correct. The article also states that Shankland should've scored - correct. Shankland will know fine well he should've buried it, it's only going to make him more determined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bull's-eye Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Just now, tiger Rudi said: And another downside. I actually think Shanks performance will have alerted other clubs to him. He didn't look out of place, his hold up play and linking were excellent. It's going to be even harder to keep him unfortunately. Because nobody is monitoring him, whole career hiding under the radar. Tom English is a tit btw who put the boot into the Hearts support on many occasions before he decided to be all risky and tell the truth about the old firm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PortyBeach Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 minute ago, tiger Rudi said: And another downside. I actually think Shanks performance will have alerted other clubs to him. He didn't look out of place, his hold up play and linking were excellent. It's going to be even harder to keep him unfortunately. If he was quoted correctly, I read Shankland had said something to the effect that he can only go so far with a club like Hearts. If that’s indeed his view, you can see why some of the indifferent team performances this season may have reinforced this thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnking123 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Nothing wrong with article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts_fan Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 25 minutes ago, jambo191 said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68643514 As the title says. What a clown. That’s the worst piece of journalism I can remember from English. I normally respect what he says, but that was sensationalist tabloid garbage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Tom English praises Shankland basically what it says. Then the faults in the performance and concerns going forward which are the same as everyone else was saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 2 minutes ago, Hearts_fan said: That’s the worst piece of journalism I can remember from English. I normally respect what he says, but that was sensationalist tabloid garbage. You mean these bits? The Hearts captain had spent his night doing the very things that some thought were potential weaknesses - working the channels, holding the line, bringing others into the game. His one-touch lay-offs to team-mates were precisely the kind of thing that Che Adams does. His presence up top was not as physically powerful as Lyndon Dykes but he was performing the nuts and bolts in his own quiet way. Shankland had to show his manager that this team can still function as his manager wants it to with him at the heart of the attack. And he did that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger Rudi Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 minutes ago, Bull's-eye said: Because nobody is monitoring him, whole career hiding under the radar. Tom English is a tit btw who put the boot into the Hearts support on many occasions before he decided to be all risky and tell the truth about the old firm. Missing my point entirely. When he was banging them in at Ayr, no big club in Scotland or elsewhere wanted to take the risk. Playing at a poor level. He's now banging them in for us at Spl level. Again bigger clubs down south think it's a poor level. Last nights performance against the likes of Van Dijk will have opened some eyes down south. He'll be away in the summer on the back of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prehen Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 See nothing wrong with the article, from what is one of the best football, make that sports journalists going. My reading is English was impressed by Shankland, and indeed English was willing Shankland to score to cap off a fine performance. I do think there is a bit of over egging the actual score. I thought Scotland looked a proper team last night. As English says, just need to work on the fragility in defence from subs and get people to be more ruthless in front of goal. Shankland missed. He scores the next. Simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bull's-eye Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 minutes ago, tiger Rudi said: Missing my point entirely. When he was banging them in at Ayr, no big club in Scotland or elsewhere wanted to take the risk. Playing at a poor level. He's now banging them in for us at Spl level. Again bigger clubs down south think it's a poor level. Last nights performance against the likes of Van Dijk will have opened some eyes down south. He'll be away in the summer on the back of it. That's even stupider than your previous effort. Well played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts_fan Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 (edited) “That was a black mark against his name for sure.” – Black marks against all the other players who missed chances then. “51% of Hearts' league goals.” – Deary me, they’re still wheeling that garbage out. Talk about scraping the barrel for a negative spin. “Had he put away that chance instead of hitting the woodwork, you'd be talking about him now usurping Adams and Dykes.” – Please. He hit the bar with his only real chance of the match, after 60-odd minutes. FFS. As if that single incident has any bearing on him “usurping” two players who couldn’t hit a cow’s backside with a banjo. The real question is why Steve Clarke didn’t give Shanks any game time at all at the previous camp. Had he done so, Shanks would have had more intl. experience under his belt. Now, you have your nation’s far and way best striker scraping about for minutes and experience before a massive tournament. Edited March 23 by Hearts_fan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hashimoto Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Good honest article. Unbiased as well. Not everyone wears maroon tinted glasses! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingantti1874 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 (edited) 19 minutes ago, davemclaren said: I think it is a perception that many, outside of most Hearts supporters, have of Shanks. clearly Dave. Really suggests they aren’t paying enough attention. Edited March 23 by kingantti1874 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horatio Caine Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 As was said elsewhere, maybe giving shanks the full 90 minutes could have produced another opportunity which he would have taken. Done now. I thought Andy Robertson's interview was more accurate and also summed up the views of the whole team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingantti1874 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Just now, Hashimoto said: Good honest article. Unbiased as well. Not everyone wears maroon tinted glasses! honest but wrong. He’s phenomenal at holding the ball up, extremely tidy on the ball and happy to run the channels when it’s needed. So call those aspects of his game “flaws” is plain wrong regardless of whether he’s being honest or not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Quaresma Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Lawrence will be fizzing that he never kept calm with that opportunity and I don't need a 2,000 word dribble to tell me what I saw bbc can get stuffed anaw So, meh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stirlo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 The article seems fair enough to me. The thing is, it doesn't really matter how many chances we score or miss if we we defend like we did in the last 20 minutes last night. The centre-back position has been a major issue for Scotland for a long time now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShedBoy Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 I like Tom English. And after reading that article. I still do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts_fan Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 The headline itself: “Lawrence Shankland’s flaws become strengths” Then this: “The Hearts captain had spent his night doing the very things that some thought were potential weaknesses - working the channels, holding the line, bringing others into the game.” Then some complimentary language. It’s flattering but misleading. Because English says some nice things about Shanks, some take away a feeling that the whole article was accurate. But Shankland’s ability to hold the line and bring others into the game is simply not in any doubt, yet here we have BBC Scotland’s Chief Sports Reporter – or whatever he is – dropping-in as if credible fact that Shanks surprised the nation with his hold up and linking play. Talk about being out of touch with reality. That is why it is a garbage article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggy2 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 (edited) If the overall perception is that he played well and was involved in the creation of numerous chances against top top defenders then I’m very pleased for him and for Hearts. I saw last night as his Championship shop window. The top half of that league can outbid Rangers with (say £4m) pocket change so if he is to leave I’m now more hopeful that Glasgow won’t be his destination and he won’t ruin the memories of a fantastic couple of years in Gorgie. We keep him to the end of his contract you just know the blue Weegies will come calling. Edited March 23 by Shaggy2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hashimoto Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 minute ago, kingantti1874 said: honest but wrong. He’s phenomenal at holding the ball up, extremely tidy on the ball and happy to run the channels when it’s needed. So call those aspects of his game “flaws” is plain wrong regardless of whether he’s being honest or not I personally thought Shankland had a very good game, especially for the reasons you quote. his lay offs and work ethic were excellent and I'm sure that the person who matters most (Clarke) would be more than pleased despite the result. However, Tom English simply highlighted what in the end was a bad miss, especially at this level along with the misconception outside of Hearts fans that Shankland's work ethic is questionable! English is a decent reporter, I always look for his rugby reports. In the end I honestly believe that this article was meant as a positive regarding Shankland's performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go for it 1308 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 52 minutes ago, jambo191 said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68643514 As the title says. What a clown. Why is it embarrassing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts1975 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Tom English, along with faddy, are the 2 pundits that talk sense. There are far far more that don't talk any sense. Really don't see what's wrong here and don't see why it merited a thread, in its own right. What exactly did TE say that was wrong ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 46 minutes ago, Poseidon said: Maybe too much emphasis on having to score that chance but rest of the article was pretty accurate IMO. Which part(s) did you find embarrassing? That’s how I saw it. I didn’t think it was anything other than a commentary on all that went wrong for Scotland last night. A chance missed and a defence that was all at sea in the second half. He did say that Shankland had a reasonable game last night apart from the missed chance - one that he would normally put away with ease. Strikers, even the very best of them do miss chances. Nothing remotely controversial in that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
been here before Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, jambo191 said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68643514 As the title says. What a clown. In what way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iantjambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 58 minutes ago, jambo191 said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68643514 As the title says. What a clown. Absolutely nothing wrong with that article. I see it as a positive one. He’s only said what pretty much all the rest of us has said. Of course he’s going to comment on THAT miss. 9 times out of 10, Shanks buries that. It was just unfortunate that the 1 time was last night. The miss aside, he had a very good game. That’s pretty much what English has said in his article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbojambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 I thought Michael Stewart was his over the top self. It was a good chance like McGinn, McTominay and Christie had and he didn't hark on about them. 2 inches lower it was in the postage stamp and it would be called a magnificent, deadly strike. Tom English wasn't looking for someone to blame and wrote it as he saw it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts_fan Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 “Shankland’s flaws” What a damn cheek to put those words together in a headline when there is no substance behind it. To believe that his “hold-up and linking” play is a flaw is just utter ignorance. Shanks’ all round game is superb. It’s a sensationalist article designed to get people talking, about Tom English. It is not a fair article about Shanks in respect of so-called “flaws”. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bindy Badgy Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 40 minutes ago, davemclaren said: I think it is a perception that many, outside of most Hearts supporters, have of Shanks. It's a pereception I had when we first signed him. Obviously, that changed after a couple of games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 23 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said: clearly Dave. Really suggests they aren’t paying enough attention. Indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK-1 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 2 minutes ago, PortyBeach said: If he was quoted correctly, I read Shankland had said something to the effect that he can only go so far with a club like Hearts. If that’s indeed his view, you can see why some of the indifferent team performances this season may have reinforced this thinking. I think he might have implied that without actually saying it so to speak. Rather than just his view a such I think it's a statement of plain fact. With the current statement of Budge in mind about spending on players, well you would think some of that could be applied to giving him a large bump, minimum 20K a week. But money aside it might also come down to a desire to win major trophies, multiple even, like drives Harry Kane. And if his ambition lies elsewhere it might be best to offload him this summer for the best price that's going to be available in comparison to the following summer. And add that money to the funds Budge says will be available now. If he could bring even just 2 million in the summer, and presuming another 5 million from euro groups all of which and more Mrs. Budge says is now available for players they could spend a bundle on a young prospect. A million minimum or even 2 million. Shankland is going to be gone, everybody knows that's an enormous loss. Typically any major loss is irreplaceable like for like, and he's more than just typical to the side. Given Mrs Budges statement about finances presuming multi millions might be available I think this has to be the optimum time to try to replace Shankland. If Shankland can secure 2 million or even more as I mentioned in another post I would like to see up to 2 million spent on some Morelos like prospect who could bang in the goals and return a profit, perhaps a handsome profit. If Shankland stayed and left at the end of his contract then obviously there's no income at all from that. And the problem of replacing him would have been kicked down the line till he was gone. Part of the reluctance to let him go among fans is often emotional rather than rational, that's football fans, all of us. Hardly surprising since he's become a club icon. I feel it's in the best interests of the club going forward that Shankland go this summer for the highest possible sum. Euro group football is already pretty much acquired if not yet mathematically. Who would it be best to showcase in Europe this year? Shankland or some young million plus prospect who, with a bit of luck, will come good. Post Shankland is a scary world, but I think it's best this summer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mud and mullets Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 The headline doesn't do Tom English any favours here. Anyone who watches Shankland every week knows he brings a lot more to the team than goals so the "flaws" part is misleading without a modifier like "perceived". Overall the article seems positive about Shanks. Everyone knows he can score goals and now they know he has more to his game. Considering the opposition I thought he played really well. After proving he can come on as a sub for Scotland and snatch a goal, he's now shown he can start and lead the line well against world class defenders even if he does look quite slow at international level. If Dykes has a mare against NI, then Shanks comes on and does well, Clarke will have some thinking to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTT Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 It was a bad miss, there isn't any getting away from it. But his all round game was very good and he did work extremely hard. This is a big step up from league football and he wasn't the only one with a sitter that missed it. 99 times out of 100 he buries that, its not a reflection on him at all. TBH the selfish part of me hopes that this puts bigger clubs off and we improve our chances of keeping him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTS1874 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Shankland played well last night, it’s just a pity he missed that chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hashimoto Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 5 minutes ago, JFK-1 said: I think he might have implied that without actually saying it so to speak. Rather than just his view a such I think it's a statement of plain fact. With the current statement of Budge in mind about spending on players, well you would think some of that could be applied to giving him a large bump, minimum 20K a week. But money aside it might also come down to a desire to win major trophies, multiple even, like drives Harry Kane. And if his ambition lies elsewhere it might be best to offload him this summer for the best price that's going to be available in comparison to the following summer. And add that money to the funds Budge says will be available now. If he could bring even just 2 million in the summer, and presuming another 5 million from euro groups all of which and more Mrs. Budge says is now available for players they could spend a bundle on a young prospect. A million minimum or even 2 million. Shankland is going to be gone, everybody knows that's an enormous loss. Typically any major loss is irreplaceable like for like, and he's more than just typical to the side. Given Mrs Budges statement about finances presuming multi millions might be available I think this has to be the optimum time to try to replace Shankland. If Shankland can secure 2 million or even more as I mentioned in another post I would like to see up to 2 million spent on some Morelos like prospect who could bang in the goals and return a profit, perhaps a handsome profit. If Shankland stayed and left at the end of his contract then obviously there's no income at all from that. And the problem of replacing him would have been kicked down the line till he was gone. Part of the reluctance to let him go among fans is often emotional rather than rational, that's football fans, all of us. Hardly surprising since he's become a club icon. I feel it's in the best interests of the club going forward that Shankland go this summer for the highest possible sum. Euro group football is already pretty much acquired if not yet mathematically. Who would it be best to showcase in Europe this year? Shankland or some young million plus prospect who, with a bit of luck, will come good. Post Shankland is a scary world, but I think it's best this summer. Excellent post. As a business Hearts must cash in on Shankland before the inevitable happens. As you say, no point in kicking the can along the road until he leaves for free Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.