Spellczech Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Would anyone have bet their house on Dykes or Adams scoring that chance? Ally McCoist needed 3 great chances to score one goal... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 57 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. TBH those were the days of sing-songs about a Beautiful City on trains, and vandalism near the ground about an owner who saved the club. Whilst I think Hearts fans have repeatedly been set up by the SPFL and SFA with regards to Celtic's political and religious interests being dragged into football, it is fair to say the Hearts support has repeatedly walked, even run, into those traps... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mud and mullets Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 2 minutes ago, Spellczech said: Ally McCoist needed 3 great chances to score one goal... During the game we were talking about when Scotland last had a decent goalscorer and we could only think of the McCoist and Johnston days, and my mate said exactly that about McCoist! The test for Shankland in that game wasn't really just can he score for Scotland it was can he lead the line, create chances and bring others into the game the way Dykes does and from Clarke and McGinn's comments it looks like he passed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicalEric Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Not related to the article but I found some of the stuff on social media about Shanks weird as. It was almost as if folk were desperate for him to fail and were delighted he didn't stick that chance away. IMO I thought he had a good game considering the defence he was up against. His link up play is definitely better than Dykes'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Just now, mud and mullets said: During the game we were talking about when Scotland last had a decent goalscorer and we could only think of the McCoist and Johnston days, and my mate said exactly that about McCoist! The test for Shankland in that game wasn't really just can he score for Scotland it was can he lead the line, create chances and bring others into the game the way Dykes does and from Clarke and McGinn's comments it looks like he passed. To be fair - the guy did have the brain and instinct to get into the positions to get those chances, and that is the key thing we have to take from last night - we made a lot of chances, but nobody had their shooting boots/head on... Koeman must be sitting there thinking "I need a new Left Back" as Patterson and even Ralston had the run of the right wing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mscjambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 The guy is a clown Pretends to be an expert on football and rugby but waffles utter tripe. He epitomises everything that's wrong with scottish football coverage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 minute ago, mscjambo said: The guy is a clown Pretends to be an expert on football and rugby but waffles utter tripe. He epitomises everything that's wrong with scottish football coverage It is how they wrote the match up. That Shanks miss was the key moment in the match. It wasn't, the key moment was the substitution of half the team... John Souttar had an absolute stinker as a sub... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mud and mullets Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 4 minutes ago, Spellczech said: To be fair - the guy did have the brain and instinct to get into the positions to get those chances, and that is the key thing we have to take from last night - we made a lot of chances, but nobody had their shooting boots/head on... Koeman must be sitting there thinking "I need a new Left Back" as Patterson and even Ralston had the run of the right wing... Yes, McTominay's header was a really bad miss but to be fair he has a lot of credit in the bank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramrod Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 It's actually pretty fair imo. He was giving us as much as Dykes/Adams would have given against that calibre of opposition but he just had to score that chance. Its what he has traded on for the last couple of seasons. Doesn't make h a bad player overnight, happens to the best of strikers, but it I will probably count against him now unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim_Duncan Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Tom English: It is an intimidating place for opposing teams because it's populated by crazies, by half the cast of Shaun of the Dead. Okay, okay. That's an exaggeration. A third of the cast. I'll pass on reading anything else he has bashed out of his keyboard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticJambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, Hearts_fan said: “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. Good post. While u don't particularly think the article is nonsense, it's for the most part arguably correct I do feel there's a subtle underlying story of I'm for sticking with dykes and adams. Frankly they bore me as strikers, and Dykes downright trolls me, a product of the 80s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daktari Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 I think it’s ok, and people are reading it differently. Firstly though, if he’d put ‘alleged’ or ‘perceived’ in front of ‘flaws’ in the headline, it would have been closer to what he and the article were trying to achieve. I don’t think he was having a go at Shankland, more the people that see him as limited/one dimensional. After that, in talking about ‘the miss’ there’s a bit of regret in as much as he highlights that these sorts of chances are bread and butter to him. I think he’s then highlighting the fickle nature of fans and punditry in general and saying that despite all his good work, if he’d scored that goal that’s all that people would be talking about - ignoring all the other stuff that he did well and they perceive as ‘flaws’. Not his best work, but I think English is a fair and intelligent journalist - one of the few. Like players, he doesn’t always play his best and sometimes hits the bar, but I don’t think that this was ever intended to be a dig at Shankland and certainly falls way short of being embarrasing. The Record and Sun set the benchmark for that measure really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go for it 1308 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 8 minutes ago, ArcticJambo said: Good post. While u don't particularly think the article is nonsense, it's for the most part arguably correct I do feel there's a subtle underlying story of I'm for sticking with dykes and adams. Frankly they bore me as strikers, and Dykes downright trolls me, a product of the 80s. Spot on. Time for Clarke to take his 'loyalty' goggles off. If shanks played for one of the uglies, then he would be the first name on Clarke's team sheet. Bloody joke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mscjambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 24 minutes ago, Spellczech said: It is how they wrote the match up. That Shanks miss was the key moment in the match. It wasn't, the key moment was the substitution of half the team... John Souttar had an absolute stinker as a sub... Porteous also was positionally all over the place last 20. English is an utter cretin though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Camazzola Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 2 hours ago, indianajones said: Strange article at times. Almost as if he's never watched Shankland before. Is a bit random. Also quoting two exhibition match wins as part of Van Dijk's honours is strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex member of the SaS Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 The EEN has Shanks on a 6/10 when the majority get 5/10, only three players get 7/10 and Soutar with a 3/10 Can't see how one miss is a disaster and the way he has written this you would think Shanks was a robot that never misses. The whole team was rank according to these figures and as it was only a friendly he can hardly moan about Shanks hitting the bar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas-voss Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Apart from not scoring he says he done really well.He done exactly what a lot of folk outside of Hearts says he can't do which is lead the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polonia Gorgie Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Steve Clarke has been excellent for Scotland so far, so if he wants what's best for his team/nation then Shankland will get another opportunity. As soon as Shankland was starting all the focus is on him. He played so well last night and his miss becomes a sitter because he has been so deadly for us for the past two seasons. Aye he missed a big opportunity but it's not like he took a wild swing, he was still composed and gave the keeper no chance. It was the substitutions that lead to Scotland's downfall not one miss from Shanks. As one poster pointed out before, Clarke probably should have started Shankland in the last international games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diadora Van Basten Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Shanks probably played better than he does for Hearts but didn’t score a chance that he probably would have done for Hearts. Pretty much what Tom English is saying. On the chance itself it wasn’t a sitter but having done everything right it was a surprise that he over hit it slightly. I’m not convinced Dykes or Adam would have scored it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Potter Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, Hearts_fan said: “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”. Using the flaws wording is a strange one and not needed, the fact we were just 1-0 down at the time of the near goal is more to do with the defence not shanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finlay James Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 I wouldn’t describe it as embarrassing but it’s incredibly harsh and a bit weird. Tom writes these pieces a lot where he contradicts himself badly. If Shanks scores at the euros, for example, he’ll be all over it and proclaiming him as the next Gerd Muller. Like all journalists, take him with a pinch of salt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gillsland jack Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 48 minutes ago, mscjambo said: Porteous also was positionally all over the place last 20. English is an utter cretin though I agree, maybe the journo's should focus on the awful standard of centre halves we currently have at international level, Porteous and Hendry should be nowhere near the national team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boyces beard Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Nothing wrong with the article, it says Shankland showed he has everything required to lead the line for Scotland. The article says he should have scored and would normally take that chance with a blindfold on which is true. Steve Clark is a very astute manager and will know that Shanks is the best finisher available to Scotland by quite some distance. I'm sure privately Clarke will have been happy with his hold up play and link up play which was very good against possibly the best centre half and one of the strongest defences in world football. He also worked hard and closed down the passing lanes well helping to force the ball back to the keeper or forcing them to play more direct. Shankland scores goals, its what he does and one miss which he would normally score with ease is not going to change that. What Shankland has also shown last night to folk who don't pay attention to Scottish football is that he is an extremely well rounded football player with a lot to offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gillsland jack Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 minutes ago, Boyces beard said: Nothing wrong with the article, it says Shankland showed he has everything required to lead the line for Scotland. The article says he should have scored and would normally take that chance with a blindfold on which is true. Steve Clark is a very astute manager and will know that Shanks is the best finisher available to Scotland by quite some distance. I'm sure privately Clarke will have been happy with his hold up play and link up play which was very good against possibly the best centre half and one of the strongest defences in world football. He also worked hard and closed down the passing lanes well helping to force the ball back to the keeper or forcing them to play more direct. Shankland scores goals, its what he does and one miss which he would normally score with ease is not going to change that. What Shankland has also shown last night to folk who don't pay attention to Scottish football is that he is an extremely well rounded football player with a lot to offer. Yup, I agree and as Neil McCann mentioned on Sportscene last night, just as Laurence was about to pull the trigger, the ball just bobbled up ever so slightly, which mean't he made contact with the ball when it was an inch or two slightly of the surface of the ground, that took it higher on to the bar, very unlucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ93 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Shankland is the #1 BBC sports article for the entire UK. Don’t think that’s happened before! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nookie Bear Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Irish Tom practically ruined his pants when Shankland missed that chance. Bunch of losers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mud and mullets Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, Jim_Duncan said: Tom English: It is an intimidating place for opposing teams because it's populated by crazies, by half the cast of Shaun of the Dead. Okay, okay. That's an exaggeration. A third of the cast. I'll pass on reading anything else he has bashed out of his keyboard. That's a throwback! The football media lost their collective minds during the Romanov era. Impartial reporting about Hearts went out the window. I think Tom English has spoken about having a bit of regret about that piece mind you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Goalscoring Knee Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Dunno why some folk are getting so het up about the article - seems very fair to me. Might also help if people realised that English most likely didn't write the headline, it'll have been done by one of the BBC's web staff with the aim of generating the sort of traffic it seems to have done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nookie Bear Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 And I couldn’t give a toss if Shanks misses chances for Scotland. Hardly the difference between winning a trophy or not, is it and I would rather he came back next season refreshed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Brown Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours 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? This entirely. He compliments his play and mentions the collapse happens after being subbed. A glorious chance missed by LS, who as English says, would've expected him to score. People need to learn to read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mud and mullets Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Clarke is a pretty conservative manager so I'd expect him to stick with Dykes/Adams for the Germany game unless Shankland scores a boatload in the friendlies, but Shankland will definitely be on the plane now and could hopefully end up being our Toto Schillaci! https://thesefootballtimes.co/2019/07/11/salvatore-schillaci-the-unlikely-hero-of-italia-90/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joondalupjambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours ago, Mikey1874 said: 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. If Shanks leads the line against Germany then that will be a huge compliment to him. Will be hard to dislodge a fit Dykes though I would imagine because Clarke will probably revert to type. Shanks needs to do this a couple of times more before that game but will be getting the chances? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nookie Bear Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 21 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said: This entirely. He compliments his play and mentions the collapse happens after being subbed. A glorious chance missed by LS, who as English says, would've expected him to score. People need to learn to read. Nah he’s using phrases like “he had to score” and “catastrophic miss”. Plenty of praise but in reality It’s a hatchet job he was desperate to write. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gar jambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours 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? Correct one game against the mighty Dutch you can't blame him for that! He knows he should have scored their was other missed chances in the game! What about Gunn losing 4 portentous was not great do you change it because of one game no! Grhhh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours ago, MrT said: Hard to argue really. Although I think the subs had more of an impact on what happened next rather than that miss. Yup,certainly dont think Shanks hitting the woodwork changed the outcome,the subs massively changed the game,ours were poor the dutch ones were keen to impress!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
innerjambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Not embarrassing really, but Shanks miss was a focal point of the article, perhaps unfairly. Shanks should have put it away, but didn't. He's human after all, and I hope this doesn't have a negative impact on his chances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Fox Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Decent article and reasonably complimentary about Shankland - don’t really see any reason to get excited about it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debut 4 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours 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. I only saw the first 20 mins and highlights of the game this morning. Based on that, I agree with what you say. I thought Shankland showed he’s not one dimensional or lacking in other parts of his game. He was very switched on, looked sharp in mind and his touch was excellent. He didn’t get caught on the ball and shifted it nice and quick when under pressure. His miss? If you look at it, it was a bit unlucky. The ball lifts off the deck just as he strikes it and that keeps it higher. If it was on the deck I think he scores. Im not making excuses for him. Even great players miss sitters. (Haaland misses 3 or 4 before he gets his goal every week for Peps lot but he gets chances on a plate). He’s a far better package than Dykes but I fear at the 11th hour sentiment could take over Clarke and put him ahead of Shankland at the euros. Football is funny that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
part_time_jambo Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 4 hours 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? I agree. I think some people go out of their way to jump on anything that they see as remotely anti-Hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours ago, MrT said: Hard to argue really. Although I think the subs had more of an impact on what happened next rather than that miss. Exactly! The subs were disastrous. First of all, if Steve Clarke had been Hearts manager at Easter Road, Shanks would have been subbed and no last minute goal. It's a point that I always consider,a top chance taker should be left on, as per that example. Second, he could have mentioned names ref the collapse, e.g. Soutar, but he didn't. We didn't lose the game because Shanks missed. All four goals were down to the defence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 His headline is wrong, for a start. Was he asked to do anything he's not asked to do every time he pulls on a Hearts shirt? Granted I didn't watch the game last night but he works the channels, brings others into play and holds the line for Hearts every single week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrystaf Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours ago, JFK-1 said: Aside from harping on about the miss I see nothing wrong with it, overall, miss aside, he said Shankland had a great game. Indeed. I may be off the mark here but according to john Carver, Shanks is an out and out striker/centre forward and that how Scotland will play him. Bollox. Most of Shanks play is behind where a striker would play, working the channels and bringing other player into scoring positions. Yes when he's in the box he can be a predator , but apart from his goals, his all round play and eye for "a pass" is equally as beneficial. He needs a striking partner to benefit from his play and Scotland is not giving him one...yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone Striker Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 2 hours ago, mscjambo said: The guy is a clown Pretends to be an expert on football and rugby but waffles utter tripe. He epitomises everything that's wrong with scottish football coverage You've obviously never read or heard other football journalists then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAlim Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 It seems like anyone who isn’t a Jambo doesn’t really understand how Lawrence Shankland plays on a regular basis tbh, his link up play is one of his main strengths Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polonia Gorgie Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 12 minutes ago, colinmaroon said: Exactly! The subs were disastrous. First of all, if Steve Clarke had been Hearts manager at Easter Road, Shanks would have been subbed and no last minute goal. It's a point that I always consider,a top chance taker should be left on, as per that example. Second, he could have mentioned names ref the collapse, e.g. Soutar, but he didn't. We didn't lose the game because Shanks missed. All four goals were down to the defence. I totally agree, I think Shankland should have got the full 90 minutes, Dykes and Adams have had countless opportunities now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyCant Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Everyone in football, including Clarke, knows he’s missing that chance maybe once or twice in 100 attempts. Overall I thought he had a good game and got nothing out of Adams when he came on. He’ll still be on the plane and he’ll score at least 3 for Scotland before he gets on it IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brux Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 9 times out of 10 he scores that chance, he is human, apart from the miss he had a good game, move on! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hmfc1965 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, mud and mullets said: That's a throwback! The football media lost their collective minds during the Romanov era. Impartial reporting about Hearts went out the window. I think Tom English has spoken about having a bit of regret about that piece mind you. And well he might. It was a ridiculous article and IIRC he doubled down on it for some time afterwards. I'm nor aware of a single word from him on the behaviour if the Hibs support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphonseCapone Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Nothing wrong with the article, we really do have some sensitive bed wetters in our support. Shankland played well. The article says that. He was excellent at the things that people who don't watch him regularly think he can't do well. The article says that. He missed an absolute sitter by his standards. The article says that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby8 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Just watched the Shankland miss for the first time on the highlights. From all the seethe I'd been expecting to see a miss of Iwelumo proportions ? Yep, he should have scored but ffs let's get things in perspective. 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.