Northampton Town (A)

[Johnnyrotten]

2 hours ago, DazBob said:

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

Stats such as the tackling one mean nothing in isolation. You don't always have to actually make a successful tackle to slow down/stop an attack.

... And nobody, as far as I can see on here, has suggested anything like your second paragraph says.

I'm not an Erahon fanboy, nor am I a Sheehan hater. I just think we saw enough of the midfield two last weekend to suggest we stick with them.

I'm the same, I've nothing against either player and recognise their qualities and limitations.  Last week v Wigan we were as poor in the 2nd half with EE on the pitch as in any poor performance this season, everyone could see it.  Sheehan came on and we were suddenly passing to a white shirt and maintaining possession.  Then there was the Lincoln 2nd half, and yes that's a different scenario all together (1 down), but he ran the show for 45 minutes, a class above.

So for folk to say its black and white that one player starts every game and the other never starts a game is a head scratcher for me.

[Johnnyrotten]

2 hours ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

They're good but I think when it comes to ability alone, Simons and EE are quite a bit ahead of the other two

I'd have Simons as the best player in home games, not sure what happens to him away. 

EE looked great in his first game v Reading, I've not seen him reach those levels since, but I've seen Sheehan reach those levels.  Morley is quality 90% of the time, if more predictable.  EE can look great then has a bit of a Tomo-esque struggle to get the ball under control quickly, can be a bit cumbersome.  

I've no problem with any of 2 of the 4 being picked as nobody knows which games they are going to be MOM contenders in and which they will be a disappointment - just like the front players.

[desperado]

32 minutes ago, Johnnyrotten said:

I'd have Simons as the best player in home games, not sure what happens to him away. 

EE looked great in his first game v Reading, I've not seen him reach those levels since, but I've seen Sheehan reach those levels.  Morley is quality 90% of the time, if more predictable.  EE can look great then has a bit of a Tomo-esque struggle to get the ball under control quickly, can be a bit cumbersome.  

I've no problem with any of 2 of the 4 being picked as nobody knows which games they are going to be MOM contenders in and which they will be a disappointment - just like the front players.

This is why I get a bit confused with some folk being so categoric and certain in their claims as if it’s obvious or a fact and are in amazement that SS isn’t seeing it the same way with picking some players.

The debate and discussion which looks at “coulds, possibles, maybes” and puts opinion against opinion, is all part and parcel of the pre and post match debate.

But these opinions often presented as facts or fait-accompli are all a bit narrow minded IMO. 

Edited September 28, 2025 by desperado

[gonzo]

First defeat since the opening day and the knives are being sharpened.

Fickle old business isn't it

[little whitt]

4 hours ago, wakey said:

I'll give it 3 games of Erhahon and Simons together in midfield before you're all moaning about it.

Erhahon seems to have become some mythical beast who goes round twatting everyone and winning possession back all over the pitch.

So for context, FOTMOB do player stats (you know, the stuff they actually do).

Here's a comparison of Sheehan and Erhahon per 90 minutes over the last 365 days (comparison with players in similar positions in the same league, higher the% the better).

Touches    Sheehan 81%  Erhahon  60%

Chances created  60%  43%

Shot attempts  71%  4%

Goals  54%  0%

Aerial duals won  18%  50%

Defensive contributions  33%  36%

 

Or if tackling is his great advantage, Erhahon has 0.9 successful tackles per game at success rate of 47.1% vs Sheehan 0.7 at 46.5%.

They're both good players with different attributes, but we're not suddenly impenetrable because we've replaced Sheehan with Erhahon.

Said it before 

Sheehan GT Morley did not get us up 

The other Two will

Dont change a WINNING Team 

 

 

[Johnnyrotten]

36 minutes ago, gonzo said:

First defeat since the opening day and the knives are being sharpened.

Fickle old business isn't it

Playing devils advocate but its not the number of defeats, its the number of points (1.4 a game), number of wins (3 in 10) and points away from home (3 out of 15) that's being debated, nobody's saying 2 defeats in 10 is unacceptable on its own, Wimbledon have lost 4 and are 6th. 

[Johnnyrotten]

7 minutes ago, little whitt said:

Said it before 

Sheehan GT Morley did not get us up 

The other Two will

Dont change a WINNING Team 

 

 

Last time we played Northampton, we'd also had a great win - at Huddersfield.  Everyone agreed it was our best performance for months.  Darby dropped Lolos and JDC, replaced by Tutu and Sheehan, and we won.  Changing a winning team can work too.  Nobody knows how each individual is going to perform on a given day, and how the opposition are going to play.  

[little whitt]

17 minutes ago, Johnnyrotten said:

Last time we played Northampton, we'd also had a great win - at Huddersfield.  Everyone agreed it was our best performance for months.  Darby dropped Lolos and JDC, replaced by Tutu and Sheehan, and we won.  Changing a winning team can work too.  Nobody knows how each individual is going to perform on a given day, and how the opposition are going to play.  

That was Then 

This is NOW 

we are going Forwards 

not Backwards 

[RUREADY2ROLL]

Still pissed off with that defeat; thrown it away again.

Pressure is on now to get a few wins on the trot

[Johnnyrotten]

1 hour ago, little whitt said:

That was Then 

This is NOW 

we are going Forwards 

not Backwards 

Correct that was then, this is now.

Glad we've cleared that up.

[Wanderlust]

6 hours ago, wakey said:

you forgot to say "I like Sheehan but..."

you're slipping.

I do like Sheehan but he has a specific role to play in this set up I.e. coming on as sub when we’re at least two goals up and killing the game.

It sure as hell isn’t breaking up opposition attacks, winning the ball and playing it forward quickly when we need a goal.

[desperado]

5 minutes ago, Wanderlust said:

I do like Sheehan but he has a specific role to play in this set up I.e. coming on as sub when we’re at least two goals up and killing the game.

It sure as hell isn’t breaking up opposition attacks, winning the ball and playing it forward quickly when we need a goal.

Did alright M when he came on at Orient, played a big part in ACD’s goal. 

[Johnnyrotten]

1 minute ago, Wanderlust said:

I do like Sheehan but he has a specific role to play in this set up I.e. coming on as sub when we’re at least two goals up and killing the game.

It sure as hell isn’t breaking up opposition attacks, winning the ball and playing it forward quickly when we need a goal.

That's your opinion.  See @desperado's post above, this putting players in a box and stating one player can only do one thing and another does something different is strange.

I must have dreamt the games when Sheehan played well despite us not being 2-0 up, and even contributed to us scoring goals and winning points.

[ianofcleveleys]

8 hours ago, Johnnyrotten said:

I'm not sure he's had any chances to compare with that one has he? 

No, he hasn't, first time he's had one of those where there's almost too much time. Hopefully next time one comes round the outcome will be different. I think he'll learn from it.

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

To be fair, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up using Sheehan in a role similar to the one described by @Wanderlust

[Johnnyrotten]

3 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

To be fair, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up using Sheehan in a role similar to the one described by @Wanderlust

I'd be absolutely amazed, but we'll see.

I feel like I'm watching a different game, 11 players played below their usual level and yet it seems to be that only one player is the reason we lost.

Anyway, I'm on a high after the Ryder Cup so this fairly pointless discussion is done for me!

[woolli]

9 minutes ago, Johnnyrotten said:

I'd be absolutely amazed, but we'll see.

I feel like I'm watching a different game, 11 players played below their usual level and yet it seems to be that only one player is the reason we lost.

Anyway, I'm on a high after the Ryder Cup so this fairly pointless discussion is done for me!

Closer than anticipated, Yanks putted well! Great win overall though.

[Rival Son]

44 minutes ago, ianofcleveleys said:

No, he hasn't, first time he's had one of those where there's almost too much time. Hopefully next time one comes round the outcome will be different. I think he'll learn from it.

With 50 appearances in the Championship and a couple in the Premier League, I was hoping we’d got someone who’s got some decent experience under his belt. Not some rookie who’s experiencing things for the first time.

[Lostock Whites]

It's fair to say it's our first loss in nearly 2 months and just 2nd of the campaign.

But that would have a lot more substance behind it if we hadn't drawn so many games and weren't 11th, already 9 points behind Bradford and at least with a win on the road after 5 attempts.

I want to be more of a glass half full and I like Schuey and the team he's built so far. But also so far, we have more than valid concerns.

Folk are getting a bit frustrated because we are consistently inconsistent. It's a pattern that is emerging. Odd losses are more than okay, but if you've won 2/3 games before and even a draw in there then that's fine. But so far it's not been good enough.

If this next 10 games we don't see an improvement than the first 10 then concerns will only deepen.

Next 2 games are against 23rd & 24th in the table. We need back to back wins for sure.

Edited September 28, 2025 by Lostock Whites

[Wanderlust]

1 hour ago, Johnnyrotten said:

That's your opinion.  See @desperado's post above, this putting players in a box and stating one player can only do one thing and another does something different is strange.

I must have dreamt the games when Sheehan played well despite us not being 2-0 up, and even contributed to us scoring goals and winning points.

You are 100% correct. It is my opinion.

[Wanderlust]

1 hour ago, desperado said:

Did alright M when he came on at Orient, played a big part in ACD’s goal. 

So you agree he should be used as a late sub then?
As I recall he came on for JDC in the 80th minute in that game shortly after we brought on two strikers and Cessoko to throw the kitchen sink at it to get a late equaliser which we finally did in the 94th minute.

Yes he got an assist at Orient (a backward pass as it happens) but by that stage we had abandoned defence and everyone was camped in their half. 
But he did a good job coming on at the death against Wigan to stifle their attempted comeback too.

Both scenarios are entirely different from sacrificing the second pivot and letting him start the game as Schumacher did against Northampton -  and later admitted he’d got it wrong.

I agree with the earlier comment about “not putting players in boxes” but all players have strengths and weaknesses and if you don’t play to their strengths and in a role that suits them, you are heading down the road of playing folk out of position which ends up where? TSL up top?

 

[Tombwfc]

14 hours ago, Zico said:

Especially when you're the dominant team 

Win at home, draw away, and you'll go up 

Just need to stop conceding first and more clinical up top 

Plenty time yet

 

If we won every home game and drew every away game from now onwards we'd finish on 86 points. You probably wouldn't go up with that. The last team with that number of points that did go up was us, nearly a decade ago.

There's time, but not an endless amount. And every bad result makes the job harder. 

[Krimzon]

late to the comments digesting the game . 

10 games in and our first woeful performance of the season that we would have won if we had taken our chances . 

Strange how missing an absolute sitter can wobble the entire team but weve seen it before with Charles a dozen times. 

If we were playing crap I would be worried but , until Northampton , we have been the better side in every game so far . The results will come if its just a bad day at the office which happens to everyone .  Rather everyone have a wank performance in one game than sporadically over a combination of games shared about. 

Think The gaffer got the tactics wrong changing the midfield but live and learn and a great opportunity to put in another wiginesque performance on Saturday .  Still very positive for the season ahead . 

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

7 hours ago, Johnnyrotten said:

I'd be absolutely amazed, but we'll see.

I feel like I'm watching a different game, 11 players played below their usual level and yet it seems to be that only one player is the reason we lost.

Anyway, I'm on a high after the Ryder Cup so this fairly pointless discussion is done for me!

I'm not pinning the blame on Sheehan

I've thought he might end up in that role since before yesterday

[desperado]

15 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

So you agree he should be used as a late sub then?

No, not should, could/can.

I’m more in agreement with@Johnnyrotten which emphasises the point I made earlier, should suggests that’s it, final, it’s all he’s good for now.

The fact that he can do this is a good option.

But starting games and contributing to good performances and playing well like he did against Plymouth may still very well mean he starts more games when required.

Like @wakey said I’m happy to leave it to SS and trust there’s good reason (which even for fans is easy to see if we look hard enough) for whichever role Sheehan is given.

Edited September 29, 2025 by desperado