Club like west ham might loan him - He will love that
i know some know him personally... born in romford...so a hammer fan then?
Yeah his Dad was managing a Harold Hill youth i think when i was playing against them, they're definitely all West Ham.
Infact i think Shelvey got in trouble last year for 'inciting' millwall fans at Blackpool when they were giving him gypsy stick, and he gave an Irons sign back.
As much as I like Jonjo as a player, if he were to come on loan we'd have to massively re-jig the entire team to fit him in. Definitely wouldn't want him in the centre of a 4-4-2, so we'd have to switch to a 4-3-3/4-5-1, a formation which probably doesn't get the best out of other players in the team. I expect SCP will stick to his 'hard to beat' mantra this season, and it would be difficult to fit Shelvey into a system which wouldn't leave us open somewhere on the pitch.
But as others have said, I think Rodgers is the perfect guy to get the best out of him.
Watching him last year he seemed to have found a bit of pace, probably because Pool didn't have him charging all over the pitch in search of the ball. He seemed a much more mature player, but had a tendency like his captain to try Hollywood passes that didn't come off. No doubt BR will cure him of that.
May have a Jack Wilshire type loan to a lower Premiership club, I know McEchran did not work out at Swansea but Jonjo could certainly fit in to their style of play for example. Assuming Laudrup continues the Rogers philosophy.
probably because Pool didn't have him charging all over the pitch in search of the ball.
You make it sound like that was what he was being told to do at Charlton. It was totally understandable from such a young player who just wanted to play, but the fact he seemingly wasn't quite mature enough to follow instructions on the pitch was a major reason he wasn't used more (or as much as he should have been) when he was here.
He's coming along nicely at Liverpool though, was surprised he didn't make the Olympic squad.
probably because Pool didn't have him charging all over the pitch in search of the ball.
You make it sound like that was what he was being told to do at Charlton. It was totally understandable from such a young player who just wanted to play, but the fact he seemingly wasn't quite mature enough to follow instructions on the pitch was a major reason he wasn't used more (or as much as he should have been) when he was here.
He's coming along nicely at Liverpool though, was surprised he didn't make the Olympic squad.
I'm not sure Parky had too many instructions on "shape" that was the part of the problem. One of the few positive comments on JonJo was how much ground he covered during a match.
Wasnt it publicised by parky that the whole reason for Jonjo not being played was because of his superior eye for a pass,and the fact other players couldn't see the passes he attempted to make?
I'm not sure Parky had too many instructions on "shape" that was the part of the problem. One of the few positive comments on JonJo was how much ground he covered during a match.
Jesus some people are utter revisionists? What are you talking about Harvey. As soon as Parky came in his whole thing was about shape. Gillespie was a left winger who played on the left, and when we weren't in possession stayed 15 yards from the lb. Burton sat on the center halfs shoulders and didn't try to lose himself in no man's land like Gray.
By the time he got his team together in the first season in league one we were all about shape. That's why Shelvey was so effective in his free role in the midfield five. Once the end of autumn came and winter just made everything that bit more difficult, players were carrying more injuries, we had no pace in midfield and Shelvey became isolated. Then not being near the ball he ran about like a petrified emu, not staying in the central area which was crucial for our counter attacks.
Shelvey may have just been coached badly, but his utter lack of knowledge to play within a formation, looked like the Charlton youth coaches had let him coast too long with his excellent talent and ignore building his tactical diversity.
What's the point of covering ground if you are nowhere near the ball, he had four midfielders behind him solely to provide the platform for him? It is utter idiocy to chase outside of a narrow 20-25 yard radius in front of the oppos defence in that formation. Being able to run around a lot with no purpose is a peculiar English talent for brainless football. Especially when the rest of the team was succesful in adopting their positions that season. Yes we lacked pace in midfield to link, but Shelvey's young bucking rendered that formation dead for winter.
Coversely in a midfield three with tight pacey inside lefts and rights, like Bellamy, Ince, and Phillips makes space for Shelvey and allows him to stay central and get into attacking areas around the box. I'm not sure if playing this way you're not too open in the Premiership with him, but certainly I think he'd beneift offensively under Rodgers and be a player to maximise Suarez's excellent movement in the box.
I'm not sure Parky had too many instructions on "shape" that was the part of the problem. One of the few positive comments on JonJo was how much ground he covered during a match.
Jesus some people are utter revisionists? What are you talking about Harvey. As soon as Parky came in his whole thing was about shape. Gillespie was a left winger who played on the left, and when we weren't in possession stayed 15 yards from the lb. Burton sat on the center halfs shoulders and didn't try to lose himself in no man's land like Gray.
By the time he got his team together in the first season in league one we were all about shape. That's why Shelvey was so effective in his free role in the midfield five. Once the end of autumn came and winter just made everything that bit more difficult, players were carrying more injuries, we had no pace in midfield and Shelvey became isolated. Then not being near the ball he ran about like a petrified emu, not staying in the central area which was crucial for our counter attacks.
Shelvey may have just been coached badly, but his utter lack of knowledge to play within a formation, looked like the Charlton youth coaches had let him coast too long with his excellent talent and ignore building his tactical diversity.
What's the point of covering ground if you are nowhere near the ball, he had four midfielders behind him solely to provide the platform for him? It is utter idiocy to chase outside of a narrow 20-25 yard radius in front of the oppos defence in that formation. Being able to run around a lot with no purpose is a peculiar English talent for brainless football. Especially when the rest of the team was succesful in adopting their positions that season. Yes we lacked pace in midfield to link, but Shelvey's young bucking rendered that formation dead for winter.
Coversely in a midfield three with tight pacey inside lefts and rights, like Bellamy, Ince, and Phillips makes space for Shelvey and allows him to stay central and get into attacking areas around the box. I'm not sure if playing this way you're not too open in the Premiership with him, but certainly I think he'd beneift offensively under Rodgers and be a player to maximise Suarez's excellent movement in the box.
Brilliant pst Colin, I always enjoy your tactical insights as you obviously understand the game.
To me, Shelvey remains in a very dangerous place for a young player, that is still falling in between positions and being neither a true centre midfielder (yet) or a striker, playing in the hole gives you no room for error as a player unless you score goals regularly.
Parky took a lot of stick for not playing Shelvey in the second half of that season but I could see why he changed it, Shelvey was starting to get worked out and did not have the experience to work out how to free himself.
Can't agree Colin. I thought when defending the full backs & wingers stayed too wide when the ball was on the other side of the pitch giving the central midfield too much ground to cover and were easily passed around. When attacking, the defensive four didn't move out and follow the midfield (much like England vs Italy) which cut down the passing options and leaving the players with the ball too isolated, team mates hanging back aware of the huge gaps behind the ball carrier, and fewer passing options. If we had such good shape why were we so poor?
Can't agree Colin. I thought when defending the full backs & wingers stayed too wide when the ball was on the other side of the pitch giving the central midfield too much ground to cover and were easily passed around. When attacking, the defensive four didn't move out and follow the midfield (much like England vs Italy) which cut down the passing options and leaving the players with the ball too isolated, team mates hanging back aware of the huge gaps behind the ball carrier, and fewer passing options. If we had such good shape why were we so poor?
Not fair to say we were "so poor" we finished 4th and only two points off automatic promotion.
Given the paucity of resources - Deon Burton being the main striker - we had a very good year.
Well said Colin, I agree with every word of your post. JJ was also showing a lot of frustration on the pitch as large parts of the game just passed him by.
Can't agree Colin. I thought when defending the full backs & wingers stayed too wide when the ball was on the other side of the pitch giving the central midfield too much ground to cover and were easily passed around. When attacking, the defensive four didn't move out and follow the midfield (much like England vs Italy) which cut down the passing options and leaving the players with the ball too isolated, team mates hanging back aware of the huge gaps behind the ball carrier, and fewer passing options. If we had such good shape why were we so poor?
Not fair to say we were "so poor" we finished 4th and only two points off automatic promotion.
Given the paucity of resources - Deon Burton being the main striker - we had a very good year.
We did have a good year, but I actually rated Deon Burton well. Infact, he would be a brilliant player to have on the bench to play the Paul Hayes role in our current squad.
Can't agree Colin. I thought when defending the full backs & wingers stayed too wide when the ball was on the other side of the pitch giving the central midfield too much ground to cover and were easily passed around. When attacking, the defensive four didn't move out and follow the midfield (much like England vs Italy) which cut down the passing options and leaving the players with the ball too isolated, team mates hanging back aware of the huge gaps behind the ball carrier, and fewer passing options. If we had such good shape why were we so poor?
Not fair to say we were "so poor" we finished 4th and only two points off automatic promotion.
Given the paucity of resources - Deon Burton being the main striker - we had a very good year.
We did have a good year, but I actually rated Deon Burton well. Infact, he would be a brilliant player to have on the bench to play the Paul Hayes role in our current squad.
Very good first touch and holding the ball up.
I probably get slated for saying this but I'd actually have him back (certainly over Hayes and Clarke) or at least have another look at him on trial... had a lot about him (good feet, weight of pass, strong, excellent at holding it up) and the fact that he's old is not so relevant as he didn't rely on pace. I was disappointed when he left.
I wish the lad all the luck in the world. Bumped into him once in Bexleyheath Broadway, was decent enough to stop and chaat for a little bit. Nice lad.
Comments
Infact i think Shelvey got in trouble last year for 'inciting' millwall fans at Blackpool when they were giving him gypsy stick, and he gave an Irons sign back.
he even went to middlesboro away to watch west ham when he was a youth player here
He's coming along nicely at Liverpool though, was surprised he didn't make the Olympic squad.
He might end up loan at West Brom with Clarke going there.
W*nkers
By the time he got his team together in the first season in league one we were all about shape. That's why Shelvey was so effective in his free role in the midfield five. Once the end of autumn came and winter just made everything that bit more difficult, players were carrying more injuries, we had no pace in midfield and Shelvey became isolated. Then not being near the ball he ran about like a petrified emu, not staying in the central area which was crucial for our counter attacks.
Shelvey may have just been coached badly, but his utter lack of knowledge to play within a formation, looked like the Charlton youth coaches had let him coast too long with his excellent talent and ignore building his tactical diversity.
What's the point of covering ground if you are nowhere near the ball, he had four midfielders behind him solely to provide the platform for him? It is utter idiocy to chase outside of a narrow 20-25 yard radius in front of the oppos defence in that formation. Being able to run around a lot with no purpose is a peculiar English talent for brainless football. Especially when the rest of the team was succesful in adopting their positions that season. Yes we lacked pace in midfield to link, but Shelvey's young bucking rendered that formation dead for winter.
Coversely in a midfield three with tight pacey inside lefts and rights, like Bellamy, Ince, and Phillips makes space for Shelvey and allows him to stay central and get into attacking areas around the box. I'm not sure if playing this way you're not too open in the Premiership with him, but certainly I think he'd beneift offensively under Rodgers and be a player to maximise Suarez's excellent movement in the box.
To me, Shelvey remains in a very dangerous place for a young player, that is still falling in between positions and being neither a true centre midfielder (yet) or a striker, playing in the hole gives you no room for error as a player unless you score goals regularly.
Parky took a lot of stick for not playing Shelvey in the second half of that season but I could see why he changed it, Shelvey was starting to get worked out and did not have the experience to work out how to free himself.
Given the paucity of resources - Deon Burton being the main striker - we had a very good year.
As Ormiston said we did very well with the players (particularly the strikers) that we had.
Burton was a good footballer but obviously not a goalscorer.
Very good first touch and holding the ball up.
I read on Wikipedia though that he is on the verge of signing for MK Dons.
wish we had seen more of this...