Sheils?

[Drover]

Anybody heard anything as to why he was struggling in the first half,so bad has to get subbed at half time?.I like him alot and when he's on form I think he's our biggest threat to score after Billy but last night he just was'nt at the races.Has he got a niggling injury?Did he struggle with visibilty in the Snow?He looked disheartened aswell,hope SOD n ROK can give him a pick me up.

[stockyboy]

Might have been struggling from his injury still, he was poor last night but then again no-one was out standing.

[Branton Rover]

Beg to differ on that score I felt Oster gave a virtuoso midfield performance he carried the ball, hardly ever lost possession, one moment sticks out in my mind he took the ball to Wellens dropped his shoulder & slalomed passed Richie as if he wasn't there, the lads quality

[TheRev]

Isn't it great how we all see the game differently  

I thought he was poor. Neshed some tackles, slowed down attacks and gave the ball away too often.

But who am I?  

[ferribyrover]

Oster. The new Copps? In the sense that he can be very good, but often fails to deliver. JO is a wimp in the tackle, can be outmuscled, gives the ball away cheaply, doesn't score. When Rovers passing game is on song both JO and JC tend to play well. Or is it that when JO and JC play well the Rovers tend to play well?

[BillyStubbsTears]

ferribyrover wrote:

Oster. The new Copps? In the sense that he can be very good, but often fails to deliver. JO is a wimp in the tackle, can be outmuscled, gives the ball away cheaply, doesn't score. When Rovers passing game is on song both JO and JC tend to play well. Or is it that when JO and JC play well the Rovers tend to play well?

Bang on.

I said to our kid after about 10 minutes last night that we really needed big games from Coppinger and Oster to have a chance.

Neither of them had a good game. We didn't have a chance.

[Ryan B]

Ignoring the debate about JO + JC... Shiels in the first half tried a fancy flick in the opposition area (fair enough) but it didn't work, and Shiels just stood, displaying his disappointment as losing the ball, as Leicester attempted to break.

He should have ran back, tried to win the ball back and not just stand there. He should have done what Hayter does - got stuck in. That for me is why Hayter replaced him at half time.

Effort is the very least a player can give.

[MrFrost]

Branton Rover wrote:

Beg to differ on that score I felt Oster gave a virtuoso midfield performance he carried the ball, hardly ever lost possession, one moment sticks out in my mind he took the ball to Wellens dropped his shoulder & slalomed passed Richie as if he wasn't there, the lads quality

Please tell me your not being serious?

[The Red Baron]

ferribyrover wrote:

Oster. The new Copps? In the sense that he can be very good, but often fails to deliver. JO is a wimp in the tackle, can be outmuscled, gives the ball away cheaply, doesn't score. When Rovers passing game is on song both JO and JC tend to play well. Or is it that when JO and JC play well the Rovers tend to play well?

Strikes me that we have too many of the same type of midfielder. Skilful enough, but not very strong and not particularly addicted to tackling or playing box to box. Coppinger, Oster, Shiels, Spicer- they're all much of a muchness. To me, that is the reason why Wilson gets in so often, because he's prepared to do the dirty work.

Maybe once Woods is fit, he and Stock will give the midfield  more of a combative edge.

[rtid88]

These are the kind of players that SOD buys because that is the kind of football he likes to play. Wilson been the exception! But when it works its breathtaking and when we get a team with a game plan like Leicester did on Tuesday it simply doesn't and we struggle to break teams down.

Oster, Sheils & Copps are absolutely awesome players when they have time on the ball, but are not so comfortable when closely marked and will go missing in games or simply back out of challenges.