Brek Shea - The New Scapegoat

I must be!! No didn't get yesterday, but have seen enough of Cywka to know that's well harsh. His solo effort against Charlton away was as vital a goal as any scored last season. If that's pea heart, then measure me up right now cos I'm having one!!

I don't know why you are sticking up for Shea. Interesting haircut yes, but all other signs point towards towards an unsuccessful loan. It happens. He might set the premiership on fire one day, but he's contributed nothing to our campaign.

 

Funniest post of the week.

 

So he scored a vital goal 14 months ago?

Not done much to help us in our current plight.

 

What?

Isn't he our 2nd top goalscorer? Despite his irregular appearences?

 

Cyzka and paddy are classed as inconsistent because they don't track back or create goals every time they play , seems crazy to not have either in team , as our results without them in team arnt good

 

He did well yesterday off the bench. The change in formation meant we played better too.

I don't know if he's a scapegoat but I laugh when I read some of the comments on here writing him off from people who've seen him no more than 7 times.

Scouts watch players more than that before making a decision on them so God knows why people on here are writing him off on so little evidence.

I've even seen folk writing Lawrence off after 3 sub appearances. Barmy

 

Scored three goals which all came in defeats.

Not my definition of a vital goal.

 

Apart from the other one which was in a draw...

 

You mean the shot that was going wide until it hit an Ipswich defender.

More points this season from goals by O'Brien.

 

Go with what the record books say matey. Can't quite see how it's a goalscorers fault if his team mates can't keep a clean sheet. Sure you'll enlighten me. I'm no Shea hater but sum up for me as an attacking player exactly what he's done in an attacking sense for us since he joined without using the word nothing.

 

On your reckoning we should picking Paddy given his goals have achieved wins for us. It's not quite that straight forward is it. Tompole has had more of an effect on matches than Shea it's impossible to argue otherwise without looking daft. Doesn't mean it'll always be like that but thus far it is. Looks like a loAn that's not quite coming off so far to me. No harm no foul as they say.

 

What do you think of Cywka's serial diving? Everytime he gets in the box you know what's coming, immensely frustrating player IMHO, could be so much more if he stayed on his feet.

 

I am absolutely gobsmacked that, given your record for attaching derogatory names to players and managers you dislike gives you the credibility to chose the the name for this thread Brek Shea - The new Scapegoat. If ever there was a poster in search of a scapegoat, then that poster is you.

Nevertheless, Brek Shea would have been my choice to bring on in that position in order to defend a 1 - 0 lead. If we had been behind by the same score, then McCort or Cwyka would have had stronger claims, but the circumstances dictated the substitution. Shea certainly has not impressed as yet. He lacks confidence and bravery, possible consequences of his long term injury. However, he does have pace, and that threat of pace is what kept the Millwall full back honest.

 

I like Cywka. He's direct, has good technique, and a strong shot in them boots. But yes, he's a little lightweight on occasions, and sometimes tries too much, especially when starting a game.

I've nothing against Brek Shea. But on the evidence I've seen, he's either not very good, or he's playing well below his usual standard (which has only been seen in the MLS, and apparently he was very erratic over there). It looks like there's a player in there, I think. And he'll get my backing whenever he's selected.
But it's my opinion that Paddy and Tomski are better footballers.

 

On balance, I agree, from the evidence both Tomas and Paddy have contributed more than Brek has. Between the 3, I'd start with Paddy, 2nd choice would be Cywka and Brek would be 3rd choice, but I also agree that whenever he plays I hope he proves me wrong and scores or sets up some goals because he does look to have some skills!

 

That's me too, Wakey. I'm desperate for him to come good.

 

Aye me three I'd live him to start playing like he sometimes momentarily looks capable of.

 

From what I've seen so far, I prefer Cywka as an impact sub and I reckon McCourt has more to offer both from the start and as a sub. However, we were 1-0 up, we weren't chasing a goal and we needed someone who would both attack and defend down the right wing. Shea did both. He didn't do anything special when he came on, but he was up with play when we were on the attack and he tracked the full back when we were defending. He did exactly what Wilson sent him on the field to do. Maybe, if we'd brought on McCourt, we would have gone on to win 2 or 3 nowt. But it's also possible he would have let the runner go and we would have drawn the game 1-1. If we'd been drawing or losing and I'd seen Shea instead of McCourt I would have been disappointed. As it was, I could see why we made the substitution we did and at the end of the game it proved to be the right one.

On a similar note, I thought Dawson was the wrong choice yesterday. I was pretty disappointed when I heard the substitution over the Tannoy as I made my way back to my seat. As it turned out, I was miles off. Dawson was great, exactly what was needed and a couple of backwards passes aside, one of his best ever performances for us.

Having said all that, you accusing others of having a scapegoat is a bit rich.

 

This ones definitely a wind up.

That said, you do seem to like players who give little effort but wears flashy boots which means they have ability.

 

To be fair he did create a very good chance for O'Grady.