We play from the back....

M

Matt Stevenson

First Team
Hi all,

I caught up on the last two EFL on Quest yesterday (Championship games only) and would estimate that about 1 in 6 of goals scored were due to a serious defensive blunder. Whilst I don't want to play hoofball as a default, have the Championship sides been seduced by Guardiola style possession and playing through the lines?

If I was writing a computer programme to analyses ways to maximise the chance of winning then I'd expect 'prohibiting passing around the back unless it was practically certain there couldn't be a goal conceded' would be in the final solution. With the goal on Saturday, even if Jefferson had got to Mepham's ball first, then he would still have been tightly marked and probably needed to have gone back to Mepham or Begovic, for them to boot it long. Why take the unnecessary risks of the extra two passes.

Can anyone think of any goals that have come directly from playing a 'risky' ball in our defensive third? I can remember one glorious move this season where we almost scored, but not much more (although my memory isn't perfect). I acknowledge that we may indirectly concede from losing possession from a long clearance, but I'd still rather their centre back has it, than their centre forward.

Am I just a footballing luddite, or I am being pragmatic? If someone does know the stats related to this (at our level, not at Champions League) then I'd be v interested to see them.

UTCIAD

Matt
 
Playing out from the back requires movement off the ball and the ability to control and pass first time. All about using triangles of team mates to make space.by moving the ball quickly.

Rolling the ball sideways to someone stood still and already marked is a bad idea.
 
For me it comes down to decision making. Open your eyes and play to what is happening in front of you. Is the opposition pressing high? Are your team mates creating the space for a pass? Was that last pass a little too close for comfort?

I think it's great that we can hold onto possession at the back, but I don't think it should be the default position against all teams or scenarios. Decision making is key. I don't know whether we are having that instinct coached out of players, whether they are that tactically unaware or if it's just their "comfort zone" when low on confidence.
 
The thing is, the kids at the club are being taught that it's this way or the highway. This is why we need a manager for now and the future and not just a stop gap. We need a manager/ coach who is going to instill his methods of play from top to bottom. The kids are still being coached Eddie's way and the first team squad are presumably being coached Woodgates way ? This is all hunky dory until we try to push one of the youngsters into the first team squad and then he is getting mixed messages. The club has no long term direction, it's being run day to day by people who are making things up as they go along.
 
I'm happy that Max doesn't et involved, but I'm really bemused by the CEO maintaining a record of near silence on anything outward facing. It really does seem shambolic. I guess Max is happy with him, but I don't really think he does anywhere near enough to justify his title.
 
Are we still singing that song? Needs some revision: "We play backwards from the back ... we don't have an attack..." (Six midfielders and one aging forward on Saturday - grrr...).
 
Second or third goal in the 4-2 win at Birmingham in the first Championship season is a perfect example of how it works well - if someone knows how to find it.

That was the day I thought, enjoy this moment, this could be the best it ever gets.
 
...and yet we are only 1 goal short of being second top scorers in champ! Beat Cardiff tomorrow and we are second.

truth is we still dream of those goal robots
 
I would prefer we play more direct passing from the back, and save the tiki taka stuff for the final third. We have players that are quite good at passing from deep (L.Cook, Lerma) and we can be quite effective when we move it quickly upfield, even if, shock horror, the ball leaves the ground while we do it. We're so laboured when we play from the back, most teams have an age to set up to defend once Kelly has finished passing it sideways for 3 minutes.
 
Runnerrunnerru said:
I would prefer we play more direct passing from the back, and save the tiki taka stuff for the final third. We have players that are quite good at passing from deep (L.Cook, Lerma) and we can be quite effective when we move it quickly upfield, even if, shock horror, the ball leaves the ground while we do it. We're so laboured when we play from the back, most teams have an age to set up to defend once Kelly has finished passing it sideways for 3 minutes.
Click to expand...
To defend Kelly , no point playing it forward if you don’t have options .
I believe all of our players apart from danjuma come towards the ball and want it to feet ,
When you have 2 up top , one looks for the ball to get whilst the other makes a run behind the defence , giving players more options
 
Matt Stevenson said:
Hi all,

I caught up on the last two EFL on Quest yesterday (Championship games only) and would estimate that about 1 in 6 of goals scored were due to a serious defensive blunder. Whilst I don't want to play hoofball as a default, have the Championship sides been seduced by Guardiola style possession and playing through the lines?

If I was writing a computer programme to analyses ways to maximise the chance of winning then I'd expect 'prohibiting passing around the back unless it was practically certain there couldn't be a goal conceded' would be in the final solution. With the goal on Saturday, even if Jefferson had got to Mepham's ball first, then he would still have been tightly marked and probably needed to have gone back to Mepham or Begovic, for them to boot it long. Why take the unnecessary risks of the extra two passes.

Can anyone think of any goals that have come directly from playing a 'risky' ball in our defensive third? I can remember one glorious move this season where we almost scored, but not much more (although my memory isn't perfect). I acknowledge that we may indirectly concede from losing possession from a long clearance, but I'd still rather their centre back has it, than their centre forward.

Am I just a footballing luddite, or I am being pragmatic? If someone does know the stats related to this (at our level, not at Champions League) then I'd be v interested to see them.

UTCIAD

Matt
Click to expand...
If you set out let's say to score 3 goals, even then most of what you do with 50% + possession won't result in a goal. If you decide to give up 5% of the possession that you would otherwise have then that should theoretically increase the chance of conceding or decrease opportunities to score.

I think most on here though know that the key is variation. If the opposition knows you only ever pass it out they can press in ways to cause pressure and still keep defensively solid. Equally, if you only lump it forward then you drop back for the second ball. Hence, I think we are at our best when we are not predictable and mix it up.

I would like every one of the back 4 to have a rehearsed clearance, that isn't an aimless hoof forward, but where they play either a ball down the line or preferably a cross field ball. That way the forwards can anticipate the clearance because they spent time targeting where it goes.
 
ChampagneCherry said:
If you set out let's say to score 3 goals, even then most of what you do with 50% + possession won't result in a goal. If you decide to give up 5% of the possession that you would otherwise have then that should theoretically increase the chance of conceding or decrease opportunities to score.

I think most on here though know that the key is variation. If the opposition knows you only ever pass it out they can press in ways to cause pressure and still keep defensively solid. Equally, if you only lump it forward then you drop back for the second ball. Hence, I think we are at our best when we are not predictable and mix it up.

I would like every one of the back 4 to have a rehearsed clearance, that isn't an aimless hoof forward, but where they play either a ball down the line or preferably a cross field ball. That way the forwards can anticipate the clearance because they spent time targeting where it goes.
Click to expand...


Agree with the need for a pre-arranged default escape ball for each defender that would allow us a better chance of retaining possession / pressurising the opponents more quickly. Also agree that variation in general is a good thing, but not in potentially suicidal areas - this shouldn't be considered unless we are better, have more confidence, and are 2 or 3 goals up. There's nothing in this league that I've seen to make me overly concerned if a handful of times a game we take the safety first option and boot it down the pitch. (to a pre-designated area).

I guess what frustrates me most about the Mepham incident is that the potential gain was so small, and the risk so large, that I cannot fathom how it was ever thought to be a good decision. It was likely to delay the 'boot' downfield by 2 passes and was never beating the press to allow us to run at them (something you could say about Raya's mistake at Brentford)

As an aside, Mepham has come across well in interviews with children, and seems a genuinely nice guy. But he needs to reduce the glaring mistakes considerably before he gets back in the team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;