The Wall - stick or twist?

[TheBigIguana]

To a point we are getting lucky (I presume you mean on Xg) but I actually think we are Burnleying Xg and it's flaw in the model. On the one hand we give lots of low xg chances away that we defend narrowly with and block very well. We also concede crosses which again have limited impact. In a lot of ways, both the Wolves and Leicester goals are actually quite unlucky, 1 goes under about 4 players and against Wolves it dissects 3 defenders where was it about an inch off in any direction one gets a touch. The counter of course is if you concede such a high number of shots from range, eventually one finds it's way through.

At the other end, DCL & Richarlinson in open play, and Mina/Keane off corners are very good in the air, and Xg seems to under estimate headed opportunities. The 2 Dom/Richarlinson had yesterday will be low chances, but knowing their abilities they should be higher. We also have Gylfi and especially James who are more likely to score from distance.

So yes, someof it is luck, a lot of it I think are flaws of Xg. It's interesting that the game we overpowerformed Xg most was Burnley but it wasn't a game you came away from thinking we'd dominated. Wood missed a couple of great headed chances for him. Brady scores a goal from distance and Burnley block a load of crosses/shots.

Part of it is the stats. Part of it is Wolves, Chelsea and Arsenal all hit the post in games we won by a single goal.

 

[canuckblue]

Could use another brick. Just sayin'.

 

[catcherintherye]

Because it just kind of is. I mean I've watched back some old 80s classic games and teams just play completely differently. I don't know how much NBA you know but it's still basketball now the same way football is but if teams tried to use 1980s NBA strategies now they'd be helplessly looking on as the opponents hit 30 three pointers and won by 50. I think football is really similar in its level of evolution.

For me the lesson we should take from moneyball is more on a recruitment front. I bang on about that in the transfer threads more than enough. Yeah finding revolutionary ideas tactically wouldn't hurt but for me dropping deep and being solid isn't really that.

Atletico are very defensive yes, but they score too. The lowest total for goals under Simeone is still in the 50s. Our recent attacking would not get us there over a whole season I don't think. So balance wise we still have to tweak what we're doing and for me the easiest tweak is just get Digne back in at LB.

There's no doubt football has evolved, it's quicker, stronger etc. But the principles are the same, it's attack v defence, but all the players are now bigger and stronger. I mean in essence formations in real terms haven't changed that much, we just call them different things. David Beckham would probably do the same things he did 25 years ago for Manchester United, but would line up at rb not rm. Midfielders are expected to sit a lot deeper now and protect defence more, to compensate, whereas that was more the terrain of fullbacks etc.

The issue is, it's not an onward march to a particular idea set. It becomes cyclical. There have been times when more defenisve innovations have come in, as well as more offensive innovations. There's absolutely nothing to say the next innovations won't be having fullbacks who go back to defending (partly to compensate for more wide forwards essetnially being attackers). From a defensive shape standpoint, it makes a lot of sense.

The stuff about competing is partly true in recruitment, but it's also about how you play. You won't beat Manchester City emulating what they do. They have the best coach in the world to do that, and the most money in the world. Christ knows we've tried it, under successive managers. Unfortunately given our position, we are in the terrain of looking at what others do, and spotting their weaknesses, rather than thinking of a plan ourselves (and to me it's no surprise this is where we've had most "success" under Carlo, as hes good at this).

The only team, outside of the top group to win the league in the past 20 years were Leicester, who sat deep, and hit on the break, while relying a bit on moments of genius from Mahrez. Atletico and Spain much the same. I'm not saying it's the only way to win, but it's probably the most logical option presently.

 

[catcherintherye]

Part of it is the stats. Part of it is Wolves, Chelsea and Arsenal all hit the post in games we won by a single goal.

Yes, it's a game of fine margins. I mean Wolves effort grazed the outside of the post. We are not good enough to win loads of games and not be a bit lucky. That wil be true however we play.

 

[catcherintherye]

I disagree. I think you're talking about it as if you can just keep the defensive side of things exactly the same and change what we do going forward but you can't do that, it's literally not possible. Attacking and defending are two sides of the same coin; the more onus we put on the attacking players to create the less they can get back into shape and help out the defence, getting Richarlison 'back to form' won't be easy if we're asking him to get up and down the pitch for 90 minutes and don't have an overlapping full back for him to link with etc etc.

Yes probably true. There moght be an argument that we play him more centrally as a striker. Weight up the cost benefit analysis of how many more goals do we get V what do we lose defensively. That would be the sort of smart thing I'd look to do. Can you play Gomes in midfield instead of Davies who can carry it better etc.

As I think I said earlier my views on the attacking side would be;
1) Get DCL match fit (which we can do)
2) Keep James fit (partially reliant on luck)
3) Get more out of Richarlinson.

How far you can do the 3rd, without sacrificing whayt he gives us defensively is a fair question. I think what you say is certainly a part of it. I do think, for whatever reason his ability to dribble and get shots off has been a bit affected this season.

In fairness to you and your "side" of the argument, getting DCL match fit and essentially using him as an out ball to win free kicks once we get ahead is unlikely to get him scoring lots more. If I'm brutally honest, if we can keep goals down to less than 1 a game, I'm willing to sacrifice offensive play this season. That seems the best chance we have to get to the top 4, rebuild again in the summer and probably re-calibrate the approach.

 

[TheBigIguana]

There's no doubt football has evolved, it's quicker, stronger etc. But the principles are the same, it's attack v defence, but all the players are now bigger and stronger. I mean in essence formations in real terms haven't changed that much, we just call them different things. David Beckham would probably do the same things he did 25 years ago for Manchester United, but would line up at rb not rm. Midfielders are expected to sit a lot deeper now and protect defence more, to compensate, whereas that was more the terrain of fullbacks etc.

The issue is, it's not an onward march to a particular idea set. It becomes cyclical. There have been times when more defenisve innovations have come in, as well as more offensive innovations. There's absolutely nothing to say the next innovations won't be having fullbacks who go back to defending (partly to compensate for more wide forwards essetnially being attackers). From a defensive shape standpoint, it makes a lot of sense.

The stuff about competing is partly true in recruitment, but it's also about how you play. You won't beat Manchester City emulating what they do. They have the best coach in the world to do that, and the most money in the world. Christ knows we've tried it, under successive managers. Unfortunately given our position, we are in the terrain of looking at what others do, and spotting their weaknesses, rather than thinking of a plan ourselves (and to me it's no surprise this is where we've had most "success" under Carlo, as hes good at this).

The only team, outside of the top group to win the league in the past 20 years were Leicester, who sat deep, and hit on the break, while relying a bit on moments of genius from Mahrez. Atletico and Spain much the same. I'm not saying it's the only way to win, but it's probably the most logical option presently.

The Leicester team still had a much better balance than we currently do.

I mean yes it is cyclical. Essentially teams have reinverted the pyramid. I know it says City are playing 4-3-3 or the RS the same but in reality they have a shape that sort of turns into a 2-3-5 when at their best. And yes maybe going fully defensive is the way to beat that in time but so far it kind of hasn't been. The examples are few and far between. Atletico who we discussed are still one of the best attacking teams in Spain even if they take a defensive stance. We have to do more going forward.

 

[TheBigIguana]

Yes, it's a game of fine margins. I mean Wolves effort grazed the outside of the post. We are not good enough to win loads of games and not be a bit lucky. That wil be true however we play.

Imo it really wasn't true early in the season. Maybe we were a tad lucky to draw the RS but other than that we earned our points with top performances. To me that is less true since the start of December.

It's tough though because we genuinely do need to be healthy to do that. But we might be soon so at that point I'd like to see Carlo try to get back to the more forward thinking set ups.

 

[catcherintherye]

Imo it really wasn't true early in the season. Maybe we were a tad lucky to draw the RS but other than that we earned our points with top performances. To me that is less true since the start of December.

It's tough though because we genuinely do need to be healthy to do that. But we might be soon so at that point I'd like to see Carlo try to get back to the more forward thinking set ups.

I think we rode the crest of a wave and came crashing down after those first 4 games. We will not create that many chances.

 

[barneygumble]

Footy isn't played on paper.

We just don't play with a back three well. There's no balance.

Against certain teams or in certain moments, yes, but Mina and Keane do not work together in a back three. Both can only play in the centre of the three so would have to be Holgate and Godfrey either side. Also puts a lot of onus on Allan and Doucoure.

Have we all just forgotten how bad we were in a back three, bar about 15 minutes against Fulham?

Completely forgot about Holgate.

I don’t want a team without Iwobi in it, and I don’t want a team without the excellent Holgate, Keane or Godfrey either.

We lack pace so Iwobi, Godfrey or Digne should not be left out so only solution is 5 at the back or Iwobi in midfield for me, to he at our most effective.

 

[TheBigIguana]

I think we rode the crest of a wave and came crashing down after those first 4 games. We will not create that many chances.

I disagree with that. DCL is still a top striker. James is still James. Digne is the best attacking fullback in the league (do one Robertson). Richarlison is whatever Richarlison is but when he's playing well he is objectively a threat. And for me if we use Iwobi on the right we have a threat there too. That's a side that can score goals and to me with the right set up be plenty secure at the back as well.

For me at our best we have an attack that rivals anyone in this league currently. The issue really is can we find the right balance in the middle, and I'm honestly not sure Allan and Doucoure will ever be that balance, to let them do their thing.

 

[Lanolin]

Yes probably true. There moght be an argument that we play him more centrally as a striker. Weight up the cost benefit analysis of how many more goals do we get V what do we lose defensively. That would be the sort of smart thing I'd look to do. Can you play Gomes in midfield instead of Davies who can carry it better etc.

As I think I said earlier my views on the attacking side would be;
1) Get DCL match fit (which we can do)
2) Keep James fit (partially reliant on luck)
3) Get more out of Richarlinson.

How far you can do the 3rd, without sacrificing whayt he gives us defensively is a fair question. I think what you say is certainly a part of it. I do think, for whatever reason his ability to dribble and get shots off has been a bit affected this season.

In fairness to you and your "side" of the argument, getting DCL match fit and essentially using him as an out ball to win free kicks once we get ahead is unlikely to get him scoring lots more. If I'm brutally honest, if we can keep goals down to less than 1 a game, I'm willing to sacrifice offensive play this season. That seems the best chance we have to get to the top 4, rebuild again in the summer and probably re-calibrate the approach.

Yeah I can see where you're coming from. Personally I don't think we get near top 4 playing like this. Apart from anything I think it's too mentally and physically tiring for the players. We don't have a big squad and we're basically asking our attacking players to put a massive shift in staying switched on and getting back to help out defensively week in week out. I don't think it's sustainable. Nor do I think we'll get away with it (for want of a better phrase) forever. At some point your shots from outside the box with your wrong foot that clip the inside of the post stop going in, and your set piece deliveries stop being bang on the money etc. That's just opinion obviously, but to me it feels like a long while since there was a league game where I'd have thought it was a travesty if we didn't win, and at some point I think that comes back to bite you. If it doesn't, great, but I just don't see it myself.

I'd also be a little bit concerned that if we keep playing like this longer term then Digne and Richarlison decide it's not for them. Even Godfrey isn't likely to want to stay at left back for too long, he won't be asking for a move but he might start to get a bit annoyed. I've said before, it's a difficult balancing act, i'm not for a minute suggesting it's easy to just start playing differently. It's easier to win games playing this way, we know it is we've done it for years under Moyes and then Allardyce, its what Burnley, Palace etc do, there's nothing remarkable about it. I think it only takes you so far though, so at some point I want to see us be a bit braver.

 

[catcherintherye]

Yeah I can see where you're coming from. Personally I don't think we get near top 4 playing like this. Apart from anything I think it's too mentally and physically tiring for the players. We don't have a big squad and we're basically asking our attacking players to put a massive shift in staying switched on and getting back to help out defensively week in week out. I don't think it's sustainable. Nor do I think we'll get away with it (for want of a better phrase) forever. At some point your shots from outside the box with your wrong foot that clip the inside of the post stop going in, and your set piece deliveries stop being bang on the money etc. That's just opinion obviously, but to me it feels like a long while since there was a league game where I'd have thought it was a travesty if we didn't win, and at some point I think that comes back to bite you. If it doesn't, great, but I just don't see it myself.

I'd also be a little bit concerned that if we keep playing like this longer term then Digne and Richarlison decide it's not for them. Even Godfrey isn't likely to want to stay at left back for too long, he won't be asking for a move but he might start to get a bit annoyed. I've said before, it's a difficult balancing act, i'm not for a minute suggesting it's easy to just start playing differently. It's easier to win games playing this way, we know it is we've done it for years under Moyes and then Allardyce, its what Burnley, Palace etc do, there's nothing remarkable about it. I think it only takes you so far though, so at some point I want to see us be a bit braver.

I think the debate is probably closer than peope might first think. I'm certainly of the view, it's highly unlikely that long term we keep this back 4 (unless than can keep up this 0.5 goals per game against over a prolonged period) which I doubt. I mean it's the cavaet thats worth saying, I don't want us playing it August 2021.

So we are essentially at a debate about about when we move away from it? What do we consider "long term" essentially.

To a degree we are riding our luck, but the phrase I'd be happier with is we look to maximise any fortune we get. That seems right to me, but as you say over time we have to get beyond that. Thats probably the difference between 2005 and now, we have the funds and investment to hopefully do that and won't take another 2-3 years to get past the likely dip that would occur if we never moved from this approach.

The essence of the debate here and now, is to me we drop a CB, move Digne to LB and probably Iwobi comes in? Iwobi V Holgate/Godfrey. In one scenario you prioritise defensive stability and understanding, the other you prioritise having attacking players in more comfortable positions. I suppose I keep the defensive stability, until either the end of the season, or until we start conceding again and it's easy to move way from. If we get to the season conceding less than 1 per game, we acknowledge our luck and probbly celebrate a great season. If we start conceding there is then an easy move.

As I indicated, people on different sides are probably a lot closer on this than we might think. If we were 10th I'd be advocating what you are, which is we arebetter boxing off a sustainable long term option. But if we could get our way into the CL, however furtiously it would be massive for the club in the summer. That being said, we might concede 3-4 at Leeds =, get worked out and it gets knocked on the head, and I doubt anyone would complain at that point.

 

[Vaughan]

I think we can also overplay our frailty defensively at times, and the best way to defend in principle is to be dangerous with the ball and make the other team fear us, to be able to keep the ball and make our possession dangerous. Ironically playing with such caution can cause the ball to go stale and unable to get it up the pitch, making us susceptible to a counter and to invite pressure. Ie if Holgate has it and cant progress the ball so we jsut move back to Mina, back to Pickford, long kick and they then turn over the ball and attack

We camped on our box for 30 minutes of the second half then broguht on Iwobi and created 3 or 4 chances in the final 15 with more progressive attacking play and looked less likely to concede.

Digne and someone like a Lamptey or Aarons would be good enough defensively to not need a 'wall' - and would ensure the other team has to think more cautiously against our attacking wing backs.

Look at the best teams, they dont really need to defend because they dominate the ball and also intimidate the opposing team into playing more defensively and offering less of a threat. That's what we should be aiming towards

 

[Zezti]

Unless we get an actual right back in, we'll have to keep it as it is.
Club doesn't seem to see the need though

 

[BlueToff]

Completely forgot about Holgate.

I don’t want a team without Iwobi in it, and I don’t want a team without the excellent Holgate, Keane or Godfrey either.

We lack pace so Iwobi, Godfrey or Digne should not be left out so only solution is 5 at the back or Iwobi in midfield for me, to he at our most effective.

Mina has probably been our best defender for about two months now too.

It's a difficult one, but a nice problem to have. Main thing is having a midfield that can cover for advancing full-backs, as we saw at the start of the season by and large.