Tactics Under Maresca

[Mike Oxlong]

To my untrained eyes it seems that we have three modes of play 

 

a) pass it around to move the opposition about, probe, use width but limited in risk taking and therefore chance creation. We have a lot of possession but not the amount of chances that it could create. The defenders and DMs see more of the ball than anyone else in this type of play

b) as a) but with more purpose at chance creation. Example of this was in the period after half time where we tried more often to thread balls through for runners particularly in and around the box. We lose possession more but are more threatening and given our ability at winning back possession this style does not seem unduly risky in giving up chances to the opposition 

c) as a) but with an intermediate level of chance creation due to the opposition chasing a goal but also a higher level of chance concession, in part due to the opponent taking more risks and committing more players forward but also at times being self inflicted through our casual mistakes

 

I think if we deployed b) more often we could score 6 or 7 in some games as the players and technical ability at this level are so good. 

 

I’ll scurry off to the understairs cupboard now before I get pelters referencing how many we score and how few we concede 

[StriderHiryu]

Regarding Plan B... there isn't one really. It's just that the team is getting better at executing our style of play. Whilst in general it tends to be very patient, we have been trying certain patterns like crosses from the touch line, long passes into space, etc.

• Be the protagonist in the game
• Control the tempo of the game by having the majority of possession
• Generate numerical superiorities across the pitch
• Find the free man who is available because of our superiorities
• Play the ball into the spaces left by players vacating their positions to deal with the free man

That's our style of play. We can play a long ball over the top, because when we did that for Patson Daka against Plymouth, he lured his defender into our third, meaning we had a 2 on 1 with Fatawu and Daka when Hermansesn played the ball over the top. For Daka's goal against Millwall, Ndidi is the free man, who finds space in the pockets (half-space), Winks plays him in, and the execution of the cross was superb.

 

Even against QPR which is the only time we have put two strikers on the pitch, we did that because they defended with 5 at the back when their man was sent off. So Enzo put another striker on briefly to go 6 v 5 against their defence. You could say that was Plan B, but it wasn't really!

[An Away Move]

3 hours ago, TaggertvsWise said:

It’s not rotten it’s just that some do not enjoy a possession based ‘wear teams down’ approach as it’s not so entertaining. Some prefer lightning counters, crash bang wallop with a bit of edge to it all. Nothing wrong with that, everyone is different. 

Except, as I said, we do still do lightning fast counters. Maybe we should give the ball away more often so we can have more of them?

[bmt]

I think our style would work really well in the prem, especially against the mid table teams.

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, Mike Oxlong said:

To my untrained eyes it seems that we have three modes of play 

 

a) pass it around to move the opposition about, probe, use width but limited in risk taking and therefore chance creation. We have a lot of possession but not the amount of chances that it could create. The defenders and DMs see more of the ball than anyone else in this type of play

b) as a) but with more purpose at chance creation. Example of this was in the period after half time where we tried more often to thread balls through for runners particularly in and around the box. We lose possession more but are more threatening and given our ability at winning back possession this style does not seem unduly risky in giving up chances to the opposition 

c) as a) but with an intermediate level of chance creation due to the opposition chasing a goal but also a higher level of chance concession, in part due to the opponent taking more risks and committing more players forward but also at times being self inflicted through our casual mistakes

 

I think if we deployed b) more often we could score 6 or 7 in some games as the players and technical ability at this level are so good. 

 

I’ll scurry off to the understairs cupboard now before I get pelters referencing how many we score and how few we concede 

Plan A is early in the game to both tire and frustrate the opposition, then you shift to a more attacking game.

 

Fairly happy with this as it seems to be working against nearly all strategies.

[cityfanlee23]

Tactical masterclass in the second half, the changes to overload them were brilliant, another good result, just hope we can clear up these moments where we tend to fall asleep in defence, our defensive record is pretty wild yet 3-4 times a match we seem to let through really sloppy errors. 
 

I missed the first 30 mins and sounds like I was lucky too but thought for the rest of the match we looked good

[Plastik Man]

14 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

Talking about this on Beyond the 90 now.

 

Changes at half-time:

- Pushed Ricardo forwards because Millwall were playing a back 5. So he wants a superiority against their defensive block, hence making it 6 v 5. This is why we blew them away so quickly.

- Changed the 8's round because Millwall brought on a sub because one of their players got booked, and they change the preferred foot of their outside CB's in the defensive 3.

- Changed the pressing trigger to target the players booked, so they were more likely to give the ball away. Means they have to more rash in their passing, meaning we win the ball more often.

 

Will write-up more later, but those changes murdered them.

It's not the first time Enzo's moved Ricardo further forward to ensure the overload, not sure of the game, was it QPR?

 

I did notice KDH and Wilf had switched in the second half, and didn't it prove effective! 

 

I've no idea if they've switched before? I haven't noticed it in earlier games.

[AjcW]

I found the second half really interesting, especially after watching his coaches voice video.

 

We seemed to change from the square of 4 in the middle to spreading 4 across the width of midfield, with 3 up top to just completely overload and trap them.

[StriderHiryu]

44 minutes ago, Plastik Man said:

It's not the first time Enzo's moved Ricardo further forward to ensure the overload, not sure of the game, was it QPR?

 

I did notice KDH and Wilf had switched in the second half, and didn't it prove effective! 

 

I've no idea if they've switched before? I haven't noticed it in earlier games.

He did it against Preston, because they had been playing 5 at the back in their previous 10 games.

 

What did they do against us? Played 4 at the back

 

So he moved Ricardo BACK from an attacking midfield role in the second half and we slapped them.

[Aleksz]

Don’t let people tell you there’s no plan B. There is - it’s just subtle changes of positions and the zones players take up. A plan b doesn’t have to necessarily entail two strikers, or complete changes of formation, or even putting Harry Souttar upfront.

 

What we saw last night and in the above clip is an Enzo’s plan b, c, d, whatever. And it worked. 

[Mike Oxlong]

5 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Plan A is early in the game to both tire and frustrate the opposition, then you shift to a more attacking game.

 

Fairly happy with this as it seems to be working against nearly all strategies.

I know, but like this chap I prefer option B 

 

 

 

[foxes_rule1978]

3 hours ago, Aleksz said:

Don’t let people tell you there’s no plan B. There is - it’s just subtle changes of positions and the zones players take up. A plan b doesn’t have to necessarily entail two strikers, or complete changes of formation, or even putting Harry Souttar upfront.

 

What we saw last night and in the above clip is an Enzo’s plan b, c, d, whatever. And it worked. 

Generally you want to keep your system and make minor tactical/positional changes to react to the opposition, major changes can instantly back fire for many reasons. 

[Lillehamring]

22 hours ago, Daggers said:

I reckon this side would have battered last season’s Rodgers effort. 

With Ward in goal, that's pretty much a given.

[Chelmofox]

2 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

With Ward in goal, that's pretty much a given.

Don’t forget the dream team pairing of Amartey and Evans. 

[Lillehamring]

22 hours ago, honeybradger said:

It is a bit worrying that we struggle to make things happen with KDH and Mavididi on the left. As much as i do like KDH, Ndidi seems to be much better at finding space to receive the ball and he works better off our wingers as a result of it.

 

Hopefully with less teams sitting deep against us next season KDH will have more opportunities to get Mavididi into the game.

I think you perhaps aren't fully appreciating what they do:

 

Shot creating actions per 90 - KDH is ranked 7th in the league, mavididi 21st, fatawu 28th, ndidi 65th

Goal creating actions per 90 - Ndidi is ranked 3rd , KDH 4th, fatawu 11th, mavididi 13th - in the league!

 

So I wouldn't exactly say we struggle.

[Lillehamring]

14 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

We are lucky to be seeing the football we are, our story second only to Ipswich this season, but as effective as our style is some just crave excitement\entertainment. 

 

Quite enjoy the style myself and two huge pluses this year that are undeniable in that we have two things we have been missing for years, a defined style and a right winger! 

 

The hardest thing to fathom is why people aren't being entertained, after 21 games in 2013 we'd scored almost 25% fewer goals. even in 2015 we'd scored 3 fewer!

What on earth is more exciting or entertaining than scoring goals!

[Lillehamring]

13 hours ago, brookfox said:

Aren’t they essentially the same thing? Plan A was to create an overload with our attacking five vs their back four. As Enzo said they played with a back five which nullified us so our Plan B was to attack with a six to create the overload. Essentially the same but responding to the opposition.

 

It was like against Plymouth when going a bit longer had some joy. Normally it wouldn’t work but Plymouth played a very high line (which was either naïve or just stupid btw!) so it was a tactic that worked.

 

Feels like we have a set Plan A and footballing philosophy but Enzo is savvy enough to tweak match tactics based on the opposition line up. Increasingly of the opinion the guys a footballing guru!

Exactly - and because, more often than not plan A has worked, with a match day tweak here and there, it's very seldom  that we've seen anything as "drastic" as the change he made at Millwall. Most of the critics on here can't see that but think that switching to some wonderful plan B will make us suddenly more watchable or better or something.

[Lillehamring]

13 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

He's definitely become more savvy the more experience he's gained.

Earlier on in the session we'd have likely stuck at our original plan and just tried hacking away. 

 

Last night he kept to his core philosophy of how he wants to play football, but tweaked the system to overload. 

I think that's also because the team are now comfortable with the basics we were managing with early in the season, now he is able to change things - as he said, they're still not in a place where they can do that mid half, but they are advanced enough to do it at half time.

[Lillehamring]

13 hours ago, TaggertvsWise said:

It’s not rotten it’s just that some do not enjoy a possession based ‘wear teams down’ approach as it’s not so entertaining. Some prefer lightning counters, crash bang wallop with a bit of edge to it all. Nothing wrong with that, everyone is different. 

But we do that as well! 

We showed in the post 15/16 seasons that relying on that type of football is unsustainable and yet people seem to imagine this is the ne plus ultra of entertaining football - and it's not even doable unless you want to be plymouth.

[UniFox21]

Noticed today Wilf was playing slightly further forward, so when we countered we'd always have 3 or 4 breaking through.

 

Concerned with how we're almost getting too cocky with the ball at times, and conceding stupid goals or large defensive lapses. 

[Chrysalis]

@StriderHiryu what do you think of enzo ball 2.0 last 3 games?

[funkyrobot]

1 minute ago, UniFox21 said:

Noticed today Wilf was playing slightly further forward, so when we countered we'd always have 3 or 4 breaking through.

 

Concerned with how we're almost getting too cocky with the ball at times, and conceding stupid goals or large defensive lapses. 

Tbf we missed about 4 absolute sitters. Fatawu had his 50p boots on, Daka had his 20p boots on and Butch Casadei had his  cowboy boots on 

[LVFox]

With a better final ball we score 5 or 6 there. I'm convinced the system is incredible and the players are good.

 

Really interested to see if we could become a ball playing counter attacking side next year. The front 3 all having pace has made us look electric in the last few games.

[StriderHiryu]

9 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

@StriderHiryu what do you think of enzo ball 2.0 last 3 games?

[SecretPro]

Elite. Showing he can mix it up. Can't wait to see how he adapts to the prem.