Tactics Under Maresca

[Lillehamring]

21 hours ago, MancFox24 said:

Said the same thing after the Huddersfield game when I thought Warnock targeted Doyle. Don't know what's going on with JJ bit if he's anything like he was before his injury then I'm struggling to see why he doesn't get in this team

He's nothing like he was before his injury. 

 

I don't understand why people are so keen to make changes in our defence -  we've played 5 games and conceded 4 goals - one a deflection, one a worldie, one off a corner and one where we really should have prevented it.  Realistically this is an entirely new back four and we have the 6th lowest xGA in the league.  Give them time, improve our ball recovery further up the pitch and we'll be extremely hard to score against, especially if coady raises the level by his return.

[Lillehamring]

22 hours ago, Tielemans63 said:

Completely agree with this. However, one small worry, if I'm being really honest, is that I haven't seen much variation in tactics so far (to some extent we haven't needed it).

 

I get that consistency of style and tactics is key, however, in a game like today's, all we did was change personnel, we didn't do anything different to unsettle Hull.

 

With 10 minutes left, when the formation hasn't really worked, why not go two up front and play more direct, see what happens (for example). That might sound a bit Mike Bassett but it was a pretty comfortable 90 minutes for Hull. They were happy to give us the ball, let our wingers huff and puff and then just defend their box. 

 

I've been impressed with Enzo so far but I thought he should have taken the handbrake off when it was clear this one was drifting away from us. 

by two up front i assume you mean keep nacho on with vardy?

I'm not sure that would have made any difference - apart from the fact that nacho only managed 1 shot in 67 minutes, a lack of attacking options wasn't the problem - from the time vardy came on to the final whistle we had 10 shots, and 7 shots after the 80th minute, that's a ridiculous amount - the tactics were fine, the problem was that of those 10 shots, 5 were wide, 5 were blocked.

[Strokes]

I just care about winning football, I don’t care if it’s intricate I don’t care if it’s hoofball. I don’t care if it’s more or less possession, what Xg it is. I just like winning football all colours and creeds.

So far he has 6 wins in 7, that’s pretty good in my book and buys him a decent amount of slack.

[StriderHiryu]

4 hours ago, foxfanazer said:

You can't have an objective conversation on this forum anymore because any slight criticism of the club or areas for improvement are jumped on by the same old posters who deny any problems exist. Was the same under Rodgers too. Complete and utter denial of any issues. 

 

Nobody's calling for Maresca's head are they? They're simply pointing out that this kind of result was due after the nature of some/all of our wins this season. Certain players really struggle with ball retention and our creation of high end chances are slim. Choose to ignore it all you like but there's discussions to be had

Agree with you here, we should all try and be a bit more objective on all things. 
 

To be a bit more constructive, for me the thing the team need to work on are it’s ability to sustain attacks. For the layman, that’s the term for keeping the pressure on inside the same passage of play. We did make chances, but if we missed them the attack was over. To really get good we need to make it so that we have 3/4 chances in the same passage of play to ramp up the pressure. That means keeping the ball for long periods in attacking parts of the pitch. This will also make the defence better too because there will be fewer opportunities to get caught on the transition. 
 

So far we’ve only conceded four goals and some of those were a bit fortunate. But at the same time our expected goals are low. So even though we put Hull under pressure, it’s not like a game of Football manager when the opposition keeper makes 4-5 world class saves in one game. If we can get better at sustaining attacks, the goals will come. 
 

Just remember that getting a team to the level where they can consistently sustain attacks does not happen overnight. 

[moseeds]

20 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I just care about winning football, I don’t care if it’s intricate I don’t care if it’s hoofball. I don’t care if it’s more or less possession, what Xg it is. I just like winning football all colours and creeds.

So far he has 6 wins in 7, that’s pretty good in my book and buys him a decent amount of slack.

1980s terraces called. They miss you.

[foxfanazer]

5 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

Agree with you here, we should all try and be a bit more objective on all things. 
 

To be a bit more constructive, for me the thing the team need to work on are it’s ability to sustain attacks. For the layman, that’s the term for keeping the pressure on inside the same passage of play. We did make chances, but if we missed them the attack was over. To really get good we need to make it so that we have 3/4 chances in the same passage of play to ramp up the pressure. That means keeping the ball for long periods in attacking parts of the pitch. This will also make the defence better too because there will be fewer opportunities to get caught on the transition. 
 

So far we’ve only conceded four goals and some of those were a bit fortunate. But at the same time our expected goals are low. So even though we put Hull under pressure, it’s not like a game of Football manager when the opposition keeper makes 4-5 world class saves in one game. If we can get better at sustaining attacks, the goals will come. 
 

Just remember that getting a team to the level where they can consistently sustain attacks does not happen overnight. 

Great post. It will take time and he should definitely be afforded that. He's been served a massive shit sandwich so 4 wins out of 5 is admirable to say the least. Yesterday could work out to be a welcome wake up call

[Chrysalis]

21 hours ago, RowlattsFox said:

What's plan b so far? 

There isnt one, every manager who plays this way will just say its patience and the good result will come.

[Chrysalis]

20 hours ago, murphy said:

I wonder if what;s happening to Burnley at the moment could be a glimpse into the future for us.

 

A team that walked this league, led by a Pep disciple and trying to play that expansive brand of football in the PL and getting whupped every week.  

 

If we do manage to get promotion this year I hope there is a plan for next year.

Thats my fear and expectation yes.

 

Winning this way when it works looks pretty to watch, but without top class players, its harder to play and leaves vulnerability at the back, its especially prone to player mistakes as it needs more passes without interruption to get a goal scoring chance.

 

Top wants us to play this way, so it will be continued in the EPL if we get promoted.

[Chrysalis]

19 hours ago, Pliskin said:

I didn’t think it was that bad…

 

Once Wilf came off, and Akgun came off we started to open them up a bit more and create more chances. 
 

What we’ve got to do is cut out the poor goals. The goal today was dreadful, it was far too easy, and to me it just screamed a lack of leadership, Vesty has been alright, but he has no leadership about him, he doesn’t command the back line…. 
 

We don’t concede that and we could have gone on to Nick the game. 
 

It’s fine margins, we are a work in progress. What we can’t do is start getting on the back of Enzo, there’s enough evidence to see that eventually this style will come good. Big two weeks now. 

We are soft at the back, but if more clinical it also wouldnt have mattered, we had enough time on the ball to win this 3-1.  Both ends need sorting out.

[Strokes]

18 minutes ago, moseeds said:

1980s terraces called. They miss you.

I miss them too, less pretentious pricks back then.

[Royston.]

5 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

So you have decided the tactic and players aren't good enough after 7 games, where we have won 6 and lost 1.

That's you saying that for me.

 

If you don't agree with my opinion fine but don't make stuff up.

[lfu]

2 hours ago, Chelmofox said:

You said no reason, but he must be able to explain why? Surely just can't hate him for existing. The man is beautiful. Got to at least appreciate his smile.

 

I'm not seeing hatred around me, but just unrest at not being able to break the teams down more easily. I think after so much time of Brendan ball (and its ultimate relegation) has made people a little weary of this strategy. Until is clicks, people are going to be restless. 

I've heard a few funny remarks, none with much substance behind them. One said Maresca is a repeat of Claude Puel. Another said "it's all the same with these foreign managers playing pif-poof rubbish" and suggested replacing Enzo with Martin O'Neill. I think I heard someone say they didn't understand why we weren't playing Mendy as well 

 

At the end of the day it's just a refusal to accept new ideas and understandings have developed since the 1970s "kick it to the big man to knock it down to the quick one" football they know and love, and the more they're exposed to different styles of play the more angry they become because "their" football has been "taken away from them".

[iancognito]

59 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

He's nothing like he was before his injury. 

 

I don't understand why people are so keen to make changes in our defence -  we've played 5 games and conceded 4 goals - one a deflection, one a worldie, one off a corner and one where we really should have prevented it.  Realistically this is an entirely new back four and we have the 6th lowest xGA in the league.  Give them time, improve our ball recovery further up the pitch and we'll be extremely hard to score against, especially if coady raises the level by his return.

You cannot underestimate this. Yes there's been a couple of times where strikers have missed straightforward chances from our mistakes but most teams aren't getting near our goal apart from set pieces. There was a lot of praise for Hull yesterday but I didn't think they were any better than Rovrum or Hudds going forward.

[CloudFox]

1 hour ago, Lillehamring said:

I don't understand why people are so keen to make changes in our defence -  we've played 5 games and conceded 4 goals - one a deflection, one a worldie, one off a corner and one where we really should have prevented it.  Realistically this is an entirely new back four and we have the 6th lowest xGA in the league.  Give them time, improve our ball recovery further up the pitch and we'll be extremely hard to score against, especially if coady raises the level by his return.

Completely agree on this. I don't think defence is our issue at all. Coady in for Vestergaard to provide more leadership at the back, and our back six (Mads through Winks) is sorted. We're giving away some clear chances at the moment, but that will tighten up with time. Forward areas are where the most work is needed.

[coolhandfox]

7 hours ago, Royston. said:

Losing like they did yesterday was always going to happen and will happen again and again because Enzo won't change tactics and the players aren't good enough.

 

Just got to collect enough points to stay in and around top 6 and recruit in January.

 

6 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

So you have decided the tactic and players aren't good enough after 7 games, where we have won 6 and lost 1.

 

1 hour ago, Royston. said:

That's you saying that for me.

 

If you don't agree with my opinion fine but don't make stuff up.

You sure? 

[filbertway]

17 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

 

You sure? 

Looks to me like hes said the players aren't good enough to play the way Maresca wants.

 

Not that tha tactics and players aren't good.

 

Quite a difference between the two

 

[sbfox]

2 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

We are soft at the back, but if more clinical it also wouldnt have mattered, we had enough time on the ball to win this 3-1.  Both ends need sorting out.

Soft at the back? We've conceded very few goals full stop and even fewer preventable ones. Once Coady comes back, we should have one of the best back 5s in the league. 

[Tom12345]

23 hours ago, SecretPro said:

My only criticism is I can't understand why Casadei isn't starting games yet. He's an infinitely better option than Wilf in that role. Are we starting Wild out of some sort of misplaced loyalty? I hope not because I expect Enzo to be better than that. 

 

KDH is killing us in transition. Cumbersome with the ball at his feet and far to slow to play the pass.

 

Other than that, I'm sticking with it. 

Good point about KDH. He is far too slow in transition.

[Tom12345]

Just now, Tom12345 said:

Good point about KDH. He is far too slow in transition.

Wilf as well. Not just slow, but makes the wrong pass at wrong angles and often underweight.

[dynamark]

Except we are playing a back 3 .Needed 4 on saturday to lighten up the space on the outside

[ClaphamFox]

3 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

Hull are 6th - it's hardly an equally poor result.

We lost though, Leeds drew. If Leeds had lost it would clearly have been a worse result, but I think their point makes the two performances approximately comparable. 

[cropstonfox]

4 hours ago, Claridge said:

Any decent manager and decent team will cause us problems, the system is just so open and doesn't really create many clear cut chances. Wasting Ricardo doesn't help

Spot on, potentially the best wing back in the Championship height used in a anonymous role!

[Tom12345]

2 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

Agree with you here, we should all try and be a bit more objective on all things. 
 

To be a bit more constructive, for me the thing the team need to work on are it’s ability to sustain attacks. For the layman, that’s the term for keeping the pressure on inside the same passage of play. We did make chances, but if we missed them the attack was over. To really get good we need to make it so that we have 3/4 chances in the same passage of play to ramp up the pressure. That means keeping the ball for long periods in attacking parts of the pitch. This will also make the defence better too because there will be fewer opportunities to get caught on the transition. 
 

So far we’ve only conceded four goals and some of those were a bit fortunate. But at the same time our expected goals are low. So even though we put Hull under pressure, it’s not like a game of Football manager when the opposition keeper makes 4-5 world class saves in one game. If we can get better at sustaining attacks, the goals will come. 
 

Just remember that getting a team to the level where they can consistently sustain attacks does not happen overnight. 

Partly, but we are also too slow in building up plays and too slow in transition allowing the opposition to set up defensively. We need to attack at pace and keep going forward. Even though our movements are better these days, our decision making is often poor: we choose to pass back instead of the risky forward pass. 

 

Also KDH and Wilf are both poor transition players. KDH often gets the ball trapped under his feet and then takes too much time to pass it on. Wilf, needless to say and while he may have good ideas in his head at times, is just technically not good enough with his passes often too long, too short, at wrong angles, and that is if he manages to control the ball in the first place.

Edited 3 September 2023 by Tom12345

[Cadno'r Cymoedd]

He is building a new way with a new squad and I'm conditionally happy to date despite yesterday's setback. But what I don't get is his insistence on Ndidi playing in that forward midfield role. He lacks nearly all the attributes needed and I'm flummoxed why Enzo can't see that. 

[Guest glasgowfox]

18 hours ago, CaliFOXnia said:

What’s your French like now, and how longs it been..? 

Abysmal.....U Grade at O level, OK we are doomed