Tactics Under Maresca

[Chrysalis]

On 03/09/2023 at 18:57, sbfox said:

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. 

Teams are not needing many attempts to score, look at our shots to goal ratio compared to our opponents, we still soft at the back.

 

When we attacking our opponents always seem to get a body in the way, always seem to have everyone marked in the box, but when teams attack us there is often gaps.  I hope that explains my comment.

Edited 6 September 2023 by Chrysalis

[Dan LCFC]

13 hours ago, CWLCFC said:

7 games in. 6 wins, 1 loss and some of you have already turned on him because he doesn’t play hoof-ball.

 

Absolutely unbelievable.

This is a perfect example of the lack of nuance at times. There are valid criticisms to be had, my main gripe is simply we still aren't really creating many chances, but that doesn't equate to "please sack him and appoint Tony Pulis". The same way we in 2013/14 and 2015/16 we didn't have 30% of the ball a game as has become accepted orthodoxy on here.

 

If Maresca was happy with how we'd played so far I'd be fairly concerned. Thankfully I don't think he is - the hint I get anyway.

[foxinsox]

I would like to see the goalie play it long every now and then, even if playing out from the back 90% of the time, 

 

It raises the anxiety levels of the opposing team, and sometimes catches them too far upfield. 

 

[SafewayFox]

9 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

• Harry Winks has 10 caps for England. Has played Champions League football and won man of the match against Real Madrid at the Bernabeau.
• Ricardo Pereira has 7 goals for Portugal, and has played in a major international football tournament.

Are these players not good enough to play the system and style of football that Maresca wants from us? Or can only Brighton do it?

 

I think your point is way off 😛 !

 

 

Touché but it was merely calling out your slight disrespect to Gross that I highlighted.

 

Maybe I waded in at the wrong point as Winks is clearly head and shoulders above the whole league technically.

 

What do you genuinely think is Ricky P’s best position at the stage in his career as he hasn’t just lost a yard of pace but more like 3 yards - it was a tad concerning see Vinagre skin him so easily.

[LCFCJohn]

14 hours ago, CWLCFC said:

7 games in. 6 wins, 1 loss and some of you have already turned on him because he doesn’t play hoof-ball.

 

Absolutely unbelievable.

 

 

Erm…where is anybody actually saying this?

 

Seems like a hyperbolic post to get some likes to me.

 

I have admittedly not read the thread in full detail due to being busy at work and home etc but I’ve seen nobody suggest they have turned on him or advocate for hoof ball as you call it.

 

At most, I have seen some mention ourselves in 2015/16 so can only presume you class our way of playing that season as ‘hoof ball’?

[Mike Oxlong]

We can play Maresca ball but still use the quick counter attack when the opportunity presents

 

It seems with years of pass and build we’ve forgotten how to use the counter attack either effectively or at all 

[Bob Weasel Fox]

With any formation it is still the ability of the players both individually and collectively to make it work 

[Oldblueyes]

There's no problem with an occasional hoofball, ask Vardy when he played against Liverpool.

[Ric Flair]

16 hours ago, jerry said:

Rodgers accused of not having a Plan B and feel Maresca is so set on his philosophy that it's unlikely he has the will or experience to change.

He's been vindicated vs Coventry, Huddersfield, Cardiff and Rotherham for sticking with his philosophy. We won the games late on. 

 

I've been guilty in the past of demanding other styles of play being implemented in games but there's also the risk that if you're very open to changing that you do it too often and are worse as a result from not being strong enough at one way of playing.

 

In time I'd like to see him develop solutions that he can spot in games and have coached his players to know how to implement it successfully.

[StriderHiryu]

3 hours ago, SafewayFox said:

Touché but it was merely calling out your slight disrespect to Gross that I highlighted.

 

Maybe I waded in at the wrong point as Winks is clearly head and shoulders above the whole league technically.

 

What do you genuinely think is Ricky P’s best position at the stage in his career as he hasn’t just lost a yard of pace but more like 3 yards - it was a tad concerning see Vinagre skin him so easily.

Let's call a truce! Pascal Gross is a great player, but he was signed from Ingolstadt in Germany and had a relatively uneventful career. He's proof that you don't need to have world beaters to have a system where players play out of an attacking press. Not everyone can do it (Wilfred Ndidi), but you don't have to have a team that costs hundreds of millions of pounds to play the way Maresca is trying to get us to do.

 

Riccy P's best position is probably at right full back, pushing up to support the attack, even if he's slower than he used to be. But I've been impressed with him in his new role, he's playing it really well IMO. He's made some great passes, that Praet 1 on 1 chance from the Huddersfield game was because he played a killer first time pass through the lines. I'm pretty sure playing the position is why he's still with us, Nice were linked with a loan move for him, which he could have pushed for if he wanted it. I could see by Christmas him excelling in the role and him being better in that position than at full back, I think he has the attributes to pull it off, even in the Premier League.

 

[Lillehamring]

9 hours ago, Dan LCFC said:

This is a perfect example of the lack of nuance at times. There are valid criticisms to be had, my main gripe is simply we still aren't really creating many chances, but that doesn't equate to "please sack him and appoint Tony Pulis". The same way we in 2013/14 and 2015/16 we didn't have 30% of the ball a game as has become accepted orthodoxy on here.

 

If Maresca was happy with how we'd played so far I'd be fairly concerned. Thankfully I don't think he is - the hint I get anyway.

No, not really - whilst it's understandable to point out and comment on areas where we can improve and things that we a re doing wrong - it isn't fair to voice these as criticism as some people are doing.  i know it's a fine line, but there is a distinction between the two attitudes.

Criticism should be saved for when we play below the standard we are capable of, right now we are playing at a level well in advance of what is reasonable to expect after such a short period of redevelopment and redirection.

[Lillehamring]

8 hours ago, foxinsox said:

I would like to see the goalie play it long every now and then, even if playing out from the back 90% of the time, 

 

It raises the anxiety levels of the opposing team, and sometimes catches them too far upfield. 

 

Hermansen is averaging 3.5 long balls per game, a little below faes and a distance behind Doyle (who leads the team with 5.2).  So, whilst there is scant place in the tactics to launch it long, there is a small long ball quality to our game.

The three main reasons it isn't part of a game are:

1. Because it instantly reduces the chance of retaining possession, if we don't have the ball, says Enzo, how can we score?

2. Because teams are sitting fairly deep against us, a long ball plays it straight in to that condensed defending.

3. Because we aren't blessed for height - only ndidi and casadei are much use in winning aerial balls.

[Lillehamring]

7 hours ago, Mike Oxlong said:

We can play Maresca ball but still use the quick counter attack when the opportunity presents

 

It seems with years of pass and build we’ve forgotten how to use the counter attack either effectively or at all 

Being able to move the ball in a quick counter is one of expected outcomes of Maresca Ball.  It's not going to be the same kind of counter attacking that we saw in 15/16 (Thought we definitely can do that - see liverpool pre-season) - but already we've see fast breaking, first time passing counter attacks.

[Mike Oxlong]

1 hour ago, Lillehamring said:

Being able to move the ball in a quick counter is one of expected outcomes of Maresca Ball.  It's not going to be the same kind of counter attacking that we saw in 15/16 (Thought we definitely can do that - see liverpool pre-season) - but already we've see fast breaking, first time passing counter attacks.

Fair point. Maybe it’s because I didn’t see much on Saturday but that could be because Hull sat deep after scoring or because I blinked and missed it 

[Lesta Legend]

10 hours ago, Dan LCFC said:

This is a perfect example of the lack of nuance at times. There are valid criticisms to be had, my main gripe is simply we still aren't really creating many chances, but that doesn't equate to "please sack him and appoint Tony Pulis". The same way we in 2013/14 and 2015/16 we didn't have 30% of the ball a game as has become accepted orthodoxy on here.

 

If Maresca was happy with how we'd played so far I'd be fairly concerned. Thankfully I don't think he is - the hint I get anyway.

Enzo has on several occasions confirmed that we at the early part of our journey and from memory said we're perhaps 20% (unsure if that is the exact figure is what he said) progress wise. I wouldn't expect us to be second when you manager is saying we no where near where he wants us to be. Can he get us where he wants us to be with ultimately promotion as the goal is of course up for discussion and will remain to be seen.

 

Some posters on here have provided nuanced / balanced points (like you) and there is plenty of room for reasoned debate, can we do better, very much so (!) and I am sure Enzo would totally agree. But there are a few on here that seem overly emotional and don't seem to like Enzo or his style no nuance whatsoever, 6 out of 6 they moaned but now with one loss that's all the ammunition they need and their off, their so fcking boring and they'll be called out for it.

 

I for one couldn't stand Rodgers and his passing around the back four and creating no chances whatsoever amongst so many negative aspects of his reign. With the huge changes, players in and out, implementation of a different play style, while trying to change the mentality of a broken dressing room (club top to bottom for that matter) I think Enzo has done better than what I thought, I didn't really want him, I wanted to Hutter. My assessment is with done well without blowing anyone away, you can see the glimpses of the type of football we'd like to see and I have faith that we will continue to improve. Sticking to the system we're implementing is exactly what we should be doing, regardless of what non experts think.

 

I hope Enzo starts picking Casadei ahead of Ndidi though and getting that right wing working (IMO Abdul) will see our progressive forward play stats on the higher side and hopefully this translates into more shot ON TARGET and the goals will follow.

[Dan LCFC]

3 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

No, not really - whilst it's understandable to point out and comment on areas where we can improve and things that we a re doing wrong - it isn't fair to voice these as criticism as some people are doing.  i know it's a fine line, but there is a distinction between the two attitudes.

Criticism should be saved for when we play below the standard we are capable of, right now we are playing at a level well in advance of what is reasonable to expect after such a short period of redevelopment and redirection.

You've just defined exactly what I mean. Pure semantics. I'd sooner read actual debate on aspects of our game than the excruciatingly dull moaning about moaning (of which there is far more of than actual moaning) which as correctly pointed out earlier up just screams of somebody begging for likes.

 

I'm really not sure I agree with the bit in bold either. I'd have taken this points tally if offered it but we are playing opposition we are vastly superior to. Our wage bill probably beats the five teams we've played combined. Like I said though I think Maresca sees it similarly to this as well.

[Lillehamring]

2 hours ago, Mike Oxlong said:

Fair point. Maybe it’s because I didn’t see much on Saturday but that could be because Hull sat deep after scoring or because I blinked and missed it 

I mean it's not happening that often simply because we are playing most of the time relatively high up the pitch against teams that are sat relatively deep.

The thing we have to learn about maresca's style of football, is that it's very subtle - it's all in the details, which a lot of our home fans will be absolutely incapable of comprehending!

[Lillehamring]

51 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

You've just defined exactly what I mean. Pure semantics. I'd sooner read actual debate on aspects of our game than the excruciatingly dull moaning about moaning (of which there is far more of than actual moaning) which as correctly pointed out earlier up just screams of somebody begging for likes.

 

I'm really not sure I agree with the bit in bold either. I'd have taken this points tally if offered it but we are playing opposition we are vastly superior to. Our wage bill probably beats the five teams we've played combined. Like I said though I think Maresca sees it similarly to this as well.

Well, yes, but just because it's semantics doesn't mean it isn't relevant - this thread is possibly the calmest most balanced thread on the forum, where generally the debate is really healthy, people will (as i defined) raise issues with our tactics and, less relevantly but still interestingly, the performance of the players and manager within the tactics; so when, especially after a game, posters swoop in and start wildly throwing about criticism without reference or reason  - we are shit, maresca is shit, we're going to start plummeting down the league etc - then it really stands out. By the same token, the post that started this (we've won 6 of 7 etc) didn't really add anything to the ongoing tactical discussion and was rightly tutted at.

 

Maybe there is a little snobbery in this thread because, by and large, as i say, it is a genuinely constructive and reasonable thread, where people ask questions and people answer and things are discussed - and so perhaps there is an inclination to police it ourselves, it's already pretty long after just 7 games, and i suppose some posters are determined to try to keep things constructive and on topic....

 

As for my suggestion that we are playing above our level, the point is that we have almost an entirely new squad, playing a new system, we're not playing brilliantly, but, again, tactics! - we seem to have taken on board and developed at a very encouraging rate compared to what most people would have predicted or expected.  That our players cost more and earn more is immaterial at this stage - a low budget team that is used to playing together can outperform an expensive team that is still trying to learn a new system or how each other likes to play or, in our case, both factors.  At bottom, as the saying goes, we can only beat the team in front of us, and so far we've done ok in that respect - the next few games will be an interesting barometer of our progress and the quality of our squad.

[Dan LCFC]

2 hours ago, Lesta Legend said:

Enzo has on several occasions confirmed that we at the early part of our journey and from memory said we're perhaps 20% (unsure if that is the exact figure is what he said) progress wise. I wouldn't expect us to be second when you manager is saying we no where near where he wants us to be. Can he get us where he wants us to be with ultimately promotion as the goal is of course up for discussion and will remain to be seen.

 

Some posters on here have provided nuanced / balanced points (like you) and there is plenty of room for reasoned debate, can we do better, very much so (!) and I am sure Enzo would totally agree. But there are a few on here that seem overly emotional and don't seem to like Enzo or his style no nuance whatsoever, 6 out of 6 they moaned but now with one loss that's all the ammunition they need and their off, their so fcking boring and they'll be called out for it.

 

I for one couldn't stand Rodgers and his passing around the back four and creating no chances whatsoever amongst so many negative aspects of his reign. With the huge changes, players in and out, implementation of a different play style, while trying to change the mentality of a broken dressing room (club top to bottom for that matter) I think Enzo has done better than what I thought, I didn't really want him, I wanted to Hutter. My assessment is with done well without blowing anyone away, you can see the glimpses of the type of football we'd like to see and I have faith that we will continue to improve. Sticking to the system we're implementing is exactly what we should be doing, regardless of what non experts think.

 

I hope Enzo starts picking Casadei ahead of Ndidi though and getting that right wing working (IMO Abdul) will see our progressive forward play stats on the higher side and hopefully this translates into more shot ON TARGET and the goals will follow.

I can't really argue with any of that. I tend to think we're in a good place because we had a pretty bad pre-season and we've had a lot of change (although I personally would've gone even heavier with changes of personnel). Hutter was also who I wanted (he happens to have 10 points from 4 games at Monaco and even the 2 he dropped were very unlucky).

 

I see some pros and cons with what I've seen so far, I think we've actually been OK defensively for the most part and haven't actually allowed all that much against after the Coventry game. Huddersfield did miss an absolute golden chance, but then on the flip side look at the goals Cardiff and Hull scored - a 30 yarder and a fluke. The Cardiff game was the first time it looked to me like we were really heading to that comfortable win until that spanner got thrown into the works.

 

The next two games are really interesting because I don't think either of them will set up to contain us like the last five have all done. Southampton especially won't compromise on their style of play. I think for all there's a chance we get soundly beaten in either, if not both, I think there's also a possibility that the space Southampton give us will open them up to a hammering as well, could really see any result in that game. I think if we just won a game 3-0 plenty of concerns would go away.

[Dan LCFC]

30 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

Well, yes, but just because it's semantics doesn't mean it isn't relevant - this thread is possibly the calmest most balanced thread on the forum, where generally the debate is really healthy, people will (as i defined) raise issues with our tactics and, less relevantly but still interestingly, the performance of the players and manager within the tactics; so when, especially after a game, posters swoop in and start wildly throwing about criticism without reference or reason  - we are shit, maresca is shit, we're going to start plummeting down the league etc - then it really stands out. By the same token, the post that started this (we've won 6 of 7 etc) didn't really add anything to the ongoing tactical discussion and was rightly tutted at.

 

Maybe there is a little snobbery in this thread because, by and large, as i say, it is a genuinely constructive and reasonable thread, where people ask questions and people answer and things are discussed - and so perhaps there is an inclination to police it ourselves, it's already pretty long after just 7 games, and i suppose some posters are determined to try to keep things constructive and on topic....

 

As for my suggestion that we are playing above our level, the point is that we have almost an entirely new squad, playing a new system, we're not playing brilliantly, but, again, tactics! - we seem to have taken on board and developed at a very encouraging rate compared to what most people would have predicted or expected.  That our players cost more and earn more is immaterial at this stage - a low budget team that is used to playing together can outperform an expensive team that is still trying to learn a new system or how each other likes to play or, in our case, both factors.  At bottom, as the saying goes, we can only beat the team in front of us, and so far we've done ok in that respect - the next few games will be an interesting barometer of our progress and the quality of our squad.

I've really not seen these posts although I've said many a few times I think the moaning about moaning is both duller, and far more frequent than the moaning itself, although I'll leave that before I create the even more niche category of moaning about moaning about moaning.

 

I can't really argue with the bottom paragraph. I think the vast majority on here would've taken 12 points with the circumstances (although I do think there's a case to say it's as kind an opening five games as anyone in the league has had). The Hull game to me was a continuation of previous games where the bounces didn't go our way - which was that we were playing OK, not terribly, not brilliantly, and hopefully our performance level does raise because I think if it doesn't then we won't go up. The biggest red flag for me isn't even just a lack of chances created, though I do consider this the knock-on effect, it's more that the bulk of our chances are falling to players who they shouldn't really be, such as Ndidi. The Ndidi thing I saw as a quite peculiar square peg in round hole, but we have the more round peg now in Casadei and he still went with it, I find it pretty detrimental to what he's trying to achieve particularly when a lot of his game does hinge on having technical ability all over the pitch even as far back as in goal, yet one of our systems designed attacking options is a destroyer.

 

I still think it's a player or two light to sustain this system over 46 games unless McAteer looks good in the middle, which he might. I'm impressed with how he's used him and Wanya so far actually - pretty underrated aspect of what he's done so far in that he's introduced two players from the academy who weren't massively fancied and had them both produce steady performances, even out of position in a couple of instances.

[James_lcfc]

12 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

I've really not seen these posts although I've said many a few times I think the moaning about moaning is both duller, and far more frequent than the moaning itself.

You mean you don’t enjoy the constant posts of;

 

”We’ve won 6 out of 7 and people still aren’t happy. Our fans are unbelievable”
 

 

Its probably the only thing that annoys me on the forum. I quite enjoy reading even the most outrageous or reactionary opinions but those who seem intent on almost censoring any kind criticism are so irritating.

[Dan LCFC]

13 minutes ago, James_lcfc said:

You mean you don’t enjoy the constant posts of;

 

”We’ve won 6 out of 7 and people still aren’t happy. Our fans are unbelievable”
 

 

Its probably the only thing that annoys me on the forum. I quite enjoy reading even the most outrageous or reactionary opinions but those who seem intent on almost censoring any kind criticism are so irritating.

Yeah I'm exactly the same, been that way a while, just such a lazy point and defeats the whole objective of a forum to me.

[Lillehamring]

2 hours ago, Dan LCFC said:

I've really not seen these posts although I've said many a few times I think the moaning about moaning is both duller, and far more frequent than the moaning itself, although I'll leave that before I create the even more niche category of moaning about moaning about moaning.

 

I can't really argue with the bottom paragraph. I think the vast majority on here would've taken 12 points with the circumstances (although I do think there's a case to say it's as kind an opening five games as anyone in the league has had). The Hull game to me was a continuation of previous games where the bounces didn't go our way - which was that we were playing OK, not terribly, not brilliantly, and hopefully our performance level does raise because I think if it doesn't then we won't go up. The biggest red flag for me isn't even just a lack of chances created, though I do consider this the knock-on effect, it's more that the bulk of our chances are falling to players who they shouldn't really be, such as Ndidi. The Ndidi thing I saw as a quite peculiar square peg in round hole, but we have the more round peg now in Casadei and he still went with it, I find it pretty detrimental to what he's trying to achieve particularly when a lot of his game does hinge on having technical ability all over the pitch even as far back as in goal, yet one of our systems designed attacking options is a destroyer.

 

I still think it's a player or two light to sustain this system over 46 games unless McAteer looks good in the middle, which he might. I'm impressed with how he's used him and Wanya so far actually - pretty underrated aspect of what he's done so far in that he's introduced two players from the academy who weren't massively fancied and had them both produce steady performances, even out of position in a couple of instances.

I think the thing with Ndidi is twofold - 1. i think maresca rates him as a player who can break up possession high up the field which helps stop teams building attacks & can help prevent counter attacks, and 2. because i think the #8 spot under maresca is a really tough position to play and ndidi has more experience playing the system, as well as matchday experience in general (he's also scored two goals).

 

I think it's fair to say that, as far as the front five is concerned, Maresca is trying different combinations and trying to work out who can do what - i've no doubt as the season goes on, he'll have a good understanding of which combination will work in which type of games.

[Lillehamring]

1 hour ago, James_lcfc said:

You mean you don’t enjoy the constant posts of;

 

”We’ve won 6 out of 7 and people still aren’t happy. Our fans are unbelievable”
 

 

Its probably the only thing that annoys me on the forum. I quite enjoy reading even the most outrageous or reactionary opinions but those who seem intent on almost censoring any kind criticism are so irritating.

In the guy's defence - it was following a stream of really unconstructive posts following the loss to Hull.  If people want to post that we're shit, they can do that in the post match thread - this is about tactics, and i think we all just want to see posts - positive or negative - that have some substance - either making a point about tactics or asking a question about tactics.

[James_lcfc]

8 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

In the guy's defence - it was following a stream of really unconstructive posts following the loss to Hull.  If people want to post that we're shit, they can do that in the post match thread - this is about tactics, and i think we all just want to see posts - positive or negative - that have some substance - either making a point about tactics or asking a question about tactics.

Yes you are absolutely right. It wasn’t just that poster either, I read it all the time.

 

I’m someone who enjoys this style of play when it’s done right, but I don’t get upset at people who prefer to watch something different.

 

I can also understand the people making the point that we maybe don’t have the players to do it well, or even that a more traditional style of football would be better suited to the Championship. It’s only a discussion after all.