Steve Cooper: The Tactics Thread

[filbertway]

6 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

From the Telegraph article today:

Long hours have been spent with head of recruitment Martyn Glover and the analysts to work through potential targets. Cooper has watched the majority of games from last season to understand why the team was successful, with the intention to build on it and make improvements in preparation for operating in a higher division.

 

We can only speculate as to what we will see, but I suspect that in the first game in pre-season we will use the same 3421 we used last season. I can see us moving away from it over time though. With both 8's currently gone from last season and a lack of proven quality in that area, it's the most glaring hole we have in the team right now.

 

1. Financially outmuscle majority of competition  

 

 

[Lambert09]

I’m really disappointed to read that cooper wants to focus on domestic players. It limits what you can get and is quite small minded. Brendan tried and failed with the same logic. 

 

Domestic and cheap rarely goes hand in hand and it’s a bit of a recipe for disaster for me.

 

Theres always a few good deals floating around but our marquee striker isn’t going to be one of them and in truth the only player who fits the bill would be Tammy Abraham. We won’t get another player at a decent age, pedigree and with english experience for 20m. 

 

Hoping the signing of Okoli is a sign that it’s more tongue and cheek and a preference rather than a must 

Edited 8 July by Lambert09

[Lesta Legend]

2 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

I’m really disappointed to read that cooper wants to focus on domestic players. It limits what you can get and is quite small minded. Brendan tried and failed with the same logic. 

 

Domestic and cheap rarely goes hand in hand and it’s a bit of a recipe for disaster for me.

 

Theres always a few good deals floating around but our marquee striker isn’t going to be one of them and in truth the only player who fits the bill would be Tammy Abraham. We won’t get another player or a decent age, pedigree and english experience for 20m. 

 

Hoping the signing of Okoli is a sign that it’s more tongue and cheek and a preference rather than a must 

Rodger’s signed a lot of non British players. Having 4 players from Belgium alone! Do the opposite of what he did. 
 

I hope there is a balance and one or two non domestic would allow for a few gems. 

[Lambert09]

10 minutes ago, Lesta Legend said:

Rodger’s signed a lot of non British players. Having 4 players from Belgium alone! Do the opposite of what he did. 
 

I hope there is a balance and one or two non domestic would allow for a few gems. 

when we were doing that, we were successfull… with the standard amount of duds you tend to get… it was the last 2 seasons (and january before) that rodgers changed the approach to focus more on  british experience, which was the reasons behind vestergard and bertrand. we never fully stuck local but the message was that it was the preference. 

 

There’s obviously talent all over and i’m not sure british experience brings as much, as people give it credit for, it’s just a lot easier to assess the ability.  If you trust your scouts it shouldn’t be a problem and seeing as our last seasons international signings were more hit than miss, i’d be trusting them to keep finding gems. You’re not finding a fatawu or a hermansen in the english game , not in our price range anyway. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

I’m really disappointed to read that cooper wants to focus on domestic players. It limits what you can get and is quite small minded. Brendan tried and failed with the same logic. 

 

Domestic and cheap rarely goes hand in hand and it’s a bit of a recipe for disaster for me.

 

Theres always a few good deals floating around but our marquee striker isn’t going to be one of them and in truth the only player who fits the bill would be Tammy Abraham. We won’t get another player at a decent age, pedigree and with english experience for 20m. 

 

Hoping the signing of Okoli is a sign that it’s more tongue and cheek and a preference rather than a must 

You can't seriously be telling me you're not keen to see us complete more great value deals for players who Know The League like Perez, Vestergaard and Ward

[Gamble92]

🎙️ Marcelo Bielsa's criticism of modern football: 💭

“I am certain that football is in a process of decline. More and more people are watching this sport, but it is becoming less and less attractive. We do not favour what made it the best sport in the world.

We promote business, because business means that a lot of people watch the matches. But over time, there are fewer and fewer footballers worth watching, the game is less and less enjoyable, and this artificial increase in spectator numbers will be reduced.

Football is not five minutes of action, it is much more than that, it is a cultural expression, a form of identification.”

 

Find that interesting considering his idea of making Plan A work and his ideas filtered down to the ones who are now making it like that.

[Lambert09]

25 minutes ago, Guest said:

You can't seriously be telling me you're not keen to see us complete more great value deals for players who Know The League like Perez, Vestergaard and Ward

The thing is mate, if we’d just got the deals for harrison or Elyounoussi over the line we would have never gone down 

[coolhandfox]

2 hours ago, Lambert09 said:

I’m really disappointed to read that cooper wants to focus on domestic players. It limits what you can get and is quite small minded. Brendan tried and failed with the same logic. 

 

Domestic and cheap rarely goes hand in hand and it’s a bit of a recipe for disaster for me.

 

Theres always a few good deals floating around but our marquee striker isn’t going to be one of them and in truth the only player who fits the bill would be Tammy Abraham. We won’t get another player at a decent age, pedigree and with english experience for 20m. 

 

Hoping the signing of Okoli is a sign that it’s more tongue and cheek and a preference rather than a must 

Kasper, Simpson, Huth, Morgan, Albrighton, Drinkwater, Vardy.

 

7 of the title winning side were domestic transfers.....

 

It's not where you buy them from is who you buy that's important.

[Guest]

I will be intrigued to see what's going to happen with Ricardo and Winks, who I think you could make a reasonable case for being two of our best players but who thrived last season in pretty specialised roles as part of a team that dominated possession every week. If we do end up in a 3-4-3 or similar then that strikes me as being bad news for both of them because I'm not convinced Ricardo is physically capable of getting up and down the flank these days (and maybe Justin isn't either) and similarly, is Winks mobile or athletic enough for a midfield two given we're likely to be without the ball most of the time? I could see the two of them in midfield together with someone more combative - whether that's a new signing along the lines of Florentino Luis or we can get Wilf to sign up and return to his old ball-winning ways - but then you're either sacking the wingers off or it's a back four. The former I think is obviously a bad idea considering we've got Mavididi, Fatawu and now also Reid, and if the latter then not only would the Okoli signing seem a bit unnecessary, you also have to wonder where that leaves Vestergaard and Coady who I think would really struggle unless in the middle of a three. **** knows.

[Finnegan]

6 hours ago, Gamble92 said:

🎙️ Marcelo Bielsa's criticism of modern football: 💭

“I am certain that football is in a process of decline. More and more people are watching this sport, but it is becoming less and less attractive. We do not favour what made it the best sport in the world.

We promote business, because business means that a lot of people watch the matches. But over time, there are fewer and fewer footballers worth watching, the game is less and less enjoyable, and this artificial increase in spectator numbers will be reduced.

Football is not five minutes of action, it is much more than that, it is a cultural expression, a form of identification.”

 

Find that interesting considering his idea of making Plan A work and his ideas filtered down to the ones who are now making it like that.

 

I disagree massively. 

 

It's not and never has been the likes of Pep, Enzo and Co that make football boring it's the knuckle draggers who don't know how to respond to it without playing anti football that is the problem. 

 

Barcelona at their best were amazing to watch just as Leicester last season at their best were amazing to watch. But people afraid to lose see these teams coming and know the path of least resistance is parking the bus and never engaging. Everyone sneers when Pep and Rodri and Co complain about teams refusing to play against them and from a financial point or view I do understand that but that doesn't mean they're wrong. 

 

Bielsa is a puritan. He'd usually rather his teams get battered at least trying and taking risks than being pragmatic. He's definitely not the problem. 

 

[Gamble92]

7 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I disagree massively. 

 

It's not and never has been the likes of Pep, Enzo and Co that make football boring it's the knuckle draggers who don't know how to respond to it without playing anti football that is the problem. 

 

Barcelona at their best were amazing to watch just as Leicester last season at their best were amazing to watch. But people afraid to lose see these teams coming and know the path of least resistance is parking the bus and never engaging. Everyone sneers when Pep and Rodri and Co complain about teams refusing to play against them and from a financial point or view I do understand that but that doesn't mean they're wrong. 

 

Bielsa is a puritan. He'd usually rather his teams get battered at least trying and taking risks than being pragmatic. He's definitely not the problem. 

 

Guess I'm a nuckle dragger then. It shown in the end that it doesn't even ensure better results in the way Enzo thought it did. Plus is showed how utterly ludicrous the idea of not having another plan is. 

 

At our best was the 5-0 against Southampton in which we played absolutely nothing like the philosophy. 

[filbertway]

46 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I disagree massively. 

 

It's not and never has been the likes of Pep, Enzo and Co that make football boring it's the knuckle draggers who don't know how to respond to it without playing anti football that is the problem. 

 

Barcelona at their best were amazing to watch just as Leicester last season at their best were amazing to watch. But people afraid to lose see these teams coming and know the path of least resistance is parking the bus and never engaging. Everyone sneers when Pep and Rodri and Co complain about teams refusing to play against them and from a financial point or view I do understand that but that doesn't mean they're wrong. 

 

Bielsa is a puritan. He'd usually rather his teams get battered at least trying and taking risks than being pragmatic. He's definitely not the problem. 

 

The response of the possession heavy teams is just pass safely and wait for an error though. The possession based teams are just as risk averse as the sit deep teams. The vast majority of coaches, regardless of the tactics they adopt are far too concerned with drilling in percentages and routines into players to the point where there's barely any individuality shown on the pitch.

 

Ancelloti said the same earlier this season. A lot of coaches are so obsessed with looking for edges and turning players into robots, they're taking taking individual talent out of the game,  they're slowly killing the sport as a spectacle

 

One day someone is gonna cotton on and realise that if teams are going to sit in their box, just have a couple of brutes in and around their box and keep putting balls into the opposition area. They'll soon want to push up and stop giving the opposition 2 thirds of the pitch to play in. It'll take someone brave enough that won't be absolutely petrified of not having 100% control of the ball at all times though.

 

To some degree I respect the time and effort coaches put into drilling their teams to being so tactically sound, but my god it's tedious. If you're not trying to get men in the box and score goals because you're so scared of what the other team could do, then you're boring as hell. Whether that's the possession based teams or the defensive teams.

 

One thing you can never knock Bielsa for is not being exciting and encouraging risk taking, he's literally the epitome of entertaining football.

 

[Finnegan]

49 minutes ago, Gamble92 said:

At our best was the 5-0 against Southampton in which we played absolutely nothing like the philosophy. 

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about. That Southampton game was 100% Enzoball at its best. 

 

The difference between that and, way, any of the dull, late 1-0 wins wasn't how we played it's how the opponent played. 

 

Southampton had the confidence to take us on head on, try and play us at our own game. We threw down a challenge and they picked it up. Two teams tried to play progressive football and we were just much, much better at the press and the counter thrust. 

 

All of which we'd have happily done against Rotherham or or whoever but those teams just refused to do anything involving leaving their own six yard box. 

 

Why should Leicester and Enzo carry the blame for making that game boring when we were the ones trying to move the ball up the pitch and score? Why does nobody blame the defending side that just played anti football for ninety minutes and hoped for a draw? 

 

[Ric Flair]

5 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

Kasper, Simpson, Huth, Morgan, Albrighton, Drinkwater, Vardy.

 

7 of the title winning side were domestic transfers.....

 

It's not where you buy them from is who you buy that's important.

It's getting the balance right and trying to find the value for a squad that currently has very little asset value. Whilst wages remain high as well, we don't have a great deal on the books to fit the model required.

 

Getting a few experienced PL players in on loan or for cheap is sensible but buying for the sake of it just for perceived familiarity of this league might be a mistake, transfer fees will be high, wages too and it makes resale unlikely.

 

Most of those players you quote came from lower league and before we arrived in the Prem. Based on the metric they need to have played in the PL I don't see the likelihood of us getting value for money.

 

I want to see some 19-24 year olds in for less than £10m on wages below £50k a week who with one decent season in the Prem can be flipped for 2-3 times what we paid for them. That's difficult to do with PL based players.

[Finnegan]

4 minutes ago, filbertway said:

The response of the possession heavy teams is just pass safely and wait for an error though

 

No. This is the fundamental difference between Puelball and Enzoball. Or, early Rodgersball and late Rodgersball. 

 

Puel had us keep possession as a defensive tactic. He wanted us to just have the ball and avoid risks because if we had it the opposition didn't. 

 

Anyone accusing Enzo of that philosophy just didn't watch properly. We took a mountain of risks, we were permanently drying to bait the opposition playing tiki taka between Winks and Hermansen and even got caught our doing it a couple of times because we wanted to encourage the opposition to engage. Puel never did that, we distributed everything safely out to wide fullbacks far away from goal. 

 

We played shit loads of progressive, vertical passes under Enzo using a smart three man maneuver to get the ball up the pitch quickly. Vesty snaps it between the lines to a striker with back to goal who lays it off first time to Winks who threads it through to a forward rushing mezzala like Ndidi or KDH. It was extremely aggressive and forward thinking football with high risk passes everywhere. 

 

But we couldn't do that if the other side refused to even enter our half or press us at all. It's not our responsibility for making the game dull is it. 

 

Even when Enzo did establish control and call for patience it was very much the philosophy that we don't pass to move the ball, we pass to move the opponent and it always paid off. 

 

What is foxestalks great idea to break down teams parking the buss against us all season? Just go long and play completely in to their hands? 

 

I'm sorry but the biggest lesson from last season for me was just how much the average fan, even the average season ticket holder, just doesn't actually understand the tactics or modern football. 

 

Some of the drivel spouted was painful and idgaf how arrogant it makes me sound to say that. 

 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Ancelloti said the same earlier this season. A lot of coaches are so obsessed with looking for edges and turning players into robots, they're taking taking individual talent out of the game,  they're slowly killing the sport as a spectacle

While I can understand that point of view, I think it's easy for him to say as someone in charge of Real Madrid. It's fine telling Modric, Kroos, Vini Jr., Bellingham etc. just go out there and express yourselves lads, or for him to eschew a defined tactical identity in favour of being more flexible/adaptable, because they are supremely gifted and intelligent footballers who can do basically anything. Most teams and players I think benefit from having a clear plan to follow, and I've also heard it argued (can't remember who it was, mind) that this is why although Ancelotti is obviously a phenomenal manager, he has had relatively little success domestically compared to other managers because his methods apply better to knockout tournaments than they do to league campaigns.

[Uncle Monty]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

 

I disagree massively. 

 

It's not and never has been the likes of Pep, Enzo and Co that make football boring it's the knuckle draggers who don't know how to respond to it without playing anti football that is the problem. 

 

Barcelona at their best were amazing to watch just as Leicester last season at their best were amazing to watch. But people afraid to lose see these teams coming and know the path of least resistance is parking the bus and never engaging. Everyone sneers when Pep and Rodri and Co complain about teams refusing to play against them and from a financial point or view I do understand that but that doesn't mean they're wrong. 

 

Bielsa is a puritan. He'd usually rather his teams get battered at least trying and taking risks than being pragmatic. He's definitely not the problem. 

 

I respect your opinion but I felt we were very seldom great to watch last season. 

 

Even when we were winning it was boring as ****. I kept having to remind myself to be happy as we were winning rather than actually enjoying it.

 

 

[sbfox]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

 

No. This is the fundamental difference between Puelball and Enzoball. Or, early Rodgersball and late Rodgersball. 

 

Puel had us keep possession as a defensive tactic. He wanted us to just have the ball and avoid risks because if we had it the opposition didn't. 

 

Anyone accusing Enzo of that philosophy just didn't watch properly. We took a mountain of risks, we were permanently drying to bait the opposition playing tiki taka between Winks and Hermansen and even got caught our doing it a couple of times because we wanted to encourage the opposition to engage. Puel never did that, we distributed everything safely out to wide fullbacks far away from goal. 

 

We played shit loads of progressive, vertical passes under Enzo using a smart three man maneuver to get the ball up the pitch quickly. Vesty snaps it between the lines to a striker with back to goal who lays it off first time to Winks who threads it through to a forward rushing mezzala like Ndidi or KDH. It was extremely aggressive and forward thinking football with high risk passes everywhere. 

 

But we couldn't do that if the other side refused to even enter our half or press us at all. It's not our responsibility for making the game dull is it. 

 

Even when Enzo did establish control and call for patience it was very much the philosophy that we don't pass to move the ball, we pass to move the opponent and it always paid off. 

 

What is foxestalks great idea to break down teams parking the buss against us all season? Just go long and play completely in to their hands? 

 

I'm sorry but the biggest lesson from last season for me was just how much the average fan, even the average season ticket holder, just doesn't actually understand the tactics or modern football. 

 

Some of the drivel spouted was painful and idgaf how arrogant it makes me sound to say that. 

 

I agree with all of this in spades, great post. 

 

To play devil's advocate, are we seeing the decline of this particular style of modern football at the Euros? If only because teams now know how to defend it, they know which areas of the pitch they need to be in when the opposition switch to 'x' player and are generally just better at implementation of a system than than they were 20 years ago? Will we see 'Pep V2' spring up soon? (Yes, I know Pep isn't responsible for all of modern football, but it's an easy naming convention) 

[Guppys Love Child]

10 hours ago, Gamble92 said:

Guess I'm a nuckle dragger then. It shown in the end that it doesn't even ensure better results in the way Enzo thought it did. Plus is showed how utterly ludicrous the idea of not having another plan is. 

 

At our best was the 5-0 against Southampton in which we played absolutely nothing like the philosophy. 

Totally agree.

 

I've posted numerous times, in various past subjects that we were a far better team when not adopting EnzoBall or less off it.

The players looked far more comfortable, as "Anti-EnzoBall" suited their natural abilities better, we were more fluid, and infinitely more entertaining to watch. 

 

 

[coolhandfox]

9 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

It's getting the balance right and trying to find the value for a squad that currently has very little asset value. Whilst wages remain high as well, we don't have a great deal on the books to fit the model required.

 

Getting a few experienced PL players in on loan or for cheap is sensible but buying for the sake of it just for perceived familiarity of this league might be a mistake, transfer fees will be high, wages too and it makes resale unlikely.

 

Most of those players you quote came from lower league and before we arrived in the Prem. Based on the metric they need to have played in the PL I don't see the likelihood of us getting value for money.

 

I want to see some 19-24 year olds in for less than £10m on wages below £50k a week who with one decent season in the Prem can be flipped for 2-3 times what we paid for them. That's difficult to do with PL based players.

As I said;

 

It's not where you buy them from is who you buy that's important.

 

Our record at buying signing PL player since we returned to PL isn't as bad as some people make out especially with free transfers.

 

I would say, where we have come unstuck is when we have brought a player for a decent fee for a player.

 

Good: Simpson, Albrighton, Huth, Evans, Winks

 

Average: Iheanacho

 

Poor: Ward, Perez, Bertrand, Vestergaard, Coady 

 

The value in the PL is to be had from free transfer or players deemed over the hill.

 

It about get the right ones, I agree we should be bringing in young players to improve and flip but it about balancing youth and experience in the squad.

 

Everyone heralds Brighton as a beacon of transfer success, but they have still siged PL experience, Welbeck, Lallana, Milner.

 

People seem to think just buying foreign or young is the key to success, we have wasted just as much money in those areas.

 

It's about the right player, with the right profile, right cost and at the right time.

 

 

Edited 9 July by coolhandfox

[Finnegan]

8 hours ago, sbfox said:

I agree with all of this in spades, great post. 

 

To play devil's advocate, are we seeing the decline of this particular style of modern football at the Euros? If only because teams now know how to defend it, they know which areas of the pitch they need to be in when the opposition switch to 'x' player and are generally just better at implementation of a system than than they were 20 years ago? Will we see 'Pep V2' spring up soon? (Yes, I know Pep isn't responsible for all of modern football, but it's an easy naming convention) 

 

The problem is that defending in modern football has been, currently at least, near enough perfected and it is much, much easier to defend than attack. 

 

You can drill a group of solid athletes with half decent attention spans to hold shape in a low block, work hard, stay focused and spoil far more easily than you can find and coach a team full of talented and skilful footballers to break that down. 

 

That's just the current stalemate football is in. 

 

But the blame seems to near universally get placed on the attacking teams and I'm just not sure what people think the alternative is. Pep's way of playing is the objective best way of breaking down a stubborn low block, it's not super exciting watching them do it but why do we always blame his team and not the team really causing it? 

 

Has anyone ever watched a Klopp team try and break down a stubborn low block? It's still a ****ing boring match, it's just his team struggles to score more. Being a fast attacking, high pressing, counter attacking, cavalier team doesn't work against someone refusing to leave their own six yard box. There isn't a way of playing that's exciting against that anti football shit and that's what we came up against most of last year. 

 

The games that were genuinely exciting weren't exciting because we did anything different, they were because the opponents did. 

 

Edited 9 July by Finnegan

[Babylon]

18 hours ago, Lambert09 said:

I’m really disappointed to read that cooper wants to focus on domestic players. It limits what you can get and is quite small minded. Brendan tried and failed with the same logic. 

 

Domestic and cheap rarely goes hand in hand and it’s a bit of a recipe for disaster for me.

 

Theres always a few good deals floating around but our marquee striker isn’t going to be one of them and in truth the only player who fits the bill would be Tammy Abraham. We won’t get another player at a decent age, pedigree and with english experience for 20m. 

 

Hoping the signing of Okoli is a sign that it’s more tongue and cheek and a preference rather than a must 

It's not different to what Pearson did, and he built basically a League 1, Championship and Premier league winning teams. A core of players used to the country, the football and the mentality etc, not only helps with a quick integration, but is far more likely to lead to a team spirit fostered quickly. It doesn't mean you don't buy foreign players, just that you don't load the squad with them. 

 

You just need to buy the right ones, Pearson bought a few older heads, but then wanted young and hungry players with something to prove. 

[StriderHiryu]

8 hours ago, sbfox said:

I agree with all of this in spades, great post. 

 

To play devil's advocate, are we seeing the decline of this particular style of modern football at the Euros? If only because teams now know how to defend it, they know which areas of the pitch they need to be in when the opposition switch to 'x' player and are generally just better at implementation of a system than than they were 20 years ago? Will we see 'Pep V2' spring up soon? (Yes, I know Pep isn't responsible for all of modern football, but it's an easy naming convention) 

The 4 best teams to watch at the Euros were Austria, Switzerland, Germany and Spain, all of whom play system football with clear attacking patterns of play. This version of Spain are brilliant, they progressed from playing possesion for the sake of it under Luis Enrique to being a a team that loves to go 1-1 on the wings and play quick vertical transitions. Often times when they attack they get 6 men into the box.

 

There is a subplot going on this Euros which is "In International Football which style works best; system football or relying on the individual brilliance of top players?" It's extremely hard to get system football to work at International level because you work with the players for such a short amount of time over the course of a year.

 

England and France are the villains of this Euros, both of whom play abject "just don't lose" football with awful chance creation and over reliance on indiviudals. This video from FourFourTwo is well worth watching where the analyst says "I can't believe I am saying this, but the way England got back into the game against Switzerland was... vibes" (see 10:30 in the video).

 

If Spain win, it might make the French and English FA's choose to appoint more progressive managers. If England went for Potter (which we all know he's holding out for), they would play system football for example, and that would be interesting to compare to how Southgate set them up.

 

 

Also just want to say @Finnegan is making some top posts in this thread today!

[James_lcfc]

46 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

 

England and France are the villains of this Euros, both of whom play abject "just don't lose" football with awful chance creation and over reliance on indiviudals. This video from FourFourTwo is well worth watching where the analyst says "I can't believe I am saying this, but the way England got back into the game against Switzerland was... vibes" (see 10:30 in the video).

 

It's the chance creation that's the key for me personally. I'm happy with any style of play as long as chances are being created.

 

Whether it's a 100 pass build up or a long ball to Brian Deane for Dickov to run on to - Both equally as entertaining to me! It's just when you don't even look like scoring that football can be a real grind, but I guess that happens with all teams regardless of the system being used.

 

Great post btw.

 

[StriderHiryu]

1 hour ago, James_lcfc said:

It's the chance creation that's the key for me personally. I'm happy with any style of play as long as chances are being created.

 

Whether it's a 100 pass build up or a long ball to Brian Deane for Dickov to run on to - Both equally as entertaining to me! It's just when you don't even look like scoring that football can be a real grind, but I guess that happens with all teams regardless of the system being used.

 

Great post btw.

 

The Turkey vs Netherlands game was epic and a lot of the chances came from direct play. Koeman stuck on Weghorst and they went for the second ball and it worked. Turkey the whole tournament have embraced chaos and played a bit like a red bull team and it also worked well for them. 
 

England don’t deserve to still be in the tournament with the way they play. If they win it fans may not care but in both of the last two games they’ve scored with their first shot on target and it’s been a screamer. That’s not a consistent way to win!