Two Points Dropped by Coward Cooper! Crystal Palace vs Leicester City Tactical Analysis

[ALC Fox]

So what's the answer to the midfield problem with Ndidi actually playing well as a #8 last season and a roving #8 or #10 this season?

 

Rewarding him for playing well but dropping him back to accommodate El Khannouss or Buonanotte doesn't seem right. I don't think we want him in a deep-lying role anymore.

 

But dropping him in favour of the others seems unfair at the moment. With the other two lads actually being specialists in that position, though, this does seem most likely to me, unless:

 

- We switch to a similar system to last season and have Buonanotte or El Khannouss as an 8 alongside Wilf and then drop one of Winks or Skipp.

 

- We moved to a midfield diamond and drop one of the wingers to accommodate a midfield four of Winks, Ndidi, Skipp and Bilal/Facundo.

 

- Give Buonanotte or El Khannouss start nominally as a winger on the understanding that they'll often drift inside.

 

It's quite a quandary. Cooper obviously likes this midfield and I can understand the approach away from home. Also, Ndidi is playing well but I imagine we'll carry much more threat on average over a period of several games with El Khannouss or Buonanotte instead.

Edited Monday at 16:45 by ALC Fox

[phoneticerror]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Looks at table, scratches head.

Sounds like you’ve got headlice.

[Bablemikey]

I blame Striders new hairstyle. It clearly distracted Coady at a crucial moment.

[sm1]

Spot on analysis. Cooper decided to cede all territory and possession to Palace, and then crossed his fingers and hoped they didnt take advantage of that. Unfortunately I don't think he's learnt anything from the weekend, and will do exactly the same thing again.

[StriderHiryu]

2 hours ago, lcfcbluearmy said:

Reat article and genuinely interested in your opinion

 

I know you state he changed to a 5-3-2 later in the game but as I noticed in both this and the villa game it's almost like he is starting with one as well.

 

This was probably more notice le in the villa game than the Palace one but its almost like he is playing Justin as a 3rd CB and the back 5 being set up as 

 

VK( wing back), Feas, okoli, Justin, fatawu/mavadidi (playing really deep as wing backs)

 

Then 3 DMs skip, Winks, ndidi

 

And vardy and ayew up front

 

Not sure if you noticed this too? But it's almost like the wingers are playing so deep they are almost wing backs

This was a very interesting comment, so I went back and watched the first 10 minutes of all our games so far!

 

I don't agree with you BUT I do see why you've said this. In recent games especially, in the initial phases it feels like some of our players go man for man with the opposition and look to win duels early to establish some initial dominance. Palace themselves had wingbacks, so it meant Ayew targetting Mitchell, and Kristiansen on Munoz, giving the look of matching them up. You've said Ayew up front, but I think he was just chasing Mitchell as he retreated.

[pazzerfox]

Looks offside from this angle. 

[FoxTimmy2]

Quite enjoyed this analysis, very high quality.

 

Vardy can no longer be competitive for a full 90 minutes. Enzo used him perfectly, and that was in the Championship ffs.

[StriderHiryu]

15 hours ago, ALC Fox said:

So what's the answer to the midfield problem with Ndidi actually playing well as a #8 last season and a roving #8 or #10 this season?

 

Rewarding him for playing well but dropping him back to accommodate El Khannouss or Buonanotte doesn't seem right. I don't think we want him in a deep-lying role anymore.

 

But dropping him in favour of the others seems unfair at the moment. With the other two lads actually being specialists in that position, though, this does seem most likely to me, unless:

 

- We switch to a similar system to last season and have Buonanotte or El Khannouss as an 8 alongside Wilf and then drop one of Winks or Skipp.

 

- We moved to a midfield diamond and drop one of the wingers to accommodate a midfield four of Winks, Ndidi, Skipp and Bilal/Facundo.

 

- Give Buonanotte or El Khannouss start nominally as a winger on the understanding that they'll often drift inside.

 

It's quite a quandary. Cooper obviously likes this midfield and I can understand the approach away from home. Also, Ndidi is playing well but I imagine we'll carry much more threat on average over a period of several games with El Khannouss or Buonanotte instead.

 

Something like this is the way I would go. If we drop Kristiansen then we don't have to drop either of Skipp or Winks. The only issue is that would mean Ricardo is still out of the team, as Skipp would essentially be playing the inverted role instead of him. Or you could change Skipp for Ricardo. The problem if we go to this system is that when we defend, we sit in a 442 shape, so someone needs to fill in as one of the fullbacks in that situation.

[chuddy8]

20 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

It was a horrendous decision. I don't buy any PL conspiracy though. More an overzealous VAR official trying to be a cleverclogs and showing he can think outside the obvious. Who was it btw? Someone inexperienced and trying to show off? 

 

As Strider says, see out that dodgy 3/4 mins after a goal and we get all three points in all probability. Crowd turns, players start to get frustrated. It's not our day mindset creeps in. Our confidence grows. 

 

 

It's so fractional whether he was offside or onside depending on angle or frame you take, that overruling the on field decision was wild.

[Les-TA-Jon]

1 hour ago, chuddy8 said:

It's so fractional whether he was offside or onside depending on angle or frame you take, that overruling the on field decision was wild.

Thing is, based on the lines they created in the check, the system told them it was onside - hence their confidence in overturning the on field decision. 

 

The real question is, based on the various angles shown that look dodgy, did they put the lines in the correct place? 

[FoxinNotts]

18 hours ago, ALC Fox said:

So what's the answer to the midfield problem with Ndidi actually playing well as a #8 last season and a roving #8 or #10 this season?

 

Rewarding him for playing well but dropping him back to accommodate El Khannouss or Buonanotte doesn't seem right. I don't think we want him in a deep-lying role anymore.

 

But dropping him in favour of the others seems unfair at the moment. With the other two lads actually being specialists in that position, though, this does seem most likely to me, unless:

 

- We switch to a similar system to last season and have Buonanotte or El Khannouss as an 8 alongside Wilf and then drop one of Winks or Skipp.

 

- We moved to a midfield diamond and drop one of the wingers to accommodate a midfield four of Winks, Ndidi, Skipp and Bilal/Facundo.

 

- Give Buonanotte or El Khannouss start nominally as a winger on the understanding that they'll often drift inside.

 

It's quite a quandary. Cooper obviously likes this midfield and I can understand the approach away from home. Also, Ndidi is playing well but I imagine we'll carry much more threat on average over a period of several games with El Khannouss or Buonanotte instead.

I personally think, Skipp has the tenacity and energy to play the number 6 role, Ndidi the number 8 (forming the double pivot) and let El Khannouss & Buonanotte fight it out for the creative role.

 

This would mean dropping Winks. But hey ho, it is a squad game, and Winksy will just have to wait for the injury to happen, or settle for coming off the bench to replace anyone in that three man midfield, to firm up the game, late on

[Tom12345]

14 hours ago, FoxinNotts said:

I personally think, Skipp has the tenacity and energy to play the number 6 role, Ndidi the number 8 (forming the double pivot) and let El Khannouss & Buonanotte fight it out for the creative role.

 

This would mean dropping Winks. But hey ho, it is a squad game, and Winksy will just have to wait for the injury to happen, or settle for coming off the bench to replace anyone in that three man midfield, to firm up the game, late on

We definitely should not have Ndidi back to being part of any double pivot role. We would struggle to get the ball up otherwise.

 

I think it has to be a choice now of either having him as a no 10 (but also dropping back to help out in defense in the middle) or we play one of the other two.  Or they can play instead of Ayew.

 

We have tried and failed for years with Ndidi playing as part of any pivot - unfortunately he just does not have the attributes required for that role in the modern game. The costs clearly outweigh the risks.

 

 

 

[Tom12345]

On 16/09/2024 at 20:09, StriderHiryu said:

For me changing shape is acceptable if you don’t have the squad players to bring on. In this game we had a plethora of options other than a striker. And even then, Ayew could have started on the bench and come on to cover that possibility. 
 

Reading about his time at Forest from some of the posts here is really worrying. Managers tend to be stubborn so I don’t see this changing 

That is true. Changing shape to counter opposition is all well and good, but not if you are simply changing shape and putting defenders on without regard to opposition tactics and simply trying to defend a lead.

[Big_Nige]

4 hours ago, Tom12345 said:

We definitely should not have Ndidi back to being part of any double pivot role. We would struggle to get the ball up otherwise.

 

I think it has to be a choice now of either having him as a no 10 (but also dropping back to help out in defense in the middle) or we play one of the other two.  Or they can play instead of Ayew.

 

We have tried and failed for years with Ndidi playing as part of any pivot - unfortunately he just does not have the attributes required for that role in the modern game. The costs clearly outweigh the risks.

 

 

 

Agreed, I don’t want to see Wilf as part of a double pivot ever again. His limitations were for all to see against Spurs and Fulham. He just can’t play in tight areas and is targeted in the opposition press. I’m no psychologist but I’d imagine Wilf crisis in confidence and apparent nosedive of form in the 18 months that led to our relegation stems from his inability to play that role anymore.
 

Enzo rejuvenated him by playing him higher up last season, and as a roving destroyer, pressing from the front, making a nuisance of himself and winning the ball back high, it really suits his game. He was excellent against Palace. But the way they set up played into our hands somewhat. We’ll get that a lot away from home, nobody will respect us and nor should they

 

There’s no way Dyche will set up in that way. They’ll be compact and we’ll need someone clever to unlock their defence from open play. Bounanotte is that player for me. Cooper should be brave and switch Wilf for Facundo and Fatawu for Ayew. 
 

Games away from home I’ve got no issue with Wilf playing in that higher role. But games at home, especially against the dregs Cooper needs to be ruthless. Get some flair on the pitch and then turn to the likes of Wilf, Ayew and co to see the game out if needed. 

Edited Wednesday at 06:02 by Big_Nige

[sylofox]

On 16/09/2024 at 09:44, Groby_Blue said:

Excellent analysis, thank you. 

 

After the match I was messaging a F***t supporting mate and he said that whenever forest were winning,  Cooper would tell them to sit back and hold on - which they rarely did, and he'd always make bizarre late subs which also never worked. 

 

And he's doing the same thing here, so if we think and hope that Cooper will learn from these decisions and make adjustments for them, history suggests otherwise. 

 

Winning away from home needs a cool head and clever game mangament to see a game out and hold on to the result and I'm not sure Cooper has got that in him at the moment.  

I'd rather drop pts giving it a go than sit back and fvcking surrender a lead.  He's clueless. Not hard to work out they can't score if you have the ball in there half. My God  Enzo ball was boring. But he never told the players to put there hands up and surrender.

[Iwebema]

21 hours ago, chuddy8 said:

It's so fractional whether he was offside or onside depending on angle or frame you take, that overruling the on field decision was wild.

The actual lines we were shown suggested he was about a yard or 2 on! If he was on it was clear it would of been right on the line, they just took a guess

[Scanchez]

SLEEPY JOE!

CROOKED HILLARY!

COWARD COOPER!

[ozleicester]

Whereas ive read and enjoyed oter topics by this poster.. this title suggests there is little honest analysis and just more unsubstantiated bashing coz our  manager isnt a foreign pretty boy

[WigstonWanderer]

On 18/09/2024 at 14:42, Iwebema said:

The actual lines we were shown suggested he was about a yard or 2 on! If he was on it was clear it would of been right on the line, they just took a guess

Very dodgy that we were never shown the full view of the actual line they used. I don’t think I’ve ever seen that happen before.