Portland Bill Posted July 30, 2017 Report Share Posted July 30, 2017 52 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said: Are we not playing with width? Overlapping full backs and still having one of the largest pitches suggests we are. Cutting inside allows options and provides space for the aforementioned overlapping full backs No, I'm amazed you aren't aware of this! Over lapping full backs were a very rare sight last season, what we had was left footed right midfielders and right footed left midfielders. Both of these cutting inside ( most of the time losing the ball) onto their favoured foot, you could probably count on the fingers of one hand how often we got crosses in from the byline, or got behind opposition defences. If Tammy had actually got some service from out wide, he would have probably scored 30 goals last season!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted July 30, 2017 Report Share Posted July 30, 2017 Just now, Portland Bill said: No, I'm amazed you aren't aware of this! Over lapping full backs were a very rare sight last season, what we had was left footed right midfielders and right footed left midfielders. Both of these cutting inside ( most of the time losing the ball) onto their favoured foot, you could probably count on the fingers of one hand how often we got crosses in from the byline, or got behind opposition defences. If Tammy had actually got some service from out wide, he would have probably scored 30 goals last season!. They really weren't The fact the delivery was so poor is a different matter, but they absolutely did overlap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted July 30, 2017 Report Share Posted July 30, 2017 1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said: They really weren't The fact the delivery was so poor is a different matter, but they absolutely did overlap. They were on our right side! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coxyboy Posted July 30, 2017 Report Share Posted July 30, 2017 On 29 July 2017 at 02:52, EmersonsRed said: I promise at this level of football, it does. Everything matters. No matter how small. The good old saying during the FA Cup when a large team goes to non-league opposition and commentators say "they won't like playing on this tight, narrow pitch" it's not a myth... In fact in the interview via the link Joe even says a few of his cross-field balls went out. It affects your shape on and off the ball. Pressing (as eluded to in OP). Good recent example is Spurs' fantastic home form. 100 by 67 meters, struggle hugely at Wembley 105 by 65m... Garbage as the pitch had been bought in about a foot max each side , makes burger all difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted July 30, 2017 Report Share Posted July 30, 2017 Just now, Davefevs said: They were on our right side! Fair point, Little struggled, but did make runs. Bryan was constantly overlapping, delivery was woeful though. We also saw a lot of wide interplay, not always with fullbacks involved, but we played with a fluid system a lot of the time. Can't agree with the assertion we only played narrow. We went down both routes, wide and narrow, during matches. PBs reaction is very OTT IMO, a yard off either side still leaves us with one of the bigger pitches and still near the upper limit when it comes to width. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmersonsRed Posted July 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2017 5 minutes ago, coxyboy said: Garbage as the pitch had been bought in about a foot max each side , makes burger all difference Clueless about football. Next. Edit: Probably still stuck in the 70s too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted July 30, 2017 Report Share Posted July 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Portland Bill said: No, I'm amazed you aren't aware of this! Over lapping full backs were a very rare sight last season, what we had was left footed right midfielders and right footed left midfielders. Both of these cutting inside ( most of the time losing the ball) onto their favoured foot, you could probably count on the fingers of one hand how often we got crosses in from the byline, or got behind opposition defences. If Tammy had actually got some service from out wide, he would have probably scored 30 goals last season!. What you are observing is a modern trend. Crossing the ball from wide is, and has always been an inefficient means of creating chances. Football has moved on from wingers getting chalk on their boots and positioning players out wide is considered wasteful and often hands midfield numerical superiority to the opposition, so the wider players are tucked in more. Teams now attack more centrally (zone 14 in techy speak) and statistically this far outscores crossing. More teams defend compactly and there is much less use of 4-4-2 and more holding midfielders (sometimes two) = Space for wide players is ceasing to exist. Another trend is players seemingly playing on the wrong side (inversion). However it is logical as an inswinging cross to the far post is no easier to defend than an outswinging cross from the byline, and cutting inside on a players stronger foot is an advantage as it normally means driving into the defenders weaker side. Full backs provide the width but yes it frequently meant City did not play with that much width. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coxyboy Posted July 31, 2017 Report Share Posted July 31, 2017 7 hours ago, EmersonsRed said: Clueless about football. Next. Edit: Probably still stuck in the 70s too Your the clueless one fella ....probably a failed player or coach at a piss poor level so you spend your Saturday's now watching Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmersonsRed Posted July 31, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2017 9 hours ago, coxyboy said: Your the clueless one fella ....probably a failed player or coach at a piss poor level so you spend your Saturday's now watching Wrong... Well, was never great at playing. Left the academy system aged 15 and anyone can be in an academy nowadays! Anyway, what's wrong mate? I feel we should ignore the fact that several hundred people can read this and have a one to one session. Your last two posts before this thread were talking some shit about having inside info on the Flint situation and calling for LJ and MA to be sacked mid-preseason. Now, if anybody is wrong, I guess it would be you. The serial bullshitter. My friend, stay off the wife beater. You clearly can't control your anger. Relax, turn to cider instead... Have a nice thatchers, get behind your football club and stop being so touchy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderMB Posted July 31, 2017 Report Share Posted July 31, 2017 Pitch altercations are almost entirely handled by the data analysts nowadays. I would imagine that the passing statistics around our players are pretty good, or we're worried about direct passes and pacey players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted August 3, 2017 Report Share Posted August 3, 2017 LJ say the reason is to help the team but he didn't explain in what way. Not being a qualified coach the reason is lost on me. Anyone know why or have a theoretical explanation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDarwall Posted August 3, 2017 Report Share Posted August 3, 2017 It was cheaper than buying a winger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted August 3, 2017 Report Share Posted August 3, 2017 LJ say the reason is to help the team but he didn't explain in what way. Not being a qualified coach the reason is lost on me. Anyone know why or have a theoretical explanation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midred Posted August 3, 2017 Report Share Posted August 3, 2017 Got to go through us rather than around us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pezo Posted August 9, 2017 Report Share Posted August 9, 2017 Did anyone notice on Saturday that the lines had been moved back out by about a foot on each side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 On 03/08/2017 at 18:20, Robbored said: LJ say the reason is to help the team but he didn't explain in what way. Not being a qualified coach the reason is lost on me. Anyone know why or have a theoretical explanation? Theoretical without seeing enough is that City are going to play tighter in possession, and adapt certain pressing styles out of possession. Defending is basically the control of space. Less space makes screening, pressing etc easier. A % of a % maybe, but a marginal gain in theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 On 30/07/2017 at 21:21, JamesBCFC said: Fair point, Little struggled, but did make runs. Bryan was constantly overlapping, delivery was woeful though. We also saw a lot of wide interplay, not always with fullbacks involved, but we played with a fluid system a lot of the time. Can't agree with the assertion we only played narrow. We went down both routes, wide and narrow, during matches. PBs reaction is very OTT IMO, a yard off either side still leaves us with one of the bigger pitches and still near the upper limit when it comes to width. Not OTT at all, a manager would only narrow 'his own' pitch for one reason. Or perhaps he wants to give the linesman a bit more running space!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 On 30/07/2017 at 22:13, Cowshed said: What you are observing is a modern trend. Crossing the ball from wide is, and has always been an inefficient means of creating chances. Football has moved on from wingers getting chalk on their boots and positioning players out wide is considered wasteful and often hands midfield numerical superiority to the opposition, so the wider players are tucked in more. Teams now attack more centrally (zone 14 in techy speak) and statistically this far outscores crossing. More teams defend compactly and there is much less use of 4-4-2 and more holding midfielders (sometimes two) = Space for wide players is ceasing to exist. Another trend is players seemingly playing on the wrong side (inversion). However it is logical as an inswinging cross to the far post is no easier to defend than an outswinging cross from the byline, and cutting inside on a players stronger foot is an advantage as it normally means driving into the defenders weaker side. Full backs provide the width but yes it frequently meant City did not play with that much width. We can talk all day about "modern trends" until the next trend comes along. Im talking about last season though, and the facts spoke for themselves. The style of play and tactics employed last season saw us nearly relegated, and everyone who watched us knew they did not work. We had the second worst away record in the Championship playing with those tactics, and those tactics clearly did not work, unless we totally change tactically this season ( especially away from home) we will again struggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 3 hours ago, Portland Bill said: We can talk all day about "modern trends" until the next trend comes along. Im talking about last season though, and the facts spoke for themselves. The style of play and tactics employed last season saw us nearly relegated, and everyone who watched us knew they did not work. We had the second worst away record in the Championship playing with those tactics, and those tactics clearly did not work, unless we totally change tactically this season ( especially away from home) we will again struggle. Teams do cross it less now and do attempt to get crosses in from the byline less because it is ineffectual. Teams do invert their wide players because there is no real reason not to. Teams now attack more centrally ... They do. If you were to bore yourself looking through my post history you will see no defence of Mr Johnson tactics last season. I was simply answering a post. In regards to Tammy if City put more service in from right out wide he may have scored less. Continually crossing the ball from wide positions is an ineffectual means of scoring a goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 8 minutes ago, Cowshed said: Teams do cross it less now and do attempt to get crosses in from the byline less because it is ineffectual. Teams do invert their wide players because there is no real reason not to. Teams now attack more centrally ... They do. If you were to bore yourself looking through my post history you will see no defence of Mr Johnson tactics last season. I was simply answering a post. In regards to Tammy if City put more service in from right out wide he may have scored less. Continually crossing the ball from wide positions is an ineffectual means of scoring a goal. If you want you really bore yourself look at my previous posts as well!!!! Because what I have talked about is not constant crossing the ball from out wide, more getting in behind teams by having width. My original point was Tammy scoring more goals with better service. It was clear that Tammy was a far better striker running onto balls than holding the ball up and bringing other players in, even though he did improve this later in the season. If we had had third man runners ( for instance) getting in behind teams and playing balls 'back', then he would have got 30+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, Portland Bill said: If you want you really bore yourself look at my previous posts as well!!!! Because what I have talked about is not constant crossing the ball from out wide, more getting in behind teams by having width. My original point was Tammy scoring more goals with better service. It was clear that Tammy was a far better striker running onto balls than holding the ball up and bringing other players in, even though he did improve this later in the season. If we had had third man runners ( for instance) getting in behind teams and playing balls 'back', then he would have got 30+ In this day of 4-2-3-1 there is less space to get in behind. Teams don't match up 4-4-2 anymore. The space has generally gone. Wide players are being pushed in because it hands numerical superiority in midfield to the opposition otherwise and hugging the line is wasteful. At the very zenith of football the greats are no longer wingers but more inside rights and lefts, and at the mediocre end of the scale even in England the home of two up top football chucking it on the mix has moved on. Tammy may have scored more by having players closer to him v players getting in behind teams who would not let them anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 2 minutes ago, Cowshed said: In this day of 4-2-3-1 there is less space to get in behind. Teams don't match up 4-4-2 anymore. The space has generally gone. Wide players are being pushed in because it hands numerical superiority in midfield to the opposition otherwise and hugging the line is wasteful. At the very zenith of football the greats are no longer wingers but more inside rights and lefts, and at the mediocre end of the scale even in England the home of two up top football chucking it on the mix has moved on. Tammy may have scored more by having players closer to him v players getting in behind teams who would not let them anyway. Sorry, I can't agree! teams worked us out last season, they worked out that we were a totally narrow team, this enabled them to defend narrow against us, we were the most predictable team in the whole league, playing style wise. Im not talking about chucking the ball in from out wide, what I'm talking about is LJ instructing players who start out wide to 'always' cut in once past the halfway line, making the pitch small ( for us) this enabling the opposition to nullify our attacking play and counter attacking in the wide areas which we had left totally vacant. Re your last point, all I can say is that we never even tried, so opposition back four's had it easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Maesknoll Red Posted August 10, 2017 Admin Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 It might be the modern way and data may back it up, but, I'd still prefer to watch a flying winger, skinning a defender, and either cutting in and shooting, or staying wide and getting a good cross in. Football should be entertaining, not reduced to being managed by statistical analysis, change is not always better........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 20 minutes ago, Portland Bill said: Sorry, I can't agree! teams worked us out last season, they worked out that we were a totally narrow team, this enabled them to defend narrow against us, we were the most predictable team in the whole league, playing style wise. Im not talking about chucking the ball in from out wide, what I'm talking about is LJ instructing players who start out wide to 'always' cut in once past the halfway line, making the pitch small ( for us) this enabling the opposition to nullify our attacking play and counter attacking in the wide areas which we had left totally vacant. Re your last point, all I can say is that we never even tried, so opposition back four's had it easy. In regards to last season it was hard to work out what BCFC were doing. I have watched football for forty five years and I have never seen any team apart from Lee Johnsons BCFC play FOUR formations in one half (Leeds) including one with no obvious forward up top ... False nines and BCFC!! I am simply posting about a general movement in football. Football norms have changed. Chagrin is often directed at Joe Bryan. He is not a defender, he is a full back, working the length of the pitch and like many modern full backs his defending is not so good (ahem) but his attacking play is adept and highly flexible. Full backs are the width, that is where the space is as teams now play a myriad of formations. My football heaven was Jordan's 4-4-2 v 4-4-2. Winger v full back. Banging balls into Taylor and Turner. Gavin and Smith would be rendered ineffectual in the now with its deep lying midfield players and full backs even if City could gain enough possession from just two in the middle. Lee Johnson is reflecting what is going on in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 29 minutes ago, Maesknoll Red said: It might be the modern way and data may back it up, but, I'd still prefer to watch a flying winger, skinning a defender, and either cutting in and shooting, or staying wide and getting a good cross in. Football should be entertaining, not reduced to being managed by statistical analysis, change is not always better........ There is also an element of common sense backing it up. Winger skins full back and crosses to one forward marked by three and four. It does not take sportscode, sporttec, prozone to work out it is most likely not going to be that effective. If you are interested the data on crossing is something like it takes 8/9 shots to score a goal, Four out of five of crosses will not hit a teammate. Crosses result in around one goal out of ninety good, bad etc crosses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearded_red Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 Whilst I understand people's concerns about potential reasoning behind narrowing the pitch and get how it may lead people to assume that we're doing it to play some horrible, negative defensive football, on the small amount of evidence I've witnessed this season (one friendly, one league game against poor opposition and a cup tie against a much changed lower league team) I don't think it is fair. It is of course true that playing on as narrow a pitch as possible would be the first and most obvious decision if you wanted to play Pulis anti-football, I remember thinking the whole thing was incredibly embarrassing the other year when Stoke were in the Europa League and they clearly had two different sets of pitch markings as the minimum size pitch in European competition was larger than in the Premier League. On the other hand, and of course people may disagree, but I have enjoyed watching Spurs in the last two seasons more than any other Premier League team and something that helps them play their high energy, aggressive pressing game and enables them to pin teams into their own half is that White Hart Lane had one of the smallest playing areas in the PL. In fact part of their struggles in the Champions League last season was that they found playing such a press much more difficult on a larger pitch and allowed (admittedly higher quality) opposition to play around them. In fact by all accounts in preparation for playing all their games at Wembley this season Pochettino had made sure all the pitches at their training ground have been made bigger so that they get used to playing their high press on a larger surface. Now, and I again admit this is a rather small sample, but what I have been liked about our play in the three homes games this season is our high energy and in particular Reid, Brownhill and Paterson pressing right from the front. A smaller pitch, although not quite as small as it was against Twente, will enable that press to be more successful. In fact if the rumours are true about City actually getting the ball rolling in regards to selling Flint then a desire to play with a higher press which then leads to playing a higher back line does make that more believable as such a high line would expose Flint's weaknesses. The way we finished last season and have started this with Brownhill and Paterson out 'wide' in what is nominaly a 442 means any space down the flanks could be exposed by teams and an easy way of getting past our initial press. As for the point about width/wingers I think we all find an Adomah like player highly entertaining, but there is always arguments about lack of end product. In fact in the Premier League teams average 18 crosses per match and on average a goal is scored once in 92 crosses. So roughly a cross leads to a goal once every five games. That of course doesn't mean never cross the ball and by looking at Diedhou's goals for Angers it would significantly decrease his goal scoring opportunities if we were to never cross the ball. It does however mean that crossing is a much smaller part of scoring goals than maybe us fans think and you need to be a lot more selective as to when to cross the ball then simply just flinging it in at every opportunity. In possession we should of course be looking to make the pitch as wide as possible, but that width will come from the fullbacks rather than wingers. We have all seen teams with much more talented players than us become incredibly easy to defend against by only using the middle eighteen yards of the field so it is obvious we still need to move the ball out wide, it's just that it may not mean smashing out to an Albert/Murray and hoping they beat three men on their own. Having said all of that I am always slightly cynical when I see things said such as 'way we play' as I can't help thinking a team like ours is never more than two defeats (and not even that many judging Johnson on last season) of completely ripping it up and playing in an entirely different manner. I must admit that during the pre-season to 2014/15 I openly doubted people confidently saying 'we will play 352 this season' and being the cynic I am and couldn't help thinking 'yeah until we lose a game'. Thankfully of course I was proven utterly wrong in those doubts and I hope this season that we actually do have an identity in our play and a style that we can say 'that's what a City team looks like', too often the only remaining characteristics from a City team from one week to the next is that they're pretty ******* terrible. If I am in any way correct that the smaller pitch is designed to in one way or another replicate how Spurs have gone about things in the last couple of years and we're looking to press teams high up and in attempt to pin them in their own half then I look forward to watching us play this season. Me being me however I'll qualify that by saying that maybe next time we go to Ashton Gate the smaller pitch will be used so we can defend our eighteen yard box all afternoon and smash balls aimlessly at Đurić.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 Regardless of the reasoning behind the changes to the pitch side the one issue you have with having a dramatically different size pitch to everyone else is when you play an away match the pitch will feel drastically different. I honestly think the best option is to have a pitch that is the leagues average, at least that way each game the difference is not too big. With that said, I don't know if our pitch is the league average, larger or smaller, I just know that's how I would approach it personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 20 hours ago, JonDolman said: Yeah Johnson said they will make it slightly wider than the Twente game, but still being narrower than last season. That explains why I was puzzled on Saturday. I sit in S22 seat 16 which is dead centre. The touchline on Lansdown side looked as if it was in same place as last season; that is the width of grass between touchline and astroturf looked same as previous. They could not move goalposts sideways as it would involve digging up the pitch to re-position the concrete post supports, one assumes also moving the rugby post supports. So it appears that the pitch has been narrowed by 0.5 / 0.75 of a metre on either side. Why bother as it hardly seems to be any different to previous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorenzos Only Goal Posted August 10, 2017 Report Share Posted August 10, 2017 23 minutes ago, cidered abroad said: That explains why I was puzzled on Saturday. I sit in S22 seat 16 which is dead centre. The touchline on Lansdown side looked as if it was in same place as last season; that is the width of grass between touchline and astroturf looked same as previous. They could not move goalposts sideways as it would involve digging up the pitch to re-position the concrete post supports, one assumes also moving the rugby post supports. So it appears that the pitch has been narrowed by 0.5 / 0.75 of a metre on either side. Why bother as it hardly seems to be any different to previous? British cycling mentality, every little thing you can do in every place will result in gains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trueredsupporter Posted August 11, 2017 Report Share Posted August 11, 2017 16 hours ago, bearded_red said: Whilst I understand people's concerns about potential reasoning behind narrowing the pitch and get how it may lead people to assume that we're doing it to play some horrible, negative defensive football, on the small amount of evidence I've witnessed this season (one friendly, one league game against poor opposition and a cup tie against a much changed lower league team) I don't think it is fair. It is of course true that playing on as narrow a pitch as possible would be the first and most obvious decision if you wanted to play Pulis anti-football, I remember thinking the whole thing was incredibly embarrassing the other year when Stoke were in the Europa League and they clearly had two different sets of pitch markings as the minimum size pitch in European competition was larger than in the Premier League. On the other hand, and of course people may disagree, but I have enjoyed watching Spurs in the last two seasons more than any other Premier League team and something that helps them play their high energy, aggressive pressing game and enables them to pin teams into their own half is that White Hart Lane had one of the smallest playing areas in the PL. In fact part of their struggles in the Champions League last season was that they found playing such a press much more difficult on a larger pitch and allowed (admittedly higher quality) opposition to play around them. In fact by all accounts in preparation for playing all their games at Wembley this season Pochettino had made sure all the pitches at their training ground have been made bigger so that they get used to playing their high press on a larger surface. Now, and I again admit this is a rather small sample, but what I have been liked about our play in the three homes games this season is our high energy and in particular Reid, Brownhill and Paterson pressing right from the front. A smaller pitch, although not quite as small as it was against Twente, will enable that press to be more successful. In fact if the rumours are true about City actually getting the ball rolling in regards to selling Flint then a desire to play with a higher press which then leads to playing a higher back line does make that more believable as such a high line would expose Flint's weaknesses. The way we finished last season and have started this with Brownhill and Paterson out 'wide' in what is nominaly a 442 means any space down the flanks could be exposed by teams and an easy way of getting past our initial press. As for the point about width/wingers I think we all find an Adomah like player highly entertaining, but there is always arguments about lack of end product. In fact in the Premier League teams average 18 crosses per match and on average a goal is scored once in 92 crosses. So roughly a cross leads to a goal once every five games. That of course doesn't mean never cross the ball and by looking at Diedhou's goals for Angers it would significantly decrease his goal scoring opportunities if we were to never cross the ball. It does however mean that crossing is a much smaller part of scoring goals than maybe us fans think and you need to be a lot more selective as to when to cross the ball then simply just flinging it in at every opportunity. In possession we should of course be looking to make the pitch as wide as possible, but that width will come from the fullbacks rather than wingers. We have all seen teams with much more talented players than us become incredibly easy to defend against by only using the middle eighteen yards of the field so it is obvious we still need to move the ball out wide, it's just that it may not mean smashing out to an Albert/Murray and hoping they beat three men on their own. Having said all of that I am always slightly cynical when I see things said such as 'way we play' as I can't help thinking a team like ours is never more than two defeats (and not even that many judging Johnson on last season) of completely ripping it up and playing in an entirely different manner. I must admit that during the pre-season to 2014/15 I openly doubted people confidently saying 'we will play 352 this season' and being the cynic I am and couldn't help thinking 'yeah until we lose a game'. Thankfully of course I was proven utterly wrong in those doubts and I hope this season that we actually do have an identity in our play and a style that we can say 'that's what a City team looks like', too often the only remaining characteristics from a City team from one week to the next is that they're pretty ******* terrible. If I am in any way correct that the smaller pitch is designed to in one way or another replicate how Spurs have gone about things in the last couple of years and we're looking to press teams high up and in attempt to pin them in their own half then I look forward to watching us play this season. Me being me however I'll qualify that by saying that maybe next time we go to Ashton Gate the smaller pitch will be used so we can defend our eighteen yard box all afternoon and smash balls aimlessly at Đurić.. In fact in the Premier League teams average 18 crosses per match and on average a goal is scored once in 92 crosses!! Puts the rubbish on here about Joe Bryans crossing into perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.