Jump to content
IGNORED

Midfield


Super

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Bullbag said:

Not just the midfield.

We have a below average squad (that has cost a small fortune to put together).

In a nutshell, we just aren't very good.

The management is just as poor.

Another relegation struggle this season, anyone who thinks it won't be has their head in the sand.

It frustrates me seeing how well Cardiff are doing since Neil went in. Always seem to get negative response on here when we mention Warnock but we would have been much better off taking the punt and offering him the role in Feb 16. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Robbored said:

The midfield was getting overrun at times last night which is why GoN came on for Diedhiou. That proved to be a smart move

It was the obvious move. And one that many people would've made 20 minutes sooner. 

After he came on we still didn't get on the ball, and that's what worries me. Don't think we have options on the bench to change games if things are going against us.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bullbag said:

Not just the midfield.

We have a below average squad (that has cost a small fortune to put together).

In a nutshell, we just aren't very good.

The management is just as poor.

Another relegation struggle this season, anyone who thinks it won't be has their head in the sand.

You must be a barrel of laughs on a night out . 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tinman85 said:

A creative midfielder player who can score goals and regularly create chances. A driver in our midfield who can help us to dominate. Brentford have many as I said previously. Do you think Smith and Pack are good enough??

Definitely not. No pace, no goals, left stranded by opposition attacks which puts so much pressure on the back four it's inevitable that we'll concede goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No team can attack relentlessly for 90 minutes. It's impossible. Nor can they press the opposition with intensity for a whole game.

When you're not attacking you have two options:

1. Forget about possession. Sit deep, defend solidly, be ready to spring forward very, very quickly when you win the ball back.

2. Don't give the ball away. Keep possession for long periods but don't bust a gut attacking every time. Save energy. Press hard and fast when the opposition does get the ball so they don't keep it for long.

City are changing from option 1 to option 2 and are currently caught between 2 stools. If we're going to do it properly then we need players who can keep the ball patiently. We can press and win the ball, and we can score quick goals, and that's great for 5 or 10 minutes but the remaining 85 can become a struggle if we don't race into an unassailable lead. We have to have someone who the defence can give the ball to, who will hold it under pressure, and who will be able to pick a pass. I'd suggest we could do worse than try playing Hegeler in front of the back 4 with a remit to get the ball and hold on to it until an easy pass is available. If he can't do it then we need to buy someone who can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our midfield wasn't to blame last night. We should of changed formation at half time because we was getting overrun, seemed Brentford had a extra player the way they was playing. A change to a 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 formation would of been good to give us more possession and would of taken some pressure off us.

Pato and Brownhill wasn't in the game enough in our 4-4-2 and our whole midfield seemed to be bypassed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, spudski said:

Our midfield is fine, for a mid table Championship Club, playing in an expansive offensive mode.

However...if we come under extreme pressure down the middle, and we let in crosses from the flanks, then imo, we don't have the personnel good enough to deal with it.

If you are going to win the header from the cross, you have to win the first ball out. Do Smith and Pack do that? Are Smith and Pack good enough to break down play and get that foot in? It's all well and good hustling the opposition, and keeping close to them...but at some point you have to get your foot in or stop the cross...lots of hustling, very little end product.

We play a very dangerous game letting so many crosses come in and not winning the first ball out of the 18 yard box. LJ speaks of the 'danger zone'...he's well aware of where the danger lies...so why let the ball come into that zone so often?

I've yet to work that one out.

Good observations.

I wasn't there but would be interested in your thoughts re Brentford lining up 4231 vs our 442.  If I play a bit of "football manager" to get my point across, who lined up against who?

Pisano / Watkins

Wright and Baker / Vibe (I'm happy for one to be spare)

Bryan / Jota

All good so far.

Then....

Pack and Smith / Sawyers, McEachran, Yenarris (this appears to create them the extra man and our two overloaded) ISSUE NO.1

But....

Brownhill and Paterson / Colin and Daksgaard

Reid and Diedhiou / Dean and Barbet

means Brentford have no spare man at the back, like we do. ISSUE NO.2 or is it OPPORTUNITY NO.1?

So....

does that mean we surrender a lot of possession and their midfield pass it around easily, but actually when we do get decent possession we can look dangerous because they have no spare man?

does the option become for Smith to sit on Sawyers and Reid drop in to name it more of a 4141...just to balance things up.

or....

do Brownhill and Paterson play narrow to support Pack and Smith to make it a 4v3...but with the expectation that Diedhiou and Reid then track the Brentford full-backs, leaving Dean and Barbet the ball...and gave to advance through a very congested middle of the park.

So...

thers a bit of basic theory!

What actually happened?

What turned 8 minutes injury time into a period where according to Sky we looked liked getting an equaliser....and did!

 

PS.  It reminds me very much of Fulham at home last season, where we seemed to have two spare men, and put zero pressure on the ball....and got outplayed without necessarily seeing our goal threatened like it was last night.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Good observations.

I wasn't there but would be interested in your thoughts re Brentford lining up 4231 vs our 442.  If I play a bit of "football manager" to get my point across, who lined up against who?

Pisano / Watkins

Wright and Baker / Vibe (I'm happy for one to be spare)

Bryan / Jota

All good so far.

Then....

Pack and Smith / Sawyers, McEachran, Yenarris (this appears to create them the extra man and our two overloaded) ISSUE NO.1

But....

Brownhill and Paterson / Colin and Daksgaard

Reid and Diedhiou / Dean and Barbet

means Brentford have no spare man at the back, like we do. ISSUE NO.2 or is it OPPORTUNITY NO.1?

So....

does that mean we surrender a lot of possession and their midfield pass it around easily, but actually when we do get decent possession we can look dangerous because they have no spare man?

does the option become for Smith to sit on Sawyers and Reid drop in to name it more of a 4141...just to balance things up.

or....

do Brownhill and Paterson play narrow to support Pack and Smith to make it a 4v3...but with the expectation that Diedhiou and Reid then track the Brentford full-backs, leaving Dean and Barbet the ball...and gave to advance through a very congested middle of the park.

So...

thers a bit of basic theory!

What actually happened?

What turned 8 minutes injury time into a period where according to Sky we looked liked getting an equaliser....and did!

 

PS.  It reminds me very much of Fulham at home last season, where we seemed to have two spare men, and put zero pressure on the ball....and got outplayed without necessarily seeing our goal threatened like it was last night.

 

I think our set up is ok Dave, however we, imo, don't have many players that are good at defending. We have a lot of offensive talent, but not defensive.

Pisano is an improvement at RB, but his strengths are that of an offensive overlapping RB.

Bryan is also an offensive LB. Have a look at how easy it is for players to get a cross in from his side of the pitch. It's constant. He's great going forward...has a great engine, very composed, tracks back etc...but gives way too much room to the opponent when tracking and hustling. He's turned very easily and allows way too many crosses to come in to the box.

It was the same last season. We allow the ball into the box too easily. We hustle, and track, but stand off and allow the opponent to either pass, cross or shoot...we hardly ever get a foot in, until it's in the danger zone. Exactly what happened for Brentford's second goal. Eventually got foot in...but the ball came off Pack and unfortunately ran straight into the path of a Brentford player to shoot and score.

How many times did a cross come in from Bryan and Pattersons side? Way too many. Easy header for Watkins.

The stats will show they get into the positions to defend...yet they don't actually defend. They don't get close enough or get a foot in. It's frustrating to watch. They do everything asked of them. The shape and position is good...they just don't do the essential thing of actually defending though. Too much room given.

The first goal for Brentford was a prime example of what we did so often last year. Watch what positions Bryan, Patterson and Pack get in. They have done what they are asked.

Then look how much space Bryan gives. Then look at Pack...How much space, how easy to turn, how easy to cross, not even an effort to tackle or block the cross....way too easy.

It's an epidemic of certain players we have in the team. They get into position, which the stats will show. But they don't actually defend the ball.

Baker and Wright can defend...they actually attack the ball...as does Hegeler, but does it in a less aggressive and more composed manner...yet he does win the first ball.

Smith hustles...does he win the ball, stand on it, command CM?

Look at our squad of players...and their actually attributes and how they are being used.

Bryan is used for his offensive attributes, not so much his defensive imo.

Put Magners in that position and he'd win more balls, stop more crosses, but you'd lose the offensive attributes Bryan gives you.

From what I've witnessed so far under LJ...he seems to want to play fast, attacking football, that is expansive.

That leaves lots of room and opportunity to the opposition.

We will score...but we will concede. He gambles a lot imo.

Whether it will work over the course of a season, we've yet to witness.

So far though...it's at least been entertaining, and for many parts enjoyable.

Most will agree we are a mid table team...in being that, we will win just as many as we lose. So lots of debate will continue for sure ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spudski said:

I think our set up is ok Dave, however we, imo, don't have many players that are good at defending. We have a lot of offensive talent, but not defensive.

Pisano is an improvement at RB, but his strengths are that of an offensive overlapping RB.

Bryan is also an offensive LB. Have a look at how easy it is for players to get a cross in from his side of the pitch. It's constant. He's great going forward...has a great engine, very composed, tracks back etc...but gives way too much room to the opponent when tracking and hustling. He's turned very easily and allows way too many crosses to come in to the box.

It was the same last season. We allow the ball into the box too easily. We hustle, and track, but stand off and allow the opponent to either pass, cross or shoot...we hardly ever get a foot in, until it's in the danger zone. Exactly what happened for Brentford's second goal. Eventually got foot in...but the ball came off Pack and unfortunately ran straight into the path of a Brentford player to shoot and score.

How many times did a cross come in from Bryan and Pattersons side? Way too many. Easy header for Watkins.

The stats will show they get into the positions to defend...yet they don't actually defend. They don't get close enough or get a foot in. It's frustrating to watch. They do everything asked of them. The shape and position is good...they just don't do the essential thing of actually defending though. Too much room given.

The first goal for Brentford was a prime example of what we did so often last year. Watch what positions Bryan, Patterson and Pack get in. They have done what they are asked.

Then look how much space Bryan gives. Then look at Pack...How much space, how easy to turn, how easy to cross, not even an effort to tackle or block the cross....way too easy.

It's an epidemic of certain players we have in the team. They get into position, which the stats will show. But they don't actually defend the ball.

Baker and Wright can defend...they actually attack the ball...as does Hegeler, but does it in a less aggressive and more composed manner...yet he does win the first ball.

Smith hustles...does he win the ball, stand on it, command CM?

Look at our squad of players...and their actually attributes and how they are being used.

Bryan is used for his offensive attributes, not so much his defensive imo.

Put Magners in that position and he'd win more balls, stop more crosses, but you'd lose the offensive attributes Bryan gives you.

From what I've witnessed so far under LJ...he seems to want to play fast, attacking football, that is expansive.

That leaves lots of room and opportunity to the opposition.

We will score...but we will concede. He gambles a lot imo.

Whether it will work over the course of a season, we've yet to witness.

So far though...it's at least been entertaining, and for many parts enjoyable.

Most will agree we are a mid table team...in being that, we will win just as many as we lose. So lots of debate will continue for sure ;-)

Good post. Do we believe it is the system we play is wrong or that the players in it are not doing what they should at the time they should.

Seems to me that some of our personnel are not suited to the formation we are now using.

For example, we now have two very similar full backs - both extremely good going forward but defending isn't their strong point.

Two central midfielders without pace, so unable to outrun forwards who are on a charge, rarely score goals and are not what I call really creative in attack.

We only have left footed wingers - I don't count Patterson as a winger. O'Dowda rarely hits a shot with his left foot when cutting in from the right. Remains to be seen if Eliasson will be any different. It seems as if the two wide players are there to carry the ball from wide into centre field in order to create openings out wide for the full backs to get into and make the crosses. We do not see the wingers/ wide men, call them what you will, cutting in and shooting from edge of the box and on target. Those shots can create goals firstly from the shot going in but also from rebounds.

I seriously wonder whether we now have most of the personnel in place to play 3-5-2 which becomes flexible into 5-3-2 and 3-4-2-1.

We have four centre halves, if one includes Flint. Plus young blood in Moore, Vyner, Kelly, Plavotic. The back three to be a much tighter unit than the League One three when Ayling went walkabout. These three are defenders!

We have two wing backs in Pisano and Bryan. Cover by Vyner and Kelly? Or O'Dowda for Bryan? 

We have Hegeler to play the defensive sweeper in front of the back three. Cover by GON or Pack?

We have Diedhiou and Reid for the front two, but without any cover due to injuries.

The missing links are the two central midfielders who will need to have pace, strength and stamina to keep going for 90 minutes and score a reasonable chunk of our goals. 

I know this will not happen because of .................. The current Plan A is only working part of the time and, as others have rightly pointed out, we don't appear to have a Plan B or C. With 3-5-2 it is quite easy to revert to 4-4-2 or others mentioned above. 

Coaching and match planning needs significant improvement. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

I think Hegeler is that player .

 

I think he would be if we played 4231, but he would be left too exposed imo, under our present set up.

Much prefer him at CB with Wright.

Would preferably have another strong DM player in front of him....an upgrade on Smith and Oneil, if we are to play with offensive wide midfielders and full backs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...