spudski Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 ...it's a bit of a bug bear with me. We are pinging them into the box left right and centre, hoping for Famara to get his head on it, or pick up the scraps after a clearance. We often get few chances from these crosses...most are cleared. What is noticeable is we get into a position to cross or pass into the box on many an occasion...but always seem to choose the cross to head There are many an occasion where a pass to feet is the better option. Famara will often be on the six yard line with two defenders on him and a keeper to fight against...when there are two or three of our own players in space in and around the penalty spot. I really do think we are making life hard for ourselves in front of goal ATM... especially when there are better options on. Great win last night...entertaining game, but I think we could have made it a lot easier on ourselves if better decisions were made when passing/ crossing into the box. Nice to have that as my only concern Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf Hucker Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 The crossing of Eliasson is exceptional and potentially dangerous but I agree that the concept of crossing in the game has become somewhat outdated. It’s not a tactic favoured by the very top teams throughout Europe. What has made Palmer such a stand out player for us is that he creates chances by attacking through the middle. Without him, most of our attacks start from the flanks People have previously posted statistics showing how proportionally few headed goals result from crosses I guess also revealing that attacking heading ability is a bit of a dying art. Certainly Famara isn’t the greatest exponent of it. No moaning from me. I’m more than happy with how things are progressing but a good point to debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnzFM Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 In most cases we were crossing from deep to, despite space being available to move into down the line. Felt like we crossed 100 times from the same position last night with no success Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 1 minute ago, BarnzFM said: In most cases we were crossing from deep to, despite space being available to move into down the line. Felt like we crossed 100 times from the same position last night with no success Yep. The cross what Elli put in for Fam in the second half is the perfect crossing position but like you said a lot are coming in from a deeper position which is easy to defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 42 minutes ago, spudski said: ...it's a bit of a bug bear with me. We are pinging them into the box left right and centre, hoping for Famara to get his head on it, or pick up the scraps after a clearance. We often get few chances from these crosses...most are cleared. What is noticeable is we get into a position to cross or pass into the box on many an occasion...but always seem to choose the cross to head There are many an occasion where a pass to feet is the better option. Famara will often be on the six yard line with two defenders on him and a keeper to fight against...when there are two or three of our own players in space in and around the penalty spot. I really do think we are making life hard for ourselves in front of goal ATM... especially when there are better options on. Great win last night...entertaining game, but I think we could have made it a lot easier on ourselves if better decisions were made when passing/ crossing into the box. Nice to have that as my only concern Wholeheartedly agree. I noticed in the first half a couple of occasions where Patto just stopped at the edge of their box as if to say 'heading the ball from the inevitable cross is Fammy's job, mine is to pick up stray balls just outside the area'. We didn't get to see Palmer last night, but one of the things I like about his play is he's so direct. A battering ram aimed at the opposition penalty spot and he doesn't let defenders get in the way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownendRed97 Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 In most cases Fam is either outnumbered or in the wrong position, Eliasson was aiming balls towards the penalty spot last night and Fam found himself at the back post a lot allowing the keeper to claim the ball. The one time he made the run towards the centre of the box guess what, he got his head on it and should’ve scored. Hopefully if Eliasson gets a run of games this understsnding will improve and more chances will come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 I suppose it is in part a defensive tactic @spudski. If you want to attack through the middle you need to be popping close range passes across a number of players and in order to drag the defence out you need your attackers to be front footed and taking gambles with little bursts forward - creating the triangles. But once you do that, a single interception could lead to a very dangerous counter attack as you tend to overcommit. We have good quality players, but do we have the technique to always get this right, like Man City might with Aguero, Silva, De Bruyne etc. Don't think so. Especially with our CF's lacking finesse in touch and control. With crossing, you have your focal point, but you have a bank of 3 or 4 players 10-20 yards behind the play ready to pick up loose balls, stifle a counter and keep the pressure on the opposition defence so they end up invariably hoofing it, where Webster picks up the ball and can go on his marauding runs forward and set up attacking phase 2-3-4. So whilst crossing is a low-sum game in terms of chance conversion, it is more protectionist. I think the change in how we attack has contributed to our good defensive record also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 1 hour ago, spudski said: ...it's a bit of a bug bear with me. We are pinging them into the box left right and centre, hoping for Famara to get his head on it, or pick up the scraps after a clearance. We often get few chances from these crosses...most are cleared. What is noticeable is we get into a position to cross or pass into the box on many an occasion...but always seem to choose the cross to head There are many an occasion where a pass to feet is the better option. Famara will often be on the six yard line with two defenders on him and a keeper to fight against...when there are two or three of our own players in space in and around the penalty spot. I really do think we are making life hard for ourselves in front of goal ATM... especially when there are better options on. Great win last night...entertaining game, but I think we could have made it a lot easier on ourselves if better decisions were made when passing/ crossing into the box. Nice to have that as my only concern Yep , with you there. One thing though, Eliasson's whipped , shaped crosses were a real threat, any touch on those and you have a chance. Fam not being a real 'target' man means most crosses are pointless. I'd like to see someone drive to the line and try low/hard cross or as you say pass. That or we work it back to Brownhill, who's shooting has come on massively. I do see it still, as a work in progress. Our attacking play has and will improve, and if we can get Palmer involved he will add a new dimension as he will try and get into the box more than some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Cigar Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 1 hour ago, spudski said: ...it's a bit of a bug bear with me. We are pinging them into the box left right and centre, hoping for Famara to get his head on it, or pick up the scraps after a clearance. We often get few chances from these crosses...most are cleared. What is noticeable is we get into a position to cross or pass into the box on many an occasion...but always seem to choose the cross to head There are many an occasion where a pass to feet is the better option. Famara will often be on the six yard line with two defenders on him and a keeper to fight against...when there are two or three of our own players in space in and around the penalty spot. I really do think we are making life hard for ourselves in front of goal ATM... especially when there are better options on. Great win last night...entertaining game, but I think we could have made it a lot easier on ourselves if better decisions were made when passing/ crossing into the box. Nice to have that as my only concern Yep, me too. We have one the best crossers I can remember at City, but 95% of them are wasted. It's not Eliasson's fault. What I noticed last night was how rarely Fam or anyone else attacked the ball from a cross. Rather they just let the ball bounce off their heads. What Eliasson did with the taking the defender on, cutting inside and shooting is what he needs to do all the time. It's a great weapon to have, especially in a team of players whose shooting from distance is pretty woeful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishRed Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 18 minutes ago, Fat Cigar said: Yep, me too. We have one the best crossers I can remember at City, but 95% of them are wasted. It's not Eliasson's fault. What I noticed last night was how rarely Fam or anyone else attacked the ball from a cross. Rather they just let the ball bounce off their heads. What Eliasson did with the taking the defender on, cutting inside and shooting is what he needs to do all the time. It's a great weapon to have, especially in a team of players whose shooting from distance is pretty woeful. Preaching to the converted here! Fam in particular, as the focal point in those open play crosses needs to attack the ball....................he doesn't with any regularity at all. It was hugely frustrating that we kept putting in crosses, some of them high quality but rarely looked like anything was going to come from the. Something that our coaching team need to focus on and soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Cigar Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 Ok you lot, get your chops around this: https://soccerment.com/2017/11/26/crossing-effective-strategy/ (from Nov 2017). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taz Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 On the subject of crosses, quite a few times Kelly tried to switch it from left to right, and most of the time the ball went out for a throw. It's nice when the only real criticisms are about overhit/misplaced crosses.... Do think we look better down the left with Dasilva playing though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SedRA Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 2 hours ago, spudski said: ...it's a bit of a bug bear with me. We are pinging them into the box left right and centre, hoping for Famara to get his head on it, or pick up the scraps after a clearance. We often get few chances from these crosses...most are cleared. What is noticeable is we get into a position to cross or pass into the box on many an occasion...but always seem to choose the cross to head There are many an occasion where a pass to feet is the better option. Famara will often be on the six yard line with two defenders on him and a keeper to fight against...when there are two or three of our own players in space in and around the penalty spot. I really do think we are making life hard for ourselves in front of goal ATM... especially when there are better options on. Great win last night...entertaining game, but I think we could have made it a lot easier on ourselves if better decisions were made when passing/ crossing into the box. Nice to have that as my only concern Totally with you. It was very frustrating last night that we seemed to ALWAYS go for the cross rather than mix it up with some interplay around/in the box. It's also annoying when we never put crosses and only play tippy tappy stuff, but there has to be some middle ground, particularly when you could see the QPR CBs were very comfortable dealing with the crosses. The first goal was a result of being more direct with the ball at feet and whilst you could argue the second came from a cross, it was a pretty dubious decision as it looked like Furlong had dealt with the situation successfully as they had done all night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 2 hours ago, spudski said: ...it's a bit of a bug bear with me. We are pinging them into the box left right and centre, hoping for Famara to get his head on it, or pick up the scraps after a clearance. We often get few chances from these crosses...most are cleared. What is noticeable is we get into a position to cross or pass into the box on many an occasion...but always seem to choose the cross to head There are many an occasion where a pass to feet is the better option. Famara will often be on the six yard line with two defenders on him and a keeper to fight against...when there are two or three of our own players in space in and around the penalty spot. I really do think we are making life hard for ourselves in front of goal ATM... especially when there are better options on. Great win last night...entertaining game, but I think we could have made it a lot easier on ourselves if better decisions were made when passing/ crossing into the box. Nice to have that as my only concern Do you think that displays your own preferences/bias and view of modern football? Crossing is inefficient … I too would like to see more interplay outside of the box. As a Johnson critic I have posted he should stop morphing through styles of play. Mr Johnson has made a decision to play more consistently, the performances are demonstrating a predictable improvement (and beyond). An improvement has been made, we may not like the outcome but it is an improvement. Altering intent and instruction = More change. The very thing many felt should cease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 1 hour ago, 29AR said: I suppose it is in part a defensive tactic @spudski. If you want to attack through the middle you need to be popping close range passes across a number of players and in order to drag the defence out you need your attackers to be front footed and taking gambles with little bursts forward - creating the triangles. But once you do that, a single interception could lead to a very dangerous counter attack as you tend to overcommit. We have good quality players, but do we have the technique to always get this right, like Man City might with Aguero, Silva, De Bruyne etc. Don't think so. Especially with our CF's lacking finesse in touch and control. With crossing, you have your focal point, but you have a bank of 3 or 4 players 10-20 yards behind the play ready to pick up loose balls, stifle a counter and keep the pressure on the opposition defence so they end up invariably hoofing it, where Webster picks up the ball and can go on his marauding runs forward and set up attacking phase 2-3-4. So whilst crossing is a low-sum game in terms of chance conversion, it is more protectionist. I think the change in how we attack has contributed to our good defensive record also. Its a point I would make - The team retains defensive shape because of the nature of the way it now plays. Ironically I was watching a academy session (non City) recently which highlighted the dangers of wide players losing the ball playing to feet and counter attacks. There players are allowed to make errors to develop the necessary qualities in the future. City? I seriously doubt if all the wide players City have although skilled can play one touch, two touch to feet in congested areas of the pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fat Controller Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 Djuric would have scored a few goals in this side, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 Tbh I thought Eliasson’s crossing was very high quality and with better movement Diedhiou and O’Dowda should have got on the end of a few more tbh. The bit I do agree with is that crosses from the full backs 40 yards out aren’t much use....too deep and it’s the keepers ball all day long and hang them back and you are trying to score with headers from 15 yards!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 I've never been a big fan of crossing and I certainly don't consider Fammy a great header of the ball, he's failed to hit the target more times than I can count this season but it's working so I'm not going to judge. For me the real test is coming up, Wolves use a back 3 so Fammy is going to get next to no space, Norwich are very good in the air when it comes to defending and we have some big fixtures coming up in the next few months. This is the part of the season where it really matters. Having lived in Cardiff for so long I watched them go season after season getting into the top 6 at this point only to fall short at the end because of how tough it gets. I personally hope to be proved wrong but I think we'll fall short of promotion, we may make the top 6 but it really does depend on how we cope with the hard games coming up. If we do make the play off's I'm just not sure if we have enough quality up front to push us over the edge because in the play offs you have 3 games and you need to have that real threat going forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murraysrightplum Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 I think it’s a great option to have and creates carnage at times. Even if it doesn’t result in a goal it scares defenses and causes them to adjust = more space up the middle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Cigar Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 24 minutes ago, Chris_Brown said: Djuric would have scored a few goals in this side, I think. I must have said this 10 times (at least) this season. Unlucky sod. So would Matt Smith! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sephjnr Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 3 hours ago, Rudolf Hucker said: People have previously posted statistics showing how proportionally few headed goals result from crosses I guess also revealing that attacking heading ability is a bit of a dying art. Brought to you by the letters C,T and E. It's not as prevalent as the leather ball days, but repeated force contact with your noggin really, really isn't healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judda Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 Problem is Fam can't read the flight of the ball. If he could he'd be on at least 15 goals by now... Just as well he's got a good 1st touch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 4 hours ago, spudski said: ...it's a bit of a bug bear with me. We are pinging them into the box left right and centre, hoping for Famara to get his head on it, or pick up the scraps after a clearance. We often get few chances from these crosses...most are cleared. What is noticeable is we get into a position to cross or pass into the box on many an occasion...but always seem to choose the cross to head There are many an occasion where a pass to feet is the better option. Famara will often be on the six yard line with two defenders on him and a keeper to fight against...when there are two or three of our own players in space in and around the penalty spot. I really do think we are making life hard for ourselves in front of goal ATM... especially when there are better options on. Great win last night...entertaining game, but I think we could have made it a lot easier on ourselves if better decisions were made when passing/ crossing into the box. Nice to have that as my only concern Don’t mind that, it was when it was knocked down with no one in the box that was to get on the end of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted February 13, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 5 hours ago, Cowshed said: Do you think that displays your own preferences/bias and view of modern football? Crossing is inefficient … I too would like to see more interplay outside of the box. As a Johnson critic I have posted he should stop morphing through styles of play. Mr Johnson has made a decision to play more consistently, the performances are demonstrating a predictable improvement (and beyond). An improvement has been made, we may not like the outcome but it is an improvement. Altering intent and instruction = More change. The very thing many felt should cease. Not really my thinking Cowshed...more making the right decision at the right time. Being efficient in the final third. It can be a cross, a pass to feet, inter play etc. Yesterday I witnessed many crosses into the box, where a pass to feet would have been more probing and likely to have been more efficient. I agree...crossing is inefficient, in as, you need many before you eventually score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo88 Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 Lots of crosses can’t be a really effective strategy with City’s current players. Famara, although big, isn’t really a target man who can cope with being tightly marked by a tough defender (or two). As has been said, with Djuric or Smith it might be different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted February 13, 2019 Report Share Posted February 13, 2019 15 minutes ago, pongo88 said: Lots of crosses can’t be a really effective strategy with City’s current players. Famara, although big, isn’t really a target man who can cope with being tightly marked by a tough defender (or two). As has been said, with Djuric or Smith it might be different Yeah, I can think of a few target men who would salivate watching some of those crosses Eliasson was putting in the mixer last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 The way he gets them to dip on the six yard line Tammy would be filling his boots this season I reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INCRED Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 On 13/02/2019 at 09:37, Rudolf Hucker said: The crossing of Eliasson is exceptional and potentially dangerous but I agree that the concept of crossing in the game has become somewhat outdated. It’s not a tactic favoured by the very top teams throughout Europe. What has made Palmer such a stand out player for us is that he creates chances by attacking through the middle. Without him, most of our attacks start from the flanks People have previously posted statistics showing how proportionally few headed goals result from crosses I guess also revealing that attacking heading ability is a bit of a dying art. Certainly Famara isn’t the greatest exponent of it. No moaning from me. I’m more than happy with how things are progressing but a good point to debate. Didn't Spurs score 3 against Dortmund with crosses in to the box last night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 On 13/02/2019 at 11:10, ScottishRed said: Preaching to the converted here! Fam in particular, as the focal point in those open play crosses needs to attack the ball....................he doesn't with any regularity at all. It was hugely frustrating that we kept putting in crosses, some of them high quality but rarely looked like anything was going to come from the. Something that our coaching team need to focus on and soon. Fair play....Fammy just hasn’t got the instinct to get across his marker in the box, he tends to lurk somewhere expecting the ball to land on his head....those four sitters he missed, or didn’t even connect with, against Bolton (I think it was) just highlighted it immensely, he isn’t an ‘in the right place at the right time’ type striker, we either need to try and coach some positional sense into him or just accept him as he is and adapt accordingly.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf Hucker Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 18 minutes ago, INCRED said: Didn't Spurs score 3 against Dortmund with crosses in to the box last night? I didn't watch it. I preferred Ipswich v Derby! Of course, goals can and will be scored from crosses. I just question whether there is a preference of top coaches today to cross less from the flanks into the box? Teams like Barca seem to use the wings just to add width to the midfield with the main attacking threat coming through the middle. If kids are going to be banned in future from heading the ball, as a newspaper article suggests, football will need to evolve because in a generation, they'll be no point in crossing the ball in high because nobody will ever compete for them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.