Do we need to up our first half performances?

[pl00peh91]

Wonderful run so far and long may it continue but I worry at times that we don’t perform to our high standards in the first halves of games and rely on “hanging in there” and overrunning teams in the last half an hour due to our fitness levels and strength in depth.

This is great provided that our defence is solid and can get to half time at either 0-0 or at worst 1-0 down, which we have done consistently in the last few months, however I do wonder whether this will continue as we play the better teams in the league over the course of the next few games.

Yesterday showed that whilst we can dominate a good premier league side, if you’re only allowing yourself half the game to do so you do run the risk of simply running out of time to get the equaliser or score the winner. 

So, is there anything we can be doing to score more goals in the first halves of games, either in the line up or tactically, or is it inherent in the way we play that we start the game more conservatively and hit teams with the knockout blow in the second half? 

[cityexile]

It’s not the first time this season, we do seem cautious starters.

Plan A seems to be a variation of rope-a-dope. First and foremost keep it tight and compact. Bring on some subs who spice us up on the hour mark, nick a goal, often late on, and see it out. In fairness, it’s worked enough to not be to critical of it.

The much more expensive Plan B attacking play we see seems to be when we have gone down by a goal, Stoke, yesterday, Bolton, QPR, WBA. We did not turn all of those around, but deserved maybe a little more than we got. 

My worry about some of the top teams we will now be playing is that their Plan A is our Plan B. They will come at us from the first whistle, and if we are not careful we will be out of it by half time. It is going to need a very careful balance. LJ has shifted stuff around when he has needed to effectively, I suspect the test in some of our bigger games to come will be getting it right from the get go.

 

[Spike]

I think it's LJ's way of assessing the game, I think he sets out with a plan but tells the lads to keep it tight at the back and uses the first 10-20 minutes to assess if the tactics he has set out are working, for this reason alone we're cautious when attacking to ensure we don't go behind early. If the tactics are working we stick with them, if there are areas we can improve LJ gets the orders out and changes it up. It's only in games like yesterday that you can really see how much LJ is improving tactically as he knew it wasn't working for us and at half time he set out to match up Wolves to take away their best-attacking options which in-turn gave us more of them.

I can see LJ improving tactically now, it certainly makes me feel better about how we set up but I don't think we'll be a straight out of the gates kind of team based on that we're defence first, attack second in our mentality.

[Mr Popodopolous]

It has been mixed through this run in this respect- though definitely of late more of an emphasis of coming on strong post halftime.

Nottingham Forest away we were better in the first half than the 2nd. Vs Birmingham away too and definitely v Norwich at home. Millwall at home yes, but that could well have been due to their tactics as much as ours. Blackburn think we were a little better in first than 2nd.

OTOH, yesterday as well as the home wins v Swansea, QPR and Bolton in the League all saw us do better after the break. Some were a mix of the 2 i.e. better in terms of shots but worse possession or vice versa in different halves. Theme that definitely seems to run through however- and I won't count yesterday so much as Wolves are a really good side who were taking this game as seriously as possible so it was just that we were outplayed first half tbh which can happen- is that we only seem to turn it on in one half or another. 2nd half has been the most productive of late, but as above not all the way through this run in terms of performance level split (goals, that's a different matter). Other thing to consider on the Wolves front is that Pack replaced by Morrell in that first half owing to the fitness also played a part- he did fine but Pack would have kept us more competitive (subject to fitness etc) in the first half IMO.

[The Bard]

We do seem to need a nudge to start playing. Bolton twice and QPR clear examples.  

[Numero Uno]

Agree with the main point but I thought that yesterday Wolves looked like a 7th in the Premiership side first half and without Pack in front of the back four due to carrying a slight injury there wasn’t much we could do about it.

What the second half showed me was that an in form Pack makes a huge difference to the way we play. Brownhill looked twice the player playing 20 yards further up, Webster started carrying the ball with Pack sitting in and we bossed possession from there on.

[downendcity]

Slow starting has been  a feature throughout LJ's time here.

Against Wolves I can understand us being cautious first half, as going at them gungho could have seen us taken apart and going in 2 or 3 down at half time, and can see us taking a similar approach against our main rivals in the coming weeks.

However, I can't understand our caution, and why we don't impose ourselves more from the start against teams like Rotherham, Bolton etc.  Norwich and Sheff U were both 3 up at half time on Saturday, but I don't see us ever playing in such a way that we could forge such a half time lead against anyone - notwithstanding that we are not such a potent goalscoring team.

The second half yesterday and against QPR showed the sort of pressure under which we can put teams, and good ones at that. How much difference would it make if we started games the way we finish them?

[Davefevs]

Here’s our h-t stats;

Sat here today we have 15 wins, 8 draws and 8 defeats.  At h-t we have 5 wins, 20 draws, 6 defeats.

Being a second half team seems to be useful.

[joenaldo]

I quite enjoyed the switch to 3 at the back yesterday - presume that will work very well against some teams, others not so much

[Ska Junkie]

It's working so why change it?

If we're level / only 1 behind at h/t, it's almost expectation that we win nowadays. It does seem a definite ploy though to start slowly / contain in the first 45 then batter opponents in the 2nd.

[Robbored]

51 minutes ago, Spike said:

I think it's LJ's way of assessing the game, I think he sets out with a plan but tells the lads to keep it tight at the back and uses the first 10-20 minutes to assess if the tactics he has set out are working, for this reason alone we're cautious when attacking to ensure we don't go behind early. If the tactics are working we stick with them, if there are areas we can improve LJ gets the orders out and changes it up. It's only in games like yesterday that you can really see how much LJ is improving tactically as he knew it wasn't working for us and at half time he set out to match up Wolves to take away their best-attacking options which in-turn gave us more of them.

I can see LJ improving tactically now, it certainly makes me feel better about how we set up but I don't think we'll be a straight out of the gates kind of team based on that we're defence first, attack second in our mentality.

Excellent post Spike.

 Nail and head springs to mind

[cidered abroad]

Copied from another thread with similar content.

Are we too cautious in first halves, especially at home?

I fully understand when away, take the sting out of opposition and crowd, but on our own patch, perhaps we should be holding a line that is ten yards nearer the half way line. I know that leaves us at the mercy of long passes over the top and into the space, a bit like Wolves did in first half, trying to hit Doherty and Jimenez. But how many Championship sides will be able to do it as accurately and at pace as Wolves do? Not too many. And remember this was an FA Cup tie not a league match in which many sides will come here to be very cautious for at least first twenty minutes.

Something for LJ to consider? We have come a long way in the last few months. A minor adjustment to first half tactics at home is now very much worth a try. Try to put the game out of reach early on rather than a chase to win it in the second half?

[Mr Popodopolous]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Here’s our h-t stats;

Sat here today we have 15 wins, 8 draws and 8 defeats.  At h-t we have 5 wins, 20 draws, 6 defeats.

Being a second half team seems to be useful.

That purely measures goals and points though, performance levels and intent in the differing halves is more of a mixed picture IMO.

e.g. Both halves v Norwich finished 1-1 and v Millwall 1st half finished 0-0 and 2nd half 1-1 yet we were a lot more in the game/dominant in the first half of each. Points are the most important currency though and in that respect, we are cashing in as a 2nd half side.

Nottingham Forest away, better side in terms of performance and attacking, possession etc first half yet won the game in the 2nd when it was more even.

[The Major]

We desperately need a goalscorer.  Regardless of 1st half performances, if we could score at a decent shot on target/goal ratio we would be in the top 2, no doubt!