Only one of our opening seven games...

[mozo]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

It was an entertaining game to watch as a neutral Dave... offensively both teams were going for it.

However... tactically...when out of possession and defending it was often cringeworthy to see what positions some of our players were taking. Wayyyyyy too open. But I guess that's what makes it 'entertaining'...as it's the human error and imperfections that allow the chances to be created.

If Boro's chances had gone in, I wonder whether fans would still have been entertained?

Watching yesterday, reminded me a little of when we came up under SC and we were playing open attacking football, but getting wooped every week.

I think the International break has come at a great time. We need it.

As for a full fit team. I'd like to see...

______________Bentley_______________

_____Kalas_____Baker____Moore______

Pedro__________Nagy_________DaSilva

_____Brownhill________Messengo_____

______________Palmer_______________

______________Afobe________________

Or...

______________Bentley_____________

Pedro____Kalas______Baker____DaSilva

_______Nagy__________Messengo_____

___Brownhill______________Palmer____

_________Weimann__Afobe___________

Do you agree that the same analysis/criticism applies to Boro too? Both sides were wide open. It was that kind of game.

2 minutes ago, spudski said:

Beg to differ Robbo.

When in possession you are less tired than chasing. Sometimes the aim off possession is to move the ball around, tire the opposition out, keep the ball deep and let the opposition come to you.

This then creates space behind which you can then exploit.

We aim to do this when in possession.

When out of possession, we press when their are triggers. I've noticed we often press higher in the first half of games with energy. looking to steal the ball or intercept higher up.

As teams are tiring...we sit deeper. Drawing the opposition into our defensive third, then counter-attack when we steal the ball and launch into an attack at speed.

Essentially, the tactic involves dropping deep, allowing the opposition to have the ball and come forward with it, committing players forward and leaving gaps in behind as they go. The aim is to take the ball off the opposition, exploiting the space left to attack and score.

We use both possession and counter attack in different parts of the game.

Be careful not to conflate possession stats (passes) with possession. They don't always correlate, e.g. tippy tappy one touch creates extra passes but not necessarily meaningful time on the ball, or control of the match.

 

I don't have any issue with your assessment of the line up, by the way. It's a reasonable view to take, I'm just not convinced that Johnson should have opted for something else given the circumstances. 

[Robbored]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Beg to differ Robbo.

When in possession you are less tired than chasing. Sometimes the aim off possession is to move the ball around, tire the opposition out, keep the ball deep and let the opposition come to you.

This then creates space behind which you can then exploit.

We aim to do this when in possession.

When out of possession, we press when their are triggers. I've noticed we often press higher in the first half of games with energy. looking to steal the ball or intercept higher up.

As teams are tiring...we sit deeper. Drawing the opposition into our defensive third, then counter-attack when we steal the ball and launch into an attack at speed.

Essentially, the tactic involves dropping deep, allowing the opposition to have the ball and come forward with it, committing players forward and leaving gaps in behind as they go. The aim is to take the ball off the opposition, exploiting the space left to attack and score.

We use both possession and counter attack in different parts of the game.

You’re using strategy and game management as a stat Spudski.

Every manager knows that if his team keep the ball they'll eventually knacker the opposition - it’s common sense. That said we’ve all seen games where a team has had the lions share of possession but loses the game and that’s why imv that possession stats are largely meaningless or at best misguided. 

[1bristolcity]

17 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Maybe I’ve got it wrong???  Hope not....might’ve pissed off a few people if so.

I looked it up, it is a 'cool' thing, or you were 'on fire'  sooooo right, and very sexy...steady on mate. xx

[exAtyeoMax]

2 minutes ago, 1bristolcity said:

I looked it up, it is a 'cool' thing, or you were 'on fire'  sooooo right, and very sexy...steady on mate. xx

bit like Freeman used to be, or whoever it is sung about now…

(is this emoji going to be updated by the way?) I'm quite happy with it as it is but just wondered

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, mozo said:

Do you agree that the same analysis/criticism applies to Boro too? Both sides were wide open. It was that kind of game.

Be careful not to conflate possession stats (passes) with possession. They don't always correlate, e.g. tippy tappy one touch creates extra passes but not necessarily meaningful time on the ball, or control of the match.

 

I don't have any issue with your assessment of the line up, by the way. It's a reasonable view to take, I'm just not convinced that Johnson should have opted for something else given the circumstances. 

I like this a lot

[Galway Red]

It was interesting watching us play at home on Sky as I'm used to being at AG, my main observation was how often we hoofed it up to Afobe (a massive improvement on Fam) Boro were more intent on playing their way up the pitch so it's hardly surprising they had more possession. I'll be flying back for the Swansea game and hopefully it will be a better result than my last visit against dirty Leeds

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

I think that possession stats are pretty meaningless.

I as posted just now any team can win a game with a low percentage of possession.

Its what a team does when in possession that really matters.

Can depend on shape, formation and mindset.

I agree, possession isn't necessarily decisive. A counterattacking or park the bus and hit when you can approach is not so incompatible with this, with eschewing the ball.

An open game though, an open shape can leave a side chasing the game- and the ball. As @spudski did say.

Eventually that high energy, octane approach of chasing without necessarily controlling the ball and midfield will catch up when up against a central 3! You need to really capitalise in that first half, 2 goal, 3 goal lead something like that.

Now if it's a case of accepting a side has little ox the ball and are happy to absorb and counter then this conserves physical energy but still can take a mental strain- makes more sense though. The advantage of holding the ball a bit more is 'resting in possession'.

[spudski]

3 hours ago, mozo said:

Do you agree that the same analysis/criticism applies to Boro too? Both sides were wide open. It was that kind of game.

Be careful not to conflate possession stats (passes) with possession. They don't always correlate, e.g. tippy tappy one touch creates extra passes but not necessarily meaningful time on the ball, or control of the match.

 

I don't have any issue with your assessment of the line up, by the way. It's a reasonable view to take, I'm just not convinced that Johnson should have opted for something else given the circumstances. 

I agree totally...and that's the angle I always come from. You are correct it doesn't give a true picture. Hence Jen's Hegelers project, trying to show more conclusive stats.

[Cowshed]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Can depend on shape, formation and mindset.

I agree, possession isn't necessarily decisive. A counterattacking or park the bus and hit when you can approach is not so incompatible with this, with eschewing the ball.

An open game though, an open shape can leave a side chasing the game- and the ball. As @spudski did say.

Eventually that high energy, octane approach of chasing without necessarily controlling the ball and midfield will catch up when up against a central 3! You need to really capitalise in that first half, 2 goal, 3 goal lead something like that.

Now if it's a case of accepting a side has little ox the ball and are happy to absorb and counter then this conserves physical energy but still can take a mental strain- makes more sense though. The advantage of holding the ball a bit more is 'resting in possession'.

It was something Pack and Webster were good at. There are posts here saying some of City passing last seasons was pointless, no pass is pointless, they all have a point, sometimes its simply attempting to move players who then do not move and hold. but often as you point out its to rest in possession and reset it. 

Doing very little with possession, just moving it can have quite lot of meaning. Its a methodology used by Man City where they hold the ball in what is termed the safe possession zone (first third) and they are intent to sit on it. Peel back the stats and its Man City who pointlessly go backwards with possession more than any team in the EPL. They rest, reset and attack rather well ...

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

It was something Pack and Webster were good at. There are posts here saying some of City passing last seasons was pointless, no pass is pointless, they all have a point, sometimes its simply attempting to move players who then do not move and hold. but often as you point out its to rest in possession and reset it. 

Doing very little with possession, just moving it can have quite lot of meaning. Its a methodology used by Man City where they hold the ball in what is termed the safe possession zone (first third) and they are intent to sit on it. Peel back the stats and its Man City who pointlessly go backwards with possession more than any team in the EPL. They rest, reset and attack rather well ...

That’s all well and good when you’re Man City, because you are right they are resetting.  But if we go back to SOD it was pass, pass, maybe go forward, then go back, sideways, sideways again, then knock back to keeper to hoof it for a contested ball.  Possession is certain more pointless in that approach than Man City.  It’s almost pointless using Man City as a reference point!

[Cowshed]

39 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That’s all well and good when you’re Man City, because you are right they are resetting.  But if we go back to SOD it was pass, pass, maybe go forward, then go back, sideways, sideways again, then knock back to keeper to hoof it for a contested ball.  Possession is certain more pointless in that approach than Man City.  It’s almost pointless using Man City as a reference point!

I would disagree with using Man City as a reference. The simplicity of the footballs principles is relevant to any level. Possession of the ball is its overriding principle. Being able to keep the ball in the first third (safe possession zone) can be a parallel. Bristol City have at times been good at that element. What happens beyond that is obviously different.

A observation to the OP is Bristol City for this season minus Webster and Pack have less possession and also in the second third look to play forward to penetrate quicker as an intent = less possession. Struggling in possession? It can be looked upon as no because it should be expected, the intent is not to monopolise the ball. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

I was looking for stuff with respect to Adam Clayton and came across this thread from early season.

It is strange and disappointing that LJ did not build from a position of strength.

We had a decent conversion rate but our chance creation was steadily sliding, our chances conceded was ticking up and this Middlesbrough game especially was a good example of open at both ends and most importantly in the context of the thread, our possession was below par.

Now the Afobe injury a big big blow, meant we needed to create more to score, our possession was still low.

DaSilva out after one game for half a season how's your luck! Nagy injured and then injured again on International duty, Kalas injured at Hull?

Maenpaa (less important at this stage) and Smith (certainly valuable), both injured coming into the season. None of this helped. 

Still though, we didn't build from a position of strength and that is disappointing! As this thread shows, we could see flaws or possible problems to come- why couldn't LJ.

[Davefevs]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I was looking for stuff with respect to Adam Clayton and came across this thread from early season.

It is strange and disappointing that LJ did not build from a position of strength.

We had a decent conversion rate but our chance creation was steadily sliding, our chances conceded was ticking up and this Middlesbrough game especially was a good example of open at both ends and most importantly in the context of the thread, our possession was below par.

Now the Afobe injury a big big blow, meant we needed to create more to score, our possession was still low.

DaSilva out after one game for half a season how's your luck! Nagy injured and then injured again on International duty, Kalas injured at Hull?

Maenpaa (less important at this stage) and Smith (certainly valuable), both injured coming into the season. None of this helped. 

Still though, we didn't build from a position of strength and that is disappointing! As this thread shows, we could see flaws or possible problems to come- why couldn't LJ.

Why Clayton?  Future player?

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Why Clayton?  Future player?

I wonder if he'd be a useful addition on a free to what is a relatively young and inexperienced central midfield at Championship level.

[GrahamC]

47 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Why Clayton?  Future player?

Been released by Boro, as has Ryan Shotton of the enormous long throw..

Fair few interesting players still not snapped up who have been let go..