Eliasson.....

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

I began trying to explain this in a different thread but abandoned it because I figured I’m probably on my own with it.

Contrary to popular belief, I think LJ 100% knows how he wants his team to play, who his best players are, what his favourite shape is etc... the problem is he doesn’t believe it in enough anymore, I suspect partly because he knows he’s under short-term pressure to get results.

Aa a result he gets so sucked into trying to tick all the various boxes he talks about, attempting to create a team with all the perceived right ingredients rather than a team with the philosophy he really believes in. As a result, he’s abandoned his own principles and we’ve ended up with increasingly confused thinking. It’s no wonder the players look like they’ve lost a bit of belief in what they’re being asked to do.

It feels, to me at least, a bit like the end of Gary’s time here. It’s a worry.

 

3 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

It’s almost a bit like “Well this is what I really want to do, but it’s not working as well/quickly as I thought it would, so I’ll give something else a go because it seems to make sense”.

That is not a recipe for success in any line of management.

Yep, that’s the kind of thing I was saying.  He’s impatient with it, as you elude too.

Millwall was your classic example.  We started brightly, but Millwall’s front 3 stopped our back 4 passing it around, buoyed by Jed’s goal.  Romeo and the other Wallace pinned our wide players back, and then any time Massengo or Nagy tried to come short, there wasn’t really a pass onto them, as the Millwall midfielders knew they could gamble on pressing them.  

If we look at the Millwall marking before LJ switched:

J.Wallace, Bradshaw and Bodvarsson taking care of our back 4.

Romeo on Eliasson

M.Wallace on Brownhill

Molumby and Williams taking care of Nagy and Massengo

So where was our out-ball?  In reality, there wasn’t one.  Millwall’s 343 (523) was pushing us back.  By trying to keep playing from the back was futile, and Nagy and Massengo were given no chance to come, receive and turn.  Millwall’s 3 CBs were able to push up high.  At times you have to admit that the opposition is on top and you’re gonna have to go about it differently.

What LJ did was swap Eliasson to the right, Weimann left, and play Brownhill off of Diedhiou in what should’ve been a 4411.  In terms of building from the back, we still had the same 44x back-eight, pinned by Millwall’s 343.  What made it worse, because Brownhill could’ve been the loose player finding space, was that Brownhill sees it as his opportunity to play alongside Fam, meaning we are no real difference to the 442 we started with that Millwall were coping easily with.  Brownhill doesn’t play the no10 positionally very well, he’s always to high up.

For me we either go 451, and the 3 in the CM, overload Molumby and Williams, or we accept we have to go longer and run them into the channels to shift momentum.  Their back 3 ain’t the quickest either.

Personally, I would’ve kept it exactly the same but played longer.  See Molumby and Williams get frustrated that they can no longer press, as the balls going over their heads, and Nagy and Massengo are now trying to run beyond them, not the other way round.  See Murray Wallace and Romeo getting frustrated that balls are now being chipped in behind them and they are now having to face their own goal.

The changes we make are too drastic, often fail to deliver anything that doing something more subtle wouldn't, and ultimately resulted in LJ losing faith in a system that had just brought us two exciting wins.

I’m not attempting to say I know better than LJ, but there are too many changes to systems and personnel, both for each game and during game for me to think he’s falling down tactically.

Most subs are used to freshen up players within the same system for other teams.  We rarely see that from LJ.  Subs are used to change system.  That can’t be right virtually every game?  Can it?

 

 

[Sir Geoff]

Spot on again Dave. Millwall doubled up on Eliason which meant there should have been space available elsewhere to exploit. Not everyones cup of tea but my argument for playing 532 / 352 is that we can push our full backs higher up the pitch forcing the opposition full/wing backs to retreat.

I mentioned in an earlier thread that if this system had been deployed vs Blackburn we would not have conceded the early corner as Pereira would have been further up field thus forcing their wingback closer to the half way line.

Personally I had no problem with LJ's early season tactics of keeping it tight for an hour then throwing Eliason on against a tiring back four, in an attempt to nick the game. It was working well whilst we were carrying injuries and looking towards the Jan window. Then he went all 442 vs Huddersfield and hasn't known what to do since.

[Super]

Very little chance he will sign a contract. Expect him gone soon.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Part of the problem is the way we are playing because LJ is playing Fam and Andi together as a pair.

In the Huddersfield game Weimann played more as the no10, pivoting around Diedhiou, Brownhill narrow, meaning we could play lop-sided to accommodate Eliasson.  It meant we were more compact as a team, able to play shorter passes and what a surprise, it entertained us.  Fulham was pretty similar, apart from we didn’t press their CBs unless there was a real chance to pinch the ball, therefore we didn’t get strung out, remained compact, and were able to play short passes.

Then LJ abandoned it over the next two games, pushing Eliasson right, Weimann left, Brownhill in behind in a 4411-type.  LJ can’t help himself.  He isn’t strong enough in his principles to stick with something.  The players need to be able to realise Eliasson is being double-teamed and exploit elsewhere.  Yet LJ messes with it.  By Wednesday (Sheffield) we are unrecognisable from the team v Huddersfield and Fulham.  By now we are 3 units, playing too far apart, with no cohesion.

If you’re pinging 40 yard passes into Weimann from back to front, I’m totally with you, wrong man for the job.  But if you’re getting passes into him from half that distance or shorter, or spinning him down the side that’s a very different matter.  That is why I see Weimann being able to play on his own, but it requires bravery to play through the thirds.  It requires bravery to leave Diedhiou out, it requires someone to take ownership defensively at set-pieces.  He’s an “In to out” runner, who unfortunately makes runs that his teammates aren’t seeing.  

Even playing Diedhiou up top and pinging 40 yard balls into him does work....so why do we persist with it.

I don’t see Nketiah as the answer in our current system(s) either.

I don't get why he keeps playing them together. I'd play Fam up top personally. But even if it is Weimann, just play one of them. 

We should only play 2 strikers if they suit each other and the team doesn't suffer with one less body in midfield.

Most passing teams seem to play one up top, whether that is 4231 or 4141.

 

[Spud55]

21 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I don't get why he keeps playing them together. I'd play Fam up top personally. But even if it is Weimann, just play one of them. 

We should only play 2 strikers if they suit each other and the team doesn't suffer with one less body in midfield.

Most passing teams seem to play one up top, whether that is 4231 or 4141.

 

I think you can play both but only 1 as a striker, stick Fam central with Eliasson as the left and Wieman on the right of a front 3 and I think that could work.

But agree that they don't work as a pair, Fam needs either nobody alongside him or a player like Reid which Wieman certainly is not that type of player to get the best out of him. 

[Davefevs]

36 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I don't get why he keeps playing them together. I'd play Fam up top personally. But even if it is Weimann, just play one of them. 

We should only play 2 strikers if they suit each other and the team doesn't suffer with one less body in midfield.

Most passing teams seem to play one up top, whether that is 4231 or 4141.

 

Agreed

[MarcusX]

On 26/12/2019 at 16:10, Hare Island said:

Thanks for enlightening me so politely o wise one. Must be another  reason why he cuts inside to cross 95% of the time.

BecUse he’s left footed and plays on the right?!

[Wolf Island]

59 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

BecUse he’s left footed and plays on the right?!

Agreed 

[Fatalist]

Anyone doubting Eliasson's value to the team should have watched Serge Airier for Spurs tonight. 6 or 7 crossing opportunities and didn't get one into the box. We take it for granted that Niclas will do the business, but it really isn't that easy.

[BCFCGav]

Can only assume that if he isn’t started tomorrow there’ll be hell to pay. He’s been our only forward of credit for months, barring very occasional good games/halves for Famara and Andi. Start him tomorrow regardless of almost anything. 

[Kibs]

So based on @cidercity1987s stats on the Kasey Palmer thread...Today’s stats added....

For every 15 games Eliasson plays, we concede only 1 more goal than we would have if he hadn’t played. 

And in terms of goals scored with him in the team, we now average a goal every 45 minutes when he plays compared with a goal every 79 minutes when he doesn’t.

He now has 10 assists to his name for the season. The most assists in the championship for the whole of last season  was only 14.

Its quite extraordinary to be honest. Well done Niclas.

[BCFC OF SWEDEN]

Somebody in OTIB  wrote that he could not cross with both his feets....