Cowshed

20 hours ago, Mallorcan Red said:

Considering how many players you see with superstitions as they walk onto a pitch or trying to keep their pre-match preparations as constant and familiar as they can, surely these weekly deviations get in the way of 100% focus needed for peak performance?

Yes there are obvious negatives. Benefits ? None. 

Players tend to have routines v superstitions. Very familiar routines to govern nerves and focus. Routines that look like ritual and superstitions but have a psychological value. 

27 minutes ago, Tony Tootle said:

They also cut holes in boots. Firminho does it. Something to do with the heel bone.

There is a condition called Haglunds where a bony spur forms where the achilles is attached. There is a benefit to altering the boot to a  miniscule number of players.

Cutting holes in socks is supposedly done to reduce pressure on the calf, which in turn reduces risk of cramp. There is no medical basis for it, players cutting holes in their socks get cramp as well! 

2 hours ago, 2015 said:

They make a good point to be fair. Seems every other home game we are remembering something. We should just focus on the game ahead of us.. It surely can be a minor distraction?

If you interested in this type of thing, to improve goal focus in sport we remove unnecessary thoughts from our brain (pre frontal cortex governs attention, focus etc) to improve function. The PFC is minuscule, and can be thought of as a like a bucket in its mechanics, and putting things into the the bucket leads to overflow, and being distracted from that primary focus - Performance on a football pitch. 

So, yes we can surely create minor distractions.  

41 minutes ago, Fjmcity said:

the first gripe you have listed certainly is commercial and as such yes we could manage through without it.

the second two listed are about humanity, compassion human rights and equality so quite happy for them to have a place in football

none of the above points made city play badly however 

None of the points will improve goal focus. The focus of winning a football match.

2 hours ago, LondonBristolian said:

For me, it comes down to two questions:

1) is the goalkeeper where I’d want us to spend (inevitably finite) resources over the summer?

2) if we did spend money on a goalkeeper, am I confident any player we bring in will be a significant upgrade on Max?

I would answer “no” to both questions. I’d rather we focused our resources on the best striker and creative midfielder we could attract and I think we would inevitably bring in either an upcoming keeper from a less high standard of league, a promising player from a premier league u-23 team, or someone not getting games at a championship club. In all cases, I’d not be confident they would be better than Max. 

You could argue we need greater competition but that very much depends on Manning’s view of Bajic and I have no idea what that view is, or what level Bajic is currently at.

Don’t get me wrong - I’d happily take Ederson, Allison or even Pickford if they’re about to come available and ready to move to BS3 on 10% of their wage due to their secret burning ambitions to play  for Bristol City but, in the absence of that scenario, I simply don’t see upgrading on Max as a priority.

Man City could easily get an upgrade to Edersons modest shot stopping ability.

His passing ability? No. Not only does Ederson skills base fit Man City's key possession principle he advances the sub principles as to how they will play e.g. width and extreme depth and playing positionally.

Man City made a compromise to advance their football by putting a exceptional talent with the ball at his feet in one of the fundamental positions for a team playing possession and positional football.

5 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

I wanted to start a new thread on this, not so much Max himself but the tactics of the distribution.

I don't quite understand the passing to the wings, it seems to me that it has a low success percentage, but it has been used by successive managers and goalkeepers. 

If the ball is over hit possession is given away, if it is under hit, you run the risk of an interception that takes the receiving player out of the defensive shape. That's before you have the issue of the likes of Bell and Mehmeti trying win the ball in the air. It's not so bad with Ross and Cam playing, but it still requires a degree of accuracy that few goalkeepers possess. 

Then you have the situation last night where, having made two good blocks and having the crowd calling his name, obviously gets a rush of adrenalin and hoofs the ball a mile out of play.

I don't quite see what the advantage is compared to playing through the middle, unless any of the coaches on here can explain it to me?

The passing to the what are wide positions is due to the intent of the team, they are part of the build up patterns as an out ball. The low success % playing to flanks (30 -35M) is still more advantageous than playing longer centrally (+40m) where the % success for O'leary is notably very low  and the risk from lost possession increases. In possession the team is opening out, numerical superiority is conceded centrally and if the ball is then played centrally the team is in a very poor position to defend against a counter attack.

In regards to accuracy its a competency you would expect a keeper in a  possession based team to have. O'leary's passing range (length x variety of pass) and its accuracy is on the low side, and very low v Keepers playing in teams playing out through the thirds.

44 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Football needs to careful with constant tinkering with the laws. Rugby fell into this trap and at club level is falling like a stone. Once fans either fail to understand the laws any more or simply hate the changes they will vote with their feet.

The difference between the Toolstation League and the pro game is mangers DO have the time to coach their players on how to ruin 10 minutes of football when you are a man down and many managers WILL do it without a second thought. £30 a game beer money players and Premier League football are two completely different entities.

There would be no change to the laws of the game.  

Even Bishop Sutton languishing at the bottom (no wins) of the tool station have time to coach players to time waste etc. The recently departed foreign sounding coach had some long player meetings, and sessions. Their players do not get £30 a game. 

16 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

………if they are that tactically cynical they will sure as hell find a way to disrupt games for 10 minutes and if they make it work every other pro manager will copy them.

If 30 minutes of every 90 each week is ruined by disruption due to teams being a man down for ten minutes people will think long and hard about paying hundreds of pounds for season tickets. All it needs is a 5% drop in support and clubs will be hit hard.

Not if they are, we are.

I instruct adult players to foul players in transition. 100%. Clubs also pay these players fines. If we don't do it, the opponents will and our teams are disadvantaged. Football is not Corinthian.

Teams with the money will also give players a little top on their wages for fouling. Cheating has always gone on, but modern football has its new phenom.  

The finest coaches in Europe instruct their players to target transition, unless anybody thinks that the very best are achieving tactical fouls versus transition at speeds higher than the rest, Pep and Ange we salute you. 

This will continue to increase without intervention. There is nothing to stop teams using fouling as an out of possession tactic. What gets practiced at the top is mimicked throughout the game.

9 minutes ago, phantom said:

Just the usual silly suggestion 

This is neither silly, or a suggestion.

Sin bins are a reality that are used in English football. This was done at the bequest of IFAB.  

The results of the experiences of using sin bins was an increases in leagues wanting to use sin bins, and now widely leagues and clubs wanting the use of sin bins being made permanent. 

Leagues and regional are also requesting that refs can use a additional card to improve the communication and identify the sin binning of players.  

13 minutes ago, CodeRed said:

Of  course - but the 10 minute sin bin period is not increased if the opposing side time waste, the opposite team is happy to extend the game when they're back to 11 v 11.

Yes it is. Stoppages are added on. 

And if a player is in the sin bin minutes before half time, he cannot start the second half till the ref deems his temporary dismissal has finished. 

4 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Why try to fix something if it’s not broken?

I can’t see why it’s necessary to introduce a blue card - a view shared by the vast majority of football managers. 

Got the stats for that? 

Or is that the view of a handful like the Spurs Manager? The Spurs who are amongst the highest tactical foulers in England, or Arsenal's "Arteta? The man caught on camera imploring players "when there is a transition foul ", his Arsenal are alongside Spurs. Man City are the champions of the tactical foul. The best cheating the best.  

Tactical fouling is increasing, its increased with possession football.

And dissent? Increasing.

Where has it decreased? In leagues where sin bins have been trialled.

12 minutes ago, CodeRed said:

1. Because in Rugby for example they stop the clock for injuries so there's no advantage to time waste, Rugby teams do slow the game in other ways.
2. Because they have to play with 10 men for the remainder of the game rather than a 10 minute period they can see out and then get back to parity - currently most teams ( Spurs notably the exception recently when they went down to 9!) - do take off an attacker and play 1 up front when down to 10.
3. My point is that a 10 minute reduction to 10 men will encourage a different tactical /time wasting reaction to a red that applies for the rest of the game, if you're down to 10 as a result of a red you have to find a way to compete for the rest of the match - if it's a blue you kill the game for 10 minutes and then go back to your game plan 
4. It's a minefield - player goes in for a tackle and catches the opponent, it's a foul but is it a yellow, a blue, a red, 

1. In football the fourth official adds time where they see it is appropriate. 

2/3. What have been the outcomes of the four year trial? 

4. It is not a minefield, its a simple and straight forward. The blue card sanction would only be applied very narrowly to specific infringements.

The referee would apply an impactful blue card to fouls that stop promising attacks, the current sanction of just a yellow card and near meaningless free kick encourages players to take one for the team.    

The blue card would not include infringements where the red card is a consideration. I

27 minutes ago, CodeRed said:

Sin Bin is a ridiculous idea in football,  as soon as a team loses a man to the bin they will time waste for the 10 minute duration,

What has been the outcome of sin bins being used in leagues since 2019? 

9 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Phew……………1) yellow 10 mins in the bin.

You would sin bin players for all yellow card offences ...You red haired revolutionary you.

On 09/02/2024 at 11:33, Robbored said:

 No need to unnecessarily complicate a system 

 

31 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Too complicated

4 minutes ago, Robbored said:

It’s not complicated

?

1. Blue ten minutes in sin bin.
2. Yellow caution.
3. Red sending off.

This is as rudimentary as 1,2,3. 

2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Too complicated Cowshed - why introduce an unnecessary card? 

Why is it complicated for you to understand?

A player and anybody would instantly know that a blue card is for one of only several sanctioned offences. 

15 minutes ago, Red Billy said:

Generally it’s not a totally ridiculous idea. How many times does a player get a yellow for a professional foul and it doesn’t seem quite punishment 

Consistently.

Teams and top teams headed by Managers like Klopp and Guardiolas teams will as a tactic routinely foul players to stop promising attacks. This is an accepted part of the game.

16 minutes ago, Red Billy said:

Generally it’s not a totally ridiculous idea. How many times does a player get a yellow for a professional foul and it doesn’t seem quite punishment enough but a red would be harsh. My concern would be on the flip side that referees would issue a blue instead of a red when it’s borderline.

There is a distinction in the laws between stopping a promising attack and denying clear goal scoring opportunity. The former doesn't have a sanction of a red card, and the latter does. 

On 09/02/2024 at 11:33, Robbored said:

I haven’t scrolled through this thread so this may have already been mentioned - surely a yellow card could  warrant 10mins in the sin bin? No need to unnecessarily complicate a system that already works pretty well.

 

This is not complicated.

1. Blue ten minutes in sin bin.
2. Yellow caution.
3. Red sending off.

59 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Exactly,  overloading can be key. Not the be all and end all but important all the same and more conducive..As you say can break the lines a bit more easily.

I think 4-2-3-1 depending on the composition of the '3' or 4-3-3 xan be tactically superior to a 3-4-3/3-5-2/3-4-2-1. Clearly it isn't just as simple as pick a formation and go.

In respect of the average point.

Naismith- where would you rate him in our context..A bit above average in our passing context, and do you think he could assist ball circulation, breaking the lines in midfield were he consistently fit?

Naismith. The club should have multiple options in key positions. I can't think of a possession system that does not have players with above average passing abilities in key positions. 

Naismith would be an obvious choice to occupy a fundamental position in CM. The system needs comfortable on the ball and a distributor. Naismith in a 4-2-3-1 as part of the two as a pivot and CDM, or double pivot. 4-3-3 part of the central three as a pivot and CDM and an attacking midfielder. 

On 04/02/2024 at 11:04, Davefevs said:

Yet LM has gone for a back-3.

In some respects there hasn’t been too much change to the shape as when in a 4, because in that back-4 we were playing it lopsided to some extent.

But the difference I’ve noticed is that it’s now one dimensional.  The ball now goes along the back and out wide, the option for the CM (James) to come and receive seems to have disappeared.  We no longer play through the centre of the pitch.  Did you call it “U-shaped” or was that someone else I was talking to?  We’ve become easy to defend against.

Thankfully you understood. what I was writing, I was thinking this looks like formation turbo nerd ..

Yes I use the term U passing. The CB's are a long way apart and the ball goes up back across and repeat.  No pass is pointless, but some have less intent, teams with average players, and City's are solid pros but average will see this passing that lacks penetration, and it is easy to defend against when the opponents lack players that are not good on the ball. Possession football doesn't require average as a keystone skill.

Stick an extra player in and the patterns change. Stick an extra player in and the opponents have more challenges to face. Go 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 there is an overload (frequently) to play into centrally to break lines. 

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Ok, so reflecting on the principles of our current head-coach and what you’ve seen of us, what formation do you think he should be playing?

The intent is possession, so I opt for shapes that I think would be more conducive to keeping possession and offering security - 4-2-3-1/4-3-3. In possession with an intent of playing full (full length of pitch), and with an eight, and two in the 4-2-3-1/4-3(2-1!) -3 leaving holding positions in relation to possession and patterns of play it would frequently look different, fluid! 

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

But only if you do that by design….you don’t become that side just by playing a formation.

The poster used the word conducive. Are some formations more conducive to keeping possession? I would answer yes.  

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Formation doesn’t dictate possession or not

But formation can be used to attempt to dictate possession by creating numerical superiority. 4-3-3 has an overload v 4-4-2 centrally, so does 4-2-3-1. 

3-4-2-1 creates a box midfield and numerical superiority versus a 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1. 

3-4-2-1 v 4-4-2 centrally mobs out the centre.

Just now, Maltshoveller said:

Didnt say they were did i

I do not understand your post 

13 minutes ago, Maltshoveller said:

 

There was a stat on opta showing that over 70% of goals scored in the prem over last few seasons

came from teams losing the ball in their own 3rd

12 minutes ago, Maltshoveller said:

Three of the top four played that kind of football last season also

Look where that got them!!

Look at Burnley this season

There was a stat on opta showing that over 70% of goals scored in the prem over last few seasons

came from teams losing the ball in their own 3rd

Sorry but over 70% of goals in the EPL are not scored from turn overs of possession in the first third. 

32 minutes ago, Super said:

Difficult to play a possession game when you have CB's who cannot pass a ball.

And its difficult without midfielders who drop in on the half turn, or facing their own goal to play bounce passes, roll it onto the FB's, or turn and play forward. 

And its difficult without a keeper who doesn't take part in build up play, cant take out 3/4 opposing players and ping a ball into his wide receivers.

They are not cannot pass a balls. The players have ability and aptitudes and Liam Manning is attempting to synch those aptitudes. These players can play possession football to a level, its not a catastrophe, the team is at its inception, principles are being intergraded, principles are not normalised and integrated.  

Performances are? At a level to be expected. Uneven and inconsistent.