Chuckle brothers football

[Dr Balls]

The first half yesterday was one of the most abject displays I have seen from a Ciry team. Amazingly by half time we had 71% possession, but we had done nothing with it, while Boro had been gifted 2 goals. The reason for this was that as well as pathetic defending, there was no movement forward, so although LJ hankers after playing a version of "tiki taka", playing out from the back, instead what we have is the defenders and goalkeeper playing "To me. To you. To me. To you." Chuckle Brother football in our own half, and no one wanting to take the ball forward as there are no options or movement in front of them.

Possession has been the magic number of football stats since "tiki taka" first appeared, but it takes no account of whether or not the team are actually doing anything constructive with it, and it doesn't correspond with goals, which is the only stay that really counts. And we did next to nothing with 71 possession,, other than putting ourselves under pressure. It only got better in the last 20 minutes, by which stage we looked a bit more desperate, and mixed things up with some longer balls forward, although up against a tall back 3, including Flint, these needed to be down the flanks rather than just being lumped up the middle, which just invited Boro to head it back with interest.

The big worry is that our slump in form since NewYear coincides with our change to Chuckle Brother football. Can we change it? Well that depends whether we have the right players, and crucially we seem to be missing a creative midfielder to complement Pack, something many of us have been saying for ages, or midfielders willing to break into the box. The lack of goals from this group is very telling, especially in the way LJ seems to want us to play. And the other problem is that playing like Man City unless you have their players is very difficult, and LJ has hinted that we are not pressing like we did last season because we can't sustain it for a whole match. But this was what brought us success last season, with the press starting from the front with Bobby Reid. Weimann looks more than capable of doing something similar, and in the first half against Forest, it was the complete opposite to yesterday. But the second half we let Forest boss us, and offered very little.

I hope that we can find a balance in how we play, but we also need to be more clinical in front of goal however we set up. As for struggling with possession football and playing out from the back, I don't think we are alone in this division. Derby also hit a brick wall playing that way against Millwall yesterday, which was predictable, while it will be interesting to see how Leeds go playing the same way under one of its originators in  Bielsa. And even they struggled in the first half against Rotherham at Elland Road yesterday, so may be more teams in this division have sussed out how to negate this style of play. In which case, we revert back to the Chuckle Brothers, with predictable results. All very worrying!

[RUSSEL85]

Oh dear, oh dear. Good post. We do very much lack a "Plan B", that has been evident for a while. We need a more ruthless streak in us, sometimes to be more bullying with opponents, another option should our tidy football fail to deliver

[Alan Dicks]

RIP Barry Chuckle

[Red Exile]

Good post. And to build on your analogy with the Chuckles they were more than 'to me, to you'...if you were lucky enough to see them live doing their panto routine they were quite brilliant at what they did...physical comedy which made people laugh...and that they were so good, and made it look so simple, was a product of them being old hands who worked for years at their craft before they got their big break. They knew exactly what they were doing.

In the technical area Bristol City have a bunch of rookies learning their trade on an unforgiving stage. Yesterday was, as so often, men against boys. Flint's comments on the attractions of working with an experienced manager like Pulis said it all for me. 

[Dr Balls]

And for those of you who want to compare styles of play here are the real deal Chuckle Brothers:

 

[slartibartfast]

2 hours ago, RUSSEL85 said:

Oh dear, oh dear. Good post. We do very much lack a "Plan B", that has been evident for a while. We need a more ruthless streak in us, sometimes to be more bullying with opponents, another option should our tidy football fail to deliver

A plan "A" would be nice !

[Davefevs]

Good OP 

...what confuses me is LJ says in his interview that we didn’t get down the sides, but he picked MW up-top who didn’t run the channels.  Weimann has the game to gave exploited Fry / Flint Down the sides but played a more withdrawn striker role.

He’s got a big week ahead.

[Ivorguy]

Very clever title to thread, but sadly what is happening with City is far from comic, more like tragic .............. yet again

[Cowshed]

8 hours ago, Dr Balls said:

The first half yesterday was one of the most abject displays I have seen from a Ciry team. Amazingly by half time we had 71% possession, but we had done nothing with it, while Boro had been gifted 2 goals. The reason for this was that as well as pathetic defending, there was no movement forward, so although LJ hankers after playing a version of "tiki taka", playing out from the back, instead what we have is the defenders and goalkeeper playing "To me. To you. To me. To you." Chuckle Brother football in our own half, and no one wanting to take the ball forward as there are no options or movement in front of them.

Possession has been the magic number of football stats since "tiki taka" first appeared, but it takes no account of whether or not the team are actually doing anything constructive with it, and it doesn't correspond with goals, which is the only stay that really counts. And we did next to nothing with 71 possession,, other than putting ourselves under pressure. It only got better in the last 20 minutes, by which stage we looked a bit more desperate, and mixed things up with some longer balls forward, although up against a tall back 3, including Flint, these needed to be down the flanks rather than just being lumped up the middle, which just invited Boro to head it back with interest.

The big worry is that our slump in form since NewYear coincides with our change to Chuckle Brother football. Can we change it? Well that depends whether we have the right players, and crucially we seem to be missing a creative midfielder to complement Pack, something many of us have been saying for ages, or midfielders willing to break into the box. The lack of goals from this group is very telling, especially in the way LJ seems to want us to play. And the other problem is that playing like Man City unless you have their players is very difficult, and LJ has hinted that we are not pressing like we did last season because we can't sustain it for a whole match. But this was what brought us success last season, with the press starting from the front with Bobby Reid. Weimann looks more than capable of doing something similar, and in the first half against Forest, it was the complete opposite to yesterday. But the second half we let Forest boss us, and offered very little.

I hope that we can find a balance in how we play, but we also need to be more clinical in front of goal however we set up. As for struggling with possession football and playing out from the back, I don't think we are alone in this division. Derby also hit a brick wall playing that way against Millwall yesterday, which was predictable, while it will be interesting to see how Leeds go playing the same way under one of its originators in  Bielsa. And even they struggled in the first half against Rotherham at Elland Road yesterday, so may be more teams in this division have sussed out how to negate this style of play. In which case, we revert back to the Chuckle Brothers, with predictable results. All very worrying!

This is not a defence of Mr Johnson but that style of football only really existed for years and depended on the brilliance of several individuals. Bristol City's patterns of play bear virtual no resemblance to Guardilolas Barcelona, or his current Man City.

Its a forum fable that is becoming a stick to beat Mr Johnson with. 

In regards to City's slump that coincided with the team passing the ball less and longer. The longer City played it in the direction of Famara/Djuric/Diony the less successful the team became by the end of the season City's passing length average was 20 metres (Cardiff was 21m) - The less chuckle football the less chuckles they were.   

 

 

 

[Dr Balls]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

This is not a defence of Mr Johnson but that style of football only really existed for years and depended on the brilliance of several individuals. Bristol City's patterns of play bear virtual no resemblance to Guardilolas Barcelona, or his current Man City.

Its a forum fable that is becoming a stick to beat Mr Johnson with. 

In regards to City's slump that coincided with the team passing the ball less and longer. The longer City played it in the direction of Famara/Djuric/Diony the less successful the team became by the end of the season City's passing length average was 20 metres (Cardiff was 21m) - The less chuckle football the less chuckles they were.   

 

 

 

But why did we end up going long? Because tippy-tappy going-nowhere football went precisely nowhere. And yesterday we had the same problem. The distance between the defence, who had the ball, and the midfield was huge. More than 20 yards for sure. So if in doubt play it to another defender or back to the goalkeeper. We got better in the second half with both Kelly and Webster bringing the ball forward into the opposition half and drawing their players then going past them. However we still seem to slow things up, which allows defences, especially good ones like Boro, time to reorganise so the threat is lost.

There is an element of confidence to playing this way, but the more poor results we get, the less confident the players will be at playing this way. And then we need a Plan B, rather than reverting to "lump ball". 

[Fiale]

People took the mick out of Cardiff long ball, but their direct play saw the ball with their attackers or in dangerous parts of the pitch within seconds / 2-3 passes. Us, kelly has the ball just outside our area, minutes and 20 + passes later and.... Kelly has the ball just outside our area.... it's so boring and predictable. I imagine Pulis asked Flint about us, I would love to know what Flinty said.

[Cowshed]

2 hours ago, Dr Balls said:

But why did we end up going long? Because tippy-tappy going-nowhere football went precisely nowhere. And yesterday we had the same problem. The distance between the defence, who had the ball, and the midfield was huge. More than 20 yards for sure. So if in doubt play it to another defender or back to the goalkeeper. We got better in the second half with both Kelly and Webster bringing the ball forward into the opposition half and drawing their players then going past them. However we still seem to slow things up, which allows defences, especially good ones like Boro, time to reorganise so the threat is lost.

There is an element of confidence to playing this way, but the more poor results we get, the less confident the players will be at playing this way. And then we need a Plan B, rather than reverting to "lump ball". 

Because in general when larger more physical players are played up front teams go longer. In Bristol Citys case Mr Johnson described his front two as a platform, he wanted the team to hit that platform and play off it. City's passing length increased with Famara and Djuric in it and decreased with Reid and Patterson … Its quite logical.

As for City's football now, I make no claim of it being good or bad,  but some of the methodology is sound. Pushing players up leaving twenty metres and more between lines is not unusual, it creates space and options e.g CM's drop into it .. Hopefully.

The above can also be hardly attributed to Man City/Barcelona ideas and drills outlining this thinking can be found on the FA licenced coaches website, it prevalent at all levels.

[Dr Balls]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

Because in general when larger more physical players are played up front teams go longer. In Bristol Citys case Mr Johnson described his front two as a platform, he wanted the team to hit that platform and play off it. City's passing length increased with Famara and Djuric in it and decreased with Reid and Patterson … Its quite logical.

As for City's football now, I make no claim of it being good or bad,  but some of the methodology is sound. Pushing players up leaving twenty metres and more between lines is not unusual, it creates space and options e.g CM's drop into it .. Hopefully.

The above can also be hardly attributed to Man City/Barcelona ideas and drills outlining this thinking can be found on the FA licenced coaches website, it prevalent at all levels.

If you want to take it right back to its roots, it's Dutch "Total Football" with the use of the sweeper keeper. It's very prevalent as a way to play, but not every team has the players to make it work, or play the ball quickly enough to get the ball forward into space. And it doesn't stop you going direct as per Aguero's first goal today.

The central midfielders, particularly Pack do drop back for the ball at times, but this just leaves us one down in the middle of the pitch. Plus if there is no movement or anyone offering themselves then it's not much easier for him than it is for the central defenders.

When we played well last season, we had players moving all over the pitch, dropping deep, going forward, all rotating around different positions between midfield and attack, and playing nice quick passes. At our worst, we have 1or 2 players making great runs into space, but no one on the ball seeing it and ponderously passing elsewhere, so after doing it multiple times without getting a pass, those making the runs to nothing get frustrated and disheartened, and stop trying those movements. And then we become really static and look really poor.

I have some hope that we can improve it, but we have to stop giving away sloppy goals at the back, plus become much more clinical upfront. Whatever system you play, you still have to score more than you concede!

[And Its Smith]

12 hours ago, JonDolman said:

I think changing to a 433 would help with forward passing options. It is so much easier to pass the ball in that system. I really don't get why Johnson isn't playing it. I don't think we lacked movement, we just couldn't get players into space as our wide men come narrow and it gets all too congested. 

According to the guys on OSIB podcast we already are playing 4-3-3 !

[BTRFTG]

Before debating the merits of formations consider the simple fact that, Pack aside, we DO NOT HAVE A CREATIVE MIDFIELDER AT THE CLUB. So when they decided to go man for man on Pack what was WeeLee's get out? 

He's signed a succession of nomark lookalikes, all supposedly wingers, who he's decided to play out of position, none of whom would be proficient two leagues lower. Midgets in his own image.

That's why yesterday (again) when it clearly wasn't working and he looks at the bench he concludes, might as well keep it as is until the death when whatever I do isn't going to make a halfpence of difference.

And to all who prattle on about the rotation and success we had against teams last year, early doors perhaps, but once found out and we were pressed in return we were woeful. Idiots were saying yesterday it worked against Man City. Last time I looked we lost both fixtures because they were more than happy to let us knock it around and hit us on the break, as did Middlesbrough.

[David Brent]

21 hours ago, Dr Balls said:

And for those of you who want to compare styles of play here are the real deal Chuckle Brothers:

 

Hardly fair comparison. Which of our players could whip in a cross like that or score a thumping header?

[Cowshed]

8 hours ago, Dr Balls said:

If you want to take it right back to its roots, it's Dutch "Total Football" with the use of the sweeper keeper. It's very prevalent as a way to play, but not every team has the players to make it work, or play the ball quickly enough to get the ball forward into space. And it doesn't stop you going direct as per Aguero's first goal today.

The central midfielders, particularly Pack do drop back for the ball at times, but this just leaves us one down in the middle of the pitch. Plus if there is no movement or anyone offering themselves then it's not much easier for him than it is for the central defenders.

When we played well last season, we had players moving all over the pitch, dropping deep, going forward, all rotating around different positions between midfield and attack, and playing nice quick passes. At our worst, we have 1or 2 players making great runs into space, but no one on the ball seeing it and ponderously passing elsewhere, so after doing it multiple times without getting a pass, those making the runs to nothing get frustrated and disheartened, and stop trying those movements. And then we become really static and look really poor.

I have some hope that we can improve it, but we have to stop giving away sloppy goals at the back, plus become much more clinical upfront. Whatever system you play, you still have to score more than you concede!

My responses were based on your posts implying Mr Johnson is attempting variant of tiki taka … It clearly is and was not.

The football last season at its best was short and possession based. Mr Johnson moved away from that football.

This season Mr Johnson with the inclusion of Webster and Keeper who keeps more of the football is attempting to progress possession.

Many fans are simply more comfortable with banging it win or lose .. 

 

 

  

[Mr Popodopolous]

22 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

My responses were based on your posts implying Mr Johnson is attempting variant of tiki taka … It clearly is and was not.

 The football last season at its best was short and possession based. Mr Johnson moved away from that football.

This season Mr Johnson with the inclusion of Webster and Keeper who keeps more of the football is attempting to progress possession.

Many fans are simply more comfortable with banging it win or lose .. 

  

  

  

4-4-1-1 was our most cohesive spell in possession IMO.

Not necessarily the best 11 in each position but:

               Fielding

Wright Baker Flint Magnússon

Brownhill Pack Smith Bryan

         Paterson

           Reid

Gave us flexibility, fluidity, control and the like. Like I say Wright and Magnússon at full back would be in the 1st XI of nobody I'd suggest, and Paterson behind Reid when we'd had Reid sort of behind Diedhiou would be disputed. Then Bryan out on the left as opposed to LB would cause debate too...yet it worked a treat in the main. Versatility too, a trait that can't be underestimated in these modern times.