Identity...

[spudski]

I'm glad this post proved thought provoking.

Without quoting and responding to every post...forgive me, I'll try and respond.

The reason I posted originally...is because when interviewed, LJ continually talks about us playing with our Identity. So it's not about what we are as a Club that he's referring too...but a playing identity. Which I have an idea...but like everyone else, we aren't sure. Is he referring to passion and commitment...or sticking to a style that is noticeable...like Leeds, Liverpool and Man City. We had that playing identity two seasons ago.

Others have noted like myself, that it wasn't possible to keep up that high energy and pressing without it having a negative effect over a season. So we've evolved. 

Imo we used to be very offensive with high press. We've now evolved to a team that has a strong defence, strong Defensive Midfield, but a less effective front line. We don't keep possession as much, but look to break up play, intercept and play on the counter...when we do try to play with possession, controlling a game, we struggle to break into the final third making chances on goal...I could go on, but that's the gist imo.

As all teams do...we set up to play in the best possible way, that will be most effective against each opposition. And during a game this will evolve as each team gets to outsmart one another.

As for starting formations...it is as follows.

3412 played 5times W4D1L1

352 3x W0D2L1

442. 3x. W2D1L0

4231  1x. W0D0L1

3421  1x. W0D1L0

[BRISTOL86]

I made similar comments in the first hour or so - if the identify we saw was what Johnson coaches and what he wants then good lord...abject. 

But for me the way we played after the change of shape was exactly what I associate with our identity, or at least what I want it to be.

High tempo, high energy, crowd right up for it. Amazing what difference a bit of urgency and movement makes, which for 60 mins was absolutely awful. 

I still can’t get my head around how we can’t play 90 minutes in the same way, we always seem to at best have 45 minutes of performance per week. If he can find the key to turn the first hour of Weds into the last half an hour on a routine basis we’d be a serious force. 

The setup and starting tactical approach was simply bizarre. 

[Cowshed]

34 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Just thinking that an ‘ identity ‘ may be down to a style of play .

Barcelona have it with their tippety tappety possession based play but if you know how a team are going to play ( without world class players) then you’re halfway to negating them. 
 

It must be quite hard for opposition coaches to counter LJ’s teams because he changes it so often .

In courses the FA will tell you identity is how you play. Coaches should be able to articulate what it is and define the project. Which does sound a bit like LJ speaking.  Identity is also broader because it will also include coaching philosophy, the way you coach and communicate. You (the Manger and Coaches) obviously have to be able to communicate the bigger picture to the players and staff. 

Barcelona have a short mission statement that defines their identity. And a massive playing and coaching philosophy which articulates their path for their regional development and academy teams through to the first team. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

10 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

I made similar comments in the first hour or so - if the identify we saw was what Johnson coaches and what he wants then good lord...abject. 

But for me the way we played after the change of shape was exactly what I associate with our identity, or at least what I want it to be.

High tempo, high energy, crowd right up for it. Amazing what difference a bit of urgency and movement makes, which for 60 mins was absolutely awful. 

I still can’t get my head around how we can’t play 90 minutes in the same way, we always seem to at best have 45 minutes of performance per week. If he can find the key to turn the first hour of Weds into the last half an hour on a routine basis we’d be a serious force. 

The setup and starting tactical approach was simply bizarre. 

4-4-2 with wingers- albeit with Semenyo and Weimann up front, which possibly creates more fluidity in some areas, vs a fairly narrow side who aren't so bothered about possession and will play on the break, but nonetheless have numerical advantage will always cause you issues.

First half was quite the non event though.

Isn't this just the Championship right now however as well? No side seems to be outstanding over 90 all that often, apart from some Leeds games- in which they didn't always get the desired result but did dominate.

[Cowshed]

11 minutes ago, spudski said:

I'm glad this post proved thought provoking.

Without quoting and responding to every post...forgive me, I'll try and respond.

The reason I posted originally...is because when interviewed, LJ continually talks about us playing with our Identity. So it's not about what we are as a Club that he's referring too...but a playing identity. Which I have an idea...but like everyone else, we aren't sure. Is he referring to passion and commitment...or sticking to a style that is noticeable...like Leeds, Liverpool and Man City. We had that playing identity two seasons ago.

Others have noted like myself, that it wasn't possible to keep up that high energy and pressing without it having a negative effect over a season. So we've evolved. 

Imo we used to be very offensive with high press. We've now evolved to a team that has a strong defence, strong Defensive Midfield, but a less effective front line. We don't keep possession as much, but look to break up play, intercept and play on the counter...when we do try to play with possession, controlling a game, we struggle to break into the final third making chances on goal...I could go on, but that's the gist imo.

As all teams do...we set up to play in the best possible way, that will be most effective against each opposition. And during a game this will evolve as each team gets to outsmart one another.

As for starting formations...it is as follows.

3412 played 5times W4D1L1

352 3x W0D2L1

442. 3x. W2D1L0

4231  1x. W0D0L1

3421  1x. W0D1L0

Bristol City would not be able to play high pressing football with Farmara and Palmer in the team. They and other cannot do it. Basically they lack the recovery times (physical ability)/psychological ability - DTI defensive tactical intensity to do the running.

If a Manager wants a team to press for the season that is evolved. Its about intent. Developed, trained in and recruited or got rid off if not up to capacity. Liverpools full throttle would be too much for some Bristol City players, and fitness and mental toughness is part of the identity = You will run and work exceptionally hard. 

[BRISTOL86]

13 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

4-4-2 with wingers- albeit with Semenyo and Weimann up front, which possibly creates more fluidity in some areas, vs a fairly narrow side who aren't so bothered about possession and will play on the break, but nonetheless have numerical advantage will always cause you issues.

First half was quite the non event though.

Isn't this just the Championship right now however as well? No side seems to be outstanding over 90 all that often, apart from some Leeds games- in which they didn't always get the desired result but did dominate.

It’s more than that for me. The first 30 mins especially was just absolutely dire.

When Charlton had the ball we sat back with 10 behind the ball at all times and stood and watched as they played through and around us time and time again. 

At home to a newly promoted league one side and we’re playing like the away team. Negative, tentative, no pressing, no urgency, absolutely zero off the ball movement. The contrast between us and them both with and without the ball was so stark. 

Then a switch is flicked and all of a sudden we do all of those things. We press, we harry, we play with tempo and urgency in possession and we bust a gut to close down spades when we’re out of possession. 

I just can’t get my head around how we can go out and start the way we did. Is it coached? Did Johnson ask us to not press, to play slowly and to barely move to find space? I find it hard to believe.

We are a very enigmatic team and I’d love to know why. 

But yeah a flat 442 is an absolutely baffling decision for me with our central midfielders. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Bristol City would not be able to play high pressing football with Farmara and Palmer in the team. They and other cannot do it. Basically they lack the recovery times (physical ability)/psychological ability - DTI defensive tactical intensity to do the running.

If a Manager wants a team to press for the season that is evolved. Its about intent. Developed, trained in and recruited or got rid off if not up to capacity. Liverpools full throttle would be too much for some Bristol City players, and fitness and mental toughness is part of the identity = You will run and work exceptionally hard. 

Diedhiou definitely, Palmer though?

Would a central midfield 3 help to reduce the need for Palmer's recovery time a bit, because there would be a bit more margin for error in CM, to guard against the quick turnover, quick break.

2 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

It’s more than that for me. The first 30 mins especially was just absolutely dire.

When Charlton had the ball we sat back with 10 behind the ball at all times and stood and watched as they played through and around us time and time again. 

At home to a newly promoted league one side and we’re playing like the away team. Negative, tentative, no pressing, no urgency, absolutely zero off the ball movement. The contrast between us and them both with and without the ball was so stark. 

Then a switch is flicked and all of a sudden we do all of those things. We press, we harry, we play with tempo and urgency in possession and we bust a gut to close down spades when we’re out of possession. 

I just can’t get my head around how we can go out and start the way we did. Is it coached? Did Johnson ask us to not press, to play slowly and to barely move to find space? I find it hard to believe.

We are a very enigmatic team and I’d love to know why. 

4-4-2 will do that. It's a terrible system at this level if you want to be proactive.

Shape and base influences performance IMO.

[Robbored]

8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Diedhiou definitely, Palmer though?

Would a central midfield 3 help to reduce the need for Palmer's recovery time a bit, because there would be a bit more margin for error in CM, to guard against the quick turnover, quick break.

4-4-2 will do that. It's a terrible system at this level if you want to be proactive.

Shape and base influences performance IMO.

Is there a difference between ‘shape and ‘base’?

[spudski]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Diedhiou definitely, Palmer though?

Would a central midfield 3 help to reduce the need for Palmer's recovery time a bit, because there would be a bit more margin for error in CM, to guard against the quick turnover, quick break.

4-4-2 will do that. It's a terrible system at this level if you want to be proactive.

I agree with Cowshed...Palmer doesn't have the natural fitness levels required to press with energy and recovery to be effective over 90mins.

And as we saw on Wednesday 442 leaves us too ineffective both going forward and defensively.

As much as people love him for his crosses, Eliasson for me is a one trick pony. Couple quick step overs and a cross. I can't think of any other parts to his game, that are effective at good Championship level. What else does he bring to the team that contributes starting every game? I'd rather have a solid midfield and rely on Pedro for width...as he brings more overall. Eliasson for me, is like bringing on the kicker in NFL...does one thing. That imo is why 442 makes us very ineffective as we saw Wednesday until the change as @BRISTOL86 Noted.

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Is there a difference between ‘shape and ‘base’?

Platform may have been a better word. Okay then, shape, base or platform.

[BRISTOL86]

3 minutes ago, spudski said:

I agree with Cowshed...Palmer doesn't have the natural fitness levels required to press with energy and recovery to be effective over 90mins.

And as we saw on Wednesday 442 leaves us too ineffective both going forward and defensively.

As much as people love him for his crosses, Eliasson for me is a one trick pony. Couple quick step overs and a cross. I can't think of any other parts to his game, that are effective at good Championship level. What else does he bring to the team that contributes starting every game? I'd rather have a solid midfield and rely on Pedro for width...as he brings more overall. Eliasson for me, is like bringing on the kicker in NFL...does one thing. That imo is why 442 makes us very ineffective as we saw Wednesday until the change as @BRISTOL86 Noted.

Completely agree on Eliasson. Very one dimensional, he will create chances with his pace but once he’s beaten his man once he knows exactly what he’s going to do 9 times out of the next 10.  

I like him but I honestly think we play our worst football with wingers on the pitch. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

23 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Completely agree on Eliasson. Very one dimensional, he will create chances with his pace but once he’s beaten his man once he knows exactly what he’s going to do 9 times out of the next 10.  

I like him but I honestly think we play our worst football with wingers on the pitch. 

Agree with this.

Eliasson- is an interesting one. Can be productive but I wonder if as part of a front 3 in a 4-3-3, or 3-4-3 it might help him and the team, could be a mixed approach of crossing and possession, he did assist Weimann after all and I'll have to watch it back but it wasn't the usual high ball to Diedhiou style IIRC- wonder if he's got more to give in other ways though.

[BRISTOL86]

COD is almost completely ineffective wide for me and is a lot more adept centrally for my money. Personally I’d be setting us up with a packed midfield and using the fullbacks for width. 

Play the system that suits the players you have, don’t try and shoe horn in players into a system that doesn’t suit their attributes. 

[steviestevieneville]

10 hours ago, spudski said:

I agree re the formation to create a platform from...or 4231/4132 which is what we do during games.

It's is if we are in transition again.

For me we play with structure in two thirds of the pitch, but in the last third it's made up on the hoof so to speak...chancing it, rather than planning it.

When everyone's back fit things could change...although I think it will be next year before those injured get back to 100%.

 

I think the afobe injury massively affects us in the final third. As you well know , the runs he made not only created space in midfield for KP to move into and pick a pass , but also unsettled defences and created room for weimann etc. 
I said to a mate after his injury , I thought we’d see us become more ridged just because of the lack of movement up front, 
unfortunately I was right. 

[steviestevieneville]

12 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

COD is almost completely ineffective wide for me and is a lot more adept centrally for my money. Personally I’d be setting us up with a packed midfield and using the fullbacks for width. 

Play the system that suits the players you have, don’t try and shoe horn in players into a system that doesn’t suit their attributes. 

Agree with this , he looked much better when more central after Han went off 

[Robbored]

LJ got booed when he subbed Eliasson against Charlton because to pretty much everyone watching Eliasson had looked City's most potent threat......... 

Sure, he’s a one trick pony but that trick poses plenty of problems for the opposition. I get the impression that opposing teams haven’t worked him out yet. 

Traditionally the way to limit a tricky wingers effectiveness is to double up but that in itself creates defensive space for strikers to take advantage of.

[Davefevs]

17 minutes ago, spudski said:

I agree with Cowshed...Palmer doesn't have the natural fitness levels required to press with energy and recovery to be effective over 90mins.

And as we saw on Wednesday 442 leaves us too ineffective both going forward and defensively.

As much as people love him for his crosses, Eliasson for me is a one trick pony. Couple quick step overs and a cross. I can't think of any other parts to his game, that are effective at good Championship level. What else does he bring to the team that contributes starting every game? I'd rather have a solid midfield and rely on Pedro for width...as he brings more overall. Eliasson for me, is like bringing on the kicker in NFL...does one thing. That imo is why 442 makes us very ineffective as we saw Wednesday until the change as @BRISTOL86 Noted.

Just visualising a 442 on paper (ipad):

Visually it just looks easier to stifle if you’re the opposition.  The straight lines running horizontally mean if you put an opponent in the gap, you block the ability to get forward.  Very simplistic and a visual rather than how it necessarily translates onto the pitch.

whereas the diamond has nice angles and pockets between players helping visually to see how you might move the ball forward progressively as a team.  If you lay out the 5212, it also has a similar feel.

442 rarely seems to work for us.  I don’t think there’s enough fluidity of movement in there at the mo’...perhaps not helped by a 3-0 defeat.  Nagy May help, but I do like the diamond or 5212.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, Robbored said:

LJ got booed when he subbed Eliasson against Charlton because to pretty much everyone watching Eliasson had looked City's most potent threat......... 

Sure, he’s a one trick pony but that trick poses plenty of problems for the opposition. I get the impression that opposing teams haven’t worked him out yet. 

Traditionally the way to limit a tricky wingers effectiveness is to double up but that in itself creates defensive space for strikers to take advantage of.

I think a modern way can be to concede the flanks or at least one of the flanks, and take your chances on weight of numbers through players tucking in- when they tuck in, the threat can be often snuffed out.

Which when there is pace or a general counterattacking threat in the defending side, can lead to a quick turnover of possession and because players are pushing up, can leave the attacking side vulnerable to a quick break- be it a fast runner, a long ball into space or mere trigger ie the loss of possession centrally to get numbers flooding forward.

It's not a strategy without its risk of course though!

[BRISTOL86]

29 minutes ago, Robbored said:

LJ got booed when he subbed Eliasson against Charlton because to pretty much everyone watching Eliasson had looked City's most potent threat......... 

Sure, he’s a one trick pony but that trick poses plenty of problems for the opposition. I get the impression that opposing teams haven’t worked him out yet. 

Traditionally the way to limit a tricky wingers effectiveness is to double up but that in itself creates defensive space for strikers to take advantage of.

I was really disappointed with the booing to be honest. One bad result in 11(?) and booing the manager’s decisions when we’re trying to win a game is laughable.

Lose the game and play poorly, fair enough, make your feelings clear after the game but absolute madness to boo a substitution halfway through a match  

I wonder how many were booing on 90+8 when one of his subs delivered the perfect ball for the match winning goal. 

[Robbored]

2 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

I was really disappointed with the booing to be honest. One bad result in 11(?) and booing the manager’s decisions when we’re trying to win a game is laughable.

If we’d been on a 5 game losing run then understandable. 

I wonder how many were booing on 90+8 when one of his subs delivered the perfect ball for the match winning goal. 

Fans were booing because they couldn’t understand why LJ had replaced Eliasson. He addressed that post match by explaining his rational behind his decision and it made perfect sense......

Fair play to LJ for explaining himself post match. Very, very few other managers would have explained themselves.

[BRISTOL86]

2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Fans were booing because they couldn’t understand why LJ had replaced Eliasson. He addressed that post match by explaining his rational behind his decision and it made perfect sense......

Fair play to LJ for explaining himself post match. Very, very few other managers would have explained themselves.

Yes I’m aware why they were booing. Just pointing out why it was completely moronic.

[spudski]

1 hour ago, steviestevieneville said:

I think the afobe injury massively affects us in the final third. As you well know , the runs he made not only created space in midfield for KP to move into and pick a pass , but also unsettled defences and created room for weimann etc. 
I said to a mate after his injury , I thought we’d see us become more ridged just because of the lack of movement up front, 
unfortunately I was right. 

 

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Just visualising a 442 on paper (ipad):

Visually it just looks easier to stifle if you’re the opposition.  The straight lines running horizontally mean if you put an opponent in the gap, you block the ability to get forward.  Very simplistic and a visual rather than how it necessarily translates onto the pitch.

whereas the diamond has nice angles and pockets between players helping visually to see how you might move the ball forward progressively as a team.  If you lay out the 5212, it also has a similar feel.

442 rarely seems to work for us.  I don’t think there’s enough fluidity of movement in there at the mo’...perhaps not helped by a 3-0 defeat.  Nagy May help, but I do like the diamond or 5212.

Agree with both comments lads.

We play so much better when not in a 442. 

The 4231/4312 is so much better for our players strengths imo.

Playing with two wide men in a 442 just leaves us so exposed in midfield, over run and very rarely does the other wide man come inside when attacking down the opposite flank, so it often leads to an overload of players to the opposition.

Eliasson crosses...but so does Hunt and Pedro...and they both offer more to the overall game.

I thought Wednesday night showed up our weaknesses with Eliasson playing...we were being overrun at times in midfield. When he came off we found our groove, better angles and shape.

Never understood our fans love of a winger down the years, imo it's held us back from progressing. As much as it looks great to skin your marker and send a cross in...it's old fashioned and so easily defended these days. 

Look at Leko...was pants for us, but he now has many assets to his game, more than just being a winger and crosser of the ball.

 

[Robbored]

1 hour ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Yes I’m aware why they were booing. Just pointing out why it was completely moronic.

So in your opinion those that booed the decision are morons?  

[BRISTOL86]

5 minutes ago, Robbored said:

So in your opinion those that booed the decision are morons?  

Yep. Was clearly a tactical switch given the system wasn’t working.

But more to the point after 1 bad result in 11/12 games or whatever and boo the manager making a substitution with 40 mins of the game to go? Moronic. 

Both substitutes made a huge difference to the outcome of the game and he should have been given the benefit of the doubt to be able to make changes without idiots getting on his back about it. 

[Northern Red]

3 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Yep. Was clearly a tactical switch given the system wasn’t working.

But more to the point after 1 bad result in 11/12 games or whatever and boo the manager making a substitution with 40 mins of the game to go? Moronic. 

Both substitutes made a huge difference to the outcome of the game and he should have been given the benefit of the doubt to be able to make changes without idiots getting on his back about it. 

Yep, though I disagreed with the sub at the time. And a timely reminder that it won't take much for things to turn toxic again.

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

 

Agree with both comments lads.

We play so much better when not in a 442. 

The 4231/4312 is so much better for our players strengths imo.

Playing with two wide men in a 442 just leaves us so exposed in midfield, over run and very rarely does the other wide man come inside when attacking down the opposite flank, so it often leads to an overload of players to the opposition.

Eliasson crosses...but so does Hunt and Pedro...and they both offer more to the overall game.

I thought Wednesday night showed up our weaknesses with Eliasson playing...we were being overrun at times in midfield. When he came off we found our groove, better angles and shape.

Never understood our fans love of a winger down the years, imo it's held us back from progressing. As much as it looks great to skin your marker and send a cross in...it's old fashioned and so easily defended these days. 

Look at Leko...was pants for us, but he now has many assets to his game, more than just being a winger and crosser of the ball.

 

Spud your points on Eliasson are spot on. He's a useful player and is very very good at one thing. That one thing is visually notable though - fans see crosses and they cheer and they remember them. That means he sticks in their mind as "our only threat". He's not. He's good when we need him but he is and should be a squad player.

On formations - personally I think that at the start of the season LJ was looking to play 4231 as our primary form. Injuries have meant we've been using 352 and 442. 

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Spud your points on Eliasson are spot on. He's a useful player and is very very good at one thing. That one thing is visually notable though - fans see crosses and they cheer and they remember them. That means he sticks in their mind as "our only threat". He's not. He's good when we need him but he is and should be a squad player.

On formations - personally I think that at the start of the season LJ was looking to play 4231 as our primary form. Injuries have meant we've been using 352 and 442. 
 

and part of me thinks the 3 in the 4231 might’ve been a narrow 3.

 

[spudski]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Spud your points on Eliasson are spot on. He's a useful player and is very very good at one thing. That one thing is visually notable though - fans see crosses and they cheer and they remember them. That means he sticks in their mind as "our only threat". He's not. He's good when we need him but he is and should be a squad player.

On formations - personally I think that at the start of the season LJ was looking to play 4231 as our primary form. Injuries have meant we've been using 352 and 442. 

Exactly

[Up The City!]

4 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said:

It’s more than that for me. The first 30 mins especially was just absolutely dire.

When Charlton had the ball we sat back with 10 behind the ball at all times and stood and watched as they played through and around us time and time again. 

At home to a newly promoted league one side and we’re playing like the away team. Negative, tentative, no pressing, no urgency, absolutely zero off the ball movement. The contrast between us and them both with and without the ball was so stark. 

Then a switch is flicked and all of a sudden we do all of those things. We press, we harry, we play with tempo and urgency in possession and we bust a gut to close down spades when we’re out of possession. 

I just can’t get my head around how we can go out and start the way we did. Is it coached? Did Johnson ask us to not press, to play slowly and to barely move to find space? I find it hard to believe.

We are a very enigmatic team and I’d love to know why. 

But yeah a flat 442 is an absolutely baffling decision for me with our central midfielders. 

I think it is done on purpose in order to conserve energy levels for later on in the game.

[spudski]

5 minutes ago, Up The City! said:

I think it is done on purpose in order to conserve energy levels for later on in the game.

It saps more energy defending both physically and mentally...that's been scientifically proven.

That's why teams keep possession...at times they are able to rest when knocking it about. Then a trigger, and they go again. You can see when they do this, as a player will move behind an opposition player so he can't receive the ball...recovery time.

Playing with possession is far less fatiguing. That's why LJ has been trying to get them to make more completed passes. Not the only reason...but a reason.