High energy / high press

[Charlie BCFC]

I’ll be honest this comment has shocked me, thought off the ball is one of the rare things we looked good at. Knight and Williams in particular looked quick to win the ball back, Wells dropping deep to do this aswell. For me it’s what we did on the ball that wasn’t good enough

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Charlie BCFC said:

I’ll be honest this comment has shocked me, thought off the ball is one of the rare things we looked good at. Knight and Williams in particular looked quick to win the ball back, Wells dropping deep to do this aswell. For me it’s what we did on the ball that wasn’t good enough

I thought Williams had a good game yesterday.  Knight was ok, won more balls back than anyone other than our 2 CBs.  He didn’t get going on the ball.

Partnerships and combinations can take a while to get going.

Some flaws in our game yesterday and also Preston stopped us too.

Worth everyone going and reading / watching this thread.

It wasn’t all bad yesterday.  It wasn’t great either…by any stretch.  We were below par.  First half was fine, two teams sussing each other out, neither getting into their rhythm.

Second half…I think everyone thought the goal would be lift-off, it had the opposite effect.  Preston came on strong, we actually defended pretty well, despite being strung out a bit.  Set-pieces were wicked from Best, but we defended them well.

We looked fitter….but not sharper.

Hopefully a grow into the season.

[spudski]

19 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I thought Williams had a good game yesterday.  Knight was ok, won more balls back than anyone other than our 2 CBs.  He didn’t get going on the ball.

Partnerships and combinations can take a while to get going.

Some flaws in our game yesterday and also Preston stopped us too.

Worth everyone going and reading / watching this thread.

It wasn’t all bad yesterday.  It wasn’t great either…by any stretch.  We were below par.  First half was fine, two teams sussing each other out, neither getting into their rhythm.

Second half…I think everyone thought the goal would be lift-off, it had the opposite effect.  Preston came on strong, we actually defended pretty well, despite being strung out a bit.  Set-pieces were wicked from Best, but we defended them well.

We looked fitter….but not sharper.

Hopefully a grow into the season.

I watched the videos put up by James this morning. He does some excellent analysis and videos. Always worth watching. 

I thought the video showing the poor pass to Conway from Matty James, where it led to losing possession and eventually them scoring was very telling. 

Often these actions are often overlooked when goals are scored. 

Matty James for me this season is my biggest concern. I said it would be at the end of last. 

He's now 32...whether he can still perform weekly at a level we need is debatable. He imo, is an important cog in our wheel. 

Fingers crossed he can. 

 

[Davefevs]

Was an awful pass.

[Offside]

Yep, I was disappointed in the lack of energy in yesterday’s performance too.  I thought we gave them too much time on the ball and when we did have possession we were poor with the ball. Very rusty. Preston in contrast pressed us well, used the ball far better and executed their game plan effectively. 

[1960maaan]

I've only just had the chance to sit down and only skimmed this thread, so my take on yesterday.

It felt like we trying to play catch up and Preston bossed that centre section of MF, we did create some good play wide. I thought Bell had a decent game, caused problems , but never seemed to link with Pring. Same on the other side , looked a bit disjointed and Tanner's delivery wasn't the best. Cornick does not convince me still, and I would have Sykes ahead of him every time ATM.
Williams was good IMO. Knight showed some moment of real promise , but James was no more than steady. They never really got hold of MF and we struggled to get any pressure on them.
Wells fed off scraps, worked hard but service was awful.
Dickie looked ok, never saw him step out as much as I would have liked, but a lot of that was down to Preston who I did think looked good and always seemed to have a player spare. 
Stand out yesterday was Vyner , I though he looked a class act and hope he can continue that. 

Really can't complain about the result , they bossed large spells, on chance I guess it was fair. What I would complain about (again) is the Reffing team . The Lino in front of the Lansdown missed some shockers, and ref Ref allowed then to get away with a lot of the niggly stuff that they always seem to get away with. 
Was our shout a Pen ? I really couldn't see it at the time and the highlights aren't convincing. Their shout might have had more chance with VAR.

Heard a lot of "picked the wrong team " yesterday , TBF not sure the changes would have made too much difference. Even Scott wouldn't have changed that much, though I think Mehmeti coming on for Weimann might have given us some ball carrying centrally . Personally I would start Sykes over Cornick , not sure what Cornick adds , I must be missing something .  I only saw the clips from pre season, but Wells's movement stood out. We hardly managed to get him in the game yesterday, but Conway was even more lost.

Roberts , Sykes , Mehmeti and Conway will start Vs Oxford, plus maybe King and Araoye . Probably a choice between not wanting to put to much strain on the side early on and wanting that first win, but most importantly getting some cohesion . 

It was the game we would expect , if it wasn't first game of a season we have some optimism for the first time in ages. How often have we seen it ? Preston is always gritty and home with a big expectant crowd is always a let down. Not sure why I thought it would be different 

[mozo]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I thought Williams had a good game yesterday.  Knight was ok, won more balls back than anyone other than our 2 CBs.  He didn’t get going on the ball.

Partnerships and combinations can take a while to get going.

Some flaws in our game yesterday and also Preston stopped us too.

Worth everyone going and reading / watching this thread.

It wasn’t all bad yesterday.  It wasn’t great either…by any stretch.  We were below par.  First half was fine, two teams sussing each other out, neither getting into their rhythm.

Second half…I think everyone thought the goal would be lift-off, it had the opposite effect.  Preston came on strong, we actually defended pretty well, despite being strung out a bit.  Set-pieces were wicked from Best, but we defended them well.

We looked fitter….but not sharper.

Hopefully a grow into the season.

Agree with everything you say, except that the first half hesitancy was fine. For me, the first 20 was a missed opportunity to set the tone for the game by pressing hard, getting comfortable on the ball and stretching the play.

Instead we treated the ball like a hot potato and tried to ping long balls to put their defenders under pressure, without any success.

Both sides were sloppy in that first half but as the home side, the onus was on us to put our stamp on the game, and I don't think the resistance from PNE was out of the ordinary.

In a funny way, this disappointment could be a timely reminder of the levels we need from hereon in.

 

 

Edited August 6, 2023 by mozo

[Charlie BCFC]

2 hours ago, spudski said:

I watched the videos put up by James this morning. He does some excellent analysis and videos. Always worth watching. 

I thought the video showing the poor pass to Conway from Matty James, where it led to losing possession and eventually them scoring was very telling. 

Often these actions are often overlooked when goals are scored. 

Matty James for me this season is my biggest concern. I said it would be at the end of last. 

He's now 32...whether he can still perform weekly at a level we need is debatable. He imo, is an important cog in our wheel. 

Fingers crossed he can. 

 

That was the worst James has played for a while, potentially ever at the club. Hopefully it’s a one off though as he normally keeps the ball a lot better than that

[Leveller]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I thought Williams had a good game yesterday.  Knight was ok, won more balls back than anyone other than our 2 CBs.  He didn’t get going on the ball.

Partnerships and combinations can take a while to get going.

Some flaws in our game yesterday and also Preston stopped us too.

Worth everyone going and reading / watching this thread.

It wasn’t all bad yesterday.  It wasn’t great either…by any stretch.  We were below par.  First half was fine, two teams sussing each other out, neither getting into their rhythm.

Second half…I think everyone thought the goal would be lift-off, it had the opposite effect.  Preston came on strong, we actually defended pretty well, despite being strung out a bit.  Set-pieces were wicked from Best, but we defended them well.

We looked fitter….but not sharper.

Hopefully a grow into the season.

“First half was fine” - seriously? I thought we were abysmal and they played well. Admittedly they created little , but they were on the front foot and played decent football. We seemed to have no first touch, no ability to find space or pass.

[Street red]

20 hours ago, joe jordans teeth said:

It all comes down to the 25 million price tag we set on him what was weird from the start,now many on here think we won’t back down on that and we probably won’t but it’s a odd way to do business

Thank Steve Lansdown for that.

[Baldyman]

Bottom line yesterday was that we were bullied by a huge , physically strong team ( but not dirty) who looked extremely competent but lacked ambition to go forward at times . We were never going to compete with them physically so opting for Cornick as our biggest forward was a waste of time . Should have played one up top and packed the midfield to give us width and more chance to get in behind them . Wrong tactics from the off in hindsight  sadly . 

[Davefevs]

6 hours ago, Leveller said:

“First half was fine” - seriously? I thought we were abysmal and they played well. Admittedly they created little , but they were on the front foot and played decent football. We seemed to have no first touch, no ability to find space or pass.

Yep, it was a nothing half…”fine” as in nothing to worry about, albeit weren’t great.

It’s human nature that when your opponent has it to feel “oh shit”, but they did bugger all too….as you stats.

I didn’t think they played well, they got one or two moves off of Keane rolling his man, that was it.

[Major Isewater]

On 06/08/2023 at 08:05, RedM said:

I think we were just set up for Weimann doing the running and had absolutely no plan B for when he went off injured. I can't believe it's as simple as that but there it is

In fairness it wasn’t great when he was on. 

[Red-Robbo]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, it was a nothing half…”fine” as in nothing to worry about, albeit weren’t great.

It’s human nature that when your opponent has it to feel “oh shit”, but they did bugger all too….as you stats.

I didn’t think they played well, they got one or two moves off of Keane rolling his man, that was it.

After an initially promising 15 minutes, we looked second best. Fortunately for us, lots of their moves were based on huge upfield punts that were either not controlled; or either Keane, the Danish lad or Potts brought down in offside positions. Didn't suit the weather or us. We played the offside trap well. Lowe clearly had a word about this at half-time. 

There's no doubt they were in our penalty box more than we were in theirs though. Bell's shot aside, most of our moves fizzled out just over the halfway line. We lost tackles, lost control of the ball or were otherwise hustled out of possession. At times, the midget ref seemed to let fouls go, although this seems to be the way in football these days. A bit of all-in wrestling seems par for the course, but if your opponent trips over your feet you give away a free kick. 

It wasn't much of a watch: they were poor and we were very poor. In the second half, we took the lead against the run of play and based on a couple of rare defensive errors by Preston. From then on, it wasn't 'if they score', it was a when? We were extremely lucky to get away with one point from such a bad performance. A big uplift is needed in order to win against all but the weediest opponents.

But, hey, I'm not panicking. We have 45 games. We've seen (even) worse opening days. 

[RedM]

4 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

In fairness it wasn’t great when he was on. 

I don't think he featured much pre season, so I was surprised to see him start. Maybe Alex Scott getting injured forced his inclusion more than we wanted? 

[Davefevs]

7 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

After an initially promising 15 minutes, we looked second best. Fortunately for us, lots of their moves were based on huge upfield punts that were either not controlled; or either Keane, the Danish lad or Potts brought down in offside positions. Didn't suit the weather or us. We played the offside trap well. Lowe clearly had a word about this at half-time. 

There's no doubt they were in our penalty box more than we were in theirs though. Bell's shot aside, most of our moves fizzled out just over the halfway line. We lost tackles, lost control of the ball or were otherwise hustled out of possession. At times, the midget ref seemed to let fouls go, although this seems to be the way in football these days. A bit of all-in wrestling seems par for the course, but if your opponent trips over your feet you give away a free kick. 

It wasn't much of a watch: they were poor and we were very poor. In the second half, we took the lead against the run of play and based on a couple of rare defensive errors by Preston. From then on, it wasn't 'if they score', it was a when? We were extremely lucky to get away with one point from such a bad performance. A big uplift is needed in order to win against all but the weediest opponents.

But, hey, I'm not panicking. We have 45 games. We've seen (even) worse opening days. 

Yep, second half we were second best, so frustrating.

That Matty James pass out in the 86th minute typified it.

But we can only look at the upcoming games and see if we learn from the Preston game or repeat the same mistakes.  For many the die is cast after Saturday. Experience tells me there will be all manner of performances through the season.

We are one point up on this stage last season…

…although two points down on our result v PNE last season. ️

 

[Red Army 75]

Probably be a better away side. Just constantly on the back foot Saturday. The amount of second balls we didn’t even contest, showed how much of a back foot we were on. Especially after we scored. Frustrating 

[Red-Robbo]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, second half we were second best, so frustrating.

That Matty James pass out in the 86th minute typified it.

But we can only look at the upcoming games and see if we learn from the Preston game or repeat the same mistakes.  For many the die is cast after Saturday. Experience tells me there will be all manner of performances through the season.

We are one point up on this stage last season…

…although two points down on our result v PNE last season. ️

 

 

Indeedy. I'm reminded of the Swiss football commentator, quoted once in Private Eye's Colemanballs feature, who said: "But the game's not over yet. There are 89 minutes left to play!"

Long way to go before we can draw too many conclusions about the shape of this season - or even the shape of City's starting XI.

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Probably be a better away side. Just constantly on the back foot Saturday. The amount of second balls we didn’t even contest, showed how much of a back foot we were on. Especially after we scored. Frustrating 

Conceding chances on the break when we were actually ahead was also worrying. Scott and Naismith will improve our ball retention and control without a doubt, but what can we do to get that assuming they and Atkinson are all out? Improve it anyway, bit for NP to think about in some areas.

[Mr Popodopolous]

How about, injury permitting a Plan B for Saturday just gone:

                 O'Leary

Tanner Vyner Dickie Pring

   Knight James Williams

   Weimann   Conway   Bell

Weimann can tuck inside more often. Has energy too and can get a few goals, definitely not a winger.

Or a Plan C

                  O'Leary

Tanner Vyner Dickie Pring

   Knight James Williams 

   Bell   Conway   Mehmeti

Very youthful front 3 from the get-go, with Knight also having that boundless energy.

Or A Plan D

                O'Leary

Tanner Vyner Dickie Pring

    Knight James Williams

                Weimann

            Conway Wells

My thinking there is, the energy of Weimann as well as his versatility, yet being a striker he can slot in beyween or get up with those two.

As well as perhaps disrupt that '1' Preston had behind Keane and negate their advantage in this area.

Plus a 2 or a 3..you never know quite what you're facing as a back 3 with Weimann in that freeish role behind two strikers.

Hindsight is everything and the injury to Weimann could scupper B or D but there could be tactical solutions even with the personnel we had Saturday.

Edited August 7, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Red Army 75]

9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Conceding chances on the break when we were actually ahead was also worrying. Scott and Naismith will improve our ball retention and control without a doubt, but what can we do to get that assuming they and Atkinson are all out? Improve it anyway, bit for NP to think about in some areas.

Well Saturday I put down to the midfield. But as you say we have players coming back. Knight was a bit off it Saturday and that’s understandable. Think he played defensively right hand side in league 1 last year. So bit of a step up and change. He will come good though I’m sure 

[ExiledAjax]

Interesting to hear from NTT20 podcast that clubs have told them that thanks to the extra injury time provisions players, on average, ran an extra kilometre at the weekend. 

Add that up over a season and it's the equivalent of 6 extra matches. 

So a fair bit to consider if you're going to play an intense press.

[TammyAB]

Looked energetic today. We're a slow burner maybe!

[Davefevs]

Excellent tweet from James:

Our press is getting there!

[chinapig]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Excellent tweet from James:

Our press is getting there!

I think Klopp actually said gegenpressing (counter pressing if you prefer) rather than just pressing to be pedantic.

Nevertheless James' point and yours still stand. I was struck in particular by Sykes often moving to a more number 8 position when we pressed high. Impressive stuff I thought.

[Port Said Red]

1 hour ago, TammyAB said:

Looked energetic today. We're a slow burner maybe!

 

23 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Excellent tweet from James:

Our press is getting there!

When I quote people like Bill Shankly, people often tell me that it's a different game these days", but I think some of the old school stuff still rings true. In his book Shanks said that the reason that Liverpool were often seen as slow starters to a season, was because he didn't like them to be at peak fitness from the first game, he preferred them to play themselves into that condition over the first 5-6 games. His reasoning was that it allowed them to last through to the end of the season stronger than other clubs.

That said, they didn't have the luxury of international breaks or multiple substitutes in those days, Liverpool won at least one title having only used 13 players, which is incredible really.

However it could be that Pearson is keen for these players to work themselves into peak fitness until the squad is strengthened by those returning from injury.

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, chinapig said:

I think Klopp actually said gegenpressing (counter pressing if you prefer) rather than just pressing to be pedantic.

Nevertheless James' point and yours still stand. I was struck in particular by Sykes often moving to a more number 8 position when we pressed high. Impressive stuff I thought.

Like this?

[chinapig]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Like this?

Exactly!

That looks like a well organised press to me.

Edited September 2, 2023 by chinapig

[DaveF]

11 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

 

When I quote people like Bill Shankly, people often tell me that it's a different game these days", but I think some of the old school stuff still rings true. In his book Shanks said that the reason that Liverpool were often seen as slow starters to a season, was because he didn't like them to be at peak fitness from the first game, he preferred them to play themselves into that condition over the first 5-6 games. His reasoning was that it allowed them to last through to the end of the season stronger than other clubs.

That said, they didn't have the luxury of international breaks or multiple substitutes in those days, Liverpool won at least one title having only used 13 players, which is incredible really.

However it could be that Pearson is keen for these players to work themselves into peak fitness until the squad is strengthened by those returning from injury.

The people that tell you it's a different game are right. If you're not at peak fitness these days the chances you'll lose are much higher, the margins are much finer these days.