Throw-ins

[You Do The Dziekanowski]

19 hours ago, CityGill said:

Firstly, I’d like to acknowledge that in the grand scheme of things, this is not the most important thing we need to fix. However, I have found it particularly irksome recently our inability to retain position from a throw-in or adequately defend our opponents throw ins. 

This is particularly true in advance positions, where more often than not, Tanner or Pring have to throw back to Vyner or Dickie due to lack of movement or support. I think there were 3 times yesterday, where Tanner threw the short throw and a combination of a poor return pass, or lack of control, meant we immediately lost possession.

The long throw down the line from deep also rarely gets any positive results, mainly due to our lack of physicality.

Defensively, we seem happy to let our opponents take a short throw with little pressure on the receiving player or we fail to track movement adequately. 

I am the first to admit, I am no football coach, and someone may have stats to prove that I’m completely wrong. From my point of view, we just don’t seem to be willing to take risks in advanced positions.

One other small thing, whilst I’m making a rare post…. And unfortunately we have conceded or given clear chances from this several times this season. Vyner, far too often, passes to Tanner, rather than going long or back to O’Leary, when Tanner is totally isolated. Normally he is quickly closed down, has nowhere to go and either, falls over trying to get a free kick, concedes a throw or looses possession, putting us immediately under pressure. The pass to Tanner is far to obvious and triggers an immediate  press.

I would argue the opposite and say throw ins are extremely important. The most common set piece you are likely to get in a match. If you can’t retain possession from a throw then the majority of the time you’ll be under pressure from the opposition. 
 

The long throw down the line is handy in certain scenarios, but again, most of the time it’s not utilising it in the best way. Even if you’re a physical side, you are throwing into a 50/50, win that 50/50, the second ball is also a 50/50. 
 

The good thing about throws (more so at grassroots) it drags opposition players over to that side of the pitch. If you can play to feet, there’s a real opportunity to counter on the opposite side. 
 

I’ve mentioned it before, Vyner and Tanner aren’t the only ones in our squads of the last 8 years who seem to struggle to pass/receive a ball. The amount of times we’ve murdered a wing back, zinging it at them knee high when a player is pressing them. Or over hitting a simple 10 yard pass straight of play. Or as you put, passing for the sake of passing, when a player is isolated with no options. 

[Dr Balls]

57 minutes ago, You Do The Dziekanowski said:

I would argue the opposite and say throw ins are extremely important. The most common set piece you are likely to get in a match. If you can’t retain possession from a throw then the majority of the time you’ll be under pressure from the opposition. 
 

The long throw down the line is handy in certain scenarios, but again, most of the time it’s not utilising it in the best way. Even if you’re a physical side, you are throwing into a 50/50, win that 50/50, the second ball is also a 50/50. 
 

The good thing about throws (more so at grassroots) it drags opposition players over to that side of the pitch. If you can play to feet, there’s a real opportunity to counter on the opposite side. 
 

I’ve mentioned it before, Vyner and Tanner aren’t the only ones in our squads of the last 8 years who seem to struggle to pass/receive a ball. The amount of times we’ve murdered a wing back, zinging it at them knee high when a player is pressing them. Or over hitting a simple 10 yard pass straight of play. Or as you put, passing for the sake of passing, when a player is isolated with no options. 

Agree with you and other posters on this. If Dave Brailsford was here rather than Man United, I can assure you we would be practising throw ins and how to play out of tight spaces so as to keep possession. It’s not even a “marginal gain”, at the moment it’s a huge weakness, because 9 times out of 10 if the ball goes out when we are attacking we completely lose any momentum and the ball gets thrown back to a defender for another round of “play it along the back line”. Really frustrating, and although a lack of decent options doesn’t help him, Tanner is the worst offender.

[Denbury Red]

Likewise a constant frustration - we never seem to look for the quick throw in and have very few "different" ideas of what to do - this must be down to training - or lack of it, as if the stats are right and we had 38 on Saturday then it is crazy we don't practise these more - or if we do practise why on earth aren't they any better.

I don't really think if you take a throw in during a Championship game or Premier Lg game there is much difference but Prem teams seem to keep/gain much more of their own momentum at throw in's than we do - and have done for many years!

It surely isn't that difficult to improve!!

[ZiderMeUp]

14 hours ago, Mad Cyril said:

I don't know if you are correct here, but if you are, other clubs get away with breaking that rule.

It is a small advantage that a team of ball boys/girls can either retrieve the ball quicker or slower depending on score, or save the energy of a knackered player retrieving a ball late in the game. 

That small advantage becomes exponential over a whole game or a whole season.

I am all for fitting an electric shock system to the chairs of our motionless ball people. Get off your arses people!!

My son is often ball boy for another football league side.  I thought the same,  said why arnt you giving the ball back to the players and just sat there.  

 

They all get a ball on a cone in front of them,  if player comes and takes ball from cone they get the ball that went out of play and replace it.  They are told not to give the ball to the players.

[ExiledAjax]

This feels like the kind of thing that fans of every team would complain about. It feels like we are bad, but are we really in comparisons to everyone else?

@Davefevs how does 35/38 compare to the rest of the division? Do you have those stats or do we not know?

Also, how much advantage would we get from being a bit better? Ultimately, would it be worth the effort, thought, and training ground time to get a bit better at throw-ins...or ios that effort, thought and time better employed getting better at something else like movement in general, set-pieces, or passing patterns?

[Back of the Dolman]

13 minutes ago, ZiderMeUp said:

My son is often ball boy for another football league side.  I thought the same,  said why arnt you giving the ball back to the players and just sat there.  

 

They all get a ball on a cone in front of them,  if player comes and takes ball from cone they get the ball that went out of play and replace it.  They are told not to give the ball to the players.

Is it an official law from the FA though as there are plenty of examples where that process hasn’t been adhered to.

Or is it just the advice of clubs trying to avoid issues between players and ball persons of which there have also been examples.

i just can’t believe that if a player is thrown a ball by a ball person and the player takes the throw that the referee will stop the match and have the throw in retaken.

 

[Davefevs]

I’d have to trawl each team individually, and I can’t be arsed!

As the 35 is “first contact”, I’m not sure it’s that meaningful really.

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, Davefevs said:

I’d have to trawl each team individually, and I can’t be arsed!

As the 35 is “first contact”, I’m not sure it’s that meaningful really.

Absolutely fair. 

[Cowshed]

8 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

This feels like the kind of thing that fans of every team would complain about. It feels like we are bad, but are we really in comparisons to everyone else?

@Davefevs how does 35/38 compare to the rest of the division? Do you have those stats or do we not know?

Also, how much advantage would we get from being a bit better? Ultimately, would it be worth the effort, thought, and training ground time to get a bit better at throw-ins...or ios that effort, thought and time better employed getting better at something else like movement in general, set-pieces, or passing patterns?

If 35/38 was securing possession that is remarkable. 

 

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, Cowshed said:

If 35/38 was securing possession that is remarkable. 

 

Agreed, and I think we know from our eyes that it's not 35/38 throw-ins resulting in "possession".

Would you have an opinion on the second question? Is it worth trying to get significantly better at throw-ins?

[Cowshed]

19 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Agreed, and I think we know from our eyes that it's not 35/38 throw-ins resulting in "possession".

Would you have an opinion on the second question? Is it worth trying to get significantly better at throw-ins?

I have an idea. There are differing measurements and from where. Generally forward throws result in lost possession. Teams can expect to lose the ball a lot. We can expect the opponents to reach the ball 54% of the time and that is clearances etc. The 46% is not securing possession its making a connection with the ball, and the second contact goes to the opposition as well who will have depth and numerical superiority. 

The generals alter with aptitude in the team. Improving range of throwers improves options and ball retention. If full backs etc have limited range and that can be - 20metres with accuracy, generally this can be improved. Throw ins are not developed, they tend to be neglected, altering the release point, run up, hand position with practice increases range, sometimes to high degrees. 

Is it worth? Depending on the intent of the team yes. If your team is possession based you want more of the ball. For the amount of possession City have throw ins are 5/6% of the possession.

Throwing the ball, backwards secures the ball 99% of the time, more possession. Lateral throws to feet again higher possession, City can improve hitting feet with regularity. Variety v down the line to a head again equals more possession .

There is the answer, more possession is good for BCFC.

Edited January 22 by Cowshed

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

I have an idea. There are differing measurements and from where. Generally forward throws result in lost possession. Teams can expect to lose the ball a lot. We can expect the opponents to reach the ball 54% of the time and that is clearances etc. The 46% is not securing possession its making a connection with the ball, and the second contact goes to the opposition as well who will have depth and numerical superiority. 

The generals alter with aptitude in the team. Improving range of throwers improves options and ball retention. If full backs etc have limited range and that can be - 20metres with accuracy, generally this can be improved. Throw ins are not developed, they tend to be neglected, altering the release point, run up, hand position with practice increases range, sometimes to high degrees. 

Is it worth? Depending on the intent of the team yes. If your team is possession based you want more of the ball. For the amount of possession City have throw ins are 5/6% of the possession.

Throwing the ball, backwards secures the ball 99% of the time, more possession. Lateral throws to feet again higher possession, City can improve hitting feet with regularity. Variety v down the line to a head again equals more possession .

There is the answer, more possession is good for BCFC.

So is the answer to simply throw the ball backwards more? If all we're interested in is increasing our possession then the obvious thing is to use throw ins as an opportunity to reset and recycle the ball back to the defence and goalie and go again.

I appreciate btw that the answer to that will likely be "depends on where the throw in is taken from".

Is it just that we say "any throw in in our own half should loom to be a simple one going backwards that allows us to regain possession 99% of the time".

[Cowshed]

11 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

So is the answer to simply throw the ball backwards more? If all we're interested in is increasing our possession then the obvious thing is to use throw ins as an opportunity to reset and recycle the ball back to the defence and goalie and go again.

I appreciate btw that the answer to that will likely be "depends on where the throw in is taken from".

Is it just that we say "any throw in in our own half should loom to be a simple one going backwards that allows us to regain possession 99% of the time".

Exclude areas adjacent to the eighteen yard box norms differ.

The answers to increase possession can really be yes, to throw the ball shorter, backwards and laterally more. These throws are more successful and efficient. 

In pro football short throw ins are taken less than medium and long throws, and the ball is thrown forwards more than backwards and laterally.

A team that throw the ball short and backwards frequently are some outfit called Man City. They frequently reset using the CB, pivot, keeper etc. Its a bit more involved than that due to the extreme width and depth moving away from the thrower to create space to throw, but Man City throw shorter (very) and backwards more to gain more (highest frequently measured) possession off their throws 

[1960maaan]

Anyone know how I could forward this to Liam ?? 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C119rkirVlt/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

 

 

[CityGill]

 

[Jerseybean]

Coventry equalise following a quickly taken (and poorly defended) throw in! 

[lenred]

7 minutes ago, Jerseybean said:

Coventry equalise following a quickly taken (and poorly defended) throw in! 

It was already a worry and now it’s becoming a pretty serious issue.  Ita a very simple basic and we just can’t seem to get it right.  It’s really really poor and again as said before it needs addressing.  

[Open End Numb Legs]

Didn't realise there was a thread for throw ins so I have copied this from my thoughts on the Cov match thread:-

About throw ins, short ones anyway. I think a good throw gets to the receiving player on the volley so the ball travels down to the players feet as its first movement or they can clear it on the volley if close to their own goal area.

A bad throw hits the grass first so its first movement is to naturally roll up the receiving player and is hard to control, giving a chance to the oppo player to nip in.