The Humble Realist Posted March 4 Report Share Posted March 4 (edited) I'm saying this tongue in cheek but... When we have the ball we should treat it like rugby. Play for territory. Long balls into the corner from which we frantically press to win it back and score. The aim is for us to only ever have the ball when they dont have 10 men behind it in their own half as that seems to be when we have problems. If we pass it more than 3 times in our own half the 4th pass should go straight out for a throw deep in their half! Obviously this is a joke suggestion but would it have been any worse on Saturday ? P.s. what would this hybrid tactic of rugby/wimbledon/gegenpressing be called ? Tikka tacky? Hoof and press ? Edited March 4 by The Humble Realist 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 1 hour ago, The Humble Realist said: I'm saying this tongue in cheek but... When we have the ball we should treat it like rugby. Play for territory. Long balls into the corner from which we frantically press to win it back and score. The aim is for us to only ever have the ball when they dont have 10 men behind it in their own half as that seems to be when we have problems. If we pass it more than 3 times in our own half the 4th pass should go straight out for a throw deep in their half! Obviously this is a joke suggestion but would it have been any worse on Saturday ? P.s. what would this hybrid tactic of rugby/wimbledon/gegenpressing be called ? Tikka tacky? Hoof and press ? You may be joking, but this is a slightly extreme version of what I said earlier on SOTC…you have to disrupt these sides. You have to stop them getting into shape. It’s actually okay to play direct into strikers who aren’t gonna win it / hold it up, if you are first to the dropping ball. Leeds were great at that at AG. How many times did we force Meslier to kick long, and Leeds win the ball off of Dickie headers back. It’s how Warnock got Cardiff promoted. I think you need to make it Germanic, how about hüffen-press? 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 6 hours ago, Davefevs said: You may be joking, but this is a slightly extreme version of what I said earlier on SOTC…you have to disrupt these sides. You have to stop them getting into shape. It’s actually okay to play direct into strikers who aren’t gonna win it / hold it up, if you are first to the dropping ball. Leeds were great at that at AG. How many times did we force Meslier to kick long, and Leeds win the ball off of Dickie headers back. It’s how Warnock got Cardiff promoted. I think you need to make it Germanic, how about hüffen-press? PowerPoint Man would literally spit at you if he read that……… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hinsleburg Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 7 hours ago, Davefevs said: You may be joking, but this is a slightly extreme version of what I said earlier on SOTC…you have to disrupt these sides. You have to stop them getting into shape. It’s actually okay to play direct into strikers who aren’t gonna win it / hold it up, if you are first to the dropping ball. Leeds were great at that at AG. How many times did we force Meslier to kick long, and Leeds win the ball off of Dickie headers back. It’s how Warnock got Cardiff promoted. I think you need to make it Germanic, how about hüffen-press? I've said it before, but I don't understand why we're not using McCrorie aerially more. He's going to win most 50/50 balls against an opposition full back and we've got enough 'busy' players to pick up a second ball. The only difference is we're in the opposition half and not our own having played 16 Triangles, 48 passes and made about 4 yards before we end up losing it and having to battle for it back again. I appreciate it's not the way Manning wants to play but feels like we're just cutting our nose to spite our face 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveInSA Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 I think I read an article in the last couple of months, which essentially said. Hoofball into and around the box is still more effective that Guardiolaball. Soon, an unexpected team will do this and win the premier league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Balls Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 Talked about this the other day and the question of “risk and reward”. Playing out from the back and using the keeper as a sweeper is potentially high risk against a pressing team but the supposed reward is you have possession and if you get past the attackers you can move the ball into midfield. However the rewards are very low if you can’t get past the attackers - passing it along the back line - but the risk still remains. By contrast a long ball out by the keeper into the opposition half is a lower risk as the ball is now a long way from your goal. You may lose possession especially if you don’t have a target man up front so the reward may not be any better than having possession 30 years further back except that you are closer to the opponent’s goal. The problem is that with our current 4-2-3-1 formation we don’t seem to get any of the second balls, which is a problem. However kicking out to the wings for McCrorie or Pring is not a bad tactic and if the ball goes out there’s little to be lost. Anything is better than the garbage that’s Manningball! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hinsleburg Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 9 minutes ago, DaveInSA said: I think I read an article in the last couple of months, which essentially said. Hoofball into and around the box is still more effective that Guardiolaball. Soon, an unexpected team will do this and win the premier league. Could argue Leicester did this to some extent just not with a typical target man. The plan was always get the ball forward as quickly as possible to Vardy, from there he'd either run in behind and receive a pass or the ball would end up with Mahrez who would create something from nothing. They also had the 'busy' players in Albrighton and Okazaki permanently picking up 2nd balls. Was so effective and not sure will ever be replicated to that standard 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 @The Humble Realist this was a great OP! 2 hours ago, Numero Uno said: PowerPoint Man would literally spit at you if he read that……… but he’d only do it in the dressing room, he wouldn’t want that emotion /phlegm (not Flem) being seen out on the grass! 45 minutes ago, hinsleburg said: I've said it before, but I don't understand why we're not using McCrorie aerially more. He's going to win most 50/50 balls against an opposition full back and we've got enough 'busy' players to pick up a second ball. The only difference is we're in the opposition half and not our own having played 16 Triangles, 48 passes and made about 4 yards before we end up losing it and having to battle for it back again. I appreciate it's not the way Manning wants to play but feels like we're just cutting our nose to spite our face Boom 36 minutes ago, Dr Balls said: Talked about this the other day and the question of “risk and reward”. Playing out from the back and using the keeper as a sweeper is potentially high risk against a pressing team but the supposed reward is you have possession and if you get past the attackers you can move the ball into midfield. However the rewards are very low if you can’t get past the attackers - passing it along the back line - but the risk still remains. By contrast a long ball out by the keeper into the opposition half is a lower risk as the ball is now a long way from your goal. You may lose possession especially if you don’t have a target man up front so the reward may not be any better than having possession 30 years further back except that you are closer to the opponent’s goal. The problem is that with our current 4-2-3-1 formation we don’t seem to get any of the second balls, which is a problem. However kicking out to the wings for McCrorie or Pring is not a bad tactic and if the ball goes out there’s little to be lost. Anything is better than the garbage that’s Manningball! Boom 30 minutes ago, hinsleburg said: Could argue Leicester did this to some extent just not with a typical target man. The plan was always get the ball forward as quickly as possible to Vardy, from there he'd either run in behind and receive a pass or the ball would end up with Mahrez who would create something from nothing. They also had the 'busy' players in Albrighton and Okazaki permanently picking up 2nd balls. Was so effective and not sure will ever be replicated to that standard Yep, Okazaki was as key as Vardy in many respects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 (edited) From when Manning took over Lommel FC in Belgium. Quote... when I arrived were used to playing with a low block, hardly any possession and hoping to nick a goal on a counter-attack or through a set-piece. Our plan was to play football at the complete opposite end of the spectrum. We had some difficult moments, because we were trying to teach them what is – in my opinion – the hardest way to play football. We wanted to dominate possession, create and exploit overloads, press high up the pitch and play attacking, high-intensity football. https://www.cityfootballgroup.com/our-story/ https://www.coachesvoice.com/cv/liam-manning-interview-mk-dons-west-ham-new-york-city/ It's worth noting that Manning shares the football philosophy set out at City football group...pretty much designed to feed Man City. Lommel FC tactics... https://breakingthelines.com/tactical-analysis/steve-boulds-new-role-at-lommel-sk-a-tactical-deep-dive-2/ Edited March 5 by spudski 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob k Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 2 hours ago, DaveInSA said: I think I read an article in the last couple of months, which essentially said. Hoofball into and around the box is still more effective that Guardiolaball. Soon, an unexpected team will do this and win the premier league. Stan Collymore was saying this last night, he basically said that Burnley, Sheff etc should play a 4-5-1 with 3 rat like central midfielders, 2 flying wingers and a quick striker rather than trying to compete with the Arsenals, Man City’s etc. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Geoff Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 2 hours ago, hinsleburg said: I've said it before, but I don't understand why we're not using McCrorie aerially more. He's going to win most 50/50 balls against an opposition full back and we've got enough 'busy' players to pick up a second ball. The only difference is we're in the opposition half and not our own having played 16 Triangles, 48 passes and made about 4 yards before we end up losing it and having to battle for it back again. I appreciate it's not the way Manning wants to play but feels like we're just cutting our nose to spite our face But that's exactly what we did on the other side under Pearson and people on here complained about playing long ball. Max would ping it out to Pring who was positioned on the half way line. We either won the second ball , the ball would go out for a throw in 50/60 yards upfield or Pring would win the header and Bell would be 'on his bike' ready to chase after it down the wing. Now as you rightly say we progress 4 yards by playing 48 sideways passes, 16 triangles and waste several minutes doing it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 I know some don't like the term, getting defenders to turn , but it's something that can work. Tommy has made run after run , waiting for that pass (that doesn't come) into space ( and he's not the only one but it would be at least, some service) , where he could get a run against slower CBs and a retreating defence. I see posts on another threads saying Chris Martin has lost his pace, he could play in this team as you don't need pace . The last time TC had a ball to run onto was from a West Ham defender. I wanted to move towards being able to play more possession football , we struggled to see games out . Pearson wanted to move towards more possession , but not to the detriment of everything else. You have to be able to mix things up, FFS Pep's team goes long when it wants . We need to be able to play possession when it suits, go more direct when we need to and not stifle the players with so many patterns of play they have to check where everyone is before passing . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marmite Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 Blimey a topic about getting the ball in the opposition half! Go on Liam, give it a try. The opposition half is where we can score goals. Not rocket science is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 1 hour ago, spudski said: From when Manning took over Lommel FC in Belgium. Quote... when I arrived were used to playing with a low block, hardly any possession and hoping to nick a goal on a counter-attack or through a set-piece. Our plan was to play football at the complete opposite end of the spectrum. We had some difficult moments, because we were trying to teach them what is – in my opinion – the hardest way to play football. We wanted to dominate possession, create and exploit overloads, press high up the pitch and play attacking, high-intensity football. https://www.cityfootballgroup.com/our-story/ https://www.coachesvoice.com/cv/liam-manning-interview-mk-dons-west-ham-new-york-city/ It's worth noting that Manning shares the football philosophy set out at City football group...pretty much designed to feed Man City. Lommel FC tactics... https://breakingthelines.com/tactical-analysis/steve-boulds-new-role-at-lommel-sk-a-tactical-deep-dive-2/ Thanks Spud. As we guessed, totally ingrained. Trying to play the hardest way, when you don’t have the best players at Bristol City, nor never will! Absolutely nuts! I did like this….talks of the 2:4 press (which we’ve seen), but ignores the 7th player in this pic. That’s a pretty bad example to use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 Just now, Davefevs said: Thanks Spud. As we guessed, totally ingrained. Trying to play the hardest way, when you don’t have the best players at Bristol City, nor never will! Absolutely nuts! I did like this….talks of the 2:4 press (which we’ve seen), but ignores the 7th player in this pic. That’s a pretty bad example to use. Cheers Dave, I would have said more re explanation, but at work, so snatching moments when I can. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.