Negative Tactics - a myth?

[Ian]

1 hour ago, Holmowl said:

 

Yesterday and last Saturday Carlos wasn't negative at all. 

 

442, two strikers, two wingers in Reach and Wallace. I give him great credit for doing that at Derby. He should always do it at home.

 

Those criticising him for yesterday are wrong imo. We attacked and were hugely unlucky. Some of our attacking play yesterday was a joy. On the 17th minute (ish) we hammered at their door for about two minutes solid. Brilliant stuff. Lee's shot, Bannan's numerous give and goes and chip were top drawer. The two headers stopped on the line....any other day we murder them.

 

However, he has set us up to attack before, it works, it works again, again and again....and then he chickens out and reverts to a defensive line-up. It's not even that he does it against top teams away from home. He does it against the Wigans, Dons, QPRs, Sunderlands. And we suffer the consequences.

 

He has the players to take sides on, but he doesn't trust them. It will be his downfall.

 

 

Agree with most of what you've said here, however CC has to take the blame for continually picking th same players who are missing these chances week in week out

[Lord Snooty]

5 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

Not sure. Don't think so.

 

My boy noticed that, and asked me why he had done it. I thought it a really sound move. Bit of variety for their full-backs.

 

Wallace got a couple of balls in on his natural foot. And Reach cut inside and looked dangerous driving in on his left foot. 

 

I think it might have just come from a corner breaking down and them just staying where they were rather than  instruction. Accident rather than design.  But both looked better in that spell. I'd have been tempted to tell them to stay there. 

[Morepork]

Goals are what matters!!

 

You can shoot from anywhere, shots, shots on target, possession, all misleading stats when taken in isolation and without context.

 

 

[DobbinTheDonkey]

1 hour ago, Lord Snooty said:

 

Wallace got a couple of balls in on his natural foot. And Reach cut inside and looked dangerous driving in on his left foot. 

 

I think it might have just come from a corner breaking down and them just staying where they were rather than  instruction. Accident rather than design.  But both looked better in that spell. I'd have been tempted to tell them to stay there. 

 

Reach has the drive to get inside and run at them. Wallace isn't as good at it now, through age, but should be able to deliver a more natural cross with pace into the box. Due to the added pace those heading it will not have to generate their own power into the ball as much.

Makes sense to me but what do we know.

Edited October 29, 2017 by DobbinTheDonkey

[upperwinngardensowl]

Yesterday was better, for a while.

cant remember their keeper having to do too much, and our only goal, while a decent move, was a complete fluke against possibly the worst defence I have seen this season.

[McRightSide]

Reach looked to be in a little more of a free role to me.

 

The kind that Bannan plays on the left. I thought he did quite well, but then he's done quite well all season really

[torryowl]

32 minutes ago, Morepork said:

Goals are what matters!!

 

You can shoot from anywhere, shots, shots on target, possession, all misleading stats when taken in isolation and without context.

 

 

.when we played Norwich last season we had 10 shots  with only  5 on  target and won 5 -1,norwich had 59% possession  .......previous match against Brentford we had 30 shots with 10 on target and lost 1-2 and we had 57% possession ........so i'm with you the only stat that matters is which side scores more goals 

[Walt]

2 hours ago, Holmowl said:

 

Yesterday and last Saturday Carlos wasn't negative at all. 

 

442, two strikers, two wingers in Reach and Wallace. I give him great credit for doing that at Derby. He should always do it at home.

 

Those criticising him for yesterday are wrong imo. We attacked and were hugely unlucky. Some of our attacking play yesterday was a joy. On the 17th minute (ish) we hammered at their door for about two minutes solid. Brilliant stuff. Lee's shot, Bannan's numerous give and goes and chip were top drawer. The two headers stopped on the line....any other day we murder them.

 

However, he has set us up to attack before, it works, it works again, again and again....and then he chickens out and reverts to a defensive line-up. It's not even that he does it against top teams away from home. He does it against the Wigans, Dons, QPRs, Sunderlands. And we suffer the consequences.

 

He has the players to take sides on, but he doesn't trust them. It will be his downfall.

 

 

Indeed, in the first half we had more than enough chances to win three games. I think Heckingbottom played into our hands as he matched us up with the 442. Second half he went 451/433 and Barnsley were looking a lot better for it and I thought it was just a matter of time before they scored. Us then reverting to the diamond because of Pudil's injury totally un-workable us. Generally imo when teams press us and play with width in either 352 or 451/433 they cause us problems. Carlos won't play 352 (although it looks a perfect fit for our players) and we haven't got the tricky/pacy wide forwards to play 451/433.

We've basically got our preferred diamond and then the 442, if these two don't work then we seem to just chuck forwards on randomly and hope for the best. Just a couple of wide / inside forward type of players could make all the difference in our options to cover most formations. I just do not get why you wouldn't give yourself this option.