Lillehamring

That's obviously not true - it's happened a few times, in a few games - as the doctor's stats reveal - between 5-30 yards he's only misplaced 8 passes all season, and three were today.

You don't think we do that? I'd say we're one of the most flexible teams in the league - i think we can be patient or explosive, i think we can be direct or we can be roundabout, i think we can go long and wide, or have our CB carry the ball the length of the pitch. We can play slow and steady, or we can go all in. As such, this notion that we've been found out seems implausible, because when teams come and try to man mark us, we find a way, when they sit deep, we find a way, when they press hard, we find a way. The only times we haven't found a way is when we've just played rubbish.

I'm sure if opposing teams use 'hoof the ball into the box and get a scrambled tap in' as useful reference towards playing us, we don't have much to worry about. Yes it was (another) woeful goal (i assume you meant that rather than 'games') to concede, but those sort of goals are so random, there's no planning behind it just wild hope. But yes, we need to get better at clearing the ball in such situations.

Problem with that is, by definition, we'd have to be under pressure more often than not - which is neither how we would want to play, nor how we actually play. What we need to do is to get better at counterattacking on the rarer occasions that we have the opportunity to.

I think they have mastered certain elements of it, but not every element of it - and i suspect in maresca's mind it is always evolving. But even when you've mastered the technical elements of a system, it's only then that you can start to master the utilization of the system. I'm not one to speculate on what will happen next year but, assuming we go up, i hope that we'll keep a core of the more competent players and then add players that have either played in similar systems or are good at adapting to different systems. And, FWIW, there is no 'one way of playing' - that's the beauty of this system, it can be used and we have used it in multiple different ways.

But did we really change the way we play - everyone complains that we are slow and boring, if that is so, then surely after we score we're just continuing in this fashion. People are talking like we played like Spurs up until we scored and then played like, er, leicester afterwards. We just play that same steady way, the goal didn't change anything, we just stuck to what we were doing before. the only difference being that west brom were no longer content to just sit back and watch us as they had been doing from, as you say, the start of the 2nd half (arguably for 72 minutes) - they are a good side, yes, but not a pressing side; as enzo said, they'll sit deep and then push up when they want to, which they did from time to time, but after we scored, they did it every time they had the ball.....

Um, i'm a little confused here - i've been an advocate of maresca and the system since day one. I'd go as far as to say i'm one of the 'system snobs' that people have been talking about - and, if anything, probably haven't been critical enough (though i believe it is working and good to watch, so....) I think it can be a bit frustrating at times, but i hope that's just while the players get used to it, but other than that, no, i am and always have been 100% behind it.

I think the other thing to consider is that the nature of our game, generally, is to play at a, well, a leisurely pace, shall we say. So, for me, it doesn't feel like we 'play negatively' after we score, but that we 'play normally' after we score. Basically, the only time you'll see real urgency in the way we play is when we're chasing a late goal. I suppose if one sees our general play as negative, then our performance after scoring a goal must also seem negative. Whereas if one sees our general play as considered and patient, then that is how it'll be perceived after we score. does that make sense?

I agree, this element has certainly dropped out of our game in the last month, or at least we aren't as good at it as we used to be. there were a few passes in the first half that were inches away from opening up their defence, but all too often they were picked off. Today's chance was as easy a chance as we've had since Praet wasted that break early in the season, and winks almost messed it up, thankfully it went in. I think maresca knows how good we can be when we get these chances, but as yet we seem to make a hash of them far too often - hopefully today will give them the confidence boost they seemed to need. But it's definitely a part of the system - and this is why people talking about plan b's and so on are missing the point, the system allows for so many different ways of playing. unfortunately, too often the countering element is a rarity because teams are just sitting deep.

I feel he'd almost be better playing as one of the 8s, his link up play in advanced positions is good, but right now he drifts from disinterested to inept. we've seen today that he can play a decent pass, but only when he doesn't have to make a decision, when it's instinctive, and you can't do that as the false 9. Vardy is the opposite, he knows where the ball needs to go, but he doesn't have the touch required. frustrating.

I thought he had his best game for us today (west brom), he's starting to look more comfortable and confident; sadly i still think he's not suited to this system and is too limited, but good to see him rediscovering some form.

I think they were a little bit tired KDH and Winks are hardly the fastest players in the league, they had five players near the ball at the start of that attack, three of them didn't manage to run more than 5 yards....

I think the mistake you're making with your comments is that, at least this is the impression you're giving, you don't see counter attacking as part of our normal game - which is completely untrue. yes this was a very obvious counter but a huge part of our game is to be able to transition from defending to attack with quick progressive passing, or counter attacking. Using this goal as a dig at the system we play is flawed, because this is exactly what the system is all about.

Then it must just come down to context - i didn't have the same commentary as you - but if it did happen as described, which i never discounted, then it must have been a. an isolated incident, or b. when we were simply trying to wear down the clock. Without knowing exactly what the situation was it's hard to really understand why maresca might have applauded it - but given that it's his system, i'm sure he had his reasons - sometimes, the obvious explanation isn't always the correct one - he must have felt the action was the right one, who are we to dispute this.

The other side of the coin to being 'negative' after scoring...

I'd love you to find one single post of anyone on here, this season, who has even remotely hinted that they disapprove of us scoring goals on the counter.

I think he's saying that whilst it was a counter-attacking move (inevitably, it could be nothing less) - it wasn't through being set up to play counterattacking football.

We were well on top, but that changed the moment we scored - they have great home form and the sixth best attack in the league and they started to really push for the first time in the game. The idea of us pushing on would have left us even more exposed than we already were - by and large, for the last 20 minutes we did well to use up the time, created a few chances to get a second and limited them to a goalmouth scramble. Sounds like a sensible way to see out a game - you can't do everything, but sometimes you can do enough.

This didn't happen, regardless of what you heard - there were times when we went back - but these two were actually starting to really click and, but for a better final ball/finish, looked like our best route to a goal (which proved to be the case). From the few shots i saw of maresca, it was usually frustration he expressed when we wasted good progression. towards the end, we were operating some fine game management, with some passing phases that kept west brom out of the game - maybe that was what they were referencing? I don't think it is that he doesn't want us to attack, it's more that he wants us to keep the ball, so picking our moments when to risk an attack or when to just keep the ball away from them, which we did pretty well.

I wasn't intending to be patronising, merely sarcastic, given how wildly limited your observation was! And that you ignored any element of this point it felt like you were another of these blinkered posters who have one idea and can't see beyond it. To suggest we were 'negative' after scoring would be to suggest that we deliberately avoided going forward (which is totally untrue), that we didn't create much is unsurprising, obviously it's not that easy to attack when all of a sudden a decent team suddenly play up to their abilities and threw everything at you. It's easy to say 'oh, we should try to score'. but to actually do it isn't so simple - and of course, as west brom proved, the higher you press for a goal the more vulnerable you are at the back The fact is, it's a balancing act how much to push, how much to sit, and maresca, for me got it right, west brom stepped up their game and we consolidated ours (we still had 50+ possession, so yes at the very least we DID keep the ball) and in doing so we used up the clock and limited them to just 2 shots in 25 minutes.

Throughout his time here, nacho has always been a bit streaky - both good and bad - the difference this year is that he doesn't seem to have a clue what's going on around him - has he always been like that, or is it new - i don't know. But right now he offers too little to justify getting 90 minutes. The slow mo of ndidi whipping in that cross was simply majestic!

Maresca's pre-game analysis, so basically, yes....but.

Because ndidi hasn't played much and was clearly shattered. Casadei came in and made a good clearance, linked up play, held up the ball

I think you discredit west brom - they played how enzo predicted and when they needed to they turned up the pressure, and they are a good team. so i'm inclined to think it is more to do with them coming out of their shell, rather than us going into ours.

After the wildness of the start of the season, now is the time to get used to the fact that this is going to be hard work more often than not.