Players on the posts for corners

[deep blue]

Lots of teams don't put players on the posts. Two players on the posts means two fewer players marking opposition players or available for a break. Do you save more goals having players on the posts or extra players in the box? Do you score more goals on the break from having additional players forward than you concede by not having players on the posts? It's a numbers game which needs to be looked at across a whole season not just one game.

 

I agree with this;  it's certainly not simplistic.  Also, "men on posts" means not only that we are in a poor position to start a counterattack but also, with fewer men up-field, we are likely to immediately lose possession and have the ball coming straight back at us, and pressure will just keep building and building.

 

It's a shame, though, that Soton caused us few problems from open play but could get 2 such cheap goals, whereas all our excellent attacking could only yield the same number.

[LcFc_Smiv]

may as well stick Kante on the post - would have stopped one if not both their chances on the line, and ANYONE but kante marking could have stopped the header. was a bit annoyed at the time but forgiven for the come back 

 

Not really sure who Kante was meant to be on but it wasn't Fonte, if you watch the replay on MOTD from behind the goal, Fonte is Morgans man. Fonte steps up and Morgan gets caught out leaving Kante to have to deal with, I'm guessing he's positioned where he is to deal with anything that comes low and hard near post.

[Captain...]

Watching it again this morning Drinkwater drops onto the near post for Fonte's goal.

I do think it would be sensible in the first half to be a little more cautious especially away from home, but hey ho, I trust Claudio.

[5waller5]

It does seem one of those obvious things to do .... and maybe all the research and stats that the management team have run and decided not to is over complicating it.

[yorkie1999]

Well worked corner, they managed to stop Morgan following his man

[dedlock]

As previous posters have said the men on the post seems pretty basic. Our defence at corners was all over the place yesterday.Having watched MOTD Soton's 2nd goal looked offside but City's defence was AWOL.

 

What is particularly baffling is that for 4 years we were managed by a former no nonsense CB. CR and Benetti are both former defenders and,as CR keeps telling us, he is Italian and wants a clean sheet.Despite this we have been vunerable in defence but particularly at corners.When will the coaching staff sort it out?

[Captain...]

It's risk vs reward again, if we had players back on the post people would be complaining about not having a player out ready to counter, as they did for a lot of last season under Pearson.

For the first corner Drinkwater was on the near post, for the second one we wanted to counter so had Vardy and Okazaki up ready for the counter.

We also have a small team and one of the reasons why Ulloa was so useful for us last season was the extra height to defend, RDL is also tall and decent in the air. Up to Claudio to sort it out now.

[Fatbloke]

We need a goalkeeper that can CATCH a high ball and is not rooted to his line, one that commands his area and also distribute the ball quickly and to his own players.

[Hirsty The Blue 94]

Had this argument many times with my old man. He is of the school that you leave as many up the pitch as you can so they have to keep plenty back. However doing that means you're short on people on the posts, and also allows attackers to get a clear run and header on things because there is more room. The more bodies in the box to stop anyone getting a free run and header at goal is they way for me, and if they score from some sort of pinball action then so be it.

[Guest ttfn]

It's risk vs reward again, if we had players back on the post people would be complaining about not having a player out ready to counter, as they did for a lot of last season under Pearson.

For the first corner Drinkwater was on the near post, for the second one we wanted to counter so had Vardy and Okazaki up ready for the counter.

We also have a small team and one of the reasons why Ulloa was so useful for us last season was the extra height to defend, RDL is also tall and decent in the air. Up to Claudio to sort it out now.

Basically what I came into this thread to say.

[tickler28]

OK I'm going to try and understand the logic with leaving men forward for a counter attack.

People are saying that despite the lack of height in our team and despite the fact that Schmeichels biggest weakness is commanding his box at corners and despite the fact that a goal saved on the line is just as good as scoring a goal we are better off taking the chance of a counter attack?

No way am I having that it's complete madness.

I bet against 90% of teams in this league with the personnel we have at present (that's without the height of Ulloa and Inler) we are more likely to concede from a corner than to score from a possible counter attack.

Does anyone disagree with that statement?

[Guy]

I agree with this;  it's certainly not simplistic.  Also, "men on posts" means not only that we are in a poor position to start a counterattack but also, with fewer men up-field, we are likely to immediately lose possession and have the ball coming straight back at us, and pressure will just keep building and building.

 

It's a shame, though, that Soton caused us few problems from open play but could get 2 such cheap goals, whereas all our excellent attacking could only yield the same number.

Guess this spells out that going back to basics....such as having men on both posts (for certainly the first goal conceded) would have meant that ideally we were no goals against at half time - well, that's if the linesman had done his job properly as then the second one wouldn't have stood anyway! Then theoretically, had things gone that way then we would have gone on to win the game in the second half, with Mahrez and Dyer's appearances after half time transforming the entire team and game plan into a potent attacking one. Then again would we have had the same impetus had it still been goal less at half time and would Southampton have switched off in the way they did in the second half had they not been two goals to the good?? Swings and roundabouts as ever in this game we......love!   

[Alexikokopops]

OK I'm going to try and understand the logic with leaving men forward for a counter attack.

People are saying that despite the lack of height in our team and despite the fact that Schmeichels biggest weakness is commanding his box at corners and despite the fact that a goal saved on the line is just as good as scoring a goal we are better off taking the chance of a counter attack?

No way am I having that it's complete madness.

I bet against 90% of teams in this league with the personnel we have at present (that's without the height of Ulloa and Inler) we are more likely to concede from a corner than to score from a possible counter attack.

Does anyone disagree with that statement?

I'd say it's more that having a man on the line means he can't be somewhere more useful to defend (rather than counter attack). Or, in the words of the Secret Football:

What particularly riles me is when you hear a pundit or co-commentator say something like, "I can't understand, Martin, why Drogba is not on the post here. That header would have fallen to him and if I'm Petr Cech I'm saying: 'Go on son, clear that off the line for me!'"

The fact is corners are routinely cleared by a man stationed on the six-yard line, exactly where Chelsea position Didier Drogba. If somebody scores inside that post it is for no other reason than a player having lost his man. That is the mistake. If there is a player on the post he will clear one, possibly two shots off the line a season. If that same player stands on the six-yard line he will probably clear 100 corners away over the course of the season.

The worst thing, though, is when this dross gets into popular culture and my friends start saying stupid things to me like, "We should have a man on the post, our manager doesn't know what he's doing", just because it sounds like the right thing to say. It's such an easy way of analysing that it infuriates me. It's lazy and it takes you, the viewer, for a fool.

http://gu.com/p/2mmap

[FireFox]

The thing i though, last season Ulloa would start at the near post, then if he saw he could win it, would come out to somewhere on the six-yard line to head it clear.

 

Though having someone ready to counterattack is also someone "somewhere more useful to defend" because after the ball initially gets cleared, he possibly will interrupt the ball coming right back into the box from one of their players starting outside the box.

 

 

No matter what, you are giving up something. However, I always would feel comfortable seeing Ulloa starting on the near post.

[Number 6]

Hate this argument. They aren't 2 extra players! They're two players who could be preventing a shot coming in at all.

For me the way Drinkwater assessed he wasn't getting the ball and dropped back onto the post was how it should be done.

[MooseBreath]

If you bought a load of tall fat blokes and lined them up on the goal line you'd hardly ever concede from corners

[weller54]

If you bought a load of tall fat blokes and lined them up on the goal line you'd hardly ever concede from corners

...or just GTF?

[filbertway]

We must have the shortest team in the league,

6'1

5'10

6'1

6'3

6'1

5'9

5'10

5'6

5'11

5'8

5'10

 

Explains why we only win on average, 19 of 46 aerial duels per game haha.

[Captain...]

I'd say it's more that having a man on the line means he can't be somewhere more useful to defend (rather than counter attack). Or, in the words of the Secret Football:

What particularly riles me is when you hear a pundit or co-commentator say something like, "I can't understand, Martin, why Drogba is not on the post here. That header would have fallen to him and if I'm Petr Cech I'm saying: 'Go on son, clear that off the line for me!'"

The fact is corners are routinely cleared by a man stationed on the six-yard line, exactly where Chelsea position Didier Drogba. If somebody scores inside that post it is for no other reason than a player having lost his man. That is the mistake. If there is a player on the post he will clear one, possibly two shots off the line a season. If that same player stands on the six-yard line he will probably clear 100 corners away over the course of the season.

The worst thing, though, is when this dross gets into popular culture and my friends start saying stupid things to me like, "We should have a man on the post, our manager doesn't know what he's doing", just because it sounds like the right thing to say. It's such an easy way of analysing that it infuriates me. It's lazy and it takes you, the viewer, for a fool.

http://gu.com/p/2mmap

 

Good find that, pretty much spot on, if Morgan hadn't lost Fonte, or Fonte escaped Morgan in a very well worked way, he wouldn't have been able to beat Kante in the air, Kante probably would have cleared and a potential break could have been on.

 

I dislike seeing all players back in the area defending the corner, it just means that clearing the ball is losing possession, you need an outlet and we have great options in players like Vardy to pick up the ball and go on the counter.

[Countryfox]

Definitely have Kante on the post instead of trying to mark giants !

[FireFox]

Explains why we only win on average, 19 of 46 aerial duels per game haha.

Don't care as long as Dyer can keep beating keepers to head the ball into the back of the net.

[tickler28]

Do I need to labour this point anymore before everyone agrees?

[Frank to be]

That was because Kante WAS on the post instead of clearing up from the front like he usually does.

[tickler28]

No one was on the post

[Frank to be]

No one was on the post

Kante was stood on the back post. Usually he would be standing up front ready for the short ball. It was having Kante in the back post instead of in front that cost us that goal.