Defending deep and counter attacking

[Arriba Los Zorros]

Is this the way football is going aka the Atletico Madrid model? Seems more and more that successful clubs are those that set up defensively but with quick forwards, don't bother with passing moves and just set up purely to counter attack. And there doesn't seem to be a way of beating it when it is done well. Teams like us and Man City that commit men forward in pretty passing moves are just playing into these teams hands.

[Sunbury Fox]

3 minutes ago, Arriba Los Zorros said:

Is this the way football is going aka the Atletico Madrid model? Seems more and more that successful clubs are those that set up defensively but with quick forwards, don't bother with passing moves and just set up purely to counter attack. And there doesn't seem to be a way of beating it when it is done well. Teams like us and Man City that commit men forward in pretty passing moves are just playing into these teams hands.

Not sure Raheem Sterling would agree with your final sentence.

[Genesis1]

Seems to be happening a lot lately. Counter attack to 1-0 and defend the game away.

[Arriba Los Zorros]

Just now, Genesis1 said:

Seems to be happening a lot lately. Counter attack to 1-0 and defend the game away.

Nobody has an answer to it. Spurs and Villa won by 5 goals against top teams by countering with direct passes. We put 5 past Man City. You can't even call it negative as it creates a lot of chances 

[shailen]

No chance. You're more likely to win a game if you control it and that means possession. If you're a team that can keep possession and the opposition sit deep, it will be harder for you to score from an average chance than the other team as they'll be more space for them in general. However, you should be able to create far more chances having more of the ball. 

 

The key with a possession based game is that you have to use the ball to cut teams open with those sharp and incisive passes and keep recycling possession. No point passing without purpose. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

14 minutes ago, Genesis1 said:

Seems to be happening a lot lately. Counter attack to 1-0 and defend the game away.

So many 1-0 results recently.

[Arriba Los Zorros]

24 minutes ago, shailen said:

No chance. You're more likely to win a game if you control it and that means possession. If you're a team that can keep possession and the opposition sit deep, it will be harder for you to score from an average chance than the other team as they'll be more space for them in general. However, you should be able to create far more chances having more of the ball. 

 

The key with a possession based game is that you have to use the ball to cut teams open with those sharp and incisive passes and keep recycling possession. No point passing without purpose. 

I don't agree with this because the team with all the possession and territory are normally trying to break down a packed defence which is hard to do and requires almost a perfect attack whereas the team countering may only have a handful of attacks in the game but they are against broken up defences and quite often tend to be the most incisive attacks and best chances. Hence why is it becoming increasingly common to see teams with less than 30% possession win games comfortably.

[shailen]

5 minutes ago, Arriba Los Zorros said:

I don't agree with this because the team with all the possession and territory are normally trying to break down a packed defence which is hard to do and requires almost a perfect attack whereas the team countering may only have a handful of attacks in the game but they are against broken up defences and quite often tend to be the most incisive attacks and best chances. Hence why is it becoming increasingly common to see teams with less than 30% possession win games comfortably.

I agree that it's harder to break down a defence that sits back, but imo it's even harder to execute the perfect counter attack at speed and finish it off. Is this counter attacking stat actually factual?

 

Man City especially have taken the Premier league to different levels and they accumulated more points in the two seasons they won it then in any other season. They play a high line, yet teams generally get very little joy from them. It's not the possession stat that is key. It's what you do with it. Possession with purpose and intent is best way to control football games imo and get results. Counter attacking invites pressure on your own goal and leads to the opposition having more chances so you've got to be able to defend well. 

[Oxfordfox83]

There’s no problem with us choosing to be more dictatorial of the game, seizing the initiative with our possession we look really good.

 

What baffles me is when we set up defensively against a physical team like West Ham, because it always always makes us more vulnerable. Man City is a rare exception, most of the time we need to take the game to people and that means being less defensive. Possession for possession’s sake is pointless...

[Arriba Los Zorros]

7 minutes ago, shailen said:

I agree that it's harder to break down a defence that sits back, but imo it's even harder to execute the perfect counter attack at speed and finish it off. Is this counter attacking stat actually factual?

 

Man City especially have taken the Premier league to different levels and they accumulated more points in the two seasons they won it then in any other season. They play a high line, yet teams generally get very little joy from them. It's not the possession stat that is key. It's what you do with it. Possession with purpose and intent is best way to control football games imo and get results. Counter attacking invites pressure on your own goal and leads to the opposition having more chances so you've got to be able to defend well. 

I do take your point but it's a strange one because for the counter attacking system to work you need to face a progressive attacking team, it's like the kryptonite for the Man City / Barca style. Whereas there is no style that effectively combats counter attacking other than the other team sitting back and then you just get a dull 0-0. 

 

Also I do think it's much easier to set up a counter attacking side and train the defensive side of things than teaching a side how to effectively break down packed defences. You don't need top players either, just a good organisation and some pace.

 

Hence why more and more sides are adopting this tactic and getting joy out of it!

[Hoopla10]

55 minutes ago, shailen said:

keep recycling possession

This is the most important bit imo. You have to close the opposition down fast, put pressure on the ball and retake possession or force a mistake. THAT'S the counter to teams that sit back.  If you allow them space/time they can look up and play balls over the top and behind. When we're at our best we dominate the opposition and cause constant threats. No shots on target is a huge problem and something we saw a few times at the end of last season.I'm genuinely concerned now about our next PL game because Villa (who I hate) obviously know how to exploit a high line and have players who can hurt us. And I'm not convinced Brendan has an answer to it. The other thing I'd like to see us do (again something we did in our title season) is come out the blocks at 100mph. Really aggressively and quickly hit them hard for that first goal. Because that goal forces them to come out and attack us. 

Edited 4 October 2020 by Hoopla10

[WigstonWanderer]

Not really new for us is it? 2016, say no more.

[twister]

most full backs are like sprinters not or 800m runners, they are built to attack not to defend, in-fact i'd argue the likes of say to the likes of a chilwell defending is something he has little concept of but it doesn't matter as he bombs on so much, same with a spurs new left back.

 

The modern game with var no contact pens, is resembling a nba game, so it makes sense that fast break counter attacks are going to be the norm.

 

Unless that is you suffocate a team to death with their press so they cant counter like liverpool did with arsenal on monday.

 

 

[Dan LCFC]

It's a pretty good idea at the minute in this defensive clown era. West Ham attempting to defend earlier today was a relative innovation.

[Le Renard]

The top teams will always try to retain possession, but they can also counter attack at speed.  Teams have had 3 or 4 years of playing and analysing Man city and Liverpool and they will eventually work them out.  The problem for te Villa as they get better and improve is that they will come up against alow block so they will become more of a possession team, this is the problem we had starting at the end of our premier league win and the season after we came unstuck, because teams sat in with a low block and so it continues for the Foxes, because most teams that come to the Kingpower will sit in deep and hit on the counter.

[Matt]

As everyone knows I don't like this possession football.

 

There is a time and place for it, I understand the logic behind it in that it hopefully draws the opposition out but in my eyes it rarely works, it's not effective, it's not productive, and it usually just leads to mistakes ultimately resulting in gifting the opposition a goal - even by the teams who 'have the players to play it', messing about side to side literally infront of your own goalmouth, what do you expect really?! I don't understand why teams create those problems for themselves or put themselves under needless pressure.

 

It all came from this obession of playing like Pep and Barca/Man City fanboys, teams have lost their identitys simply because of the phrase 'This is how you play football', I just wish teams were the exception and not the rule (you still do get the odd teams playing thier own style that suits but generally most teams are trying it now).

 

So far this season we've played possession football, i'm still not too keen but atleast we're playing it higher up the field, yesterday we created very little but I thought it was better than compared to what we have been doing in the last couple of years because atleast we weren't playing silly little passes, putting ourselves under no pressure for no reason infront of our own penalty area, we didn't create anything largely because West Ham were solid and fair play to them for that.

 

Give me Atletico's, Us in 15/16, Wolves, e.t.c style any day over possession football.

 

Some people say 'it's negative', 'route 1, lump it over the top', I find the possession football more negative, less productive and creating more issue for yourself, Counter attacking football, direct football doesn't have to be route 1, lumping it over the top and alot of the time it isn't, likewise that's not what i'm asking for.

 

McManaman summed it up yesterday, we tend to have alot to have alot of possession at the back, but as we move up the pitch its lacking (Although in yesterdays game I didn't think he really had a point as I believe we played quite high up the pitch).

 

Possession is all about what you do with the ball and we should all know that, we used to take the piss out of possession based sides for that.

 

Edited 5 October 2020 by Matt

[shailen]

7 hours ago, Arriba Los Zorros said:

I do take your point but it's a strange one because for the counter attacking system to work you need to face a progressive attacking team, it's like the kryptonite for the Man City / Barca style. Whereas there is no style that effectively combats counter attacking other than the other team sitting back and then you just get a dull 0-0. 

 

Also I do think it's much easier to set up a counter attacking side and train the defensive side of things than teaching a side how to effectively break down packed defences. You don't need top players either, just a good organisation and some pace.

 

Hence why more and more sides are adopting this tactic and getting joy out of it!

I know exactly where you are coming from but the best teams in the world play out from the back and play this possession based game for a reason. It gives you control.

 

We could never sit back as you say vs West Ham yesterday as they wouldn't have necessarily come for us and so to play the counter attack game would have been difficult. I do agree with you in that it's easier to set a team up to defend and counter from deep but that doesn't mean it will necessarily give you the best results.

 

Why do teams that play counter attacking football struggle to score goals - the top teams in terms of goals scored are those that generally play possession football and not on the counter attack. I think I said in my earlier post, what makes those teams successful is being able to win the second balls, recycle possession and go again. I think it looks like teams are getting joy from the counter attacking tactic as the other teams are not doing this bit well. Liverpool were a shambles yesterday at doing this as were Man City when we played them. 

[fox_up_north]

I read a book a couple of years ago - can't remember the name of it - but it was about how tactics have changed over the last couple of decades. 

442 with no nonsense defenders and two attackers became 451 with a focus on the midfield became 4231 with possession became 433 counter attack became 343/ 352 high press and now here we are. Looks like we're in the transition phase to a new style that will become dominant over the next few years. I would say that the tiki taka from Pep is pretty much over, though. 

 

The other caveat is that this season is completely unlike any other in that we had a massive break a few months ago, then loads of football, then a quick break. So many variables. 

[Nick]

15 hours ago, Arriba Los Zorros said:

Is this the way football is going aka the Atletico Madrid model? Seems more and more that successful clubs are those that set up defensively but with quick forwards, don't bother with passing moves and just set up purely to counter attack. And there doesn't seem to be a way of beating it when it is done well. Teams like us and Man City that commit men forward in pretty passing moves are just playing into these teams hands.

It’s for me the way we should play against the big six when we can’t go toe toe with them in the modern style. For all other opponents we play as Brendan wants, imposing our style.

[Genesis1]

14 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

So many 1-0 results recently.

I think the writer of the topic was talking about football in general and not simply the premier league. Perhaps read the entire post before attempting to be comical. 😊

[Kilworthfox]

Apologies, but did anyone catch LCFC 2015/16 season?

 

Since the great Barcelona teams with Xavi & Iniesta dictating the possession in midfield, seemingly all of football arrogantly believed this is the way to play, and anything else just "isn't proper football" which we took full advantage of in 2016 especially. See recent comments from Stirling & Rodri.

 

There is nothing more boring than watching decent footballers, but not world class ones, trying to play tiki taca football at a slow pace. Laboriously moving the ball around in defence & midfield within their own half, believing they are entertaining, and holier than thou because they have 50.1% possession or more.

 

Nobody absolutely loved how we played in 2016 more than I. Sticking the counter attack to those possession fossils. Not that CA is the only way to play! You should play to your strengths like Barca did, but they had the players to play that way.

 

I am not a fan of Rodgers, as he is still within this new breed mould of possession obsession. However I was genuinely impressed with him last week at Manchester City as he was pragmatic to the strengths of the team he has, that is what a great manager does. I believe this is the first time he has changed tactics in this way, and I was so impressed, but it wont last sadly, as his own self importance and belief in possession, will lead him to revert back to his coaching beliefs, just like Puel & Sosa did, and kill our strengths with keeping the ball in safe areas, for possessions sake.

Edited 5 October 2020 by Kilworthfox

[StriderHiryu]

16 hours ago, Arriba Los Zorros said:

Is this the way football is going aka the Atletico Madrid model? Seems more and more that successful clubs are those that set up defensively but with quick forwards, don't bother with passing moves and just set up purely to counter attack. And there doesn't seem to be a way of beating it when it is done well. Teams like us and Man City that commit men forward in pretty passing moves are just playing into these teams hands.

Definitely not, but it's a good way to get a result against a team with players that are technically better than yours.

 

Looking back at the last 10-12 years of football, I'd say tactics and styles have broadly evolved as such:

 

- 2008-2012: The era of Tiki-Taka. Spain and Barcelona dominant. Heavy possession football with the idea being that if the other team doesn't have the ball they can't score, and eventually you will create the perfect goal. Arsenal and even Swansea City in the Premier League play light versions of the same system.

- 2010-2016: Counter attacking football becomes a viable strategy to defeat Tiki-Taka. Mourinho's Inter Milan beating Guardiola's Barcelona. Atletico Madrid reach two Champions League Finals and win La Liga. The Leicester City story.

- 2012-ongoing: Gegenpressing. Press right from the front so the other team can't get out. Capitalise on defensive mistakes and quick transitions to score before the opposition can setup their defensive block. Klopp's Dortmund win the Bundesliga and reach the Champions League final. All of the RB teams copy the formula, Atalanta in Serie A (though both of these aren't till much later).

- 2016-ongoing: Guardiola's centrally deployed fullbacks to combine high possession football with a high press. A bit like Tiki-Taka meets Gegenpressing. I would say our style at it's best is a version of this.

- 2018-ongoing. Klopp's Liverpool. Gegenpressing again, but this time sacrificing technical play in central midfield in favour of full-backs that score and assist as much as some wingers do. Actually sacrificed some attacking power but stabilised the team in doing so.

- 2020-ongoing: High line, high intensity with the ability to play good football. Bayern Munich in this season's Champions League are the best examples, they can seemingly do everything though they are susceptible at the back and perhaps wouldn't be so successful without Neuer. Liverpool buying Thiago from Bayern might mean they could go this way too.

 

There's more than just those ideas, but those have been the biggest. Football always goes in cycles, so when one tactic becomes the most popular, strategies that beat the tactic start becoming more effective. But I'd say that the high press style is currently proving to be the best right now. Villa might have won last night, but I see that as more of a one-off than a pattern. Man City on the other hand are too slow in their build-up and have big problems defensively, which is why they are getting caught out.

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

%possession stat is the biggest waste of time, totally irrelevant as we proved to some considerable success in our time.

[Muzzy_Larsson]

It's cyclic like everything else. It's in vogue and working just now but soon enough someone will find an effective way of countering it (no pun intended) and things will evolve again. It was the same with tiki-taka, about a decade ago and now teams can get the better of that pretty easily.

[Muzzy_Larsson]

20 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

Definitely not, but it's a good way to get a result against a team with players that are technically better than yours.

 

Looking back at the last 10-12 years of football, I'd say tactics and styles have broadly evolved as such:

 

- 2008-2012: The era of Tiki-Taka. Spain and Barcelona dominant. Heavy possession football with the idea being that if the other team doesn't have the ball they can't score, and eventually you will create the perfect goal. Arsenal and even Swansea City in the Premier League play light versions of the same system.

- 2010-2016: Counter attacking football becomes a viable strategy to defeat Tiki-Taka. Mourinho's Inter Milan beating Guardiola's Barcelona. Atletico Madrid reach two Champions League Finals and win La Liga. The Leicester City story.

- 2012-ongoing: Gegenpressing. Press right from the front so the other team can't get out. Capitalise on defensive mistakes and quick transitions to score before the opposition can setup their defensive block. Klopp's Dortmund win the Bundesliga and reach the Champions League final. All of the RB teams copy the formula, Atalanta in Serie A (though both of these aren't till much later).

- 2016-ongoing: Guardiola's centrally deployed fullbacks to combine high possession football with a high press. A bit like Tiki-Taka meets Gegenpressing. I would say our style at it's best is a version of this.

- 2018-ongoing. Klopp's Liverpool. Gegenpressing again, but this time sacrificing technical play in central midfield in favour of full-backs that score and assist as much as some wingers do. Actually sacrificed some attacking power but stabilised the team in doing so.

- 2020-ongoing: High line, high intensity with the ability to play good football. Bayern Munich in this season's Champions League are the best examples, they can seemingly do everything though they are susceptible at the back and perhaps wouldn't be so successful without Neuer. Liverpool buying Thiago from Bayern might mean they could go this way too.

 

There's more than just those ideas, but those have been the biggest. Football always goes in cycles, so when one tactic becomes the most popular, strategies that beat the tactic start becoming more effective. But I'd say that the high press style is currently proving to be the best right now. Villa might have won last night, but I see that as more of a one-off than a pattern. Man City on the other hand are too slow in their build-up and have big problems defensively, which is why they are getting caught out.

Great post.