Fox92 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Nige .... Here's tactics 101 for you. Against a strong side like Arsenal you dd the right thing in being more defensive, letting them push on, and counter attacking. Against the bluntest, most un-inspiring front line in the league then you don't need to sit back and invite pressure - you can actually attack them. Nigel doesn't seem to understand anything but setting up for a narrow loss. Oh and if it's not working, and you're watching the game .... It's OK for you to change it and use those guys sat next to you in the tracksuits. Exactly. Agree with that. I don't mind the formation/set up at Arsenal but against Villa, in a knockout competition, I want to see us go for it. We got no chance with Kramaric alone up front. He's chasing the ball all day and none of the central midfielders get up and support him because they've both got no pace.
SpacedX Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I think his whole problem is he has installed this regime of over analysing the opposition. My mate, a west brom fan, was telling me that Pullis is on the touchline barking out orders and telling the players where to be and who to cover and constantly giving directions, no clipboards, no little sketchbooks just the players doing what they are told in the moment. I think the other factor that has crucified us most of this season was the stubborn adherence to zonal defence.
SpacedX Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 5 at the back for me always meant the full backs would get forward to provide the crosses, with our 5 at the back set up we are left either short in midfield or up front, De Laet and Schlupp have to play in a back 5 to get forward and get crosses in, play an extra body in midfield and 2 up front. Here is the problem though, no room for Mahrez or Albrighton, but to get the balance right they couldn't start. I think it negates Albrighton more than Mahrez, the latter likes to cut in and run the channel/at a defence more - as he did against Arsenal where the W/B system didn't seem to interfere with or inhibit him. (Largely because Konch and Simpson didn't exploit the role and stayed deep.)
Fox Ulike Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 It reminds me of the Man Utd and Palace matches earlier in the season. The way we set up against United was ideal for counter attacking, exploiting their high line and dealing with their attacking threat. We won 5-3 and in typical Pearson fashion, he doesn't change a thing for Palace away, resulting in us being unable to break Palace down and losing 2-0. United and Palace, particularly back then, were two totally different propositions and we needed to adapt. I would call it naivety, but you can learn from naivety and he isn't. I think it's more stubbornness. He has never been sure of the best XI and best system this season, so the second one works, he's too scared to change it. The result, crippling inconsistency. We are, by the very nature of being a promoted side, going to face a lot of teams that are stronger than us. We have to adapt to nullify their threats or exploit their weaknesses, not just change systems once we don't play very well. It's not like last season when whoever we faced, we could pick the same 442 and know that if we are at our best, we'll win. Even if we had beaten Arsenal with 541, I wouldn't even consider using it against Villa for a second. We need an extra CM in games like yesterday. Exactly so. Unfortunately it suggests that Pearson really hasn't learnt a thing this season. He's looking for a magic formation that is going to 'work' regardless of the opposition. And it's just never going to happen.
Ollie93 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I wasn't one of the 6500, as I never go to any away matches and actually choose to not bother going to the home games.. The FA cup is meaningless in modern football so in a way I agree with what Pearson has done today (formation-wise) So you don't go to any games AND you think the FA cup is meaningless? We have a proper football fan here....
Stadt Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Wookie, selection is a key part of strategy. Pearson appears to allow personal preference and even favouritism to obfuscate and confound those tactics on the rare occasions that they are sound. He got it badly wrong on Sunday in terms of selection, formation and a stubborn refusal to significant effect changes to a system that clearly wasn't working. He was 'tactically inept' and the only reason that we didn't lose by three goals or more is because Villa are still suffering the hangover from Paul Lambert. Sherwood will transform them into the attacking side that they are on paper. He did change the system, then we conceded.
lcfc81 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 The other thing I didn't get about yesterday was people berating the tactics of starting 5-4-1. The 5 at the back saw a tight and dull game where we had the best chances (the post, the James shot and the penalty), surely an ideal away performance? As soon as we went 442 we let in 2 goals? I wouldn't personally class the 5-4-1 as the problematic part?
Bellend Sebastian Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 The other thing I didn't get about yesterday was people berating the tactics of starting 5-4-1. The 5 at the back saw a tight and dull game where we had the best chances (the post, the James shot and the penalty), surely an ideal away performance? As soon as we went 442 we let in 2 goals? I wouldn't personally class the 5-4-1 as the problematic part? I didn't think it was as barmy as people have made out. The system worked pretty well against Arsenal, so regardless of the opposition, you'd hope that the players would be comfortable playing that way again. Also, Villa may have been terrible to date but with a new manager to impress they probably expected them to be more positive than they were
kingfox Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 We didn't look too bad with 5 at the back in the first half, we created the better chances and we were the better side. We then changed formation and gaps started to appear more frequently, they scored two goals, Benteke started to win more headers, while the midfield were getting more overrun. I'd stick with it to be fair; however change it round slightly and go the Watford way. Play a back three of Wasilewski, Huth & Morgan/Upson, make De Laet and Schlupp wing-backs, play a midfield three of Hammond, James & Mahrez, let Hammond and James hold like Munari and Tozser do for Watford, and get Mahrez to be the attacking/creative threat like Abdi is for Watford. Then go with Kramaric partnering Nugent or Ulloa.
Kitchandro Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 IT WAS NOT AN EXPERIMENT WE HAD EVIDENCE THAT IT COULD WORK ALREADY DID YOU NOT SEE THE FVCKING ARSENAL GAME? I don't get this. We lost against Arsenal didn't we? We gave it a go in the second half but we were second best when the scores were level. And that's our problem, we have some individuals capable of playing good football, but we wait until we go behind before we decide to attack as a team. That formation will, most of the time, be no good to us whatsoever.
Kitchandro Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 We didn't look too bad with 5 at the back in the first half, we created the better chances and we were the better side. We then changed formation and gaps started to appear more frequently, they scored two goals, Benteke started to win more headers, while the midfield were getting more overrun. I'd stick with it to be fair; however change it round slightly and go the Watford way. Play a back three of Wasilewski, Huth & Morgan/Upson, make De Laet and Schlupp wing-backs, play a midfield three of Hammond, James & Mahrez, let Hammond and James hold like Munari and Tozser do for Watford, and get Mahrez to be the attacking/creative threat like Abdi is for Watford. Then go with Kramaric partnering Nugent or Ulloa. Nah, come on, this is bullshit. In the first half Villa dominated the ball. We barely had it - and as for all these chances we supposedly had - I count one real one: Morgan's header over the bar. There was a shot outside the box from James, and a flick on from a corner that hit the post. We were absolutely dreadful in possession and of course you're going to be if all you do is lump it forward to a lone striker from minute 1. The second half was even worse but don't be fooled into thinking we had any control at all in the first half. We were totally shit. 4-5-1 is a dogshit formation for us, we don't have a striker capable of playing it and we don't get enough midfielders forward quickly enough. Add to that we had two defensive midfielders in the middle, and 5 defenders who just can't pass, and we're going to struggle to get out of our own half. The worst of all of it is, it was abundantly clear it wasn't working at all and Pearson still made only one change. Appalling.
Fox92 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Nah, come on, this is bullshit. In the first half Villa dominated the ball. We barely had it - and as for all these chances we supposedly had - I count one real one: Morgan's header over the bar. There was a shot outside the box from James, and a flick on from a corner that hit the post. We were absolutely dreadful in possession and of course you're going to be if all you do is lump it forward to a lone striker from minute 1. The second half was even worse but don't be fooled into thinking we had any control at all in the first half. We were totally shit. 4-5-1 is a dogshit formation for us, we don't have a striker capable of playing it and we don't get enough midfielders forward quickly enough. Add to that we had two defensive midfielders in the middle, and 5 defenders who just can't pass, and we're going to struggle to get out of our own half. The worst of all of it is, it was abundantly clear it wasn't working at all and Pearson still made only one change. Appalling. Agree with all of that post, but that highlighted part is spot on. That's exactly what I've been getting at, and is one of the reasons why I was so frustrated after the game. I'll be really angered if go with the same set up on Sunday at Everton.
BigMicky Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Nah, come on, this is bullshit. In the first half Villa dominated the ball. We barely had it - and as for all these chances we supposedly had - I count one real one: Morgan's header over the bar. There was a shot outside the box from James, and a flick on from a corner that hit the post. We were absolutely dreadful in possession and of course you're going to be if all you do is lump it forward to a lone striker from minute 1. The second half was even worse but don't be fooled into thinking we had any control at all in the first half. We were totally shit. 4-5-1 is a dogshit formation for us, we don't have a striker capable of playing it and we don't get enough midfielders forward quickly enough. Add to that we had two defensive midfielders in the middle, and 5 defenders who just can't pass, and we're going to struggle to get out of our own half. The worst of all of it is, it was abundantly clear it wasn't working at all and Pearson still made only one change. Appalling. Are you serious? Shay Givens save was world class from James, it was all but in.
Kitchandro Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Are you serious? Shay Givens save was world class from James, it was all but in. Yes but it's not a chance is it. It was a very good effort from outside the box. You can't say the formation worked in an attacking sense because we had a shot from outside the box.
cc_star Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Nah, come on, this is bullshit. In the first half Villa dominated the ball. We barely had it - and as for all these chances we supposedly had - I count one real one: Morgan's header over the bar. There was a shot outside the box from James, and a flick on from a corner that hit the post. We were absolutely dreadful in possession and of course you're going to be if all you do is lump it forward to a lone striker from minute 1. The second half was even worse but don't be fooled into thinking we had any control at all in the first half. We were totally shit. 4-5-1 is a dogshit formation for us, we don't have a striker capable of playing it and we don't get enough midfielders forward quickly enough. Add to that we had two defensive midfielders in the middle, and 5 defenders who just can't pass, and we're going to struggle to get out of our own half. The worst of all of it is, it was abundantly clear it wasn't working at all and Pearson still made only one change. Appalling. Nonsense Kram drooping deep enables the likes of Mahrez, Schlupp & James to pour forward, with Kram ghosting back into the box in space later in the buildup it's just yesterday Mahrez was total garbage & Schlupp only played for the first 45, before going AWOL & James was just ok, (but considering he was alongside Cambiasso he was trying to do two men's jobs) Where the formation broke down Vs Villa was to have two fullbacks who can't attack for shit, it was crying out for RDL & Schlupp to play there yesterday And your 2nd point about NP is spot on, Disgrace!
BigMicky Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Yes but it's not a chance is it. It was a very good effort from outside the box. You can't say the formation worked in an attacking sense because we had a shot from outside the box. You said we had 1 real chance? A shot flying into the top corner goes down as a chance for a premiership footballer.
NotTheMarketLeader Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I think Pearson was experimenting. Obviously not what we wanted as it was a great chance to get to Wembley but in the context of our situation I understand. The formation worked brilliantly against arsenal, we even managed to attack in a successful fashion. So Pearson, like me and many others wanted to see if it would have the same affect against a team we can truly attack against. No, it didnt work. But would you not rather discover that in the cup then against a rival in the league? If he's experimenting at this stage of the season then add that to reasons why he should be axed
NotTheMarketLeader Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Steady, I got flame grilled by the Konch and Jeff fanboys for suggesting this - because apparently this season on the left wing 'he's made the role his own'. Dropping Wes and relinquishing the armband to Cambiasso; reinstating DeLaet over Simpson; Jeff to LB/WB over Konch; and starting Albrighton - it's almost although Nige knows that inside - but his arrogance leaves him in complete denial of himself. Also, all this crap on here about how Krameric 'likes to play'. Although it is vital to play to and exploit a players preferences, strengths and style - I don't give a shit what he liked to do in the Prva HNL this is the premiership. He was marooned yesterday and dropping too deep. A natural predatory instinct like that needs to remain in and around the box - not running the channels or 'creating chances for his teammates and for himself' as someone suggested was his strength. Not in this league it ain't. Agreed. Get him some support and keep him in and around the box, and he will score. The bloke has already scored as many as Nugent and Vardy in open play put together. They've had all season he's played about a total of 4 games. Good decision Nige, at home to Stoke, to keep him on the bench most of the game, and yesterday leave him marooned surrounded by defenders. Two of many examples illustrating why Pearson should be jettisoned immediately.
LCFCSOULBOY Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Many are arguing that Pearson changed the formation at the back from what worked somewhat at Arsenal. What they fail to mention and accept that is he doesn't know what to do while we are losing or don't,t have a foot in the game. I for one could see from the first 5 minutes we were getting run over by Villa. Should have made changes almost immediately. When you see we cannot string 3 passes together,sacrifice a defender for a midfielder. How can you possibly give your team a real chance of winning a game with only about 10 minutes of possession. The opposition has such an advantage even when it is Villa. For those who are going to reply Fvck off and die I would just like to say Go fvck yourselves.
SpacedX Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 He did change the system, then we conceded. I said significant changes and again he left it too late. He reverted to four at the back @ 65 mins only to accommodate Ulloa and in doing so took off the wrong CB making no further substitutions to augment a struggling and ineffectual midfield. We conceded because Simpson is struggling right now although I concede Villa may have struggled to penetrate the five man defence.
Guest ttfn Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 It reminds me of the Man Utd and Palace matches earlier in the season. The way we set up against United was ideal for counter attacking, exploiting their high line and dealing with their attacking threat. We won 5-3 and in typical Pearson fashion, he doesn't change a thing for Palace away, resulting in us being unable to break Palace down and losing 2-0. United and Palace, particularly back then, were two totally different propositions and we needed to adapt. I would call it naivety, but you can learn from naivety and he isn't. I think it's more stubbornness. He has never been sure of the best XI and best system this season, so the second one works, he's too scared to change it. The result, crippling inconsistency. We are, by the very nature of being a promoted side, going to face a lot of teams that are stronger than us. We have to adapt to nullify their threats or exploit their weaknesses, not just change systems once we don't play very well. It's not like last season when whoever we faced, we could pick the same 442 and know that if we are at our best, we'll win. Even if we had beaten Arsenal with 541, I wouldn't even consider using it against Villa for a second. We need an extra CM in games like yesterday. Absolutely nailing it with the Palace/United comparison.
LCFCSOULBOY Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Watching Preston playing MU. Having a real go at them. Afraid we would have just laid back like yesterday and let them have their way with us
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.