Ratings vs Palace

[spids]

Trippier was Burnley's best defender last season? .....what Burnley's?..come on mate, he may or may not prove to be a decent player, but i'm not having that....Burnley were relegated.

Poch got his tactics spot on yesterday,he did a job on Palace , we never let our full backs venture to far forward and Walker especially defended brilliantly against Zaha and then Bolaise..

This Walker bashing is really fucking boring when its just for the sake of it.......he has his faults, but yesterday he was decent and disciplined.

My biggest grip with Walker is that offensively, in the last third, he is poor. His delivery is repeatedly bad. With his pace and aggression, if he could cross the ball, he'd be one of the best RBs in the world. But he can't. Trippier, by all accounts, can cross the ball very dangerously and spot a pass. I'd like to see him given a go, especially as Walker is not in the best vein of form defensively either.

 

[spids]

[QUOTE="I just don't think Dier is the defensive midfield wonder bread that some seem to be proclaiming and in a footballing sense he's a huge compromise, and he certainly isn't the future. The thing is I don't think he is playing as an out and out Defensive Midfielder. I wasn't at the game yesterday, but at Half Time on Sky they showed our shape using a heat map and Dier was pretty much in the middle of defence supported either side by Vertonghen and Alderweireld. When given the space Dier will move forward, but it's very similar to how Guardiola has used his defenders/midfielders.

When we have the ball building from the back Dier often slots into the middle of a back 3 (Verts goes left, Toby right), and the FBs push right on. We almost become a 3-4-3. This is what the heat map showed yesterday at HT.

 

[spids]

I think it's worth pointing out just how spectacularly good Palace are away from home under Pardew. Below are their away results since Pardew took over last January against Top Flight opposition. Yesterday was as much about stopping them scoring as it was getting a goal ourselves. They average two goals a game away from home, so a clean sheet was no mean feat! And they've only ever lost by a goal to nil, so we did well offensively too.

Palace Away Under Pardew P12 W9 D0 L3 F24 A13

Spurs 1-0 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-2 Crystal Palace
Norwich 1-3 Crystal Palace
Liverpool 1-3 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-0 Crystal Palace
Sunderland 1-4 Crystal Palace
Stoke 1-2 Crystal Palace
Southampton 1-0 Crystal Palace
West Ham 1-3 Crystal Palace
Leicester 0-1 Crystal Palace
Southampton 2-3 Crystal Palace (FA Cup)
Burnley 2-3 Crystal Palace

 

[WiganSpur]

For my money, Mason is far better when he is allowed to get forward and Bentaleb is far to slow to react defensively. We tried pretty hard to sign Schneiderlin and Wanyama which to me indicates that Poch sees a problem there which wasn't sorted in the previous season with presumably plenty of input during training. That partnership won't cut it defensively. I agree that Dier isn't necessarily the long term answer although he's only played a handful of games where we have been 10x more resilient than before and I think he will grow into the role. He also fills in when the CBs bring the ball out with no compromise defensively and wins aerial battles in MF and a big threat at set plays. I also agree that 433 would suit the current squad. Whatever way you look at it though, we are keeping clean sheets and looking like we can actually see a game out.

Bentaleb just needs a run of games to get the confidence back. He's a bit overrated but that doesn't make him a bad footballer.

We should be going 4-3-3 especially against dominant midfields. I think Dier at the base of the 3 would suit us much better where he can focus on what he is good at: Interceptions, tackling and long passes, rather than having to be athletic enough to get out of tight situations further up the pitch.

We also have a good balance of left and right footed CMs to be able to put the right players ahead of Dier in midfield. Mason or Alli could operate as the more advanced of the 3, with Dembele, Bentaleb or Carroll to the left of them.

 

[yido_number1]

The thing is I don't think he is playing as an out and out Defensive Midfielder. I wasn't at the game yesterday, but at Half Time on Sky they showed our shape using a heat map and Dier was pretty much in the middle of defence supported either side by Vertonghen and Alderweireld. When given the space Dier will move forward, but it's very similar to how Guardiola has used his defenders/midfielders.

When we have the ball building from the back Dier often slots into the middle of a back 3 (Verts goes left, Toby right), and the FBs push right on. We almost become a 3-4-3. This is what the heat map showed yesterday at HT.[/QUOTE]

There have been interviews with some of the Southampton players and I think Poch about his formation. It's all built around playing out from the back and creating options for the keeper to play short. By dropping in you are offering the most outcomes to pick up the ball and build out.

Dier was pushing on and looking more confident yesterday. If you watch the goal back he was one of the front 3/4 up with Son when he scored the goal. From my seat behind the goal in the Paxton it looked like he was a key part of us getting amongst their midfield and unsettling them. I went to the game with some of my Palace fans who sat in the away end and they all agreed we looked like we had 2 extra players on the pitch. I think I have seen a stat that said last week we covered more ground than any team and this week Delle covered more ground than any other player!

 

[Bus-Conductor]

For my money, Mason is far better when he is allowed to get forward and Bentaleb is far to slow to react defensively. We tried pretty hard to sign Schneiderlin and Wanyama which to me indicates that Poch sees a problem there which wasn't sorted in the previous season with presumably plenty of input during training. That partnership won't cut it defensively. I agree that Dier isn't necessarily the long term answer although he's only played a handful of games where we have been 10x more resilient than before and I think he will grow into the role. He also fills in when the CBs bring the ball out with no compromise defensively and wins aerial battles in MF and a big threat at set plays. I also agree that 433 would suit the current squad. Whatever way you look at it though, we are keeping clean sheets and looking like we can actually see a game out.

I don't think it's as simple as Dier being there. I think the CB Pairing is working, and as a team we are defending a bit better. We played a ManU who are not ripping it up creatively right now and for the middle 30-40 minutes of that game completely ceded control, Dier (and Bentaleb to be fair after his mistake) were woeful.

We we pummelled out of a two goal lead against Stoke, completely yielding control of the midfield for 45 minutes at hime. I think Dier had a good game against Everton, other than that we have played teams that sit deep, which don't really test a CM to the full defensively, but do require more "football" than Dier offers IMO.

 

[mpickard2087]

The thing is I don't think he is playing as an out and out Defensive Midfielder. I wasn't at the game yesterday, but at Half Time on Sky they showed our shape using a heat map and Dier was pretty much in the middle of defence supported either side by Vertonghen and Alderweireld. When given the space Dier will move forward, but it's very similar to how Guardiola has used his defenders/midfielders.

I think this highlights some of the problems (in my mind) we are having. It's been discussed before from a few of us, I know @Bus-Conductor is one of those who also thinks along these lines, that it's more by accident than design that Dier is doing what he is doing. He drops between the centre backs because as a centre half himself he needs the ball in front of him in order to play. It's what he knows and it's understandable. He really, really doesn't want the ball on the half turn or under pressure.

I'd also argue that a lot of the time it isn't really necessary. If we look at Guardiola who you mention, or even Bielsa who both Poch and Pep took some inspiration and ideas from, the transition between a two/three at the back and someone dropping in and out of the backline is to do with having a spare man in defence, and then with the ball being able to play around the press. Bielsa used it for more defensive reasons, but if we use Pep + Busquets as the example, he didn't drop in every single game. He started dropping in when Barca faced teams who did press well and would press with two front men. So Busquets dropped in as the extra man as the passing option. These are ideas that I largely agree with when it comes to how football should be played and having a flexible shape.

My problem with what Dier is doing is that in most of the games already we are facing teams who don't really press and who only have one up top. Look at Palace yesterday for example (Leicester game was another great example, that was overkill with him and Mason dropping deep inexplicably), a low block for most of the first half and about half a front man in Bolasie. The two centre backs should in my view be able to play past him in a 2 vs. 1. In this situation there is no need for Dier to be so deep. He should be higher up the pitch receiving the ball looking to engage the second line of defence (their midfield) rather than the first (attackers).

I don't blame him for what he is doing given that he is really a CB by trade, but I don't think what he is doing has much purpose at all really. It's unnecessary for him to be so deep. A lot of fans seem to be like 'oooh, we're playing 3-4-3' but its not needed against a team playing one up top. If the fullbacks were really bombing forward then you could maybe understand this, but at half time yesterday we also had the complaints that the full backs were far too conservative, so then that's basically five players hanging back against a team defending deep in numbers.

 

[Xeeleeyid]

I think it's worth pointing out just how spectacularly good Palace are away from home under Pardew. Below are their away results since Pardew took over last January against Top Flight opposition. Yesterday was as much about stopping them scoring as it was getting a goal ourselves. They average two goals a game away from home, so a clean sheet was no mean feat! And they've only ever lost by a goal to nil, so we did well offensively too.

Palace Away Under Pardew P12 W9 D0 L3 F24 A13

Spurs 1-0 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-2 Crystal Palace
Norwich 1-3 Crystal Palace
Liverpool 1-3 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-0 Crystal Palace
Sunderland 1-4 Crystal Palace
Stoke 1-2 Crystal Palace
Southampton 1-0 Crystal Palace
West Ham 1-3 Crystal Palace
Leicester 0-1 Crystal Palace
Southampton 2-3 Crystal Palace (FA Cup)
Burnley 2-3 Crystal Palace

Precisely, a lot of pundits predicted a tough time for us and Bwin betting had us losing at home to them as one of their top-tips (based on their away for, our struggles in front of goal and coming off Europa League game). So while we might have only won 1-0 with a goal that went through the keeper and they hit the woodwork twice, the fact that we completely nullified their threat for the vast majority of the match and had them pinned back comfortably in their own half for the whole game is quite an achievement against what have been a very good team since Pardew took over.

 

[Firekid]

I think this highlights some of the problems (in my mind) we are having. It's been discussed before from a few of us, I know @Bus-Conductor is one of those who also thinks along these lines, that it's more by accident than design that Dier is doing what he is doing. He drops between the centre backs because as a centre half himself he needs the ball in front of him in order to play. It's what he knows and it's understandable. He really, really doesn't want the ball on the half turn or under pressure.

I'd also argue that a lot of the time it isn't really necessary. If we look at Guardiola who you mention, or even Bielsa who both Poch and Pep took some inspiration and ideas from, the transition between a two/three at the back and someone dropping in and out of the backline is to do with having a spare man in defence, and then with the ball being able to play around the press. Bielsa used it for more defensive reasons, but if we use Pep + Busquets as the example, he didn't drop in every single game. He started dropping in when Barca faced teams who did press well and would press with two front men. So Busquets dropped in as the extra man as the passing option. These are ideas that I largely agree with when it comes to how football should be played and having a flexible shape.

My problem with what Dier is doing is that in most of the games already we are facing teams who don't really press and who only have one up top. Look at Palace yesterday for example (Leicester game was another great example, that was overkill with him and Mason dropping deep inexplicably), a low block for most of the first half and about half a front man in Bolasie. The two centre backs should in my view be able to play past him in a 2 vs. 1. In this situation there is no need for Dier to be so deep. He should be higher up the pitch receiving the ball looking to engage the second line of defence (their midfield) rather than the first (attackers).

I don't blame him for what he is doing given that he is really a CB by trade, but I don't think what he is doing has much purpose at all really. It's unnecessary for him to be so deep. A lot of fans seem to be like 'oooh, we're playing 3-4-3' but its not needed against a team playing one up top. If the fullbacks were really bombing forward then you could maybe understand this, but at half time yesterday we also had the complaints that the full backs were far too conservative, so then that's basically five players hanging back against a team defending deep in numbers.

Yeah because palace away from home never score goals!? Maybe because we had 5 at the back is the reason we didn't concede and actually beat them. They are a good team away as below shows. Your logical reasoning is probably the same as liverpools (and all the others) thinking hence why they lost and we won!

Spurs 1-0 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-2 Crystal Palace
Norwich 1-3 Crystal Palace
Liverpool 1-3 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-0 Crystal Palace
Sunderland 1-4 Crystal Palace
Stoke 1-2 Crystal Palace
Southampton 1-0 Crystal Palace
West Ham 1-3 Crystal Palace
Leicester 0-1 Crystal Palace
Southampton 2-3 Crystal Palace (FA Cup)
Burnley 2-3 Crystal Palace

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I think this highlights some of the problems (in my mind) we are having. It's been discussed before from a few of us, I know @Bus-Conductor is one of those who also thinks along these lines, that it's more by accident than design that Dier is doing what he is doing. He drops between the centre backs because as a centre half himself he needs the ball in front of him in order to play. It's what he knows and it's understandable. He really, really doesn't want the ball on the half turn or under pressure.

I'd also argue that a lot of the time it isn't really necessary. If we look at Guardiola who you mention, or even Bielsa who both Poch and Pep took some inspiration and ideas from, the transition between a two/three at the back and someone dropping in and out of the backline is to do with having a spare man in defence, and then with the ball being able to play around the press. Bielsa used it for more defensive reasons, but if we use Pep + Busquets as the example, he didn't drop in every single game. He started dropping in when Barca faced teams who did press well and would press with two front men. So Busquets dropped in as the extra man as the passing option. These are ideas that I largely agree with when it comes to how football should be played and having a flexible shape.

My problem with what Dier is doing is that in most of the games already we are facing teams who don't really press and who only have one up top. Look at Palace yesterday for example (Leicester game was another great example, that was overkill with him and Mason dropping deep inexplicably), a low block for most of the first half and about half a front man in Bolasie. The two centre backs should in my view be able to play past him in a 2 vs. 1. In this situation there is no need for Dier to be so deep. He should be higher up the pitch receiving the ball looking to engage the second line of defence (their midfield) rather than the first (attackers).

I don't blame him for what he is doing given that he is really a CB by trade, but I don't think what he is doing has much purpose at all really. It's unnecessary for him to be so deep. A lot of fans seem to be like 'oooh, we're playing 3-4-3' but its not needed against a team playing one up top. If the fullbacks were really bombing forward then you could maybe understand this, but at half time yesterday we also had the complaints that the full backs were far too conservative, so then that's basically five players hanging back against a team defending deep in numbers.

Bang on the money.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Yeah because palace away from home never score goals!? Maybe because we had 5 at the back is the reason we didn't concede and actually beat them. They are a good team away as below shows. Your logical reasoning is probably the same as liverpools (and all the others) thinking hence why they lost and we won!

Spurs 1-0 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-2 Crystal Palace
Norwich 1-3 Crystal Palace
Liverpool 1-3 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-0 Crystal Palace
Sunderland 1-4 Crystal Palace
Stoke 1-2 Crystal Palace
Southampton 1-0 Crystal Palace
West Ham 1-3 Crystal Palace
Leicester 0-1 Crystal Palace
Southampton 2-3 Crystal Palace (FA Cup)
Burnley 2-3 Crystal Palace

Or because we now have a settled back four with two competent CB's and Walker sacrificed any attacking contribution and concentrated on actually defending properly ? We also had Son and Lamela who both work hard defensively.

Also Zaha was so poor yesterday he was taken off at half time.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

[QUOTE="I just don't think Dier is the defensive midfield wonder bread that some seem to be proclaiming and in a footballing sense he's a huge compromise, and he certainly isn't the future.

[/QUOTE]

See MP's answer above. It's post wonder bread.

 

[mpickard2087]

Yeah because palace away from home never score goals!? Maybe because we had 5 at the back is the reason we didn't concede and actually beat them. They are a good team away as below shows. Your logical reasoning is probably the same as liverpools (and all the others) thinking hence why they lost and we won!

Spurs 1-0 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-2 Crystal Palace
Norwich 1-3 Crystal Palace
Liverpool 1-3 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 1-0 Crystal Palace
Sunderland 1-4 Crystal Palace
Stoke 1-2 Crystal Palace
Southampton 1-0 Crystal Palace
West Ham 1-3 Crystal Palace
Leicester 0-1 Crystal Palace
Southampton 2-3 Crystal Palace (FA Cup)
Burnley 2-3 Crystal Palace

Personally I'd like my football played a bit braver. You can be mindful of the counter attack without sticking five at the back, such as pressing and winning the ball back early and don't allow them the spring the counter.

My post was also more reflective on what we were doing with the ball, They were playing a low block, compact defence. Even if they are dangerous on the counter (which they weren't particularly yesterday) we were really inefficient with our play and over-cautious and cant just leave it to the front four + whoever plays next to Dier to attack. We need width from the fullbacks for instance. As I said this isn't the only game where we have had this problem, and Dier just compounds it with what he instinctively does.

 

[Good Doctor M]

Whatever we're doing and wherever Dier is playing, it's hard to argue with 3 PL clean sheets in a row. If Dier does this all season, I'll be more than happy.

We could have won that game with ease if Erikson was match fit and on from the start and Harry looked up and passed a few more times than he did.

If Dier is playing as a CB/CDM, then long may it continue.

 

[Good Doctor M]

Personally I'd like my football played a bit braver. You can be mindful of the counter attack without sticking five at the back, such as pressing and winning the ball back early and don't allow them the spring the counter.

My post was also more reflective on what we were doing with the ball, They were playing a low block, compact defence. Even if they are dangerous on the counter (which they weren't particularly yesterday) we were really inefficient with our play and over-cautious and cant just leave it to the front four + whoever plays next to Dier to attack. We need width from the fullbacks for instance. As I said this isn't the only game where we have had this problem, and Dier just compounds it with what he instinctively does.

But I totally get where you're coming from. I think we can't over estimate how important it is that we manage to secure a few clean sheets. The amount of goals we conceeded last year was ludicrous. I'm happy to be overly cautious for a while so our defence can regain some confidence.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Bang on the money.

What a surprise.

 

[Japhet]

I don't think it's as simple as Dier being there. I think the CB Pairing is working, and as a team we are defending a bit better. We played a ManU who are not ripping it up creatively right now and for the middle 30-40 minutes of that game completely ceded control, Dier (and Bentaleb to be fair after his mistake) were woeful.

We we pummelled out of a two goal lead against Stoke, completely yielding control of the midfield for 45 minutes at hime. I think Dier had a good game against Everton, other than that we have played teams that sit deep, which don't really test a CM to the full defensively, but do require more "football" than Dier offers IMO.

I think last season we played a whole bunch of which, on paper, didn't warrant us playing a defensive midfielder. A lot of the time we came away with nothing. We were crying out for a midfielder whose mindset was defensive. How Stambouli and Capoue never got a look in remains a complete mystery to me. At least with Dier in there we don't look like a train wreck about to happen every time we lose possession, and as you have said previously, coughing up possession cheaply when we are on the attack has been a dreadful weakness. It's very early days for Dier but I'm thankful that Poch has identified the problem and done something about it. We seem tougher to get at, and for now that will do for me.

 

[mpickard2087]

But I totally get where you're coming from. I think we can't over estimate how important it is that we manage to secure a few clean sheets. The amount of goals we conceeded last year was ludicrous. I'm happy to be overly cautious for a while so our defence can regain some confidence.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think we have been that much better defensively so far. We've just mainly cut out individual errors, which have blighted us in the last couple of years. A lot of Dier's work is reactive stuff, making lunging challenges in our third of the pitch. Sunderland had chances against us. Palace not too many but still hit the post twice. I think we'll look better defensively if we were more focused and disciplined with our press for instance, and stopped letting teams make easy yards against us bringing the ball up the pitch.

Mainly though I'm trying to focus on what we are doing with the ball. Dier can still sit in midfield and offer this defensive solidity but be in better positions receiving the ball. Just being the other side of the attacker rather than dropping in and getting it goal side could open out the game for us. It might then force the midfield towards him and then in turn open up space between the lines for our attacking players. My main point is that we need to do a better job of 'manipulating the opposition', be smarter, and making low block defences work harder. That doesn't mean we have to be reckless and leave ourselves open at the back.

 

[jezz]

I think some are doing a huge disservice to our players.
We harrassed them from the word go, many of there attacks were stopped in there half.
They were unlucky against City and Arse but we deserved the points.
Every team will have chances in the game and hitting the post is unlucky but it's not like we didn't have chances.
There keeper made some good saves and wit a little more composure we could have had more.
Play like that every week and we will be right up there in May.
Well done lads more of the same please.

 

[Mr Pink]

Personally I'd like my football played a bit braver. You can be mindful of the counter attack without sticking five at the back, such as pressing and winning the ball back early and don't allow them the spring the counter.

My post was also more reflective on what we were doing with the ball, They were playing a low block, compact defence. Even if they are dangerous on the counter (which they weren't particularly yesterday) we were really inefficient with our play and over-cautious and cant just leave it to the front four + whoever plays next to Dier to attack. We need width from the fullbacks for instance. As I said this isn't the only game where we have had this problem, and Dier just compounds it with what he instinctively does.

If you watch the goal again, Dier is actually breaking his neck to get into the box and into a position for Son to square it!