SC's Tactical Autopsy thread

[InOffMeLeftShin]

i'm not a massive fan of 4231 as all too often the 2 gets clogged up with ball winners first, footballers 2nd. everyone's too scared to replace one of them for a player with a bit more game out of fear of leaving the backline marginally more exposed. you lose rhythm and the three behind the striker find it hard to impact the game.

It's in part because of the desire to have all rounders in there, players that can do a bit of everything. When that happens they get caught a bit in between defending and going forward and can't really do either as effectively. Sure the players we play in the 2 can all tackle, can all pass, can all dribble but one of them needs the freedom to receive the ball and actually do positive things with it. That can only happen if the other is happy to defend first and plug all the gaps that allows his partner in crime freedom to express himself.

 

[sloth]

I would go:

Paulinho Capoue bentaleb

Lamela Adebayor Eriksen

So in essence it comes down with replacing Chadli with Paulinho, and moving Eriksen to the left?

This is the team he will go with:

Capoue Bentaleb
Lamela Eriksen Chadli
Adebayor

For me that's a much more attractive proposition than the one I've quoted above. It will ask questions of Liverpool, and can be potent on the break.

The massive flaw in your proposal, imo, is Paulinho, who has only performed in fits and spurts. Even yesterday, for the first 60 minutes, he was the most frustrating player on the pitch. Watching him from virtually the touchline the most noticeable thing about him was his lack of all round awareness (could say the same about a few playing yesterday), he never seemed to take the time to have a glance about, with the result that he missed obvious opportunities, and often turned into trouble or played it into congestion, or simply did that Scot Parker thing of unnecessarily turning back on himself. He made our play laboured. This is not a one off complaint about him though, I think it's about 12 months worth of familiar complaint, barring some honourable exceptions.

So, for me, it's crazy to play an out of form/less talented player who's not renowned for his bite or energy in the tackle or off the ball, in order to accommodate a formation fantasy.7

Final thing, your fear of how the match may go is well founded, I also fear we may start brightly, and that Liverpool may then wrest control. I fear this because they are a very good team and have done it before to teams as good as we are. I fear they'd do it to us even more were we to play the way you suggest, in fact I think it would be a recipe for losing control of the midfield, of being pushed back, of being stale in possession, and anemic off the ball. The thing is we won't play the way you suggest, so if Liverpool do control the match there will only be one of us who can pretend that had they only done it the way we thought it would all of magically been different. Only one of us coming on here and giving it the "I told you sos", only one who goes away more sure than ever of his perspicacity in the face of myopic world. On the other hand if it works out the other way, and Liverpool don't dominate, who is to say if we'd done it the other way we wouldn't have dominated even more!!! Suggesting a formation that we'll never play is a win-win in terms of ego completion.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

So in essence it comes down with replacing Chadli with Paulinho, and moving Eriksen to the left?

This is the team he will go with:

Capoue Bentaleb
Lamela Eriksen Chadli
Adebayor

For me that's a much more attractive proposition than the one I've quoted above. It will ask questions of Liverpool, and can be potent on the break.

The massive flaw in your proposal, imo, is Paulinho, who has only performed in fits and spurts. Even yesterday, for the first 60 minutes, he was the most frustrating player on the pitch. Watching him from virtually the touchline the most noticeable thing about him was his lack of all round awareness (could say the same about a few playing yesterday), he never seemed to take the time to have a glance about, with the result that he missed obvious opportunities, and often turned into trouble or played it into congestion, or simply did that Scot Parker thing of unnecessarily turning back on himself. He made our play laboured. This is not a one off complaint about him though, I think it's about 12 months worth of familiar complaint, barring some honourable exceptions.

So, for me, it's crazy to play an out of form/less talented player who's not renowned for his bite or energy in the tackle or off the ball, in order to accommodate a formation fantasy.7

Final thing, your fear of how the match may go is well founded, I also fear we may start brightly, and that Liverpool may then wrest control. I fear this because they are a very good team and have done it before to teams as good as we are. I fear they'd do it to us even more were we to play the way you suggest, in fact I think it would be a recipe for losing control of the midfield, of being pushed back, of being stale in possession, and anemic off the ball. The thing is we won't play the way you suggest, so if Liverpool do control the match there will only be one of us who can pretend that had they only done it the way we thought it would all of magically been different. Only one of us coming on here and giving it the "I told you sos", only one who goes away more sure than ever of his perspicacity in the face of myopic world. On the other hand if it works out the other way, and Liverpool don't dominate, who is to say if we'd done it the other way we wouldn't have dominated even more!!! Suggesting a formation that we'll never play is a win-win in terms of ego completion.

Well, what can I say to that, you've done your utmost to turn my win/win strategy into a lose/lose strategy. I guess that's why you're a bookie.

All I can say is, we tried the CM2 with two very different applications against Liverpool last season twice and it was a resounding failure resulting in a 9-0 aggregate score.

I am also generally a fan of the 433 for us because of the players we have. Perhaps more so last year than this though, time will tell.

But rest assured you've done a great job of negating my potential rightness and mitigating your potential wrongness early doors.

 

[DEFchenkOE]

I'd like us to play 433 but with Eriksen in the middle 3 alongside Capoue and Dembele or Paulinho.

Lamela/Ade/Chad front 3

 

[Bus-Conductor]

But as we've been back and forward on many times before, 'controlling the ball' does not equal a higher percentage of possession, the two aren't mutually exclusive.

A team that is toothless up front (pardon the pun) due to the loss of their superstar, commits more men forward when they have the ball, when ball is lost, we have a chance to attack their ropey defence. To me, worrying about what we are doing with the ball when we get it is far important than what the opposition might or might not do with it, especially if we are at home and trying to win the game. You said yourself that Liverpool had lots of situations, but they didn't get to the end product, which is their weakness.

Surely a good manager/coach worries about both ?

Chris Davies, head of Liverpool's opposition analysis:

In your opinion, what is the most effective way of getting results; reduce the vulnerabilities of your team, or target the opposition’s weaknesses?

Well, in the simplest form it’s both really. That is 50/50 split if you’re going purely on what should happen. I think we would probably edge on the side of targeting the opposition’s weakness. I think Brendan’s an aggressive coach and his teams play an aggressive way. He likes to be very aware of the opponent’s strengths, but he likes to focus more on how we can beat them and how we can impose our game on them. But of course always reassessing and analysing where we are vulnerable and just trying to address that. So, in essence, it’s both.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

Chris Davies, head of Liverpool's opposition analysis:

What about a good coach?

So in the simplest form it's both, but in reality, away from computers, it's focusing on what you do when you have the ball. Shock.

It's like that guy forgets his job role half way through and realises he's making his position less important. "BOTH, both are important. 100%, ignore what I've just said about Brendan."

Are there any better examples?

 

[Coyboy]

Well yeah he reinforces your point.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

What about a good coach?

So in the simplest form it's both, but in reality, away from computers, it's focusing on what you do when you have the ball. Shock.

It's like that guy forgets his job role half way through and realises he's making his position less important. "BOTH, both are important. 100%, ignore what I've just said about Brendan."

Are there any better examples?

We had the ball 60% of the ball against Liverpool. For them to win 3-0 they had to spend more time worrying about what they did without the ball than with it.

Better examples of what ?

 

[Spurs_Bear]

We had the ball 60% of the ball against Liverpool. For them to win 3-0 they had to spend more time worrying about what they did without the ball than with it.

Better examples of what ?

This is where you are so blind to stats and the relativity of context.

Letting us piss around with the ball when they're 3-0 up isn't something they would have written a dossier on before the game.

It's a pretty pointless discussion with you on this subject.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

This is where you are so blind to stats and the relativity of context.

Letting us piss around with the ball when they're 3-0 up isn't something they would have written a dossier on before the game.

It's a pretty pointless discussion with you on this subject.

Cont
How many tactical variations or scenarios do you typically help Brendan to plan for?

We always have discussions on how the game might evolve tactically, and Brendan will have a very clear tactical plan. As soon as he sees what formation, system, and gets a brief feel for how the opponents are going to play, (which a lot of the time he’ll have a good feel for anyway knowing the Premier League teams), he’ll have a plan in his mind tactically of how he wants the game to go. But he also has plan B, and plan C, and how he can change it within a game. I think Brendan’s one of the most dynamic managers at making changes within games. He’s made changes within the first half of games as well, which is quite rare and I think it’s a very proactive manager that does that. So there are different scenarios that we plan for.

How much can your work help Brendan to react in-game and adjust to how the game is playing out?

I think it can. Brendan will know certainly a lot of the information on what a team may do in a game from my work, so I’ll have been at games where they’ll have made tactical changes. A lot of good communication Brendan and I have is actually informal. It might be a quick chat in the morning if I’ve come back from a game. He’s always interested to know how a team has reacted to going a goal down, or late in the game. And I think that can help him prepare for the eventualities where hopefully we’re winning in a game, and how that team may react, and what players they may bring on, which I think helps him in terms of his own decision-making.


What kinds of considerations are managers typically using in evaluating and anticipating what is happening on the pitch and judging when to ‘stick or twist’?

I think it depends on what club you’re at really, and what you want from the game really. Being at a club like Liverpool the idea really is you have to win games, so invariably if it’s one nil or one all in a game we would generally look to try and get the win, certainly in the majority of the games home and away. But I think it’s a consideration for Brendan to just see the psychological state of the players on both teams, see what condition they’re in, and judge, with the momentum of the game, to make his decision.

I don't get what my ability to contextualise stats has got to do with our discussion.

I made a simple point. A good coach pays attention to the tactical application of both facets - what his team does with and without the ball.

The very best coaches do this. Mourinho is the best manager in the world because he does this better than anyone. It's the difference between 4th being as good as it gets and 2nd being as good as it gets.

It's like your angry with me for debunking Keyser Soze Redknapp's greatest trick of convincing the world tactics don't exist.

 

[Mr Pink]

Agree with SB really.

That possession stat is pretty meaningless in the grand scheme of things. The last half an hour of the game was a non entity - which in turn affects said stat.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Agree with SB really.

That possession stat is pretty meaningless in the grand scheme of things. The last half an hour of the game was a non entity - which in turn affects said stat.

That isn't the point. That possession stat doesn't just represent 30 minutes of the game.

Ignore the stat. It was a throwaway remark to underline an over arching issue. That issue being the importance of paying attention to detail, of adapting your game for the opposition tactically both specifically and generally.

The point was it's stupid to say "what's the point of worrying about what they do, we should just be concentrating on what we do".

 

[Mr Pink]

That isn't the point. That possession stat doesn't just represent 30 minutes of the game.

Ignore the stat. It was a throwaway remark to underline an over arching issue. That issue being the importance of paying attention to detail, of adapting your game for the opposition tactically both specifically and generally.

The point was it's stupid to say "what's the point of worrying about what they do, we should just be concentrating on what we do".

No it doesn't, but context is king.

I agree that being tactically prepared and efficient will focus very much on both.

As for your last sentence - the one team that springs to my mind more than any other is Arsenal.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

That isn't the point. That possession stat doesn't just represent 30 minutes of the game.

Ignore the stat. It was a throwaway remark to underline an over arching issue. That issue being the importance of paying attention to detail, of adapting your game for the opposition tactically both specifically and generally.

The point was it's stupid to say "what's the point of worrying about what they do, we should just be concentrating on what we do".

Which of course nobody actually said.

To me, worrying about what we are doing with the ball when we get it is far important than what the opposition might or might not do with it, especially if we are at home and trying to win the game.

It would be so much more refreshing to do this to and fro with you if sometimes you just admitted to dropping a bollock.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

I don't get what my ability to contextualise stats has got to do with our discussion.

I made a simple point. A good coach pays attention to the tactical application of both facets - what his team does with and without the ball.

The very best coaches do this. Mourinho is the best manager in the world because he does this better than anyone. It's the difference between 4th being as good as it gets and 2nd being as good as it gets.

It's like your angry with me for debunking Keyser Soze Redknapp's greatest trick of convincing the world tactics don't exist.

You're pathetic. You really are. What has Redknapp got to do with anything?

 

[Bus-Conductor]

It would be so much more refreshing to do this to and fro with you if sometimes you just admitted to dropping a bollock.

You've spent the last 2/3 years telling everyone what a tactically limited chancer Rodgers is. I'll get in the queue shall I ?

 

[Bus-Conductor]

No it doesn't, but context is king.

I agree that being tactically prepared and efficient will focus very much on both.

As for your last sentence - the one team that springs to my mind more than any other is Arsenal.

I think that's a very fair comment re Arsenal. Wenger is a brilliant coach and developer of footballers, I don't think he's a very good tactician, if he was they'd probably have half a dozen more trophies in the cabinet.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

You've spent the last 2/3 years telling everyone what a tactically limited chancer Rodgers is. I'll get in the queue shall I ?

He is. But I'll admit he's a better man manager than I gave him credit for.

 

[Coyboy]

We had the ball 60% of the ball against Liverpool. For them to win 3-0 they had to spend more time worrying about what they did without the ball than with it.

Better examples of what ?

Like when we beat Arsenal, City and Chelsea in 2010 without having the majority of the ball.

 

[Black]

Can we make a new thread for the new season