The high line myth

[Choda]

Is pace key to play a high line? I believe not.

I don't understand this thinking at all by large sections of fans. To play a high line you need two CB's who can organise a defence and catch people offside. What good would it do having two quick CB's who can't play the offside trap and get caught out with a simple ball over the top? Vertonghen pace hardly helped against New York Red Bulls.

Remember the Arsenal defence? Adams, Keown and Bould - hardly sprinters. Why did it work? Master defenders, who knew the art of defending in a system. Overall people forget at home we have been playing a high line, the reason being most teams sit back and stick 11 men behind the ball. Away from home will be tough to implement this style, but the only two players in our squad who are capable of organising are Gallas and Dawson. Why? Because they lead, communicate, organise, command and have experience.

Also we'll need to have at least two comfortable ball playing central midfielders, with a striker who can hold and link up play. If we can't keep the ball, teams will find it easy to counter against us and we'll be open to attacks.

Good defenders are built for AVB's system, infact many compare Dawson to John Terry as the reason why AVB won't play him. But Terry was the sole reason why AVB managed to keep 6 (8?) clean sheets on the spin, the moment he got injured Chelsea crumbled and AVB was sacked.

The reason why the high line never worked at Chelsea was because they can't keep the ball, take a look at Barcelona - they suffocate teams high up the field because they can keep the ball, which then allows the defence to push up.

Verts will need time, I haven't seen him play in Holland, only a couple of times during the CL and it would be naive to believe he could come into a newly formed defence, implement a high line, organise the team whilst getting use to his new life in London and playing premier league football.

Time for Kaboul to become a leader.

 

[StartingPrice]

Is pace key to play a high line? I believe not.

I don't understand this thinking at all by large sections of fans. To play a high line you need two CB's who can organise a defence and catch people offside. What good would it do having two quick CB's who can't play the offside trap and get caught out with a simple ball over the top? Vertonghen pace hardly helped against New York Red Bulls.

Remember the Arsenal defence? Adams, Keown and Bould - hardly sprinters. Why did it work? Master defenders, who knew the art of defending in a system. Overall people forget at home we have been playing a high line, the reason being most teams sit back and stick 11 men behind the ball. Away from home will be tough to implement this style, but the only two players in our squad who are capable of organising are Gallas and Dawson. Why? Because they lead, communicate, organise, command and have experience.

Also we'll need to have at least two comfortable ball playing central midfielders, with a striker who can hold and link up play. If we can't keep the ball, teams will find it easy to counter against us and we'll be open to attacks.

Good defenders are built for AVB's system, infact many compare Dawson to John Terry as the reason why AVB won't play him. But Terry was the sole reason why AVB managed to keep 6 (8?) clean sheets on the spin, the moment he got injured Chelsea crumbled and AVB was sacked.

The reason why the high line never worked at Chelsea was because they can't keep the ball, take a look at Barcelona - they suffocate teams high up the field because they can keep the ball, which then allows the defence to push up.

Verts will need time, I haven't seen him play in Holland, only a couple of times during the CL and it would be naive to believe he could come into a newly formed defence, implement a high line, organise the team whilst getting use to his new life in London and playing premier league football.

Time for Kaboul to become a leader.

Some good points...the emphasised text, that we pretty much play a high line at home, anyway, because teams defend in depth against us (and, incidentally, break out quickly and score goals because they haven't been caught offside ), is something I was thinking yesterday when the high line terror was mentioned once again.

Funnily enough, I was reading it thinking that Verts could be that organiser, and that Kaboul is much more vocal and communicative these days, and then got to your last paragraph and final sentence

Good work.

 

[teok]

You need quick defenders to play a high line because often the offside trap won't work.

 

[Choda]

Some good points...the emphasised text, that we pretty much play a high line at home, anyway, because teams defend in depth against us (and, incidentally, break out quickly and score goals because they haven't been caught offside ), is something I was thinking yesterday when the high line terror was mentioned once again.

Funnily enough, I was reading it thinking that Verts could be that organiser, and that Kaboul is much more vocal and communicative these days, and then got to your last paragraph and final sentence

Good work.

Not many sides score against us on the counter at home, we mostly concede through lack of intelligence, concentration or spirit. When King played, especially during our amazing 18 game run of form he never broke a sweat and we always looked organised.

Playing a high line can only work if the whole defence is organised, Benny and Walker can't full asleep or be caught out positionally. We must have two CB's who can communicate and organise. Being quick is the last thing that really matters IMO. It's basically giving excuses for the defence to be caught out, so they can chase the man who managed to ghost in-behind.

Verts look like a leader, but has he earned the right to start ahead of Dawson? IMO no. People forget that before Dawson got injured he kept 7 clean sheets in 8 games, he is a fantastic defender IMO.

Kaboul has improved leaps and bounds. But on a few occasions during the last four months, he went back to his old self and he needs to grow up now, take responsibility of the whole team and organise.

But all this won't matters unless we can keep the ball in the oppositions half.

 

[JimmyG2]

It has certainly been a criticism of Spurs defending in the past several years
that we have defended too deep, and have not 'got out' quickly enough
when the pressure has been released.
On many occasions we seemed to sit back and wait for the next attack.
If we can develop a new positive attitude and defend higher up the pitch
then I'm all for it.
Dawson likes to sit deep and 'launch' the ball which is not want we want to see.
We also need to bring the ball out more quickly which is where Vertonghen might feature
and where we might miss the sudden surges of Modric.
We need to pass the ball on more quickly too which is where Parker and Kaboul are weak.
The slow chanelling of the ball across the back four(and often back again and then back to the keeper which allows the opposition to regroup) needs some attention.
We need a between the lines player to link up with the back four and recycle the ball more quickly.
Simply playing a high line is asking for trouble but AVB is too sophisticated to be proposing just that..

Cuttting down the oppositions room to play in which a high line achieves can be undone
as we saw against Red Bull for the foul by Vertonghen which resulted in the penalty.

 

[StartingPrice]

Not many sides score against us on the counter at home, we mostly concede through lack of intelligence, concentration or spirit. When King played, especially during our amazing 18 game run of form he never broke a sweat and we always looked organised.

Playing a high line can only work if the whole defence is organised, Benny and Walker can't full asleep or be caught out positionally. We must have two CB's who can communicate and organise. Being quick is the last thing that really matters IMO. It's basically giving excuses for the defence to be caught out, so they can chase the man who managed to ghost in-behind.

Verts look like a leader, but has he earned the right to start ahead of Dawson? IMO no. People forget that before Dawson got injured he kept 7 clean sheets in 8 games, he is a fantastic defender IMO.

Kaboul has improved leaps and bounds. But on a few occasions during the last four months, he went back to his old self and he needs to grow up now, take responsibility of the whole team and organise.

But all this won't matters unless we can keep the ball in the oppositions half.

Too many teams scored against us at home either directly through the break, or indirectly through the second phase of player after we had got back after conceding possession - and I am talking about teams that shouldn't be scoring against us at all, and not the likes of United where lack of intelligence, concentration or spirit were factors, I am talking bottom half teams.

Benny and Walker will be encouraged to get forward and provide width under AVBs system - the players who need to stay awake in his system are the deep lying central midfielders.

 

[Choda]

Too many teams scored against us at home either directly through the break, or indirectly through the second phase of player after we had got back after conceding possession - and I am talking about teams that shouldn't be scoring against us at all, and not the likes of United where lack of intelligence, concentration or spirit were factors, I am talking bottom half teams.

Benny and Walker will be encouraged to get forward and provide width under AVBs system - the players who need to stay awake in his system are the deep lying central midfielders.

I'm finding it really hard to remember mate, Norwich springs to mind straight away but that was purely because of King and our team shape. Man United at home was through mistakes IMO, Kaboul not coming out to block Ashley Young sooner, Walker sloppy on the corner and Modric falling asleep from the throw.

Playing a high line system, from a defensive stand point relies much on our passing and our strategy once we lose the ball. Barcelona start pressing (hunting for the ball) the instant they lose possession. That is the perfect time to press because the opposing player who has just won the ball is vulnerable. He has had to take his eyes off the game to make his tackle or interception, and he has expended energy. That means he is unsighted, and probably tired. He usually needs two or three seconds to regain his vision of the field. So Barcelona try to dispossess him before he can give the ball to a better-placed team-mate.

Furthermore, if the guy won the ball back in his own defence, and Barcelona can instantly win it back again, then the way to goal is often clear. This is where Lionel Messi’s genius for tackling comes in. The little man has such quick reflexes that he sometimes wins a tackle a split-second after losing one.

The Barcelona player who lost the ball leads the hunt to regain it. But he never hunts alone. His teammates near the ball join him. If only one or two Barça players are pressing, it’s too easy for the opponent to pass around them.

The 5 second rule as well, if Barcelona don't win the ball back in 5 seconds they'll retreat and build a compact 10 man wall. Barcelona also incorporate the 3 on 1 system, which was created by the Italians. If the opposition gets anywhere near the penalty area, they'll attack in three's one of Barcelona’s four defenders will advance to tackle the man with the ball, and the other three defenders will assemble in a ring about two or three metres behind the tackler. That provides a double layer of protection. Guardiola picked this rule up in Italy. It’s such a simple yet effective idea that you wonder why all top teams don’t use it.

But the main point, we must attack and defend as a team. The system must be more important than the players.

 

[Berglad]

The conventional wisdom is that Dawson has no place in the high line - I think he's actually pretty suited to it. He seems to love playing up near the halfway line making interceptions and headed clearances, he does get caught out at it occasionally but he's always seemed much more comfortable as the risk-taking stopper CB, while having his partner be around to cover him in case he misses his tackle/interception. It worked great when King was available and even with Bassong in 2009/2010. Thought he looked quite good in the pre-season appearances and probably the pick of our CBs, even though all of them played well (except Bassong but he played at LB only).

I'd expect Kaboul / Vertonghen will be first choice but I think Daws still has an important role and will get plenty of game time filling in as 3rd choice and either Daws/Vertonghen and Daws/Kaboul is still a quality pairing. Caulker can play in the cups and fill in when necessary as well. Gallas is still pretty decent but I wouldn't be surprised/disappointed if we try to get a little money for him while we can and get his wages of the bill - he also may make for an unhappy bench player. Bassong is probably toast considering AVB didn't try him at all at CB and he was pretty awful at LB.

 

[elDiablo]

i think Dawson enjoys and suits the backs-to-the-wall style, where the opposition are launching in crosses and has to clear them away.

I cant remember the game, but i distinctly remember the defence playing on the halfway line and someone(perhaps tevez/bellamy) knocking it past him and having a clear run at goal.

 

[Damian99]

Personally i think it's going to be a very very dodgy game to play, it's fuck all like the Arsenal days for a start off the offside rule is massively different now and will not help playing this way by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[StartingPrice]

I'm finding it really hard to remember mate, Norwich springs to mind straight away but that was purely because of King and our team shape. Man United at home was through mistakes IMO, Kaboul not coming out to block Ashley Young sooner, Walker sloppy on the corner and Modric falling asleep from the throw.

Playing a high line system, from a defensive stand point relies much on our passing and our strategy once we lose the ball. Barcelona start pressing (hunting for the ball) the instant they lose possession. That is the perfect time to press because the opposing player who has just won the ball is vulnerable. He has had to take his eyes off the game to make his tackle or interception, and he has expended energy. That means he is unsighted, and probably tired. He usually needs two or three seconds to regain his vision of the field. So Barcelona try to dispossess him before he can give the ball to a better-placed team-mate.

Furthermore, if the guy won the ball back in his own defence, and Barcelona can instantly win it back again, then the way to goal is often clear. This is where Lionel Messi’s genius for tackling comes in. The little man has such quick reflexes that he sometimes wins a tackle a split-second after losing one.

The Barcelona player who lost the ball leads the hunt to regain it. But he never hunts alone. His teammates near the ball join him. If only one or two Barça players are pressing, it’s too easy for the opponent to pass around them.

The 5 second rule as well, if Barcelona don't win the ball back in 5 seconds they'll retreat and build a compact 10 man wall. Barcelona also incorporate the 3 on 1 system, which was created by the Italians. If the opposition gets anywhere near the penalty area, they'll attack in three's one of Barcelona’s four defenders will advance to tackle the man with the ball, and the other three defenders will assemble in a ring about two or three metres behind the tackler. That provides a double layer of protection. Guardiola picked this rule up in Italy. It’s such a simple yet effective idea that you wonder why all top teams don’t use it.

But the main point, we must attack and defend as a team. The system must be more important than the players.

1) I'm agreeing with everything else you say, so there is no need to explain the theory or what Barcelona do

2) I specifically cited United as an instance where you are right that we concede due to lack of intelligence, concentration or spirit, so I really don't know why you are citing it back to me as an instance where I am wrong.

3) I didn't specify that I was talking just about last season.

4) If you haven't seen one bottom half of the table team after another sitting deep, at WHL, and soaking up pressure and then hitting us quickly, and either scoring directly from the attack, or from the second phase of play where they have got a corner or free-kack or throw-in, usually because we have been put on the back foot because desperately racing back, over the last few seasons, then we musta been watching different teams

I was agreeing with everything you said, just saying.

 

[EJWTartanSpur]

We played a high line under Ramos and it worked very well at times, before things went pete tong with losing our strike force, and too many players coming in at the same time. . I can remember a game against the scum at the Library, on December 22nd 08 (?), we lost 2-1 Keane with a missed pen when it was 1-1. Anyways, we had the far better of the game that day and actually dominated them in the centre of midfield with O'Hara and Boateng(!), as our high line squeezed them and those two guys were closing down and forcing errors very quickly whenever the Arsenal midfield got a hold of the ball

 

[THOWIG]

In certain games this season I can see us playing three at the back.

 

[parklane1]

I think there is a lot of talk about high lines and there are some misconceptions about it, its more like a pressing game then anything else really. If there is space left behind that line then pace is important but not crucial, what is crucial is (1) making sure that the opposistion does not get the space to knock a ball over the top and (2) that runners from the opposing M/F do not get the chance to run unchallenged onto it.

The pen we gave away the other day is a example of that, Cahill managed to run in behind Hudd and into the space and that has got to be stopped. As a aside that is why i believe that Hudd is not going to be a first choice player because he always shuts off on his defensive dutys.

One of the things i am looking forward to is having a settled CB partnership this season, we have messed around with injury prone players ( King, Gallas, Dawson) far to often which has led to changing CB's far to often.

 

[Choda]

1) I'm agreeing with everything else you say, so there is no need to explain the theory or what Barcelona do

2) I specifically cited United as an instance where you are right that we concede due to lack of intelligence, concentration or spirit, so I really don't know why you are citing it back to me as an instance where I am wrong.

3) I didn't specify that I was talking just about last season.

4) If you haven't seen one bottom half of the table team after another sitting deep, at WHL, and soaking up pressure and then hitting us quickly, and either scoring directly from the attack, or from the second phase of play where they have got a corner or free-kack or throw-in, usually because we have been put on the back foot because desperately racing back, over the last few seasons, then we musta been watching different teams

I was agreeing with everything you said, just saying.

1; Me bringing up Barcelona was purely from the view of you mentioning AVB's system and deep lying central midfielders. I believe the whole team are important the moment you lose the ball, which is why I brought up Barcelona - a system that AVB champions.

2; Sorry just a numpty moment from myself.

3; Again, from my own memory I can't say I've witnessed many sides counter-attack us during Harry's tenure, or at least cut us open with a simple ball over the top. I can't argue either way.

4; That's a big difference from being counter-attacked, to losing possession and teams gradually working their way to a goal. Second phase of play is irrelevant, the players should have had enough time to reshape and get back into position. So, I'll respectfully disagree.

 

[only1waddle]

It has certainly been a criticism of Spurs defending in the past several years
that we have defended too deep, and have not 'got out' quickly enough
when the pressure has been released.
On many occasions we seemed to sit back and wait for the next attack.
If we can develop a new positive attitude and defend higher up the pitch
then I'm all for it.
Dawson likes to sit deep and 'launch' the ball which is not want we want to see.
We also need to bring the ball out more quickly which is where Vertonghen might feature
and where we might miss the sudden surges of Modric.
We need to pass the ball on more quickly too which is where Parker and Kaboul are weak.
The slow chanelling of the ball across the back four(and often back again and then back to the keeper which allows the opposition to regroup) needs some attention.
We need a between the lines player to link up with the back four and recycle the ball more quickly.
Simply playing a high line is asking for trouble but AVB is too sophisticated to be proposing just that..

Cuttting down the oppositions room to play in which a high line achieves can be undone
as we saw against Red Bull for the foul by Vertonghen which resulted in the penalty.

Agree, and i think it also had a reverse affect on Hudds/Livermore and Sigurdsson in the first half, it looked very cramped at times and we stopped our own central players from having space, second half was more open and the defence sat deeper, our passing was more fluid, if we can get a balance between last season and AVB's system/coaching methods we will be moving in the right direction..
Offside trap was also much sharper in the second half..

 

[StartingPrice]

1; Me bringing up Barcelona was purely from the view of you mentioning AVB's system and deep lying central midfielders. I believe the whole team are important the moment you lose the ball, which is why I brought up Barcelona - a system that AVB champions.

2; Sorry just a numpty moment from myself.

3; Again, from my own memory I can't say I've witnessed many sides counter-attack us during Harry's tenure, or at least cut us open with a simple ball over the top. I can't argue either way.

4; That's a big difference from being counter-attacked, to losing possession and teams gradually working their way to a goal. Second phase of play is irrelevant, the players should have had enough time to reshape and get back into position. So, I'll respectfully disagree.

1) That's fine. Like I said, I was agreeing with you, that is the way Barca play, was just a bit confused as to how you got from Mr Redknapp's defensive set-up to Barca's forwards pressing the ball

2) Dim probs - we all have them

3) Again, I am thinking specifically about bottom half of the table teams at WHL. I thought that was their basic gameplan (and a pretty obvious one). I never mentioned the high ball over, I jsut said counter-attacking.

4)
a: Second phase of play isn't irrelevant. If we are talking about a dead-ball that resulted from us being countered quickly it is very relevant indeed.
b: Over the last few years I have certainly got the feeling that no matter what type of ball played, bottom half of the table teams have come to WHL looking to soak up pressure and then hit us fast. I have all of the games on my hard-drive, but I'm not going to watach back over the whole of last season and then watch the CL final just to re-miserableify myself And I may be wrong - it's just kinda how I have remembered certain sides playing, and I think the vital point isn't whether they hit us fast (in any way), it is that we didn't press from the front effectively enough to prevent an effective attack from forming - I believe.

 

[ultimateloner]

We would have to be great on the ball to play highline. I don't think we are there yet.

 

[Choda]

1) That's fine. Like I said, I was agreeing with you, that is the way Barca play, was just a bit confused as to how you got from Mr Redknapp's defensive set-up to Barca's forwards pressing the ball

2) Dim probs - we all have them

3) Again, I am thinking specifically about bottom half of the table teams at WHL. I thought that was their basic gameplan (and a pretty obvious one). I never mentioned the high ball over, I jsut said counter-attacking.

4)
a: Second phase of play isn't irrelevant. If we are talking about a dead-ball that resulted from us being countered quickly it is very relevant indeed.
b: Over the last few years I have certainly got the feeling that no matter what type of ball played, bottom half of the table teams have come to WHL looking to soak up pressure and then hit us fast. I have all of the games on my hard-drive, but I'm not going to watach back over the whole of last season and then watch the CL final just to re-miserableify myself And I may be wrong - it's just kinda how I have remembered certain sides playing, and I think the vital point isn't whether they hit us fast (in any way), it is that we didn't press from the front effectively enough to prevent an effective attack from forming - I believe.

1; Just transitioning from a side-point to the my main point of the thread, if we want to implement a high line home and away, we must defend as a team - AVB's philosophy apparently mirrors Barcelona.

Enjoyable debate, regarding discussion 4) I just can't remember every game or moment that well, some moments stick out but I can't argue for or against if I'm honest.

 

[Pringle]

I agree with those that say its not about pace - its about reading the game. Pace is only needed if the system breaks down and unless the defender is Usain Bolt, or the striker is Gary Doherty then the striker will rarely be caught. If player a has a running start against player b who starts facing the wrong way - over a distance of 30 metres or so there is only going to be 1 winner.

The other key to success with this system is having at least 1 pressing midfielder - if there is no pressure on the ball carrier for the opposition then they will have the time to pick their pass out. In the pre season games where other teams have broken the offside line, take note of who has been playing in CM. If we line up with a midfield of Sandro and Parker who will harass the opposition then we have a far better chance of success than with a midfield of Modric and 1 other.