Player Watch - Tanguy Ndombele

Ossie85 · Mar 8, 2020

Ionman34 said:
So moving to a back 4 and putting an extra forward up made us more dominant in midfield?

M'kay...

YES! Because we had an extra man going forward, an extra option for pass, and so an extra man for Burnley to mark. With 5 at the back they had superiority over us all over the field except in our defense.
Getting GLC changed things obviously as he's our best player, but the change in setup and attitude was a huge reason for the change

Ionman34 · Mar 8, 2020

Ossie85 said:
YES! Because we had an extra man going forward, an extra option for pass, and so an extra man for Burnley to mark. With 5 at the back they had superiority over us all over the field except in our defense.
Getting GLC changed things obviously as he's our best player, but the change in setup and attitude was a huge reason for the change

Oh for Chrissakes!

I'll try again...

Burnley played 442, we had 3 up front so they always had a spare man. Moving Moura up front changed nothing other than they didn't have a spare man at the back.

Their midfield was a 4 in the 1st half, then a 4 in the 2nd half. They dominated in the 1st half, we dominated in the 2nd.

Our midfield shape didn't change, neither did theirs, so again, how did we end up dominating the midfield when neither team changed their midfield formation? All we did was swap out personnel.

Putting on a forward gives you options going forward, it does not suddenly make your midfield dominant.

FFS, put the shovel down!

rez9000 · Mar 8, 2020

Ossie85 said:
We've played with GLC and Moura with a back 5 and were as shitty as we were yesterday in the first half. So I don't understand how can you conclude that the difference was the personnel and not the tacts. Even the commentators in my stream talked about how the change in formation changed us completely

You're wrapping yourself in knots here, Ossie.

So, Mourinho should be criticised for his tactics, but not credited for changing those tactics, criticised for taking Ndombele off but lambasted for picking him in the first place?

There's some serious mental gymnastics going on here.

(I'm thinking of putting this in my sig): If you hate Mourinho that's your prerogative. Your choice, not for me to say you nay. But be honest. Just say you hate him and that nothing he does will remove that hatred. Don't try and mask the hatred behind mental gymnastics. It's a waste of your time and everyone else's time because if you don't want to give him a chance to prove himself, you harping on about this that and the other adds absolutely no value because all you're really doing is justifying your choice to yourself.

scat1620 · Mar 8, 2020

rez9000 said:
(I'm thinking of putting this in my sig): If you hate Mourinho that's your prerogative. Your choice, not for me to say you nay. But be honest. Just say you hate him and that nothing he does will remove that hatred. Don't try and mask the hatred behind mental gymnastics. It's a waste of your time and everyone else's time because if you don't want to give him a chance to prove himself, you harping on about this that and the other adds absolutely no value because all you're really doing is justifying your choice to yourself.

Dude, nobody reads signatures, and the true gangstas on SC go one better and turn View Signatures off in their profile settings. ?

mrlilywhite · Mar 8, 2020

Ionman34 said:
Oh for Chrissakes!

I'll try again...

Burnley played 442, we had 3 up front so they always had a spare man. Moving Moura up front changed nothing other than they didn't have a spare man at the back.

Their midfield was a 4 in the 1st half, then a 4 in the 2nd half. They dominated in the 1st half, we dominated in the 2nd.

Our midfield shape didn't change, neither did theirs, so again, how did we end up dominating the midfield when neither team changed their midfield formation? All we did was swap out personnel.

Putting on a forward gives you options going forward, it does not suddenly make your midfield dominant.

FFS, put the shovel down!

Actually, Burnley lined up with a 4-4-2, but their attacking shape overloaded the midfield by pushing up their full-backs into a support role and that was due to us sitting deep and trying to defend, so their midfield basically became a 4 in attack, with their fullbacks either offering width in attack or closing down space in the middle, thus giving our two "shielding" midfielders hardly any forward options, Even when we had a rare opportunity to break out, their fullbacks were suitably placed to nullify our efforts. In a situation, as we faced in the first half, neither of our fullbacks ventured too much out of the defensive shape. With Burnely overloading the midfield, it ensured we didn't have a route out, so Skipp & TN faced an uphill battle. The biggest problem in the first half was sitting far too deep and compressing space which we couldn't get out of and Burnley dominated us.

Second Half.

Making the changes that Jose did forced a formation change to a 4-4-2 and matched Burnley - he also abandoned the deep line, so our midfield suddenly had more space to play in and not pushed back into a defensive shape and that is one of the reasons why we were so much better. No doubt Lo Celso made a big impact, but that first-half performance was due to Jose and sitting far to deep trying to play on the counter when in reality, we didn't have the right personnel in which to do it. I make no bones about N'Dombele needing to sort himself out, but that public spanking by JM was as much about him hiding his piss poor tactics than actually N'Dombele having a stinker, which in reality he didn't really play THAT bad.

ralphs bald spot · Mar 8, 2020

If that was N dombele not playing that bad I would hate to see him have a bad game

Ossie85 · Mar 8, 2020

Ionman34 said:
Oh for Chrissakes!

I'll try again...

Burnley played 442, we had 3 up front so they always had a spare man. Moving Moura up front changed nothing other than they didn't have a spare man at the back.

Their midfield was a 4 in the 1st half, then a 4 in the 2nd half. They dominated in the 1st half, we dominated in the 2nd.

Our midfield shape didn't change, neither did theirs, so again, how did we end up dominating the midfield when neither team changed their midfield formation? All we did was swap out personnel.

Putting on a forward gives you options going forward, it does not suddenly make your midfield dominant.

FFS, put the shovel down!

Lol, I think you’re understanding of tactics is very limited. You think the only way of winning the midfield is by having more midfielders.
The shift from 5 to 4 at the back was pretty clear, and with the extra forward, Burnley couldn’t press higher as they had an extra concern in defense . But hey, we still had 2 in CM, so it’s not the tactics but the players.

mrlilywhite · Mar 8, 2020

ralphs bald spot said:
If that was N dombele not playing that bad I would hate to see him have a bad game

Come on - please elaborate why TN had a bad game, what he didn't do and why Skipp, et al were miles better - because according to your brief assumption he must have been totally shit against Burnley, more so than he was against Wolves. Of course, nothing about JM's shit starting tactics had any influence whatsoever did it?

LeParisien · Mar 8, 2020

LeParisien said:
@[email protected] is a great poster

So much hate for this post wtf

Deleted member 27995 · Mar 8, 2020

Ossie85 said:
Lol, I think you’re understanding of tactics is very limited. You think the only way of winning the midfield is by having more midfielders.
The shift from 5 to 4 at the back was pretty clear, and with the extra forward, Burnley couldn’t press higher as they had an extra concern in defense . But hey, we still had 2 in CM, so it’s not the tactics but the players.

He was still piss poor yesterday - not ignoring the way we started out, he showed little and he didn't show often. Lo Celso, even though as you are willing to point out after the half time changes, still had to come back and get the ball, carry it and make the other players around him work. Lo Celso did far more of this in his 45 that ndombele did in his.

Ossie85 · Mar 8, 2020

rez9000 said:
You're wrapping yourself in knots here, Ossie.

So, Mourinho should be criticised for his tactics, but not credited for changing those tactics, criticised for taking Ndombele off but lambasted for picking him in the first place?

There's some serious mental gymnastics going on here.

(I'm thinking of putting this in my sig): If you hate Mourinho that's your prerogative. Your choice, not for me to say you nay. But be honest. Just say you hate him and that nothing he does will remove that hatred. Don't try and mask the hatred behind mental gymnastics. It's a waste of your time and everyone else's time because if you don't want to give him a chance to prove himself, you harping on about this that and the other adds absolutely no value because all you're really doing is justifying your choice to yourself.

Huh? When have I ever said any of that??

His initial tactics were atrocious.
He did well in changing the tactics at half time, and we played better. The subs were also positive, but imo the tactics were the key.
In fact I mentioned just after the game that he should set us up like he did in the second half but from the start.

If you are gonna criticize me, do it with something I’ve said. Don’t group me with other comments you don’t like

Ossie85 · Mar 8, 2020

Vinny_Sammways_left_peg said:
He was still piss poor yesterday - not ignoring the way we started out, he showed little and he didn't show often. Lo Celso, even though as you are willing to point out after the half time changes, still had to come back and get the ball, carry it and make the other players around him work. Lo Celso did far more of this in his 45 that ndombele did in his.

True, but GLC had a better setup to work with. Not denying Ndombele had a bad game, but he suffered from a terrible tactic. Most of them did. But Skipp and him the most.

Deleted member 27995 · Mar 8, 2020

Ossie85 said:
True, but GLC had a better setup to work with. Not denying Ndombele had a bad game, but he suffered from a terrible tactic. Most of them did. But Skipp and him the most.

Yeah, but it's one game, he hasn't been a great deal better in the previous 23 he has featured in - maybe villa? It's a distant memory now.

Ronwol196061 · Mar 8, 2020

mrlilywhite said:
Actually, Burnley lined up with a 4-4-2, but their attacking shape overloaded the midfield by pushing up their full-backs into a support role and that was due to us sitting deep and trying to defend, so their midfield basically became a 4 in attack, with their fullbacks either offering width in attack or closing down space in the middle, thus giving our two "shielding" midfielders hardly any forward options, Even when we had a rare opportunity to break out, their fullbacks were suitably placed to nullify our efforts. In a situation, as we faced in the first half, neither of our fullbacks ventured too much out of the defensive shape. With Burnely overloading the midfield, it ensured we didn't have a route out, so Skipp & TN faced an uphill battle. The biggest problem in the first half was sitting far too deep and compressing space which we couldn't get out of and Burnley dominated us.

Second Half.

Making the changes that Jose did forced a formation change to a 4-4-2 and matched Burnley - he also abandoned the deep line, so our midfield suddenly had more space to play in and not pushed back into a defensive shape and that is one of the reasons why we were so much better. No doubt Lo Celso made a big impact, but that first-half performance was due to Jose and sitting far to deep trying to play on the counter when in reality, we didn't have the right personnel in which to do it. I make no bones about N'Dombele needing to sort himself out, but that public spanking by JM was as much about him hiding his piss poor tactics than actually N'Dombele having a stinker, which in reality he didn't really play THAT bad.

Excellent let's get one for every game!

parj · Mar 8, 2020

There is one thing that massively bugs me about this... If he is so out of shape and unhealthy then how did he pass the medical?

Ionman34 · Mar 8, 2020

Ossie85 said:
Lol, I think you’re understanding of tactics is very limited. You think the only way of winning the midfield is by having more midfielders.
The shift from 5 to 4 at the back was pretty clear, and with the extra forward, Burnley couldn’t press higher as they had an extra concern in defense . But hey, we still had 2 in CM, so it’s not the tactics but the players.

What an idiotic comment, considering what I've been posting since yesterday.

My whole point has been that we didn't change our shape in midfield, we changed the personnel. The numbers didn't change.

They didn't press higher because our midfield became more mobile, able to take the ball on the half turn and release it more intelligently. Along with this, they worked harder to press the Burnley midfield and became dominant, all with the same quantity of midfielders.

That dominance allowed our wing backs to push higher up the field, thereby negating their fullbacks forward momentum. Our wingbacks had attempted to do this in the first half, but we were losing the battle in the middle so they were forced to drop deeper to cover the acres of space the centre of our midfield was leaving, more to the point TN was leaving Skipp to cover.

Lo Celso effectively changed the dynamic by being the out ball for our beleaguered defenders, showing for the pass, turning and finding the progressive ball. Watch Ndombele when our defenders had the ball, he was running behind their press, pointing at other players for the defenders to pass to. Chalk and cheese between him and Lo Celso in terms of effort, application and intelligence, not to mention bravery.

In my life I have never ever hated on anyone associated with this club, but I'll offer criticism where I feel it is due, and it is due for Ndombele.

The tactical setup was indeed to counter, but it was dependant on the battle in the middle being won, thereby allowing our wingbacks to get forward. On those occasions where we did manage to get the ball they got forward, particularly JV who overlapped Bergwijn when the opportunity arose. However, we lost the battle in the middle miserably in the 1st half, so we were forced to play deep to cover.
The 2nd half was different gravy as we won the battle, allowing the wingbacks to push up and press, meaning their fullbacks couldn't push up and overload. Take Dier off, leave Skipp and Ndombele in the middle and put on Moura and I can pretty much guarantee that nothing changes as we still lose the battle in the middle.

There's a reason it's called the engine room.

ralphs bald spot · Mar 8, 2020

mrlilywhite said:
Come on - please elaborate why TN had a bad game, what he didn't do and why Skipp, et al were miles better - because according to your brief assumption he must have been totally shit against Burnley, more so than he was against Wolves. Of course, nothing about JM's shit starting tactics had any influence whatsoever did it?

He offered nothing at all during the game his role was to carry the ball and link things up but he did nothing. Tactics, the players have to play., offer some heart and application he sold everyone short. Its not defendable.

In my book it was a dreadful performance by Ndombele and whether you like it or not he has to provide more for the team, Of course Mourinho had to change it at half time because the midfield had no control of the game and he was let down by the person who had to be key to our performance and having any control in the game. As soon as Lo Celso comes on starts linking with AlI the game changes.

If Ndombele stays on we lose the game as he was incapable of gettiing on the ball and giving us some sort of meaningful possession

rez9000 · Mar 8, 2020

Ossie85 said:
Huh? When have I ever said any of that??

His initial tactics were atrocious.,/quote]Really? And you're basing this on...? Your many years as a professional coach? Your knowledge of the status of the players he has available to him? The conversations he's had with the players on the training pitch? The information provided to him by his training and medical staff?

[quote}He did well in changing the tactics at half time, and we played better.

Which you make zero mention of. In fact, this is what you said:

Ossie85 said:
So I don't understand how can you conclude that the difference was the personnel and not the tacts

And in a follow-up post, this:

Ossie85 said:
I'm not in England and so far JM has only made us play defensive boring football

And then this:

Ossie85 said:
YES! Because we had an extra man going forward, an extra option for pass, and so an extra man for Burnley to mark. With 5 at the back they had superiority over us all over the field except in our defense.
Getting GLC changed things obviously as he's our best player, but the change in setup and attitude was a huge reason for the change

If there's any praise for Mourinho it would be in that last sentence and to call it miserly would be an understatement.

Not once have you had the willingness to actually use some positive language - it's all obfuscation and skirting around which suggests to me someone who has a set agenda and nothing will alter their view of it, even if it's self-evident. What's even more ironic is that you're actually undermining yourself by harping on about 'terrible tactics' because then you should give Mourinho credit for the changes he made. But you don't.

And that, to me, speaks of someone with an agenda, not someone with a balanced and fair view.

pelayo59 · Mar 8, 2020

Vinny_Sammways_left_peg said:
Yeah, but it's one game, he hasn't been a great deal better in the previous 23 he has featured in - maybe villa? It's a distant memory now.

Lol man, he was very good when he has feaured in apart Chelsea

Ossie85 · Mar 8, 2020

Ionman34 said:
What an idiotic comment, considering what I've been posting since yesterday.

My whole point has been that we didn't change our shape in midfield, we changed the personnel. The numbers didn't change.

They didn't press higher because our midfield became more mobile, able to take the ball on the half turn and release it more intelligently. Along with this, they worked harder to press the Burnley midfield and became dominant, all with the same quantity of midfielders.

That dominance allowed our wing backs to push higher up the field, thereby negating their fullbacks forward momentum. Our wingbacks had attempted to do this in the first half, but we were losing the battle in the middle so they were forced to drop deeper to cover the acres of space the centre of our midfield was leaving, more to the point TN was leaving Skipp to cover.

Lo Celso effectively changed the dynamic by being the out ball for our beleaguered defenders, showing for the pass, turning and finding the progressive ball. Watch Ndombele when our defenders had the ball, he was running behind their press, pointing at other players for the defenders to pass to. Chalk and cheese between him and Lo Celso in terms of effort, application and intelligence, not to mention bravery.

In my life I have never ever hated on anyone associated with this club, but I'll offer criticism where I feel it is due, and it is due for Ndombele.

The tactical setup was indeed to counter, but it was dependant on the battle in the middle being won, thereby allowing our wingbacks to get forward. On those occasions where we did manage to get the ball they got forward, particularly JV who overlapped Bergwijn when the opportunity arose. However, we lost the battle in the middle miserably in the 1st half, so we were forced to play deep to cover.
The 2nd half was different gravy as we won the battle, allowing the wingbacks to push up and press, meaning their fullbacks couldn't push up and overload. Take Dier off, leave Skipp and Ndombele in the middle and put on Moura and I can pretty much guarantee that nothing changes as we still lose the battle in the middle.

There's a reason it's called the engine room.

I'm not gonna go over the same things again, so let me ask you this.
Have we ever played with GLC and Moura and 5 at the back from the start in these last games??? I know we did. Then did we perform like yesterday's second half or did we lose the midfield like in the first half???

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

Player Watch - Tanguy Ndombele

Rio de la Plata

SC Supporter

Any point?

L'espion mal fait

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Rio de la Plata

Well-Known Member

Wrong about everything

Deleted member 27995

Rio de la Plata

Rio de la Plata

Deleted member 27995

Well-Known Member

NDombelly ate all the pies

SC Supporter

Well-Known Member

Any point?

Well-Known Member

Rio de la Plata

Similar threads