Defenders who can't win a header

[ThatJa]

Why oh why cant any of our defenders win headers? The amount of times Rochdale lumped the ball up top and their not so big strikers won the header was unbelievable.

We need some more height in the team throughout imo.

 

[moDtheGod]

I would say that Alcock is very good in the air. Especially so given his relative stature.

 

[SwissBlade]

I would say that Alcock is very good in the air. Especially so given his relative stature.

Got to say I was completely unimpressed by Alcock yesterday on two fronts:
distribution/ in possession
In the air.

Thought he was the weaker one of a solid back four.

 

[SotonBlade]

Clean sheet and we won......concentrate on that.

I'm sure you've got a nailed on loan signing in the pipeline to sort this out JL94x4

 

[sheffielder]

I thought HM won everything that came his way, especially in the first half. In the 2nd they kept it away from him more by picking on Alcock

 

[sitwell]

I don't think they won that many headers and hardly surprising the ones against Alcock with the size difference ,its the second ball which is more important anyway ,this is when Flynn shows his worth. We used to use the same tactics with Flo ,putting him up against a full back and aiming goal kicks at him ,but we rarely threatened with this.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Why oh why cant any of our defenders win headers? The amount of times Rochdale lumped the ball up top and their not so big strikers won the header was unbelievable.

We need some more height in the team throughout imo.

Give credit where it's due mate. their No.7, who I thought was MOM, towered above Alcock who is normally commanding in the air. Credit to Hill too, because he isolated Alcock with the big'un in the second half.

 

[DazBlade88]

Vincenti was always going to win the majority against Alcock, but we dealt with the second ball well for the most part.

McGahey won pretty much everything in the first half and I don't recall Rochdale being a threat from any set piece, where we could have easily scored a couple. It's not a worry for me.

 

[Silent Blade]

I thought HM won everything that came his way, especially in the first half. In the 2nd they kept it away from him more by picking on Alcock

Apart from the strange error in the 2nd half when he knocked over his opponent in the centre circle which gave him time and space to head the ball but mistimed and completely missed the ball

 

[JohnDenver]

Got to say I was completely unimpressed by Alcock yesterday on two fronts:
distribution/ in possession
In the air.

Thought he was the weaker one of a solid back four.

He's been MoM in half of our games this season. That was the first ordinary match I've seen him have, and it came after an injury lay off.

We know what he can do so I'm more concerned about finding a first choice striker, getting Basham playing to his strengths, and getting Murphy back to form.

 

[Pinchy]

Give credit where it's due mate. their No.7, who I thought was MOM, towered above Alcock who is normally commanding in the air. Credit to Hill too, because he isolated Alcock with the big'un in the second half.

Really? You thought he was better than JCR, Baxter and Doyle?

He won a few headers against a man a foot smaller than him and did very little else.

 

[Pinchy]

Apart from the strange error in the 2nd half when he knocked over his opponent in the centre circle which gave him time and space to head the ball but mistimed and completely missed the ball

I think we forget that his predecessor was prone to similar schoolboy errors. In truth, he only eradicated them in the course of last season.

 

[sheffielder]

He's been MoM in half of our games this season. That was the first ordinary match I've seen him have, and it came after an injury lay off.

We know what he can do so I'm more concerned about finding a first choice striker, getting Basham playing to his strengths, and getting Murphy back to form.

What are Basham's Strengths?

 

[JohnDenver]

What are Basham's Strengths?

He looks like a defender to me.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Why oh why cant any of our defenders win headers? The amount of times Rochdale lumped the ball up top and their not so big strikers won the header was unbelievable.

We need some more height in the team throughout imo.

it wasn't defenders - it was defender - just Alcock.

Keith Hills game plan was very very simple - hit the No 7 (left side midfield) who won all but 1 header against Alcock and then pick up the 2nd ball, which they did. Very much like Bassett teams. The difference with Rochdale is that they also had a very busy midfield. The plan worked perfectly, but no blame to Alcock - the No 7 was a real lanky git.

As for overall, we were lucky really, but then we were unlucky v Brizzle when just before half time we could have scored 3 or 4.

Football balances it self out and that game puts us in the credit department.

UTB

 

[SwissBlade]

He's been MoM in half of our games this season. That was the first ordinary match I've seen him have, and it came after an injury lay off.

We know what he can do so I'm more concerned about finding a first choice striker, getting Basham playing to his strengths, and getting Murphy back to form.

Yeah i was expecting him to be better, but as you say he's been decent in the other games so i'm not too concerned

 

[alcoblade]

Got to say I was completely unimpressed by Alcock yesterday on two fronts:
distribution/ in possession
In the air.

Thought he was the weaker one of a solid back four.

Agreed, his worst game for us. But I'd put that down to the previous iunjury. He's been outstanding before yesterday.

UTB

 

[wizadry]

Keith Hills game plan was very very simple - hit the No 7 (left side midfield) who won all but 1 header against Alcock and then pick up the 2nd ball, which they did. Very much like Bassett teams. The difference with Rochdale is that they also had a very busy midfield. The plan worked perfectly, but no blame to Alcock - the No 7 was a real lanky git.

Agree that it was only Alcock getting beat in the air,but i wouldn't say their plan worked as i could have swore we won 1-0.

 

[mattbianco1]

Why oh why cant any of our defenders win headers? The amount of times Rochdale lumped the ball up top and their not so big strikers won the header was unbelievable.

We need some more height in the team throughout imo.

I thought the central defenders played well. Won quite a lot in the air. Alcock and McEveley got caught a couple of times but their pace got them out of the shit.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

it wasn't defenders - it was defender - just Alcock.

Keith Hills game plan was very very simple - hit the No 7 (left side midfield) who won all but 1 header against Alcock and then pick up the 2nd ball, which they did. Very much like Bassett teams. The difference with Rochdale is that they also had a very busy midfield. The plan worked perfectly, but no blame to Alcock - the No 7 was a real lanky git.

As for overall, we were lucky really, but then we were unlucky v Brizzle when just before half time we could have scored 3 or 4.

Football balances it self out and that game puts us in the credit department.

UTB

It's a simple tactic, but it can prove effective. Bergen Blade will be along shortly to tell us how Egil Olsen used it very well, with Jostein Flo as the wide player you hit with the diagonal ball.

How you combat it, is either tweaking the formation and moving a taller player to full-back to try and win some of the headers or you drop off the tall, wide guy and simply mop up his headers. Having watched the game it seems we did more of the latter and it seemed to work as they created very little from the tactic.

 

[Bergen Blade]

It's a simple tactic, but it can prove effective. Bergen Blade will be along shortly to tell us how Egil Olsen used it very well, with Jostein Flo as the wide player you hit with the diagonal ball.

How you combat it, is either tweaking the formation and moving a taller player to full-back to try and win some of the headers or you drop off the tall, wide guy and simply mop up his headers. Having watched the game it seems we did more of the latter and it seemed to work as they created very little from the tactic.

Yes, it worked well for Norway in the 90s, but there has to be good movement with more than the odd player anticipating the dropping ball. Warnock used the same tactic with Keith Gillespie quite a lot in our Premiership season.

There are three decent Rochdale chances in this clip following Vincenti winning headers:

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

Yes, it worked well for Norway in the 90s, but there has to be good movement with more than the odd player anticipating the dropping ball. Warnock used the same tactic with Keith Gillespie quite a lot in our Premiership season.

There are three decent Rochdale chances in this clip following Vincenti winning headers:

It's interesting how things change and develop tactics-wise. The key, as you say is good movement anticipating the header. I'm also sure that I read somewhere that old Drillo said the ball into the wide man had to be delivered correctly to make it work well and that a floaty high ball was no good, it had to be delivered with a flatter trajectory and with a bit of pace on it.

As I said I'm more interested in defending it. Pressing high up the pitch and trying to close down the space of those players that would deliver the ball is one way to reduce the effectiveness. But generally teams either try to win the header or drop-off and pick up the dropping ball. I've played when both were used and the more effective if you have the players is to pick off the dropping ball. Trying to win the headers often means that the defender does the job of the wide-player with mis-timed headers. Also, against lesser standard players it has to be said, dropping-off and giving the wide-player a free header for some reason messes them up and they seem to get confuse as to whether they should head the ball on or try and trap it on the chest, ending up doing nothing with it. Personally, I would have changed the formation slightly and sent Collins wide and pulled Alcock into the middle, we know he can play there.

 

[cooperblade]

Peterborough used a very similar tactic but Alcock and McEveley were both excellent in the air that night.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Peterborough used a very similar tactic but Alcock and McEveley were both excellent in the air that night.

I remember Tranmere putting a six foot defender on their right wing and tried high balls to him against our short left back. Problem was that our left back was Matt Hill, who won every single header.

It is true that Alcock has a great leap, but 6'4 Vincenti was just too tall for him.

 

[Sharrowblade]

Peterborough used a very similar tactic but Alcock and McEveley were both excellent in the air that night.

Spot on, Alcock was superb at Peterborough,

I for one was quite happy that Rochdale applied the same tactic, it meant thay weren't putting it into the feet of Matt Done like they did the previous week at Crawley.

 

[Balham Blade]

I was more annoyed that Alcock was properly challenging for every single header when it was obvious that he'd only win one in 10. Let Vicenti win the header then pick up the second ball.

That said, Davies having a mare didn't help - Flynn's defensive reading of the game helped out when he switched to the right as he could then pick up the loose balls.

No real complaints about Alcock's performance from me, thought he did OK.

 

[On The Plus Side...]

The most disappointing thing about the defense was Harrison McGahey's desperate urge to run out with the striker who was going to head the ball, then watch the striker head it on towards our goal, then run around aimlessly as they headed towards our goal . On the plus side... getting 3 points and a clean sheet is fantastic