Ending games on the back foot

[Ricky]

It's a recurring theme, regardless of the opposition.

The longer any tight game goes on, the less likely we are to score, and the more likely we are to concede.

Very frustrating and we need to try to do something about it.

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

We're a first half team.

If we don't score in the first half we very rarely win.

 

[Addison]

A very good point but it seems to be extending to the second half at the moment. It would help when we are at Home that we don't put 10 men behind the ball when defending set pieces. Brum looked sharper and fitter second half and picked up all the second balls. Is it fitness, tactics, subs or confidence. Don't know but its seems an age since we finished a game on the front foot going for it right up until the final whistle.

 

[wizadry]

If they all didn’t sup too much Peroni they’d be a lot fitter.

 

[Maidenhead]

It's a recurring theme, regardless of the opposition.

The longer any tight game goes on, the less likely we are to score, and the more likely we are to concede.

Very frustrating and we need to try to do something about it.

Norwich

 

[biggey blade]

A very good point but it seems to be extending to the second half at the moment. It would help when we are at Home that we don't put 10 men behind the ball when defending set pieces. Brum looked sharper and fitter second half and picked up all the second balls. Is it fitness, tactics, subs or confidence. Don't know but its seems an age since we finished a game on the front foot going for it right up until the final whistle.

Norwich at home? Billy last min winner?

 

[Ricky]

Norwich

They looked the more likely to score in the last 10 minutes in that one. Basham said himself we sucker punched them.

When have we won any other home games late on in the Championship?

 

[Maidenhead]

Record at home so far this season with regards to late goals at BDTBL is lost one, won one.

Hardly a convincing stats to support us always finishing on the back foot, unless you count good game management as being on the back foot.

 

[LJBlade]

We're a first half team.

If we don't score in the first half we very rarely win.

What are our stats on this and how do they compare to other teams?

 

[dc_blade]

Agree 100% Ricky. When we missed those two chances at the start of the second half (Egan's header and Baldock's one-on-one) it was almost like someone had flipped a switch--we were out of ideas.

We do seem to rely on blowing teams away with constant possession, pass and move, territorial domination. When it works, it's spectacular (Villa), but when we're not out of sight after 60 minutes we start to seem a bit lost.

We lack a Plan B. That's not Wilder's fault, it's a question of resources. Last season Plan B was bring Donaldson on and hit the channels. This season it's...bring Woodburn on? I do think he'll come good but so far he looks out of his depth and he's clearly not going to take a game by the scruff of the neck and give us something different.

The upside is, we're much more solid at the back. So we can have a bad day at the office and still come away with a point. I think we'll play better on Saturday.

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

What are our stats on this and how do they compare to other teams?

Don't know about comparisons to other teams but last season we only won two matches when we didn't score in the first half.

Blades 1-0 Ipswich (HT 0-0)
Blades 4-1 Hull (HT 0-1)

It's something that's becoming more and more noticeable.

 

[LJBlade]

Don't know about comparisons to other teams but last season we only won two matches when we didn't score in the first half.

It's something that's becoming more and more noticeable.

So this might actually be a common occurrence across all of football?

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

So this might actually be a common occurrence across all of football?

I don't think so.

It's one of the things that's jarringly different to Blades teams of yesteryear.

It was often said that we were very much a second half team when Warnock was manager and I think that was true. Especially at home.

It always seemed like we were slow starters in those days but as the game progressed we got stronger and stronger. By the last 20 mins of games at Bramall Lane we often battered teams to death and scored many late equalisers and winners.

These days it's the complete opposite. Games seem to run away from us the further they progress and we look tired and lethargic.

I was surprised we didn't get sucker punched tonight because there only looked like one winner in those closing stages.

 

[Sean Thornton]

It's a recurring theme, regardless of the opposition.

The longer any tight game goes on, the less likely we are to score, and the more likely we are to concede.

Very frustrating and we need to try to do something about it.

Bang on.

 

[Deleted member 875]

To be honest it was something i hadn't really noticed, until it got brought up on here, and it seems to make sense. I've noticed a tendency for us to start strongly and then tail off towards the end of games.

On one hand it is good getting off to a decent start, as for a long long time, if United didn't start well then teams would sit back, wait for the crowd to get restless and hit us on the break. That was a well known weakness and i saw christ knows how many teams nullify us early on, only to hit us on the break when we got a bit restless and nervy, and this was more prominent during those years in the pub league. That really doesn't to happen any more.

I think this might be a combination of having a second string that isn't as good as the first team, and this becomes more apparent when we make substitutions or the first team regulars are injured.

 

[Rob86]

I have noticed it and it has happened in the last 2 games, 1 we lost and the other we clung on to the draw. Seems to coincide with Duffy’s legs going so it’s a shame Woodburn so far hasn’t provided that spark from the bench.

Maybe try it the other way round, bring Duffy on at 60 and we may finish the game stronger. Suppose in a few weeks we can start with Fleck, Norwood, Coutts and the latter will only play 60 mins for a few weeks

 

[CopenhagenBlade]

I used to notice this under Liverpool, when Brendan Rogers was manager. If they didn’t score within the first 20 minutes I would bet on the opposition scoring the first goal.
Maybe it’s an issue with high pressing, high energy teams that its unsustainable over a whole game. If the opposition then score, while you’re having a ‘breather’ they can then pack the defence, close the space and make it very difficult for us.

 

[nopigfansintown]

I used to notice this under Liverpool, when Brendan Rogers was manager. If they didn’t score within the first 20 minutes I would bet on the opposition scoring the first goal.
Maybe it’s an issue with high pressing, high energy teams that its unsustainable over a whole game. If the opposition then score, while you’re having a ‘breather’ they can then pack the defence, close the space and make it very difficult for us.

This is bang on. It is a product of what you could call energy management.We go full pelt from the first whistle and start to decline as the game goes on. It's a choice imposed by the management. If you can't manage the game due to not having the lead, - or not possessing the ball players to maintain possession and pick teams off once the lead is obtained, - your pressing deteriorates and you are increasingly open to counter attacks.Energy levels will only dip quicker when possession is surrendered uncharacteristically easily, and you have to expend unusual amounts of energy getting it back (see Wednesday night's midfield performance, and over the last several months the loss of Coutts). Where the comparison with that Liverpool team becomes even more germane, is that they lacked quality options of the bench, who can imitate the style of first team players - in the same way we do. If we had strikers and an attacking midfielder who can give us what Duffy and the first choice front two can in terms of off the ball work; the problem is drastically reduced. Where we may have seen progress is the fact we changed both wing backs on Wednesday - something Wilder was loath to do last season due to the lack of a quality LWB replacement for Stevens.The wing back position is the most physically demanding position when playing this system, alongside the Duffy role.The strikers also have a large amount of work to do compared to their counteparts in teams with less demanding styles.
All of the demands of this system and style are increased when you have three games in a week.To use your Liverpool comparison again: they went out of the cup competitions early that season, and they weren't in European competition.They could pool resources at a league campaign, usually playing one game per week. Even last season, they underachieved in the league as they pooled all their resources towards the Champions League.They settled for fourth place, despite arguably being the second, or third, most accomplished team in the league (see their results vs the top sides). It's increasingly clear that Wilder does not want to change the style but hopes that he can interchange Sharp, Clarke, Mcgoldrick and Washington and still achieve a high pressing front two. That he can interchange Baldock, Freeman, Stevens and Johnson and maintain the high energy levels required from wing backs. The big conundrum is Duffy.We've already seen Mcgoldrick and Woodburn come into that position. Fleck has played there in patches and may do more if Coutts and Norwood can play together successfully. None of these players have been convincing in that position so far imo. Of course we went for Freeman but didn't get him...
Overall I'm a big fan of this style of play. I'm not going to pretend I wasn't pointing out the squad issues we would have in maintaining it.
At the end of last season we had an opportunity to go 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 and build around Brooks due to his unsuitabilty for the established style of play. Also as an acknowledgement of the difficulty obtaining top quality strikers in comparison to wide players This would have taken the emphasis from pressing and turned us into a more pragmatic counter attacking team.Im a big advocate of the current style, but I could see arguments either way due to our lack of resources.

 

[ChipButtyBlade]

We're a first half team.

If we don't score in the first half we very rarely win.

Hull City at home last season must have been an exception,as #11 shows.

 

[davidblade]

It a consequence of our our high press game , inevitable of system,the players are burnt out after eighty minutes

 

[snootyfenooty]

The upside is, we're much more solid at the back. So we can have a bad day at the office and still come away with a point. I think we'll play better on Saturday.

That's dead right. We're equipped to hold on to a draw now, especially when we're playing shite and nothing's wrong with that. That wasn't always the case last season although it has to be said some of Wilder's substitutions didn't help.

 

[super_pig]

It's a recurring theme, regardless of the opposition.

The longer any tight game goes on, the less likely we are to score, and the more likely we are to concede.

Very frustrating and we need to try to do something about it.

duffy goes off??

 

[Topplayersleave]

I made the point earlier in the week

If we don't score early it becomes more and more laboured and the chances of being sucker punched increase dramatically

Of course I got criticised for it because it was me

 

[I should coco]

Of course I got criticised for it because it was me

There's a lesson in there then, if only you weren't too negative to learn it.

 

[GrayBlade]

I used to notice this under Liverpool, when Brendan Rogers was manager. If they didn’t score within the first 20 minutes I would bet on the opposition scoring the first goal.
Maybe it’s an issue with high pressing, high energy teams that its unsustainable over a whole game. If the opposition then score, while you’re having a ‘breather’ they can then pack the defence, close the space and make it very difficult for us.

I think you’re spot on mate and it also has an impact on overal players when we get several games in a short period.

I don’t think this is anything to do with the club’s fitness regime or individual players levels, it’s down to the fact that to play with the intensity that we do we need back up players (particularly in the engine room) who we can come on and keep the momentum going seamlessly. There’s no way that Norwood who in my opinion was just knackered after playing too many games, should have been kept on the pitch on Wednesday but the only alternative was Lundstram, who as much as he tries hard just isn’t a direct replacement.

Ideally tomorrow, we’d rest Norwood or have him on the bench and be able to bring on Coutts if he was fit, but what about cover for Fleck and Duffy? There isn’t any really. Our attacking centre backs also expend much more energy than in most other teams, but only JOC and Bash in the squad can really bomb forward effectively. The
problem is that the players who expend the most energy like those I’ve mentioned hardly ever get subbed or rested because they’re basically irreplaceable, there’s no like for like.

If we go a goal or two up early on, the pressure’s off and we can then focus more on containment and reduce the intensity, but if we need to push on, there’s just not enough gas in the collective tank sometimes. We can only change this by either having a squad of enough depth and genuine quality to be able to effectively rotate our key players on a game by game basis and during a game, OR be able to successfully change the way we play during a game that’s less intensive and still win games.

This is not a criticism by the way, I love the way we play most games and as you point out, even a club with the resources of a Liverpool can struggle to play this way, but it is a fact that we’ve got an issue with players blowing out of there arses from late in the first half and into the second, and the only way we can change this is by recruiting more players of the quality of Norwood or by making tactical changes. I think that our team as a whole is as fit or fitter than other teams in the league when fully rested, it’s just not an issue. UTB

 

[BushBlade]

I used to notice this under Liverpool, when Brendan Rogers was manager. If they didn’t score within the first 20 minutes I would bet on the opposition scoring the first goal.
Maybe it’s an issue with high pressing, high energy teams that its unsustainable over a whole game. If the opposition then score, while you’re having a ‘breather’ they can then pack the defence, close the space and make it very difficult for us.

I’ve said for years that when a team starts a game dominating the opposition they have to score in the first twenty minutes. Invariably, if they don’t, the other team works its way back into the game. As you say, Liverpool were a good example of this.

 

[Topplayersleave]

There's a lesson in there then, if only you weren't too negative to learn it.

Negative to a dumb clapper
But to somebody normal it was a fair point. We only get positive results when we start well and get an early goal
If we don't, we struggle to break stubborn teams down and then finish games the weaker of the two sides

 

[him behind you]

It a consequence of our our high press game , inevitable of system,the players are burnt out after eighty minutes

Agree DB. Maybe we just need to improve our fitness / stamina levels to be able to continue our style of play as other teams might now be also spotting the pattern.

 

[Bladesway]

When have we won any other home games late on in the Championship?

I hate it when that happens.

 

[Bladezz]

We scored in last minute to win again.

And we end games on back foot.

Cannot makes this forum up.