Width

[CornwallBlade]

Please help me understand. I was playing senior level in the 80’s and 90’s. Tactically, you hurt teams by getting wide and in behind quickly. Every defender will tell you that a ball cut back from the deadball line is s nightmare to deal with. So, why oh why do we see umpteen opportunities to get the ball wide and deep wasted because it comes back inside and across the back line? Grealish et al very rarely take on the last man outside. There are a few, Saka and Salah, who occasionally get in behind. When they do, I’d estimate it results in a goal or great chance 25% of the time. What has happened? Is it the obsession with possession?

 

[DifferentClass]

It's length what matters.

 

[brownblade]

It's the statistical analysis showing what's most effective, most often.

 

[mancunianblade]

Premier League - goal statistics

www.footballhistory.org

Bar 2014 the goals per game record of the PL is superior in the modern era (last 15 years) which would suggest possession football gets you goals, Point of possession football is also to tire your opponent and if you have the ball your opponent doesn't reducing the likelihood of conceding?

 

[CornwallBlade]

What? That if you never take a chance you don’t affect your pass completion or xg rates? Or players are obsessed their personal stats to protect their value?

 

[CornwallBlade]

Premier League - goal statistics

www.footballhistory.org

Bar 2014 the goals per game record of the PL is superior in the modern era (last 15 years) which would suggest possession football gets you goals, Point of possession football is also to tire your opponent and if you have the ball your opponent doesn't reducing the likelihood of conceding?

Or, the unwillingness to take chances has resulted in a boring pattern of play that is easier to defend against? You could argue that defensive play hasn’t actually improved its just not tested as it used to be.

 

[Digs blade]

It's length what matters.

Agree. Especially if you try to get round the back

 

[CornwallBlade]

Premier League - goal statistics

www.footballhistory.org

Bar 2014 the goals per game record of the PL is superior in the modern era (last 15 years) which would suggest possession football gets you goals, Point of possession football is also to tire your opponent and if you have the ball your opponent doesn't reducing the likelihood of conceding?

Fair point but I’d argue that is has nothing to do with tiring them out its a philosophy of “if we have the ball, they can’t score” which, when you think about it, is a recipe for boring games.

 

[Keen Blade]

It's the statistical analysis showing what's most effective, most often.

There's lies , damned lies & statistics.

I've watched footy for 55 years and one thing I've noticed is that crossing from the byline creates havoc in the defence + the ball coming out to meet the attackers favours them to strike it goalwards.
All you have to do is watched all the goals from a weekend + note the goals resulting from such a cross.

Whereas cutting inside + playing tippy tippy across the front of defenders is boring and doesn't penetrate their line.

We only play one winger at a time.
When it's JRS , he is two-footed enough to go either inside or outside the LB.
When Brooks (more of a L footer) comes on I would prefer him on the L , or at least to swap & alternative flanks during his time on the pitch.

But he must be under orders to stay on the R where he is less effective than JRS.

As a consequence we never test the opposition RB to see if he can be beaten on the outside (unless Burrows has been able to attack) coz that is not the style of the R-footed O’Hare & Hamer.

 

[Trigger]

Would love to see JRS, Brooks and Seriki all on the pitch together, with an instruction of you three, just go and terrify the shit out of the opposition’s defence. With our defence (when not suspended) we’d be scoring cricket scores and conceding very little.

 

[jt64]

Put it simply, defending crosses at the highest level is a piece of piss, unless you either put in an incredibly low percentage wonder ball, or are so skillful you can actually beat your defender and drive deep enough into the box to make the key pass extremely easy to make. It's the same with shots from distance - you don't do low return shit at the highest level unless the game state dictates you need to gamble

 

[Bert]

There's lies , damned lies & statistics.

I've watched footy for 55 years and one thing I've noticed is that crossing from the byline creates havoc in the defence + the ball coming out to meet the attackers favours them to strike it goalwards.
All you have to do is watched all the goals from a weekend + note the goals resulting from such a cross.

Whereas cutting inside + playing tippy tippy across the front of defenders is boring and doesn't penetrate their line.

We only play one winger at a time.
When it's JRS , he is two-footed enough to go either inside or outside the LB.
When Brooks (more of a L footer) comes on I would prefer him on the L , or at least to swap & alternative flanks during his time on the pitch.

But he must be under orders to stay on the R where he is less effective than JRS.

As a consequence we never test the opposition RB to see if he can be beaten on the outside (unless Burrows has been able to attack) coz that is not the style of the R-footed O’Hare & Hamer.

Indeed, every time Brooks goes wide on the right he cuts inside to get it on his left foot.
He needs to rapidly improve his right foot or we might as well play Long John Silver on the right.

 

[CornwallBlade]

Put it simply, defending crosses at the highest level is a piece of piss, unless you either put in an incredibly low percentage wonder ball, or are so skillful you can actually beat your defender and drive deep enough into the box to make the key pass extremely easy to make. It's the same with shots from distance - you don't do low return shit at the highest level unless the game state dictates you need to gamble

I’m not talking about crosses, it’s the difficulty of defending against balls played in from the backline area. A pass flat across the goal Is a defender’s worst nightmare

 

[1889]

Indeed, every time Brooks goes wide on the right he cuts inside to get it on his left foot.
He needs to rapidly improve his right foot or we might as well play Long John Silver on the right.

Surely he’d struggle when it came to judging distance though, with just having the one eye and then of course there’s his parrot. Not to mention potential conflict with Captain Blade?

I’m not sure Bert’s thought this through properly

 

[Keen Blade]

Would love to see JRS, Brooks and Seriki all on the pitch together, with an instruction of you three, just go and terrify the shit out of the opposition’s defence. With our defence (when not suspended) we’d be scoring cricket scores and conceding very little.

A lovely thought but there has to be a catch somewhere ...

 

[Keen Blade]

Premier League - goal statistics

www.footballhistory.org

Bar 2014 the goals per game record of the PL is superior in the modern era (last 15 years) which would suggest possession football gets you goals, Point of possession football is also to tire your opponent and if you have the ball your opponent doesn't reducing the likelihood of conceding?

The modern finance based era has such a gap between the top teams + the rest that the top ones get 4s , 5s and 8s against the bottom feeders like us.

 

[Keen Blade]

Indeed, every time Brooks goes wide on the right he cuts inside to get it on his left foot.
He needs to rapidly improve his right foot or we might as well play Long John Silver on the right.

I like Brooks and he's a L footer so I dunno why CW persists with him on the R unless he actually wants him to turn inside (which I find boring coz it never gets us anywhere).
Play Brooks on the Left , is my plea !

 

[Keen Blade]

Surely he’d struggle when it came to judging distance though, with just having the one eye and then of course there’s his parrot. Not to mention potential conflict with Captain Blade?

I’m not sure Bert’s thought this through properly

His parrot wouldn't be a problem , it could go and play wiv dem pigeons

 

[Keen Blade]

Put it simply, defending crosses at the highest level is a piece of piss, unless you either put in an incredibly low percentage wonder ball, or are so skillful you can actually beat your defender and drive deep enough into the box to make the key pass extremely easy to make. It's the same with shots from distance - you don't do low return shit at the highest level unless the game state dictates you need to gamble

No crosses , no shots ?
How do you get a goal in your game of chess ?
Why does anyone have wingers or wingbacks ?
Pick a weekend , any weekend , and watch every goal scored in the top four leagues.
You'll see loads from dangerous cutbacks from the byline.

 

[SGBlade]

I’m not talking about crosses, it’s the difficulty of defending against balls played in from the backline area. A pass flat across the goal Is a defender’s worst nightmare

I don’t have the actual stats (would be interesting if someone does) but I actually think this still happens quite a bit. Just anecdotally looking at us this year, I can recall quite a few times JRS, Hamer and Brooks have driven to the line and fired one across / pulled one back. Thinking of O’Hare’s goal recently and a few times this year when Moore has almost scored from close range. Whilst the trend of inverted wingers does encourage them to shoot more, I still think that the good ones have the ability to go both ways (JRS can do this, Brooks needs to work on it).

The difference is that the crosses are now coming from the byline but inside the area or even six yard box. What’s been lost is both the long outswingers from the touchline onto the big Center forward’s head on the 6 yard box (eg 90% of Duncan Ferguson goals) and the drillers to the near post from the corner flag for the forwards to attack the front post and flick (eg a lot of shearer’s goals). Aesthetically that’s a shame because they were both great goals to watch. But % wise you can imagine that these are pretty low probability.

Having said all that, football is a game of trends and I wouldn’t be totally shocked to see this kind of play come back into fashion at some point, perhaps with a slight tweak. Already I’m seeing a few more 442 formations (albeit with inverted wingers), which would be unthinkable 5 years ago.

 

[mancunianblade]

The modern finance based era has such a gap between the top teams + the rest that the top ones get 4s , 5s and 8s against the bottom feeders like us.

Depends on what we classify as modern because some could say premier league era however the topic is wingers essentially and the stats prove otherwise on high scoring games. However I think the stats maybe skewed with the teams in question taking their foot off the gas and resting players when in such positions

List of highest-scoring Premier League matches - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[MobileBlade]

Would love to see JRS, Brooks and Seriki all on the pitch together, with an instruction of you three, just go and terrify the shit out of the opposition’s defence. With our defence (when not suspended) we’d be scoring cricket scores and conceding very little.

Didn't England try something similar against Greece?

 

[jt64]

No crosses , no shots ?
How do you get a goal in your game of chess ?

I'd rather have one attempt that goes in 40% of the time than ten shots that go in 3% of the time, it's simple maths

 

[Sharrow Snuff Mill]

I like to see wingers beating the full back, getting close to the goal line, then crossing the ball.
However, even more than that, wherever possible, I want to see the early ball played to give the situation of forwards on the front foot against defenders on the back foot.

 

[dazzlingblade]

Not at all what I was expecting, knowing this boards standards

 

[Ginger Gnome]

I like Brooks and he's a L footer so I dunno why CW persists with him on the R unless he actually wants him to turn inside (which I find boring coz it never gets us anywhere).

That's exactly what he wants, everyone uses inverted wingers now, cutting inside on their stronger foot, the idea is that it opens up space for the fullback to go around the outside and put in more traditional crosses.

 

[SwissBlade]

It's length what matters.

Length is vanity…
Girth is what matters

 

[DronnieBlade]

It plays a part but out and out wide players are a thing of the past by enlarge.

Even players tasked with hugging the touch line are inclined to come inside.

We even got inverted full backs these days !

Across all 4 divisions, it’s a game of chess. Possession, recycle, move the opponents around to create your spaces and overloads.

I prefer it to hoof n hope .

UTB

 

[Keen Blade]

That's exactly what he wants, everyone uses inverted wingers now, cutting inside on their stronger foot, the idea is that it opens up space for the fullback to go around the outside and put in more traditional crosses.

But when our RB is Gilchrist he hasn't a clue how to overlap. And Gilchrist has been our main RB.
Good defender , offers little in attack.

Your point carries more weight if Seriki is RB.

PS , Mackem's Watson caused us some problems as a Lfooted LW

 

[Pollingtonblade]

Why do that when we can play a neat pass back to midfield and back to souttar then back to Cooper, and maintain our 1-0 or 2-0 lead?