Movement

[bertieblade]

The guy with the ball never had any options. The forwards hide, never make a run and are seemingly scared to receive the ball.
It is ridiculous to blame the guy with the ball for his inability to find a forward pass or pass it backwards as he has no options.
The bloody players in front of the ball are statues, should grow some balls and show for it!!!

 

[SteveBlade]

Exactly.

When people say things like 'We could have Xavi or Iniesta in our team and they'd look poor' many just see it as an OTT jokey type statement, but it's not untrue.

From personal experience, I'm a solid footballer, not a player who will wazz his way to winning games on his own through sheer skill, but a good footballer. When I play with poor players I'm about as good as they are. When I have players moving, and cleverly making space I look like a very good player.

The same is true at any level of football to different extents.

 

[bornablade]

When a team has possession the most important players are the ones without the ball. They are the ones who should be creating the angles to receive it.

Continuing your Barcelona theme Steve, they are at their most impressive when they lose possession. They are almost personally offended that the opposition have the audacity to have the ball. They track back and harass the opposition until they get it back and then their 'support the man with ball' starts all over again.

It really is a simple game. It needs strong minds, self discipline, total concentration. Almost like a flock of flying geese.

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

Exactly.

When people say things like 'We could have Xavi or Iniesta in our team and they'd look poor' many just see it as an OTT jokey type statement, but it's not untrue.

From personal experience, I'm a solid footballer, not a player who will wazz his way to winning games on his own through sheer skill, but a good footballer. When I play with poor players I'm about as good as they are. When I have players moving, and cleverly making space I look like a very good player.

The same is true at any level of football to different extents.

Good point, Hammond was a bit hit and miss but almost looked bewildered by the lack of movement around him when he had the ball.

 

[WeareBlades]

There was no one touch passing last night and that allowed Fleetwood to not be dragged out of position. When Coutts and Baxter came on they upped the tempo so much. It was a mistake starting hammond, very rusty.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Good point, Hammond was a bit hit and miss but almost looked bewildered by the lack of movement around him when he had the ball.

Big time Charlie, send him back.

 

[super_pig]

Big time Charlie, send him back.

heh. the lad's played an hour on a moments notice and he's getting pelters already

 

[him behind you]

The guy with the ball never had any options. The forwards hide, never make a run and are seemingly scared to receive the ball.
It is ridiculous to blame the guy with the ball for his inability to find a forward pass or pass it backwards as he has no options.
The bloody players in front of the ball are statues, should grow some balls and show for it!!!

This is exactly what I was saying last night during the game Bertie. I've been a long standing complainer (this season) about the midfield not protecting the back 4 and, although Hammond didn't look great (not complaining given that he'd only met the team a few hours earlier), he and Basham were much better at that last night.

The major problem last night was the lack of movement beyond them. We suffered this on Saturday against 10 men and it was exactly the same last night and whether we like it or not, Adams and Done on both occasions, and JCR last night were the culprits and need to pick up their game. So often last night when either defenders or the central midfield 2 had the ball and looked forward for a pass, Sharp was the only player making a run wanting the ball. Adams, Done and JCR were completely motionless almost hiding behind Fleetwood's midfield making a pass to them impossible for 90% of the time. As such, the players with the ball were forced to go backwards and sideways to keep possession - only to get sections of the crowd on their back for not lumping it forward (don't get me wrong, it was dull to watch but whilst we controlled possession we controlled the match and were never in danger). The only time those 3 looked interested was on the odd occasion we actually got into the final 3rd. They really need to pick up that part of their game.

What I would also say is that our performance picked up when Done went off and Adams went wide and suddenly got involved, maybe we should accept that he is better wide and doesn't (yet) understand what he needs to do when playing centrally? Perhaps a few afternoons watching video's and taking advice from a certain Mr Deane might be of benefit.

 

[Slim Man]

Hammond wasn't fantastic in possession but he generally isn't, it's not his job to be his job as a defensive midfielder is to shield the defence and keep it simple. Due to the lack of movement the only way he could keep it simple was by passing it sideways or backwards.

He'll get better with the more training sessions he gets.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

The guy with the ball never had any options. The forwards hide, never make a run and are seemingly scared to receive the ball.
It is ridiculous to blame the guy with the ball for his inability to find a forward pass or pass it backwards as he has no options.
The bloody players in front of the ball are statues, should grow some balls and show for it!!!

Good point - except it has been like this for at least 5 years - even in Wilsons days, we tended to hide at times.

Certainly Cloughs midfield and what Adkins has inherited.

Sends me bonkers - this lack of showing and taking responsibility.

Coutts showed for every ball and then wanted it back - so different from a load of others.

This is why teams have stuffed us in midfield so far this season - think the penny has dropped.

Basham/Coutts/Hammond - any 2 from 3 in a game - strong core - but we must do more pass and move in training otherwise we are going to get dumped by more teams aka: Gillingham/Port Vale etc.

UTB

 

[Railway Blade]

I noticed the lack of movement too, especially first half. It seemed we were almost playing 424. The two wingers pushed so far up and the whole four of them were just standing in front of their back four.
With their bank of 5 midfielders including 3 centrally in front of our central two it made it almost impossible to find a forward pass. Only Sharp occasionally saw the problem and tried to come short. He also At one point tried to encourage JCR to drop further into a midfield area but he pretty much ignored him.

 

[1889]

I thought last night that Fleetwood, despite conceding and early goal, just came for a draw and had no plan B.
They packed the midfield and and had very little attacking intent. In those circumstances there is less space to exploit, but also it is only to be expected, that Utd are going to think, 'Well were one up, if you don't want to come out, we'll keep the ball and have the three points, Thanks very much'. I have to say, I thought Fleetwood were absolutely dreadful and if they want to survive they need a change in both personnel and strategy.

Nevertheless, I agree that Utd's lack of movement up front and an apparent lack of awareness of teammates positions at times is frustrating to watch and of more concern than our defensive frailties. As someone has said, in any football team the most important players are the ones who don't have the ball. The only player who regularly looks to make a run, to either receive the ball or create space for others is Billy Sharp. So often when we have possession our forwards are stood in touching distance of their marker or walking alongside them. It is also rare for our midfield to play the ball forwards, preferring the safe option of back where it came from or sidewards. I'm not sure whether the lack of movement is symptomatic of the reluctance to pass forwards or vice versa, but I believe, if we are to win this league and progress in the next, Nigel Adkins should make addressing both problems an immediate priority.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

With both our full backs and wingers pushed very wide and getting "chalk on their boots", there were acres of space in the central areas of the pitch.
Personally, I thought that Adams quite often did come short and found a yard or two of space but wasn't given the ball.
He's showed before that if you roll the ball into his feet, he only needs half a yard to turn his man and run at the defence.
Too often last night, the defenders and midfielders had the chance to do just that but instead chose the safer sideways/backwards option.

Another annoyance was Howard's continued refusal to kick the ball out of his hands when we had the chance of a quick break
It didn't happen very often last night but at least a couple of times he had the opportunity of turning their defence with a quick long kick but instead wanted to roll the ball out short or wait until he could drop it at his feet and walk forward a couple of yards with it.
Why can't/won't he kick it out of his hands!?

However, I did like the look and shape of the team and the overall goal threat.
We just need to work on executing the forward pass more often and sooner whether it be rolled into feet or lofted over the top.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

I agree with some of the sentimemts about lack of movement at times but 442 is a more rigid formation than 451. Colchester showed at the lane how good 451 can be with good movement.

442 often relies on a big man little man combination which we didn't have last night. Both strikers wanted the ball to feet, as did the wingers. That makes it difficult to find them and the defence and midfield therefore often waited longer for a forward option to become available.

It doesn't bother me if we keep the ball like we did last night and shut the opposition out like we did last night. It was an approach that worked perfectly and we saw the advantages of 442 as we got on theend of 3 low crosses into the box to score the goals.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Well I thought Billy in particular was in motion all the time.

Istm that our MO is to play down the wings, and this is where all three goals came from.

When we did go more direct and central we quite often lost the ball, sometimes bc Che's first touch is, er, clumsy.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I agree with some of the sentimemts about lack of movement at times but 442 is a more rigid formation than 451. Colchester showed at the lane how good 451 can be with good movement.

442 often relies on a big man little man combination which we didn't have last night. Both strikers wanted the ball to feet, as did the wingers. That makes it difficult to find them and the defence and midfield therefore often waited longer for a forward option to become available.

It doesn't bother me if we keep the ball like we did last night and shut the opposition out like we did last night. It was an approach that worked perfectly and we saw the advantages of 442 as we got on theend of 3 low crosses into the box to score the goals.

Exactly.

 

[Kevincarterversion2.0]

Been saying this for weeks - no movement = nobody for the ball players to pass too. Then the ball players get booed from daft fans when they pass sideways (as they want to keep the ball).

 

[sheffielder]

Over the next few weeks I am sure Adkins will find the right partner for Hammond in midfield. We didn't concede last night and hopefully his arrival will help the defence as having sharp done and Adams are likely to nick us tight games. Hopefully we have that platform now

 

[1889]

Whatever the formation, whoever the opposition you need movement. It makes you harder to mark, sometimes keeping the defenders attention away from other aspects of the game, creates space for others and makes you a better option to pass to.
As an example, last night say Collins gets the ball from Howard, JCR should know he's very likely to pass it to Wallace and therefore should be getting a yard of space to receive the ball down the line from Wallace and looking who he is then going to pass it to. Wallace in turn should also know where JCR is and pass it to him and move to help him out if required and so on throughout the team as we move up the field. Every player should know where their marker is, where his teammates are and who he's going to pass to before the ball arrives.
In reality, Collins gets the ball, passes to Wallace he looks down the line and JCR is stood with their right back, so he naturally gives it back to Collins. That happened at least half a dozen times last night.
I appreciate the opposition are wise to movement, but this is why it needs to be swift, one touch to control it and get it out of your feet and another to pass it. We are too ponderous on the ball we either need two or three touches to get it where we can pass it or we're looking around because we don't know who's available before the ball comes and the opportunity is lost. It is just a matter of seconds that make ALL the difference, the only player who occasionally plays that way is Jose Baxter. (eg Bradford City)

 

[SUFC Guy]

We are too ponderous on the ball we either need two or three touches to get it where we can pass it or we're looking around because we don't know who's available before the ball comes and the opportunity is lost. It is just a matter of seconds that make ALL the difference, the only player who occasionally plays that way is Jose Baxter. (eg Bradford City)

Spot on! We need more urgency and where possible dare I say it... miss a player out and pass to the player in front of him! It's simple and I am sure NA knows this - it's just whether or not the players can do it under pressure.

 

[bogo40]

[QUOTE="
The major problem last night was the lack of movement beyond them. We suffered this on Saturday against 10 men and it was exactly the same last night and whether we like it or not, Adams and Done on both occasions, and JCR last night were the culprits and need to pick up their game. So often last night when either defenders or the central midfield 2 had the ball and looked forward for a pass, Sharp was the only player making a run wanting the ball. Adams, Done and JCR were completely motionless almost hiding behind Fleetwood's midfield making a pass to them impossible for 90% of the time. As such, the players with the ball were forced to go backwards and sideways to keep possession - only to get sections of the crowd on their back for not lumping it forward (don't get me wrong, it was dull to watch but whilst we controlled possession we controlled the match and were never in danger). The only time those 3 looked interested was on the odd occasion we actually got into the final 3rd. They really need to pick up that part of their game.
[/QUOTE]

If you looked at the middle of the pitch when Blades got the ball at the back the two wide men JCR and Done were wide but so were the other two Billy and Adams. There was a hole in the middle of the pitch from in front of our defence to their keeper 15 - 20 yds wide all the way through, we need to have some one in the middle to play the ball to and hold the ball up. Sammon should be able to do this for us.

Having said that if the passing is going to be of the (bad)quality last night it wont matter. when we passed the ball quickly and forward, instead of slowly and sideward or backward, we actually looked quite dangerous.

 

[Fiery Blade]

Hammond wasn't fantastic in possession but he generally isn't, it's not his job to be his job as a defensive midfielder is to shield the defence and keep it simple. Due to the lack of movement the only way he could keep it simple was by passing it sideways or backwards.

He'll get better with the more training sessions he gets.

It doesn't seemed to have worked with Collins, McEverley, Long, Howard, JCR, Woolford, Baxter,McFadzean etc !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tyler Durden]

Taking Throw-Ins- The Sheffield United Method

Throw-In Taker:

1) Allow the ball to run out of play when it's perfectly feasible and more advantageous to keep it in.

2) Pick up ball from touchline and do nothing for approximately 5 seconds, just stand there marvelling at this strange plastic covered spherical object which has found its way into your hands.

3) Hold ball over your head for another 5-10 seconds, taking special care not to shout to your teammates where you want them to position themselves to recieve the ball. After all you might startle them.

4) When all of your teammates are completely blocked by an opposition player, throw ball to the opponents feet.


Throw-In Reciever:

1) When throw-in taker is in position, be sure to stand absolutely still as opposing players can detect movement and may attempt to take the ball.

2) If you HAVE to move, make sure you get behind an opposition player so that they can shield you from any airborne object which might come your way.

3) Refuse to respond to any suggestion that you should run into space, fuck that, you don't get paid enough and you might get a stitch.

4) Watch as your marker takes the ball with ease, and make sure you look at the other dozy bastard who was stood three weeks away from the touchline. It was definitely his fault.

 

[longinthe toothblade]

There was no one touch passing last night and that allowed Fleetwood to not be dragged out of position. When Coutts and Baxter came on they upped the tempo so much. It was a mistake starting hammond, very rusty.

Yep, agree with that.

Fact is that we develop the ball so damn slowly from the back that it allows the opposition so much time to get behind the ball and close down the space. It therefore becomes 10 times more difficult to break them down or for a striker to find (productive) space.

Pace and movement both key.

Also playing for 90 mins instead of 45 helps

 

[longinthe toothblade]

It doesn't seemed to have worked with Collins, McEverley, Long, Howard, JCR, Woolford, Baxter,McFadzean etc !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bitch

 

[Bergen Blade]

Movement and passing go hand in hand, and it's difficult to get things going if we're weak in either aspect. I don't think we had many phenomenal passers in the starting line up, and essentially not in central midfield.

We should be fair to Dean Hammond. Although he's come from the Premiership there's been nothing to suggest he'll be a great playmaker for us. In fact, fans of his previous clubs mention that as his weakness. There have been players in the past that have come from higher divisions and probably been expected to stand out. Players like Garry Flitcroft, Leon Britton, Paddy McCarthy did well at former clubs in certain roles, but all struggled to live up to expectations in a team that expected them to be good at things they weren't really good at.

The difference after Coutts came on was obvious. When he's in the mood, Coutts' touch, composure, vision and accuracy make opposition players struggle to get close to him. Fleetwood found out that when they tried hard, he'd just pass it on with his first touch and it was just a waste of energy. As they realised that, Coutts was given more time and space, and players started moving into space, not just coming short to help out because a teammate was in trouble. Coutts' playmaking meant we finally started get some flowing moves going.

But Coutts sometimes looks like he's 50 when he chases. In games, or roles, where he'll be required to cover a lot of space he'll be a potential liability. Adkins must agree with this, otherwise he wouldn't have kept trying to sign Hammond. Hammond looked rusty and not match fit, but despite us playing wingers and two strikers, he and Basham made sure that the opposition didn't run straight through us. In terms of protecting the back four, and getting away with the 4-4-2 formation Basham and Hammond could do well, but we'll have to see if we'll be able to play good attacking football and maintain our good scoring record.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Movement and passing go hand in hand, and it's difficult to get things going if we're weak in either aspect. I don't think we had many phenomenal passers in the starting line up, and essentially not in central midfield.

We should be fair to Dean Hammond. Although he's come from the Premiership there's been nothing to suggest he'll be a great playmaker for us. In fact, fans of his previous clubs mention that as his weakness. There have been players in the past that have come from higher divisions and probably been expected to stand out. Players like Garry Flitcroft, Leon Britton, Paddy McCarthy did well at former clubs in certain roles, but all struggled to live up to expectations in a team that expected them to be good at things they weren't really good at.

The difference after Coutts came on was obvious. When he's in the mood, Coutts' touch, composure, vision and accuracy make opposition players struggle to get close to him. Fleetwood found out that when they tried hard, he'd just pass it on with his first touch and it was just a waste of energy. As they realised that, Coutts was given more time and space, and players started moving into space, not just coming short to help out because a teammate was in trouble. Coutts' playmaking meant we finally started get some flowing moves going.

But Coutts sometimes looks like he's 50 when he chases. In games, or roles, where he'll be required to cover a lot of space he'll be a potential liability. Adkins must agree with this, otherwise he wouldn't have kept trying to sign Hammond. Hammond looked rusty and not match fit, but despite us playing wingers and two strikers, he and Basham made sure that the opposition didn't run straight through us. In terms of protecting the back four, and getting away with the 4-4-2 formation Basham and Hammond could do well, but we'll have to see if we'll be able to play good attacking football and maintain our good scoring record.

Absolutely wholeheartedly agree with every word Bergen. Every team will have strengths and weaknesses as does every player. On Tuesday, we set up in such a way that we played 2 relatively defensive minded CMs to protect our back 4 and provide a platform for our attacking flair players to thrive. The sacrifices we had to make to do that was to lose some ball playing ability from midfield and some quality from set pieces was also lost with Done and JCR taking them. It meant we could fit 4 dangerous players who can make things happen into the team (Sharp, Adams, JCR and Done). The problem was that Done and JCR didn’t have great games but we still had enough largely because of good contributions from the full backs (which they might not have been able to provide without the cover from Basham and Hammond) and the threat in the box demonstrated by Sharp and Adams. 451/433 relies on more movement between the lines in midfield. 442 is more reliant on wing play and having 2 forwards in the box when crosses come in. People seem to want to grumble that our CMs aren’t defensively solid, ball playing midfielders who can also take people on and get box to box. We’re not going to get a Yaya Toure or Steven Gerrard at this level I’m afraid. It’s a case of trying to find a balance that optimises the strengths of our players without exposing their weaknesses too badly. I happen to think we made rather a good job of that on Tuesday

 

[Darthblade]

Hammond wasn't fantastic in possession but he generally isn't, it's not his job to be his job as a defensive midfielder is to shield the defence and keep it simple. Due to the lack of movement the only way he could keep it simple was by passing it sideways or backwards.

He'll get better with the more training sessions he gets.

It was notable that he looked "rusty" and not match fit, he also looked amazed that when he looked up whilst on the ball ( something he did do regularly ) our "statue like forwards" were giving him nothing to pass to; but he will also take time to get used to the staggeringly poor standard of refereeing at this level.

He was fouled several times and looked visibly astounded that the referee & linesmen were not even interested ....... this is something he must quickly adapt to !!
UTB & FTP

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Absolutely wholeheartedly agree with every word Bergen. Every team will have strengths and weaknesses as does every player. On Tuesday, we set up in such a way that we played 2 relatively defensive minded CMs to protect our back 4 and provide a platform for our attacking flair players to thrive. The sacrifices we had to make to do that was to lose some ball playing ability from midfield and some quality from set pieces was also lost with Done and JCR taking them. It meant we could fit 4 dangerous players who can make things happen into the team (Sharp, Adams, JCR and Done). The problem was that Done and JCR didn’t have great games but we still had enough largely because of good contributions from the full backs (which they might not have been able to provide without the cover from Basham and Hammond) and the threat in the box demonstrated by Sharp and Adams. 451/433 relies on more movement between the lines in midfield. 442 is more reliant on wing play and having 2 forwards in the box when crosses come in. People seem to want to grumble that our CMs aren’t defensively solid, ball playing midfielders who can also take people on and get box to box. We’re not going to get a Yaya Toure or Steven Gerrard at this level I’m afraid. It’s a case of trying to find a balance that optimises the strengths of our players without exposing their weaknesses too badly. I happen to think we made rather a good job of that on Tuesday

Great post.

 

[Grappler]

Movement and passing go hand in hand, and it's difficult to get things going if we're weak in either aspect. I don't think we had many phenomenal passers in the starting line up, and essentially not in central midfield.

We should be fair to Dean Hammond. Although he's come from the Premiership there's been nothing to suggest he'll be a great playmaker for us. In fact, fans of his previous clubs mention that as his weakness. There have been players in the past that have come from higher divisions and probably been expected to stand out. Players like Garry Flitcroft, Leon Britton, Paddy McCarthy did well at former clubs in certain roles, but all struggled to live up to expectations in a team that expected them to be good at things they weren't really good at.

The difference after Coutts came on was obvious. When he's in the mood, Coutts' touch, composure, vision and accuracy make opposition players struggle to get close to him. Fleetwood found out that when they tried hard, he'd just pass it on with his first touch and it was just a waste of energy. As they realised that, Coutts was given more time and space, and players started moving into space, not just coming short to help out because a teammate was in trouble. Coutts' playmaking meant we finally started get some flowing moves going.

But Coutts sometimes looks like he's 50 when he chases. In games, or roles, where he'll be required to cover a lot of space he'll be a potential liability. Adkins must agree with this, otherwise he wouldn't have kept trying to sign Hammond. Hammond looked rusty and not match fit, but despite us playing wingers and two strikers, he and Basham made sure that the opposition didn't run straight through us. In terms of protecting the back four, and getting away with the 4-4-2 formation Basham and Hammond could do well, but we'll have to see if we'll be able to play good attacking football and maintain our good scoring record.

I don't think Hammond or Basham had particularly good games, but they were effective in defending the back four. Hammond at the side of Basham means we have two six footers in the middle of the park, and so the ball launched over the top of midfield is almost eliminated as we have players who can win a 50/50 header. Both can be physical as well, something we have lacked.

At Oldham last year, when Poleon scored twice, the Oldham manager and coaching staff kept shouting "height!, height!" and pointing to our midfield (Scougall, Holt, Doyle), as if if say, "they can't win anything in the air in midfield, keep chipping the ball over", Hammond and Basham negate that option.