Coolblade
Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2015
- Messages
- 250
- Reaction score
- 1,555
A few observations from the stats:
Team Observations;
McGuinness delivered a high volume of clearances (12) and strong aerial command, but his positioning for the opening goal and weakness for the second were catastrophic. Tanganga put in a defensive shift with 11 clearances and 5 aerials won, though a caution and one misjudged flight detracted from his score.
Set-Plays: WBA earned 8 corners to our 4. Cooper never looked confortable.
Midfield: The lack of central compactness allowed WBA to exploit the spaces between the lines: While the pivot's ball-winning was occasionally ok (Soumaré 3 tackles, Hamer 2 tackles and 2 interceptions), the lack of compactness allowed Grant and Price to drift into half-spaces, leaving the edge of the box vulnerable for the second goal.
Distribution & Turnover: The overall team pass accuracy was 75.9% v 78.1% but when while we moved the ball forward plenty (168 forward passes v WBA 151), the central tempo was lost when WBA raised the press.
Forwards: Forward players struggled with distribution accuracy, indicating turnovers in dangerous areas:, especially Bamford with very low pass accuracy of 35.7% indicating frequent failed hold-up or distribution. Campbell was top of key passes with 3 (next best Burrows with 2). Cannon attempted 3 passes, with 1 successful.
Creativity & Chance Construction: The reliance on wide play limited the creation of high-value central chances. We registered 11 shots (4 on target) compared to WBA's 16 (5 on target). Our shot accuracy was 36.4% v WBA 31.3%, but WBA’s chances were higher value, as reflected in the xG. WBA’s compact 4-2-3-1 successfully squeezed the middle, forcing United to cross. United attempted 24 crosses, only 7 successful, which yielded limited high-value outcomes.
Strategy:The rapid line depth increase after the 50th minute stretched the team and exposed the FB–CB seams and the zone atop the box. A key focus is holding a narrower weak-side full-back and a staggered pivot to contest second phases. The lack of a deep playmaker meant the team defaulted to wide progression. Perhaps we need to consider rotating Hamer inward earlier, or deploying Arblaster sooner, to help the central buildup.
We showed enough possession and box presence to stay competitive, but WBA’s ability to generate higher-value chances and the lack of line/spacing management after the 50th minute proved decisive.
We got what we deserved. Nothing
UTB
Team Observations;
- Shape & Approach: Wilder set up in a flexible 4–4–2 / 4–2–2–2 structure in possession. Hamer was nominally on the left but had license to roam, while Soumaré and Riedewald formed the double pivot behind the strike partnership of Bamford and Campbell. Out of possession, we aimed for a compact mid-block, triggering the press on poor WBA touches or square passes.
- Chance Quality (xG): WBA created the significantly better moments with xG 2.53 v 1.05. Our best chances were generated in transition rather than sustained pressure. WBA also edged the Expected Assists (xA), 1.35 v 1.23.
- Territorial Balance: We actually edged the overall possession (approximately 51%) and recorded more final third touches inside the opposition box (27 to 24). Passing volume was similar (436 vs. 392). However, West Brom successfully restricted United to the outside lanes, forcing weak crosses instead of central combinations.
McGuinness delivered a high volume of clearances (12) and strong aerial command, but his positioning for the opening goal and weakness for the second were catastrophic. Tanganga put in a defensive shift with 11 clearances and 5 aerials won, though a caution and one misjudged flight detracted from his score.
Set-Plays: WBA earned 8 corners to our 4. Cooper never looked confortable.
Midfield: The lack of central compactness allowed WBA to exploit the spaces between the lines: While the pivot's ball-winning was occasionally ok (Soumaré 3 tackles, Hamer 2 tackles and 2 interceptions), the lack of compactness allowed Grant and Price to drift into half-spaces, leaving the edge of the box vulnerable for the second goal.
Distribution & Turnover: The overall team pass accuracy was 75.9% v 78.1% but when while we moved the ball forward plenty (168 forward passes v WBA 151), the central tempo was lost when WBA raised the press.
Forwards: Forward players struggled with distribution accuracy, indicating turnovers in dangerous areas:, especially Bamford with very low pass accuracy of 35.7% indicating frequent failed hold-up or distribution. Campbell was top of key passes with 3 (next best Burrows with 2). Cannon attempted 3 passes, with 1 successful.
Creativity & Chance Construction: The reliance on wide play limited the creation of high-value central chances. We registered 11 shots (4 on target) compared to WBA's 16 (5 on target). Our shot accuracy was 36.4% v WBA 31.3%, but WBA’s chances were higher value, as reflected in the xG. WBA’s compact 4-2-3-1 successfully squeezed the middle, forcing United to cross. United attempted 24 crosses, only 7 successful, which yielded limited high-value outcomes.
Strategy:The rapid line depth increase after the 50th minute stretched the team and exposed the FB–CB seams and the zone atop the box. A key focus is holding a narrower weak-side full-back and a staggered pivot to contest second phases. The lack of a deep playmaker meant the team defaulted to wide progression. Perhaps we need to consider rotating Hamer inward earlier, or deploying Arblaster sooner, to help the central buildup.
We showed enough possession and box presence to stay competitive, but WBA’s ability to generate higher-value chances and the lack of line/spacing management after the 50th minute proved decisive.
We got what we deserved. Nothing
UTB
What is the fucking point of posts like this? XG this, rapid line depth that? This is just a ‘look at me post’ just a load of modern day footballing bullshit that means absolutely nothing to the average fan.
