GoalWatch - our defending vs Doncaster

[Bergen Blade]

0-1: After some ping pong in our half, Shiels runs in behind our midfield, and plays a through ball to Hayter. His shot is deflected off Walker and beats Bunn.

Quinn gets caught in noman’s land, and when Monty is held off by Woods, Shiels can run unchallenged at our defence. Morgan steps out of the backline to close him down, but while Davies pushes up, Walker runs back, which means Hayter is onside and one on one with the gk.

Who is right? This is not clear cut, but as long as Walker and Davies doesn’t do the same we are making an organisational mistake. From what I’ve seen Walker struggles with the offside trap, being unsure of when to push up and when to drop down. His phenomenal pace sometimes sees him making last ditch tackles, but if our defensive organisation was better, maybe he wouldn’t have to.

A general rule:

• If the man on the ball is poorly closed down – drop back.
  
• If the man on the ball is well closed down – the defence can collectively push up, but they should be forming a straight line.

For me – Shiels has such a free run that it’s too risky to push up. If Walker had also pushed up there’s a chance that Shiels could have played his through ball a touch earlier, which could have meant Hayter could still have been onside.

Conclusion: I would have liked Davies, along with Walker, to drop back behind Morgan and cut off Hayter’s run.

 

[yorkshirecoast]

For me it was the few seconds before Shiels got the ball that put us in trouble. Walker had a simple chance to head clear but totally mistimed his header presenting Donny with the chance to break.

 

[Micalijo]

Good stuff Bergen. Totally agree. I think Davies was trying to play the off-side but very dangerous in that type of situation.

You won't have seen it but literally straight from kick-off, Donny got into a very similar great postion down our inside right flank and again it was to me a total lack of organisation. The move reminded me of Ipswich's second last week. Very weak shot was the result straight at Bunn.

 

[raul]

Bergo, the names of Quinn and Monty keep cropping up in your analysis. Is it lack of understanding of their roles or just lack of ability to carry them out?

 

[Sensiblade]

Bergo, the names of Quinn and Monty keep cropping up in your analysis. Is it lack of understanding of their roles or just lack of ability to carry them out?

Walker, Morgan & Davies are also mentioned why only pick out Quinn & Monty?

 

[raul]

Because they stick in my mind from previous Goalwatch posts is all.

 

[Sensiblade]

Because they stick in my mind from previous Goalwatch posts is all.

I'm pretty sure Morgan & Walker at least will have been mentioned in the previous ones.

 

[raul]

Bergo, you keep mentioning Morgan and Walker in your analysis. Do you think it's a lack of understanding of their roles or lack of ability to carry them out?

 

[Sensiblade]

bergo, you keep mentioning morgan and walker in your analysis. Do you think it's a lack of understanding of their roles or lack of ability to carry them out?

lmao

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Morgan steps out of the backline to close him down, but while Davies pushes up, Walker runs back, which means Hayter is onside and one on one with the gk.

From my view on the Kop, Morgan looked as though he was nutmegged. It wasn't a particularly great attempt at a block from Walker, Bunn seemed to commit himself a little too early, Davies seemed to be standing by doing nothing, and then we have the issue of how the ball was lost in the first place - put simply, the blame can be shared round those mentioned. It's infuriating that it was such an simple goal to defend against, especially given the numbers we had back.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Bergo, the names of Quinn and Monty keep cropping up in your analysis. Is it lack of understanding of their roles or just lack of ability to carry them out?

For me a few of our goals have happened because we have nobody covering when a player loses his man. I don't quite know what Blackwell tells his players though.

A typical example was the build up before Ipswich's second goal (see photo). Monty (red) was closing down Leadbitter (also red), who played a 1-2 and ran in behind him. Monty couldn't reach him and there was nobody covering the space behind him.


Harper (blue line) was maybe in a position where he could have stepped in, but he was possibly more focused on his man (also blue). When does he decide he'll have to leave his man and help out Monty?

This is the problem with the man marking system. Our players are told who to mark/close down and whose runs to track (colour lines). If one player slips up, we are in trouble. I can't say for certain this is Blackwell's instructions, but we do seem VERY man marking orientated.


I think this system has strengths too, and especially if we can be a bit more up for it, a bit more aggressive, a bit stronger, we can restrict the opposition quite effectively. The likes of Monty and Quinn are normally very good at doing their defensive roles, and I don't think replacing them, while keeping the same system, would lead to fewer goals conceded, probably quite the opposite.

But if the opposition match us in those departments (aggression, strength etc) and have some clever movement I don't think they have to be world beaters to cause us problems.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

The key passage of play in the piece is about 3 seconds earlier. Monty is all over the place without an ipswich player within 10 yards of him.

Love the guy, but sometimes his all action play leaves us a bit exposed in the middle, especially if partnered with a player that doesn't have the same drive as he does(harper, Howard, Tonge etc)

I really don't see the point of a midfield of monty harper quinn and A.Winger.

Harper isn't a midfield battler, quinn isn't a winger. Better to have two terriers in the middle and then two quick wingers providing multiple attacking options, if our style of play means creating from the wings.

The selection of quinn by blackwell i think is recognition that we have a gaping defensive hole left by Naysmiths injury. But sod that. Instead of playing two players in positions that aren't suited to our current style of play (Quinn and Harper), move Quinn back in the middle, drop the 'creative' CM, and play two pacy wingers.

Edit: i should also add that Harper does not do a good job of closing the midfielder on the ball down, so maybe it's not all monty's fault.

 

[iggle-theblade]

0-1: After some ping pong in our half, Shiels runs in behind our midfield, and plays a through ball to Hayter. His shot is deflected off Walker and beats Bunn.

Quinn gets caught in noman’s land, and when Monty is held off by Woods, Shiels can run unchallenged at our defence. Morgan steps out of the backline to close him down, but while Davies pushes up, Walker runs back, which means Hayter is onside and one on one with the gk.

Who is right? This is not clear cut, but as long as Walker and Davies doesn’t do the same we are making an organisational mistake. From what I’ve seen Walker struggles with the offside trap, being unsure of when to push up and when to drop down. His phenomenal pace sometimes sees him making last ditch tackles, but if our defensive organisation was better, maybe he wouldn’t have to.

A general rule:

• If the man on the ball is poorly closed down – drop back.
  
• If the man on the ball is well closed down – the defence can collectively push up, but they should be forming a straight line.

For me – Shiels has such a free run that it’s too risky to push up. If Walker had also pushed up there’s a chance that Shiels could have played his through ball a touch earlier, which could have meant Hayter could still have been onside.

Conclusion: I would have liked Davies, along with Walker, to drop back behind Morgan and cut off Hayter’s run.

Looking at that still Davies should be cutting off Hayters run and Walker keeping an eye on the winger incase the ball is played to him.
Davies seems to be a bit off the pace but he has only had just over a week to work with the team.

 

[Robbie]

If we're only looking at the final analysis then Davies is at fault.

Walkers man is the left winger, and Davies should be covering Morgan. As Davies hasn't covered Morga - Walker has attempted to do this instead.

 

[Ollessendro]

Has anyone got access to the highlights? I looked on the BBC website but it's out of date. I was away last week and can't make much of a judgement without seeing the clip.

Thanks for this again though Bergen.

I'm not sure that we can single Davies out for the whle offside thing. From the pictures and debate it seems that he should have been covering Hayter, but there could be more to it than that. It depends on what Davies and Walker have said to each other (and the rest of th defence). Whenever I played centre half (my actual position) I always used to make it very clear that my full backs should always be infront of me. If I caught a full back (barring exceptional circumstances) behind me I would play hell up with him. Having them a yard infront of me meant I could step out and ay the striker off if necessary. However, this is a risky game. And I guess that the instructor has to take responsibility (so maybe I am talking myself out of this and saying it could be Davies fault!?) although he should be giving the full back a right ear bashing!!?