issues from Fulham

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Wards said:
Main issue for me is that we seem to treat the ball like a hot potato and so reluctant to keep possession. The players are capable of doing so but we look so scared to take it (or so scared of losing it) that's it's hampering everything we do. Until we address this we'll struggle to get control in any game this season.
Click to expand...
The lack of movement by our players (too afraid to take responsibility? Worried in case they mess up?) means that there's often no easy "out" ball. Far too many stationary players, especially midfielders, ball watching.

Watch the top teams and see how their players are constantly trying to make space and pull opposition defenders out of place.

We've got to get back to dynamic triangles of players, rather than a simple backpass, leaving us in a worse position than before.

Fulham's 1st goal was a perfect example, of how with a few simple passes, they extract themselves from a tricky defensive position deep in their own half, and can then break away (and score).
 

Watching Saturday's game made me realise how much better we looked last season when Doyle came into the team in Norwood's role. Not only is he far more athletic, but we can actually build out from the back because he's much better at receiving the ball from the defence than Norwood is. I would much rather us have resigned Doyle than McAtee.

As it is we have to throw Slimane in there somehow, because he looks like our most athletic midfielder. We just get overrun in there.
 
Bergen Blade said:
The midfield (I'll focus primarily on Souza and Norwood) is struggling to keep up with the pace and movement of PL midfielders and the defence becomes too exposed.

1st goal. Fulham plays through our high pressure and plays it up to their striker. As their runners bomb into space our midfielders are not in a position to help out and they certainly can't track them:
View attachment 172713


2nd goal: Archer loses the ball and our midfielders are not in a position to rescue him:

View attachment 172714

3rd goal, Willian picks up Trusty's half clearance. Our midfielders are both on their heels, too far apart and can't stop him running across our box and shooting:
View attachment 172715

Our defenders are not amazing. They need a great deal of help from the players in front of them and at the moment the protection, the shield, is lacking too often.
Click to expand...

Any hope i had for saturday evaporated the minute I saw Norwoods name on the team-sheet.

The midfield is awful and is our biggest problem by a mile....the biggest shock for me on Saturday was that Hecky didn't bring Fleck on....

He's got to go, jobs too big for him.
 
wadblade said:
We were terrible yesterday and I am more depressed than after Newcastle

Points raised in no particular order

1/ Trusty looked OK you have to question why PH would not play him before

2/ the first goal why did we get outnumbered in our own box. Even when we played overlapping CB’s we were never that exposed. I know it was a new cobbled together back 3 but still not good enough

3/ second goal Archer trying to be clever gets caught in possession rather than passing just outside our own box!!! This was immediately after McBurnie was booked for doing the same thing and that nearly led to a goal

4/ Archer not doing it , we may as well play Brewster/ Traore and develop our own players. Seriously if we can get our money back in January we should seriously consider

5/ Mid field not good enough it needs a rethink I would consider moving Hamer or McAtee to behind the striker

6/ McBurnie was he injured because he was a shadow of the play who played v ManC and Everton

7/ best wishes to Bash

8/ The only positive I can take this weekends results leave us no further adrift,

UTB
Click to expand...
Point 6.

This seasons purple patch may very well stop and start with the 120 minutes you mention.
Remains a HUGE part of our problem for all the reasons as before.

Time for a rethink on our entire offensive strategy that does not involve him except perhaps the occasional cameo off the bench.

Osula, Traore, Brew and Jebbo when available all offer significantly more. Albeit not as good at defensive headers, if that remains a key ingredient for your number 9 !

UTB
 
Champagneblade said:
Options running low.

G: Wes, Davies
RWB: Bogle
LWB: Thomas, Larouci
CB: Anel, Trusty, Robinson
CM: Slimane, Hamer, Souza, Norwood, Fleck, McAtee
CF: McBurnie, Archer, Brewster, Traore

Should make selection easier!

I’d be looking as I mention on a recent post at 5-4-1.

Just a question of what midfield you can fashion there. Norwood and Souza deeper and Hamer and McAtee further forward in support of a lone McBurnie? Slimane and Fleck as Fresh legs and a few quick options on the bench if needed?

As some have mentioned, you could consider Larouci in there if you went for a wide 4. Him and Macca out wide and Hamer and Souza or Norwood central?
Click to expand...
We all know it’s only a matter of time until another 2 or 3 out of that lot are injured in training. Bash was just cruel luck, but Tom Davies after all the others … ridiculous.
 
Balham Blade said:
Loving the analysis as ever Bergen Blade

One more thing from that first photo is the sheer naivety of our defending. You highlight Norwood and Souza but for me the issue is that Ahmedhodzic has gone attacking but we've not compensated for that. Trusty is challenging Vinícius but for me that should be Robinson with Trusty further across to guard against Pereira's run. Thomas should be goalside of De Cordova-Reid who ends up exploiting the enormous gaps and scoring past the exposed Foderingham.

I would also have loved to see Vinícius on the receiving end of a Robinson reducer.

Excuse the Paint editing of the screengrab...

View attachment 172748

Rather than
View attachment 172749
Click to expand...

We'd had a throw in high up the pitch so AA was up to take that. Norwood and Souza swapped sides momentarily, probably as those situations can give us the chance to pass back to Norwood with him crossing unchallenged. But that didn't happen and after some neat passing Fulham had got past AA, Archer and Bogle, meaning this was the situation:

1696863338876.png

As can be seen here we've got six players in the picture, so it's clear that we saw the opportunity to create something from this throw in. But everything has to be done with some balance and you always have to plan ahead in case you lose the ball and the opposition launch a counter attack.

It's been termed as "Attacking marking", though there may be a better English expression. Even if a team is attacking, some players (defensive midfielders are often key) have to anticipate where to be, and how to interfere in case the opposition breaks.

So agree, in terms of positioning, Souza should probably have taken up a deeper position. The fact that he didn't, may have something to do with...

a) him being played as a RCM, an 8, in this game. He had slightly more grass to cover. Mentally his defensive mindset may have not been fully switched on. Or...
b) him and Norwood momentarily swapping positions as a potentially attacking move for the throw in. Things like that can lead to small organisational confusion.

So that's poor anticipation. But both him and Norwood also show mediocre reaction to danger as soon as we lose the ball. Norwood is with the soon to be assist-maker in the photo above, but foolishly steps ahead of him, achieving two things:

1) Giving Pereira a head start
2) Avoiding the humiliation of being left for dead in a straight sprint
 
ATL Recs said:
YES we did it last season -clearing our lines, so to speak leaving one target man and constantly looking for him bypassing midfield yes they are being told to do that -
Click to expand...
Looking for a target man with a long ball is not the same thing as booting the ball anywhere.
I’m not disputing the fact that we’ve done a lot of aimless hoofing of the ball over the past couple of seasons, but I think it’s largely through desperation, not design. I’m challenging the assertion that it’s part of an intended plan.

Picture the scene at Shirecliffe.... McCall turns up with a huge bag of footballs - “ right lads, we’re going to practice booting the ball anywhere - not you Ollie Norwood, you’ve got your one to one coaching on how to hit the first defender at corners..”
 
Sheffsteel said:
Agree...for me that is football basics.

From day 1 if I was manager I'd be practising keep short passing/ keep possession drills.
Obviously Hecky doesn't mind the players booting it long straight back to the opposition.

When we were defending a lead....we often did the same last season.
Parking the bus having numbers back and booting it anywhere to clear it.
So it shouldn't be a surprise that we lack any composure.
Hecky doesn't think it's important so he doesn't think it's a problem, that's why I question Hecky's competence.
Click to expand...
How do you know Hecky doesn’t think it’s important?
 
Bergen Blade said:
We'd had a throw in high up the pitch so AA was up to take that. Norwood and Souza swapped sides momentarily, probably as those situations can give us the chance to pass back to Norwood with him crossing unchallenged. But that didn't happen and after some neat passing Fulham had got past AA, Archer and Bogle, meaning this was the situation:

View attachment 172753

As can be seen here we've got six players in the picture, so it's clear that we saw the opportunity to create something from this throw in. But everything has to be done with some balance and you always have to plan ahead in case you lose the ball and the opposition launch a counter attack.

It's been termed as "Attacking marking", though there may be a better English expression. Even if a team is attacking, some players (defensive midfielders are often key) have to anticipate where to be, and how to interfere in case the opposition breaks.

So agree, in terms of positioning, Souza should probably have taken up a deeper position. The fact that he didn't, may have something to do with...

a) him being played as a RCM, an 8, in this game. He had slightly more grass to cover. Mentally his defensive mindset may have not been fully switched on. Or...
b) him and Norwood momentarily swapping positions as a potentially attacking move for the throw in. Things like that can lead to small organisational confusion.

So that's poor anticipation. But both him and Norwood also show mediocre reaction to danger as soon as we lose the ball. Norwood is with the soon to be assist-maker in the photo above, but foolishly steps ahead of him, achieving two things:

1) Giving Pereira a head start
2) Avoiding the humiliation of being left for dead in a straight sprint
Click to expand...
I agree...but none of this goes against my assertion that our defenders' organisation and positioning was all wrong 😊
 
Everyone in the stadium can see it yet again yet the management does not/will not change.

The central midfield lacks legs and running, and the current formation is making the wing backs so exposed all the time with this personel.

We need to shift to a 4 in the middle and get some pace in there too. Drop Hamer deeper and get Macca and Slimane in wide positions.
 
Bergen Blade said:
We'd had a throw in high up the pitch so AA was up to take that. Norwood and Souza swapped sides momentarily, probably as those situations can give us the chance to pass back to Norwood with him crossing unchallenged. But that didn't happen and after some neat passing Fulham had got past AA, Archer and Bogle, meaning this was the situation:

View attachment 172753

As can be seen here we've got six players in the picture, so it's clear that we saw the opportunity to create something from this throw in. But everything has to be done with some balance and you always have to plan ahead in case you lose the ball and the opposition launch a counter attack.

It's been termed as "Attacking marking", though there may be a better English expression. Even if a team is attacking, some players (defensive midfielders are often key) have to anticipate where to be, and how to interfere in case the opposition breaks.

So agree, in terms of positioning, Souza should probably have taken up a deeper position. The fact that he didn't, may have something to do with...

a) him being played as a RCM, an 8, in this game. He had slightly more grass to cover. Mentally his defensive mindset may have not been fully switched on. Or...
b) him and Norwood momentarily swapping positions as a potentially attacking move for the throw in. Things like that can lead to small organisational confusion.

So that's poor anticipation. But both him and Norwood also show mediocre reaction to danger as soon as we lose the ball. Norwood is with the soon to be assist-maker in the photo above, but foolishly steps ahead of him, achieving two things:

1) Giving Pereira a head start
2) Avoiding the humiliation of being left for dead in a straight sprint
Click to expand...

But if Norwood had got the ball it would have resulted in him blindly clipping one of those aimless balls over the defender that goes straight out of play 9 times out of 10.....rinse and repeat....we haven't got a clue how to link defence to midfield and midfield to attack which is why we end up punting long to Oli Mac who didn't win a header all game against Ream and ended up going out to the wing to receive the long ball so that he could challenge the shorter Robinson....who is exceptional in the air for a smaller player and still beat him on most occasions.

Tactics and positional play are piss poor and that is solely down to the coaching staff and Manager. Lack of effort is down to the players and unfortunately we have got both in spades at the moment....
 

Bergen Blade said:
Hope the management are keeping an open mind about what's possible to do with the squad.
Click to expand...
Only thing they're wondering is who is our next available centre half if one of those 3 goes down. No way he goes to a back 4 after the Newcastle game, although that was a last minute daft decision with bad personnel for a back 4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom