Near or Far post cross

[Bergen Blade]

I thought Burton were impressive defensively against us. They got behind the ball very quickly and were great at preventing counter attacks. Sharp and Sammon found it really difficult.

As we struggled to pass through them centrally I thought our best chance of scoring from open play may have been from a cross, although we didn't put in many good ones. On a couple of occasions we didn't make the most out of good crossing opportunities.

Postulate 1:

In a quick attack, cross early and to the first post.

Postulate 2:

In a long lasting attack, cross to the far post.


In this example the attack seems to go on and on down our right. It is clearly a situation for using postulate 2:



Defenders and goalkeepers often get pulled towards the ball on these occasions. The video shows that our big target man is marked by a 5'8 right back (stop at 17 secs) on the far post.



Postulate 3:

If the crosser gets close to the first post (into the box), consider a chipped cross to the far post.





We actually have three unmarked players (stop at 11 secs) at the back post in this situation. Coutts is probably trying to pick out Sammon, but his cross is too low (and unnecessarily driven).

 

[Fulwood Blade]

We actually have three unmarked players (stop at 11 secs) at the back post in this situation. Coutts is probably trying to pick out Sammon, but his cross is too low (and unnecessarily driven).

The problem for me is typical of thick footballers - no one makes a move across a defender. fans can have as much a go at keith Edwards as you like, but he would have made a run to the near post.

In that situation, Sammon being nearest to Coutts should have gone to the front, instead of being static - the defender(s) would have gone with him leaving two behind, one of which was Flynn in the middle.

We might actually score a few more if our players had a collective brain in their head and played "as a team" and created openings for others by being less selfish.

That type of actions sends me bonkers - thanks Bergs for the clip............bloody Adkins should play it to the players and bollock them.

UTB

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I thought Burton were impressive defensively against us. They got behind the ball very quickly and were great at preventing counter attacks. Sharp and Sammon found it really difficult.

As we struggled to pass through them centrally I thought our best chance of scoring from open play may have been from a cross, although we didn't put in many good ones. On a couple of occasions we didn't make the most out of good crossing opportunities.

Postulate 1:

In a quick attack, cross early and to the first post.

Postulate 2:

In a long lasting attack, cross to the far post.


In this example the attack seems to go on and on down our right. It is clearly a situation for using postulate 2:



Defenders and goalkeepers often get pulled towards the ball on these occasions. The video shows that our big target man is marked by a 5'8 right back (stop at 17 secs) on the far post.



Postulate 3:

If the crosser gets close to the first post (into the box), consider a chipped cross to the far post.





We actually have three unmarked players (stop at 11 secs) at the back post in this situation. Coutts is probably trying to pick out Sammon, but his cross is too low (and unnecessarily driven).

Thanks. As always.

It makes sense that the longer you have the ball, the more the opposition will be drawn to it, it's almost instinctive.

There's plenty to work on in football, and although there have been significant advances in analysing and playing the game - which have left some forum posters and Radio Sheffield pundits behind - I bet this post would be an insight to many coaches of professional teams.

Proposition: whenever possible the player crossing the ball should signal to the players in the box where he intends to cross: near, far, high, low, pulled back, driven.

Obviously if you've taken on your man and you're travelling at speed it's going to be hard but if you have time to set yourself then why not?

It's this sort of innovation I expected from the Americans as you could see it as combining elements of American Football and Baseball.

Great post again.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

I thought Burton were impressive defensively against us. They got behind the ball very quickly and were great at preventing counter attacks. Sharp and Sammon found it really difficult.

As we struggled to pass through them centrally I thought our best chance of scoring from open play may have been from a cross, although we didn't put in many good ones. On a couple of occasions we didn't make the most out of good crossing opportunities.

Postulate 1:

In a quick attack, cross early and to the first post.

Postulate 2:

In a long lasting attack, cross to the far post.


In this example the attack seems to go on and on down our right. It is clearly a situation for using postulate 2:



Defenders and goalkeepers often get pulled towards the ball on these occasions. The video shows that our big target man is marked by a 5'8 right back (stop at 17 secs) on the far post.



Postulate 3:

If the crosser gets close to the first post (into the box), consider a chipped cross to the far post.





We actually have three unmarked players (stop at 11 secs) at the back post in this situation. Coutts is probably trying to pick out Sammon, but his cross is too low (and unnecessarily driven).

Haven't heard that for ages, Bergs, made my night.

In terms of movement as a forward, the coaching follows the same thoughts. If it is a breakaway attack try and get across/in front of the defender. If the attack is more sustained go across then check back and find space behind. Simple game!

 

[cooperblade]

Just stuck "postulate" into Norwegian -> English in Google Translate and it's drawn a blank. Anyone help?

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Just stuck "postulate" into Norwegian -> English in Google Translate and it's drawn a blank. Anyone help?

<nerd>
Elementary error: it's Greek.
</nerd>

 

[boo radley]

Bergen Blade. You've given two examples of breakdown in an attack from crosses. What about the other crosses we had last night. Did they break down through wrong decision of where to place the cross or did the crosses go to the right area depending on the length of attack and attackers available.
In the second one it is clear that the choice should have been far post delivery but the crosser got this wrong. Whilst broadly speaking I agree about that it may depend on length of attack to aid decision, there are so many variables it has to be the decision of the one making delivery. Reflect on Saturday and the two great crosses for our 1st half goals. As you say maybe Burton are great when it comes to defending and Donny are not in that class?

 

[Bergen Blade]

Just stuck "postulate" into Norwegian -> English in Google Translate and it's drawn a blank. Anyone help?

pos·tu·late

Spoiler: It IS an English word!

(pŏs′chə-lāt′)
tr.v. pos·tu·lat·ed, pos·tu·lat·ing, pos·tu·lates
n. (pŏs′chə-lĭt, -lāt′)
1. Something assumed without proof as being self-evident or generally accepted, especially when used as a basis for an argument: "the postulate that there is little moral difference betweenthe superpowers" (Henry A. Kissinger).
2. A fundamental element; a basic principle.
3. Mathematics An axiom.
4. Archaic A requirement; a prerequisite.

Nils Arne Eggen used it when he managed Rosenborg, some general rules on what they agreed to do in certain situations.

 

[BushBlade]

Just stuck "postulate" into Norwegian -> English in Google Translate and it's drawn a blank. Anyone help?

Premise or hypothesis I think.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

pos·tu·late


Nils Arne Eggen used it when he managed Rosenborg, some general rules on what they agreed to do in certain situations.

Egge - "Arse Football"

Don't think him and Drillo ever agreed tactically

 

[robbiez666]

Proposition: whenever possible the player crossing the ball should signal to the players in the box where he intends to cross: near, far, high, low, pulled back, driven.

They shouldn't need signals, that's what they work on in training. The person should know where the forwards should be, and obviously look up if they get a chance to check. It's why sometimes it looks like a winger puts in a great pass to no one.

 

[Blade82]

These players are in league one for a reason. They don't do the things that would be done 9/10 times by premiership players. They're here because they have a mistake or two in them, make poor decisions and are too inconsistent to player at the highest level.

To get promotion you need to pick the best of a bad bunch and hope you pickup players who have potential and are on the up, who in a few years to come will be capable of playing higher, but are learning the game (reed, Adams etc) We have to be patient with them and the manager who can only work with what he has got.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Bergen Blade. You've given two examples of breakdown in an attack from crosses. What about the other crosses we had last night. Did they break down through wrong decision of where to place the cross or did the crosses go to the right area depending on the length of attack and attackers available.
In the second one it is clear that the choice should have been far post delivery but the crosser got this wrong. Whilst broadly speaking I agree about that it may depend on length of attack to aid decision, there are so many variables it has to be the decision of the one making delivery. Reflect on Saturday and the two great crosses for our 1st half goals. As you say maybe Burton are great when it comes to defending and Donny are not in that class?

To be fair to Basham he popped up on the other side second half (lengthy attack, cross from inside box) and tried doing exactly what I wanted, i.e. chipped it towards the far post, but it was slightly overhit and went over Sammon:



Regarding your comparison to the Doncaster goals, I think we've done well in all situations. The Doncaster goals were great, showing movement and good technique. But we have actually got into situations (in the OP) where sticking to some basic principles may have been enough to score. It wasn't really Burton's defending that stopped us.

I'm not unsure whether it was the execution, the vision or lack of pre-planned guidelines that saw the mentioned crosses cleared though.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Egge - "Arse Football"

Don't think him and Drillo ever agreed tactically

There were differences, but also more similarities than you'd think.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Premise or hypothesis I think.

Whooosh?

 

[AnonymousBlade1995]

I thought Burton were impressive defensively against us. They got behind the ball very quickly and were great at preventing counter attacks. Sharp and Sammon found it really difficult.

As we struggled to pass through them centrally I thought our best chance of scoring from open play may have been from a cross, although we didn't put in many good ones. On a couple of occasions we didn't make the most out of good crossing opportunities.

Postulate 1:

In a quick attack, cross early and to the first post.

Postulate 2:

In a long lasting attack, cross to the far post.


In this example the attack seems to go on and on down our right. It is clearly a situation for using postulate 2:



Defenders and goalkeepers often get pulled towards the ball on these occasions. The video shows that our big target man is marked by a 5'8 right back (stop at 17 secs) on the far post.



Postulate 3:

If the crosser gets close to the first post (into the box), consider a chipped cross to the far post.





We actually have three unmarked players (stop at 11 secs) at the back post in this situation. Coutts is probably trying to pick out Sammon, but his cross is too low (and unnecessarily driven).

can we make you manager or at least a coach please

 

[BushBlade]

Whooosh?

Probably.

 

[boo radley]

pos·tu·late

Spoiler: It IS an English word!

(pŏs′chə-lāt′)
tr.v. pos·tu·lat·ed, pos·tu·lat·ing, pos·tu·lates
n. (pŏs′chə-lĭt, -lāt′)
1. Something assumed without proof as being self-evident or generally accepted, especially when used as a basis for an argument: "the postulate that there is little moral difference betweenthe superpowers" (Henry A. Kissinger).
2. A fundamental element; a basic principle.
3. Mathematics An axiom.
4. Archaic A requirement; a prerequisite.

Nils Arne Eggen used it when he managed Rosenborg, some general rules on what they agreed to do in certain situations.

It may be Cros-tu-late in this case.

 

[Silent Blade]

To be fair to Basham he popped up on the other side second half (lengthy attack, cross from inside box) and tried doing exactly what I wanted, i.e. chipped it towards the far post, but it was slightly overhit and went over Sammon:

View attachment 13722

I remember this incident. Sammon wanted to push his marker rather than trying to time his leap to head the ball. The ref awarded a foul for Burton and I was annoyed with Sammon for concentrating on pushing his marker!

 

[BushBlade]

It may be Cros-tu-late in this case.

I get that one.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

There were differences, but also more similarities than you'd think.

I'd love to sit in on that conversation. Two of Europe's greatest coaches discussing total football, the direct pressing game and the tactical nuances of it all.

 

[sitwell]

I cant stand how the pigs manager keeps dropping 'dynamic' in his stupid wanky accent into every sentence. Does my nut in.

 

[Bergen Blade]

I remember this incident. Sammon wanted to push his marker rather than trying to time his leap to head the ball. The ref awarded a foul for Burton and I was annoyed with Sammon for concentrating on pushing his marker!

That was actually a different situation, but very similar. I think it did show Sammon's limitation in the air. Derby fans said the same. Is it something we can teach him? Can you remember any of our players improving dramatically in the air?

I felt Higdon never won enough straight balls, but his heading technique from crosses was good, as shown by his goal for Oldham against Port Vale:

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

That was actually a different situation, but very similar. I think it did show Sammon's limitation in the air. Derby fans said the same. Is it something we can teach him? Can you remember any of our players improving dramatically in the air?

I felt Higdon never won enough straight balls, but his heading technique from crosses was good, as shown by his goal for Oldham against Port Vale:

In my experience, strikers/centre forwards can be split into two groups. Those who can play facing goal and those who can play with their back to goal. Same applies with the heading, with a few notable exceptions who could do both.

 

[Bergen Blade]

In my experience, strikers/centre forwards can be split into two groups. Those who can play facing goal and those who can play with their back to goal. Same applies with the heading, with a few notable exceptions who could do both.

Beattie? Henderson on good days? Hulse?

Chief was excellent at winning flick ons (didn't have to jump, just stood where the ball fell down with the centre halves unable to move him), but I can't recall many powerful headed goals. D'Jaffo and Porter also won many flick ons, but only occasionally looked a threat from crosses.

Ashley Ward, Andy Gray, Carl Asaba, Marcus Bent, Richard Cresswell, Iffy Onuora.. don't think any of them were great in the air, and Sammon so far looks like falling into this category.

 

[SwissBlade]

Bergen Blade i think in this case, it's been over analysed, for me it's more simple. I've said it for a number of years, since the season before Ched got his 30+ goals if memory serves correct. The connection just isn't there yet. It's simply about putting the ball where the striker wants it.

I thought on Saturday that we were starting to 'get it'. Basham getting on the end of a cracking cross in a bully sharp/ Marc McNulty position, at the front post. Connor Sammon getting in on a Connor Sammon position for the second.

What I mean is that the strikers should be telling the wingers and fullbacks where want the ball, we were sharp and smarter than Donny on Saturday, we anticipated where the wingers would put the ball.

I always believe that intelligent strikers should always dictate where they want the ball, Sharp for example is smart enough to hit that front post at the right time, he has the speed of thought which is enough to steal a yard on his marker. McNulty, I don't think, has this natural intelligence to anticipate so he has to work harder to learn. Playing with Sharp will help. Ched was similar to Sharp, he made the smart runs, but they often weren't noticed or he was being forced to make runs and chase the game.

Sammon for me is more of a back post player, he's got the height for the floated balls but can also hit the low crosses, like Saturday and his astounding miss the other week v Blackpool

The joy of this is that when we switch to a front three with Che Adams it causes confusion, but also when Sharp and Sammon break from the predictability and swap, Billy's goal v Bradford for example. The ball came from deep, but Billy made the run from what would've been the far post

 

[BushBlade]

Beattie? Henderson on good days? Hulse?

Chief was excellent at winning flick ons (didn't have to jump, just stood where the ball fell down with the centre halves unable to move him), but I can't recall many powerful headed goals. D'Jaffo and Porter also won many flick ons, but only occasionally looked a threat from crosses.

Ashley Ward, Andy Gray, Carl Asaba, Marcus Bent, Richard Cresswell, Iffy Onuora.. don't think any of them were great in the air, and Sammon so far looks like falling into this category.

Sir Brian of Deane.

 

[Silent Blade]

That was actually a different situation, but very similar. I think it did show Sammon's limitation in the air. Derby fans said the same. Is it something we can teach him? Can you remember any of our players improving dramatically in the air?

IQUOTE]

No, I cannot think of any of our players who have improved dramatically in the air but I get annoyed when someone who is tall but cannot time his headers right. We had players who arent tall but were excellent in winning the balls in the air. My dad tells me a lot about Doc Pace and Joe Shaw, I remember John Tudor and Ian Bryson were good at attacking crosses despite not being tall and at present we have Terry Kennedy who is not tall but good in the air. Lou Macari was very good in the air for Man U despite being only 5 foot 6. I remember reading in Alan Birchenall's autobiography that Dave Sexton told him to be as late as possible when making your leap to head the ball and Alan said that helped him a lot.

In the last 45 years I have followed the Blades there are two of our players who were stronger in the air than Brian Deane, they were Gareth Taylor and Paul McGrath

 

[Bergen Blade]

Bergen Blade i think in this case, it's been over analysed, for me it's more simple. I've said it for a number of years, since the season before Ched got his 30+ goals if memory serves correct. The connection just isn't there yet. It's simply about putting the ball where the striker wants it.

I thought on Saturday that we were starting to 'get it'. Basham getting on the end of a cracking cross in a bully sharp/ Marc McNulty position, at the front post. Connor Sammon getting in on a Connor Sammon position for the second.

What I mean is that the strikers should be telling the wingers and fullbacks where want the ball, we were sharp and smarter than Donny on Saturday, we anticipated where the wingers would put the ball.

I always believe that intelligent strikers should always dictate where they want the ball, Sharp for example is smart enough to hit that front post at the right time, he has the speed of thought which is enough to steal a yard on his marker. McNulty, I don't think, has this natural intelligence to anticipate so he has to work harder to learn. Playing with Sharp will help. Ched was similar to Sharp, he made the smart runs, but they often weren't noticed or he was being forced to make runs and chase the game.

Sammon for me is more of a back post player, he's got the height for the floated balls but can also hit the low crosses, like Saturday and his astounding miss the other week v Blackpool

The joy of this is that when we switch to a front three with Che Adams it causes confusion, but also when Sharp and Sammon break from the predictability and swap, Billy's goal v Bradford for example. The ball came from deep, but Billy made the run from what would've been the far post

Overanalysed? In the first situation, for me it's just an observation that the attack has gone on down one side for a long time, coupled with the statistical knowledge that this tend to draw defenders towards the ball, meaning they're often vulnerable at the far post.

In the second situation, it's Coutts proximity to the first post that pulls the defenders + goalkeeper towards him, again meaning they tend to be vulnerable at the far post.

These are very simple guidelines that can aid decision making.

In all crossing situations it's vital that there's movement in the box and we need more than one target. As I see it the Doncaster goals weren't just Basham/Sammon anticipating where the crosses would be put, there was decent movement that made it difficult for Doncaster. Watch how those two makes runs for each other's goals, forcing Butler to run along with them, effectively taking him out of the vital area in front of goal:

 

[secretchief]

A basic point but I notice all these examples are from the right, as were the Donny goals (and most of the wing play at the Donny game, I wasn't at the Burton game).

This gives the lie to the idea that Flynn has been worthwhile on the left, when in fact he was very subdued indeed, in attacking terms against Doncaster.

How about having attacking players on both flanks?