Our inability to set up properly for big games

[bluegaz13]

Having started this thread .....and reading some really interesting and articulate replies (especially from Dax even though I don't agree with his staunch defence of Pellegrini).....however taking on his point about the goals conceded were not due to the set up, let's not forget in the games against Leicester and Liverpool that they both missed a large number of pretty easy chances on the break that could have doubled the score on both occasions.
last week at Sunderland we again started with 2 in midfield....at half time he made the change to bring another midfielder on because we were being out numbered ( I presume) then started the second half with Yaya as an out and out forward.....guess what we still only had 2 in midfield !!
I agree with Dax that the players have made errors that have undermined the formation...........but the same players keep making the same mistakes....surely it is Pellegrini s job to either sort it out or change the players !
When we won the league 2 seasons ago, we nearly always use to score very early and force teams to come out and then batter them.. Arsenal, Spurs twice etc...........however even then we looked vulnerable at the back, but could nearly always out score teams.......we have lost that ability and I'm afraid haven't got an alternative.
The Delphi experiment of starting out on the left wing has not worked in previous matches..........so why was it going to work on Saturday !
As has been mentioned we haven't really played well in many game after the first five games.......Seville and Everton last week apart..........but I have not seen the evidence the Pellegrini was trying to change this or do something different !

 

[fergal_oc]

Sevilla v City:
Hart, Sagna, Kompany, Otamendi, Kolarov, Fernando, Toure, Fernandinho, Jesus Navas, Sterling, Bony


Villa v City:
Caballero, Zabaleta, Otamendi, Sagna, Clichy, Fernando, Delph, Fernandinho, Navas, Sterling, Iheanacho

You see it's quite easy. Outside of Sagna, every player there is being played in their preferred position even Fernandinho who has played as an advanced midfielder before he came to us albeit it he's as comfortable in central midfield.

What we usually get is Manuel picking his best 11 players and trying to get them to fit the positions available instead of picking the best player available to fill the positions for the formation he's chosen, hence 'Sqaure Pegs in Round Holes'.

Is that clear enough?

Spot on although both those times feel like they came from injury based necessity than a conscious decision which is why I thank you for the kleenex

 

[birchwoodgingerste]

pellers likes to create lots of chances outscoring the opposition hence both zabba and kolorov because we had no navas we were to poen .got to be sagna and ott with zabba and clichy fullbacks and two ferns in middle mak us more solid

 

[Dribble]

Spot on although both those times feel like they came from injury based necessity than a conscious decision which is why I thank you for the kleenex

Lol..............

And this is my point exactly, both line-ups seem to be mostly forced through injury than Pellegrini actually opting for this as his best option. It was even more surprising because he had KDB on the bench when I would have been willing to place a wager that he'd start.

This is similar to two other away performances whereby injury forced change and excellent displays followed against Bayern and Roma. Keep the Kleenex handy for when Pep arrives, you'll hopefully be able to use them for more than cleaning up your tears! :-)

 

[Dribble]

pellers likes to create lots of chances outscoring the opposition hence both zabba and kolorov because we had no navas we were to poen .got to be sagna and ott with zabba and clichy fullbacks and two ferns in middle mak us more solid

Eh??????

 

[Dax777]

Dax777 - I have read a few of your posts today on this thread, and you bang on about facts.

The issue with Pellegrini is that he is the one in charge of setting the game plan up for our players before a game. Take Sterling as an example, he was purchased for his ability to break at speed, and take a opposing RB to the by-line, sometimes beating that player and scoring - like he was doing for Liverpool.

Now at the moment if you actually watch Sterling, he will mostly receive the ball, run towards the opposing box but will then stop and wait for Kolarov to over-lap him, if that isn't on then he will pass the ball inside to the next available player. He is being told what to do due to the style of play he is being asked by the manager. The problem with this is that it is way too easy for the opposition to read because they can predict what movement is going to take place

You will get no arguments from me O the above. Our movement is pedestrian. This has been the case under every manager here since Adug, with the exception of Pellars first season. Some of it is due to the player, and some due to our reluctance to lose possession.

That said, I am a big believer in trying Raheem on the right, so he can run at players first down the line then cutting across inwards. He does this sparingly on the left. He'd do it better on the right I believe. As for flourishing under Pep, well I hope so. He'd be also more comfortable with hiscteam by then.

The other glaring issue that has been obvious for some time is that both the LB and the RB will go forward at the same time, this leaves the 2 CB exposed, especially one in MDM who is now too old and way to slow to keep up the pace of the premier league. This again must come from what the manager is saying to them, do you not think ?

In a response to Lance Flucket, I did a vomit of what we did tactically against Leicester. I'll try not to do that now. The high line claim is a mirage. It's a function of possesion. Unless it's a counter and you are trying to outrun the opposition in a 3 v3 or better with open space, generally teams move up together as a unit. That's just good footballing philosophy. If we are camped outside their box trying to penetrate everyone comes up. The last defender seats on the half line. This is normal. Even Leicester did it in possession. And yes we tried to hit them over the top 2ice and failed. But because we dominated possession, by natural happenstance, they get more opportunity to try hitting over the top. They had 11 tries of this sort, and were successful once. I wouldn't get into the weeds with examples and how we matched them. If you are interested, said a little in my response to Lance.

take a look at the M.E.N today and read the article on Bersant Celia, where he reveals what was said at half-time against Leicester....stick to the game plan I think was the words. It doesn't speak volumes for a manager when he should have been analysing it better than that.
Also I realise that we have had a torrid time with injuries, but again if that is the case and you do not have your full squad to choose from, it is surely inevitable that you cannot setup the same way, something that Pellegrini again fails to realise.

We knew as fans how Leicester would setup and play, Pellergrini should and would have known this but he failed to adjust once more.

You are right, injuries forced selections, and vi disagree with some of them, but my overall claim here, is that the moan is often about the irrelevant decisions made.

 

[Dax777]

Sevilla v City:
Hart, Sagna, Kompany, Otamendi, Kolarov, Fernando, Toure, Fernandinho, Jesus Navas, Sterling, Bony


Villa v City:
Caballero, Zabaleta, Otamendi, Sagna, Clichy, Fernando, Delph, Fernandinho, Navas, Sterling, Iheanacho

You see it's quite easy. Outside of Sagna, every player there is being played in their preferred position even Fernandinho who has played as an advanced midfielder before he came to us albeit it he's as comfortable in central midfield.

What we usually get is Manuel picking his best 11 players and trying to get them to fit the positions available instead of picking the best player available to fill the positions for the formation he's chosen, hence 'Sqaure Pegs in Round Holes'.

Is that clear enough?

So just Sevilla then?

I was about to point out Sagna not being a CB, but I see you did so yourself. Which is the point I was trying to make with this exercise. These believes held by many simply don't hold up under mild scrutiny. Talk less a rigorous one.

Let me do you one better.

Stoke v City

Hart Kolarov Otamendi Demi Sagna Fernando Fernandihno DeBryune Silva Sterling Bony.

Square pegs in square holes. Still we got punked. These claims never hold up under the light of scrutiny. :)

But it never stops folks from believing it though. They just move to something different to moan about. At Stoke, it was why not start Kelechi over Bony, and Delph over Fernando, and Navas. You know we always win when he plays :)

I've said it many a time on many a thread. The standard format is to take what rudimentary personel selection Pellars doesn't make and claim its the cause. And thus, Pellars suck.

Let's be clear here, I hold no position on whether Pellars suck or not, just saying the claims often made for why he does are mostly reached after the fact.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

I apologize. I get carried away with these things. I should not expect others to read my long essays. That's not why we are here. I get it.

My point was that we agree that no goal conceded was as a direct result of the high line. The rest of the vomit youbdidntbresd and I understand why, really just delved into the nitty gritty of what we did.

I'll give you the short version: We really didn't play a high Line!

Ok, apologies for not reading your post but honestly I just haven't got the time or inclination. I don't know what clever tactical (and presumably factual) stuff you have explained to prove that we didn't play with a high line and I do not for one minute claim to be hot on football tactics but what I will say is that on Saturday I ended up in hospitality rather than my usual seat so I was sat in level 2, bang on the half way line and I promise you we defended with a high line. I was having fucking kittens at the amount of space they had to play the ball into behind us before the passes were being made...you could see it coming a mile off. Remarkably, the more we got caught out and they had one on ones, the further we seemed to defend up the pitch. This thing you have about facts is doing you no favours IMO. There are so many facets of football that you can't boil down to a provable fact. It's the kind of nonsense that leads people to think everything about a match can be understood by stats whereas the truth is that using your eyes is often just as helpful. No goal may have been conceded as a direct result of the high line but I am not sure how helpful that "fact" is because it is ignoring so much like the pattern of the game, momentum, confidence, all sorts of stuff that despite you discounting as arguments because they supposedly aren't facts, are incredibly relevant to the outcome of football matches and can have just a slightly less direct influence in us conceding a goal. It is a football match not a scientific experiment after all. But there you go, I know we will not agree on anything so the discussion is more or less pointless.

 

[Dax777]

Having started this thread .....and reading some really interesting and articulate replies (especially from Dax even though I don't agree with his staunch defence of Pellegrini).....however taking on his point about the goals conceded were not due to the set up, let's not forget in the games against Leicester and Liverpool that they both missed a large number of pretty easy chances on the break that could have doubled the score on both occasions.
last week at Sunderland we again started with 2 in midfield....at half time he made the change to bring another midfielder on because we were being out numbered ( I presume) then started the second half with Yaya as an out and out forward.....guess what we still only had 2 in midfield !!
I agree with Dax that the players have made errors that have undermined the formation...........but the same players keep making the same mistakes....surely it is Pellegrini s job to either sort it out or change the players !
When we won the league 2 seasons ago, we nearly always use to score very early and force teams to come out and then batter them.. Arsenal, Spurs twice etc...........however even then we looked vulnerable at the back, but could nearly always out score teams.......we have lost that ability and I'm afraid haven't got an alternative.
The Delphi experiment of starting out on the left wing has not worked in previous matches..........so why was it going to work on Saturday !
As has been mentioned we haven't really played well in many game after the first five games.......Seville and Everton last week apart..........but I have not seen the evidence the Pellegrini was trying to change this or do something different !

In fairness bluegaz, I am not defending Pellars as such. More so I am attacking false claims about what out tactics were, and why they didn't work.

What most do here is use a red herring argument to attempt to show Pellars is shit. I.e Attribute something bad to someone, and then acusse the person of being bad for doing what you attributed to them.

Example, he played a high line. He played slow defenders and midfielders like Kola Demi Yaya, and played Delph out of position. And then conlude these tactics and selection was why we lost. Thus, Pellars suck.
My point for most of this thread, is simply saying well Kola was good defensively, Delph was deployed left to help defend Mahrez, Yaya played well actually, and Demi was his only available senior CB.

So my claim is not that Pellars is good, but rather that these claims don't prove his bad, and worse still they mostly miss the most significant problems in the game.

It's a nuanced point I know, but its one worth making.

 

[daztrueblue91]

The problem with this side is that there is a huge lack of trust in certain players. Instead of getting each individual player to focus on their own job, we have players whose specific job is to mop up after another player. It has even been mentioned how the only CM player Pellers trusts with the ball is Yaya.

Two seasons ago we had Fernandinho doing his and Yaya's defensive duties and it was a success. Yaya was destroying teams almost single handily and was a constant menace going forward. The problem now is that we need another midfielder aswell as Fernandinho to accommodate Yaya. It is no surprise that our best results (since the opening 5 games) have come when Yaya has either been out of the side or played alongside Fernandinho and Delph/Fernando.

Look at the side Vs Leicester for a perfect example of why we are struggling. Delph was stuck on the left and had to defend a lot, in addition he is about as much of a left winger and Caballero is. Fernandinho was having to be on his defensive guard at all times which left an attacking quartet of Kun, Sterling, Yaya and Silva.

They were the only 4 players who had and was allowed attacking intent that game. Whilst I acknowledge that Zaba and Kolarov are instructed to get forward at every opportunity, they still have to be very disciplined in their position.

When you consider that both Silva and Yaya prefer the ball to feet, play from deep and very rarely make runs ahead of the Kun it is no surprize that we are easy to defend against. There is zero forward movement.

The only players we have who will drag defenders out of position are Sterling and Kun. Add the fact that Yaya and Silva both want to play the game at a walking pace it is no wonder we are struggling to create chances.

There was a passage of play in the game where Sterling had played an intricate pass to Kolarov who got the ball on the by-line. He looked up to put a cross into the box and there was only Kun in there with about 6 Leicester players. Yaya and Silva could not be arsed to get into the box.