Our inability to set up properly for big games

Tactically it is all wrong. Some really simple decisions that we get wrong every single time, and that helps explain why we have yet to beat a top 6 team.

Just a few examples and this is just Leicster

Playing Delph on the left
Wrong choice of full backs
Somehow it was a 4-4-2 with 5 midfielders?
Pressing as we did

I could go on. All opinion of course but there is a lot of naivety in the choices he makes. Some really simple things but most of all not having the courtesy of showing the other team any respect by adapting your own tactics.
 
Our set pieces, both offensively and defensively, need a lot of work as they're awful. There was at least one occasion where we had a free kick around the half-way line. Ten passes later and we still hadn't got the ball in Leicester's half.

I think Huth won nearly every header from a corner both in attack and in defence
 
I think Huth won nearly every header from a corner both in attack and in defence
We allowed Sunderland's best header of the ball a free header, between both our centre backs.

Irrespective of what Pellegrini says, I don't understand why one of our cbs or better aerial players don't recognise the threat or the effectiveness at either end, & just take the responsibility to put that player out of the equation. Just stop him from getting a contact on the ball, block him whatever. They don'f have to jump above him, just prevent him from getting a decent contact. It's elementary stuff. This has been a problem with our lesser cbs for years, from Boateng through Savic, Nastasic, now Otamendi. Just weak against powerful players.

Fucking Rooney was marking John Terry at corners yesterday & did a betrer job of it than any of those lot would. It's not good enough.
 
You make some interesting points but to take the one about the high defensive line. The point of that is to compress the midfield, so that you can press the opponents high up the field. We usually play with our defensive line about 15-20 yards in front of the 18-yard box but what we don't do is have our midfield close enough to that line to make life difficult for our opponents. Our midfield, particularly players like Silva and Toure, simply don't work hard enough closing opposition players down meaning the defenders are too often exposed to opposition players coming at them, often with with equal numbers or even numerical superiority. We may have been playing a high defensive line on Saturday but Kante and Drinkwater had the run of midfield and were first to every ball. If we's had bodies in the right positions who were prepared to work as hard as those two, we'd have been fine.
Excellent analysis of what was wrong on Saturday, add to that Delph out wide, and Fernandhino doing the job of three, its little wonder our midfield was so poor, and why the game was so pathetically lost. For me though a lot of that boils down to a complete lack of organistation, which was quite evident.

Every attack we had was 3 or 4, against 8 or 9, every attack they had, was 4 or 5 against 4 or 5, that shouldn't be happening with the quality we had out, even with our current injury list.
 
Excellent analysis of what was wrong on Saturday, add to that Delph out wide, and Fernandhino doing the job of three, its little wonder our midfield was so poor, and why the game was so pathetically lost. For me though a lot of that boils down to a complete lack of organistation, which was quite evident.

Every attack we had was 3 or 4, against 8 or 9, every attack they had, was 4 or 5 against 4 or 5, that shouldn't be happening with the quality we had out, even with our current injury list.
That's right. So why is this? Are the players lazy or don't have a clue of where they are supposed to be on the field?
 
Well on Saturday it looked like a mixture of both, but brought on by not knowing where they were supposed to be, so some just gave up, pretty unforgivable to me, on both counts.
I think, and hope, that our players are in for a bit of a culture chock when Pep arrives and starts to actually demand hard work and tactical behavior from them. From what I have seen here in Germany Pep is not very tolerant towards laziness and sloppiness.
Under Pellegrini the team seem to be in a sloppy trot where they just do the minimum. Not much of a plan, not much of fire in the belly, and not many signs that the manager really cares a lot. In fact Pellegrini's (lack off) attitude in the dug out seems to be reflected by the players attitude on the pitch.
 
In fact Pellegrini's (lack off) attitude in the dug out seems to be reflected by the players attitude on the pitch.
While I agree with the rest of your post, I don't agree with this. Over the years I've seen plenty of managers who showed passion on the sidelines, but their teams were f**King clueless, some at City.

Passion on the sidelines might look good to supporters, but players don't buy into it.

I still have nightmares about when Pearce was manager, with his constant coaching from the side.

The wide players must have been grateful or shitting themselves at half time when we changed round, because they knew they were either getting a break from his constant yelling, or they knew it was their turn next. Full of passion, but a shit manager nonetheless.
 
So sticking your fingers in your ears and going "la la la" are you?
Thank goodness Pep takes Sports Phycology seriously and will make sure our players are properly conditioned to reduce the impact of bad events in one area of the game on other areas.
Oh read his books by the way if you want evidence for that. Getting players heads focused on playing as a team is just about his number one priority.
I ignored your argument because it was an irrelevant point. Smart sounding, but irrelevant none the less.

It's irrelevant because Stress was not the issue in contention. The claim was about what was the Cause in Fact of the goals. Not whether you could make a colorable argument about some tenous proximate cause. Which by the way if we took the argument to its outer to its limits, it could easily be shown that you couldnt prove a direct causal relationship BTW the goals and a high line. If nothing else we had already conceded the initial set piece goal before we ever moved our back line up.

But it was such a pointless exercise that I chose not bite and derail the thread.

So don't mistake my sidestepping the irrelevant for acquiescing.

And yes, I hope Pep brings all his sport psychology know-how to the table for us. But this has no relationship to whether a supposed high line caused the goals we conceded in a particular match.
 
Excellent analysis of what was wrong on Saturday, add to that Delph out wide, and Fernandhino doing the job of three, its little wonder our midfield was so poor, and why the game was so pathetically lost. For me though a lot of that boils down to a complete lack of organistation, which was quite evident.

Every attack we had was 3 or 4, against 8 or 9, every attack they had, was 4 or 5 against 4 or 5, that shouldn't be happening with the quality we had out, even with our current injury list.

I have been saying something similar for a while. No matter where the ball is we are more often than out numbered. It's simply not good enough.

Until we get some more fit bodies on the pitch, I would rather we went for a solid set-up (that DOES NOT mean Delph on the wing) and just try to nick some goals. If Yaya is to play, it would be good to see him stay deep next to Delph, while giving Fernandinho the opportunity to go forward. At least if he goes forward we know he is able to run backwards towards his goal too. Plus he is the kind of player who will not venture too far forward if we are losing the battle in the middle.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.