SC's Tactical Autopsy thread

[Spurs1960]

What you have demonstrated is a complete inability to read and comprehend what I have written.

I have no problem with how Walker sets about what I (and most of us) believe is his remit. I actually think the bulk of how he carries out what I perceive as his instructed remit pretty damn well.

What I have a problem with is Walker's actions and decisions in given situations and his composure under pressure on some occasions. I'm pretty sure AVB hasn't ever told him to pass the ball to an opponent, or to mis-control the ball when confronted by a pressing opponent, or to get himself in a positional quandary.



Do you understand better the nature of my criticisms now ?

I have understood the nature of your biased criticism all along, what you haven't grasped is you are basing some of them from a lack of understanding.

Using your criteria why aren't you criticising every player in the team? But first you need to know what is a mistake and what isn't, what situations are caused by teammates lack of movement for instance and the offering of options. That's a side of the game you basically completely overlook.

Criticism is a negative and unhelpful, why not adopt a positive approach and tell us what a player should do in a given circumstance then your criticisms might attain a level of credibility they currently lack.

Adopting a more positive, he could have done this, solution based approach would be far more beneficial.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Analysis: Shit

That is all.

 

[Legend10]

So shall we go back to talking about how the likes of Allardyce and Pulis haven't got a clue and just coach their teams to kick lumps out of the opposition?

Must have got this wrong but yesterday it looked to me like an Allardyce team without a player (maybe Diame) who would have got on our bench let alone in our starting 11 played us off the park.

 

[totty]

right! seeing our weaklink in the fullback positions, anyone agree with me that we should perhaps play 3 at the back against teams that park the bus?

let's face it, weak teams are not gonna come at us and we have lloris as an additional sweeper, a back three of verts, daws, chiriches/kaboul with sandro protecting could unleash the creativity up the pitch by having paulinho, eriksen, holtby as central midfielders, townsend and lamela on the wings and soldado up front to trouble the opponents.

this solves our fullbacks weakness as well as having an abundence of options in the opponent half.

i'm not saying we should play this every week but could we just start like this against defensive sides till we get the lead before reverting to a back four?

 

[Sp3akerboxxx]

To play 3 at the back you need 2 defensive midfielders and very hard working wingers to cover the gaps. If your wingers arent hard workers or positionally astute, then quality wingers will have a field day against you. Saying that i think it is the future.

besides, 3-2-2-2-1 is the formation i use with spurs on fm13, and we win everything on there with it, so it must be right :d

 

[TaoistMonkey]

This looks like it should go in the Tactical thread so ill move it.

 

[sebcole]

As a tongue in cheek response to the thread - '3 at the back', Why not play 0 up front - that is what West Ham did yesterday, they had no striker - and it worked wonders for them. Maybe it is not so tongue in cheek because there is a place for this system, as used by Spain sometimes I believe.

We have good players that can't get in the first 11 such as Holtby and Lamela, which could be used more if we sacrificed the lone striker role - which lets be honest has not worked thus far. I'm happy with Soldado by the way, a view which was strongly reinforced yesterday. Just a thought, food for thought - we have many creative players who could score goals I would bet. Another SC member joked about playing Walker up front because West Ham are so bad - I bet he wouldn't be awful there, you just never know.

I hope these things are experimented upon in training - i.e - Vertonghen (who is not having the best season defensively) in AM, because of his silky skills and intelligence - Chiriches can dribble really well, so could play further up the pitch - as can Kaboul. I hope we can think out of the box if necessary as players have ample skill to fulfill many different positions if coached wisely into it.

We surely have all the ingredients we need as a whole to challenge for the title - we need to right recipes to use the ingredients best. We need a better cook book perhaps, putting different herbs and spices in different ways match to match to surprise the palate of the opposition - the food critiques.

Using a 433 without a striker could mean 3 holding mids to gain complete domination in midfield - Capoue, Sandro and Dembele - and 3 attacking players of sorts - choose between yourselves.

 

[danielneeds]

A few tactical tweaks that could make us more dangerous at home would be:

1. Bring Sandro/Capoue in as a true holder who can sit back with the centre backs and let the fullbacks make us a 3-4-3 when attacking.

2. Swap Eriksen's and Paulinho's positions in congested games like yesterday. Eriksen was finding himself facing away from the goal too often and coming under heavy pressure. A better option would be for him to dictate the tempo from deeper and make late runs forward. Paulinho would then be the attacking mid with license to get in the box at every opportunity and join the striker. He's shown he has a finisher's instincts to be in the right place at the right time, we need to get him as close to goal as much as possible.

3. Not play Siggy from the left when Naughton is behind. Shuts down the entire left flank, making the pitch too small.

 

[JimmyG2]

I'm not a great tactical theorist but have read this thread with awe and interest.
I'm from the 'I don't know much about football but I know what I like' school.
As W.Ham weren't pressing and Walker wasn't up to scratch through illness or whatever
could we not have gone three at the back and brought on Sandro to shield the back three?
Or even Sandro and Dembele to play deeper
and let Paulinho go further forward to link up with Eriksen.
A sort of 32311/ 31411.
Do any teams actually play three at the back?
I noticed that Chelsea did at the weekend I think, and won.
Only asking in genuine interest.
Do any teams actually play 3 at the back in England?

 

[ItsBoris]

I'm not a great tactical theorist but have read this thread with awe and interest.
I'm from the 'I don't know much about football but I know what I like' school.
As W.Ham weren't pressing and Walker wasn't up to scratch through illness or whatever
could we not have gone three at the back and brought on Sandro to shield the back three?
Or even Sandro and Dembele to play deeper
and let Paulinho go further forward to link up with Eriksen.
A sort of 32311/ 31411.
Do any teams actually play three at the back?
I noticed that Chelsea did at the weekend I think, and won.
Only asking in genuine interest.
Do any teams actually play 3 at the back in England?

Liverpool do now it seems.

 

[Huddlestone22]

My analysis regarding the Spam game:

I'm going to start off with the formation itself. I think the major problem with playing a double pivot with both Paulinho and Dembele is the space left between the defense and the midfield. Dembele and Paulinho aren't really defensive midfielders by nature, with the former once being an attacking midfielder and Paulinho evolving in recent years into more of an attacking threat from midfield giving them tendencies to naturally push forward. This can lead to faster players exploiting the space giving them a run on the defenders, basically what happened with Vaz Te, Morrison, and Diame constantly being able to utilize the space to get them into 1 on 1 situations with the defenders. I understand AVB's theory into playing both of them with him wanting to press the life out of the opposition with constant attacks but there's guaranteed to be situations where the team counter. It makes a lot more sense to start with a naturally defensive minded midfielder in one of Sandro and Capoue to try keep them space given to a minimum.

Regarding individual performances I'll start with Dawson. Now I don't dislike Dawson as a player, however it is becoming more apparent that he's getting exploited for his pace and decision making. There are far too many times in recent games where he has lunged prematurely leading to the opposition given a decent attacking opportunity. Dawson has been quite fortunate in that regard that Wes Ham have been the only team to take real advantage. It's a shame that currently we have Kaboul who for me has the perfect attributes that can't currently complete a full game and Chriches who may take time to settle. I haven't got a problem with Dawson starting at the moment but I'm hoping before long Kaboul or Chriches are able to fill the role at RCB before long.

I'd normally pick out Walker for his couple of brain fart moments but he's played a ridiculous amount of football recently and even before the game stated that he didn't feel right. AVB simply shouldn't be playing him in the Europa League and the Premier League constantly. Fryers and Naughton are completely capable of playing against Anzhi, Sheriff, and Tromso respectively considering the positions of the clubs in their current leagues.

I was disappointed with the selection of Defoe in the team just because of the qualities Soldado offers even without scoring at the moment. Unfortunately West Ham knew exactly how to defend Defoe, which is to basically give him little time when on the ball around and in the area and restrict him to instinct shot which the majority of the time he'll put it in the path of the keeper or in reach. There was times where I thought that a striker could have taken some of the chances that Townsend set up only for Defoe to make no movement towards the ball. One of the qualities that Soldado provides over Defoe is the ability to link up play. It's pretty telling that even Soldado's poor game (Chelsea) he was able to provide an assist where as Defoe on is pretty anonymous when not scoring.

I get slightly irritated that some players are seemingly undroppable despite other players playing well and contributing in recent weeks. Recent example is Holtby not being brought into the squad despite the fact he's been our best player all all games he's started recently where I don't think Eriksen has contributed much more than he did on his debut, I'm not saying Eriksen isn't good because he certainly is (even potentially World Class) but he has a habit of being complacent and fading out of games which he has even said himself. At the very least Holtby should have been given a lot longer than he did on Sunday.

My final point to raise is with our inability to defend set pieces. Apparently changing managers, players and marking styles has no bearing on the matches itself as we suffer from the exact same predicament that we have for as long as I remember. No one seems to take responsibility for getting their head the ball and they all seem to wait until the ball falls to them before reacting. I detest John Terry as a person but his qualities from defensive situations are absolutely spot on and we could really do with a player who offers the same qualities. I can only hope that AVB will be working on improving that because it's our ultimate downfall at the moment.

 

[only1waddle]

Re:Wet Spam
I just watched the first 25 minutes again, i counted 3 times moves breaking down where Sigurdsson had strayed into the No.10 position leaving it congested with no wide forward on the left.
A couple of golden opportunities where Naughton stopped and played the ball back into the middle, any pacey left footer would have been away.
Defoe, just no, movement was awful.
Walker was clearly struggling after the Anzhi trip.
Dembele looked unsure of what his role was.
Clearly our other defenders looked reluctant to use Naughton as an out ball on the left. Miles out of position at times too.
Watching that first half hour again it really highlights the point we could have won that game in the first half, the balance of the team was all wrong, it was not as if we were terrible, just had very limited options on the ball because of personnel.
More pro active in game management and on the ball subs should have given us all 6 points this week.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

As a tongue in cheek response to the thread - '3 at the back', Why not play 0 up front - that is what West Ham did yesterday, they had no striker - and it worked wonders for them. Maybe it is not so tongue in cheek because there is a place for this system, as used by Spain sometimes I believe.

We have good players that can't get in the first 11 such as Holtby and Lamela, which could be used more if we sacrificed the lone striker role - which lets be honest has not worked thus far. I'm happy with Soldado by the way, a view which was strongly reinforced yesterday. Just a thought, food for thought - we have many creative players who could score goals I would bet. Another SC member joked about playing Walker up front because West Ham are so bad - I bet he wouldn't be awful there, you just never know.

I hope these things are experimented upon in training - i.e - Vertonghen (who is not having the best season defensively) in AM, because of his silky skills and intelligence - Chiriches can dribble really well, so could play further up the pitch - as can Kaboul. I hope we can think out of the box if necessary as players have ample skill to fulfill many different positions if coached wisely into it.

We surely have all the ingredients we need as a whole to challenge for the title - we need to right recipes to use the ingredients best. We need a better cook book perhaps, putting different herbs and spices in different ways match to match to surprise the palate of the opposition - the food critiques.

Using a 433 without a striker could mean 3 holding mids to gain complete domination in midfield - Capoue, Sandro and Dembele - and 3 attacking players of sorts - choose between yourselves.

We did play 0 up front.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

So shall we go back to talking about how the likes of Allardyce and Pulis haven't got a clue and just coach their teams to kick lumps out of the opposition?

Must have got this wrong but yesterday it looked to me like an Allardyce team without a player (maybe Diame) who would have got on our bench let alone in our starting 11 played us off the park.

I singled out Allardyce for credit in my ratings post. Fair play to the guy. But "played us off the park" is bollocks. He tried a different tactic, certainly to what he's ever tried before, and because we wasted chances and positions, they paid off eventually.

Like Redknapp, and Pullis etc, it's not that "they don't do tactics", it's that, unlike Sunday, throughout their careers they haven't been very innovative, ambitious or entertaining to watch (try reading the other teams fans thread for what Hammers were thinking of how they've been playing generally).

West Ham didn't play great football with the ball, they were tactically excellent off though. I doff my cap to the tactical change Allardyce made and it's ultimate efficacy, but this wasn't Spain's attacking, possession centric 460 (or even 280) it was a very defensive 460. Effective, but I still wouldn't want to watch my team play like that most weeks.

And the very bottom line is, if Defoe has an ounce of finesse and dinks the already grounded keeper (or if Paulinho had showed more composure etc) , Allardyce's tactical masterplan is fucked. As good as it was.

Regardless of the poor choices and execution made by various (of our) players from front to back Sunday, I would still rather watch a team that tries to control the ball and construct something with the ball than one who doesn't.

 

[mpickard2087]

I agree with the shout of switching to a 3-4-3. Personally I think we should have gone to something like this:

First of all, obviously Chiriches would ideally be in place of Naughton but I had no subs left to use. My thinking would be that the only two to have 'fixed' positions would be Sandro as the screen to block anything coming through, and Dawson as the one fixed centre back in case anyone does occupy a position right up top.

In attack, Lamela and Eriksen can come from outside to in, hopefully finding space in between the lines and occupy defenders. Townsend and Walker (ok, long shot considering he was injured I admit) can then push into the space vacated. Basically we try and go round the brick wall. Paulinho kept on instead of Dembele as his runs would be useful up in support of Soldado. Naughton and Vertonghen push forward a bit as well when we have the ball and hopefully we could have kept them camped in and unable to get up the pitch and into the game. In defence they shuttle back to make a back three again, and Walker and Townsend obviously have a responsibility to track back, as does Paulinho.

That would have been my tactical tinkering

 

[Legend10]

I singled out Allardyce for credit in my ratings post. Fair play to the guy. But "played us off the park" is bollocks. He tried a different tactic, certainly to what he's ever tried before, and because we wasted chances and positions, they paid off eventually.

Like Redknapp, and Pullis etc, it's not that "they don't do tactics", it's that, unlike Sunday, throughout their careers they haven't been very innovative, ambitious or entertaining to watch (try reading the other teams fans thread for what Hammers were thinking of how they've been playing generally).

West Ham didn't play great football with the ball, they were tactically excellent off though. I doff my cap to the tactical change Allardyce made and it's ultimate efficacy, but this wasn't Spain's attacking, possession centric 460 (or even 280) it was a very defensive 460. Effective, but I still wouldn't want to watch my team play like that most weeks.

And the very bottom line is, if Defoe has an ounce of finesse and dinks the already grounded keeper (or if Paulinho had showed more composure etc) , Allardyce's tactical masterplan is fucked. As good as it was.

Regardless of the poor choices and execution made by various (of our) players from front to back Sunday, I would still rather watch a team that tries to control the ball and construct something with the ball than one who doesn't.

Have you considered he doesn't have the quality of player that Spain have?

He doesn't even have the quality of player we have! Managers have to make choices based on the weaponry at their disposal and West Ham like Stoke and others don't gave a great deal of weaponry, especially ones that have finesse.

I'm sure we would all sooner watch a spurs style team than what West Ham churn out, nobody would argue that, and nobody would surely are hue for West Ham to win at the likes of a Spurs, Arse, UTD etc they're going to need some luck along the way, this will always be the case when the other team has better players than you.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Have you considered he doesn't have the quality of player that Spain have?

He doesn't even have the quality of player we have! Managers have to make choices based on the weaponry at their disposal and West Ham like Stoke and others don't gave a great deal of weaponry, especially ones that have finesse.

I'm sure we would all sooner watch a spurs style team than what West Ham churn out, nobody would argue that, and nobody would surely are hue for West Ham to win at the likes of a Spurs, Arse, UTD etc they're going to need some luck along the way, this will always be the case when the other team has better players than you.

Swansea and Southampton don't have the quality of player we have, and probably had smaller budgets than West Ham, but their managers are still managing to play a more attractive (and successful) brand of football than Allardyce has managed with West Ham.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

Swansea and Southampton don't have the quality of player we have, and probably had smaller budgets than West Ham, but their managers are still managing to play a more attractive (and successful) brand of football than Allardyce has managed with West Ham.

I agree with this notion, but overall you are still giving us too much credit for Sunday. I'm comparing this and your response to some of the clusterfucks under Redknapp where you basically wrote war and peace about coaching/tactics etc etc amen. Here you're giving us the 'yeah but if Defoe scores or Paulinho scores it's all different.'

That doesn't work, I'm fucking fuming that AVB got schooled by Allar-Allar-Allardyce Woooaaaaaahoooooaaaaoooooooh. It was a fucking disgraceful showing and there's no harm calling a spade a spade.

 

[Legend10]

Swansea and Southampton don't have the quality of player we have, and probably had smaller budgets than West Ham, but their managers are still managing to play a more attractive (and successful) brand of football than Allardyce has managed with West Ham.

I would think that Southamptons budget is probably double West Hams but that's a different point.

But anyway your initial notion was that you know what Allardyce, Pulis and co do on the training ground, and I'm afraid you don't.

 

[Legend10]

I agree with this notion, but overall you are still giving us too much credit for Sunday. I'm comparing this and your response to some of the clusterfucks under Redknapp where you basically wrote war and peace about coaching/tactics etc etc amen. Here you're giving us the 'yeah but if Defoe scores or Paulinho scores it's all different.'

That doesn't work, I'm fucking fuming that AVB got schooled by Allar-Allar-Allardyce Woooaaaaaahoooooaaaaoooooooh. It was a fucking disgraceful showing and there's no harm calling a spade a spade.

This is why it's sometimes difficult to take BC seriously, he has different measures for different people doing the same job. For example Gallas fucks up and it's not his fault a la Chelsea at home last season when he made 2 calamitous errors that cost us the game, Walker makes an error in the last minute for a pretty meaningless goal and he gets slated for it. And if Dawson had made the same mistakes as Gallas it would be because he's a goofy useless ****!

There's no objectivity by game or incident it's all premeditated decisions based on bias.

And what really worries me is that his dream management team for Spurs is himself with Brenton as his assistant, come on BC you can admit that lol?