Strategic discussion

[kremlyn]

This thread is somewhere to discuss what we think is going right and wrong with the strategic and tactical set up of our team.

It's not a continuation of the manager's thread; it's where we can discuss what we think the manager should do, analyse their successes or mistakes and debate whether the players can carry out these ideas.

Please don't clog it up with comments about whether you think the manager is competent or should be sacked - there's a thread for that.

COYS

 

[kernowspurscoach1977]

One thing I noticed against villa, we are as a team , and a squad, far more effective when we press with an high line and pressing from the front - when we did this for a short spell in the match we caused them problems

 

[aliyid]

Playing out from the back is the right thing to do and it infuriates me when pundits / fans say it’s the biggest issue at the club.

While it feels risky at the time we’re not actually conceding many goals from high turnovers and when we end up pumping it long (yes we do mix it up no matter what poor pundits will tell you) it always goes straight back to the opposition and allows them to launch an attack.

 

[aliyid]

One thing I noticed against villa, we are as a team , and a squad, far more effective when we press with an high line and pressing from the front - when we did this for a short spell in the match we caused them problems

Agreed, we’re at our best when intensity is high and we can swarm teams.

I think it’s a key reason why we’ve struggled so much over the last few months as we just don’t have the energy to maintain this over a period of time.

 

[kernowspurscoach1977]

Agreed, we’re at our best when intensity is high and we can swarm teams.

I think it’s a key reason why we’ve struggled so much over the last few months as we just don’t have the energy to maintain this over a period of time.

We don’t have the energy or rotation for
It.
A huge part of this is solanke and he has been a huge miss.

 

[kremlyn]

My first post is a contentious one - I think we should go back to inverting our full backs and forget about overlapping to get crosses in.

The Brentford game, our first win in ages, featured a near flat-back-four, with Djed and Porro sitting back out of possession and then overlapping the winger in possession. This allowed Djed in particular to mark Mbuemo which he did to great effect. But this win glossed over what is a major strategic compromise which subsequently, Liverpool capitalised on to devastating effect in the Carabao and then Villa in the FA cup.

Our midfield is V shaped so the minute you beat the press, you have taken 2 of our midfielders out of the game and our 6 is totally exposed. Neither Bissouma nor Bentancur can cope with this and opponents have been running amok through the centre of the pitch. Inverted fullbacks support the 6 and close off the lanes, slowing down the transitions and allowing the team to recover.

I know the inverted full back strategy has taken some stick but if you are going to play with a V formation then it is a must; it's been a mainstay of Pep's teams and any other who plays with a lone 6.

The biggest argument against is that we lose the ovelapping runs and crosses from the full backs but this gradual decay of the system means that our forward players stop learning how to make it work, how to pick apart low blocks. It also means we don't know how to press as a team because no one is exactly sure where their team mate is.

 

[kremlyn]

One thing I noticed against villa, we are as a team , and a squad, far more effective when we press with an high line and pressing from the front - when we did this for a short spell in the match we caused them problems

Agreed - I don't think it's just a matter of who is playing, I think there is a lack of confidence in our press and that comes from not knowing which lane to cover if you don't know which lane your teammates are covering.

I know it's not a popular formation but I think it's more effective to play consistently so players can make better assumptions on when they can press and where.

 

[theslowcentury]

I think the Brentford game showed that a bit of flexibility in approach enables us to get a result with the current injury list, so my only wish would be to see more of the pragmatic approach wed with Ange's inherent tactical baseline. I don't mean resorting to the deep, defensive styling of the last two managers but rather a sense that we will need to enjoy defending a little deeper vs teams who would otherwise bypass the midfield and be two goals to the good before we land a punch.

 

[-Afri-Coy-]

The core of our tactical problems, for me, lies in our insistence on inverting the fullbacks.

Have a look at the image below (2 + 5)

Problems:

1. Notice how much width is lost, how much space there is for the opposition to counter on the wings and how little defensive solidity we have.
2. The full backs tend to occupy this space with the wingers often pushing out wide.
3. Johnson, Kulusevski, Son and to a degree Moore all prefer the inside forward role as opposed to the traditional winger role.
4. Often our 2 CB's are left to defend a counter on their own. Almost always a 3 vs 2 or 4 vs 2 scenario.
5. We overload the central areas of the box with too many bodies and not enough width to stretch defenses.

If we had the fullbacks keeping the width and depth like this

We would have:

1. More width
2. Our wingers playing in their preferred space and position
3. More defensive solidity for counters
4. Less overload in and around the box
5. Space for our Midfielders to run into when applicable

There is a reason why no other managers employ inverted fullbacks. It just doesn't work.

The closest we've seen is Pep's hybrid system, defending in a 3-2 shape with one fullback sitting deep with the 2 CB's, and the other joining the midfield.

 

[kremlyn]

We don’t have the energy or rotation for
It.
A huge part of this is solanke and he has been a huge miss.

I started to get the feeling that Solanke was doing all of the pressing by himself, hence the injury. I think the players have lost the knowledge due to the tactical tweaks.

 

[kremlyn]

The core of our tactical problems, for me, lies in our insistence on inverting the fullbacks.

Have a look at the image below (2 + 5)

View attachment 151987

Problems:

1. Notice how much width is lost, how much space there is for the opposition to counter on the wings and how little defensive solidity we have.
2. The full backs tend to occupy this space with the wingers often pushing out wide.
3. Johnson, Kulusevski, Son and to a degree Moore all prefer the inside forward role as opposed to the traditional winger role.
4. Often our 2 CB's are left to defend a counter on their own. Almost always a 3 vs 2 or 4 vs 2 scenario.
5. We overload the central areas of the box with too many bodies and not enough width to stretch defenses.

If we had the fullbacks keeping the width and depth like this

View attachment 151988

We would have:

1. More width
2. Our wingers playing in their preferred space and position
3. More defensive solidity for counters
4. Less overload in and around the box
5. Space for our Midfielders to run into when applicable

There is a reason why no other managers employ inverted fullbacks. It just doesn't work.

The closest we've seen is Pep's hybrid system, defending in a 3-2 shape with one fullback sitting deep with the 2 CB's, and the other joining the midfield.

Tell me you loved Poch's team without telling me you loved Poch's team ;-)

The prototypical Ange and Pep teams keep the wingers extremely high and wide - their purpose in the press is to stop the ball being pumped up the line and the centre for the pitch should be safe with the inverted full backs supporting the 6 and covering the direct channels infront of the defenders.

No formation is perfect but I don't see our wingers pressing high and wide as they know there are gaping holes behind them. The better the wingers do this job, the fewer times the cbs would have to do those diagonal covering runs if the opponent's fullbacks do get to pump the ball up to their winger.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

The core of our tactical problems, for me, lies in our insistence on inverting the fullbacks.

Have a look at the image below (2 + 5)

View attachment 151987

Problems:

1. Notice how much width is lost, how much space there is for the opposition to counter on the wings and how little defensive solidity we have.
2. The full backs tend to occupy this space with the wingers often pushing out wide.
3. Johnson, Kulusevski, Son and to a degree Moore all prefer the inside forward role as opposed to the traditional winger role.
4. Often our 2 CB's are left to defend a counter on their own. Almost always a 3 vs 2 or 4 vs 2 scenario.
5. We overload the central areas of the box with too many bodies and not enough width to stretch defenses.

If we had the fullbacks keeping the width and depth like this

View attachment 151988

We would have:

1. More width
2. Our wingers playing in their preferred space and position
3. More defensive solidity for counters
4. Less overload in and around the box
5. Space for our Midfielders to run into when applicable

There is a reason why no other managers employ inverted fullbacks. It just doesn't work.

The closest we've seen is Pep's hybrid system, defending in a 3-2 shape with one fullback sitting deep with the 2 CB's, and the other joining the midfield.

We’ve rarely been inverting our full backs to the same extent as last season since we’ve had this mental injury crisis though.

 

[-Afri-Coy-]

We’ve rarely been inverting our full backs to the same extent as last season since we’ve had this mental injury crisis though.

Pedro Porro says hi.

In fairness to you, Spence is MUCH better at retaining the width, and he is world's above Porro in terms of defensive capability.

So you're right, in a sense that one of our fullbacks tends to play the traditional role that works while the other just bombs forward at every opportunity.

I'm very interested to see how we setup once Udogie is back. I feel like Udogie/Spence should be our pair going forward.

 

[-Afri-Coy-]

Tell me you loved Poch's team without telling me you loved Poch's team ;-)

The prototypical Ange and Pep teams keep the wingers extremely high and wide - their purpose in the press is to stop the ball being pumped up the line and the centre for the pitch should be safe with the inverted full backs supporting the 6 and covering the direct channels infront of the defenders.

No formation is perfect but I don't see our wingers pressing high and wide as they know there are gaping holes behind them. The better the wingers do this job, the fewer times the cbs would have to do those diagonal covering runs if the opponent's fullbacks do get to pump the ball up to their winger.

Poch will always have a special place in my heart and there is a reason why his setup/formation works.

In terms of Pep, he inverted a single fullback as opposed to 2, and he had the second sitting as cover with the CB's to complete the 3-2 setup.

Not to mention he has the world's best DM in Rodri.

 

[kremlyn]

Pedro Porro says hi.

In fairness to you, Spence is MUCH better and retaining the width, and he is world's above Porro in terms of defensive capability.

So you're right, in a sense that one of our fullbacks tends to play the traditional role that works while the other just bombs forward at every opportunity.

I'm very interested to see how we setup once Udogie is back. I feel like Udogie/Spence should be our pair going forward.

What's really interesting is that Djed stays super wide and flat on the left but inverts when he's on the right. I really hope he gets a crack at the right but I think he needs to invert on the left as well.

 

[JonnySpurs]

Playing out from the back is the right thing to do and it infuriates me when pundits / fans say it’s the biggest issue at the club.

While it feels risky at the time we’re not actually conceding many goals from high turnovers and when we end up pumping it long (yes we do mix it up no matter what poor pundits will tell you) it always goes straight back to the opposition and allows them to launch an attack.

Do you have the data on this by any chance cos for me it has felt like every time we turn the ball over lately, teams score from the resulting transitional attack (thinking specifically about Liverpool's 1st goal as an example). I'd love to see what the numbers are on high turnovers leading to goals conceded

 

[NickHSpurs]

Porro's positioning is one of the biggest issues I think, it's so easy to play behind us in that space when he gets forward. That's not Porro's fault, it's what he's being asked to do.

I think the lack of a proper #6 is the issue as ideally you'd like to think that would be their job to fill that space on any transitions. Hopefully this is the job Archie Gray will do when he's given a chance in his proper position.

That said, the senior players like Bissouma should be discilined enough to spot that danger and help, I just don't think he's that intelligent a footballer and we're asking him to do a job he doesn't want to do.

 

[kremlyn]

Do you have the data on this by any chance cos for me it has felt like every time we turn the ball over lately, teams score from the resulting transitional attack (thinking specifically about Liverpool's 1st goal as an example). I'd love to see what the numbers are on high turnovers leading to goals conceded

There's a video doing the rounds in the ange thread. Crap video but it does have those stats. It effectively shows how, as our full backs have drifted (because of injuries etc) teams have been able to create 3 times more attacks in transitions through the middle of the pitch.

The Aston Villa game, covered by 4-4-2 podcast shows this happening in technicolour. It's the middle of the pitch that's gaping and the inverted full backs should (and did) plug those gaps.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

Pedro Porro says hi.

In fairness to you, Spence is MUCH better at retaining the width, and he is world's above Porro in terms of defensive capability.

So you're right, in a sense that one of our fullbacks tends to play the traditional role that works while the other just bombs forward at every opportunity.

I'm very interested to see how we setup once Udogie is back. I feel like Udogie/Spence should be our pair going forward.

Nah Porro has been swinging in way more crosses than he did last season. He used to pretty much settle in central mid when he got to the half way last season and any foray he did make forward was in the inside channel. In the last 10-15 matches he has been offering him self as a wide option and whipping the ball in.

Udogie/Spence could be a great full back combo. Porro needs a break whatever happens.

 

[King of the Lane]

From my POV our tactical short comings are mainly down to the following:

- over reliance on overloading in attack

There are times where we win back possession and all of the midfielders sprint past the player who has the ball and Porro pushes very high up the pitch. The advantages of doing this means we we can squeeze the oppositions defence, have more bodies in their area then they do and allows us to create a high number of chances.

The disadvantages to this are that we no longer have players back that can cover the spaces they are leaving behind so we have big gaps which can get exploited. So like in our recent two games, as soon as we make a bad pass and lose possession a few things happen:

1. We leave big gaps and are easy to pass through
2. We are regularly in danger any time we get countered
3. The defence is left far too exposed
4. It causes nerves in our team and players arent sure whether to go or stay in positon
5. It causes excessive sprinting and running

I feel like the players arent able to fully commit to the playstyle as they arent sure what to do and if they should be pushing up or dropping back etc. Its why people on here keep saying the players dont know what they should be doing. Imo we never look settled or fully in control and its due to the overload.

Thats just my opinion and I dont have coaching badges etc, but the eye test tells me its a major issue and has been since last season.