The Tao of Eriksen

[DaSpurs]

Know when to hug the touchline and offer width to open teams up and not always come inside and occupy the central areas when it's congested. Personally I think we have always looked best when we have pace out wide and particularly wingers who drive on the outside and whip balls in or pull back for the likes of Eriksen to come onto. The combination of Bale and Lennon was affective at this.

Not only is it affective in attack but also when tracking back to help the fullback. Bale wasn;t the best at that but Lennon was very good at it. I like the work rate from Lamela and to an extent Chadli, they do track back but often times when they roam we become vulnerable out wide to the counter attack. I think a big cause of our defensive errors have come when teams attack out wide and our fullbacks are left exposed. Not to mention that expecting the fullbacks to offer the width in attack and get back is asking too much. Unless we're camped in the other teams half but we're not Barca so we wont do that all too often.

Lamela, Chadli and Eriksen all want to come infield but for that to work you need to be quick and decisive at moving the ball in order to create space. We could get away with 2 of those 3 but at least one of them needs to hug the touchline more. It's a lot more important on our narrow pitch as well.

I agree with the benefits which you propose, but they don't come innately embedded in traditional wingers. Traditional wingers don't inherently have better defensive senses, in fact Lamela has far and away been our hardest working winger this term defensively, and he is the antithesis of the traditional winger. I agree we need more pace, and I agree we need to be quicker and more decisive, and incisive, in moving the ball around and more dangerously/aggressively in order to open up space; but again, this is yet another trait which doesn't come inherently embedded in traditional wingers. Inverted wingers are fully capable of this too, we just happen to have rather slow inverted wingers at the moment.

When you look around Europe, there are sides succeeding everywhere with inverted wingers, and inverted wingers on both sides no less. The best front line in the world atm has inverted wingers on both sides. So point is, "inverteds" are not the causative factor. Brits seem to resent this transition in the modern game as its the biggest deviation from their traditional game, the "7/11 4-4-2," and as such they look to blame it on what is perceived to be the greatest difference, and that is the winger orientation.

Personally I like to see balance and I do like to see one winger, regardless of traditional or inverted, be fully capable of getting to the byline to supply crosses. I think we're currently rather unbalanced as we lack any genuinely pacey and disruptive wide options, which causes our attack to be very static and stifling (to ourselves). But this lack of balance is due to the personnel we've accumulated and with a lack of consideration for expanded options, not because we happen to primarily play inverted wingers.

 

[Blake Griffin]

He did at Ajax but for Denmark he's primarily played as a 10.

probably why his manager thinks he's shit.

 

[DaSpurs]

probably why his manager thinks he's shit.

His manager has played him out on the left mostly since this comments from last September. Will see how long that lasts after his slow defending costed them both goals from the US in that friendly in March.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Know when to hug the touchline and offer width to open teams up and not always come inside and occupy the central areas when it's congested. Personally I think we have always looked best when we have pace out wide and particularly wingers who drive on the outside and whip balls in or pull back for the likes of Eriksen to come onto. The combination of Bale and Lennon was affective at this.

Not only is it affective in attack but also when tracking back to help the fullback. Bale wasn;t the best at that but Lennon was very good at it. I like the work rate from Lamela and to an extent Chadli, they do track back but often times when they roam we become vulnerable out wide to the counter attack. I think a big cause of our defensive errors have come when teams attack out wide and our fullbacks are left exposed. Not to mention that expecting the fullbacks to offer the width in attack and get back is asking too much. Unless we're camped in the other teams half but we're not Barca so we wont do that all too often.

Lamela, Chadli and Eriksen all want to come infield but for that to work you need to be quick and decisive at moving the ball in order to create space. We could get away with 2 of those 3 but at least one of them needs to hug the touchline more. It's a lot more important on our narrow pitch as well.

It's like you closed your eyes and missed most of the previous 5 years. Bale was absolutely hopeless defensively and Lennon was little better. He would shadow chase an opponent but rarely get within 3 yards of him and hardly ever tackled anyone. Lennon created less than Lamela has.

We couldn't win nine home games with Lennon and Bale out wide and that was with Modric and VDV too.

What's the point of having full backs and wide wingers ? Where's the tactical variation. The idea is to have both inverted AM's and full backs out wide, and also have the AM's interchanging.

 

[Blake Griffin]

What's the point of having full backs and wide wingers ? Where's the tactical variation. The idea is to have both inverted AM's and full backs out wide, and also have the AM's interchanging.

do our attacking mids really interchange though? or do they all kind of just migrate to the same position? i don't think chadli/eriksen/lamela are dynamic enough as a trio to really do it effectively, not like chelsea's three for example.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

do our attacking mids really interchange though? or do they all kind of just migrate to the same position? i don't think chadli/eriksen/lamela are dynamic enough as a trio to really do it effectively, not like chelsea's three for example.

Still preferable than having two fuckwits like Walker and Lennon running the same 100m sprint lane.

 

[Chris12]

do our attacking mids really interchange though? or do they all kind of just migrate to the same position? i don't think chadli/eriksen/lamela are dynamic enough as a trio to really do it effectively, not like chelsea's three for example.

I think they can do it, just haven't done it enough. Some of our better matches were when those three were interchanging. Or when Dembele was in there instead of one of the three.

 

[DaSpurs]

do our attacking mids really interchange though? or do they all kind of just migrate to the same position? i don't think chadli/eriksen/lamela are dynamic enough as a trio to really do it effectively, not like chelsea's three for example.

Agreed, they aren't dynamic enough to make it effective. The advantage to having more variation in the styles and routes of players in the AM3 is it causes defenses to entirely rethink and readjust after a rotation. For the most part, when those three rotate (which they do rather slowly, if they do it), it makes the defense change nothing.

This is part of why I'd like to see Chadli acknowledge his advantage of size more. Would like to see him cause a fullback to panic a bit because while that fullback was previous defending Lamela who of course likes the ball at his feet and likes to cut in, suddenly he's having to defend against a substantially larger player capable of getting in the air and with decent finishing ability. And of course, more dynamic movement such as what Pritch or a pacier winger would offer would really cause reanalysis from an opposition back line, and consequently hold more potential for inducing disorganization.

 

[mpickard2087]

do our attacking mids really interchange though? or do they all kind of just migrate to the same position? i don't think chadli/eriksen/lamela are dynamic enough as a trio to really do it effectively, not like chelsea's three for example.

Yep I agree with that bit completely. They don't really interchange, they all tend to make the same runs into the same position and there's not thought into what they are doing a lot of the time. Timing of runs/movements is also pretty bad in my opinion, the default option seems to be to head towards the centre of the pitch. I never really see anyone waiting and then picking the right moment to arrive in that pocket of space (admittedly that pocket is never really available, what with the other two already occupying it).

 

[Main Man]

He did at Ajax but for Denmark he's primarily played as a 10.

When researching the OP I was actually surprised to learn how few assists Eriksen had playing for Ajax.

I have repeatedly observed him fail with attempted incisive passes. Some were tricky but you kind of hope he's good enough to make those.

I look back to Ajax at the Etihad and he dominated in the Modric role, that is where I would like to see him play for us. He is the closest - although obv nowhere near as good - that we have come to filling his void.

He needs to step up next season though I think despite a good goalscoring record this.

I have no issue with him taking free kicks but why we persist with him on corners is beyond me.

 

[mil1lion]

It's like you closed your eyes and missed most of the previous 5 years. Bale was absolutely hopeless defensively and Lennon was little better. He would shadow chase an opponent but rarely get within 3 yards of him and hardly ever tackled anyone. Lennon created less than Lamela has.

We couldn't win nine home games with Lennon and Bale out wide and that was with Modric and VDV too.

What's the point of having full backs and wide wingers ? Where's the tactical variation. The idea is to have both inverted AM's and full backs out wide, and also have the AM's interchanging.

You seem to think we're Barcelona. We're not good enough to play the inverted wingers because they're not intelligent enough to make it work. I didn't say Bale and Lennon were great at defending, but it makes it a lot easier to track back when you're on the wing than if you're caught in a central attacking position.

Not to mention having a winger in front of the fullback gives them a pass out from the back. So often I see our fullbacks pick the ball up from deep and have no way to retain the ball. They end up either putting the ball out for a throw or play a long ball and concede possession.

 

[mil1lion]

I agree with the benefits which you propose, but they don't come innately embedded in traditional wingers. Traditional wingers don't inherently have better defensive senses, in fact Lamela has far and away been our hardest working winger this term defensively, and he is the antithesis of the traditional winger. I agree we need more pace, and I agree we need to be quicker and more decisive, and incisive, in moving the ball around and more dangerously/aggressively in order to open up space; but again, this is yet another trait which doesn't come inherently embedded in traditional wingers. Inverted wingers are fully capable of this too, we just happen to have rather slow inverted wingers at the moment.

When you look around Europe, there are sides succeeding everywhere with inverted wingers, and inverted wingers on both sides no less. The best front line in the world atm has inverted wingers on both sides. So point is, "inverteds" are not the causative factor. Brits seem to resent this transition in the modern game as its the biggest deviation from their traditional game, the "7/11 4-4-2," and as such they look to blame it on what is perceived to be the greatest difference, and that is the winger orientation.

Personally I like to see balance and I do like to see one winger, regardless of traditional or inverted, be fully capable of getting to the byline to supply crosses. I think we're currently rather unbalanced as we lack any genuinely pacey and disruptive wide options, which causes our attack to be very static and stifling (to ourselves). But this lack of balance is due to the personnel we've accumulated and with a lack of consideration for expanded options, not because we happen to primarily play inverted wingers.

I think I explain the term inverted winger a bit different. When I say inverted winger I refer more to the position the winger takes up being too central. It probably sounds like I am referring to traditional wingers as those who play on their favoured foot. I don't have an issue with right footed players on the left and vice versa. I'm more concerned with how that player moves without the ball. Chadli and Lamela would work well if they hugged the touchline more, particularly when we defend because it would give our fullback a ball to play down the line rather than have nothing to pass to.

Even Messi has done that at Barca since he moved to the right. There are times he's right on the line and that's in a team far superior to us on a pitch wider than ours. So often when I go to the Lane it just seems to congested and I think the wingers need to understand when to pull out wide and when to come inside and crossover etc. Maybe it's just a matter of training them more or maybe we need to bring another player or two in that can do it.

Also I do not think it's fair to suggest that because some of the best clubs succeed with inverted wingers that it works because it hasn't been working for us these past 2 years. I just think we have to be realistic as far as what we can do as a team. I think we're trying too hard to play like Barca when really I think we should line up a bit more like Swansea. I think they have the system that would work well for us personally.

 

[Nebby]

So, Christian Eriksen is the top scoring midfielder in the EPL. Nice. But why has this seemed to come at the cost of his ability to directly create for others ?

Put him in a team not swamped with a bunch of goal-shy dunderheads, and I imagine his assists stats would shoot up.

Other than Kane and perhaps Chadli, the team is hardly blessed with finishers.

 

[Khilari]

I look back to Ajax at the Etihad and he dominated in the Modric role, that is where I would like to see him play for us. He is the closest - although obv nowhere near as good - that we have come to filling his void.

He needs to step up next season though I think despite a good goalscoring record this.

I have no issue with him taking free kicks but why we persist with him on corners is beyond me.

Yes - I'd really like to see him get on the ball more in the middle, though he did so well early on in the season carving out late chances in and around the box. He's a great passer, though we would lose one of Mason and Bentaleb's energy and tackling possibly making us even more vunerable at the back (unless we had a Schneiderlin-like player in there).

It could mean more of Lamela in the middle, Chadli staying out on the left and the likes of Townsend (or another) on the right (the three changing around).

 

[lol]

personally would play him as a cm alongside a defensive minded cm, basically a matic or schneiderlin. play lamela at the 10 as he'd come back and make tackles in the middle of the park.

two players who can take on and beat fullbacks on both the left and right, kane right in the middle.

 

[Blake Griffin]

cm3 yes, cm2 no.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

You seem to think we're Barcelona. We're not good enough to play the inverted wingers because they're not intelligent enough to make it work. I didn't say Bale and Lennon were great at defending, but it makes it a lot easier to track back when you're on the wing than if you're caught in a central attacking position.

Not to mention having a winger in front of the fullback gives them a pass out from the back. So often I see our fullbacks pick the ball up from deep and have no way to retain the ball. They end up either putting the ball out for a throw or play a long ball and concede possession.

Yeah, that's it, I think we are Barcelona.

The wingers we have aren't as good at being wide wingers as the inverted wingers we have are at being inverted wingers. And I haven't seen many orthodox "wide wingers" out there who are that good.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Put him in a team not swamped with a bunch of goal-shy dunderheads, and I imagine his assists stats would shoot up.

Other than Kane and perhaps Chadli, the team is hardly blessed with finishers.

Well assists stats weren't great when playing for the top team in the dutch league.

 

[DaSpurs]

I think I explain the term inverted winger a bit different. When I say inverted winger I refer more to the position the winger takes up being too central. It probably sounds like I am referring to traditional wingers as those who play on their favoured foot. I don't have an issue with right footed players on the left and vice versa. I'm more concerned with how that player moves without the ball. Chadli and Lamela would work well if they hugged the touchline more, particularly when we defend because it would give our fullback a ball to play down the line rather than have nothing to pass to.

Even Messi has done that at Barca since he moved to the right. There are times he's right on the line and that's in a team far superior to us on a pitch wider than ours. So often when I go to the Lane it just seems to congested and I think the wingers need to understand when to pull out wide and when to come inside and crossover etc. Maybe it's just a matter of training them more or maybe we need to bring another player or two in that can do it.

Also I do not think it's fair to suggest that because some of the best clubs succeed with inverted wingers that it works because it hasn't been working for us these past 2 years. I just think we have to be realistic as far as what we can do as a team. I think we're trying too hard to play like Barca when really I think we should line up a bit more like Swansea. I think they have the system that would work well for us personally.

Yeah the first two paragraphs of your clarification are fair. I agree the players we have end up congesting each other a bit much and I certainly agree they are too likely to move to the middle. This is part of why I'm a fan of Konoplyanka, as not only does he provide aggressive pace and dribbling, but in his ambidexterity you have no idea which angle he's going to take as he's equally capable of cutting in to attack and create as he is taking it towards the byline to get in a cross. That is my ideal kind of inverted winger.

However, it is fair to suggest that inverted wingers work given the evidence around Europe. The fact it's not worked for us doesn't come remotely close to countering that, it just means we currently don't have the right balance and the right players for it. Ergo, we seem to be linked with a slew of wingers. Hopefully we'll see better balance, better movement, better stretch, and better creativity through that stretched out space.

 

[DaSpurs]

Yeah, that's it, I think we are Barcelona.

The wingers we have aren't as good at being wide wingers as the inverted wingers we have are at being inverted wingers. And I haven't seen many orthodox "wide wingers" out there who are that good.

It's true. When you look at the top wingers around Europe, none of them are traditional wingers. You could have made an argument Griezmann is a "traditional" winger in that he played on his natural side, but he didn't really play like one and he isn't one anymore anyway now that he's deployed as a second striker in Simeone's 4-4-2.