What i dont understand though, is why we often seem to get bullied in the second half after largely excellent first half performances, why is that?
For ‘playing quick’ insert playing direct then. The point I’m making is you don’t play the ball into Sarabia on a counter because he barely has the pace to run into open space let alone beat a man 1v1, especially if the loss of possession is likely to catch us out on transition.This is the type of stuff that makes me think how did you come up with that?
1) Playing quick isn't a thing. Playing at a higher passing tempo in your own third can get you up the pitch quicker, City and Arsenal do this. Liverpool play a higher tempo passing game in the final third as well to try and tease teams into making a mistake by pulling players out of position and exploiting the space with fresh runners and angled runs. All 3 teams use a change of pace to unsettle defenders. GoN had that with Cunha, Hwang, Neto as his front 3.
2) GoN tactics of playing slowly deeper is to do two things, firstly it means our 'set plays in possession' (not set pieces) can be recycled to see if the opposition have a tactical weakness and secondly to draw the opposition onto the ball carrier to then exploit the space they leave behind.
GoN's counter attacks are mainly done at pace this way and his style is running with the ball, like Klopp's teams in the gegenpress, rather than hitting long direct balls (a la Warnock).
We have shown this slow passing system does not work for us and I have no idea why he persists with it. We are far better on the front foot using the higher tempo passing to get up the pitch and control tempo that way, we have won a lot of games this way from October. Currently setting us up to try and not concede and play on the counter isn't working and he needs to stop it and trust his players to get a higher tempo again.
FWIW, I work with a Bournemouth fan and he said GoN did similar with them last season when they had injuries.
When do we ever use subs early enough though? We leave it to late mostly.Is it the lack of subs?
Every other side generally has 3/4/5 good options to come on. We don't.
i dont think it is, we were guilty of poor second half performances from the start of the season, when we had subs. And lack of subs does not explain why many teams get at us straight from the half time restart and put us under pressure that we dont seem to recover from.Is it the lack of subs?
Every other side generally has 3/4/5 good options to come on. We don't.
Playing direct wouldn't isolate your attackers 1v1 though.For ‘playing quick’ insert playing direct then. The point I’m making is you don’t play the ball into Sarabia on a counter because he barely has the pace to run into open space let alone beat a man 1v1, especially if the loss of possession is likely to catch us out on transition.
You have to work to the profile of player you have on the pitch, hence why our passing has slowed down, in order to work out channels to play through - think RAN’s 1v1 against Burnley. You can move the ball as quick as you like but there has to be a natural instinct within the forward line to combine well and the technical aptitude to make it happen. We haven’t got all of those boxes ticked right now.
You’ve said nothing that contradicts what I’ve said so I’ve no idea why you’re so confused?.
Why doesn't playing quickly create 1v1s though? Burnley for example were quite extreme I thought in leaving themselves 1 against 1 when they were pressing us. I don't know if they'd have done that anyway, but against Sarabia and Chiwome they coped with us very comfortably, I don't think it would have looked like that with Neto and Cunha?Playing direct wouldn't isolate your attackers 1v1 though.
My aim wasn't to contradict more explain what I think we do which is very different to your explanation above.
I'd like to know how you came up with it, genuinely. Watching games back and analysing stats, which stats and how do they work with you searching games?
Is it confirmation bias or some kind of objective tactical analysis?
Genuine curious as it's good to know where folks come from. We all see things differently.
Unless they were chasing the game, I highly doubt they’d have left Neto with Esteve alone, like you say.Why doesn't playing quickly create 1v1s though? Burnley for example were quite extreme I thought in leaving themselves 1 against 1 when they were pressing us. I don't know if they'd have done that anyway, but against Sarabia and Chiwome they coped with us very comfortably, I don't think it would have looked like that with Neto and Cunha?
I post videos nearly every week. I plan to do another this week to highlight our issues without our first choice forward line and how it impacts our defence.Playing direct wouldn't isolate your attackers 1v1 though.
My aim wasn't to contradict more explain what I think we do which is very different to your explanation above.
I'd like to know how you came up with it, genuinely. Watching games back and analysing stats, which stats and how do they work with you searching games?
Is it confirmation bias or some kind of objective tactical analysis?
Genuine curious as it's good to know where folks come from. We all see things differently.
Thanks Gully...I post videos nearly every week. I plan to do another this week to highlight our issues without our first choice forward line and how it impacts our defence.
I’ll be sure to explain what I mean regarding playing direct. just for you
Otherwise feel free to indulge
Gully's Tactical Analysis
I post videos nearly every week. I plan to do another this week to highlight our issues without our first choice forward line and how it impacts our defence.
I’ll be sure to explain what I mean regarding playing direct. just for you
Otherwise feel free to indulge
Gully's Tactical Analysis
“If your knowledge and understanding of the game is really poor, you could reach the conclusion that it’s offside." - Gary O'NeilGary now Charged by FA over West Ham protest.
Don’t condone it but I imagine he wanted to rip the officials doors off the hinges!Loved everything Gary said publicly. Obviously we don't know what happened around the ref's room, but can't condone anything overly aggressive. The FA don't need to wake up to the fact that pretty much every time these sort of charges are brought (not just against us) they are caused by incompetent refereeing, and that's been compounded by how hard it is to take when the ref has actually decided correctly only to be effectively overruled by a VAR.
He said he wasn't calm enough to receive an explanation when he went to see the ref afterwards I think?Don’t condone it but I imagine he wanted to rip the officials doors off the hinges!
Who could blame him in all fairness!He said he wasn't calm enough to receive an explanation when he went to see the ref afterwards I think?
Yes, I did say that at the weekend, but in fairness he seems to have been charged over his behaviour at the ref's room, not his media comments.I’ve always thought it so unfair that managers are forced to do interviews straight after a game, then get punished if they say what they believe to be true truth.
“If your knowledge and understanding of the game is really poor, you could reach the conclusion that it’s offside." - Gary O'Neil
I think for this savagery, he should get a medal, not a fine.
Typical useless FA. No surprise he has been charged. The game is run by idiots.
Fair enough, as long as Tony Harrington and Darren England also get charged for impersonating a match official.Or the fact he had to be removed from their room…….. He is in trouble……. That quote, plus the removal, he is buggered!!
You can’t behave like he clearly has in regards to being removed from the referees room……
Badly treated or not in regards to the VAR decision, he cannot behave in that kind of manor that sees him removed from being near the ref.
Not run by idiots at all….. there are clear standards for behaviour when speaking and dealing with refs and he has overstepped that!
I said at the weekend that those actions would see him in hot water!
And at a time when we are low on numbers, potentially losing him from the touchline is a bloody big own goal!!!!
I love the passion, but right or wrong you still need to behave appropriately with officials
Strange time to post this given GoN got his pants pulled down and bottomed smacked by Moyes in the second half last weekend.Baffled at the take that O'Neil isn't a 'tactical' manager. Whether he's had all options available to him or not, he's found micro-tactical instructions that we've been able to exploit. Over time he's been able to impress upon the players more, get increased buy-in, understand their abilities and limitations and whether they are capable of carrying out his instructions correctly. There have been countless examples of O'Neil's tactics materialising into important in-game moments, from trigger-based pressing to overloading and moving to 2-3-5 in possession.
I don't think the 'Harry Redknapp-style' manager survives in the Premier League today. Any club in the top half is using teams of analysts and balancing developing a cohesive style of play (macro) and exploiting the opposition (micro). The coaches towards the top are probably more macro than micro, but for those who don't have the benefit of huge budgets and squads full of winners, the only way to keep pace is eek out every last bit of what you have, and use them in a way that takes advantage of what your opponents don't have. How many teams have targeted Semedo's back-post defending, Kilman's unauthoritative defending style, Lemina's unfamiliarity with his wide role and more recently, our lack of a decent left-back?
Just because the opposition manager has also made successful tactical changes and they have been more successful than ours, doesn't mean the manager isn't tactical. Unsurprisingly, we've looked far more tactically fluid when we've had everyone available. Who'd have guessed it And just because you can't see those tactical changes and their effects, doesn't mean they aren't there.
I agree in theory but there is also clear standards of behaviour from players that is blatantly ignored by the same officials for 90 minutes. I’m not saying “two wrongs make a right” just that if anything it shows the standard of officiating. I mean they were getting pelters from all directions walking off the pitch but didn’t send any one off either players or none playing staffYou can’t behave like he clearly has in regards to being removed from the referees room……
Badly treated or not in regards to the VAR decision, he cannot behave in that kind of manor that sees him removed from being near the ref.
Not run by idiots at all….. there are clear standards for behaviour when speaking and dealing with refs and he has overstepped that!
I said at the weekend that those actions would see him in hot water!
And at a time when we are low on numbers, potentially losing him from the touchline is a bloody big own goal!!!!
I love the passion, but right or wrong you still need to behave appropriately with officials
Yes, it was wrong, it wasn't even the worst we've had this season, I'm not even sure it makes top 3!I'm surprised this is the one that has tipped O'Neil over the edge.
I do get the feeling that he is someone who wants to deflect. The ballboy thing after Coventry and now this, describing it as the 'worst decision ever' is excessive.
Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe it was the wrong call as I explained at the time, because Fabianski can see the ball. However, whether we like it or not, there have been goals disallowed for similar incidents in the past.
So, there is a logic to the decision, even if it's wrong in my opinion, and I've no doubt that from a tactical point of view, Chirewa has messed up by not stepping up when the ball is played in, as we will have known that West Ham don't have men on the posts. So, his job will have been to screen the keeper and then get onside, which he forgot to do.
I am maybe more accepting of Saturday as I felt we needed to win to have any chance of staying in the hunt for European football, so a draw wasn't doing much anyway.
I was personally far more gutted with the decisions earlier in the season. The Newcastle, Sheffield United and Fulham games were tough to take and I thought O'Neil would've flown off the handle then, particularly as they were relatively close together.
I agree in theory but there is also clear standards of behaviour from players that is blatantly ignored by the same officials for 90 minutes. I’m not saying “two wrongs make a right” just that if anything it shows the standard of officiating. I mean they were getting pelters from all directions walking off the pitch but didn’t send any one off either players or none playing staff
To me it’s the referee hiding behind having to answer the questions from GON by hiding behind “ooh he was being aggressive so needed removing”.
I take your well point but after yet another screw job, Gary can hardly be expected to stroll up to Harrington and say " Thanks awfully old chap. I think you may have got that last bit wrong. But hey ho such is life. Once again spiffing game old boy and toddle pip until we next meet "
Yes, it was wrong, it wasn't even the worst we've had this season, I'm not even sure it makes top 3!
What I think separates it from some of the other ones is that it was so late (as was Sheff U to be fair) but also a VAR decision that came when absolutely nobody thought there could be anything wrong with the goal.
It was a game that held importance for European qualification too giving West Ham the advantageWhat I think separates it from some of the other ones is that it was so late (as was Sheff U to be fair) but also a VAR decision that came when absolutely nobody thought there could be anything wrong with the goal.
Only if they promise to take the “elite” officials with them.At this point, I'm warming to the European super league just to **** over these charlatans at the Prem.