Minority Report - Talking Tactics (4)

And here's a subsidiary question for everyone: We set off very well against Fulham but have faltered somewhat (Charlton was better than the two away games) since. Do we prosper on Saturday by tweaking the system/formation, or rediscovering the motivation and confidence? (I think we're OK on fitness). Or both?

 

I think its both.

Tactically, away from home especially, I think we've failed to cope with having the ball. The opposition have often sat deep to negate space and given little space to pass through. Additional energy and confidence may assist to get through that more effectively, or, we might have to find new ways to get through tactically.

I think a game is full of many different aspects. Strategy and tactics play a part. Orchestration and planning play a part. How players interpret and deliver their instructions. The quality of the player and individual skill and their motivation in doing it. The competitive aspect of duels within the game and what is proving to more successful (some of which may be unplanned) and then obviously the random nature of a game, deflections, indecisions, human nature, wind, the pitch, fear, knocks and slight injuries.

I agree with RR that you plan for what you can control and have a game plan and set tactics at the outset for how you think you want to approach a fixture. But I also believe that can go out of the window at any point and adaptation plays a huge part in individual play and overall team success.

 

Against Fulham, we tried to stop them playing from the back. At goal kicks, Fulham wanted to pass their way up the field, so we marked up every defender in short passing range. We allowed the keeper to have the ball, hoping he would kick it long, and confident that our tall defenders would win it if he did. It was a very successful tactic and Mitrovic was effectively isolated, but it was tiring, especially so as they had exactly the same plan for us when we had the ball. With 20 minutes left, our tiredness meant that we had to revert to 4-4-2 and try to shut up shop.

For Charlton Athletic, both teams kicked it long from the keeper, even though on many occasions it meant that possession was sacrificed. Both teams played 4-4-2, but the Charlton midfield was arranged in a diamond, and IMHO, this was the biggest influence on the game because it meant that we we out numbered in central midfield which meant that Jonny Williams kept getting free, and he was the biggest influence on the game.

Orsenkhat and Tiff-Taff have insisted above that tactics are not important. but tactically the press in the first game and Charlton's midfield diamond were huge influences on those games. I get it that not everyone is interested in tactics, but the fact that you are not interested does not render such things to be unimportant, especially when there is not much between the teams and the Coach is looking for an edge.

I do not know what happens away from home as I only attend home games.

 

In his pre-match interview before the Luton Town game, Dale Tonge talks about lots of teams playing either low block or mid block. Does anyone know what these terms mean?

 

just got this from tinterweb

low block

defends from a very deep position in order to limit the amount of space the opposition has to exploit. Teams generally use it when they are inferior to the opposition (quality wise) or if the manager believes the best way to win is to exploit the opposition in their defensive transitions.

 

mid block

not looked it up but an educated guess would be that the mid block would be to defend against the opposition from the midfield area where, as you have stated previously, it's very much man against man at lose quarters ( that's where you need a nobby stiles or gwn thomas!).
The high block, as we know, is pressing high up top from front to back.

 

Thank-you for that 55&counting. Is there any reason they can't use English?

 

Because the average footballer doesn't understand English?

 

I agree fitness wise we're probably o.k.
It must be very confidence sapping for a player to come out on to the pitch with clear instructions on what his role is, what tactics he should use etc and then he finds the opposing players play in such a way that he can't do his job.
This is of course a two way process we may impose our tactic/game plan on the opposition or it may work the other way.
Can a team change it's tactics/formation mid-way through the match if things are not going well?
Do we win matches because we had the right tactics/formation do we lose matches because the other team had better tactics or is there a lot of luck involved?

 

I know drain block is when we are backing up playing sh.it

 

Enjoyed this thread. You're all right! Tactics help us to make our own luck. And all the physical and psyche factors play in to the outcomes. That's why it's such a great game.

The more dribbles you make into the penalty area, the more penalties you're likely to get. It's a %age game.

 

Credit to Red Rain for making his long awaited comeback!
By way of enlightenment and without wishing to lower the tone, I listened to the "Under the Cosh" podcast with Mark Crossley this afternoon.
I mention this as it relates to a couple of things in this thread:
1. The influence of Coaches on players and
2. Tactics.
it has been previously mentioned on here. If you've not listened to it yet, then please don't not listen. Quality story from the Hoyland Gordon Banks with a superb impersonation of Cloughie to boot!!

 

At the end of the day team formations have not caused us to lose points this season. Errors have. We are much more likely to be punished in the championship for one bad ball or slip. It doesn't mean formations & tactics are out of the window though, as poor tactics put us under pressure. I feel DS did get his tactics wrong vs Brum, as we had no attacking threat in the game with the team selection & one error let a very good striker take the one chance he was gifted. Everyone makes mistakes, even DS. He has got it right on most occasions as Barnsley manager & for my mind will learn a lot from that game. My poor scores after the game were for all the forward players & McGeehan, who to my mind were responsible. Maybe Mads could have lofted that ball into the stand, but that is clearly not how he has been instructed to play.

 

definitely BOTH Orsen!!!
One way to do that is as mentioned by (I think Red Taff).......show them what they are capable of by showing the Fulham VT.
And repeat. And repeat.

 

Love the double negative.

 

Can't disagree with much of what you've said here.
Daniel, unfortunately, got it horribly wrong at Hillsbro also. Too much east to west and west to east football (as Bassett use to call it) - nothing incisive, no speed of passing. He was out thought by Bullen. However as you've said we're on a learning curve here and Daniel is no fool. I retain my optimism by putting faith in this terrific young Manager and his Team.....who will make the step up.
I often judge Managers in terms of "Would I like to work for them? Could they get me motivated?" With many Football managers it's a no but with our man it's a very positive yes.
Said it before......patience and perspective is what we need as fans.
WISBERATE!

 

Nowt wrong with the good old double negative by way of emphasising the point!!

 

It's a long season & we have only played 4 league games. A couple of wins & posters will be moving from flounce to talking about the playoffs. For me staying up is the only target & as yet I think we can do it.

 

I listened to the Crossley podcast the other day - it's brilliant!

You can't help but be struck by the motivational abilities of many of the great coaches: Shankly, Clough, Ferguson, Guardiola, for example.

I suppose the tactics/systems/formations specialists would be headed by Sir Alf Ramsey?

That got me thinking about whether any of this could be linked to some of Max Weber's theories about the sources of authority (Traditional, Rational-legal and Charismatic). I suppose the systems and tactics bias would equate to the rational-legal type of authority, whereas the motivational bias might be more akin to charismatic authority. Above my pay grade (I'm not a sociologist!) but very thought-provoking!

 

The Crossley one’s brilliant, nearly crashed the car laughing when he was telling the **** house & sunday league story.

The Killgallon one from this week was one of the better ones as well