Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lake district canary

They can't beat you if they haven't got the ball

Recommended Posts

Technical ability is one thing, teamwork is something else.   We have good technical players at Norwich, but they are not the  best in the league - finances dictate that.  So we have to beat teams with better players in by not letting them have the ball.   Stringer''s team in the late eighties knew this and we kept posession and moved the ball well. In recent seasons, even under Paul Lambert,  looking after the ball was not our strong point. 

Under AN we appear to be moving the ball around better, with better movement off the ball and improved and quick passing out of trouble is more prevalent - even Wes looks to have bought in to this idea.  This teamwork/movement is something I hope we are going to see plenty of this season.  I know tactics will be important, I know it''s important to score goals, but most of all, the simple way to play football is the best - look after the ball when you have got it by passing and moving - and fight like mad to get the ball back when you haven''t got it with the high pressing game. The rest is down to motivation/desire and hard work.

Simple, but not easy to achieve. Get that aspect right, though - and anything is possible.  Successful German teams play like that (from what I''ve seen).   Dortmund we are not......but we could be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not strictly true LDC, Palace had the worst possession stats (40.5%) and the worst pass completion rate (69.4%) in the Prem last year but finished 10th.Its good to have controlled possession, but if when you lose the ball the opposition counter attack and score in 3 passes it counts for little.Possession stats for last seasons Prem.http://www.whoscored.com/Regions/252/Tournaments/2/Seasons/4311/Stages/9155/TeamStatistics/England-Premier-League-2014-2015

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For every well constructed argument, there is a statistic that will disprove it.

But Molly, what LDC is saying is STRICTLY TRUE, any team that has 100% possession will not lose.....unless of course they score an own goal. Therefore, NOT strictly true.

So one irrelevant cliche is countered by statistics only to be found true ,unless catastrophe strikes......Football in a nutshell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You''ve got to hold and give, but do it at the right time, you can be slow or fast, but you must get to the line.
They''ll always hit you and hurt you, defend and attack, there''s only one way to beat them, get round the back.

 

Statistically the wisest words about football.

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="wcorkcanary"]For every well constructed argument, there is a statistic that will disprove it.

But Molly, what LDC is saying is STRICTLY TRUE, any team that has 100% possession will not lose.....unless of course they score an own goal. Therefore, NOT strictly true.

So one irrelevant cliche is countered by statistics only to be found true ,unless catastrophe strikes......Football in a nutshell.[/quote]Nearly true [:)] ...... But the opposition will get some possession as they kick off one half and after any goal.Palace are are very good example of how possession stats are only a good indicator but not a guarantee of success.Their stats for the previous season (2013/4) are even worse than last seasons with 37.6% possession and a 70% pass success.Would be interesting to see stats for goals per minute of possession and goals conceded per minute the opposition have possession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You''re very sharp this morning Molly, but as LDCs thread was about not getting beaten , we can discount them having KO after us scoring ( a 0-0 draw is not getting beaten). True, they would get a touch of the ball at the start of one half, but if they dont complete the standard short pass to player stood 2 feet away and we intercept aforementioned pass, were they really ''in possession''.

This hypothetical game is getting more interesting by the minute.

Anyone care to take it to the next level of sillyness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="wcorkcanary"]You''re very sharp this morning Molly, but as LDCs thread was about not getting beaten , we can discount them having KO after us scoring ( a 0-0 draw is not getting beaten). True, they would get a touch of the ball at the start of one half, but if they dont complete the standard short pass to player stood 2 feet away and we intercept aforementioned pass, were they really ''in possession''. This hypothetical game is getting more interesting by the minute. Anyone care to take it to the next level of sillyness.[/quote]

 

What happens at the end of the season when every team has followed this philosophy and every game finished 0-0, who would be champions?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="TCCANARY"]

[quote user="wcorkcanary"]You''re very sharp this morning Molly, but as LDCs thread was about not getting beaten , we can discount them having KO after us scoring ( a 0-0 draw is not getting beaten). True, they would get a touch of the ball at the start of one half, but if they dont complete the standard short pass to player stood 2 feet away and we intercept aforementioned pass, were they really ''in possession''. This hypothetical game is getting more interesting by the minute. Anyone care to take it to the next level of sillyness.[/quote]

 

What happens at the end of the season when every team has followed this philosophy and every game finished 0-0, who would be champions?

 

 

[/quote]Rule C . 7.Subject to Rule C.17, if any 2 or more Clubs have scored the same number of points, have the same goal difference and have scored the same number of goals in League Matches in that Season they shall be deemed to occupy the same position in the table.We would be first and Champions, but we would also finish last and relegated and every position inbetween.The League really have not thought this through, have they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now we''re really getting somewhere with this thread. excellent research Molly and an interesting theory. Any thoughts LDC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"]Interesting. [:)] 

I suppose I should have said "the opposition can''t score if they haven''t got the ball" - maybe irefutable (own goals excepted) ?   

[/quote]Ah, but technically you have not got the ball when you score, unless you push it across the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s true that if you enjoy total possession the chances are that you will win or draw. But there are two doubts in my mind:

1) Possession is not enough. Other teams have lightning fast attacks, and any error is likely to be costly, especially if our rather ponderous defence fails to cut them out.

2) It remains to be seen how many goals we score. We have no proven Premiership quality striker at the moment, and it could be that well-marshalled and quick defenders could reduce our attack to near impotence.

All this is pessimistic, and worst case, because other defences may be caught out, -like Middlesboro''s at Wembley, which had been solid all season, and human beings can be prone to error, especially with Redmond running at them, and by good crosses from our players. Opposing attackers can also miss chances, or have shots blocked or saved.

Having said this, I must admit that I would be happier if we sign a top quality and consistent striker, and also a capable and quick centre back. We may need to consider dropping defenders who are too slow and also error prone, and any player who consistently. miss-passes or gives the ball away. If we succeed in these respects, and also respond to AN''s "give all until I drop" attitude, then we could have a good season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We''re playing more like we did under Hughton than Stringer wrt possession. There''s not exactly a ''right'' way to play, but I''ve tried counting the triangles when we''re in possession and often can''t get higher than one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the opposition could have 100 shots in a game and miss, we could have 1 shot and score....

all it will say is we won.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
''''We''re playing more like we did under Hughton than Stringer wrt possession. There''s not exactly a ''right'' way to play, but I''ve tried counting the triangles when we''re in possession and often can''t get higher than one.'''' ...93V

The point of playing triangles as i understand it is that you (or the opposition) dont spot the third point of the triangle untill the pass is received , and then the ball is moved on in a ''flow of triangles'' ...... this is communicated to players by the Mantra...The space is created, the ball is played, and then the player arrives to receive it. ad infinitum.

Under CH we were more often in static triangles, with our only out ball a static Snoddy, who then didnt pass. Meanwhile RVW had made his run, expecting delivery that rarely came until he was tightly marked. Suarez would struggle with that kind of set up too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously haven''t been to many Premier League games in the last few years LDC?

Trying to play possession football was our biggest downfall under Hughton.

We would win back possession, play the ball out to Snodgrass/Pilks/Redmond on the wing, then they would stop dead and play the ball the backwards. By this time the opposition were back in position and we didn''t have the personnel to even attempt breaking them down. The system continually left our front man isolated and our wingers running into dead ends, ultimately ending up in us losing possession without posing a single threat in front of goal.

If you can''t score goals in the PL you''re going to lose more games than you win or draw. Top quality players only need one chance.

Just to add the German League is completely different to the Premier League.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Our passing has improved under the new manager and Possession is important. I feel our weakness this season could, well be, once we give the ball away, we will be susceptible to the counter attack. Watch out for this against CP who have bags of pace on the break.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="STAN"]You obviously haven''t been to many Premier League games in the last few years LDC?

Trying to play possession football was our biggest downfall under Hughton. [/quote]

I''m well aware that playing "possession football" as such, is not likely to work.  All I am saying is that you have to keep the ball as much as you can and make sure you do something with it, or as Swindon says, we will get caught on the break and punished.  Under Hughton, the break down in midfeld due to the lack of ability to keep possession or at least do something useful with the ball, was quite often painful to watch. 

Hughton was short of attacking ideas - or at least didn''t get the players to work effectively together to create decent attacks.  I don''t see the same issue happening with AN - and the way we played against Brentford showed we are likely to be much more quick and efficient with our use of the ball than we were last time in the premiership. 

But the same thing applies in all football - it''s a simple game - if you have the ball, you are in the driving seat - and the opposition can''t hurt you unless you give it away.   Giving the ball away cheaply is a crime in the premier league for which you are likely to be punished for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We have some good technical players but it would be a disaster in my book to play possession football next year.

The PL is played at such a high and pressing tempo that our only chance of keeping the ball for at least 60% of the game against any established team would be by staying in our own half and moving forward slowly. Even if we had Diego Costa up front for us we would be the lowest scorers in the league playing like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
STAN wrote the following post at 05/08/2015 2:28 PM:

You obviously haven''t been to many Premier League games in the last few years LDC?

Trying to play possession football was our biggest downfall under Hughton.

We would win back possession, play the ball out to Snodgrass/Pilks/Redmond on the wing, then they would stop dead and play the ball the backwards. By this time the opposition were back in position and we didn''t have the personnel to even attempt breaking them down. The system continually left our front man isolated and our wingers running into dead ends, ultimately ending up in us losing possession without posing a single threat in front of goal.

If you can''t score goals in the PL you''re going to lose more games than you win or draw. Top quality players only need one chance.

Just to add the German League is completely different to the Premier League.

Absolutely Stan, we had no movement off the ball under. Hughton and good attacking players like Pilks started to look lost if they carried the ball out of their own half.

Problems that were highlighted on here time after time, and of course time after time many posters defended the tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don''t get this idea that you don''t try and keep the ball and do something useful with it.   The alternative is to let the opposition have it and then you are defending more.   The simple idea is to pass and move, moving the ball quickly and accurately so as to be an effective team with an end product.  Just saying, oh we''re playing Chelsea, so we''ll let them have the ball and just defend, is bonkers.

You play to keep the ball moving with your own team mates, with sufficient movement off the ball that you stretch opponents - as we did against Middsbro. Is that so hard to understand?  

Some people are using the "possession football" label as if it were somehow derogatory - it doesn''t need to be - because at the top level, it has to be about creating your own chances, while limiting those of the opposition. You can only do that if you''ve got the ball! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="wcorkcanary"]''''We''re playing more like we did under Hughton than Stringer wrt possession. There''s not exactly a ''right'' way to play, but I''ve tried counting the triangles when we''re in possession and often can''t get higher than one.'''' ...93V

The point of playing triangles as i understand it is that you (or the opposition) dont spot the third point of the triangle untill the pass is received , and then the ball is moved on in a ''flow of triangles'' ...... this is communicated to players by the Mantra...The space is created, the ball is played, and then the player arrives to receive it. ad infinitum.

Under CH we were more often in static triangles, with our only out ball a static Snoddy, who then didnt pass. Meanwhile RVW had made his run, expecting delivery that rarely came until he was tightly marked. Suarez would struggle with that kind of set up too.[/quote]I think under Hughton everyone had their position, but outside of defending we had no idea. We lost our ability to play the simple triangle and keep the ball moving. The players were fearful.Under AN there are similarities in keeping to our positions, but we''ve improved our ability to do the simple things without huge fear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"]I don''t get this idea that you don''t try and keep the ball and do something useful with it.   The alternative is to let the opposition have it and then you are defending more.   The simple idea is to pass and move, moving the ball quickly and accurately so as to be an effective team with an end product.  Just saying, oh we''re playing Chelsea, so we''ll let them have the ball and just defend, is bonkers.

You play to keep the ball moving with your own team mates, with sufficient movement off the ball that you stretch opponents - as we did against Middsbro. Is that so hard to understand?  

Some people are using the "possession football" label as if it were somehow derogatory - it doesn''t need to be - because at the top level, it has to be about creating your own chances, while limiting those of the opposition. You can only do that if you''ve got the ball![/quote]"Possession football" is itself a broad term, but a useful trait for a team to have. Problems arise when a team can''t do it even if they tried.The best teams have a good variety of ''modes'' that they can switch on when needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to keep the ball without being ''possession football'' is just playing football with better passing.

No one wants to give the ball away, so it''s just dependant on how the players execute their passes. Not really a game plan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...