Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
grefstad

Barca-Leverkusen

Recommended Posts

Leverkusen 1-0 up at Barca at HT.

Leverkusen have run 4.8km more than Barca, 480m per outfield player, in the first half. That is a lot...

Remains to be seen if they can see the game out, but they certainly put down the effort..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We are getting reports of atheletics meetings now. I suppose it''s because they make more sense to you than football. Which does appear to be a totally alien and incomprehensible activity to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barcelona had 70% possession. You tend to run more off the ball than on it. Hardly surprising they ran more. All you''ve done is literally state the obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="AllenWickerbasket"]We are getting reports of atheletics meetings now. I suppose it''s because they make more sense to you than football. Which does appear to be a totally alien and incomprehensible activity to you.[/quote]

Comments from ignorants like this is why English football never take the next steps out of the backwaters. England got the players, but not the athletes or the nescessary attitude.

Football these days is a game of athletes. No more, no less.

In earlier times, where you probably are still stuck, a team could get away with carrying a few junk-in-the trunk players. Nowadays you can not.

As for the Barca-Leverkusen game, Barca win it with two quickfire goals, but Leverkusen played a very good game, and could easily have won or drawn this game.

My point, in all this, is that if you have a team that is inferior to the opposition, you got do something to level the playing field a bit, and thats more running, more tackling, more ground covering, more "boring athletics stuff".

Or do you expect us to pass Man C, Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, et al off the park with little physical effort?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So this is a criticism of our work rate, right?  Or anticipation of us not working hard enough against the top clubs?  There will not be lack of work rate, because their better players on the ball will demand that we work harder quite naturally.  Whatever happens, we will be effective and organied as always - whoever we are playing - and will rise to whatever challenge is put in front of us.

What will scare the pants of the likes of ManC and ManU, is our quality on the ball and the directness of our attacks.  As we have seen already this season, the top clubs do leave space for the opposition to play - and they are starting to be found out by one or two clubs who have the quality to expoit it.   We can do that too.  

Work rate will not be an issue - you work as hard as you have to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="grefstad"][quote user="AllenWickerbasket"]We are getting reports of atheletics meetings now. I suppose it''s because they make more sense to you than football. Which does appear to be a totally alien and incomprehensible activity to you.
[/quote] Comments from ignorants like this is why English football never take the next steps out of the backwaters. England got the players, but not the athletes or the nescessary attitude. Football these days is a game of athletes. No more, no less. In earlier times, where you probably are still stuck, a team could get away with carrying a few junk-in-the trunk players. Nowadays you can not. As for the Barca-Leverkusen game, Barca win it with two quickfire goals, but Leverkusen played a very good game, and could easily have won or drawn this game. My point, in all this, is that if you have a team that is inferior to the opposition, you got do something to level the playing field a bit, and thats more running, more tackling, more ground covering, more "boring athletics stuff". Or do you expect us to pass Man C, Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, et al off the park with little physical effort?[/quote]

 

It must be hard being so humble.

 

Thanks for sharing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Really, because I thought that the main criticism of English national football is that the players are tremendous athletes, but not as technically or mentally (in a footballing sense) gifted as some of the other world nations.

Do you honestly think football is just a "game of athletes, nothing more nothing less"? Funny stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No surprises whatsoever from the OP but are you actually indirectly criticising the current NCFC squads work rate, Grefsted? Something tells me you''ve not seen much, if any, of us at all this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Alex "]No surprises whatsoever from the OP but are you actually indirectly criticising the current NCFC squads work rate, Grefsted? Something tells me you''ve not seen much, if any, of us at all this season.[/quote]

Indirectly, I am a bit critical of Norwich'' workrate off the ball, yes.

I dont think we are less fit than other teams in this league, but we sure could cover more ground than we are currently doing, and we would be a better team for it.

Now, AN is no mug, so he will know about the fact that Norwich is the team running the fewest miles of all teams in the Premier.

Maybe he is happy with it, maybe not.

But for me, I think we need to run more in order to "take the next step", i.e establish ourselves as a midtable Premier team for seasons to come.

Now, most of you would say this issue is not pressing, since the team is doing quite well at the moment, and therefore, why change something that is working well?

I am not talking about changing our approach, our style of play, etc.

When we have the ball, the movement is generally quite good.

I am talking about when we dont have the ball. We are conceding far too many goals, and I belive it is due to not shutting out situations before thy become critical.

Its about creating the small freekicks in areas which are not dangerous, closing down space before the ball comes to close to our penalty area, etc.

Parma explains this very well in his tactics Masterclass.

We are conceding goals mostly due to not moving enough, quickly enough. Combine it with the odd personal error, and there you have a receipe for conceding goals at this level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is an interesting new trend, you can write any old tosh and then try and justify it but referencing Parma''s Masterclass [:)]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"]Barcelona had 70% possession. You tend to run more off the ball than on it. Hardly surprising they ran more. All you''ve done is literally state the obvious.[/quote]
Just uhh..highlighting this again because it takes a steaming dump on everything you''ve said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I watched the Leicester game on Saturday and they all put in the miles, chasing for every ball etc. They still got thrashed. Running x amount of miles is not the be all and end all, whatever that means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

''Football these days is a game of athletes. No more, no less.''That merely reaffirms my view that you have neither a clue, or any understanding of the game. As they say in the attic  ''I''m out''.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Football is a game for Athletes and that''s why England aren''t very good! What a crock. England haven''t been good enough because they have traditionally relied on athletes and haven''t promoted technical ability. How often do you hear he''s too small and not strong enough to make it. Watch some youth football or even Sunday league and you will see the reliance on being quicker, bigger and stronger.

As for Alex Neil being happy/ unhappy with the miles run see when he was asked if he was concerned when asked this exact question. He raised a wry smile and said we are more efficient than other teams.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/norwich-boss-alex-neil-insists-6472539

As Parma said in his masterclass Alex Neil is looking for a new way of doing things to give us a tactical edge. Just maybe he has found a way of doing so that involves less running about like a headless chicken and wants to base his side on good technical ability and being disciplined. Seemed to work for Barcelona and we''re not exactly struggling now are we.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many times do I have to hear "we are not exactly struggling now, are we"?

We are doing OK, but not doing exceptionally well.

We can do much better.

But most of the people in here seems happy with scrapping along in 13-14th place being only a win or two from the drop zone.

I guess most of you don''t think there is any room for improvement in this Norwich team at all?

Yes, I am aware of Leicester getting trashed even though they put down the miles. A game of football is ofcourse not all down to running. But it is a big part of the game.

A part where I think we are lacking at the moment.

Look at this link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-united/11888783/Just-one-Premier-League-team-has-run-further-than-Manchester-United-this-season.html

Man Utd are 2nd in the table when it comes to running. And they have a lot of possession too. Now, that means Van Gaal wants a lot of movement off the ball, when in possession, and when not in possession.

I would like us to head in that direction. Skillfull players also need to keep moving, as football is a game of fluency. The days when Jan Molby could operate inside Liverpool''s midcircle and ping crosses out on either wing is long gone.

Now, this table which The Telegraph produces, showing teams who run most and least, is ofcourse not the bible of how to play the beautiful game.

But it gives some interesting insight in how teams play.

Newcastle and WBA are both high up on the running tables, but not doing too well in the league (non-correlation).

But you also got Villa, Sunderland and Stoke far down in the runner tables and also in the league (correlation).

Typical possession-based teams like Chelsea, Man C, Swansea and Arsenal are all below average in the runner tables. It is therefore suggesting that for all the possession these teams have, the are not moving much off the ball.

Now, where does this leave Norwich City?

We are not very possession based (49% avg), yet run fewer miles than any other team. That makes us rather static.

Also, stats found at squawka.com says Norwich is the team committing 4th most fouls (89) of all 20 teams, and suffering fewest fouls (54) of all 20 teams, per matchweek 7.

Check this link: http://www.squawka.com/football-team-rankings#performance-score#team-stats#english-barclays-premier-league|season-2015/2016#0#90#any#any#season#1#all-matches#total

So, committing most fouls, and drawing least fouls, what does this say about our fluidity?

I suggest it hints about a rather static approach in the way we play.

However, we are 9th in the squawka.com list of chances created, inclusing key passes, so the pleasing thing seem to be that although we do not run much, we create quite a lot.

Also, we''re 7th for shots made, but only 14th for shot conversions, but this has to do with a lot of our shots being from outside the area (3rd in the tables).

Obviously, it is hard to pick out selected stats like these, and then draw a conclusion. After all, I am no sports scientist. But it does give hints about where we can improve, and statistical sites like whoscored.com and squawka.com gives great insight, and if you have got some time to fiddle with it, it is a useful, or at least interesting, waste of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="grefstad"][quote user="AllenWickerbasket"]We are getting reports of atheletics meetings now. I suppose it''s because they make more sense to you than football. Which does appear to be a totally alien and incomprehensible activity to you.[/quote]

Comments from ignorants like this is why English football never take the next steps out of the backwaters. England got the players, but not the athletes or the nescessary attitude.

Football these days is a game of athletes. No more, no less.

In earlier times, where you probably are still stuck, a team could get away with carrying a few junk-in-the trunk players. Nowadays you can not.

As for the Barca-Leverkusen game, Barca win it with two quickfire goals, but Leverkusen played a very good game, and could easily have won or drawn this game.

My point, in all this, is that if you have a team that is inferior to the opposition, you got do something to level the playing field a bit, and thats more running, more tackling, more ground covering, more "boring athletics stuff".

Or do you expect us to pass Man C, Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, et al off the park with little physical effort?[/quote]BALL MOVES QUICKER THAN THE PLAYER...so by passing you don''t need to rely on athletes. Secondly the whole you have to run more to level it...no. Its called being smarter and if you are running around chasing the ball like a dog with a tennis ball then you deserve to lose. passing is designed to force the opposition to move in realtion to the ball. A clever team will know when to drop off and let a team have it and when to press up and close off space. Moron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="grefstad"][quote user="AllenWickerbasket"]We are getting reports of atheletics meetings now. I suppose it''s because they make more sense to you than football. Which does appear to be a totally alien and incomprehensible activity to you.[/quote]

Comments from ignorants like this is why English football never take the next steps out of the backwaters. England got the players, but not the athletes or the nescessary attitude.

Football these days is a game of athletes. No more, no less.

In earlier times, where you probably are still stuck, a team could get away with carrying a few junk-in-the trunk players. Nowadays you can not.

As for the Barca-Leverkusen game, Barca win it with two quickfire goals, but Leverkusen played a very good game, and could easily have won or drawn this game.

My point, in all this, is that if you have a team that is inferior to the opposition, you got do something to level the playing field a bit, and thats more running, more tackling, more ground covering, more "boring athletics stuff".

Or do you expect us to pass Man C, Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, et al off the park with little physical effort?[/quote]BALL MOVES QUICKER THAN THE PLAYER...so by passing you don''t need to rely on athletes. Secondly the whole you have to run more to level it...no. Its called being smarter and if you are running around chasing the ball like a dog with a tennis ball then you deserve to lose. passing is designed to force the opposition to move in realtion to the ball. A clever team will know when to drop off and let a team have it and when to press up and close off space. Moron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="grefstad"]How many times do I have to hear "we are not exactly struggling now, are we"? We are doing OK, but not doing exceptionally well. We can do much better. But most of the people in here seems happy with scrapping along in 13-14th place being only a win or two from the drop zone. I guess most of you don''t think there is any room for improvement in this Norwich team at all? Yes, I am aware of Leicester getting trashed even though they put down the miles. A game of football is ofcourse not all down to running. But it is a big part of the game. A part where I think we are lacking at the moment. Look at this link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-united/11888783/Just-one-Premier-League-team-has-run-further-than-Manchester-United-this-season.html Man Utd are 2nd in the table when it comes to running. And they have a lot of possession too. Now, that means Van Gaal wants a lot of movement off the ball, when in possession, and when not in possession. I would like us to head in that direction. Skillfull players also need to keep moving, as football is a game of fluency. The days when Jan Molby could operate inside Liverpool''s midcircle and ping crosses out on either wing is long gone. Now, this table which The Telegraph produces, showing teams who run most and least, is ofcourse not the bible of how to play the beautiful game. But it gives some interesting insight in how teams play. Newcastle and WBA are both high up on the running tables, but not doing too well in the league (non-correlation). But you also got Villa, Sunderland and Stoke far down in the runner tables and also in the league (correlation). Typical possession-based teams like Chelsea, Man C, Swansea and Arsenal are all below average in the runner tables. It is therefore suggesting that for all the possession these teams have, the are not moving much off the ball. Now, where does this leave Norwich City? We are not very possession based (49% avg), yet run fewer miles than any other team. That makes us rather static. Also, stats found at squawka.com says Norwich is the team committing 4th most fouls (89) of all 20 teams, and suffering fewest fouls (54) of all 20 teams, per matchweek 7. Check this link: http://www.squawka.com/football-team-rankings#performance-score#team-stats#english-barclays-premier-league|season-2015/2016#0#90#any#any#season#1#all-matches#total So, committing most fouls, and drawing least fouls, what does this say about our fluidity? I suggest it hints about a rather static approach in the way we play. However, we are 9th in the squawka.com list of chances created, inclusing key passes, so the pleasing thing seem to be that although we do not run much, we create quite a lot. Also, we''re 7th for shots made, but only 14th for shot conversions, but this has to do with a lot of our shots being from outside the area (3rd in the tables). Obviously, it is hard to pick out selected stats like these, and then draw a conclusion. After all, I am no sports scientist. But it does give hints about where we can improve, and statistical sites like whoscored.com and squawka.com gives great insight, and if you have got some time to fiddle with it, it is a useful, or at least interesting, waste of time.[/quote]

 

I propose that when we have the ball in the opponents half John Ruddy runs around the penalty area, this will increase our running around stats and also up the keepers fluidity rating. Or if we follow the Sqawka stat that although we do not run much, we create quite a lot of we could stand still all game and create more.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="hogesar"]Barcelona had 70% possession. You tend to run more off the ball than on it. Hardly surprising they ran more. All you''ve done is literally state the obvious.[/quote]
Just uhh..highlighting this again because it takes a steaming dump on everything you''ve said.
[/quote]
*ahem*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You will hear that phrase as long as the style of football we are playing is working. What you are advocating is essentially a change in the way we play which isn''t really needed at the moment. You have taken stats in isolation and you need to use them in connection with what is seen on the pitch and the reasons we are not running further than other teams.

I have seen certain changes like in how we only pressure the ball in certain parts of the pitch and try not to get sucked into pressing too high and being easier to play through. We also try to keep the line higher and win the ball further up the pitch leaving less distance needed to join the attack unlike say Palace who sit deep and rely on lung busting runs to get forward. Tettey has a role that plays within a smaller zone of the pitch than previously not getting far into the opposition half other than at a corner. There''s more of a willingness to hold the ball and try and control the tempo by speeding up and slowing down play whilst inviting them to press our defence. This all helps to keep our mileage down. Plus leaves some energy to keep up the tempo we want later in the game which has been evident so far.

I also disagree that lack of miles means static or poor movement. Some of the best movement is very subtle and doesn''t require a sprint or a run to find space. There''s a Zidane film that is just a camera on him for 1 game and it''s a good watch. He just floats into space offering an option all the time.

I do agree we can improve but I think you are looking in the wrong area. We have more concerning areas like conceding at set pieces, will our strikers be able to score enough goals to supplement what the rest of the team will provide, who do we pick to play down the left and the new pies at Carrow Road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fair points, Dead Canary. Appreciate the aim of contributing to the discussion instead of the hopeless bashing seen from the usual suspects.

Your views regarding roles, pressure in certain areas of the pitch, etc are interesting.

Still, I dont think AN would want us to be the team doing the least running in the league, deliberately, so my whole point of this thread is if there is a deeper issue here (lack of fitness, or just tactical twists/playing style) which makes us run less than others.

Looking at the best teams in football, like Barcelona, they keep the ball very well, and you can of course advocate that they save a lot of energy by keeping it, forcing the opposition to run between to cover space, etc.

But when Barca lose the ball, they are very aggressive in trying to win it back the first 5-10 seconds after losing it. They swarm around the player with the ball, nicking it back as soon as possible.

There are some signs that AN is also trying to implement the same principles at Norwich, but not to super effect just as yet.

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...