Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lake district canary

Tettey and defensive strategy.

Recommended Posts

In a 4141, or 4231, or indeed with a 442, with Naismith, Wes and Redmond in the team, we are going to be weak defensively.  All three good attack minded players, none of the three particularly good at defending.   With one striker in front of them, that leaves just two players behind who have to spread themselves too thinly to help the defence.   If Tettey - who is our best performer in that position imo - doesn''t play, we are weak there. Howson, Dorrans, Mulumbu, O''Neil....you can take your pick out of any two of those,  we are not good enough at defending with Wes,Naismith amd Redmond in the team.  We might score goals as we did on Saturday, but defensively we were under too much pressure.   You can blame Martin for the fourth goal, but for the rest, we were pulled around all over te place because there was so much space to cover with too few players.  As at Newcastle we were exploited by better players - once Tettey left the field.  So Tettey is key to our survival imo, but he needs support and AN has tried different combinations there.  Imo we should have three midfield players who are designated with primarily defensive roles so that space is limited for opposition attackers.  Watford do it well - but they do it in an incredibly pro-active way, so rather than just keep shape at the back, they are like terriers closing down the space - and they do it in numbers.  We don''t and we are punished for it more often than not.   Watford also have two exellent strikers....but arguably so do we now......so the onus imo is for AN to tackle the defensive attitude of our players - challenge them to treat defence in a positive way, not a passive way as it quite often looks. So you could have a team that looked like -                 RuddPinto Bennett Klose  Olsson     Tettey  O''Neil  Brady          - with only three players designated as forwards looking players - Naismith, Mbokani and one other from Howson, Vadis, Wes, Redmond. Our defence simply has to be more solid and secure - and I believe we have the players to achieve that - if they learn to defend better as a unit.  There is of course opportunities for fluidity within that, but the basic premise has to be on defending better with more players behind he ball.  Brady is a fabulous player going either direction, but even he has imo to spend more time helping the defence and only getting forwards on a break where he can use his pace to advantage.  Sorry this has been a bit of a ramble, but the writing is on the wall - we have to defend better and we need to start doing it now, otherwise we are stuffed.  Not static, position based defence like under Hughton, but proactive, positive defending.   Let Naismith, Mbokani and one other do their stuff up front, but the rest of them have to have defence as their main job. Imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LDC

"In a 4141, or 4231, or indeed with a 442, with Naismith, Wes and Redmond in the team, we are going to be weak defensively. All three good attack minded players, none of the three particularly good at defending. With one striker in front of them, that leaves just two players behind"

This post appears to begin with a simple numerical flaw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
with everyone fit and back from suspension, i can see Neil going with

......................Rudd..................

Pinto......Klose......Bassong......Brady

..............O''Neil.......Tettey..................

Howson...........Naismith.........Hoolahan

....................MBokani..............................

not necessarily the team I''d pick but at least it should guard against the defensive abhorrence that was Saturday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]with everyone fit and back from suspension, i can see Neil going with

......................Rudd..................

Pinto......Klose......Bassong......Brady

..............O''Neil.......Tettey..................

Howson...........Naismith.........Hoolahan

....................MBokani..............................

not necessarily the team I''d pick but at least it should guard against the defensive abhorrence that was Saturday[/quote]is that Hoolahan at LM? Or LAM? Because he''s dreadful at LM, people just run past him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LDC, with that midfield I''d like Wes & Naismith linking up with Mbokani, Naismith often running ahead of Dieumerci & Wes roaming between the two. Mbokani has provided some lovely touches to forward runners (remember Jarvis'' cracking goal) & can act as a lynch pin slightly withdrawn as well as an out & out target in the box.

I think the midfield would provide enough discipline & steel to shut down the opposition with Brady & Tettey - occasionally! - overlapping when the time is right. if the full backs overlap, then Tettey or Brady can drop back.

Trouble is I doubt we''ll have Tettey & O''Neil together until after The former''s inevitable impending suspension; let''s hope O''Neil is back before that happens!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="nutty nigel"]I still quite like the idea of 3 defenders, 2 wing backs and 1 defensive midfielder. [/quote]Me too, except that it is still only six players on defensive duty - in effect the same as four at the back and two defensive midfielders.  The wing backs can get forwards of course, but then the problem of being caught on the break  is there, without enough cover.  From what I have seen of Watford, they seem to be able to defend in numbers and with terrier like defending - and rely on the quality of two or three forward players to get their goal threat.    It''s a mind set more than anything - and I know I''ve said it before, but the attitude to defending needs to be as positive as the attitude to attacking - and it still seems to me that some of our players pay lip service to defending and not treat it with the positive attitude that it needs at this level.  I''m not taking about defenders here, because that is their job, but more the midfelders.   Tettey is great - but there is often not enough players around him to help close down the opposition.   It''s hard because I think our midfielders are good - but at this level they need to be better at closing down, getting behind the ball and closing down spaces.  Naismith mentioned lack of communication between players - and that may be part of the problem, but whatever it is,  we need to be better defending as a team.  If Wes is in the team, he has to be relatively free of defensive duties - because he is not good enough at that.  Same with Redmond and Vadis imo and is a reason why we can''t play all three players in the same team and hope to keep things tight at the back.  

PS - well done Parma for summing it up in so few words - 4321 it is! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]I still quite like the idea of 3 defenders, 2 wing backs and 1 defensive midfielder. [/quote]

And thereby, possibly, unearthing an ideal position for Russell Martin.

Remember when we stumbled across our sweeper Culverhouse?

If Alex chooses this it could be our breakthrough moment. It''s a funny old game..... In the space of a week Russ could go from zero to new found hero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Pinto and Brady are first choice full-backs, then it does suggest that Klose, +1, + sweeper ( to provide cover for marauding full-backs) makes sense. The sweeper role would probably be best suited for Martin'' s versatility and would afford him his final chance of holding on to a first team place.

I am sure pre-season, most Canary fans were anticipating a Tettey/Mulumba defensive midfield against the top teams, but this is clearly not now going to happen.

There is no doubt that Naismith''s arrival has offered City a bigger attacking threat, it''s such a shame that it didn''t happen in the summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However you criticise the starting line up, we went 3-1

up. The fewer forwards there are, the more defending you have to do, eventually mistakes will be made.

We have suffered badly because of the injury to Mulumbu.

If he is not going to be 100% for the rest of the season we have to get somebody in. There is no way that O''Neil should be in any starting line up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way that O''Neil should be in any starting line up. ......CY

is that because of one stupid foul or because you dont like the way that we seem more solid with him on the pitch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don''t think he is good enough for a starting place in a premiership side, he couldn''t get a regular place in a championship club last season. Sub at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the Oscar Hiljemark thread I just suggested that Hiljemark seem to be performing both attacking and defending midfield roles in Palermo''s preferred 4-3-1-2, and that AN might be interested in adopting such a formation.

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...