Vrancic

[kingsway 94]

Your right Parma, these Vrancic qualities you touch upon have gone unnoticed by most Norwich fans cause you seem to be one of the few who have seen them!

You say that Tettey is weak at them very same qualities but give me Alex Tettey over Mario Vrancic in the team anyday cause I know who is the most effective!!

Vrancic is not good enough despite some trying to dress it up to try and justify him! - And yes I think his passing is brilliant but overall his weaknesses far outweigh them!

[Crabbycanary3 994]

I''m with baldyboy, in that Vrancic''s job, is to assist the attack, not have a priority of stopping a possible counter attack. Otherwise what roles are the likes of Trybull and Reed about?

[king canary 7,580]

Yeah, that doesn''t really ring true Parma. He''s actually fairly often out of his set position and not really offering much as an attacking option or defensive cover to his full back.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

Chaps, you are conflating what I have said with what I haven’t said.

Because the nominal 4231 formation sees Vrancic sometimes played in a paper advanced role, you are judging him against what an attacking playing might contribute in those positions. That isn’t how he plays and the manager is more than canny enough not to expect it.

The player I see is a controlled, central midfield player, who needs the game going on around him and is capable of making good passes and taking up disciplined defensive positions, whilst finding space and time on occasions to deliver decisive assists. He has excellent set piece delivery.

He is not a penetrative runner or especially attacking in a running, dribbling sense, that is not his game. The comparisons to Surman are quite fair.

Criticising him for what he isn’t ignores what he is. Fitting him correctly into the side is a separate issue. With Maddison playing well and few injuries, I don’t think he would be a regular starter at this stage.

Parma

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Parma, you are talking about where you think Farke should be playing him, we are talking about where Farke IS currently playing him.

[lake district canary 4,531]

Vrancic has a role to play and there is no doubt of his passing ability but it is still early days and although he doesn''t always look eye catching, he has put in match winning passes in matches he has played in -  it has just been the lack of strikers able to finish the clear cut chances he has created that has been the problem.  He didn''t do that against Wolves, but then there were too many other players in that match who didn''t deliver either. The match Vrancic really shone in this season was against Brentford

where he waas given the central midfeld position and had the free kick

reponsibility.  That for me is where he ought to play to get the best

out of him, but we have rightly got Maddison in there at the moment.

Trying to accomodate Vrancic in the same team as Maddison is difficult

imo (Maddison didn''t feature in the Brentford match).   He is a mercurial type player and some fans don''t take to those kind of players. Surman used to get abused by some fans at matches and on here, but he was a similar kind of player imo.  Vrancic has a fantastic left foot too and in the right match, in his best position we will more likely see that.

[king canary 7,580]

Well then what you are saying is he''s playing a different position to where he''s put on the pitch and therefore isn''t really doing his job. It''s a bit like saying Jerome is doing well because he clears a lot of corners- fine but it''s not the key part of his job.

[king canary 7,580]

@ldc

I was at that game- as stated before it was essentially Brentfords reserve team. He was good, took a nice free kick and his penalty was good.

I don''t think Vrancic is awful but right now I feel like we are trying to force him into the team to the detriment of the overall shape and performance of the team. It reminds me of when Neil used to put Howson out wide.

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="king canary"]@ldc

I was at that game- as stated before it was essentially Brentfords reserve team. He was good, took a nice free kick and his penalty was good.

I don''t think Vrancic is awful but right now I feel like we are trying to force him into the team to the detriment of the overall shape and performance of the team. It reminds me of when Neil used to put Howson out wide.[/quote]Nobody is trying to "force him into the team". Some of us are simply defending him against unjust criticism and calling for a more accurate understanding of his abilities and how Maddison''s emergence has radically altered the situation relative to when he signed. If he plays it is because Daniel Farke sees him as the best option available in the circumstances (the circumstances being not just the opponents in a particular game but the ongoing problem created by injuries, and especially the extended absence of Pritchard). If we were, through more ill-fortune, to suffer the further blow of losing Maddison for an extended period, Vrancic could well turn out to be our saviour.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

Truthfully I tire of posts that infer intelligent managers don’t really know what they are doing.

In this case the implication is that Farke cannot see what Vrancic isn’t.

There is further inference that Vrancic isn’t suited to a forward-thinking role in one of the 3 in a 4231.

Do you really think that Farke doesn’t see that and more? Just because the tannoy or the EDP says it’s a 4231 doesn’t mean that the roles and movements you’d expect from a Murphy - played in nominally the same on-paper role - is what the manager asks or expects Vrancic to do.

Other players in the side will be instructed to make different movements, focus on different patterns and attack or defend from different angles depending on the players available and their particular strengths and weaknesses, be it Vrancic or any other.

It is the balance of the entire team that is relevant as a unit. It is the harmony of this unit that the Manager tries to achieve, this doe not mena every player is requested to shine brightly in the eyes of the fans. Some have to carry water.

As each component of the team changes, so may the tactical shape, strengths and weaknesses and movements of the individuals within it. This is what managers are constantly monitoring and evaluating.

Some players suit flat-track bully superior games, some suit a tight, technical game when you are inferior, others have repeatable weapons that can be employed week after week whatever the circumstances. There are so many variables, that judging a player such as Vrancic against FM18 nominal 4231 roles is futile without understanding his instructions.

In my experience Managers place great store and emphasis in players - like say Surman or Vrancic - whom one can predict clearly what they will offer and how they will play, what movements they will make and what shakes they will take up in both an attacking and defensive sense.

Such players may not always catch the eye, or be considered the best players in any side, but they can be built around and often offer unused options, out balls and ‘what if’ scenario cover that goes entirely unnoticed by those following what does happen on the field, rather than what might have happened.

In Italy the number 9 and (half of) the number 10 would have historically been the extent of the out-and-out attacking make up of any side.

That Farke may choose Vrancic to play in a not-particularly-offensive role in some games, leaving 3 attacking players rather than 4, is hardly parking the bus. It may mean that the central midfield area is strengthened, protecting better against turnovers, allowing the centre backs to split a little wider, protected by the 2 CDMs, plus a Vrancic holding Station in a deeper central role behind the attack, creating a de-facto shaped defensive 5 and thus allowing the full backs to push even higher.

In this way just because Vrancic isn’t attacking, others - who may not commonly attack so much or so freely - may be able to do so more aggressively and often. They will then shine more and Vrancic less so.

Sometimes doing less may be precisely what is required, both by the manager and the team as a functioning unit.

Parma

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

Nah, Vrancic just isn’t suited to the championship. It’s as simple as that.

I think there’s an element of hit and hope with regard to Vrancic’s selection. On paper he looks like he may be suited, hence why we bought him. But he isn’t, and simply not playing him suggests defeat with the player and ultimately a failed transfer. Something Farke and Webber will probaly refuse to accept or admit.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Vrancic, is an obviously talented player. He is not playing very well at the moment.

[westcoastcanary 173]

Sometimes threads on here cause me to wish that some posters got the team and club they deserve -- and that''s even without including the likes of lincoln [:(]

[hogesar 9,618]

Great post Parma but your great points are somewhat wasted by the superiority of Lincolns reading of the game. Which by the way, is also better than Farkes himself.

[Badger 2,405]

Good post Parma - don''t worry too much about the "tiresome posters" - you just have to accept that unfortunately few people see the world as clearly as the ignorant! Everything is simple to them[:(]

[king canary 7,580]

There are few more reductive arguments than ''well the manager knows more than you so he''s clearly right.'' On that basis you might as well shut down the message board as there''d be nothing to debate.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Indeed Badger! That is why I put it , into two sentences.

[king canary 7,580]

@parma

Again, this doesn''t ring true to how we''ve actually played. I understand Vrancic in this formation is not really playing as a right winger nor should we be expecting to play in the manner of a winger.

However...to suggest he''s in there to add more solidity and cover in the central areas baffles me, mainly because he''s been started at home and left on the bench away. If you''re suggesting Farke chose to add more cover at home against Burton and Bristol then that doesn''t make a great deal of sense. You''d think if it was a move to make things more compact and not commit as many bodies forward he''d be more suited to playing away from home.

[Badger 2,405]

KC there would still be plenty to debate but it might be at a higher level than some of the nonsense that is put on the board by a relatively small minority of voters.

[Badger 2,405]

KC - re your point about Vrancic at home - it depends upon his instructions to others - e.g.the full backs (in his case Pinto) who may play much higher or give Madison more freedom?

[king canary 7,580]

@badger

Yes but again that isn''t what we see on the pitch- Pinto is much more restrained in this system and it doesn''t free him up to attack more. In fact due to often not having an option infront of him it actually hurts his attacking ability.

I just feel at home we''ve seen teams work out that they can sit deep and let us pass it sideways in front of them. It seems counter intuitive to me to then reduce our attacking four to an attacking three. It only really makes sense to me if we can get an early lead- then we can control possession and don''t need to commit as many men forward.

[Badger 2,405]

I agree with parts of that KC but not all. I remember Pinto on advanced runs of several occasions against Derby and of course, Steipermann hit the bar with that chance. But, of course, something isn''t quite working at home atm.

[king canary 7,580]

@badger

I think the full backs are more restrained than they were under Alex Neil (although they couldn''t be much more attacking than Neil used them). I think with two defensive midfielders who stick to their position and full backs less likely to bomb on and overlap we don''t then need another player to clog up that central area of the pitch.

I would like to see us maybe give him a go in one of the deeper central positions when we''re at home against teams that set up to defend from the off.

[hogesar 9,618]

I havent seen everything Parma has said re Vrancic with my own eyes, only bits. But with Parmas background im willing to accept ive probably missed it or not read it correctly, and hence Farke continues to play him.

[AJ 1,218]

Although he isn''t playing him today!

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

Norwich’s major weapons in recent times are Oliveira, Maddison, Murphy and Wildschut. Without Nelson it is only the latter two.

Farke looks to amortise defensive weakness in both of these two latter players, or allows for Maddison to play higher (not sure that’s entirely beneficial to the whole team function personally) by ensuring that a Vrancic or a.n.other nominal ‘paper-forward’ drops into spaces behind the attack and watches for counters.

In this scenario the full backs do not often play as high as they might, as the onus is on a ‘freer’ Murphy or Wildschut to penetrate with direct running, with spaces behind them protected by others (full back plus a half player), unlike the more open method of Alex Neil when he freed a 3/4 player in the same way without such structured cover.

Vrancic is a player that drops into these half spaces at the right moments. He may look to some that he is ‘doing nothing’, which entirely misses the need to offer half-man cover off the ball to allow someone else to perform a freer, attacking function to the benefit of the team, rather than the individual.

Parma

[king canary 7,580]

@Parma

That sounds incredibly conservative football to me.

Full backs being asked to stay back.

Two defensive midfielders to sit and offer a shield.

One of the ''attacking three'' midfielders dropping in to look to prevent counters.

That is 8 of the 11 who apparently are mainly concerned with defense and preventing counters when we attack. At home. Against teams that are going to sit deep.

Explains why we don''t score I guess..

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

It’s not for me to be an apologist for Farke or Vrancic. What I see and what I’d do are not necessarily the same.

The Alex Neil method failed repeatedly tactically despite generating attacking excitement, lots of goals and and a team that ‘went for it’.

Fans finally saw that it was flawed and demanded change. Ricardo and the Masterclasses had identified the flaw very early on.

Farke could see it and set about remedying it as a number one priority. Quite correctly in my view. It was a glaring weakness and engendered a corollary of ‘plastic’ mental superiority (we can walk through anyone, we’re on loan to the Championship).

We have had excellent runs of away wins and clean sheets. When Oliveira has played we are dangerous enough to worry teams and we have won, whilst keeping it tight.

Football is not a message board. Perfection is not on offer. Attacking compromises defending and defending compromises attacking.

We lost Oliveira and Farke tried to be more expansive and progress the development. The risk was stress-testing the depth and resilience of our hard won defence resolve. This was what he didn’t want to risk earlier (vs Burton for example).

With Murphy off key, Wildschut unable to find end product and Oliveira injured, we would have been better retaining defensive resolve. We can control that, scoring goals is far harder to control as a coach.

Jerome and Watkins are not weapons and not dangerous enough to the opposition, allowing THEM to behave differently.

Vrancic is therefore a red herring. The problem is elsewhere.

Parma

[Bill 1,788]

errr, quite

[hogesar 9,618]

Good post Parma.