Mates, Match, Opinons, Beers & Curry, England 11 - A Great Weekend

[Ray 111]

I took three old muckers to the game on Saturday, not NCFC supporters but steeped in football, who all played at a decent level back in the day and who are very good analysers of what they see, consequently I thought it may be worth summarising/sharing their views, given they have no axe to grind and good footballing knowledge. Many of their views and thoughts mirror those already expressed on this forum but a neutral’s prospective is good to have.

Their take on our performance was; Maddison is a star of the future and we will do well to hang on to him but overall we look weak creatively, systematic of our defensive style, although they did feel we defended very well. They have some concerns over how well our CB’s will cope if they are left ‘to their own devices’ so to speak. They, quite correctly in my opinion, pointed out that, they have a limited job to do because of the numbers we defend with, at the same time agreeing they did it well, their concern was that if the two CB’s were given a more testing/demanding role at any stage, would they be up to it and would we possibly go back to being a bit easier to pick off. Obviously neither we, nor they, know the answer to that conundrum and if we keep winning by scoring first then we may never will and promotion, probably automatic, will be the end result.

They expressed some surprise that Josh Murphy did not swap wings at all, as there was often wide open spaces on the right and this would have created some ‘panic’ in the Reading defence. On occasion the spaces were filled by Cam but then no-one filled the space he left in the middle and that generally Pinto was left unsupported down the right, often having nowhere to go. This they felt was made us very predictable and easier to defend against, that said they thought both goals were very well taken.

Overall they thought we did what we do very well but they raised the question of what would happen if we were in a position of having to chase the game, not that they thought we couldn’t do it, but could we be more creative whilst still remaining secure at the back, three at the back was discussed at this stage.

I guess the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, so let’s hope we don’t get served desserts too often and we climb that table with alacrity.

After the game we went for (quite) a few beers and a curry culminating in an attempt to select a current England 11, as you do, and surprise, surprise there were many differing opinions floating about but we did mange to get down to only 13 players on the pitch, pity we can’t do the same at NCFC.

Overall a good weekend away and a great result, after all, as I pointed out to my now slightly worse for wear mates, a win is a win no matter how you get it.

[westcoastcanary 173]

Can you think of any pair of CBs in the EPL or Championship who can be relied on to "cope well if left to their own devices"? 

[Ray 111]

Hi Westcoast,

How you doing?

In answer to your question, no, but I believe you have taken my ''so to speak'' somewhat literally.

However, for more clarity, I think what they meant, and what I took it as, is if they didn''t have the luxury of two defensive midfielders and had two full backs who were marauding further up the field and were therefore required to mark more space, would they do as well The obvious answer is it will be more difficult, hence the 3 at the back discussion, but my mates question was, how good would they be in that situation, not that they couldn''t do it but could they.

[westcoastcanary 173]

Any pair of CBs left exposed by both fullbacks marauding upfield and no disciplined central defensive midfield cover will struggle, whoever they are. Arsenal, for example, had international quality CBs for years before reverting late last season to three at the back, and were regularly undone for precisely that reason. The real question is whether we have anyone capable of playing the role required of a single DM pivot, including being comfortable dropping back to form a three at the back when the fullbacks go forward and the CBs are required to spread wider to cover them.

[Ray 111]

Perhaps you have made the point with your term struggle, accepting it is more difficult, will they all struggle?? Agree with the DM pivot point.

Anyway, in this case I am just the messenger, the conduit for the musings of three ''football intelligent'' neutrals.

That said, my own feelings are that Klose will probably fare quite well, I have some concern that Zimmerman will fare as well. I think he looks good as a CB who doesn''t have to wander too far and performs the ''old style'' CB role at a decent level but will he cope having to mark/cover more space, he appears to be learning fast so I hope so.

If we went 3 at the back, who would you play and where? We also run the risk of the team ethic of defending going missing, previously it appeared most of the rest of the team thought defending was solely the defenders job and in that case, your word struggle is appropriate, as long as they all bust a gut getting back when needed then I think we should be OK. Mindset and fitness are key in this situation, let''s hope DF has instilled them in abundance.

Although I never want us to be in a position when we have to chase a game, it is bound to happen and I have to say I''m looking forward to see how we perform, if we perform well then I am certain we will be contenders come the end of the season.

On a different topic, I''ve got a mate who lives in Vegas, have emailed him but heard nothing yet? Difficult to comprehend from here!

Cheers.

[It's Character Forming 1,204]

I think what this misses is that for quite a few games I saw last season, our formation was theoretically the same as we''ve played in the last 3 away wins - back 4, 2xDMs, wide players and a striker with a no 10 behind.  Yet the reality of how that formation has been applied on the pitch has of course been totally different.  And when defending a one-goal lead in the closing minutes of all 3 games, at no stage did Farke feel the need to bring on an extra CB and go five at the back - yet we saw out the games comfortably, unlike some of the catastrophic endings to games last season (Newcastle, cough).

 

As to the question of what we''d do if we had to chase the game.  Well, in all 3 games we have created a reasonable number of openings - not huge, but enough to make it unsurprising that we''ve scored.  If we fell behind, the chances are we''d get more possession as the other team would defend a bit deeper.  At 1 goal down, a big change in approach is not needed - you keep discipline, try not to concede another, and keep trying cautiously to create more chances.  Actually pretty similar to how we played at Reading having gone ahead and then quickly conceded an equaliser which gave them the momentum - we didn''t change our approach and eventually got our reward.

 

Clearly if you go 2-0 down, it''s an uphill battle and that''s when you need to look at what you need to change (see Alex Neil at Barnsley last season).  But with our squad in this division, that should be relatively unusual. Also, most of the time a team that has gone 2 goals behind loses in football, so there''s nothing special about us if that happens.

[westcoastcanary 173]

Just as difficult to comprehend from 270 miles away as 5,270 Ray. 

You can''t expect Zimmermann to to be anything other than he is, vastly less experienced than Klose, with a lot to learn. But one of the most intriguing things about this season is watching the new players and youngsters bed in, and discovering what exactly Webber and Farke are building for us.  

Re. your question about the make up of a defensive three, with Russ currently struggling,and Hanley still an unknown quantity, I''ve really no idea.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Good thread Ray.

The aim in football is to score the next goal without conceding a goal/another goal. We went 1-0 down at Fulham but didn''t change much until bringing on Wes with ten minutes to go. (Yes we did change Jerome for Oliveira earlier but I believe that''s referred to as like for like). Hoolahan for Reid was a change and it brought about the equaliser. However if we''d already gone 2-0 down or more that equaliser would have been a consolation. Someone will no doubt say an earlier change could have brought about an equaliser and a winner but maybe that wasn''t the most likely outcome?

I believe it''s a good philosophy not to look beyond the next goal.

[Ray 111]

Westcoast,

Point one, understand that!

Point two, yeah it''s heartening, intriguing and exciting.

Point three, a difficult one, personally I would play Klose on the left, Zimmerman or Hanley central and probably bring Russ in from the cold and play him or Zimmerman on the right, with whoever isn''t selected on the bench.