Parma’s Tactics Masterclass 17

[norfolkngood 1,086]

i think it is quite easy players are more worried about keeping the ball than flair trying something different so the flair energy is sucked out of them

Keep the ball do not try any flicks any direct passes etc

where we all know that a direct ball may not work but second ball scraps can be just as good as a wonderful pass in the other teams box

[king canary 7,599]

There is a similarity between Farke and Hughton in that both seem to favour very structured play and positional discipline. This isn''t always a bad thing but you can end up in a situation where players are confined to one role and one space on the pitch which can be very easy to defend against. Having a back four with fullbacks not bombing on and two defensive midfielders should really free up the attacking midfielders and striker to be more expressive but it doesn''t seem that way currently.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="king canary"]There is a similarity between Farke and Hughton in that both seem to favour very structured play and positional discipline. This isn''t always a bad thing but you can end up in a situation where players are confined to one role and one space on the pitch which can be very easy to defend against. Having a back four with fullbacks not bombing on and two defensive midfielders should really free up the attacking midfielders and striker to be more expressive but it doesn''t seem that way currently.[/quote]

Hughton never had the right players for what he was trying to do - a task made doubly difficult because he was trying to do it in the PL. Farke has the luxury (if you can call it that) of being able to rebuild in a less intense environment, even though of course the championship is incredibly competitive. He has the time, the heirachy to back him up and players that he brought in that will help assimilate the new ways.  But - we still have players that are not schooled in that disciplined way that Farke wants - and it will take time to get it that through the whole squad. Hughton ran out of rope without really ever getting his ways to work well enough, I trust Farke will be given the time to see the job through, even if there are setbacks along the way.

[king canary 7,599]

Hughton also got to spend a big ol'' load of cash on players so it is on him if the players didn''t fit what he wanted to do.

But lets not rehash that all again.

Under both managers you can see players operating under constraints they are maybe not comfortable with. With Hughton it was most noticeable with Howson, who clearly wanted to be making runs from deep and supporting attacks but was instead asked to stay back. In this system it feels like the wider players are more restricted from attacking in pairs and looking for overlaps.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

Ray, the subject is so fundamental, so essential to sporting, social, economic and spiritual success that forum posts are insufficient to scratch the surface.

For professional, commercial and personal reasons I began studying neuroscience and neuroplasticity. The advent of FMRI scanners and intersection of science and technology made huge swathes of precious psychological teaching redundant and archaic.

Some military methods survived, though the majority of psychology books and medical received wisdom were thrown away and a return to old-fashioned, rigorously corroborated scientific methods (as opposed to conjecture and literature built on pre-existing theory) was re-introduced, particularly thanks to the ability to track single neural pathways empirically and the recognition that areas and pathways of the brain - whilst previously predominantly used for certain actions, thoughts, input and reactions - were not exclusively functioning for that purpose, indeed many other areas interjected and fired neurons simultaneously. Further to that, should that area become incapacitated in any way other areas (previously used for an entirely separate function) could ‘step in’ and perform that function.

We can indeed ‘see’ with our tongue. There is nothing illogical or unlikely about this. It opens enormous neurological possibilities for medicine, society and sport.

Parma

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="king canary"]Hughton also got to spend a big ol'' load of cash on players so it is on him if the players didn''t fit what he wanted to do.

But lets not rehash that all again.

Under both managers you can see players operating under constraints they are maybe not comfortable with. With Hughton it was most noticeable with Howson, who clearly wanted to be making runs from deep and supporting attacks but was instead asked to stay back. In this system it feels like the wider players are more restricted from attacking in pairs and looking for overlaps.[/quote]

Agreed don''t want to rehash the Hughton stuff, but the issues are the same imo - front players not good enough for what they were being asked to do.  We had Snodgrass, RVW, Hooper, Redmond, none of whom were up to the task in the PL (but might have been in the championship).  We now have Murphy, Wildschut, Jerome, Oliveira and Watkins - imo any combination of those in a front three is not up to the task either. Murphy has scored goals, but not enough contribution otherwise, Wildschut is nothing more than a bulldozer, Watkins yet to impress. With good service, Jerome will still score a few and Oliveira too, but it doesn''t inspire confidence!  Maybe Pritchard playing o the left instead of Murphy will give us an added bite - and please, before anyone says otherwise, he is a capable player on the left - and if he doesn''t play on the left, where would Maddison fit in.....we need both in the team once fully fit.

 

[Ray 111]

Parma,

Thanks for your response.

I am aware of most of the information you provided but I feel my fundamental question hasn''t been answered. Do you have an opinion on how well, or otherwise, we as a club address the psychological side of the game and if so what is it?

I agree wholeheartedly that it is fundamental to sporting success, it''s just that I get the feeling it is not particularly well addressed at NCFC.

I also agree the subject is too vast to be fully explored on a forum, so a simple yeas or nays would satisfy my curiousity, unless of course you wish to expand on your answer.

Cheers

[westcoastcanary 173]

king canary wrote: " ........ you can see players operating under constraints they are maybe not comfortable with. With Hughton it was most noticeable with Howson, who clearly wanted to be making runs from deep and supporting attacks but was instead asked to stay back. In this system it feels like the wider players are more restricted from attacking in pairs and looking for overlaps."

The point -- surely -- is that "this" is NOT "the system", it is a stage in instilling what''s needed for the intended system to operate successfully. Offensive plays in the intended system depend crucially on combinations of players producing overloads and creating spaces for penetrating runners etc. As Parma has repeatedly observed, it all has to be coordinated, and that coordination requires team-wide awareness and understanding of when the moment is right, when not, and what fail safe steps are needed even when the moment is right, breakdown always being on the cards. 

Unless people can better grasp the difference between means and ends, history, as LDC points out, is in danger of repeating itself. Nutty gets it; there''s real interest to be had from simply witnessing the process unfold. 

[king canary 7,599]

@Westcoast

Fair enough in some respects. However there is a very reasonable school of thought that coaches can over complicate systems and create problems for their players.

I remember Rex Ryan in the NFL was accused by the Bills defence of an over-complicated defensive scheme that stopped a talented bunch of defenders from doing what they did best. He left and performance improved significantly.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

I remember Rex Ryan in the NFL was accused by the Bills defence of an

over-complicated defensive scheme that stopped a talented bunch of

defenders from doing what they did best. He left and performance

improved significantly.Thats why one of the best / most honest sayings (imo) is "those that can do, and those that cant will talk about it" [li]

[Bill 1,788]

"Offensive plays.." ?Romans in Britain was considered quite offensive, as was Hair, at least by Mary WhiteHhouse[quote user="king canary"]

Fair enough in some respects. However there is a very reasonable school of thought that coaches can over complicate systems and create problems for their players. .[/quote]That has long been my though. the criticism of Revie missed the point that for all his over elaboration and dossiers he recognised it was a need to build a team''s unity'' that mattered as much on the day as any huge formula.Coaching is about developing and motivating players, not trying to drum into them some kind of rehearsed performance. Sadly there a many who don''t seem to grasp what football is (a sort) and what other stuff is (a costume drama)Let the players play. Nobody coached Josh how to chip a ball over an oncoming keeper, Wes how to make defence splitting passes or Maddison how to ''twist and turn.Let the players play

[ron obvious 1,502]

On the subject of over complication, I remember one of our best spells in the Prem spell under Hughton (I think) coinciding with a sudden change of technique from Wes. He suddenly started playing one touch football - whenever possible - & the result was a spectacular improvement in our attacking threat. He showed his ability to open up even the best defences with beautifully accurate passing,

For some reason it didn''t last long. Perhaps he missed a few games; whatever he reverted to his old style - still a joy to watch, but nowhere near as effective.

[westcoastcanary 173]

@king canary

I agree that coaches can "over-complicate systems and create problems for their players", but I don''t think that applies in our case right now. I see it more as a matter of the difficulty of teaching old dogs new tricks -- with the qualification that some of our dogs are not so much old as set in old ways, all but our continental imports having been subjected to a good old traditional British football education. Requiring players to learn new basics is not "over-complication", but it does pose a challenge to what for many or most is close to being second nature. As Rock the Boat suggested, adapting is going to prove beyond some; they will have to be replaced. That''s what happened over two transfer windows at Huddersfield following Wagner''s arrival; in our case it''s almost certainly going to take a bit longer.

Regarding the idea that all you have to do is "let the players play", I''m sorry but that is absolute nonsense. Do people really think that, for example, the Arsenal back four of Bould, Adams, Dixon and Winterburn were simply four individuals their managers "let play"? Do people really think that Guardiola''s Barcelona were simply 11 talented players left to do their thing (by a manager who, after one game, spent the best part of an hour explaining how a match had been turned round by his instructing his right back to play five yards further infield)? Are people really incapable of seeing the fallacy of it being demonstrated in front of their own eyes as Alex Neil''s Norwich pile forward in numbers off any managerial leash only to concede to the league''s bottom club because nobody thought to provide defensive cover to the CBs? Parma must wonder why on earth he bothers posting his Masterclasses. 

Good system provides the stage on which individual talent flourishes; without it, talent''s contribution is ephemeral.  

[king canary 7,599]

@Westcoast

Interesting points.

Just to clarify though- ''let the players play'' is City1st not me.

[westcoastcanary 173]

Yes sorry kc, the second para wasn''t at all prompted by you.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"]@king canary

I agree that coaches can "over-complicate systems and create problems for their players", but I don''t think that applies in our case right now. I see it more as a matter of the difficulty of teaching old dogs new tricks -- with the qualification that some of our dogs are not so much old as set in old ways, all but our continental imports having been subjected to a good old traditional British football education. Requiring players to learn new basics is not "over-complication", but it does pose a challenge to what for many or most is close to being second nature. As Rock the Boat suggested, adapting is going to prove beyond some; they will have to be replaced. That''s what happened over two transfer windows at Huddersfield following Wagner''s arrival; in our case it''s almost certainly going to take a bit longer.

Regarding the idea that all you have to do is "let the players play", I''m sorry but that is absolute nonsense. Do people really think that, for example, the Arsenal back four of Bould, Adams, Dixon and Winterburn were simply four individuals their managers "let play"? Do people really think that Guardiola''s Barcelona were simply 11 talented players left to do their thing (by a manager who, after one game, spent the best part of an hour explaining how a match had been turned round by his instructing his right back to play five yards further infield)? Are people really incapable of seeing the fallacy of it being demonstrated in front of their own eyes as Alex Neil''s Norwich pile forward in numbers off any managerial leash only to concede to the league''s bottom club because nobody thought to provide defensive cover to the CBs? Parma must wonder why on earth he bothers posting his Masterclasses. 

Good system provides the stage on which individual talent flourishes; without it, talent''s contribution is ephemeral. 

[/quote]

oh dear

oh dearie dear me

Firstly Parma''s stuff is a send up

And you are still projecting football as some kind of game of battleships, or a costume drama such as watched in the US (NFL).

Your stuff about Huddersfield is guff. One of their notable points was fast attacking, which never appeared offensive at all to me. Quite entertaining to be honest. Ours seem more absorbed with keeping possession than scoring. Perhaps Farke thinks the numbers on www,Saddo,com amount to goals or points.

What both Lambert''s and AN''s teams had was an ability to come back from a goal down. Something we struggle to do - mostly because our mechanical football can easily be read. Not by the coach on the touchline moving a player a few yards but simply by the players being aware. That is why we were caught out at Millwall so easily.

Look at the last goal we scored, freeze the picture at the point of Murphy''s shot and tell me how many players of both sides were in their ''station'', or supposedly allotted part of the pitch

I suspect, bar the keeper, none.

[king canary 7,599]

I can''t decide if City 1st''s ''Formations/tactics are a lie'' or his''parma is parody account'' is my favourite ''wtf?'' talking point.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="king canary"]I can''t decide if City 1st''s ''Formations/tactics are a lie'' or his''parma is parody account'' is my favourite ''wtf?'' talking point.[/quote]I have never claimed "''Formations/tactics are a lie" that is just you making yo stuff.Anyone who talks the guff Parma does... players having a station has to be a wind up. I even cut and paste them off to others who enjoy their subtlety

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]From Ricardo’s report thread on Yanic and the need for unified movement and thought processes - particularly off the ball - to make the system work effectively:

‘Yanic needs to be coached to drive effectively into spaces between the lines in the three quarter areas.

For this to be effective however, a number of other things have to be achieved. Passing players need to put better messages on the ball and weight passes into the spaces he needs to be attacking, players further forward need to be making runs away from that space to create the opening for the ball to go into.

Yanic himself ideally needs to be already moving before he gets the ball. He can accelerate dramatically from a standing start, it his brain is a little cumbersome and he delays the movement, puts his head down and tends to move in very straight lines. He has a - not unpleasing, but unconventional - habit ornament* running right through or over players, rather than round. He makes it work, but it’s a little too random for anything other than attacking areas.

His story is a microcosm of some of the issues in the Masterclass. The model requires multiple parts functioning in unison. We do not appear to have the off-the-ball brainpower to do it currently. It is not about individuals, but an organic unit thinking and moving together’.

Parma[/quote]Passing players need to put better messages on the ball and weight passes into the spaces he needs to be attackingmessages on the ball  ?players further forward need to be making runs away from that space to create the opening for the ball to go into.or running off the ball as it is normally known it his brain is a little cumbersomeThe Emperors clothes spring to mind

* I would welcome your explanation

[king canary 7,599]

If I had to pick which one out of you two was a parody account, it wouldn''t be Parma...