Late Goals

[Van wink 2,994]

Since Daniel Farke took over, Norwich City have scored six equalisers in the 88th minute or later (Fulham, Hull, Ipswich, Wolves, Sunderland, Birmingham)

Before that we hadn’t scored one that late for nearly two-and-a-half years... #ncfc

Interesting stat and one which must give credit to Farkes training methods. I''ve noticed critisism in the past about players picking up too many injuries during training, this is the counter argument. For me its a great attribute to have, "never knowing when your beat" is what successful teams have.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

This is something I continually referred to last season. However these late goals were better received in the Paul Lambert era.

BTW it''s not just the training methods. It''s also the method of play. Norwich tend to spend periods of the game passing the ball across the back while the opposition run from side to side which is much more tiring.

[SwindonCanary 457]

More like us going a little more direct when needing a goal.

[daly 551]

[quote user="SwindonCanary"]More like us going a little more direct when needing a goal. [/quote]

Correct exactly like last season crap sideways football for 85 minutes and then we go for it in the last 5

[hogesar 10,761]

isnt it odd how some posters, the same ones typically, can twist anything into a negative?

[Guest]

Most teams, if they were losing by the odd goal, would go direct with two minutes to go.

England reached the semi finals and we were told they were a set piece team.

Any goal is as good as any other even if less memorable.

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]This is something I continually referred to last season. However these late goals were better received in the Paul Lambert era.

BTW it''s not just the training methods. It''s also the method of play. Norwich tend to spend periods of the game passing the ball across the back while the opposition run from side to side which is much more tiring.[/quote] Spot on nutty. To misquote Hamlet: "There''s more to purpose and intent than is dreamt of in many a poster''s philosophy".

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

If we were still passing the ball across the back when one-nil down and five minutes to play I think I would shoot someone.

[king canary 8,750]

Is it twisting though Hogesar?

The first late goal that sprang to mind was v Hull last season. Long throw, flicked on by one big striker and poked home by another. We went more direct, we scored.

[hogesar 10,761]

Yes. Even looking at our goals yesterday we were still passing across the back before moving forwards and the second goal we were passing till we opened up space with Srbeny driving forwards.

Not that I need to even credit my statement. Look at the posters that twist it. Look at their post history. Its hardly a coincidence.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="SwindonCanary"]More like us going a little more direct when needing a goal. [/quote]

Pretty much Swindon. However we have to be fit enough to do that. Under Alex Neil we played hi tempo from the start and won games early. However the games we didn''t win early we didn''t often get any points at all and we conceded well over half our goals in the last 30 mins of games.Last season the last 15 minutes of games were our most productive F14 A9. Both scenarios left us mid-table and the drop in league positions was probably due to the drop in quality and huge changes of the squad rather than tactical.

Now let me just say that I preferred the Neil approach although I thought we got better under Farke in the second half of the season And I''m hoping this season sees an improvement on that too. What I do think is that in the modern game teams can''t go high intensity from the first minute and expect to last 90. 

[lake district canary 4,823]

If we are fitter than the opposition in the last ten minutes of a match, then that has to be a help.  Bringing on subs late that have pace and desire is also key to scoring late goals, the subs did really well yesterday to help that happen.  What is really needed was one of those early chances to have gone in.  That could happen in the next game and set us up for a win and the extra fitness helping to keep ahead.

It''s about the whole package working, get ahead early in the match, consolidate and push on late in the game.....or if you go behind, know that you are able to get back with your level of fitness helping....or if it is 0-0, superior fitness helping find that winner. 

Whichever way you look at it, being the fitter, stronger team towards the end of a game is bound to be helpful.  If that means conserving energy in a match through controlling posession, so be it. We have just got to be a little better at getting the first goal - Rhodes was a whisker away from that in the first half yesterday.  So add that bit of luck, add a bit more confidence as the teamwork develops and the ability of the likes of Hernandez and the other front men should see us into having a strong season.

[Guest]

Is it really just fitness?

I often wonder why teams are not all at the same level of fitness. Their trainers ought to be singing from similar if not the same hymn sheet.

I wonder if it is the desire? Just maybe we have a wee bit more than others

[nutty nigel 7,902]

There''s many ways to be fitter. Mental fitness is huge in football. Mistakes come later in games through lesser players getting mentally tired. We profited from that greatly in League One. Our sports science team will have been chuffed with how mentally fit we were for the Arsenal and Chelsea games.

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]There''s many ways to be fitter. Mental fitness is huge in football. Mistakes come later in games through lesser players getting mentally tired. We profited from that greatly in League One. Our sports science team will have been chuffed with how mentally fit we were for the Arsenal and Chelsea games.[/quote] In addition to a sports science team, we badly need a fan re-education team. I thought you had your own personal educator sitting alongside you nutty; what''s happened to him?

[king canary 8,750]

As mentioned though I''m not sure scrambling 6 late equalisers proves much other than our system leaves us chasing far too many games late on.

Have we picked up many late winners in his time?

[ZLF 334]

It is an impressive, and welcome feature, that we now have a squad both fit enough and with the drive to convert defeats into draws; something that Adams and Neil seemed unable to prevent.

As KC mentions what the stats don''t mention is how many late winner we have had under either regime, which is just as vital.

And it would be refreshing to not be behind in the final 5-10 mins so we don''t have to make it 7 times in 13 months so soon...

We now have the fitness base and mental strength to make it count; start finishing these chances and it does all come together for a more encouraging season doesn''t it?

[king canary 8,750]

Of course I would say I much prefer us pulling back late equalisers rather than conceding them as we too often did under Neil.

[Van wink 2,994]

nutty nigel wrote the following post at 05/08/2018 10:49 PM:

"There''s many ways to be fitter. Mental fitness is huge in football.

Mistakes come later in games through lesser players getting mentally

tired"

I think thats right, and of course metal fitness is relatd to being physically at your best, when you become tired physically you also start tiring mentally and there is a higher risk of making the wrong decision or losing concentration and making a mistake.

[Badger 2,745]

Scoring late goals is helped by extra fitness, but it is also helped by having possession - as teams tire they become less able to cover every run etc. It''s tiring covering every movement when the opposition have most of the ball during a game.

[king canary 8,750]

"Scoring late goals is helped by extra fitness, but it is also helped by having possession - as teams tire they become less able to cover every run etc."

Yes, but if the domination of possession over creating chances means we''re always chasing games then its a bit swings and roundabouts.

[Badger 2,745]

[quote user="king canary"]

Yes, but if the domination of possession over creating chances means we''re always chasing games then its a bit swings and roundabouts.[/quote]The problem is not the possession-based football, it is more an issue that we have not deployed it sufficiently effectively. We need to dominate possession AND create chances. We also need to stop giving stupid goals away - like Saturday - which is the main reason we are chasing games too often. It is not because we try to dominate possession per se, but because we have failed to be sufficiently effective in the final third at both ends.I''m pretty confident that being a long ball team would not make us any more effective in either third, especially given the make up of the squad.

[lake district canary 4,823]

[quote user=" Badger"]I''m pretty confident that being a long ball team would not make us any more effective in either third, especially given the make up of the squad.

[/quote]

On Saturday we did start playing long balls up to the front men and it created uncertainty in the Birmingham back line - which in turn meant a little more space in midfield which in turn helped the runners coming through.

So the key to it imo is mixing it up and once we had willing runners on in McLean and Srbeny, added to the sublime passing skill of Leitner and with Pukki and Rhodes on the pitch too - we looked like a real force to be reckoned with in all areas of the pitch.

[king canary 8,750]

@Badger

Not sure I agree with your first point- simply put last season we appeared to be much more effective at both ends of the park when we had less possession. For instance in all 5 games that we conceeded 4 or more goals last season we had at least 57% possession. We proved last season we don''t need to dominate possession- we just want to. You can be perfectly effective with 45-50% of the ball if you play it right.

As LDC says it is about being able to mix things up- we were far too predictable and easy to defend against last season as teams could happily let us have the ball on the half way line and watch us move it left and right without having to do much more than stand there. We didn''t make teams chase the ball.

There is, as always, a middle ground between how we played last season and long ball football. It isn''t all either Pep or Pulis. I think as the second half went on we found a balance. Hopefully we see more of that going forward and less of what we saw in the first half.

[Van wink 2,994]

“As LDC says it is about being able to mix things up- we were far too predictable and easy to defend against last season as teams could happily let us have the ball on the half way line and watch us move it left and right without having to do much more than stand there. We didn''t make teams chase the ball. “

Exactly this, it’s a game plan that does require us to mix it up, once (if) we are able to do that with accuracy we will become a very difficult team to defend against. But as said earlier, if we gift goals to the opposition then the whole thing is wasted.

[westcoastcanary 173]

Statistics show that more goals are scored in the final few minutes of the first half (minute 42 to half-time whistle) than at any other time in the game. And there is a significant peaking in goals scored in the five minutes between minutes 52 and 57 compared to similar periods either side. I haven''t the data to back this up, but my impression is that we are particularly prone to conceding in both those windows (Maghoma''s goal on Saturday a case in point). Rather than applauding our re-established habit of scoring late goals, I''d rather we addressed what looks like a well-established habit of easing off and getting distracted by the approach of half-time, and extending the half-time break for another 15 minutes after the resumption of play!

As regards late goals (87th minute onwards), while fewer goals are scored then than in equivalent periods between minutes 67 and 87, it is still more than in any equivalent period in the first half. "Late" goals are not that unusual and we may well be no better than average when it comes to scoring them. The psychological effect on watching fans simply inflates them out of proportion.

[king canary 8,750]

@Vanwink

The thing is, the more you have the ball the more likely you are to commit errors- it is one of the reasons Mourinho has preferred his teams to have less of the ball vs teams like Barca in the past, to minimise the chance of an unforced error.

Errors like the couple of square passes Hanley played to the opposition are inherently more likely when we ask the defence to pass it among themselves. I''m not advocating a Mourinho style of play but it is something that has to be factored in when you consider the style we play.

[hogesar 10,761]

There''s nothing wrong with the possession style we''re trying to implement. We are mixing it up a bit more which is good to see as it gives the opposition team more to think about but even playing the longer balls came from us passing eventually dragging Birmingham players onto us (even when they didn''t really want to press, they eventually felt obliged). This gave the extra room for Hanley, Klose or Trybull to play a longer diagonal to someone in space.

We created chances with passing play too. That first header was a great chance for Rhodes, the second he''d put away 99/100. Hernandez had a couple of chances ignoring his goals too. Watch the highlights, the build up is fundamentally passing play.

[lake district canary 4,823]

[quote user="king canary"]@Vanwink

The thing is, the more you have the ball the more likely you are to commit errors- it is one of the reasons Mourinho has preferred his teams to have less of the ball vs teams like Barca in the past, to minimise the chance of an unforced error.

Errors like the couple of square passes Hanley played to the opposition are inherently more likely when we ask the defence to pass it among themselves. I''m not advocating a Mourinho style of play but it is something that has to be factored in when you consider the style we play.[/quote]

Even the best teams c*ck up with the passing at the back - man city did it yesterday in the charity shield match - so it is a dubious tactic to play a lot of imo.  It requires movement from the midfielders to work well, otherwise the centre backs have nowhere to go with it - and sometimes on Saturday, there was not enough movement going on.  Nerves come into it as well so it''s not a particularly safe tactic. 

It works when done in context of moving the ball around and moving players around, but if it becomes static, that is when it invites pressure and the errors occur.

[king canary 8,750]

Hogesar

I think some of us might be talking at cross purposes here.

The issue I have is the possession for possessions sake we saw last season- not play short, quick passes as we did in the second half on Saturday.

Fundementally I don''t think either of those chances for Rhodes get created last season. Based on how we often played I''d expect Leitner to pass rather than cross and for Marshall to not be overlapping. If those are signs of how it looks going forward then sign me up. If we go back to what we often were last season and most of the first half on Saturday then I''m less on board.