Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Parma Ham's gone mouldy

Parma’s Tactics Masterclass 19

Recommended Posts


Nash Game Theory assumes that self-interest encourages competitors to find and use the optimum strategy in any given scenario. 

There is criticism - common when results are negative - of tactics, substitutions, Board, philosophy, strategy, lack of Plan B* and quality. 

There are pages of quick-fire simplistic solutions all over this board implying that ‘if only we did x, or if only we did y’ we’d be better off, surviving, thriving, competing better. 

In that context - and to make an empirical judgment - the only meaningful question is: ‘Are we doing the best we can with the parameters we have?’

The painful Nashian evaluation might well be that this is ‘as good as it gets’. *Plan B does not need to exist if Plan A is already the best you can do with what you have. Which is not the same as winning every (or in fact any) week.

Farke’s defence - and by extension the Club’s unless contradicted - is that the limits of the finances (ergo the limits of the self-sustaining model) ensure that we have a ‘youthful’ (trans: naive, inexperienced as well as ‘young in age’) team that is learning on the job, increasing in education and increasing in value as an asset, further sustaining the model. 

The concentration of youth in defence (and conversely age in attack), can be observed to be the photo-negative of the typical approach whereby (to exaggerate to make the point) old sweats - battle-hardened, scarred and negative - have the appropriate, fearful, danger-lurks-around-every-corner mindset to keep goals out, whilst young, fearless, carefree, try-anything-once, zippy-footed youngsters bear down spontaneously on goal, making it hard to determine their next move and increasing the chances of scoring. 

That teams and players are significantly better en bloc at Premier level can be clearly noted. Systems are as strong as their weakest point and teams have the funds, depth of resources and analysis to minimise, amortise and prioritise their weaknesses. 

The optimum strategy to disturb Norwich’s tactics philosophy might be observed to be a well-coordinated high press, with dynamic physicality and a particular focus on the dedicated tempo-playmaker (vid the targeting of Leitner).

But wait. That’s not exactly news is it? Didn’t everyone know to do that last year in the Championship? 

A clear example of how and why it is greater quality, finer coordination - not Norwich failing in some way - that sees our negative outcomes repeating can be seen in the intelligence, unity and coordination of the high press against us. A press that contains 6 players moving in synch not 3 makes a fundamental difference. Players that can mentally repeat this process better, for longer and can then do something penetrative and meaningful with the ball after they have achieved a turnover  (perhaps at the fourth time of trying). They then do it all again after making an assist or scoring. Do not underestimate how impressive this is. It just doesn’t exist to anything like this level in the Championship. And all Premier teams can do it. 

Pukki’s exceptional goalscoring of course bailed us out multiple times from some average performances last season, he now gets less space, less chances and the increased pressure on defending inevitably leads to more exposure to danger and less creation. In the Championship other teams miss and waste a far higher percentage of chances, encouraging and rewarding more open strategies (to the point of cavalier: vid Alex Neil). It can be observed that you simply don’t have to focus so hard on defending and minimising chance creation against you under these parameters. That you may not be mentally, tactically or physically equipped to amend this failing at a later date at a higher level can also be observed. 

Buendia -  arguably second in influence over outcomes last season behind Pukki - has been less able to exploit a half second of time and space than he was a full second of it in the Championship. Conversely Cantwell, statistically far less effect in the Championship than Buendia (and others) - indeed he was arguably peripheral for much of the Championship campaign - has shown himself well able to replicate what he can do at the top level with comparatively much less time to do it in. This does not inevitably meant that he will dominate - or even succeed - if returned to the Championship. 

This is what scouts and Coaches really look for. Not really FM2019 style stats on who has done what - anybody can find and filter those - but rather ‘does what he does translate to a higher level? Will he be able to do the same thing with less time, under greater pressure, when he has to think faster, when his mistakes cost him more, when he is exposed to brighter lights?’
You might note that England has typically dominated smaller teams - often beating them far more heavily in qualifying than other major nations - only to regularly come up short when in the latter stages of a tournament. This is why. The style of play and methodology  (until recently) dominated at lower levels and was conversely ill-suited to higher levels. One does not prove the other. 

In the Championship goals are often scored by a relatively limited number of players. Often not lots of midfielders or defenders score repeatedly (we were an exception) and coaching dangers can be reasonably targeted on limited areas. In the Premier it is far less the case that you can discount some areas, players and possibilities as nearly all players are capable of causing problems if left unattended. 

Norwich have also made a stylistic decision that has implications for the type of player they recruit and play as Farke has repeatedly stressed. The approach of our contemporaries is instructive here to counterpoint our philosophy. Villa and Sheffield United have followed the tried-and-tested received wisdom of the ‘winning the mini-League’ and adopting defensive-minded strategies with high physicality and athleticism to spoil, disrupt and compete with similar sides and restrict chances of big beatings - with the hope of the odd ‘cup win’ style victory against an off-colour superior. Heightened physicality -  often (outside of very high prices) with a corollary of less fluid technicality - can thus be observed as an advance acceptance of mini-league membership. We decided to do different, aware of the risks. 

We can be observed to have attempted (actually ‘be copying’) the style of top level clubs in a desire to dominate possession and win games by ‘being better’ than the opposition. This is an ambitious and attractive approach that - let us not forget - was well able to dominate the Championship where ‘spoilers’ abound. It can be observed - currently - to be a style of play suited to playing better teams ( Man City, Chelsea, Arsenal, even Liverpool) who have a similar approach, albeit with far greater resources. 

The sit-tight-and-counter-attack approach is far safer tactically (disclaimer: it might be observed that this is actually what we de-facto did vs Man City) and whilst it concedes possession, it does not threaten your own defensive shape in the way that fluid attacking and brave chance-creation often does. 

The apparent bete-noire for Norwich of weak set-piece defending via zonal marking is true and not true. Zonal marking exists in man-to-man marking systems too. Putting men on the posts is a zone no? The perceived danger of an opponent ‘getting a run on you’ via Zonal should be negated by simply filling the area they want to run into by having lots of strategically-placed bodies there (which we do). Opponents can’t often (if ever) score from headers from the penalty spot outwards, so we are not talking about a huge strip of zonal land here. Zonal can encourage the keeper to come more, which can equally be  good or bad. The truth is that lots of goals are scored by set pieces and good delivery is hard for anyone - and any system - to defend. Players switching off is switching off, zonal or not. If you defend a lot, you will logically have to defend more set pieces. If you defend more of them, you’ll concede more from them. Concessions from zonal do look awful though, so they may imprint deeper as a negative image on all. I would be lying if I said I thought all Norwich defenders looked comfortable with the current set piece defensive set up however. 

Money cannot be excluded in the margins of a game either. Many Premier clubs pay high sums for game-changing Plan B subs. A Crouch, Fellaini, Carroll,  a set piece specialist (throws, direct free kicks, sharp delivery). We have a good, balanced squad with interchangeable players. We cannot buy top end weapons to sit on the bench ‘just in case’ as others can.

As Nash knows, there is no point in Plan B if the odds still favour Plan A (even if ‘pub’ humans like change for change’s sake in the mistaken belief that it must inherently be better). There will be plenty of flaws in a 6/10 strategy and this board is full of some of them. Unfortunately too often the ‘solutions’ are simply anything and everything that the current strategy isn’t. This is easy to prescribe, though it in no way proves that any such change would derive a better outcome. It is Farke and Webber’s raison d’etre, their life’s work to achieve the best outcome, the maximum output from the resources available. Racing a Fiat against a Ferrari takes more than a good driver however. 

We have a clear identity. A clear methodology and style of play. It is now well-drilled and established in the minds of the players. There is no confusion, no lack of cohesion, no misunderstanding of what is required individually and collectively. The players purchased fit the model well, the players grown and nurtured are well-schooled in what the coach needs and wants to achieve. This has and will create a good ‘floor’ to outcomes. Our clarity and consistency of message should and will ensure that performance levels - over an extended period (including perhaps the Championship) remain above the ‘floor’ level. 

It would be naive and disingenuous to imagine that no corollary ‘ceiling’ exists under a self-sustaining model however. Over time - in theory - there are no limits to the model, though a 2020 Championship team without Pukki might well not repeat the surprising and wonderful victory of last season. Goals are much harder to replace than anything else - regardless of the elegant construction of any model - and they can cover a multitude of sins. If buying goals is hard, growing them is harder. 

If the ruthless approach to transfers this season is due to a long-term infrastructure plan that included not only the training ground, but also the stadium itself, this might be a vote-winner. Giving those who earned success a fair chance is fair-minded, though perhaps romantic in professional sport. Providing an educational platform for young, ascending assets should be economically sound and admirably advertises the model to tomorrow’s candidates, though is quite possibly compromising in immediate sporting terms. 

There is of course an issue with long-term vision and golden promises of jam tomorrow. Like it or not in our Football world there is the Premier League and far, far behind - in media, money, global interest, exposure, excitement - there is everything else. 

There is no linear progression, football has changed. Money has changed it dramatically. Small teams historically are now strong economic entities with rich (maybe distant) owners, huge historic clubs floundering - despite maintaining gates at turnstiles - because it pales into insignificance versus TV revenues. Conversely you need a bigger stadium out of the Premier League when you no longer have guaranteed demand to fill it and - horribly - you could shut the stadium and show all your games online via Amazon and make a fortune while at the top tier. Our model is a good one, an elegant one, one to be proud of and support, much of it of eternal good sense regardless of means. Though in truth it was born out of necessity, dressed as choice. It is retrospective justification for what needs to be. We would spend more if we had it. 

We are doing as well as we can - the manager, the players, the sporting team, the board - with what we have. Nash would be proud. 

Parma

Edited by Parma Ham's gone mouldy
  • Like 15
  • Thanks 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

You might note that England has typically dominated smaller teams - often beating them far more heavily in qualifying than other major nations - only to regularly come up short when in the latter stages of a tournament. This is why. The style of play and methodology  (until recently) dominated at lower levels and was conversely ill-suited to higher levels. One does not prove the other. 

Norwich have also made a stylistic decision that has implications for the type of player they recruit and play as Farke has repeatedly stressed.

We have a clear identity. A clear methodology and style of play. It is now well-drilled and established in the minds of the players. There is no confusion, no lack of cohesion, no misunderstanding of what is required individually and collectively. The players purchased fit the model well, the players grown and nurtured are well schooled in what the coach needs and wants to achieve. This has and will create a good ‘floor’ to outcomes. Our clarity and consistency of message should and will ensure that performance levels - over an extended period (including perhaps the Championship) remain above the ‘floor’ level. 

 

England (luckily not my team) get knocked out as soon as they either come up against a team that plays therir way but is just better at it (often Germany) or a team that plays that different, higher-level game...

As for Norwich City this clear identity (which will survive changes of head coach) is surely the major benefit of having a sporting director, so the players bought for the future as well as for now will fit into it. I have made the point before that the summer signings for the u-23 squad are as important to the project as those  earmarked for the senior squad.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Good read (again) Parma.

Seconded. We are doing the best we can.

At the moment it is not happening that we are playing well enough - in spells and in some matches yes, but if we are not totally "on it" we look quite ineffective. It is to be hoped that we can get to that stage where we play at our best every week and for 90 minutes - if we do, results will improve - I suppose that is the 64 million dollar question - can we raise our game enough?  I think we can, but we will only know that as the season progresses. That is the beauty of the game, the future is where it will be decided and the future has not happened yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree that we are performing as well as can be expected, and conclude that we are going to get relegated if nothing changes. To improve our performance, either the current players have to elevate their game or we get new players. If we can't get new players because we don't have any money and the current players don't improve then the only possible responses are either to sell our better players to get new ones, or to promote different players from elsewhere in the club.

If Farke doesn't think any of the other players will do any better (which he clearly doesn't or he would have put them in the team by now) then January will see a couple of sales if we get what the club feels are decent offers.

To be honest, that is our only hope of survival, and it would make perfect sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Enjoyable read that after the first 2 paragraphs. Are they in code ? 

Only if your knowledge of football, tactics , psychology and English is limited.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

Still one of the best parody accounts on here 🤣😀👍🏻

You do know people have met him in real life dont you?

Edited by hogesar
Sorry, already covered by Rivvo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I'm not having it!

Your reasoning is correct in understanding and itemising those issues, but you're way behind the timeline. You might as well be on the history channel. 

We knew all that information last year  and the year before etc etc. Nothing has changed, we have consistently been too open in midfield and conceded goals in the Championship and our previous visits to the Premier League. 

Had Farke and Webber done the best they could, this issue would have been addressed through developing tactics accordingly and either training emerging players or bringing in appropriate players, as opposed to overloading our squad with so many attacking midfielders they can only play a handful of games each.

You have alluded to the choice that the management make regarding playing styles etc, but the conclusion of this being the best they could have done is a very weak argument and smacks of an allegiance to Farke / Webber rather than knowledge and logic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

Villa and Sheffield United have followed the tried-and-tested received wisdom of the ‘winning the mini-League’ and adopting defensive-minded strategies with high physicality and athleticism to spoil, disrupt and compete with similar sides and restrict chances of big beatings - with the hope of the odd ‘cup win’ style victory against an off-colour superior.

This is absolutely not what I've seen from Sheffield United this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Number9 said:

We knew all that information last year  and the year before etc etc. Nothing has changed, we have consistently been too open in midfield and conceded goals in the Championship and our previous visits to the Premier League. 

Had Farke and Webber done the best they could, this issue would have been addressed through developing tactics accordingly and either training emerging players or bringing in appropriate players, as opposed to overloading our squad with so many attacking midfielders they can only play a handful of games each.

So you would have used different tactics last season? 

In the PL we were too open under Neil for a couple of months - and he lost his nerve with that after the Newcastle result and we tried to be more defensive, that didn't work either. Under Hughton we were not open - we were just poor at executing what was required, in his second season.

As for Farke and Webber, just as well they bought in such good midfielders, they all contributed to a fantastic season last time. The only addition there this season has been Roberts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

So you would have used different tactics last season? 

In the PL we were too open under Neil for a couple of months - and he lost his nerve with that after the Newcastle result and we tried to be more defensive, that didn't work either. Under Hughton we were not open - we were just poor at executing what was required, in his second season.

As for Farke and Webber, just as well they bought in such good midfielders, they all contributed to a fantastic season last time. The only addition there this season has been Roberts.

To be fair Lakey, Pukki’s prolific scoring record did cover up a multitude of sins for us defensively last season. I’m not saying we should have played any differently or changed tactics etc, just that we weren’t exactly solid for large sections of last season and went up as a result of some strong comebacks and an ability to outplay and out score the opposition, neither of which we ate having a huge amount of luck with this season.

when we lost against Liverpool we were “too open”, but when we played our way better against Man City we are brilliant. It just feels like the way we play in this league requires every single player to be at the top of their game and “on it” to a level above that which more defensive tactics allows. It’s not the lack of wins which is killing us, it’s our inability to bring out draws and stop the opposition from scoring.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

Still one of the best parody accounts on here 🤣😀👍🏻

Nonsense, you were never even in the top five.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everything in the post has been touched on before, but still a very good read nonetheless.

I'd say that I agree with everything except for the 'Plan B'. I understand the view that improving and maximising Plan A should be the priority, but there are some games in which the opponent sets up specifically to negate Plan A and as a result, it is ineffective. When this happens, the logical thing is to revert to a Plan B in order to take the opposition by surprise and give them something else to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

If Daniel Farke communicates to his players in a pretentious and waffling nature like this, no wonder we’re losing so many games 😹😹

Maybe you and Parma should compare coaching credentials? I know which one i've got my money on..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bearing in mind Nash Game Theory posits nothing of the sort , and has absolutely no practical application to multi- participant sports such as football with myriad uncontrollable variables such as the weather , I didn’t read the rest of it . 
 

🎶the king is in the Altogether 🎶

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Maybe you and Parma should compare coaching credentials? I know which one i've got my money on..

Tbh Parma's somewhat 'verbose' style does invite accusations of pretentiousness.

The above post is a fine example- lots of words that basically boil down to 'teams are better in the Premier League so we can't just play how we did last season.' 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hogesar said:

Maybe you and Parma should compare coaching credentials? I know which one i've got my money on..

Maybe you should concentrate on running “your” company (of which you don’t have a controlling stake 🤣👍🏻)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

Maybe you should concentrate on running “your” company (of which you don’t have a controlling stake 🤣👍🏻)

Now,now, lets leave life outside of footy where it is, outside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hogesar said:

Maybe you and Parma should compare coaching credentials? I know which one i've got my money on..

He may have all the coaching badges on the world but stick him in a dressing room with 18 footballers of various nationalities and not one of them is going to understand what the f*ck he is talking about. 

I'd believe it if somebody told me that he's Eric Cantona's ghostwriter. If he could just do a three line summary in the style of Harry Redknapp at the bottom of each of these complex pieces of abstract art he'd be doing us all a big favour. 

Edited by TeemuVanBasten
  • Like 1

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...