Rupp and Duda

[Thirsty Lizard 3,197]

19 hours ago, sgncfc said:

It's always a treat when so many people see things so differently. I see Rupp and Duda having tightened us up - it's meant the opposition are not destroying us in midfield as they were, and exposing our centre backs. The trouble is that has compromised us going forward, as we are creating fewer chances and missing the ones we do create. 

I expect that in away games we will start with them both, to stay in the game and try to win it later. That approach so nearly worked at Newcastle, and almost got us a point yesterday - we need it to work at Wolves. 

That's not really true. Away at Newcastle we had 19 shots - it's the most we've ever had in a Premier League away game without scoring. 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,197]

11 hours ago, Number9 said:

I'll tell you what will happen, we will let in another two goals per game because Herr Farke won't address our poor defensive situation. 

Is that the only thing that will happen again if we are in the Championship? Or will we stroll the League again playing brilliant attacking football and scoring goals for fun again too? 

[Number9 272]

1 hour ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Is that the only thing that will happen again if we are in the Championship? Or will we stroll the League again playing brilliant attacking football and scoring goals for fun again too? 

We didn't stroll the League last year Mr Lizard. 

[BigFish 2,209]

On 16/02/2020 at 10:11, Il Pirata said:

At this level, we need the CDM to be able to chase and harry - Tettey is only effective when the ball is sucked into a small area just in front of the back four. His lack of mobility gives the opposition too much time on the ball. 

That is almost 100% wrong, the last thing teams need at this level is a CDM running around like a headless chicken. That job is to hold position & protect the back four, you are effectively criticising Tettey for doing his job, doing it well and doing it better than anyone else at the club in all the squads of that period for his entire career.

[Thirsty Lizard 3,197]

39 minutes ago, Number9 said:

We didn't stroll the League last year Mr Lizard. 

Ha Ha......... straws................. clutching at .............. much ....... 🤣

[king canary 8,267]

17 minutes ago, BigFish said:

That is almost 100% wrong, the last thing teams need at this level is a CDM running around like a headless chicken. That job is to hold position & protect the back four, you are effectively criticising Tettey for doing his job, doing it well and doing it better than anyone else at the club in all the squads of that period for his entire career.

I'd argue that Tettey doesn't really do either, more a bit of both.

He's improved positionally under Farke- previously he was much more of a headless chicken and often got sucked out of position leaving the defence exposed. However he's still prone to chasing the ball where he shouldn't at times and one of the weaknesses of our set up under Farke is a lack of defensive cover when a player gets moved out of position. 

[BigFish 2,209]

29 minutes ago, king canary said:

I'd argue that Tettey doesn't really do either, more a bit of both.

He's improved positionally under Farke- previously he was much more of a headless chicken and often got sucked out of position leaving the defence exposed. However he's still prone to chasing the ball where he shouldn't at times and one of the weaknesses of our set up under Farke is a lack of defensive cover when a player gets moved out of position. 

Wouldn't argue with any of that, my point was that a poster was criticising him when he was doing his job well. As it stands the team needs a CDM and his the best we have, no one else in squad can match him for the job. Whether he is good enough for the Prem is another question but the role is an expensive one to fill and replacements won't be cheap.

[sgncfc 1,301]

3 hours ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

That's not really true. Away at Newcastle we had 19 shots - it's the most we've ever had in a Premier League away game without scoring. 

If you look at the overall stats rather than just the number of shots we had in one game to suit your argument, you will see that we are creating fewer chances. And not scoring. We are also giving away fewer chances. And losing/drawing. That's my point. When Duda and Rupp play we are defensively tighter, but our results are still not there yet because we are not converting, unlike the teams we are playing against. Losing 1-0 may be more professional/impressive than losing 3-2, but it's still losing.

[Upo 91]

1 minute ago, sgncfc said:

If you look at the overall stats rather than just the number of shots we had in one game to suit your argument, you will see that we are creating fewer chances. And not scoring. We are also giving away fewer chances. And losing/drawing. That's my point. When Duda and Rupp play we are defensively tighter, but our results are still not there yet because we are not converting, unlike the teams we are playing against. Losing 1-0 may be more professional/impressive than losing 3-2, but it's still losing.

 

Why I just made a thread about this. 

Rupp has really impressed and Duda's quality will be apparent once we get past midfield. His missed chance against Newcastle was unfortunate, but very promising. He was *there*.

The reason why Buendia didn't start was because the best chance Norwich had was to go for 0-0. Buendia for all his brilliance can be a defensive liability. Liverpool was not a winnable game. Literally every other game is winnable and if his head is right, you start Buendia. But not that game.

[JF 694]

2 minutes ago, Upo said:

 

Why I just made a thread about this. 

Rupp has really impressed and Duda's quality will be apparent once we get past midfield. His missed chance against Newcastle was unfortunate, but very promising. He was *there*.

The reason why Buendia didn't start was because the best chance Norwich had was to go for 0-0. Buendia for all his brilliance can be a defensive liability. Liverpool was not a winnable game. Literally every other game is winnable and if his head is right, you start Buendia. But not that game.

I’m not sure where this opinion that Buendea is a defensive liability has come from? Certainly the evidence doesn’t back that up 

[Upo 91]

26 minutes ago, JF said:

I’m not sure where this opinion that Buendea is a defensive liability has come from? Certainly the evidence doesn’t back that up 

He CAN be a defensive liability. There was a reason he spent a few games benched earlier. If he loses the ball, it tends to be in a bad position to do so. Still, it's his job to be opportunistic. He's great at it. Sometimes you need someone more defensive minded, like Rupp for example, though. Liverpool game was such a time.

[ron obvious 1,610]

2 minutes ago, Upo said:

He CAN be a defensive liability. There was a reason he spent a few games benched earlier. If he loses the ball, it tends to be in a bad position to do so. Still, it's his job to be opportunistic. He's great at it. Sometimes you need someone more defensive minded, like Rupp for example, though. Liverpool game was such a time.

Precisely this.

[king canary 8,267]

Michael Cox wrote an interesting piece for the Athletic recently about how the best players in the League also fail a lot.

Buendia was (at the time he wrote the article) the third most disposed player in the league. He was also the third-best player at beating his opponent. 

Trent Alexander Arnold has the most unsuccessful passes and failed crosses in the league- he also has 10 assists from right back.

Players like Emi will fail a lot because they try a lot. But for a team like us we need players who will do this otherwise we'll never create anything. It is on Farke to find a way to accommodate a player like Buendia without sacrificing defensive solidarity.

 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,197]

2 hours ago, sgncfc said:

If you look at the overall stats rather than just the number of shots we had in one game to suit your argument, you will see that we are creating fewer chances. And not scoring. We are also giving away fewer chances. And losing/drawing. That's my point. When Duda and Rupp play we are defensively tighter, but our results are still not there yet because we are not converting, unlike the teams we are playing against. Losing 1-0 may be more professional/impressive than losing 3-2, but it's still losing.

Oh come on sgncfc - we didn't just have a load of hopeful pot shots at Newcastle - we created a number of excellent chances - which unfortunately Pukki mostly (and also Duda) missed. 

[ron obvious 1,610]

Having just watched the highlights I'm going to say something a bit sacrilegious.

I think Teemu should have done better when Rupp was played through by Kenny's excellent long ball.

He stayed too central , rather than running a couple of yards to his left. Allison would then have had to make a decision, either to try & cover Teemu & Rupp by moving right, leaving a clear shot for Rupp, or closing him down, making for an easy pass to Pukki. As it was Rupp had to hit the pass softly otherwise, to be sure of clearing Alison, it would have forced Teemu out wide & the 'pool defenders would have recovered.

Never mind. VAR would have disallowed it anyway   

 

[king canary 8,267]

14 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

Having just watched the highlights I'm going to say something a bit sacrilegious.

I think Teemu should have done better when Rupp was played through by Kenny's excellent long ball.

He stayed too central , rather than running a couple of yards to his left. Allison would then have had to make a decision, either to try & cover Teemu & Rupp by moving right, leaving a clear shot for Rupp, or closing him down, making for an easy pass to Pukki. As it was Rupp had to hit the pass softly otherwise, to be sure of clearing Alison, it would have forced Teemu out wide & the 'pool defenders would have recovered.

Never mind. VAR would have disallowed it anyway   

 

Don't think it is hugely controversial.

That chance rather summed up our issues this season- fantastic build-up then a complete farce when it came to actually pulling the trigger. Pukki should have gone wider, Rupp should have played the ball better, it is farcial that we had a chance like that and didn't even end up with a shot on goal from it.

[ron obvious 1,610]

9 minutes ago, king canary said:

Don't think it is hugely controversial.

That chance rather summed up our issues this season- fantastic build-up then a complete farce when it came to actually pulling the trigger. Pukki should have gone wider, Rupp should have played the ball better, it is farcial that we had a chance like that and didn't even end up with a shot on goal from it.

My point was that Rupp's passing option would have been a whole lot easier if Teemu had run that little bit wider. Being so close meant Rupp had to weigh his pass absolutely perfectly.

 

[king canary 8,267]

1 minute ago, ron obvious said:

My point was that Rupp's passing option would have been a whole lot easier if Teemu had run that little bit wider. Being so close meant Rupp had to weigh his pass absolutely perfectly.

 

Yeah I got that and I agree. I still don't think Pukki being where he was made the pass he actually played any better though.

[Il Pirata 249]

5 hours ago, BigFish said:

That is almost 100% wrong, the last thing teams need at this level is a CDM running around like a headless chicken. That job is to hold position & protect the back four, you are effectively criticising Tettey for doing his job, doing it well and doing it better than anyone else at the club in all the squads of that period for his entire career.

Absolutely not what I'm saying at all. 

A CDM who can press effectively is not the same as running around like a headless chicken. Is N'golo Kante a headless chicken? Or Wilfrid Ndidi? 

If Tettey can only operate in a small area in front of the back four that leaves large amounts of space in front. Space that quality EPL opposition take advantage of, and can leave us continually on the back foot struggling to get out. 

 

[king canary 8,267]

1 minute ago, Il Pirata said:

Absolutely not what I'm saying at all. 

A CDM who can press effectively is not the same as running around like a headless chicken. Is N'golo Kante a headless chicken? Or Wilfrid Ndidi? 

If Tettey can only operate in a small area in front of the back four that leaves large amounts of space in front. Space that quality EPL opposition take advantage of, and can leave us continually on the back foot struggling to get out. 

 

Attempting to not sound too pretentious but...

The modern day defensive midfielder needs to play horizontally rather than vertically. With attacking fullbacks the norm, there is a lot of space across the pitch that can be exploited on the counter. A player like Ndidi or Kante spends as more time shuttling left to right than up and down. Tettey, for me, lacks the mobility these days to do this.

 

[Il Pirata 249]

If people 

3 minutes ago, king canary said:

Attempting to not sound too pretentious but...

The modern day defensive midfielder needs to play horizontally rather than vertically. With attacking fullbacks the norm, there is a lot of space across the pitch that can be exploited on the counter. A player like Ndidi or Kante spends as more time shuttling left to right than up and down. Tettey, for me, lacks the mobility these days to do this.

 

Not pretentious at all. You're right, but I think it's a mixture of both. The point essentially is lack of mobility, and that he can't press and get to a players often enough and win the ball. Most of his ball winning happens when the opposition play too tight and at close quarters to Tettey. 

My motive isn't to bash Tettey. But if he is one of our better midfielders then that should be of concern to fans. As I've said before, we should be miles past Tettey now. 

[Woodman 92]

I agree with whoever made the point about us tightening up recently. 2 clean sheets out of the last 3 games.

We somehow need to find a way of playing Duda, Rupp, Cantwell, Buendia and Tettey.  But that leaves out Vrancic, McLean and Onel.

[Number9 272]

3 hours ago, ron obvious said:

Having just watched the highlights I'm going to say something a bit sacrilegious.

I think Teemu should have done better when Rupp was played through by Kenny's excellent long ball.

He stayed too central , rather than running a couple of yards to his left. Allison would then have had to make a decision, either to try & cover Teemu & Rupp by moving right, leaving a clear shot for Rupp, or closing him down, making for an easy pass to Pukki. As it was Rupp had to hit the pass softly otherwise, to be sure of clearing Alison, it would have forced Teemu out wide & the 'pool defenders would have recovered.

Never mind. VAR would have disallowed it anyway   

 

Not being funny, Rupp should have scored - end of. 

[ron obvious 1,610]

37 minutes ago, Number9 said:

Not being funny, Rupp should have scored - end of. 

I'd have backed Allison to save in his position from that far out.

End of, Mr. Bell

 

[Number9 272]

11 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

I'd have backed Allison to save in his position from that far out.

End of, Mr. Bell

 

Come on, he's through on goal, just the keeper to beat, it's not unrealistic to expect a goal. 

Any player, other than Byram in that situation, the crowd are on their feet expecting a goal.

[ron obvious 1,610]

1 minute ago, Number9 said:

Come on, he's through on goal, just the keeper to beat, it's not unrealistic to expect a goal. 

Any player, other than Byram in that situation, the crowd are on their feet expecting a goal.

I've seen too many top class strikers fluff their lines in that situation. And Rupp is not even a striker. I'd have rated his chances as 50-50 at best.

if Pukki had run wide he'd have had a 99.999... tap in - or created a tap in for Rupp.

 

 

[king canary 8,267]

1 minute ago, ron obvious said:

I've seen too many top class strikers fluff their lines in that situation. And Rupp is not even a striker. I'd have rated his chances as 50-50 at best.

if Pukki had run wide he'd have had a 99.999... tap in - or created a tap in for Rupp.

 

 

Rupp was all alone on the penalty spot and had to pass the ball 5 yards but fluffed it.

[Number9 272]

14 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

I've seen too many top class strikers fluff their lines in that situation. And Rupp is not even a striker. I'd have rated his chances as 50-50 at best.

if Pukki had run wide he'd have had a 99.999... tap in - or created a tap in for Rupp.

 

 

There you go,  I think our players are better than you do, he's got to score from there, no question about it. 

Even the old gits in the River End will have picked up the hot chocolate and the blanket to cheer a goal from that position. 

[ron obvious 1,610]

34 minutes ago, Number9 said:

There you go,  I think our players are better than you do, he's got to score from there, no question about it. 

Even the old gits in the River End will have picked up the hot chocolate and the blanket to cheer a goal from that position. 

You've never seen a top class striker miss from there? You haven't watched must football then.

[ron obvious 1,610]

50 minutes ago, king canary said:

Rupp was all alone on the penalty spot and had to pass the ball 5 yards but fluffed it.

Pukki's position meant he gave Alisson a chance to save it - unless Rupp hit it harder, pushing Teemu wide & allowing the defence to get back at him.