“Farke has lost the players” - Robbie Earl

[Aggy 752]

13 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

Perhaps that's because the players cannot consistently follow instructions? Don't have the positional awareness necessary in the PL? That they get tired of being outmuscled time & time again? Why has an ageing midfielder often looked our best player on the pitch??

In bursts, & in odd games, we've been good enough. Consistency & a lack of discipline are most often the reason for our downfall, Experience in the PL is invaluable in that respect, & we just don't have it. Lack of skill has not been our problem;  it's our inexperience exacerbated by inadequate physicality & athleticism that has been.

I don’t think so. I can’t believe that 9 players all just lose concentration at the same time and decide to scatter themselves 50 yards apart. It’s clearly tactical instruction. Rather than moving up through the phases in blocks, we have told players to get so far apart even at 0-0 in the first half. 

Likewise with set pieces  - which to be honest is my biggest gripe this season - had we sorted that out even a little bit I’d probably be willing to give the coaching staff the benefit of the doubt more generally, but I really do worry about what we do on the training pitch. You can drill bang average players to defend set pieces against supposedly far superior opponents. Again, see Allardyce and Pulis. See most other clubs in this division. Yes we’d have still let goals in from set pieces because we’re not as tall or large as a lot of other clubs. But our defending of set plays this year has been laughable. That’s the coaching.
 

Would we have been good enough? Probably not. Would there still have been individual errors or individuals just being outdone by opponents? Probably yes, But the above are basic things we could be doing much better and arent. That’s down to the coaching.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Aggy

[Harry53 208]

6 hours ago, Canary Jedi said:

It would be great to hear from Webber. I'm only guessing, I don't have inside info, but I believe they were publically managing expectations from the start of the season while privately hoping they could have a good first season in the prem. Certainly after the first few games (performances 2nd half liverpool, newcastle, chelsea, [ignore wet spam], man city) there was every reason to believe we could hold our own.

So I can imagine to go out with such a whimper is below expectations, and frankly not good enough.

By the way, back to Robbie Earle the way he said it was almost reluctantly, it wasn't just a sound bite.

It really is a shame we are finishing the season so badly. Looking back on this season we have often controlled games or certainly competed well, only to lose or not win by a single goal.  All season reporters have used the words "fine margins" and it did sum up our games. We missed that killer touch and continued to ship stupid goals in. 

Looking back we could easily have had another 6 or more points but it wasn't to be. Relying on Teemu was wrong and unfortunately the many midfielders that we have didn't contribute enough. That was ultimately our downfall. 

I personally would like to see us playing with more than one striker. It may have worked last season but i am not hopeful to rely on the same formation next time. 

[ron obvious 1,501]

3 hours ago, Aggy said:

I don’t think so. I can’t believe that 9 players all just lose concentration at the same time and decide to scatter themselves 50 yards apart. It’s clearly tactical instruction. Rather than moving up through the phases in blocks, we have told players to get so far apart even at 0-0 in the first half. 

Likewise with set pieces  - which to be honest is my biggest gripe this season - had we sorted that out even a little bit I’d probably be willing to give the coaching staff the benefit of the doubt more generally, but I really do worry about what we do on the training pitch. You can drill bang average players to defend set pieces against supposedly far superior opponents. Again, see Allardyce and Pulis. See most other clubs in this division. Yes we’d have still let goals in from set pieces because we’re not as tall or large as a lot of other clubs. But our defending of set plays this year has been laughable. That’s the coaching.
 

Would we have been good enough? Probably not. Would there still have been individual errors or individuals just being outdone by opponents? Probably yes, But the above are basic things we could be doing much better and arent. That’s down to the coaching.

So we have the old conundrum: why did the tactical instruction work so well against ManC & Newcastle? Were the players only instructed to do the right things in certain games, the ones where we performed better?

Or are the players unable to perform consistently? Not move into position at the right times? Positional sense is not something you can easily coach into many players, it often needs a lot of experience (viz. Alex Tettey).

As for Pulis & Allardyce, look at the sort of players they like to recruit.

And I repeat, if you can drill bang average players to defend against superior opponents then why bother to look higher than L2 for defenders. In the end there's only so much you can do, & the defence we've been left with is simply not good enough.

[Tumbleweed 106]

I'm pretty much with Aggy on this. I think we all agree that we don't have the quality and that has been significant. But that means we need to cut our cloth accordingly. There are some things going through the entire team which can only be down to tactics or instruction. Full backs being so high and so wide, a strung out midfield, slow passing, often backwards just inviting pressure, set piece incompetence at both ends, but most worringly lack of real grit and determination. I really would like to know why we start games and second halves so languidly, its like there is no motivational stuff going on and the team only gets it through adrenalin from playing the top sides (where we have oddly looked a bit better) or from a baying crowd. Post lockdown they have trooped on and appear to have been given a sedative.

[Jonncfc 28]

10 hours ago, lake district canary said:

No, you are only as good as your next game.

So, just because Liverpool won the league by a country mile, in reality they’re no better than we are because they’re only as good as their next game.  Thanks for explaining that one.

[hogesar 9,618]

18 hours ago, Don’t be Krul said:

Agreed, there is something that has gone on during lockdown. My guess is Farke has told the club he’s off and it has been filtered down to the players.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city/canaries-daniel-farke-job-status-relegation-1-6742254

[ron obvious 1,501]

46 minutes ago, Tumbleweed said:

I'm pretty much with Aggy on this. I think we all agree that we don't have the quality and that has been significant. But that means we need to cut our cloth accordingly. There are some things going through the entire team which can only be down to tactics or instruction. Full backs being so high and so wide, a strung out midfield, slow passing, often backwards just inviting pressure, set piece incompetence at both ends, but most worringly lack of real grit and determination. I really would like to know why we start games and second halves so languidly, its like there is no motivational stuff going on and the team only gets it through adrenalin from playing the top sides (where we have oddly looked a bit better) or from a baying crowd. Post lockdown they have trooped on and appear to have been given a sedative.

If you don't have the quality - & that has many aspects - you're stuffed whatever you do.

Full backs being high & wide is how we play. We do that because it suits the full backs we have - they do not have the attributes of Pulis type players; at this level they are better attackers than defenders (& their attacking abilities have been countered by being up against better players).

The strung out midfield has happened because our players are just not good enough overall to survive. Their skills get overrun by stronger more dynamic players.  They get closed down & have to make hurried passes to anyone they can. They cannot cope. Again I ask why Alex has often looked our best midfielder.

After our initial success the opposition cottoned on to our susceptibility to pressure, our lack of physicality, & quickly realised their forwards could work a very high, very aggressive press & destroy our passing game. There was no out ball, nobody strong enough to hold onto the ball further up the pitch; all other teams had to do was wait for the inevitable mistake.

This shifted the balance of confidence dramatically. You could see teams playing with us cat & mouse style, pouncing on our errors knowing they could cut through our ramshackle defence. As I said, players like Zimmermann & Hanley are adequate, Ben lacks experience, & Timm just wasn't there. With  3 out of those 4 missing at various points & never a chance to form a decent partnership (essential, especiallyy when defending set pieces) we didn't stand a chance.

The readiness of the opposition to pounce on us is remarkable. Every time I watch MOTD I see teams making horrendous mistakes occasionally but it never gets punished with the regularity ours do; the other team are surprised by it, not expecting it as they are with us.

This really is the most ruthless league & any weakness will be probed & exploited to the maximum. We are a skilful, intelligent team ,a quick passing side who rely on razor sharp communication to make attack work & having our best defenders fit to offer even a reasonable defensive capability.

I said last season I was concerned with our lack of physicality for the PL. Unfortunately my concern was well founded.

[Aggy 752]

6 hours ago, ron obvious said:

So we have the old conundrum: why did the tactical instruction work so well against ManC & Newcastle? Were the players only instructed to do the right things in certain games, the ones where we performed better?

Or are the players unable to perform consistently? Not move into position at the right times? Positional sense is not something you can easily coach into many players, it often needs a lot of experience (viz. Alex Tettey).

As for Pulis & Allardyce, look at the sort of players they like to recruit.

And I repeat, if you can drill bang average players to defend against superior opponents then why bother to look higher than L2 for defenders. In the end there's only so much you can do, & the defence we've been left with is simply not good enough.

Para 1 - yes exactly that. I would say it’s pretty clear that against Man City we set up to play solidly and defend and try to nick something on the counter. Against a lot of other sides we’ve tried to play “our way” too much, when we should have been adapting “our way” to suit the prem - more solid and play your nice football on the counter, or even play your nice football but do it without leaving humongous gaps all over the field. This is exactly my point and my criticism of Farke this year - we haven’t been pragmatic enough in our approach. We might still not have been good enough, but too often we haven’t set up to give ourselves the best chance. “There’s only so much you can do” - yes, but have we done that much?
 

We have very rarely out played sides this season other than perhaps the early Newcastle win. So why did we keep trying instead of getting more solid and doing something different on a more regular basis? When we did set up more solidly (usually against the bigger clubs) we looked better than we did against bottom half clubs. Do you think that’s because the players all just switched off against the lower half clubs, or because they had been working on defensive shape before the Man City game and told to play tight in that game but then told to go out and play “our way” against the bottom half clubs, foregoing that solidity? 

 From your next post “full backs high and wide is how we play because it suits our full backs.” Well that’s great but if it keeps costing us goals then you change it. And it isn’t about changing it massively anyway - look at the cup quarter final - Lewis first half was our most dangerous player, but he was also starting less high up the pitch, getting forward less off the ball, but then getting further forward when he had the ball. Man City win - from goal kicks were our full backs fifty yards away from the centre backs? Do you honestly think that’s because in other games they just wandered that far forward because they lacked discipline? Not that it was instructions from the coach?

You can still play your nice football, but sit tighter and do it in units moving up the pitch rather than having huge gaps between all your players. That’s basic team shape and can be drilled into most players - if they haven’t got the discipline to do that then it is what it is and you get relegated anyway, but you have to give yourself the best chance. The problem we’ve had is that last season we still let shed loads of goals in but scored more. This season we haven’t even looked dangerous going forward. If we had scored loads but gone down because of defensive frailty, people would understand. If we had been solid but just not quite had the firepower or quality to stay up, people would understand. Too often this season though we haven’t been good enough going forward but have tried to persist with that rather than tightening up the defence and trying to play the percentages a bit more.

We won’t be a million points adrift at the end of the season. Had we been just a little bit more pragmatic in our approach (or practiced corners properly) we could have maybe done enough to just stay up. That’s the point. The players might still not have been good enough but the manager and coaching staff take part of the “blame” as well as they haven’t been able to get the basics right this year.

[Mason 47 1,373]

I believe Farke doesn't believe we have the personnel to set up to defend effectively, so we play in a way that is supposed to maximise our numbers high up the pitch in the 'we're gonna score one more than you' approach. I believe it is also a marketing tactic because if our defence is always 'out of position because tactics' then buying teams are less likely to question the fact our bright young defenders can't really defend.

I've said for a long time that our best performances came against the top sides where we respected them enough to concentrate on compact defensive shape. Sure enough, against West Ham they had a 3v3 on our back line inside the 2nd minute. 

People often say Byram is defensively better than the two young fullbacks but not as good going forwards; but if you really think back, Byram has missed more chances than Max + Jamal combined from open play AND is considered better defensively. This is because he has experience and he knows when to push on and when to hold- the same reason Tettey looks so much more comfortable than our midfield, as he is tactically aware and experienced.

Our system gives a lot of license for players to play their own game, but the thorough lack of PL experience means that the players nor the tactics look sufficient. Next time we come up, I guarantee you it won't be with 5 u22s in vital positions.

 

[Jerrykerry 223]

We didn't adapt our game. 

The instant teams pressed our back four the season was doomed. 

We are incapable of doing anything other than tippy tappy in our own half. 

Teams just press and when we lose the ball, and with out full backs miles up the pitch, we concede. 

 

[Hardhouse44 261]

6 minutes ago, Jerrykerry said:

We didn't adapt our game. 

The instant teams pressed our back four the season was doomed. 

We are incapable of doing anything other than tippy tappy in our own half. 

Teams just press and when we lose the ball, and with out full backs miles up the pitch, we concede. 

 

This is spot on. We didn’t adapt our game. 
 

The manager persisted with the same style of play week in week out and we got punished for it.  
 

You can teach a lab rat not to continue to touch and electrode but you can’t teach a stubborn manager to chance his formation.

 

[Aggy 752]

On 12/07/2020 at 10:12, Mason 47 said:

I believe Farke doesn't believe we have the personnel to set up to defend effectively, so we play in a way that is supposed to maximise our numbers high up the pitch in the 'we're gonna score one more than you' approach. I believe it is also a marketing tactic because if our defence is always 'out of position because tactics' then buying teams are less likely to question the fact our bright young defenders can't really defend.

I've said for a long time that our best performances came against the top sides where we respected them enough to concentrate on compact defensive shape. Sure enough, against West Ham they had a 3v3 on our back line inside the 2nd minute. 

Agreed on the second point you make there..... 9 of our 21 points this season have come against the traditional ‘big six’ and Leicester (and we’ve still got to play two of them again). So 9 points from 12 games against the big boys at 0.75 ppg. 12 points from 23 against the rest at 0.52 ppg. Even if you assume we lose our last three games, it becomes 0.65 against the big boys and 0.5 against the weaker sides. Add in that the big boys are better than the rest, and I think it’s safe to say we’ve performed better against them than the weaker sides.

As for Farke not thinking we’ve got the personnel to set up to defend, I wouldn’t mind that if (a) we were actually scoring and (b) we hadn’t proven that we can defend pretty well in a number of games against the top sides in the division. If you can’t attack or defend, then you’ve got to play the averages and try not to concede. There’s a bigger gap between us and second lowest scoring side than there is between us and second highest conceding...

[Mason 47 1,373]

1 hour ago, Aggy said:

 

As for Farke not thinking we’ve got the personnel to set up to defend, I wouldn’t mind that if (a) we were actually scoring and (b) we hadn’t proven that we can defend pretty well in a number of games against the top sides in the division. If you can’t attack or defend, then you’ve got to play the averages and try not to concede. There’s a bigger gap between us and second lowest scoring side than there is between us and second highest conceding...

I agree with this, I just think that's the what and why of it. I feel like this is reflected in the Tettey post-match where he was saying how the manager wants to play differently but doesn't have the players.

I see it all over our play. Against West Ham we regularly had 7 players closer to their goal than their midfield, and it happens too often for it not to be tactically purposeful. Our best moments often came when we had numbers just inside our own half to get the passes together, then sprang the Pukki- very frustrating we stopped seeing this.