Bill TV

[Bill 1,788]

actually, just a few highlights from last night

 

and some interesting thoughts from Herr Farke - no new covid cases in 6 days, happy to be back, lads played well and it might help if squad dealt with covid now rather than during season......err, that's it

 

 

[horsefly 4,732]

Can't you say something even slightly controversial Bill? Greavesy is going to be very disappointed.

[Bill 1,788]

I fear the title alone may set off a few of the Father Ted 'Jurassic Park' inhabitants, who seem to be permanently angry

.....mostly with me, it would appear.  😛

[TheGunnShow 6,588]

As much as I agree with the notion that "it's only a much-changed Gillingham", what stood out from the highlights was just how well PLM, Rupp and Gilmour played despite not having been together for very long. Some of that one-touch passing and movement was a delight to watch. It also looked more like a 4-3-2-1 instead of a 4-2-3-1 so Farke's going for more bodies in the middle of the park, with a clear eye on our weaknesses of the previous Premier League season where we were often too easily overran down the centre whilst at the same time theoretically meaning more bodies available there to use short passes to drive the team forward. Furthermore, I agree that Gillingham had a few first-teamers out but we were missing Pukki, Hanley and Rashica too.

Gilmour looks like a considerable upgrade on Leitner and Vrancic, he might not be the biggest of lads but he's pretty mobile. Lees-Melou and Lungi have a similar, languid quality to their movement and Rupp's sprightly. 3 instead of 2 in deeper midfield somewhat compensates for Buendia's missing workrate and indeed Skipp's tackling. I do think you'll see this 4-3-2-1 in possession, dropping to 4-5-1 off the ball. If Tzolis comes in then expect him and Rashica to be used as counter-attackers.

Newcastle will tell us far more in terms of the quality the team is playing with, but Farke's basic strategy in getting around the absences of Buendia and Skipp looks clear enough from here.

[Rich T The Biscuit 601]

I thought it was called YouTube 😉

Lees-Melou looks like a steal but will save my judgment until I've seen how he fairs week in week out in the PL, certainly a player in there and he does love a strike.

Interesting that we used a 4 at the back last night, was that down to the lack of players available or is that the game plan, guess we'll know when we kick off against Newcastle in the last friendly.

[Bill 1,788]

Just now, Rich T The Biscuit said:

I thought it was called YouTube 😉

Lees-Melou looks like a steal but will save my judgment until I've seen how he fairs week in week out in the PL, certainly a player in there and he does love a strike.

Interesting that we used a 4 at the back last night, was that down to the lack of players available or is that the game plan, guess we'll know when we kick off against Newcastle in the last friendly.

I would think that it is a case of horses for course, so will adapt for, and during, each game.

One of the notable points last night was how the team continued with moving around the pitch as the game went along, rather than adhering to some fixed positions.

With Gillingham funnelling back at every opportunity, City chose to keep possession around the box, looking for a pass that would put on of the in on goal, rather than hitting the ball towards a 'target man' to see if he can score.

The nearest we came to that was Cantwells free kick when Sorensen appeared, Martin Peters like, to ghost in the 5th.

And yes we will have to see how it pans out. Gillingham not L'pool etc, but the intent was clear to see last night.

It bodes well for the coming season.

[Bill 1,788]

27 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

 with a clear eye on our weaknesses of the previous Premier League season where we were often too easily overran down the centre

that was not down to how the 'flowers were arranged' - but the flowers

last time in the PL we were  'out muscled' far too many times - players like Lewis, Leitner and Vrancic were knocked off the ball to easily

and if you watched last night the 'formation' stuff is meaningless, both Giannoulis and Aarons were consistently level with our furthest forward players and Gilmour, Dowell, L-M, Cantwell and Rupp moved about as the game dictated, neither sticking to the left or right side of the pitch, nor consistently being ahead or behind one another

the best you can say is that bar the keeper and the two CBs and Idah staying forward the rest of the team had no real position

[chicken 2,831]

19 minutes ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

I thought it was called YouTube 😉

Lees-Melou looks like a steal but will save my judgment until I've seen how he fairs week in week out in the PL, certainly a player in there and he does love a strike.

Interesting that we used a 4 at the back last night, was that down to the lack of players available or is that the game plan, guess we'll know when we kick off against Newcastle in the last friendly.

People have been banging on about three at the back constantly for months.

Farke has previously said he would like that as an option - but never indicated that he wanted it permanently.

As things stand we have four recognised CB's. For three at the back, you'd really need at least five with others that can play there comfortably. So Sorensen maybe.

IMHO we're not there yet. And if all of our CB's are not fit, you don't play it. So it's more a case of wait and see.

[Capt. Pants 4,501]

It doesn't surprise that our best pre season performance by far came as we reverted to a back 4. Hopefully we will stay that way, but may be a case for a 5 in certain circumstances, perhaps game management when trying to see out a win!

 

[Capt. Pants 4,501]

Would also add that we seemed to get our shots off quicker and the final ball into the box was faster too. A fault with us is to overplay around the edge of the box and the move would breakdown. Accept we were up against low quality opposition but hopefully this is something Farke has been working on.

 

[TheGunnShow 6,588]

23 minutes ago, Bill said:

that was not down to how the 'flowers were arranged' - but the flowers

last time in the PL we were  'out muscled' far too many times - players like Lewis, Leitner and Vrancic were knocked off the ball to easily

and if you watched last night the 'formation' stuff is meaningless, both Giannoulis and Aarons were consistently level with our furthest forward players and Gilmour, Dowell, L-M, Cantwell and Rupp moved about as the game dictated, neither sticking to the left or right side of the pitch, nor consistently being ahead or behind one another

the best you can say is that bar the keeper and the two CBs and Idah staying forward the rest of the team had no real position

Sort of, but Leitner and Vrancic also don't have the same mobility as a Lees-Melou, Gilmour or Rupp. Their greater pace means they're better at getting into space, meaning those short passes to drive us forward are more likely to be on, as well as being more likely to be available for short balls out of defence to get an attack going in the first place.

Both Leitner and Vrancic suffered badly due to a lack of pace (as indeed did Tettey), and it was exposed further by only having two in the middle.

[Rich T The Biscuit 601]

27 minutes ago, Bill said:

and if you watched last night the 'formation' stuff is meaningless, both Giannoulis and Aarons were consistently level with our furthest forward players and Gilmour, Dowell, L-M, Cantwell and Rupp moved about as the game dictated, neither sticking to the left or right side of the pitch, nor consistently being ahead or behind one another

I'm not saying this to be argumentative but formation isn't meaningless as without a formation Aarons and Giannoulis couldnt be that far forward.

Teams set up with 2 formations, one with the ball and one without.

With the ball and with the CM knowing that they have to drop in and make us a 3 to ensure we don't get to exposed, when we don't have the ball we are a 4 with Aarons and Giannoulis tucked in.

I know you're stuck on the whole formation thoughts but without formation teams would be so exposed it would be crazy.

I also know it's not obvious but trust me having spent over 20yrs in coaching roles there always has to be some kind of formation so players know their roles within it.

[Rich T The Biscuit 601]

34 minutes ago, chicken said:

People have been banging on about three at the back constantly for months.

Farke has previously said he would like that as an option - but never indicated that he wanted it permanently.

As things stand we have four recognised CB's. For three at the back, you'd really need at least five with others that can play there comfortably. So Sorensen maybe.

IMHO we're not there yet. And if all of our CB's are not fit, you don't play it. So it's more a case of wait and see.

Agree.

As per my last reply we have a 3 when we have the ball it's just not an obvious or permanent 3

[Feedthewolf 5,199]

17 minutes ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

I'm not saying this to be argumentative but formation isn't meaningless as without a formation Aarons and Giannoulis couldnt be that far forward.

Teams set up with 2 formations, one with the ball and one without.

With the ball and with the CM knowing that they have to drop in and make us a 3 to ensure we don't get to exposed, when we don't have the ball we are a 4 with Aarons and Giannoulis tucked in.

I know you're stuck on the whole formation thoughts but without formation teams would be so exposed it would be crazy.

I also know it's not obvious but trust me having spent over 20yrs in coaching roles there always has to be some kind of formation so players know their roles within it.

This. Even the Ajax/Netherlands 'total football' sides of the 1970s set up with a nominal 4-3-3 around which they improvised. David Winner's book "Brilliant Orange" is a great read, and the peerless Jonathan Wilson also looks at how Cruyff's legacy lived on at Barca in "The Barcelona Legacy".

[Rich T The Biscuit 601]

24 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

This. Even the Ajax/Netherlands 'total football' sides of the 1970s set up with a nominal 4-3-3 around which they improvised. David Winner's book "Brilliant Orange" is a great read, and the peerless Jonathan Wilson also looks at how Cruyff's legacy lived on at Barca in "The Barcelona Legacy".

Brilliant Orange, great book by the way 👍

Suppose it depends on how people use the word formation I guess as some think of it as a fixed position and if you're a right winger you stay on the right wing 🤷🏻‍♂️ which is clearly really old skool 😆

Pretty much my entire coaching career I've set my teams up as a 4 without the ball and a 3 (2 plus CDM) with it, gives so much flexibility. The problem I always had was finding and trusting the CDM to do their job in that formation.

Always up top I'd have 1 on the shoulder; some would say thats a 4 5 1 defence and a 3/2/4 roaming/1 formation but now I'm getting far to technical 😆

[shefcanary 2,622]

Can I just say the kit performed well!  It's so good to see bright yellow shirts on our players, not dulled by too much encroaching green!  It's an omen I tells ya!  It's going to be a good season.

[hogesar 10,051]

1 hour ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

I'm not saying this to be argumentative but formation isn't meaningless as without a formation Aarons and Giannoulis couldnt be that far forward.

Teams set up with 2 formations, one with the ball and one without.

With the ball and with the CM knowing that they have to drop in and make us a 3 to ensure we don't get to exposed, when we don't have the ball we are a 4 with Aarons and Giannoulis tucked in.

I know you're stuck on the whole formation thoughts but without formation teams would be so exposed it would be crazy.

I also know it's not obvious but trust me having spent over 20yrs in coaching roles there always has to be some kind of formation so players know their roles within it.

You've put this far more sensibly, accurately and politely than I would have done as the previous conversations on this have been painful 😂

[Rich T The Biscuit 601]

Just now, hogesar said:

You've put this far more sensibly, accurately and politely than I would have done as the previous conversations on this have been painful 😂

It's the new me, I'm trying to use a feather and not a sledgehammer 😆

[TIL 1010 4,951]

City1st starts thread and straightaway horsefly attempts to get Greavsy involved and straightaway City1st comes back again with insults towards posters all in the space of a few minutes.

Just saying as i am sure i read on here that horsefly is another City1st account.

Waits........................

[lake district canary 4,641]

2 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

City1st starts thread and straightaway horsefly attempts to get Greavsy involved and straightaway City1st comes back again with insults towards posters all in the space of a few minutes.

Just saying as i am sure i read on here that horsefly is another City1st account.

Waits........................

It's long been my view that City 1st is a spoof account, as the character Bill/City 1st is a stretch too far to believe is "real".  There have been several very good spoof accounts over the years, often by the same person and I wouldn't mind betting this is one of his.  You have to be very clever to keep it going - I know, in the early days I invented a couple of different characters to try and get away from the abuse I was getting at the time and it is very difficult to keep it going without giving yourself away. I often wonder if Chopsy is still having a good laugh at our expense..... Bill/City1st maybe?  True Grit?   Done well it is brilliant, a good character here, a bad character there - it's entertaining either way.........

 

[Dr Greenthumb 764]

13 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

City1st starts thread and straightaway horsefly attempts to get Greavsy involved and straightaway City1st comes back again with insults towards posters all in the space of a few minutes.

Just saying as i am sure i read on here that horsefly is another City1st account.

Waits........................

Oh goody 😂

[Feedthewolf 5,199]

Just now, Dr Greenthumb said:

Oh goody 😂

Yeah, there goes any hope of continuing the interesting discussion about tactics that was threatening to break out... *rolls eyes*

[Dr Greenthumb 764]

Just now, Feedthewolf said:

Yeah, there goes any hope of continuing the interesting discussion about tactics that was threatening to break out... *rolls eyes*

This forum is just one big argument nowadays, it’s past discussion. I wish there was a way to delete the account, so I could t get tempted to reply 😂

[Feedthewolf 5,199]

Just now, Dr Greenthumb said:

This forum is just one big argument nowadays, it’s past discussion. I wish there was a way to delete the account, so I could t get tempted to reply 😂

I promise I'm not trying to wind you up by saying this, but I don't necessarily agree 🙂

There's still plenty of good conversation to be had, you just have to try to switch off to the stuff that gets on your wick. I used to get the right arsehole with some posters, but it's just not worth the stress. Getting into those slanging matches raised my blood pressure and brought out my bad side.

As old Ray would have said, at the end of the day we're all NCFC fans!

[hogesar 10,051]

3 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Yeah, there goes any hope of continuing the interesting discussion about tactics that was threatening to break out... *rolls eyes*

Lol @ you for thinking that was ever plausible in a thread with three musketeers...

[Bill 1,788]

8 hours ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

Brilliant Orange, great book by the way 👍

Suppose it depends on how people use the word formation I guess as some think of it as a fixed position and if you're a right winger you stay on the right wing 🤷🏻‍♂️ which is clearly really old skool 😆

Pretty much my entire coaching career I've set my teams up as a 4 without the ball and a 3 (2 plus CDM) with it, gives so much flexibility. The problem I always had was finding and trusting the CDM to do their job in that formation.

Always up top I'd have 1 on the shoulder; some would say thats a 4 5 1 defence and a 3/2/4 roaming/1 formation but now I'm getting far to technical 😆

you are getting there....almost

no attack will be the same, as no defending will be the same

players react as required, much as our last minute goal against the binners... a Hanley/Klose combo- look at the binners defence, what formation were they playing ?

how many times have you seen Buendia or Pukki back 'helping out the defence, what part of a set of numbers are they following - at what stage does a player think

"aha, they have the ball so I must now move to my allotted part of the pitch....whoops, we have just won the ball back so off to my other allotted space"

a players position on the pitch will, at any given point, be determined by what has happened prior to that moment, not some farcical idea of arranging themselves to fit some absurd set up

[TIL 1010 4,951]

5 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Yeah, there goes any hope of continuing the interesting discussion about tactics that was threatening to break out... *rolls eyes*

The thread is about BillTV not tactics wolfie.

[TIL 1010 4,951]

5 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

This forum is just one big argument nowadays, it’s past discussion. I wish there was a way to delete the account, so I could t get tempted to reply 😂

Easy Dr G, don't log in and you cannot be tempted to reply.

[Feedthewolf 5,199]

1 minute ago, TIL 1010 said:

The thread is about BillTV not tactics wolfie.

So you guys can happily derail sensible threads with endless bickering, but if I try to discuss tactics on a thread called BillTV, that's O/T? Okay then...

[hogesar 10,051]

1 minute ago, Bill said:

you are getting there....almost

no attack will be the same, as no defending will be the same

players react as required, much as our last minute goal against the binners... a Hanley/Klose combo- look at the binners defence, what formation were they playing ?

how many times have you seen Buendia or Pukki back 'helping out the defence, what part of a set of numbers are they following - at what stage does a player think

"aha, they have the ball so I must now move to my allotted part of the pitch....whoops, we have just won the ball back so off to my other allotted space"

a players position on the pitch will, at any given point, be determined by what has happened prior to that moment, not some farcical idea of arranging themselves to fit some absurd set up

It isn't @Rich T The Biscuit that needs to 'get there'.

If, for example, Pukki is deep defending a corner, we win possession and have an opportunity to counter,  which one out of Pukki or Hanley makes the effort to join in on the counter attack, generally speaking? It's the striker, because his position is highest up the pitch and its his responsibility.