Tactical failure or individual error?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,543]

David Wagner made the following point in his defence of Tim Krul.

Quote

"We can discuss about individuals who didn't mark their man or who didn't mark their space in the set pieces. If this is so clear and obvious this is not a technical problem or a tactical mistake, this is only individuals.

Teams at our level will regularly make mistakes. We still made mistakes even under Farke in our superb Championship seasons, but more forgiving opponents often result in getting away with things more often than not, which is a theory put forward for how we may have become 'flat track bullies' to borrow a great phrase from elsewhere that can point to our pattern of recent failure in the Premier League in spite of outstanding success on paper in the Championship.

Has Wagner succinctly laid out why most efforts to scapegoat individual players is flawed and also why individual mistakes being laid at a manager's door are unsound in one fell swoop? Does this underline why we're now at a point where we need to step back and relax a bit as far as kicking on to the next level is concerned while Attanasio establishes himself at the club and wait and see what's going to happen on the financial side? As the previous two games before Burnley showed, there's plenty of fun to be had at this level without worrying too much about promotion either way.

[Mark .Y. 352]

I generally agree with this and did see quite a few mistakes happening in the Prem over the weekend.

My problem is that the decision-making regarding the passing out from the back is something we seem to be repeatedly poor at. Already in the Burnley game, before Tim's error,  Andy O had passed out to Max who was very deep on the right hand touchline and was already fairly tightly marked, that resulted in a throw to Burnley, which fortunately came to nothing. I watched a bit of the Wolves game and their keeper (Sa ??) generally went longer when he had nobody he could pass to who wouldn't be under pressure, I think we need to look more closely at that.

Having said that, I can forgive the odd error but that was the third game on the trot that Tim K has given the ball directly to an opposition striker and, much as I think he has been very good for us over the years, I feel Gunn is now the better keeper and should be back in the first team as soon as he is fit.

[lake district canary 4,531]

When you go to a game, or watch it on tv, you just want to see your team play well, but our players are paid big salaries to perform for the club and when you get individual players making schoolboy style mistakes then it is only natural to be a bit annoyed.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,543]

5 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

When you go to a game, or watch it on tv, you just want to see your team play well, but our players are paid big salaries to perform for the club and when you get individual players making schoolboy style mistakes then it is only natural to be a bit annoyed.

They are paid astronomical sums in most people's terms, but if they made less mistakes they could all mostly be on bigger salaries elsewhere; such is the nature of the English player market.

[Capt. Pants 4,226]

It was a bit of both.

It was too early in the game to be pissing about at the back, especially when Burnley were out the traps as quick as they were. 

Had it not been for that block from Hanley after McLean had given the ball away we would have been 2 down in 8 minutes.

I don't expect these mistakes again.

 

[Badger 2,405]

7 minutes ago, Mark .Y. said:

I generally agree with this and did see quite a few mistakes happening in the Prem over the weekend.

My problem is that the decision-making regarding the passing out from the back is something we seem to be repeatedly poor at. Already in the Burnley game, before Tim's error,  Andy O had passed out to Max who was very deep on the right hand touchline and was already fairly tightly marked, that resulted in a throw to Burnley, which fortunately came to nothing. I watched a bit of the Wolves game and their keeper (Sa ??) generally went longer when he had nobody he could pass to who wouldn't be under pressure, I think we need to look more closely at that.

Having said that, I can forgive the odd error but that was the third game on the trot that Tim K has given the ball directly to an opposition striker and, much as I think he has been very good for us over the years, I feel Gunn is now the better keeper and should be back in the first team as soon as he is fit.

The "playing out from the back" criticism does not really apply for this game though as the Krul mistake was a goal kick, not from open play. 

I do agree with those that suggest that we ought to vary the tactic more often to create a bit of doubt with the opposition, but generally speaking, the reason teams press you really hard and really high is because they want you to go long, so that they win back possession easily.

I think it is also worth noting that one of the few times we beat their press created the only chance in the game from either side that was not the result of player error (as far as I can recall).*

* The one in the first half when we played it down their left side.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

After kick-off the Burnley press was so intense in our half, that apparently there were two of their playing squad sipping tea in the lower Barclay concourse.... 

[Petriix 2,834]

The missing ingredient (which I'm confident is in development) is that the players need to be able to play without fear. Mistakes will happen but, through perseverance and consistency, the players will gain the confidence to pass the ball faster and with more accuracy.

To be perfectly honest though, I think the biggest issue with 'playing it out from the back' lies with the midfield. If the opposition are pressing our defenders then there should be pockets of space between the lines. We need the three attacking midfielders to be looking for the ball more and creating the passing options.

Ultimately it's not a million miles away and we won't be playing Burnley every week. We just need to be a little bit patient. At least there's a recognisable style to our play now. 

[lake district canary 4,531]

39 minutes ago, Mello Yello said:

After kick-off the Burnley press was so intense in our half, that apparently there were two of their playing squad sipping tea in the lower Barclay concourse.... 

Thing is that they weren't pressing that much in the opening minutes. If you watch the match again, they are standing off us, only moving in when Krul dilly dallied on the ball. If he could only move it quicker, it wouldn't look half so bad. 

[Mello Yello 2,289]

2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Thing is that they weren't pressing that much in the opening minutes. If you watch the match again, they are standing off us, only moving in when Krul dilly dallied on the ball. If he could only move it quicker, it wouldn't look half so bad. 

I was there and I'm saying what I saw and it was my Interpretation.(The tea in the lower Barclay concourse wasn't actually fact)....

[lake district canary 4,531]

13 minutes ago, Mello Yello said:

I was there and I'm saying what I saw and it was my Interpretation.(The tea in the lower Barclay concourse wasn't actually fact)....

They really weren't pressing that hard at the beginning of the match. We just made it easy for them by all the delaying.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

To be honest I think DW is a thinker and anlayses the game to the nth degree and he will know let alone beaten on the pitch, we were beaten by tactics as well. And that is down to him. Its no disgrace. We lost. Learn from it and prepare for Bristol.

[hogesar 9,658]

1 hour ago, Petriix said:

The missing ingredient (which I'm confident is in development) is that the players need to be able to play without fear. Mistakes will happen but, through perseverance and consistency, the players will gain the confidence to pass the ball faster and with more accuracy.

To be perfectly honest though, I think the biggest issue with 'playing it out from the back' lies with the midfield. If the opposition are pressing our defenders then there should be pockets of space between the lines. We need the three attacking midfielders to be looking for the ball more and creating the passing options.

Ultimately it's not a million miles away and we won't be playing Burnley every week. We just need to be a little bit patient. At least there's a recognisable style to our play now. 

That won't happen with the idiots around me in the lower barclay jeering us passing it around the back from the off, and shouting at Krul to lump it forwards, only to then bemoan it coming back at us

[lake district canary 4,531]

6 minutes ago, hogesar said:

That won't happen with the idiots around me in the lower barclay jeering us passing it around the back from the off, and shouting at Krul to lump it forwards, only to then bemoan it coming back at us

It's hardly a surprise people want us to "lump it forwards" given how poor we are at playing it around at the back. The players look like ducks out of water doing it, especially since Farkeball ended - at least he had the players moving around a bit more in support. Every time Krul gets it now, you just start to get nervy - mainly because he looks so uncertain at what he's going to do. 

[Petriix 2,834]

15 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

To be honest I think DW is a thinker and anlayses the game to the nth degree and he will know let alone beaten on the pitch, we were beaten by tactics as well. And that is down to him. Its no disgrace. We lost. Learn from it and prepare for Bristol.

Genuinely interested: what tactics do you think Burnley beat us with? What were our tactical mistakes?

My observation was that Burnley were more disciplined and determined out of the blocks while we were a bit nervous. Those two things are fairly understandable given that they have been playing the same system for many months and are on a winning run stretching back to November.

I thought we were tactically equal but made a few costly errors and lacked a little bit of individual brilliance - largely in finding the incisive pass into/through the midfield.

We had the only real chance that stemmed from quality attacking play. We should have had a penalty and one of the corners they scored from was a goal kick. How could we have improved tactically?

[shefcanary 2,396]

5 minutes ago, Petriix said:

Genuinely interested: what tactics do you think Burnley beat us with? What were our tactical mistakes?

My observation was that Burnley were more disciplined and determined out of the blocks while we were a bit nervous. Those two things are fairly understandable given that they have been playing the same system for many months and are on a winning run stretching back to November.

I thought we were tactically equal but made a few costly errors and lacked a little bit of individual brilliance - largely in finding the incisive pass into/through the midfield.

We had the only real chance that stemmed from quality attacking play. We should have had a penalty and one of the corners they scored from was a goal kick. How could we have improved tactically?

Do you not have access to the Pink'Un app Petriix? There is a brilliant analysis from Ben Lee that summarises how Burnley's press was so much more effective than Norwich's. However it should only have stopped Norwich from winning, not helped Burnley win the match. It was only because it was so effective that the Norwich players perceived pressure on them to win the game lead to some shocking errors which ultimately gave the game to Burnley. Did Burnley have to do anything creative to win? In short no. They got in front then used the dark arts to stop Norwich getting back into the game.

In short they bullied us ...

[dylanisabaddog 4,914]

35 minutes ago, hogesar said:

That won't happen with the idiots around me in the lower barclay jeering us passing it around the back from the off, and shouting at Krul to lump it forwards, only to then bemoan it coming back at us

That is the issue. Clubs across the world have spent time and money to work out the statistical chances of conceding goals playing out from the back as opposed to hitting the ball long. They have all quite rightly concluded that playing out from the back gives you a greater chance of keeping the ball. Of course when it doesn't work it looks awful but that doesn't make it wrong. 

The problem is that some keepers and defenders are better at it than others and some are lacking in judgement and try to do it all the time. What is required is a keeper who is competent with the ball at his feet who also has sound judgement. And an awful lot of time is needed to work through scenarios on the training ground. 

For what my opinion is worth, I don't think either of our keepers is that great at it but it probably still costs us less goals than knocking it long. 

[nutty nigel 7,530]

43 minutes ago, hogesar said:

That won't happen with the idiots around me in the lower barclay jeering us passing it around the back from the off, and shouting at Krul to lump it forwards, only to then bemoan it coming back at us

But I assume Webber made it plain to Wagner not to say he's glad the next game is away (Emojis don't work)

[Petriix 2,834]

20 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Do you not have access to the Pink'Un app Petriix?

No, and I generally find the level of analysis on the Pinkun to be pretty average (being kind). I witnessed Burnley's press. They were good, but not infallible and there were opportunities to get through them.

When they over-comitted we should have been quicker to play balls in behind, but that's down to the individuals rather than a tactical failure, we did exactly this against Coventry with success.

I don't think we would have had greater success pressing them higher. They're too good and would have likely caught us short at the back, especially with their pace.

I think our tactics were fine. 

[El Convento 14]

3 hours ago, Mark .Y. said:

Having said that, I can forgive the odd error but that was the third game on the trot that Tim K has given the ball directly to an opposition striker and, much as I think he has been very good for us over the years, I feel Gunn is now the better keeper and should be back in the first team as soon as he is fit.

this ^.  Krul is a great keeper in so many ways, but being safe with ball at his feet isn't one of them.

[Well b back 3,202]

56 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

It's hardly a surprise people want us to "lump it forwards" given how poor we are at playing it around at the back. The players look like ducks out of water doing it, especially since Farkeball ended - at least he had the players moving around a bit more in support. Every time Krul gets it now, you just start to get nervy - mainly because he looks so uncertain at what he's going to do. 

Wasn’t Krul in goal under Farke.

 

[Well b back 3,202]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

That won't happen with the idiots around me in the lower barclay jeering us passing it around the back from the off, and shouting at Krul to lump it forwards, only to then bemoan it coming back at us

I have to agree, from minute 1 the players were being put under pressure for doing ‘ as they were told ‘ I guess. 
When we started kicking the ball down the pitch it just came back again, and then people were complaining that we kicked the ball straight down the pitch, which was no different to the previous 12 games ( Preston and Coventry excluded ).

[lake district canary 4,531]

9 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Wasn’t Krul in goal under Farke.

 

Yes, but my point there was more about defenders and midfielders who were a bit more switched on.  Krul has always looked a bit iffy at it, since the day he arrived, but the rest of his game had made up for it. I don't know whether it still does with Gunn just as good (imo).

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

54 minutes ago, Petriix said:

Genuinely interested: what tactics do you think Burnley beat us with? What were our tactical mistakes?

My observation was that Burnley were more disciplined and determined out of the blocks while we were a bit nervous. Those two things are fairly understandable given that they have been playing the same system for many months and are on a winning run stretching back to November.

I thought we were tactically equal but made a few costly errors and lacked a little bit of individual brilliance - largely in finding the incisive pass into/through the midfield.

We had the only real chance that stemmed from quality attacking play. We should have had a penalty and one of the corners they scored from was a goal kick. How could we have improved tactically?

They played a 4231 and it allowed them to press man for man. So Aarons and Dimi had to sit deeper to get the ball. The previous two games, they had pushed higher, AO went wide as did Hanley and Kenny dropped in to get the ball. No such luxury Saturday. And that meant Dowell and Sarge were passengers for so long. Kenny had to hit it longer and Cullen had a field day in the two for Burnley and he could pick and choose who he gave it to. Their possession was nearly twice ours in the first half.

So we had no ball, no space and carrying passengers. Second half they tried a bit from the press and sat a bit deeper and Barnes was left to make a nuisance of himself (which he did) and Tella was left just to threaten until Da Silva came on, and of course his first touch was to score.

I remember posting at half time that I though Sarge could have come off and Sorenson could have come on to try and even midfield meaning they couldn't press so high. The scoreline, which is all that mattered after 45 minutes, was close enough for Burnley to blink first with the substitutions but that first one crippled us.

Of course, DW might tell me I am totally wrong but I am only relaying what I believe I saw as an fanatic not a coach.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

38 minutes ago, Petriix said:

No, and I generally find the level of analysis on the Pinkun to be pretty average (being kind). I witnessed Burnley's press. They were good, but not infallible and there were opportunities to get through them.

When they over-comitted we should have been quicker to play balls in behind, but that's down to the individuals rather than a tactical failure, we did exactly this against Coventry with success.

I don't think we would have had greater success pressing them higher. They're too good and would have likely caught us short at the back, especially with their pace.

I think our tactics were fine. 

It may have improved since you last looked. The analysis of the Burnley game is 18 paragraphs long, with 14 diagrams. I found it interesting.

[hogesar 9,658]

19 minutes ago, Well b back said:

I have to agree, from minute 1 the players were being put under pressure for doing ‘ as they were told ‘ I guess. 
When we started kicking the ball down the pitch it just came back again, and then people were complaining that we kicked the ball straight down the pitch, which was no different to the previous 12 games ( Preston and Coventry excluded ).

Yes. And if the players aren't massively confident at this point the pressure from the fans is the opposite of helpful.

[repman 635]

I think Burnley are a very well coached side who are further on in their development than we are. Burnley's press gave us a problem we hadn't seen before. However, instead of trying to find the solution we often just ended up playing long, so we're not really any better for it. I think the individual errors early on spooked us, and we definitely didn't have the courage to keep at it but also we are nowhere near as tactically astute as Burnley are, that's not the players or Wagner's fault, it's down to the previous coaching staff we're way behind.

[ron obvious 1,502]

2 hours ago, Petriix said:

No, and I generally find the level of analysis on the Pinkun to be pretty average (being kind). I witnessed Burnley's press. They were good, but not infallible and there were opportunities to get through them.

When they over-comitted we should have been quicker to play balls in behind, but that's down to the individuals rather than a tactical failure, we did exactly this against Coventry with success.

I don't think we would have had greater success pressing them higher. They're too good and would have likely caught us short at the back, especially with their pace.

I think our tactics were fine. 

I would have thought you could access this, which is pretty comprehensive

https://www.pinkun.com/news/23300927.norwich-city-tactical-analysis-burnley-championship-defeat/

[Petriix 2,834]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

They played a 4231 and it allowed them to press man for man.

They've almost exclusively played a 4-2-3-1 since the beginning of October. It's no surprise. Their press was good (they know the system well and have practiced it to perfection) but it's a risky plan. We could have easily caused them some more problems with slightly better passing.

Sargent isn't quite a number 10. He should try to drop deeper more often and link up play. Onel was too high as well, but that's his natural game, and we have to play to our strengths.

The only thing we could have tried is pressing them higher, but it would have been a gamble and they could have got in behind us by going more direct. Going toe-to-toe with Burnley was probably not the best plan but, in hindsight, it couldn't have gone worse. The thing is that our mistakes didn't really come from anything Burnley did - a goal kick and two corners - so I think our tactics weren't really an issue. 

[Petriix 2,834]

13 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

I would have thought you could access this, which is pretty comprehensive

https://www.pinkun.com/news/23300927.norwich-city-tactical-analysis-burnley-championship-defeat/

Yes, it's a decent analysis. I've never seen anything of that quality on the Pinkun before.

While Burnley pressed well, we could have hit a few more balls over the top to exploit the high line. I thought Dowell did a reasonable job of linking up the play at times while Sargent and (in particular) Hernandez were too high and a little too predictable.

The main issue in possession was a lack of individual skill on the ball in midfield. Just because an opponent is nearby doesn't mean you have to panic and pass the ball backwards with your first touch. Controlling the ball and allowing your team mates to find some space is a crucial missing step. 

When Burnley had the ball they enjoyed plenty of possession by going 3 v 2 in the defensive third but they didn't actually create anything or cause us any real problems. We always had an extra man in midfield and could allow them possession in areas that posed little threat.

Their chances came from errors and badly defended corners. We looked vulnerable when we lost the ball in the first half but it could have been better at hitting the space behind their high line.