What's Tony Mowbray saying?

[littleyellowbirdie 3,140]

https://www.pinkun.com/news/23381326.norwich-city-sunderland-boss-tony-mowbray-ipswich-town/

Quote

The 59-year-old outlined how they did that post-match, highlighting the weakness the north-east side targeted. "Norwich are a really good team," he said, "and yet they do build from the back and give every team a chance to try and nick it off them as they're building.

Is he daring to criticise Farkeball/Wagnerball? Could he be hinting that he thinks our tactics might not be the best approach with our players? What's he trying to say if not? 🧐

[Capt. Pants 5,012]

He's saying Gibson and Hanley are sh1t at it.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

45 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

He's saying Gibson and Hanley are sh1t at it.

They were good enough at it in that golden record breaking season behind closed doors...

[yellowrider120 917]

The 'old' Ipswich boy is spot on as well know only too well now!

In recent home games (Burnley apart) we have played it out quicker from the back thus reducing the likelihood of getting caught out when (invariably) we make mistakes. So disappointing then that on Sunday we reverted to type with the old style slow, side ways, back and inviting pressure so reminiscent of the last two managers! 

Whilst not advocating a complete 'long ball' strategy, it's a fact that sides like us without the cultured, quick passing players at the back and the incisive movement from forward players to create options, the best % approach for us is to 'get it forward' when being closed down and focus on winning throw ins / free kicks up the pitch and coming out on top with the 'second ball' duels. 'Ah yes but we'll just lose possession' is the predictable reply! Well, if you actually watch the pretty rare occasions when we do opt for the more direct ball you'll be surprised at the number of times that this apparently.........'old school, out of date, unattractive, dinosaur' football actually turns out to be a highly effective attacking weapon! I would much rather lose possession 60 yards from  our goal and well into the opposition half than 6 yards from our goal after giving the ball away in an obsession with playing out from the back!  

  

[shefcanary 2,955]

36 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

They were good enough at it in that golden record breaking season behind closed doors...

Yes but that was in the past. You can't live on old glories. None of us are getting younger, Hanley especially. Other teams are wiser, they didn't high press then but do now, Klopp had only just started making it a thing in that season. If Mowbray knows, then so do others now. We have to move on, the sooner the better. 

[Newtopia 573]

I think he is spot on, he is saying we keep playing out from the back and consistently losing the ball and hence goals.......

[nutty nigel 7,902]

5 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Yes but that was in the past. You can't live on old glories. None of us are getting younger, Hanley especially. Other teams are wiser, they didn't high press then but do now, Klopp had only just started making it a thing in that season. If Mowbray knows, then so do others now. We have to move on, the sooner the better. 

It could be that. Or it could be the uncompetitive glorified friendlies flattered them...

Charlie Rich knew...

[Duncan Edwards 2,424]

I didn’t really feel they pressed us as high as some others that caused us problems. They were content for Gibson/Hanley to have the ball and it was when they tried to progress the ball into midfield that they were quick to hit the second man, turn it over and then turn us around. They seemed to maintain shape when our centre backs had it without pulling themselves out of their set up and basically said to BG/GH, we don’t think you’re good enough to hurt us, in fact we are calling into question your ability to progress the ball effectively if we don’t over commit.

Well, that’s how I saw it. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Nuff Said 5,965]

8 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

I didn’t really feel they pressed us as high as some others that caused us problems. They were content for Gibson/Hanley to have the ball and it was when they tried to progress the ball into midfield that they were quick to hit the second man, turn it over and then turn us around. They seemed to maintain shape when our centre backs had it without pulling themselves out of their set up and basically said to BG/GH, we don’t think you’re good enough to hurt us, in fact we are calling into question your ability to progress the ball effectively if we don’t over commit.

Well, that’s how I saw it. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Yeah, but why waste an opportunity to complain and slag off our players by actually watching what’s going on on the pitch?

[cambridgeshire canary 7,798]

He's saying that faffing it about passing around at the back has always been stupid, will always be stupid and will just lead to us crumble as soon as any team starts building pressure.

[Duncan Edwards 2,424]

14 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

He's saying that faffing it about passing around at the back has always been stupid, will always be stupid and will just lead to us crumble as soon as any team starts building pressure.

I don’t think he’s saying that at all. I think he’s saying that if he allowed us to play as we choose, that’d be stupid. The fact we choose to play the way we do means that on occasion we can play ourselves into trouble if pressure is applied at the right/certain times. That gave them a chance to Nick a goal and protect it. Which they did brilliantly.

It’s not always about how garbage our plans are, but how effectively the opposition apply theirs is obviously a huge factor. They defended really well (no surprise that was a particular focus after getting tonked), lots of last ditch blocking, ball dropping favourably etc. I didn’t think there was much in the game, I don’t think Mowbray would have been throwing teacups if he’d walked away with a point but I thought he edged the tacticals on the day. Fine margins. NOW WHAT IS THE SOCCERBOT FOR? Or something. 

[unique 466]

Mowbray is only stating the bleeding obvious. 

We know it . All the Championship coaches know it. All the Championship coaches ensure their players know it, and the stats back it up in spades.

Hanley, Gibson, Giannoulis and Aarons are the four worst defenders in the Championship when they have possession of the football in their own half. It is quite possible that Gibson is the worst defender in the Championship when his transfer fee is taken into consideration.

 

[hogesar 10,765]

4 minutes ago, unique said:

Mowbray is only stating the bleeding obvious. 

We know it . All the Championship coaches know it. All the Championship coaches ensure their players know it, and the stats back it up in spades.

Hanley, Gibson, Giannoulis and Aarons are the four worst defenders in the Championship when they have possession of the football in their own half. It is quite possible that Gibson is the worst defender in the Championship when his transfer fee is taken into consideration.

 

Yet all four have Championship title medals. Some more than one. This might just be hyperbole.

[repman 754]

1 hour ago, Duncan Edwards said:

I didn’t really feel they pressed us as high as some others that caused us problems. They were content for Gibson/Hanley to have the ball and it was when they tried to progress the ball into midfield that they were quick to hit the second man, turn it over and then turn us around. They seemed to maintain shape when our centre backs had it without pulling themselves out of their set up and basically said to BG/GH, we don’t think you’re good enough to hurt us, in fact we are calling into question your ability to progress the ball effectively if we don’t over commit.

Well, that’s how I saw it. 🤷🏻‍♂️

This is the real truth, we're dreadful at getting the ball from our defenders into the midfield areas. Sunderland closed us off pretty well but that's hardly a new occurence either. It felt like every other attack we ended up trying a big cross field pass to move forward as it's far too easy to stop us playing through the lines.

It's why I don't like us playing 2 strikers because I think we could do with another option in the buildup. It's the same with Kenny dropping back to make a 3, that's all well and good but couldn't we perhaps be a bit braver and use Gunn, which would in turn allow Kenny to take up a midfield position to receive the ball.

[AJ 1,359]

The whole point of playing out from the back is sucking the opposition up the pitch so you can exploit space left behind when they press. Therefore there will always be some risk if playing out goes wrong and this is where we really miss Buendia as he was very good at connecting the back to the front very quickly and to that end we've never really replaced him. Nunes has potential but at the moment is often too slow to thread passes which is a common theme amongst our entire midfield

Edited March 13, 2023 by AJ

[chicken 3,087]

1 hour ago, shefcanary said:

Yes but that was in the past. You can't live on old glories. None of us are getting younger, Hanley especially. Other teams are wiser, they didn't high press then but do now, Klopp had only just started making it a thing in that season. If Mowbray knows, then so do others now. We have to move on, the sooner the better. 

Only a year between Hanley and Gibson.

[Duncan Edwards 2,424]

40 minutes ago, repman said:

This is the real truth, we're dreadful at getting the ball from our defenders into the midfield areas. Sunderland closed us off pretty well but that's hardly a new occurence either. It felt like every other attack we ended up trying a big cross field pass to move forward as it's far too easy to stop us playing through the lines.

It's why I don't like us playing 2 strikers because I think we could do with another option in the buildup. It's the same with Kenny dropping back to make a 3, that's all well and good but couldn't we perhaps be a bit braver and use Gunn, which would in turn allow Kenny to take up a midfield position to receive the ball.

Dreadful, probably a bit harsh, but it’s not a strength. Noticeably, Nunez found it difficult to get involved in the first half; perhaps speed was an element but physicality I thought was definitely a factor. Teams don’t have to be cracking the enigma code to see how important Sara is to us. I thought he largely did ok, he’s strong and intelligent BUT if he is the one that loses the ball and is subsequently taken out of the game it’s a double whammy. It’s also fair to point out that the reason that Kenny drops and collects is that he is dynamic in carrying the ball through sections of the pitch. We’ve utilised Aarons like this too, allowing him to run right to left rather than stick to the paint. It doesn’t always work (what does?) but both Kenny and Max doing this pulls players out of position, into spaces that they are uncomfortable in and can help us create by exploiting the created space/taking players out of the game.

We’re probably not a million miles away but there are many increases to iron out. I’d love to say that next year will be the year but so much will be reliant on recruitment and retainment.

I’ve complained before that we don’t have any ‘magic’ in the team, yet Sara and Nunez have shown flashes of it. If we retain and recruit around them, maybe it will come more to the fore. As always though, finding another Wes, Pritchard (briefly), Maddison, Buendia is a bit more difficult than finding a pi55head in the pub.

I’ve written expectation off for this season but am prepared to be surprised. What happens next will be fascinating. Incomings, outgoings, finance, ownership…

Is it time to be excited or to shart your shreddies? 

[Jim Smith 2,610]

He’s spot on as we all know. Quite why any team would choose not to press us now is beyond me. The teams that sit off us we usually score a few past. 

[Bovril 264]

The difference between now and Farke (it's the same build out of the back tactic) is the midfield.

Everyone knows Gibson, and especially Hanley, are not good enough with the ball to feel comfortable under pressure - compare this to the Burnley centre-backs at Carrow Road who dribbled past our press at times. However, it's the midfield that was the difference.

Previously Hanley could just play a simple pass to Skipp or Buendia under pressure, and they would take responsbility to beat the press, either through a half-turn or quick pass further up the field. They had the technical ability to do that. We no longer have a true DM or No.10 to pop the ball too and hence Hanley looks for Aarons and Gibson for Gianni instead.

We have two Number 8's (Mclean and Sara) and a lost Nunez who if plays, needs to play on the wing ahead of Aarons and not centrally where he gets physically outmuscled offensively and defensively. We need a 6 and 10 to play possession football.   

[rock bus 1,059]

1 hour ago, Bovril said:

Previously Hanley could just play a simple pass to Skipp or Buendia under pressure, and they would take responsbility to beat the press, either through a half-turn or quick pass further up the field. They had the technical ability to do that. We no longer have a true DM or No.10 to pop the ball too and hence Hanley looks for Aarons and Gibson for Gianni instead.

We have two Number 8's (Mclean and Sara) and a lost Nunez who if plays, needs to play on the wing ahead of Aarons and not centrally where he gets physically outmuscled offensively and defensively. We need a 6 and 10 to play possession football.   

I think this is the key point and the major issue that Wagner has in playing the style he wants (although it's been our Achilles heel since Tettey left!).

Having McLean drop into the back 3 has been the temporary fix and that works when we are playing weaker teams as he has time and space to do something with it. However, against the better teams he is either pressed (and then puts us under pressure with poor decision making0 or they leave him space but has no one else in midfield to pass to (because he has dropped back, Sara is marked in the middle and neither Hernandez or Idah/Sargent are good enough at controlling or even protecting the ball) so resorts to long balls (which is what a capable ball playing half could do anyhow and is inevitably either a wonder pass or more often just a 50/50 ball...again what we are trying to avoid!).

We either need better quality ball playing CBs or we need a better avenue out of the back through  midfield.

[essex canary 623]

Mowbray is experienced. Do we like his sort of depth of experience at Carrow Road?

[Capt. Pants 5,012]

To be fair our midfield didn't exactly help. Nunez was largely a passenger, McLean disappeared a bit after twice giving the ball away and Sara didn't really get in the game.

Too many statues not enough movement.

[Google Bot 3,934]

Another day they get sent home with a defeat, we were just off it on Sunday.   All across the pitch.

[Matt Juler 211]

It's the lack of variety that frustrates me.  We're so predictable, from the 1st minute to the 91st minute.  If we mix it up a bit, sometimes play short, sometimes play long, the opposition would have to set up more conservatively and can't high press in the way most teams do against us.

[dylanisabaddog 6,147]

The fact that Sunderland played 3 at the back and 5 across the middle made it more difficult for us. 

But the fact is that we lose possession of the ball more frequently when we play it long. Idah lost possession virtually every time on Sunday. Sargent improved the situation but not by much. 

It's easy to criticise the defenders for not playing out successfully from the back but to make it work requires a whole team effort. Perhaps if they moved themselves around a bit rather than standing and spectating it might help. 

As for Mowbray, he's been very clever and not for the first time. He knows Sunderland have to finish above us and he's taken the opportunity to get in the players heads. 

[BigFish 2,283]

Some real man in the pub bollox posts on this thread. Ben Lee's analysis is far more persuasive e.g. Wagner set up the team a player short at the back. From that I think we really missed Sorenson.

[Capt. Pants 5,012]

15 minutes ago, Matt Juler said:

It's the lack of variety that frustrates me.  We're so predictable, from the 1st minute to the 91st minute.  If we mix it up a bit, sometimes play short, sometimes play long, the opposition would have to set up more conservatively and can't high press in the way most teams do against us.

Difficult to mix it up as Pukki never wins a header if we go long and it isn't Idah's strength either.

It worked on a couple of occasions when Angus cleverly went a bit longer to the wings but Sunderland largely had everyone closed down.

[ron obvious 1,711]

1 hour ago, rock bus said:

neither Hernandez or Idah/Sargent are good enough at controlling or even protecting the ball)

Pardon me? I've seen Onel take the ball down Under pressure & leave the man for dead so many times. This idea that he's clumsy or has poor control is just bonkers. His problem is that he nearly always twists & turns even though he's already beaten his man. Against Millwall he was more direct & therefore effective, on Saturday he wasn't right for whatever reason. Both he & Kenny were overrunning the ball which I haven't seen for a long time. A bad day all round.

[yellowrider120 917]

58 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

To be fair our midfield didn't exactly help. Nunez was largely a passenger, McLean disappeared a bit after twice giving the ball away and Sara didn't really get in the game.

Too many statues not enough movement.

Agreed - which dictates a more direct approach at times during the game is needed.  

[Worthy Nigelton 1,303]

12 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

It could be that. Or it could be the uncompetitive glorified friendlies flattered them...

Charlie Rich knew...

It could be that they had a quality DM in front of them and not Kenny McLean.