Wagner's delusion that we are playing out from the back

[rock bus 878]

Another thread briefly diverted on how frustrating it was on Saturday to see Gunn, Gibson and Duffy persistently just knocking the ball between them.

For all the fans present it was just so annoying and painful to watch!

Wagner seems to still believe we are 'playing out from the back and this is us retaining possession and creating space

This ISN'T playing it out from the back, it's playing it across the back with no purpose.

I don't necessarily totally blame the players mentioned here, it's more to do with the lack of options being created in front of them.

Ironically, Coventry showed us how to do it. Two or three quick passes (taking one touch to control - not the minimum three or four our defenders seem to need) and then playing it up field to a midfielder or attacker who had actually moved in to space.

I've no issues with playing out from the back but we arent doing that.

Alongside the bemusing use of subs its giving me grave concerns about Wagner

[hogesar 9,875]

To be fair, first half we created all our chances via playing out from the back. Kenny's movement and picking up the ball from the CB's and driving forward, Gibson playing a decent through ball into Placheta (who obviously done little with it) etc.

Maybe Coventry learnt how to do it after we showed them in the first half?

[Petriix 2,860]

People seem a bit confused about this but let me elucidate: we had lost a bunch of away games, including conceding 6 at Plymouth. Here we found ourselves ahead away from home; it's unsurprising that we were happy to rest on the ball and eat up time. The onus is on the team chasing the game to...chase the game.

Coventry stood off us, allowing us to simply pass it around at the back rather than trying to pass it into the congested midfield. It's absolutely the right thing to do and it would have been pretty stupid to do anything different at that point. 

The thing we actually did wrong was sit far too deep once Coventry started committing more men forwards so we didn't have an out ball. People blame the substitutions but I blame the recruitment because we should have enough quality on the bench but really don't. 

[Channon’s Windmill 344]

When your CF keeps dropping back into midfield there was no outlet whatsoever, it was only ever a question of when they would score as we invited so much pressure.

[yellowrider120 811]

2 hours ago, rock bus said:

Another thread briefly diverted on how frustrating it was on Saturday to see Gunn, Gibson and Duffy persistently just knocking the ball between them.

For all the fans present it was just so annoying and painful to watch!

Wagner seems to still believe we are 'playing out from the back and this is us retaining possession and creating space

This ISN'T playing it out from the back, it's playing it across the back with no purpose.

I don't necessarily totally blame the players mentioned here, it's more to do with the lack of options being created in front of them.

Ironically, Coventry showed us how to do it. Two or three quick passes (taking one touch to control - not the minimum three or four our defenders seem to need) and then playing it up field to a midfielder or attacker who had actually moved in to space.

I've no issues with playing out from the back but we arent doing that.

Alongside the bemusing use of subs its giving me grave concerns about Wagner

Excellent post and is exactly how I and I suspect many (if not most) of the travelling army saw it. If this persists then the natives will voice considerable displeasure! 

[MORDENCANARY 71]

We're currently not good enough to consistently play out from the back. There are times when a bit of possession for possession sake can take the pressure off . Other times it's best to wack it up field and force the opposition to turn back so the team can reset the shape .

[canarybubbles 1,982]

I wonder if the fashion for playing it out from the back will start to weaken soon. A lot of it is apparently based on the stats that playing out from the back works, but as teams get better and better at pressing and countering it, maybe this statistical advantage will disappear, and  I suspect there will be a move towards old-fashioned lump it up to a tall guy who can either hold it up or head it down for a teammate.

[Hardhouse44 261]

4 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

I wonder if the fashion for playing it out from the back will start to weaken soon. A lot of it is apparently based on the stats that playing out from the back works, but as teams get better and better at pressing and countering it, maybe this statistical advantage will disappear, and  I suspect there will be a move towards old-fashioned lump it up to a tall guy who can either hold it up or head it down for a teammate.

Thing is you don’t even need to win the header you just need to challenge and pick up the pieces. That requires determination and actually a skill called anticipation. Something that Idah lacks completely!

[Google Bot 3,425]

That got me thinking about fashions in football and ideas that haven't been done.

Would it be legal to defend the ball as per the Roman army shields formation, where you surround the ball carrier to the point that the defending team has to pretty much foul you to break through the wall.   

I don't know if locking arms with a team mate would be allowed, but that would be my starting idea, to have a ring of outward facing divas who'd fall down when touched.

It would be great to see 10 men bundles slowly making their way up the field while the the opposition are trying to crawl in underneath to steal the ball.  6 or 7 players at a time feigning injury, rolling around, Referee and VAR completely unsure what to do.

[norfolkngood 1,103]

playing around at the back is fine , but we do it to slow to easy to predict ,

Other teams also are quite happy moving side to side at a slow pace ,

like others have said more pace in passing the press does not work as you are chasing shadows the ball has gone time you get there ,

problem is when we do up the pace our defenders make a mistake 

[Ken Hairy 3,828]

1 hour ago, Google Bot said:

 

It would be great to see 10 men bundles slowly making their way up the field while the the opposition are trying to crawl in underneath to steal the ball.  6 or 7 players at a time feigning injury, rolling around, Referee and VAR completely unsure what to do.

Sounds similar to the ruck in Rugby

[Google Bot 3,425]

9 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

Sounds similar to the ruck in Rugby

No need to swear mate.

[chicken 2,708]

4 hours ago, Petriix said:

The thing we actually did wrong was sit far too deep once Coventry started committing more men forwards so we didn't have an out ball. People blame the substitutions but I blame the recruitment because we should have enough quality on the bench but really don't. 

I think the bench would look very different with Sargent, Barnes, Sainz and Nunez fit. Hell, even the starting 11. It does say a lot that we have four forward players out injured, two of which were bang on starters, and we are wondering why our bench looks lacking in quality. We have our 3rd and 4th choice strikers out there. Sainz would add more quality from the bench. Nunez would give us another more forward thinking midfield option. To think that in amongst this, Onel was out injured for a few games too. 

Hanley doesn't really count here as it was known he wouldn't be ready for the start of the season. 

[S_81 929]

36 minutes ago, chicken said:

I think the bench would look very different with Sargent, Barnes, Sainz and Nunez fit. Hell, even the starting 11. It does say a lot that we have four forward players out injured, two of which were bang on starters, and we are wondering why our bench looks lacking in quality. We have our 3rd and 4th choice strikers out there. Sainz would add more quality from the bench. Nunez would give us another more forward thinking midfield option. To think that in amongst this, Onel was out injured for a few games too. 

Hanley doesn't really count here as it was known he wouldn't be ready for the start of the season. 

The squad lacks depth all over the pitch. If you can’t see that then there’s no helping you. 

[hogesar 9,875]

10 hours ago, S_81 said:

The squad lacks depth all over the pitch. If you can’t see that then there’s no helping you. 

To be fair that applies to nearly all sides at Championship level if you excuse the Leicester / Southampton / Leeds squads.

Preston are third. They only have one player with more than 2 goals and that's Willl Keane. They don't really have anyone on the bench for their wing-back positions. Their strikers are literally Will Kean and Osmajic - that is it.

Sunderland are 4th. They are fullly reliant on their first team of Jack Clarke (7 goals), Daniel Neil (DMC), Dan Ballard, Trai Hume, Bellingham, and Patterson and O'Nien. They've played every game without injury. Any of those get injured and you're looking at players who are completely unproven at championship level.

It doesn't surprise me that the only injury Sunderland have in their squad is Corry Evans who'd not be a starter anyway, and for Preston it's Ched Evans who also wouldn't start for them, but might make the bench.

 

[S_81 929]

18 minutes ago, hogesar said:

To be fair that applies to nearly all sides at Championship level if you excuse the Leicester / Southampton / Leeds squads.

Preston are third. They only have one player with more than 2 goals and that's Willl Keane. They don't really have anyone on the bench for their wing-back positions. Their strikers are literally Will Kean and Osmajic - that is it.

Sunderland are 4th. They are fullly reliant on their first team of Jack Clarke (7 goals), Daniel Neil (DMC), Dan Ballard, Trai Hume, Bellingham, and Patterson and O'Nien. They've played every game without injury. Any of those get injured and you're looking at players who are completely unproven at championship level.

It doesn't surprise me that the only injury Sunderland have in their squad is Corry Evans who'd not be a starter anyway, and for Preston it's Ched Evans who also wouldn't start for them, but might make the bench.

 

Yep - which IMO furthers the point that the coach/manager can be a real determining factor. And Wagner will never get this squad promoted. Regardless of injuries or not. He’s just not versatile enough for the range of teams we face in this league. His decision making re players is often poor. And he very very rarely can change a game for the better with his substitutions. 

[ridgeman 135]

Just read Wagner comments in the evening news does he honestly think we controlled the game in the second half against Coventry. It’s beyond belief.

[hogesar 9,875]

55 minutes ago, S_81 said:

Yep - which IMO furthers the point that the coach/manager can be a real determining factor. And Wagner will never get this squad promoted. Regardless of injuries or not. He’s just not versatile enough for the range of teams we face in this league. His decision making re players is often poor. And he very very rarely can change a game for the better with his substitutions. 

Possibly. He's certainly struggling to make an impact on games via shape change or anything when we're struggling.

But it's also worth noting our first 4 games was our best start in 35 years alongside the most amount of goals scored in our first 4 games for 120 years. So there has to be a little balance that with a full squad, we were looking very good.

[shefcanary 2,526]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

So there has to be a little balance that with a full squad, we were looking very good.

Not disagreeing with you Hoggy, but Wagner also has to find a way to play with the replacements for those injured players, and frankly he seems to be moving further away from finding the best set up. We're getting worse as he tries to look for a better tactical approach. In my view he has to be even more radical than he has been up to now. Wagner seems to be acknowledging a high pressing game isn't working for the replacements, but to just sit in and defend with our defence ain't going to help us win any games that's for sure. Hopefully Saturday's second half performance has proven that for him and he will try something else against Leeds.

[lake district canary 4,583]

15 hours ago, Google Bot said:

That got me thinking about fashions in football and ideas that haven't been done.

Would it be legal to defend the ball as per the Roman army shields formation, where you surround the ball carrier to the point that the defending team has to pretty much foul you to break through the wall.   

I don't know if locking arms with a team mate would be allowed, but that would be my starting idea, to have a ring of outward facing divas who'd fall down when touched.

It would be great to see 10 men bundles slowly making their way up the field while the the opposition are trying to crawl in underneath to steal the ball.  6 or 7 players at a time feigning injury, rolling around, Referee and VAR completely unsure what to do.

This sounds a wonderful idea in principle, but would still make scoring goals difficult, as all the defending line would have to is stand in the way and the defensive shield couldn't move forwards as it would have to foul the defenders if it did.. .. or maybe the defenders could be done for obstruction in that case......hmm....would like to see a team try it! 

[chicken 2,708]

On 09/10/2023 at 23:03, S_81 said:

The squad lacks depth all over the pitch. If you can’t see that then there’s no helping you. 

It's all relative as Hog essentially points out. Either way, some of our bench would be strong starting 11 contenders elsewhere.

Wagner is suffering the same issue as Farke, but for different reasons. What is plan B? For Farke, he struggled to change a losing side to a winning one in games and he struggled to reinvent us when it was clear his original approach wasn't going to be flexible enough against better opposition.

Right now, Wagner is struggling to find a plan that works with our 3rd and 4th choice strikers due to injury and their aparant inability to be like for like replacements.

Equally, injuries to Onel previously and Sainz and Nunez currently, it means his options are somewhat limited going forwards.

It's not ideal.

Equally though; Sargent, Barnes with Idah on the bench is good. Rowe, Fass, Sainz, Onel, Springett, Placheta is also pretty good depth. The first three are very good, in Onel and Placheta there are two players who'd get into other teams first teams.

Giannoulis and McCallum are the same.

Gibson, Duffy , Batth with Hanley when he returns... older, but again, decent at this level.

CM and RB are arguably our two weakest positions without genuine experienced competition for each spot. And poss up front.

RB: Stacey and Fisher

CM: Mayor, Sara, Nunez, Forshore, Gibbs, Sorensen.

Wagner may well not be the man to get the best out of this squad and I do feel inclined to agree that perhaps he has to be a little more radical with his approaches whilst we are without plan A players.

4-1-4-1 or 4-2-3-1, but more round pegs in round holes.