Ben Lee’s analysis

[CANARYKING 707]

Very last sentence:

a head coach who is stifling the development of this club and its individual prospects.Analysis cannot live or die by score lines,  processes matter and Norwich’s need to improve.

 

[Number9 272]

2 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

Very last sentence:

a head coach who is stifling the development of this club and its individual prospects.Analysis cannot live or die by score lines,  processes matter and Norwich’s need to improve.

 

The numbers confirm what your eyes tell you.

Hey, we won the game,  alles ist gut ja?

[Branston Pickle 4,144]

Seems the pinkun is firmly setting its colours to the mast.  This “tactical analysis” has usually been largely garbage and as for Seaman’s match report he might as well not have been there.

 

[shefcanary 2,950]

22 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Seems the pinkun is firmly setting its colours to the mast.  This “tactical analysis” has usually been largely garbage and as for Seaman’s match report he might as well not have been there.

Hi, can you help me out here, why is the analysis "largely garbage", I put quite a bit of store by it. Honestly, looking for a reasoned argument here?

The frustration Lee has with the current situation is building week by week. 

[king canary 8,749]

7 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Hi, can you help me out here, why is the analysis "largely garbage", I put quite a bit of store by it. Honestly, looking for a reasoned argument here?

The frustration Lee has with the current situation is building week by week. 

Probably because he doesn't agree with it so it must be bad.

[Branston Pickle 4,144]

15 minutes ago, king canary said:

Probably because he doesn't agree with it so it must be bad.

No - as “analysis” goes I just find I rather misleading, I don’t have to agree with it and I won’t.  I have no idea who the guy is, but playing away at Hull and largely limiting their opportunities to long range efforts whilst creating some decent ones for ourselves on a very stodgy pitch is not a bad outturn/return, and suggests we weren’t tactically poor. There was absolutely no need for the final comment.

It seems to fit the current Pinkun ‘M.O’ to be overly critical - the “match report” was a disgrace.

 

Edited January 15 by Branston Pickle

[Number9 272]

5 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

No - as “analysis” goes I just find I rather misleading, I don’t have to agree with it and I won’t.  I have no idea who the guy is, but playing away at Hull and largely limiting their opportunities to long range efforts whilst creating some decent ones for ourselves on a very stodgy pitch is not a bad outturn/return, and suggests we weren’t tactically poor. There was absolutely no need for the final comment.

Have you followed Ben's analysis throughout the season?

He's done every game, you can see with your own eyes that it's not right when you watch the games,  reading through the analysis afterwards is quite interesting to see how wrong Wagner gets it & raises big questions as to why he doesn't change. 

Winning at Hull, yeah I'll take the three points, doesn't alter the fact that Wagner isn't bringing the best out of our players.

Edited January 15 by Number9

[Branston Pickle 4,144]

6 minutes ago, Number9 said:

Have you followed Ben's analysis throughout the season?

He's done every game, you can see with your own eyes that it's not right when you watch the games,  reading through the analysis afterwards is quite interesting to see how wrong Wagner gets it & raises big questions as to why he doesn't change. 

I’ve read it sometimes, I don’t have to agree. Vs Hull imo we got more right than wrong: that is evidenced by the win that I saw with my own eyes, despite Seaman claiming it somehow relied on huge amounts of luck.

 

Edited January 15 by Branston Pickle

[nutty nigel 7,902]

33 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Hi, can you help me out here, why is the analysis "largely garbage", I put quite a bit of store by it. Honestly, looking for a reasoned argument here?

The frustration Lee has with the current situation is building week by week. 

I haven't got a clue if it's garbage. But much of his other stuff is click bait nonsense. As usual I'm out of mt depth Shef. Just to help me out - why would this analysis be better than the stuff Attanasio and Knapper are spending so much money on?

[king canary 8,749]

25 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

No - as “analysis” goes I just find I rather misleading, I don’t have to agree with it and I won’t.  I have no idea who the guy is, but playing away at Hull and largely limiting their opportunities to long range efforts whilst creating some decent ones for ourselves on a very stodgy pitch is not a bad outturn/return, and suggests we weren’t tactically poor. There was absolutely no need for the final comment.

It seems to fit the current Pinkun ‘M.O’ to be overly critical - the “match report” was a disgrace.

 

This is a lot of words to still say 'i don't agree with it so it must be garbage.'

[Branston Pickle 4,144]

10 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

I haven't got a clue if it's garbage. But much of his other stuff is click bait nonsense. As usual I'm out of mt depth Shef. Just to help me out - why would this analysis be better than the stuff Attanasio and Knapper are spending so much money on?

Good question.  I think people like his analysis as it fits their mindset. Imo there’s degrees of right and wrong.

Edited January 15 by Branston Pickle

[Branston Pickle 4,144]

13 minutes ago, king canary said:

This is a lot of words to still say 'i don't agree with it so it must be garbage.'

As opposed to what?  I’m entitled to my opinion.  Garbage perhaps oversteps the mark but I have often disagreed with them. But Imo the final comment in the piece way oversteps ‘analysis’ and brings the whole piece into question as it suggests an inherent bias. Which it has to be said is not surprising coming from the Pinkun at the moment. 

Edited January 15 by Branston Pickle

[Ulfotto 798]

The pinkun have been pushing the Wagner is a spent force narrative for since September. 
 

I don’t think it will happen in a million years but what if we sneak 6th then beat Farke and the scum on the way to the promotion. 

[Monty13 2,736]

2 minutes ago, Ulfotto said:

The pinkun have been pushing the Wagner is a spent force narrative for since September. 
 

I don’t think it will happen in a million years but what if we sneak 6th then beat Farke and the scum on the way to the promotion. 

I don’t think they’ve been pushing he’s a spent force, they’ve been largely pointing out how streaky he is and how poor some of our play is despite some of the results. We are relying on individual quality like Rowe and Gunn and that’s not sustainable. I don’t think they are wrong in that conclusion personally.

Also pointing out how poor quality the Championship is which considering our recent run to still be just outside the playoffs tells its own story.

[shefcanary 2,950]

31 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

I haven't got a clue if it's garbage. But much of his other stuff is click bait nonsense. As usual I'm out of mt depth Shef. Just to help me out - why would this analysis be better than the stuff Attanasio and Knapper are spending so much money on?

It shouldn't be Nutty, that's the bottom line. The only difference is that Attanasio and Knapper have to negotiate with Wagner. They may well have done already, the current deep block may be the results of all the analysis! Certainly my sense based only on the timing of when it was first implemented, Kenny moved back to LCB may be one of the fruits of Knapper's analysis.

Just to add, much of Lee's analysis is factual, the base set-ups, the pressing structures, etc. Sure, he provides a layer of opinion over why the team sets up the way it does, together with concerns of doing it. He doesn't provide any solutions though. That he leaves for Knapper and Wagner to sort, so it is a form of sniping in that respect.

Edited January 15 by shefcanary
further thoughts

[Cowboy 237]

35 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I’ve read it sometimes, I don’t have to agree. Vs Hull imo we got more right than wrong: that is evidenced by the win that I saw with my own eyes, despite Seaman claiming it somehow relied on huge amounts of luck.

 

Pretty much everyone I speak to would agree with Sam's analysis. There have been a number of fortunate outcomes in matches lately which disguise the underlying poor individual performances and abysmal lack of tactical structure. The inability to keep possession in the second half at Hull was almost comical (I don't think I've ever seen worse), and reliance on moments of brilliance by Rowe can only last so long. The outcome of Wagner keeping his job might be the worst of all possible outcomes from this period. 'More right than wrong' - I can't really understand that based on what I saw.

[Google Bot 3,923]

11 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

We are relying on individual quality like Rowe and Gunn and that’s not sustainable. I don’t think they are wrong in that conclusion personally.

Can you not same the same with England and Kane, though?   Also, Pukki and Buendia. 

Isn't that just how some teams operate?  Successful or not.  Smith's concept was very much about providing the foundations and he clearly put a lot of hope in Rowe too based on our transfer dealings, but as we know injuries took a tool for him on that initial plan.

Behind the scenes they know what Rowe is capable of, I don't think it's luck as people suggest.

I find a lot of the pinkun content to be playing to the gallery right now, and they have sadly shown a very intent bias.  I don't like it personally.  But then again, I don't know how you can express an opinion and remain neutral either - you get the same with Butler on Norfolk.

Edited January 15 by Google Bot

[Branston Pickle 4,144]

3 minutes ago, Cowboy said:

Pretty much everyone I speak to would agree with Sam's analysis. There have been a number of fortunate outcomes in matches lately which disguise the underlying poor individual performances and abysmal lack of tactical structure. The inability to keep possession in the second half at Hull was almost comical (I don't think I've ever seen worse), and reliance on moments of brilliance by Rowe can only last so long. The outcome of Wagner keeping his job might be the worst of all possible outcomes from this period. 'More right than wrong' - I can't really understand that based on what I saw.

What analysis was that, then?  We did not rely on luck any more than any other side in any game. And that was the only ‘analysis’ there was - it was not a valid match report.

Edited January 15 by Branston Pickle

[Number9 272]

6 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

I don’t think they’ve been pushing he’s a spent force, they’ve been largely pointing out how streaky he is and how poor some of our play is despite some of the results. We are relying on individual quality like Rowe and Gunn and that’s not sustainable. I don’t think they are wrong in that conclusion personally.

Also pointing out how poor quality the Championship is which considering our recent run to still be just outside the playoffs tells its own story.

This is a key point from the analysis, our system is pretty crap and doesn't use our players to their best, doesn't paint Wagner as a master tactician. 

Instead of producing patterns or systems of play which can be replicated & providing chances for goals, the way we're setup & playing simply relues on a player having a world class moment, scoring an individual goal etc. ie Rowes goal, made out of nothing by the player having an individual moment of brilliance. 

This isn't good management & coaching & it's not sustainable. 

 

[Mason 47 1,921]

This thread conflicts me. I feel that the Pinkun team are very club-negative with most of their stuff, I've stopped reading what they put out for the most part as it feels like an echo chamber. However, I do agree with the tactical analysis the vast majority of the time.

Taken in isolation it's an excellent away result. Looking at it in more detail, I myself feel that this group is capable of significantly more than it currently shows. Sara, Sainz and Sargent in particular are excellent assets that are spending 90% of games doing structural shuttles, which doesn't feel necessary. Rowe also, but he seems to have the golden touch when it comes to finding a pocket of space to make a difference regardless.

I maintain my position that the best outcome we could have is Wagner works it out and starts hitting again. However, Hull was probably as spot-on 'relying on moments' as you can possibly get- all 5 big incidents went out way, and that just won't be sustainable.

[Google Bot 3,923]

5 minutes ago, Number9 said:

This isn't good management & coaching & it's not sustainable. 

Depends how you look at it, in my opinion we have a lot of players at this club who think they're better than what they are.. or rather, what they're achieving.  And this was having a great impact when we weren't performing or getting the results as expected - we dropped very heavily when conceding, and this was true last season also.

I think Wagner has transposed them from being 'great' players that are underperforming, into becoming a tighter underdog group, now out to prove a point. 

It's a dangerous tactic, and one that doesn't align with fans - But I can almost see how he's aligning to the Huddersfield track and what worked there(?).  People talk about the minus goal difference when they got promoted, I was thinking that with Sarge etc back fit we'd go back to being on the front foot and aggressive.

But now i'm wondering if we're going to be riding this track of inching past teams by the odd goal.

Edited January 15 by Google Bot

[Cowboy 237]

 

What analysis was that, then?  We did not rely on luck. And that was the only ‘analysis’ there was.

Conclusion would have been a better word, yes.

Edited January 15 by Cowboy

[hogesar 10,753]

I quite like Ben's analysis' (shock to everyone on here, I'm sure), with a couple of caveat's.

I think there's a little too much strength put towards the idea that possession = control. That isn't necessarily the case and ultimately you can make a choice to concede some possession for greater structural control.

Secondly, the result influencing the analytics / quality of opposition. Anyone who went to Huddersfield away at the beginning of the season would have had a great time as I did, but it was quite clear that even Huddersfield could transition through the middle of the pitch with little problem. They didn't have the quality to punish but they did get through regularly and we were mostly helped by how aggressive both Gibson and Duffy were at pushing into their forward players and squeezing space.

Yet, a direct quote from the end of that game was:

"Overall, Saturday’s win provided yet more evidence of Norwich’s adaptability under David Wagner, with the German’s side facing a unique challenge against a complete man-to-man press."

So I do think that nowadays the analysis sort of goes into the game from a certain angle to begin with, if that makes sense. A lot of what he said was of course right, but I do think there's an "obsession with possession". 🙂

 

[Branston Pickle 4,144]

1 minute ago, Mason 47 said:

This thread conflicts me. I feel that the Pinkun team are very club-negative with most of their stuff, I've stopped reading what they put out for the most part as it feels like an echo chamber. However, I do agree with the tactical analysis the vast majority of the time.

Taken in isolation it's an excellent away result. Looking at it in more detail, I myself feel that this group is capable of significantly more than it currently shows. Sara, Sainz and Sargent in particular are excellent assets that are spending 90% of games doing structural shuttles, which doesn't feel necessary. Rowe also, but he seems to have the golden touch when it comes to finding a pocket of space to make a difference regardless.

I maintain my position that the best outcome we could have is Wagner works it out and starts hitting again. However, Hull was probable as spot-on 'relying on moments' as you can possibly get- all 5 big incidents went out way, and that just won't be sustainable.

I think that’s kind-of what I’m getting at. I don’t particularly agree with the tactical analysis but that’s more a side issue. It is the inherent anti-club bias in just about everything that is becoming a problem.

As a long-distance fan I’d much prefer ‘down the line’ reporting rather than it having to come from a pro/anti standpoint.  

[Badger 2,745]

I like Ben Lee's analysis, if I wished to challenge his analysis, which I don't really, I would point to the fact that we won quite comfortably on xG (0.97 to 1.4).*

 

*I haven't read tne full article, just what was on Twitter

Edited January 15 by Badger
Added last sentence

[nutty nigel 7,902]

19 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

It shouldn't be Nutty, that's the bottom line. The only difference is that Attanasio and Knapper have to negotiate with Wagner. They may well have done already, the current deep block may be the results of all the analysis! Certainly my sense based only on the timing of when it was first implemented, Kenny moved back to LCB may be one of the fruits of Knapper's analysis.

Just to add, much of Lee's analysis is factual, the base set-ups, the pressing structures, etc. Sure, he provides a layer of opinion over why the team sets up the way it does, together with concerns of doing it. He doesn't provide any solutions though. That he leaves for Knapper and Wagner to sort, so it is a form of sniping in that respect.

Yes, I’ve noticed changes. Since the end of November we’ve conceded just 8 goals in 9 games. This includes surprising results (according to club critics) against the binners, Southampton and Hull. A realistic set of fixtures to evaluate.

Im not convinced about Wagner but it would seem over these games he’s getting more from the squad than he was. Of course having better players available is a massive plus.

As for the articles. They are designed to get the most clicks. This is how Newsquest works. 

[Number9 272]

7 minutes ago, Badger said:

I like Ben Lee's analysis, if I wished to challenge his analysis, which I don't really, I would point to the fact that we won quite comfortably on xG (0.97 to 1.4).*

 

*I haven't read tne full article, just what was on Twitter

If you had time to read the complete piece, he does discuss xg

[Number9 272]

3 minutes ago, Number9 said:

If you had time to read the complete piece, he does discuss xg

Must stress though, Ben's analysis isn't xg based, it's just a review of where the players were & how the team was setup during different phases of the game.

Actual positions of the players & actual setup / tactics by Wagner. 

Yes, you can extrapolate an opinion from that, but it's the actual game as it happened, not an intangible like xg.

[hogesar 10,753]

6 minutes ago, Number9 said:

Must stress though, Ben's analysis isn't xg based, it's just a review of where the players were & how the team was setup during different phases of the game.

Actual positions of the players & actual setup / tactics by Wagner. 

Yes, you can extrapolate an opinion from that, but it's the actual game as it happened, not an intangible like xg.

xG isn't intangible 🤓By it's very definition it's a value!

[PurpleCanary 6,371]

54 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

I don’t think they’ve been pushing he’s a spent force, they’ve been largely pointing out how streaky he is and how poor some of our play is despite some of the results. We are relying on individual quality like Rowe and Gunn and that’s not sustainable. I don’t think they are wrong in that conclusion personally.

Also pointing out how poor quality the Championship is which considering our recent run to still be just outside the playoffs tells its own story.

From the comments on the minute by minute reports and particularly in the Q&As the feeling I get from them is that they don't think Wagner's style of football, possibly even irrespective of results, is what Knapper wants to see.