Scoring Goals "In Transition".

[Thirsty Lizard 3,215]

Okay, okay it's basically just a posh way of saying "scoring on the break", but we've recently become rather good at this haven't we?

Both goals yesterday came from us winning the ball deep in our own half and then slicing West Brom to pieces at pace on the break. Add this to Sargent's goal against Southampton and Barnes' goal against Sheffield Wednesday. Even Rowe's goal at Hull up to a point, although this came from him winning a loose ball in midfield rather than a team build up. 

Very pleasing to see and totally gives the lie to those who have claimed that Wagner only has one way of playing blah, blah, blah. 

[Midlands Yellow 4,682]

Interesting post. 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,215]

5 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Interesting post. 

Thank you. 

[Petriix 3,220]

I don't think I've ever said Wagner has only one way of playing (or blah, blah, blah), but I am critical of his midfield tactics. Offensive transitions are absolutely our strength and I'm definitely a fan of starting from a low block, like a coiled cobra ready to strike (too dramatic?).

I think particular attention should be paid to Sara's involvement in that second goal: how he picked the ball up in the central 10 position and drove forwards before playing it out to Dimi.

[Thirsty Lizard 3,215]

Just now, Petriix said:

I don't think I've ever said Wagner has only one way of playing (or blah, blah, blah), but I am critical of his midfield tactics. Offensive transitions are absolutely our strength and I'm definitely a fan of starting from a low block, like a coiled cobra ready to strike (too dramatic?).

I think particular attention should be paid to Sara's involvement in that second goal: how he picked the ball up in the central 10 position and drove forwards before playing it out to Dimi.

I know we're having a little debate about tactics on another thread, but I really wasn't thinking of you when I typed that. 

[TheGunnShow 7,377]

I think it was the legendary Egil Olsen who discovered that relatively few goals are scored against defences that are set, and he was a big advocate of lots of attacking runs made without the ball to overwhelm a defence. Now his preferred way of getting his team up the field was to physically overpower a much weaker player in the air, win the flick-on and push up at pace. Hence why he had one of the various Flo brothers on a flank as they were all about twenty-nine feet seventeen or something and up against short full-backs.

I'm not saying we go full Drillo, but I think that old Norway side that got to #2 in the FIFA rankings in the early/mid 1990s could tell us a few things we could use.

[CDMullins 498]

35 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Okay, okay it's basically just a posh way of saying "scoring on the break", but we've recently become rather good at this haven't we?

Both goals yesterday came from us winning the ball deep in our own half and then slicing West Brom to pieces at pace on the break. Add this to Sargent's goal against Southampton and Barnes' goal against Sheffield Wednesday. Even Rowe's goal at Hull up to a point, although this came from him winning a loose ball in midfield rather than a team build up. 

Very pleasing to see and totally gives the lie to those who have claimed that Wagner only has one way of playing blah, blah, blah. 

But is this really a ploy/strategy/tactic?

Or a bi-product of us struggling to retain possession?

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,626]

15 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

I think it was the legendary Egil Olsen who discovered that relatively few goals are scored against defences that are set, and he was a big advocate of lots of attacking runs made without the ball to overwhelm a defence. Now his preferred way of getting his team up the field was to physically overpower a much weaker player in the air, win the flick-on and push up at pace. Hence why he had one of the various Flo brothers on a flank as they were all about twenty-nine feet seventeen or something and up against short full-backs.

I'm not saying we go full Drillo, but I think that old Norway side that got to #2 in the FIFA rankings in the early/mid 1990s could tell us a few things we could use.

Egil Olsen was just Tony Pulis with data, wasn't he?

[TheGunnShow 7,377]

7 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Egil Olsen was just Tony Pulis with data, wasn't he?

Nah, he was too keen on zonal marking for that.

[littleyellowbirdie 3,141]

31 minutes ago, CDMullins said:

But is this really a ploy/strategy/tactic?

Or a bi-product of us struggling to retain possession?

It's probably a strategy resulting from us having players who struggle to keep possession. There's a school of thought that this sort of thing is what managers are supposed to do.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,626]

23 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Nah, he was too keen on zonal marking for that.

Probably because the data told him that zonal marking concedes fewer goals than man to man 😉

[The Raptor 1,573]

1 minute ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Probably because the data told him that zonal marking concedes fewer goals than man to man 😉

Is that really the case? How come it's never seemed to work for us?

Or like most fans have I only noticed it when it's been ****!?

[lake district canary 4,831]

28 minutes ago, CDMullins said:

But is this really a ploy/strategy/tactic?

Or a bi-product of us struggling to retain possession?

This is the right question imo. To me, the way we are now playing us as a result of not being capable of holding on to control of the ball well enough, which has led to a kind of "backs to the wall, catch them on the break" policy.

At championship level, we should always aim to play the best football possible - as we did under Lambert, Adams/Alex Neil and Farke. Settling for a backs to the wall policy would just be a cop out and a lack of the right kind of coaching to achieve something better.

If the aim is to gradually play our way out of that strategy and start to dominate a bit more in midfield as we get more confident, I can see the sense of it.....I hope that is the case and we start to see a bit more progressive football as the weeks go on.

[Monty13 2,736]

45 minutes ago, CDMullins said:

But is this really a ploy/strategy/tactic?

Or a bi-product of us struggling to retain possession?

I assumed it was the plan we have been trying to enact all along actually working.

You don’t play two strikers if you want to play possession based football. You don’t sign Duffy and Batth. You probably don’t sign players like Stacy and Sainz whose main strength on the offensive is carrying the ball at pace. Likewise you don’t give Onel a new contract and release Dowell.

[Mengo 852]

4 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

I assumed it was the plan we have been trying to enact all along actually working.

You don’t play two strikers if you want to play possession based football. You don’t sign Duffy and Batth. You probably don’t sign players like Stacy and Sainz whose main strength on the offensive is carrying the ball at pace. Likewise you don’t give Onel a new contract and release Dowell.

Spot on. Simple basic stuff. 👌 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,626]

17 minutes ago, The Raptor said:

Is that really the case? How come it's never seemed to work for us?

Or like most fans have I only noticed it when it's been ****!?

Yes, it is. I suppose, similar to how short corners are statistically more successful than those crossed straight into the box, it just looks worse when it fails so people notice it more.

[CDMullins 498]

48 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

I assumed it was the plan we have been trying to enact all along actually working.

You don’t play two strikers if you want to play possession based football. You don’t sign Duffy and Batth. You probably don’t sign players like Stacy and Sainz whose main strength on the offensive is carrying the ball at pace. Likewise you don’t give Onel a new contract and release Dowell.

If this is orchestrated then my next question would be,

Is this a change of philosophy from Stuart Webber?

Or something he has allowed Wagner to proceed with?

Would feel like a long term ploy if you're correct about buying them player types and extending contracts.