Wagner "clueless" for not playing Sara as a 10

[nutty nigel 7,555]

3 hours ago, Monty13 said:

It was massive, you (and we) missed Gunn as well. But it wasn’t enough justification for getting just 7pts over an 11 game period, that was the crux.

No but they never said it was. They just pointed out genuine mitigating circumstances which not only compromised the starting eleven but also options to change the game from the bench. 

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,034]

17 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

Would this be a good thread to mention that Michael and Delia were spot on when they recognised how massive the loss of Sainz, Sargent and Barnes was earlier this season.. 

Sargent and Barnes I agree with, not sure I would include Sainz in there, not because he is not an excellent player but because he was not getting many starts. The big misses were Barnes, Sargent, Gunn and Hanley.........

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

We've now taken 18 points from our last 10 games, which included Ipswich(a), West Brom(h&a), Southampton(h), Hull(a), Leeds(a) and Coventry(h). That's 7 out of 10 games against teams above us and we still managed 1.8 points per game. Sargent has played in the last 4 of those and we won 3 of the 4, with the one exception being Leeds away.

Sargent has scored 6 goals in 8 starts and 2 sub appearances. Where would we be now if we had him and Sainz all season? The key question now is what van Hooijdonk can add as well for the rest of the season. Sydney is actually two weeks older than Josh, so it could be quite a battle for game time.

[BigFish 1,988]

3 hours ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

You made a similar post just before the Leeds match, and I backed it up with the theory that players nowadays have functions rather than positions. The same applies here.

I did, and you did. Actually I very much agree with you, with the caveat that the function may change in a match situation.

The key question would then be what do you consider Sara's optimum functio or functions @Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man?

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,791]

13 minutes ago, Yelloow Since 72 said:

We've now taken 18 points from our last 10 games, which included Ipswich(a), West Brom(h&a), Southampton(h), Hull(a), Leeds(a) and Coventry(h). That's 7 out of 10 games against teams above us and we still managed 1.8 points per game. Sargent has played in the last 4 of those and we won 3 of the 4, with the one exception being Leeds away.

Sargent has scored 6 goals in 8 starts and 2 sub appearances. Where would we be now if we had him and Sainz all season? The key question now is what van Hooijdonk can add as well for the rest of the season. Sydney is actually two weeks older than Josh, so it could be quite a battle for game time.

I dont think we'd have been up with Leicester and Southampton but we would be above WBA and a good few points clear of this cluster of teams we're in i.e hull coventry sunderland watford etc

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,827]

9 minutes ago, BigFish said:

I did, and you did. Actually I very much agree with you, with the caveat that the function may change in a match situation.

The key question would then be what do you consider Sara's optimum functio or functions @Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man?

Driving forward with the ball and releasing passes to the forward players, arriving in or on the edge of the box without it to be in the right position should the ball arrive, and finally his long range shooting. 

As a result, it's better for him to start deeper. It's more difficult to do these things when he's expected to be playing off Sargent.

[nutty nigel 7,555]

43 minutes ago, Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB said:

Sargent and Barnes I agree with, not sure I would include Sainz in there, not because he is not an excellent player but because he was not getting many starts. The big misses were Barnes, Sargent, Gunn and Hanley.........

Well I guess you can’t miss what you never had and yet Sainz was injured at the beginning of July which meant he missed the majority of preseason which was why it took him longer to get up to speed. Sarge at least had that preseason plus some early games and even then he’s not yet back to where he was pre-injury. Barnes was rushed back through needs must.

Michael and Delia understood these things and Wagner appreciated that.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,034]

16 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Well I guess you can’t miss what you never had and yet Sainz was injured at the beginning of July which meant he missed the majority of preseason which was why it took him longer to get up to speed. Sarge at least had that preseason plus some early games and even then he’s not yet back to where he was pre-injury. Barnes was rushed back through needs must.

Michael and Delia understood these things and Wagner appreciated that.

I understand that but Sainz made his debut for us on 27th September against Fulham but did not start a game again until 13th December...............

[shefcanary 2,435]

28 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Well I guess you can’t miss what you never had and yet Sainz was injured at the beginning of July which meant he missed the majority of preseason which was why it took him longer to get up to speed. Sarge at least had that preseason plus some early games and even then he’s not yet back to where he was pre-injury. Barnes was rushed back through needs must.

Michael and Delia understood these things and Wagner appreciated that.

A good manager would have managed the period without Sarge and Barnes better. You can't ignore that period in judging Wagner as a manager; Wagner showed he hadn't a clue during that period. 

McBinna also is now showing without one key player he isn't a shoe in for Klopp. Buying Moore and playing ****e football to rescue the situation ain't good management either is it? 

[Robert N. LiM 4,429]

15 hours ago, hogesar said:

I thought he played a pretty conventional free 10 role, rarely high enough to be considered a second striker aside from their goal kicks when we pressed high and he acted as a two then.

Am I right to assume this is for the whole game, ie it would include the 35 mins after Barnes came on and he was back as an 8...?

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

2 hours ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

I don't think we'd have been up with Leicester and Southampton but we would be above WBA and a good few points clear of this cluster of teams we're in i.e hull coventry sunderland watford etc

Ipswich only have 14 points from the same 10 games and only 8 points from their last 8 games. 

[nutty nigel 7,555]

2 hours ago, shefcanary said:

A good manager would have managed the period without Sarge and Barnes better. You can't ignore that period in judging Wagner as a manager; Wagner showed he hadn't a clue during that period. 

McBinna also is now showing without one key player he isn't a shoe in for Klopp. Buying Moore and playing ****e football to rescue the situation ain't good management either is it? 

If you like Sheff. But I don’t see how losing three attacking players like Sargent, Sainz and Barnes cannot weaken the squad and especially weaken attacking options from the bench. 

[nutty nigel 7,555]

21 minutes ago, Yelloow Since 72 said:

Ipswich only have 14 points from the same 10 games and only 8 points from their last 8 games. 

It’s embarrassing for the pantwetters that’s for sure…

[BroadstairsR 2,186]

The subtleties of 8 or 10, apart from the obvious, are lost on me. It was much easier in days gone by when players had a distinct position and role to play.

As I see it, Sara has been more or less given a free role whilst being reminded of his defensive duties. Perhaps the latter became paramount in a struggling side, but he has always been a player with an attacking intent  even though his goals have dried up.

Although more than decent on Saturday, he was not as prominent as we have been accustomed to.

Of course, it's a waste having him at the a-rse end of the donkey too much, but he is an intelligent player who should be given his head without overmuch pre-planned involvement and positional restriction.

More tic-tacs than tactics, I suppose, but it is not stupid to suggest that this team needs an effective CDM.

 

Edited February 5 by BroadstairsR

[cornish sam 959]

21 hours ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

You made a similar post just before the Leeds match, and I backed it up with the theory that players nowadays have functions rather than positions. The same applies here.

This is getting dangerously close to bill think of there are no such things as formations anymore ...

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,827]

10 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

This is getting dangerously close to bill think of there are no such things as formations anymore ...

Maybe Bill was a visionary ahead of his time. 

Last time I mentioned the 'functions rather than positions' theory, I referenced Andrea Pirlo, but maybe next time I'll quote Bill's infamous claim that football tactics are simply a case of whoever is nearest to the ball will kick it.

[Capt. Pants 4,263]

17 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Am I right to assume this is for the whole game, ie it would include the 35 mins after Barnes came on and he was back as an 8...?

Looking at the directional arrow at the top it's for the 2nd half. From my lofty perch in the Upper Barclay that looks about right and highlights my thoughts on the day that we didn't really support Sarge. That all changed of course when Barnes came on and also Onel deserves a bit of credit for getting us up the pitch too.

[Robert N. LiM 4,429]

16 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Looking at the directional arrow at the top it's for the 2nd half.

Happy to be corrected by those who know about these things but I'm pretty sure that they put both halves together and the arrow just shows which end is the defensive half, which the attacking one.

[Capt. Pants 4,263]

4 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Happy to be corrected by those who know about these things but I'm pretty sure that they put both halves together and the arrow just shows which end is the defensive half, which the attacking one.

That makes sense actually 

[hogesar 9,709]

1 hour ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Happy to be corrected by those who know about these things but I'm pretty sure that they put both halves together and the arrow just shows which end is the defensive half, which the attacking one.

Yes, that is correct.

It shows to me that he essentially played a pretty standard 10 role, not a "second striker" - although off the ball and pressing from goal kicks he was higher than a 10 would normally be.

 

[king canary 7,643]

I've said it before but saying he shouldn't be playing in the deeper DM type role doesn't mean he has to play as a number 10.

We know he's not good defensively, we know he's excellent at carrying the ball forward, he has an excellent range of passing and he's very good at timing late runs into the box to get goals. So you need to accentuate those strengths and not put him in a position to expose his weaknesses.

[king canary 7,643]

19 hours ago, shefcanary said:

A good manager would have managed the period without Sarge and Barnes better. You can't ignore that period in judging Wagner as a manager; Wagner showed he hadn't a clue during that period. 

McBinna also is now showing without one key player he isn't a shoe in for Klopp. Buying Moore and playing ****e football to rescue the situation ain't good management either is it? 

Hasn't a clue might be strong but I largely agree. 

It was clear his 'two false 9' set up only worked with Sargent and Barnes and didn't work with Idah or anyone else. So to persist with it when you lost Sargent was odd, to keep persisting with it when we lost Barnes too was pretty ridiculous. 

[Mason 47 1,389]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

Hasn't a clue might be strong but I largely agree. 

It was clear his 'two false 9' set up only worked with Sargent and Barnes and didn't work with Idah or anyone else. So to persist with it when you lost Sargent was odd, to keep persisting with it when we lost Barnes too was pretty ridiculous. 

Articulated how I feel about it. Full credit to Wagner for sticking it out and pulling back results now, but a bit odd to religiously stick to dry tires even whilst it's tipping down.

Isn't it lovely to be arguing about whether or not we're good, than why we're bad 😃

[Robert N. LiM 4,429]

5 hours ago, hogesar said:

Yes, that is correct.

It shows to me that he essentially played a pretty standard 10 role, not a "second striker" - although off the ball and pressing from goal kicks he was higher than a 10 would normally be.

 

Thanks.

Will say again, though, that given Barnes came on with (iirc) more than 30 mins to go, Sara was clearly not playing as a second striker at that point, ie for at least a third of the game. It would be interesting* to see his heat maps for before and then after the substitution.

Edited February 5 by Robert N. LiM
*not everyone would find this interesting, I realise

[Indy 3,307]

Seriously based on one game & 20 minutes we base that Sara isn’t a 10 and Barnes is! Barnes came on did well, just like Idah better off the bench! 
I much prefer to see Sara & McLean given a free role with Nunez doing the dirty work. Whatever we as fans on a forum discuss and disagree with it’s based on our opinions and what we expect from players and what we see! Barnes best performance since the start of the season, maybe it’s best to leave him as an impact as said he has legs for the 30 minutes.

As for our set up, playing Sara & McLean opens the option to play Sainz & Rowe with a front two, nearly back to a 4-4-2 with VH & Sarge. Lots of options for Wagner and one thing I’m really pleased about is Wagner getting results still hope he gets the backing to prove himself next year!

[hogesar 9,709]

3 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Thanks.

Will say again, though, that given Barnes came on with (iirc) more than 30 mins to go, Sara was clearly not playing as a second striker at that point, ie for at least a third of the game. It would be interesting* to see his heat maps for before and then after the substitution.

A really simplistic way to look at it is look at Sargents heat map vs Sara. Sara has nothing inside the box. That isn't too uncommon for a traditional 10 (how I believe he is deployed / naturally reverts to when given that position) but it is for a second striker. Look at Barnes when he played that position for 30 mins, much closer to Sargents:

Equally, look at Sara's heatmap when playing as a 10 vs Leeds:

i know its become fashionable to blame Wagner tactically at pretty much every point (not aimed at you), but all the evidence suggests Sara isn't having to play some awkward second striker role but is able to roam as any typical 10 would. 

Which brings me back to my initial point that I don't think Wagner playing Sara deeper was as criminal as suggested by multiple posters at multiple times this season. One in particular said not playing Sara as a 10 was a sackable offence on its own and plenty on here agreed.

It's simply a cautious reminder that managers and coaches see far more of these players than the 90 minutes a week we do and have a load of data to go with it too, whilst having significant experience in judging players. So things we think we know better we simply don't.

Despite all this, I've never said Sara can't play a 10 role. He can. I just don't think it's his best position. But McLean and Nunez have worked well too and Sargent most definitely won't be wanting McLean dropped anytime soon..

[Robert N. LiM 4,429]

Cheers, @hogesar, appreciate that. Think we're at cross-purposes a bit in that I also think Sara is better playing a bit deeper - I think he's at his most effective with the ball in front of him, and lots of attacking options to choose from - and also when arriving later in the box or the attacking third (such as for the equaliser on Saturday). I've been arguing on here all season against the idea we need to play him further forward. I think he's a better attacking weapon when he picks up the ball earlier in attacking moves.

The only point I was making was that presumably his role changed (in whatever way) against Coventry when Barnes came on, so that heat map of the whole game (as opposed to before and after the substitution) is not too useful. But comparing it with Leeds does clarify things a bit.

Turning away from the stats and to the 'eye test' - would you say Sara's role/positioning did change after Barnes came on? I was only able to watch from just before that change was made.

[Jim Smith 2,325]

Regardless of whether Sara is yet flourishing in the more advanced role, our general improvement has resulted from playing Nunez with Kenny as the deeper two. Which is what many, many fans were saying should have been happening way before it did. 

[Jim Smith 2,325]

And I know Kenny was playing CB for a while but we could have played Nunez and Gibbs. 

[Jim Smith 2,325]

I would also add that I think Wagner has been effectively playing Sara as a second striker rather than an advanced midfielder.,I would agree he needs to be able to drop deep.