Hanley: can you teach an old dog new tricks?

[Harry53 229]

Firstly I am not calling him an old dog in a disrespectful way!! However, I am holding him responsible for the slow build up in nearly every match he plays. 

He is incapable  of seeing a forward pass and yesterday we had ample opportunities to create more attacks down the right with Stacey and Rowe doing absolutely nothing for long periods, as when Grant had the ball,  he never turned his body to the right,  instead played it sideways.

This was even worse last season when Ben Gibson partnered Grant, it was a if they simply enjoyed passing to each other and didn't want the responsibility to go forward. Thank goodness Gibson has gone,  but we still have to watch Grant dither on the ball, and blinkered.

So the game wasn't great,  but it could have been so much better,  by getting Rowe in the game. I thought maybe, that Thorup might have had a word with him at half time,  because he moved the ball faster in the second half, but I am really not convinced Grant can adjust to a faster tempo game. He seems happy playing easy,  comfortable passes, but from what Thorup has told us,  this isn't what he expects. 

Brad Hills, who I much prefer to see in the future alongside Cordoba, plays more progressive football and will actually drive into space than taking the negative, non committal pass. 

Grant so far in all the friendlies hasn't changed his way of playing,  and probably never will. Some dogs you can teach new tricks, but I think this is a lost cause with Grant.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

Hanley performed well in a Daniel Farke team that also focused on playing out from the back and moving through the thirds at pace. Much of players slowing things down and holding onto the ball is trying to trigger the opposition press to open a passing lane. You’ll see the best possession teams and ball playing defenders often slowing things right down and putting their foot on the ball in order to wait for space to develop. 

Thorup used a defender at Nordsjaelland who is 36 and significantly worse on the ball than Hanley. He just set up the team so he was never expected to do anything too difficult with the ball by having ball playing defenders on either side of him.

I’d be more concerned about Duffy who is probably worse on the ball than Hanley anyway. 

[Harry53 229]

2 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Hanley performed well in a Daniel Farke team that also focused on playing out from the back and moving through the thirds at pace. Much of players slowing things down and holding onto the ball is trying to trigger the opposition press to open a passing lane. You’ll see the best possession teams and ball playing defenders often slowing things right down and putting their foot on the ball in order to wait for space to develop. 

Thorup used a defender at Nordsjaelland who is 36 and significantly worse on the ball than Hanley. He just set up the team so he was never expected to do anything too difficult with the ball by having ball playing defenders on either side of him.

I’d be more concerned about Duffy who is probably worse on the ball than Hanley anyway. 

I understand that,  but with his foot on the ball,  naturally facing to his left,  he never looks to his right. Gibson did the same on the left. Faces right,  while so many times Dimitri or Sam stood unmarked waiting for the ball. Stacey and Rowe were so frustrated as well positioned in space, but because Grant doesn't change his body position,  he never sees the obvious and easy pass.

[TheGunnShow 7,377]

The bigger problem with Hanley is his recovery from such a bad injury. He's lost a bit of his leap and a yard of pace for me. Started looking more vulnerable at set pieces again because of it, as usually he was hyper-reliable in terms of getting that head of his on anything crossed in - or at least making such a big nuisance of himself anyone attacking the ball was put off as well.

Edited August 4 by TheGunnShow

[chicken 3,084]

32 minutes ago, Harry53 said:

Firstly I am not calling him an old dog in a disrespectful way!! However, I am holding him responsible for the slow build up in nearly every match he plays. 

He is incapable  of seeing a forward pass and yesterday we had ample opportunities to create more attacks down the right with Stacey and Rowe doing absolutely nothing for long periods, as when Grant had the ball,  he never turned his body to the right,  instead played it sideways.

This was even worse last season when Ben Gibson partnered Grant, it was a if they simply enjoyed passing to each other and didn't want the responsibility to go forward. Thank goodness Gibson has gone,  but we still have to watch Grant dither on the ball, and blinkered.

So the game wasn't great,  but it could have been so much better,  by getting Rowe in the game. I thought maybe, that Thorup might have had a word with him at half time,  because he moved the ball faster in the second half, but I am really not convinced Grant can adjust to a faster tempo game. He seems happy playing easy,  comfortable passes, but from what Thorup has told us,  this isn't what he expects. 

Brad Hills, who I much prefer to see in the future alongside Cordoba, plays more progressive football and will actually drive into space than taking the negative, non committal pass. 

Grant so far in all the friendlies hasn't changed his way of playing,  and probably never will. Some dogs you can teach new tricks, but I think this is a lost cause with Grant.

Last season? How many times did Hanley play? And alongside Gibson? 

[Ernie Wise 112]

30 minutes ago, Harry53 said:

Firstly I am not calling him an old dog in a disrespectful way!! However, I am holding him responsible for the slow build up in nearly every match he plays. 

He is incapable  of seeing a forward pass and yesterday we had ample opportunities to create more attacks down the right with Stacey and Rowe doing absolutely nothing for long periods, as when Grant had the ball,  he never turned his body to the right,  instead played it sideways.

This was even worse last season when Ben Gibson partnered Grant, it was a if they simply enjoyed passing to each other and didn't want the responsibility to go forward. Thank goodness Gibson has gone,  but we still have to watch Grant dither on the ball, and blinkered.

So the game wasn't great,  but it could have been so much better,  by getting Rowe in the game. I thought maybe, that Thorup might have had a word with him at half time,  because he moved the ball faster in the second half, but I am really not convinced Grant can adjust to a faster tempo game. He seems happy playing easy,  comfortable passes, but from what Thorup has told us,  this isn't what he expects. 

Brad Hills, who I much prefer to see in the future alongside Cordoba, plays more progressive football and will actually drive into space than taking the negative, non committal pass. 

Grant so far in all the friendlies hasn't changed his way of playing,  and probably never will. Some dogs you can teach new tricks, but I think this is a lost cause with Grant.

I would be more concerned with how ineffective and anonymous Gibbs and Nunez were yesterday. They did nothing to create or provide any sort of protection for the back line. 
In the two home friendlies the much maligned McLean provided the best chances for Sainz (twice), Rowe and to a lesser extent Sargent with pinpoint long range passes-but I suppose that doesn’t count…..because it’s McLean?

[cambridgeshire canary 7,797]

Don't worry Hoff promised us he would play the youth.

 

No wait hold on..

[yellowrider120 917]

1 hour ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Hanley performed well in a Daniel Farke team that also focused on playing out from the back and moving through the thirds at pace. Much of players slowing things down and holding onto the ball is trying to trigger the opposition press to open a passing lane. You’ll see the best possession teams and ball playing defenders often slowing things right down and putting their foot on the ball in order to wait for space to develop. 

Thorup used a defender at Nordsjaelland who is 36 and significantly worse on the ball than Hanley. He just set up the team so he was never expected to do anything too difficult with the ball by having ball playing defenders on either side of him.

I’d be more concerned about Duffy who is probably worse on the ball than Hanley anyway. 

OMG! If that is true and the manager seeks to replicate that in The Championship then we will be well and truly sunk!

[Cowboy 240]

He's done well in the past, but he's a very 1990s style defender with his best years behind him.

[Harry53 229]

51 minutes ago, chicken said:

Last season? How many times did Hanley play? And alongside Gibson? 

Ok the season before that !

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,035]

Think Hanley would still do a decent job as a centre of a back 3, where he invariably plays with Scotland, where he just needs to head it and block it, no emphasis in being pulled out wide or playing out from the back

 

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

1 hour ago, Harry53 said:

I understand that,  but with his foot on the ball,  naturally facing to his left,  he never looks to his right. Gibson did the same on the left. Faces right,  while so many times Dimitri or Sam stood unmarked waiting for the ball. Stacey and Rowe were so frustrated as well positioned in space, but because Grant doesn't change his body position,  he never sees the obvious and easy pass.

Defenders are usually instructed to not make lateral passes in front of their goal unless the opposition has significantly dropped off. So the left sided centreback would look to the left and the right sided looks to the right. Opposition set pressing traps that will apparently leave the far sided full back free, but someone is ready to jump on them if a it looks like the defender is shaping to pass to them. 

Opposing press is usually hoping the centre backs turn inside, this closes their passing lanes and increases the risk. Hanley is naturally disadvantaged when playing on the left as he will want to turn inside, but will be under pretty strong guidance to not do so (unless Norwich are in the settled possession phase). St Pauli and Madenburg both pressed very high shutting off passing lanes effectively. 

As others have said, defenders shouldn’t be expected to make difficult passes as the midfielders and full backs should be in position to receive a simple pass. Too often this pre season no midfielder has provided an option and the fullbacks haven’t been close enough. It has forced more long passes than would be expected, or a slow and ineffective build up. 

Hanley isn’t brilliant at build up, but Norwich to being able to get two defenders both good with and against the ball on a limited budget is unlikely. Getting Cordoba and Doyle, who are both very comfortable on the ball will greatly help. But there will definitely be space for a Duffy or Hanley who are best suited to winning their duels and arial battles. 

I’m more concerned about Sorensen in defence to Hanley to be honest. 

[Harry53 229]

3 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Defenders are usually instructed to not make lateral passes in front of their goal unless the opposition has significantly dropped off. So the left sided centreback would look to the left and the right sided looks to the right. Opposition set pressing traps that will apparently leave the far sided full back free, but someone is ready to jump on them if a it looks like the defender is shaping to pass to them. 

Opposing press is usually hoping the centre backs turn inside, this closes their passing lanes and increases the risk. Hanley is naturally disadvantaged when playing on the left as he will want to turn inside, but will be under pretty strong guidance to not do so (unless Norwich are in the settled possession phase). St Pauli and Madenburg both pressed very high shutting off passing lanes effectively. 

As others have said, defenders shouldn’t be expected to make difficult passes as the midfielders and full backs should be in position to receive a simple pass. Too often this pre season no midfielder has provided an option and the fullbacks haven’t been close enough. It has forced more long passes than would be expected, or a slow and ineffective build up. 

Hanley isn’t brilliant at build up, but Norwich to being able to get two defenders both good with and against the ball on a limited budget is unlikely. Getting Cordoba and Doyle, who are both very comfortable on the ball will greatly help. But there will definitely be space for a Duffy or Hanley who are best suited to winning their duels and arial battles. 

I’m more concerned about Sorensen in defence to Hanley to be honest. 

You state the left succeed player should look to the left to pass and the opposite for the right,  but this was my main point in my post, he doesn't look to see if the full back is available. He faces inwards,  so passes laterally. With a team high pressing this causes lots of errors and often the ball ends up with the keeper hoofing the ball up the park. 

It's not just these last few games,  it's always been this way. The CB need to make it the way forward by going wide if the player is free,  as Stacey was yesterday for long periods. 

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

17 minutes ago, Harry53 said:

You state the left succeed player should look to the left to pass and the opposite for the right,  but this was my main point in my post, he doesn't look to see if the full back is available. He faces inwards,  so passes laterally. With a team high pressing this causes lots of errors and often the ball ends up with the keeper hoofing the ball up the park. 

It's not just these last few games,  it's always been this way. The CB need to make it the way forward by going wide if the player is free,  as Stacey was yesterday for long periods. 

Hanley should be on the right hand side. No need for him to go on the left and hopefully Thorup does change that. I suspect he was keener to see Sorensen on the right as he knows Cordoba will be the left sided centreback once fit. However, once Doyle arrives and plays inverted then it becomes more of a back three and Hanley would be more comfortable in that system with players either side to move the ball too. 

Generally, coaches don’t want to build up using full backs out wide. It is very easy for opposition to press them up against the touch line which leads to easy turnovers. At most you want to use them for a bounce pass, or they drop back in line with the central defenders. Always best to go through the middle, but can have full backs out wide to force the opposition to split their midfield wider and create more space. Thorup was interesting in Denmark as he’d have all three of his midfielders drop deep and narrow at times in the build up, with the full backs moving wide. This is hard to opposition to press as there will always be space somewhere. It can result in too big a gap to the attackers though. 

Ultimately, coaches can and have to compensate for defenders who aren’t great with the ball at their feet. Only a few teams can really afford to get centre backs who are happy with and without the ball. At Championship level you will often have to sacrifice one or the other (which is why Cordoba could be a great deal as he does seem happy both ways).

As long as Hanley’s injury hasn’t scuppered his physical attributes he is still a perfectly decent Championship defender and is just about good enough with the ball (as witnessed in his time with Farke) to be able to work in a deep build up. He will need to be helped out by the midfield, but that is pretty much the case with all defenders as you really want to minimise the amount of risky passes they are taking, regardless of their ability. 

[Mason 47 1,924]

34 minutes ago, Harry53 said:

It's not just these last few games,  it's always been this way. The CB need to make it the way forward by going wide if the player is free,  as Stacey was yesterday for long periods. 

Sometimes making the fullback clear and obvious for a pass is on purpose. It asks the opposition a question, stretch wider and open spaces or stay compact and give up the wide areas. If Stacey is constantly open and Hanley is constantly not taking that option, it's more likely he's been instructed not to as opposed to unable 

[rock bus 1,059]

Someone started a new thread on Hanley but in attempt to keep in one place.

one thing that’s definitely right is that he shouldn’t be captain. Shows no leadership qualities or ability to inspire other players. I accept he may lead by example in terms of commitment but he can do that without the arm band.

May actually help him not to have any other responsibilities.