Tactics today

[Shack Attack 0]

I''ve seen a few grumbles about the way we set up today, not just on here, but watching now on Game of the Day (our local was one of those affected by the block) I think we got things just about right to start with. Man City are not a team blessed with any great pace or width (other than the full backs) so it makes sense to attempt to throw a blanket centrally over your defensive third and limit the space that the likes of Silva, Aguero and Nasri like to work in. Things went pretty much according to plan in the first half but PL was left with a decision to make after we conceded a very soft second goal. Holt and Hoolahan have just come on as I watch and I''m guessing that we will probably now show a little more attacking threat but get picked off as we push more men forward. Maybe if Steve Morison had not had such a heavy second touch in the first half and the defence and John Ruddy had not combined to gift Man City a second goal we might be looking back at todays game in a more favourable light?

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

Think you analysed in pretty well. Good call

[ZLF 275]

its possible - but we were facing an onslaught with wave after wave of attack. They simply were too good.

Our defence was run raggedbut why tierney is not getting more grief for not clearing nasris goal I dont know, it is clear that ruddy rightly assume he was going to head it clear yet he tierney at the last second moves his head to allow the ball to pass, effectively wrong footing Ruddy - yes ruddy should have stopped it

[......and Smith must score. 1,361]

Whatever tactics we employed yesterday we were almost certainly going to lose heavily.We have virtually no previous experience of playing in the top flight and were up against a team costing a fortune.Each of their four scorers cost at least £20 million !! Analyse our '' mistakes '' ''til the cows come home but the plain fact is that they are a far better team than almost all the other teams in the Premier League. I''ll be amazed if we aren''t well beaten in the Carrow Road return in April but it''ll be no disgrace against this lot.

[Making Plans 940]

If you look at the stats, we lost 2-0 during the period when we were playing defensively and we lost 3-1 in the last 30 minutes when we brought on Holt & Hoolahan. So either way we were 2 goals worse. Sure you can point to a couple of chances we had, and their soft 2nd goal, during the first 60 minutes but overall during this period Man City on another day might have had another 3 or 4. Likewise the last 30 minutes when we looked better going forward but if anything we were carved open more frequently at the back. Personally, I think if we''d played the last 30 minute formation for the whole 90 minutes then we''d have shipped even more goals than we did.

[BW 0]

Tactics were correct just think if morison had got his chance when he over hit it or bennet in the second half it could of been a different story. Luck wasn''t with us this weekend and to beat a great team like man city you need some luck. We will beat newcastle.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

As the OP said, Man City lack pace up front and width (which is provided by their full-backs).

 

This begs the question why we didn''t play a high line so our midfield could support Morison and Ruddy had room to operate.

 

Our midfielders were constantly running to get back, it was ridiculous, Man City were gifted all the possession and their full backs could get forward knowing we had no one advanced enough to get in behind them. They are a fantastic team going forward but as Napoli showed they are far from the best side defensively which is why they are possibly going out of the Champions League.

 

If we are going to defend deep we need to move forwards and backwards as a unit which means passing and moving. Our passing was shite and when the opposition players have the ball we need to pressure them not dangle in a leg, fail to win the ball then run back five yards like trench warfare.

 

I''m bloody furious about our performance and tactics yesterday.

[YankeeCanary 0]

 

Rudolph, it''s clear to me from your response here ( as well as what you''ve directed to me on other threads ) that you and I have similar reactions to some of the things that are occurring at the moment. I think I would tend to say that "I''m disappointed" more than "bloody furious" but, that aside, I think we agree. You may recall that Ricardo was rebutting some of my comments on one of his previous match reports by indicating that when we are up against this kind of quality our lesser quality players are always going to get the short end because they do not have the ability to cope given the split second timing required. Ricardo is correct when there are split second decisions required but, in my opinion, where he gets it gets it wrong is broad brushing everything down to our poorer quality players and split second timing. What I have been disappointed with is the poor execution on those occasions when our players are not required to make split second decisions. That is where you and I agree entirely.  

[Robert N. LiM 4,509]

I only watched the first half.

I thought we defended with superb discipline in the first 45 minutes. The midfield five were relentless in their positioning, and it was really hard for Citeh to break us down. I don''t recognise the complaints about the lack of effort that some posters were making elsewhere.

The problem was that Morison was so isolated that the ball just kept coming back. I have no idea whether, for instance, picking Hoolahan instead of Surman might have given us more chance of holding on to the ball and thus preventing those attacks from coming in waves. It did look as though we had set up basically to defend for 90 minutes, which realistically was never going to happen, especially if you make individual errors, as it sounds as if we did in the second half.

I think this is a really difficult question. If we had been more attacking we might not have had to defend as much, but I think Citeh would have created more with those fewer attacks.

Be interested to hear others'' views on what happened when we brought Wes and Holt on.