Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Canary02 IV

QPR tactics - High pressing and Simeon Jackson.

Recommended Posts

QPR, coming off a 5-0 home defeat will be in the same psychological state as we are. Playing away their first instinct will be to tighten up defensively to allow themselves any chance of an improved performance.

Our best method of attack will be to press them high up the pitch and harry them. Give their defenders no time on the ball, and make them make mistakes. Make them concede possession. Shatter their fragile confidence. The player who does this best for us is Simeon Jackson. Let him run them down for 65 minutes and exhaust himself, then bring on James Vaughan to complete the job.

QPR have been playing one up front with Cisse and I don''t see them changing this following their result as they''ll want to shore up defensively and away from home they''ll see us as easy to hit on the break with Cisse''s pace as we were against Fulham. In the tactic I suggest with a high pressing game we would be vulnerable to this, but every tactic has a weakness and I would put this under the heading of acceptable risk when weighed against the positives of the tactics.

I would replace Turner and Bennett with Ward and Barnett, not because one game makes either of the former terrible players, or even worse players than the latter pair, but it''s a quick way of removing the psychological scar of yesterday, and bringing in players who have performed for us successfully before. It also reinforces that it''s a squad game, that everyone has a role to play and a chance to play, and that if you have a bad game, someone else is always ready to step in and take your place.

In midfield I''d play with a variation of the diamond. Howson at the base, Surman nominally on the left of the diamond when attacking, but when defending coming inside to help out Howson. On the right, Bennett, playing as a right sided midfielder rather than a flat out winger, and able to give Russell Martin defensive support. At the tip, Hoolahan, but with the proviso that when defending he needs to either help out Howson, or go to the left to allow Surman to do so, depending on the situation.

Ruddy

Martin, Barnett, Ward, Tierney

Howson

Bennett, Surman,

Hoolahan

Jackson, Holt

Subs: Rudd, Lappin, Turner, Johnson, Pilkington, Morison, Vaughan.

(Turner rather than Bennett on the bench to lessen the psychological blow a touch for a player who is dropped after his debutand reassure him he is still involved)

The risk of this tactic would be the openness to counter attack and balls over the top. The benefits would be a fresh, familiar and untainted centre of defence, a midfield who are fluid and comfortable on the ball, who are able to interchange positions and tactics depending on the situation, and two up front with Simeon Jackson terrifying defenders that are already low on confidence. The other risk is that we are too open and light in the middle of the park, so there will be a lot of responsibility on Wes to work hard defensively, for he and Surman to work together in this respect, and for the midfield to remain narrow when not in possession.

We can all point out what went wrong yesterday. This is my opinion on how to actually fix the problem before next week.

I''ll put my tin hat on and wait to be ripped to shreds!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good stuff.Without wanting to single anyone out (though I will lol) I think Tierney and Martin both need to pick their game up, and fast. Their defensive positioning wasn''t the best yesterday, and I''m not talking about tactic fiddling, more just basic holding the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you serious? You can''t play Jackson, he is god damn awful, wasn''t on the bench yesterday and 99% of our fans wrote the guy off 18 months ago. If Jackson is the answer then we must be getting desperate, unless of the 99% were wrong of course?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks chaps.

Agree that a new striker would give us a lift. Zaha of Palace would be my choice as he is pacy, dynamic and gives us something we don''t already have.

Tierney is out as soon as Garrido is up to speed anyway. I wouldn''t destroy him by playing Lappin instead for one game ahead of Garrido taking over anyway (although that would e a temptation after y''day!)Right back worried me too but Hughton has already brought in Whittaker so I''d wait and see what he has to offer before looking elsewhere. Despite yesterday I don''t see Martin as a liability, just as a player we can easily upgrade on if we choose to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Thumbelina"]Are you serious? You can''t play Jackson, he is god damn awful, wasn''t on the bench yesterday and 99% of our fans wrote the guy off 18 months ago. If Jackson is the answer then we must be getting desperate, unless of the 99% were wrong of course?[/quote]

Why do you think Jackson is awful, and why do you think he wouldn''t be an asset in a high pressing formation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jimmy Bone - Superstar"]What about Snodgrass after one game?[/quote]

Would have others ahead of him in terms of fitting the system outlined in the OP, but admittedly forgot about him when picking the subs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell us, what does Zaha give us that we don''t already have, apart from the possibility of being an overpriced flop?  I doubt very much whether Palace would let him go on the cheap. No better than what we already have here in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Thumbelina"]Please tell us, what does Zaha give us that we don''t already have, apart from the possibility of being an overpriced flop?  I doubt very much whether Palace would let him go on the cheap. No better than what we already have here in my opinion.
[/quote]

 

I reckon Sunderland already signed him and he played for them yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Thumbelina"] unless the 99% were wrong of course?[/quote]You obviously didn''t pick up on the irony of my first post - I have always thought NCFC look a much better side with Jackson in the team, but that is not a popular opinion amongst NCFC fans. It seems that most would rather see anyone upfront for us than Jackson, hence calling for new strikers that have not even matched Jackson, Morison and Vaughan''s standards in the Championship yet.If NCFC are to bring a new striker in then should be somebody who they know has performed at a higher level than what they already have at the club.  I don''t feel that a striker from the Championship is the answer as all the best attaking talent outside the Premier League has been brought by the likes of Southampton, Swansea and ourselves.Looking abroad if you want to improve on you have got upfront is the answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]

[quote user="Thumbelina"]Please tell us, what does Zaha give us that we don''t already have, apart from the possibility of being an overpriced flop?  I doubt very much whether Palace would let him go on the cheap. No better than what we already have here in my opinion.[/quote]

 

I reckon Sunderland already signed him and he played for them yesterday.

[/quote]

Poor Sunderland, how much did they spend on him?I think Zaha would struggle to hold down a place in the first team at the Stadium of Light too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zaha does the unexpected, has pace and exceptionally quick feet and at his age he is only going to get better. However, I agree there may well be better value to be gained from abroad. Zaha has huge potential but is a boom or bust prospect.

Snodgrass was omitted from the subs in error rather than design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Thumbelina"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]

[quote user="Thumbelina"]Please tell us, what does Zaha give us that we don''t already have, apart from the possibility of being an overpriced flop?  I doubt very much whether Palace would let him go on the cheap. No better than what we already have here in my opinion.[/quote]

 

I reckon Sunderland already signed him and he played for them yesterday.

[/quote]

Poor Sunderland, how much did they spend on him?I

think Zaha would struggle to hold down a place in the first team at the Stadium of Light too.

[/quote]

Zaha won a penalty for Crystal Palace yesterday so unless he''s signed overnight I assume it''s a different player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary02 IV"][quote user="Thumbelina"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]

[quote user="Thumbelina"]Please tell us, what does Zaha give us that we don''t already have, apart from the possibility of being an overpriced flop?  I doubt very much whether Palace would let him go on the cheap. No better than what we already have here in my opinion.
[/quote]

 

I reckon Sunderland already signed him and he played for them yesterday.

[/quote]


Poor Sunderland, how much did they spend on him?

I think Zaha would struggle to hold down a place in the first team at the Stadium of Light too.



[/quote] Zaha won a penalty for Crystal Palace yesterday so unless he''s signed overnight I assume it''s a different player[/quote]

 

Oh dear.  Old Bor got in a muddle.  It''s Saha who Sunderland have signed, not Zaha.  Wait until you get to my age, that''ll come to you too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally my line up would be:

Ruddy

Martin, Barnett, Bennett, Garrido

Johnson

Bennett Howson Pilinkgton

Vaughan Holt

Subs: Rudd, Turner, Snodgrass, Surman, Hoolahan, Morison and Jackson

Missed Howson in the attacking role, were fox fit he''d probably go in as the holding mid for johnson. Two up front is a must for me, and whilst tempted to blood Francomb in our shortage of RB''s, I think its probably a lot to ask so early on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Canary02 IV"] Why do you think Jackson is awful, and why do you think he wouldn''t be an asset in a high pressing formation?[/quote]

Because for every nine out of ten chances he has he cannot hit a cow''s backside with a banjo and that is just not good enough in the Premiership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with thesentiments of the OP.

 

Like that team because EB and Surman give good support to the full backs who looked exposed yesterday. Particularly Russell Martin who Fulham were very effective at isolating. As has been discussed RM looked more solid at centre back last season and imo the right back position remains a concern. I seem to recall when Ryan Bennett was signed it was said he could play at right back. Would that be an option or is my memory playing tricks?

 

OTBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Said it before s jackson is not the answer, 2 years and only been a genuine threat in the prem and in champ, for 2 months of the season.

We need that new striker and s Jackson isn''t that striker. He will be released on a free next season

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="Canary02 IV"] Why do you think Jackson is awful, and why do you think he wouldn''t be an asset in a high pressing formation?[/quote]

Because for every nine out of ten chances he has he cannot hit a cow''s backside with a banjo and that is just not good enough in the Premiership.

[/quote]

Really? It seems to me that you are talking out of your backside.I''m sure that you have all of the facts and stats at hand to back up this expert analysis?While you are at it perhaps you could also address the points that the OP was making, ie; do you feel that by playing Jackson Norwich play a much higher line which in return relieves pressure on our defence and midfield?Did somebody not recently post that with Jackson starting matches we won a very high percentage of games?  I do not know whether this is true or not, but I believe they claimed it was something like 7 wins in 10 Premier League outings for a NCFC team with Jackson starting.  Those stats sound about right to me and I am far more likely to believe them than the uninformed drivel you have posted above.It''s a team game just in case you had forgotten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Trawlerboy"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="Canary02 IV"] Why do you think Jackson is awful, and why do you think he wouldn''t be an asset in a high pressing formation?[/quote]

Because for every nine out of ten chances he has he cannot hit a cow''s backside with a banjo and that is just not good enough in the Premiership.

[/quote]


Really? It seems to me that you are talking out of your backside.

I''m sure that you have all of the facts and stats at hand to back up this expert analysis?

While you are at it perhaps you could also address the points that the OP was making, ie; do you feel that by playing Jackson Norwich play a much higher line which in return relieves pressure on our defence and midfield?

Did somebody not recently post that with Jackson starting matches we won a very high percentage of games?  I do not know whether this is true or not, but I believe they claimed it was something like 7 wins in 10 Premier League outings for a NCFC team with Jackson starting.  Those stats sound about right to me and I am far more likely to believe them than the uninformed drivel you have posted above.

It''s a team game just in case you had forgotten.


[/quote]

Now then Smudger i would suggest that if Morison,Vaughan or even Martin played with Holt they would put away far more chances than Jackson that come their way and of course playing two up front whether it be Jackson and one other of any of our strikers would make you play a higher line.However missing chances when presented does not allow for the defence to have a comfort zone and just one slip by a defender could mean defeat.

By the way i am no expert on football just merely an observer for the last 50 years unlike you Smudger who give it the Billy Big Bollox on here claiming a wealth of knowledge on all things football.

Anyway why the identity change yet again ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="Trawlerboy"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="Canary02 IV"] Why do you think Jackson is awful, and why do you think he wouldn''t be an asset in a high pressing formation?[/quote]

Because for every nine out of ten chances he has he cannot hit a cow''s backside with a banjo and that is just not good enough in the Premiership.

[/quote]

Really? It seems to me that you are talking out of your backside.I''m sure that you have all of the facts and stats at hand to back up this expert analysis?While you are at it perhaps you could also address the points that the OP was making, ie; do you feel that by playing Jackson Norwich play a much higher line which in return relieves pressure on our defence and midfield?Did somebody not recently post that with Jackson starting matches we won a very high percentage of games?  I do not know whether this is true or not, but I believe they claimed it was something like 7 wins in 10 Premier League outings for a NCFC team with Jackson starting.  Those stats sound about right to me and I am far more likely to believe them than the uninformed drivel you have posted above.It''s a team game just in case you had forgotten.

[/quote]

Now then Smudger i would suggest that if Morison,Vaughan or even Martin played with Holt they would put away far more chances than Jackson that come their way and of course playing two up front whether it be Jackson and one other of any of our strikers would make you play a higher line.However missing chances when presented does not allow for the defence to have a comfort zone and just one slip by a defender could mean defeat.

By the way i am no expert on football just merely an observer for the last 50 years unlike you Smudger who give it the Billy Big Bollox on here claiming a wealth of knowledge on all things football.

Anyway why the identity change yet again ?

[/quote]What a load of waffle.Like I said there are no facts or stats to back up your opinion. It is an ill informed opinion and no more than that.  We play higher up the pitch with Jackson in the team with any combination of two up front you care to choose and the results are better with Jackson in the team than they are without him in it. Why is that? He must do a hell of a lot of work for the team if his conversion rate really is anywhere near as poor as you like to claim. I was chatting to somebody who couldn''t have had much more than ten years experience of watching the game this weekend. Even they had noticed this most basic of observations which you and others still fail to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Trawlerboy"][quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="Trawlerboy"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="Canary02 IV"] Why do you think Jackson is awful, and why do you think he wouldn''t be an asset in a high pressing formation?[/quote]

Because for every nine out of ten chances he has he cannot hit a cow''s backside with a banjo and that is just not good enough in the Premiership.

[/quote]


Really? It seems to me that you are talking out of your backside.

I''m sure that you have all of the facts and stats at hand to back up this expert analysis?

While you are at it perhaps you could also address the points that the OP was making, ie; do you feel that by playing Jackson Norwich play a much higher line which in return relieves pressure on our defence and midfield?

Did somebody not recently post that with Jackson starting matches we won a very high percentage of games?  I do not know whether this is true or not, but I believe they claimed it was something like 7 wins in 10 Premier League outings for a NCFC team with Jackson starting.  Those stats sound about right to me and I am far more likely to believe them than the uninformed drivel you have posted above.

It''s a team game just in case you had forgotten.


[/quote]

Now then Smudger i would suggest that if Morison,Vaughan or even Martin played with Holt they would put away far more chances than Jackson that come their way and of course playing two up front whether it be Jackson and one other of any of our strikers would make you play a higher line.However missing chances when presented does not allow for the defence to have a comfort zone and just one slip by a defender could mean defeat.

By the way i am no expert on football just merely an observer for the last 50 years unlike you Smudger who give it the Billy Big Bollox on here claiming a wealth of knowledge on all things football.

Anyway why the identity change yet again ?

[/quote]

What a load of waffle.

Like I said there are no facts or stats to back up your opinion. It is an ill informed opinion and no more than that.  We play higher up the pitch with Jackson in the team with any combination of two up front you care to choose and the results are better with Jackson in the team than they are without him in it. Why is that? He must do a hell of a lot of work for the team if his conversion rate really is anywhere near as poor as you like to claim. I was chatting to somebody who couldn''t have had much more than ten years experience of watching the game this weekend. Even they had noticed this most basic of observations which you and others still fail to see.


[/quote]

You call it Waffle and i call it my opinion Smudger.My opinion is that if you were to give Jackson,Morison,Vaughan,Holt and Martin ten chances on goal Jackson would have the lowest success rate.Stats and opinion are not the same thing so what exactly are you on about ? Good to see you still have no respect whatsoever for anybodies opinion on football that takes a different stance to yours.

Anyway talking of waffle what has happened to Thumbelina?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary02 IV"]Zaha does the unexpected, has pace and exceptionally quick feet and at his age he is only going to get better. However, I agree there may well be better value to be gained from abroad. Zaha has huge potential but is a boom or bust prospect.

Snodgrass was omitted from the subs in error rather than design.[/quote]

Martin out scored Zaha last season

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good OP, whilst I don''t necessarily agree with all points, It''s nice to see someone actually put thought into a game plan rather than the usual ''two men upfront and ball in the mixer'' stuff that is usually talked about.
Personally, it all comes down to one man for me: Holt. If Holt plays than a second striker is a necessity. One of Holt''s biggest attributes is his movement off the ball and if you play Holt up front by himself you lose that movement as he is required to remain central.
If Hughton goes with two up front, expect us to be more direct (if QPR continue with their 4-2-3-1 then we will struggle to out pass them in the midfield). If Hughton goes with a single striker, expect Holt to be dropped to the bench. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why are people slating jackson, all he needs is a good run of games and then surely he''ll be off. like in the championship. hardly ever played in the first half of the season, yet effectively won us promotion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Sussexyellow"]

Agree with thesentiments of the OP.

 

Like that team because EB and Surman give good support to the full backs who looked exposed yesterday. Particularly Russell Martin who Fulham were very effective at isolating. As has been discussed RM looked more solid at centre back last season and imo the right back position remains a concern. I seem to recall when Ryan Bennett was signed it was said he could play at right back. Would that be an option or is my memory playing tricks?

 

OTBC

[/quote]

Ryan Bennett is far better at CB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...