Last 5 minutes and you need a goal

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,736]

Hughton''s quore from the link....."It’s important that you’re penetrating. The ideal way to do this is to get the ball wide, either to deliver a cross or to keep their full-backs pinned back,"

rather begs the question as to why the hell he substituted Redmond on Saturday?!?!?

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

I think Redmond was taken off because by then Hull had worked out how to stop him, and he''d out of ideas.  He simply wasn''t contributing anything to the attack by then.  His inexperience showed. 

 

I''m not a fan of playing Wes out wide but given Pilks in out injured, there wasn''t really another option in the squad to replace Redmond on the left, and Wes did at least produce something of an attacking threat.

[ref89 0]

Yes he was.  Talking to someone else who went, they claimed he was waving them back.  The hate specs are unremovable.

[quote user="swindoncanary"]Last half hour of Saturdays match Hughton was always waving at the players to get forward. [/quote]

[ref89 0]

If you can''t see why Redmond was taken off then quite frankly you don''t deserve the right to have an opinion.His end product - supplying the players in positions to score was AWFUL, we had to try and improve, so Wes came on instead.Clear now?  Or was the fact he is fast enough for you to be impressed?[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Hughton''s quore from the link....."It’s important that you’re penetrating. The ideal way to do this is to get the ball wide, either to deliver a cross or to keep their full-backs pinned back,"

rather begs the question as to why the hell he substituted Redmond on Saturday?!?!?

[/quote]

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,736]

[quote user="ref89"]If you can''t see why Redmond was taken off then quite frankly you don''t deserve the right to have an opinion.

His end product - supplying the players in positions to score was AWFUL, we had to try and improve, so Wes came on instead.

Clear now?  Or was the fact he is fast enough for you to be impressed?

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Hughton''s quore from the link....."It’s important that you’re penetrating. The ideal way to do this is to get the ball wide, either to deliver a cross or to keep their full-backs pinned back,"

rather begs the question as to why the hell he substituted Redmond on Saturday?!?!?

[/quote][/quote]

I was quoting the Hughton link (afterall that''s what this thread is about) in comparision to what he actually did on Saturday?

My opinion is a different matter, for what its worth, given Hull were playing 8 men across their penalty area and Danny Graham up from on his own, wasn''t their scope for playing Snodgrass/Redmond on either wing with Hoolahan behind Elmander and RVW and sacrificing one of the back 4?

sounds like you''ve written off a £3.2m signing off already ??

[nutty nigel 7,510]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"][quote user="ref89"]If you can''t see why Redmond was taken off then quite frankly you don''t deserve the right to have an opinion.

His end product - supplying the players in positions to score was AWFUL, we had to try and improve, so Wes came on instead.

Clear now?  Or was the fact he is fast enough for you to be impressed?

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Hughton''s quore from the link....."It’s important that you’re penetrating. The ideal way to do this is to get the ball wide, either to deliver a cross or to keep their full-backs pinned back,"

rather begs the question as to why the hell he substituted Redmond on Saturday?!?!?

[/quote][/quote]

I was quoting the Hughton link (afterall that''s what this thread is about) in comparision to what he actually did on Saturday?

My opinion is a different matter, for what its worth, given Hull were playing 8 men across their penalty area and Danny Graham up from on his own, wasn''t their scope for playing Snodgrass/Redmond on either wing with Hoolahan behind Elmander and RVW and sacrificing one of the back 4?

sounds like you''ve written off a £3.2m signing off already ??

[/quote]

 

How do we know Redmond''s substitution was tactical?

 

 

[Big Rons Brain 0]

I was at the Hull game (only had to travel from Sheffield) and was really disappointed, so much so I could only bear to watch the MOTD highlights last night, couldn''t face it on Saturday.In the cold light of day, the highlights show we were clearly piling the pressure on and creating some chances in the second half, wolfies header, the two Howson efforts etc.  Also Garrido was pretty much playing at the corner flag for the last part of the game, in line with the piece to video about how to chase the game.Sure, we should have passed much better and created more, but against a supremely motivated organised and ultra defensive Hull we lost the game because fer, wolfie, howsen, and redmond failed to convert, as much as because of any tactics.Also the penalty was well soft and we should have had one ourselves, 1-1 or 0-0 we all go one happily to the next game I reckon...My main worry is that it is a bitter pill that we have lost our width to injury, badly need Pilks back.  The key problems I saw was that both Snodgrass and Redmond cut in, which leaves the middle of the pitch too congested.  Also we need to free up the midfielders to try and play RVW in, he was making a fair few runs, but we seem to nervous to lose possesion to try and hit him, without taking that chance he is going to be under-utilised. 

[snake-eyes 13]

Interesting point about wingers cutting in too much.

 

This seems to be the norm these days, which I don''t understand.  By going passed the fullback to the byline and crossing or pulling the ball back you are turning the defense towards it''s own goal and pushing the deeper into their own area.

 

Cutting in allows a defense to push up and close down.

 

Watching Jesus Navas against Newcastle was like a blast from the past.  Traditional wing play where he took on the fullbacks regularly, Beat them enough times to get good crosses in and caused all sorts of problems.  You don''y have to beat the full back every time and sometimes you wont get the cross in, but you sow seeds of doubt in the defenses mind. The fullback start to expect you to try and go passed them so they sit off and deeper. If they then anticipate and cut the cross out it often results in a corner.

 

This is when the cut in is most effective. as the defender is deep, the winger cuts into the area and not in front of it.  If the defens doubles up it means there is a player free elsewhere and thus an early cross becomes dangerous.

 

I played Centre forward and wing due to my pace.  When I played wing I always saw it as a chess game and a personal battle with my opposing fullback.  I always tried to keep him guessing whether I would go outside, inside or cross early.  By the end of the game I usually had him licked and fouling me just to stop me.

 

It also helps to develop to be two footed.  Show you can cross with both feet and they never know which way you are going to go.

 

This is what I would like to see Redmond doing.  If he goes outside more often he will get som crosses in and some will result in corners.  This is pressure and defenses hate it!

 

Snake

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="snake-eyes"]

Interesting point about wingers cutting in too much.

 

This seems to be the norm these days, which I don''t understand.  By going passed the fullback to the byline and crossing or pulling the ball back you are turning the defense towards it''s own goal and pushing the deeper into their own area.

 

Cutting in allows a defense to push up and close down.

 

Watching Jesus Navas against Newcastle was like a blast from the past.  Traditional wing play where he took on the fullbacks regularly, Beat them enough times to get good crosses in and caused all sorts of problems.  You don''y have to beat the full back every time and sometimes you wont get the cross in, but you sow seeds of doubt in the defenses mind. The fullback start to expect you to try and go passed them so they sit off and deeper. If they then anticipate and cut the cross out it often results in a corner.

 

This is when the cut in is most effective. as the defender is deep, the winger cuts into the area and not in front of it.  If the defens doubles up it means there is a player free elsewhere and thus an early cross becomes dangerous.

 

I played Centre forward and wing due to my pace.  When I played wing I always saw it as a chess game and a personal battle with my opposing fullback.  I always tried to keep him guessing whether I would go outside, inside or cross early.  By the end of the game I usually had him licked and fouling me just to stop me.

 

It also helps to develop to be two footed.  Show you can cross with both feet and they never know which way you are going to go.

 

This is what I would like to see Redmond doing.  If he goes outside more often he will get som crosses in and some will result in corners.  This is pressure and defenses hate it!

 

Snake

[/quote]

 

Teams moving to have one striker also meant the winger who goes wide and crosses is also less effecitve - it''s very easy to defend against crosses, even when facing your own goal, if you have two centerbacks against one striker.

 

Without two forwards playing there is more space in the center of the pitch, so wingers are encouraged to come into this area and force on the the centrebacks to move towards the ball, creating space in behind them, for with an AM to use or the striker. Also, with rules becoming stricter and stricter on tackling there is more chance of getting a penalty if a quick, nimble winger goes against a full back forced onto his weaker side. The inside-out winger isn''t a particulary new invention, but Mourinho at several clubs and Bayern Munich over the past couple of seasons have very much brought them right into trend.

 

Redmond does need to add a little variation into his game, as he cuts inside pretty much every time, he should go on the outside (even if he then has to cut back again to cross) a few times, as you say, to keep his full back guessing. The weird thing on Saturday was how Garrido kept cutting back onto his right foot before crossing - although I think this is also due to the knowledge that crosses into a single striker will have to be perfect to work.

[snake-eyes 13]

I can see that Bethnal, but trust me it is not easy defending facing your own goal.  This is where you get a majority of own goals.

 

Defenders will always prefer defending away from their own goal. Try clearing a cross away when the ball is head high facing your own net.  At worst you get a corner from it.

 

In response to the lone striker formation, the second striker is the Hole player or Attacking midfielder.  The main striker would head towards the 6 yard box. The other would ghost in later either at the back post or near post but a bit deeper in the area.

 

This is no different to the Two striker formations we used in Germany when I played there. The Germans hated defending against it as they could not get their head around the options that it created.  Defending became very difficult.

 

I agree though that variation is a necessity, but it is how you set that up and introduce it into the game that causes the problems.

 

Snake 

[Big Rons Brain 0]

Agree about the problem with getting the ball to the head of a single target man.  Man City played two up against Newcastle which is why it worked, I guess they will try 4-4-2 against weaker teams (or maybe not after the weekend!) but use something more modern for the top 6 teams.  In the end though, so far RVW has had his only chances from crosses (one goal, one miss and one great save if my memory serves) so it seems that more crosses will probably equal more joy...