Style, philosophy

[HampsteadCanary 0]

We are all aware that Southampton are doing much better than us this season (yes they have money/a good youth academy etc), but the manager that was brought in has kept the club philosophy from Adkins, as has Laudrup at Swansea.

Our problem is that Hughton came in and either didn''t agree with the way we played before or didn''t think the players could handle it any more. Therefore we changed our style completely to the rather dull defensive approach that we''ve all been moaning about.

Now he brings in some better attacking options in the summer, and decides to revert to the way we played before...good passing football, but leaving ourselves a lot more open to counters. So each system he has introduced has failed in one sense, from the hangover of the previous.

Last season our players were frustrated as they were shackled to a shape that they weren''t allowed to break from. However, they got very good at defending with that shape, even though it was very dull to watch and didn''t provide enough goals. They were trained to play free flowing attacking football under Lambert, but were asked to play a rigid formation under Hughton - no continuity.

This season, we have tried to get a lot more movement, which was severely lacking last season, but the players still have last season''s tactics hanging over them...so they''re still getting used to being allowed to swap wings, interchange positions, or "break from the shape" as Hughton calls it. However, this has undone all the good work that Hughton put in with the defence, and now we can''t score OR defend!

Last season it took at least 8 games for them to get used to Hughton''s defensive tactics, so its fair to say that four league games into this more attacking approach, we''re not seeing the fruits of it yet. Not only have we had to gel the new players into the old system, but a new system has been introduced 5 games into the season. So new players are trying to get used to one system first, then change, and our old players are trying to adapt to a new philosophy as well. We didn''t play this new way in pre season, but looking back at last years football, we should have done!

I think what frustrates me as a supporter, is that Hughton hasn''t built on last year''s success (I''m sorry, finishing 11th is a success in my book!). He needed to build on that solid foundation, using the defensive discipline that we nurtured last year, with a lot more freedom for the attacking players.

[4th floor 4]

Good post, I''ve been saying much the same about the changing of styles. People forget that we hadn''t had both the benefit of a longer term plan and experience of a settled style such as Swansea enjoyed. They built over several seasons and a few different managers, gradually improving unlike most teams in League One or the Championship who perhaps sacrifice doing things ''correctly'' in order to throw the kitchen sink at getting promoted. When they went up they were right at home (albeit after a short period of adjustment), indeed superior to a lot of teams such as say Bolton who had been in the Premiership for several seasons since the mid 90''s.Norwich by contrast went from Roeder''s loanee addiction and general destructiveness, to a complete rebuild after getting relegated, to almost going into administration, to another rebuild after Gunn was fired and then an almost unlikely second successive promotion after comparatively minimal strengthening. Unlike Swansea we needed to be up and at ''em and direct, anything else could well have seen us struggle. The mindset was that we had nothing to lose and survival was everything.Where I disagree with many on here is that the general football, and the forward play in particular, was excellent under Lambert. Compared to Hughton''s first season it was very good, it was exciting. I''d however argue that we didn''t get anywhere near the playing standards set in the Stringer and Walker eras; the former was the king of possession who build upon Ken Brown''s solid foundations, the latter bolted on a directness with goalscoring prowess and tactical nous.People tend to forget the poor games under Lambert, the difficulty we had retaining and recovering possession. Our passing wasn''t the best at times and the fluency of our counter-attacks was rarely that good. With Holt we were one of the best teams at scoring from crosses, but at the expense of being able to attack centrally along the ground or play a defence splitting pass. But the emotions generated by our direct approach and our attitude were more than enough to paper over the cracks, especially so after years out of the top flight.The question people have now is whether Hughton is capable of producing a side which meets or even exceeds the standards set by Walker and Stringer, something that Lambert didn''t achieve despite the euphoria he generated. If Hughton is capable, will he have the time to change? Or will he be like Brown and Stringer who had to make way for someone else to improve on what they had started? Back to the original point. How much more competitive it is and how much more money is at stake nowadays

maybe makes it difficult to draw comparisons between now and 20-25 years ago. The debt both Hughton and Lambert inherited is probably another significant factor, the effects of which would have infuenced Hughton even up until now. However Stringer and Walker both succeeded because they didn''t change things too radically when they took over, it was evolution rather than revolution. Did Hughton make a mistake when he took a reasonably good attacking side and made it so drastically more defensive?

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Hmm, some refreshingly well-thought out posts.

 

I think we''re seeing our current playing style in an overly-negative light, as we''ve just played Chelsea, Arsenal, Cardiff and Man U.  Leaving aside the Man U game, in the 3 games before we played well IMO. 

Against Chelsea we were well on course for a point or 3 when we were undone by over-committing to a corner late in the game and a series of mistakes.  At Arsenal we gave it a decent go, but were undone by some excellent finishing by them, which reminded me of the Man City away game under Lambert.  The Cardiff game was one of those where the chances don''t go in.

 

The Man U game on Tuesday was for me a combination of the ref gifting them the initial goal, and poor performances by several of the players who came in (Elmander, Wes, BJ) but even so, the scoreline was only 2-0 nearly to the end.

 

Saturday is likely to be a repeat of the Arsenal game, anything we get is a bonus.  The real work is to try to get the new, more attacking style of play working well from the game after Saturday.