What do people think to this theory...

[Nicko 0]

We all know CH doesn''t usually set up to attack. He usually sets up to stop the other team playing, which is a viable tactic on occasions.

How about this: CH asks the team to setup a certain way for an away game. The players play this way and come in at half time 2-0 down or whatever the score maybe. They then, disregard CH''s tactics and think ''we''re never going to win by playing this way''. This would explain the breath of fresh air we seem to see in the second half.

Does anybody think this is happening now?

[crabbycanary 2]

Err, no.

[JF 694]

How about this theory? Chris Hughton isn''t a manager, he is a coach.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="Nicko"]We all know CH doesn''t usually set up to attack. He usually sets up to stop the other team playing, which is a viable tactic on occasions. How about this: CH asks the team to setup a certain way for an away game. The players play this way and come in at half time 2-0 down or whatever the score maybe. They then, disregard CH''s tactics and think ''we''re never going to win by playing this way''. This would explain the breath of fresh air we seem to see in the second half. Does anybody think this is happening now?[/quote]

 

Haven''t seen that myself TBH.

 

Against WH at home he setup the "attacking" formation many have been calling for with 2 upfront, as a result they dominated the midfield with 60% possession, took the lead and probably should have won the game by half-time.  Fortunately we got a break for a change and when we equalized it put them on the back foot and us on the front foot, and we went on to win - football''s often like that.

 

This season in away games we haven''t set up to try to stop the other team playing.  That was much of last season.  But the reality is, if you concede a goal after 2 minutes away from home, you''re going to struggle.

[a1canary 0]

[quote user="Nicko"]We all know CH doesn''t usually set up to attack. He usually sets up to stop the other team playing, which is a viable tactic on occasions. How about this: CH asks the team to setup a certain way for an away game. The players play this way and come in at half time 2-0 down or whatever the score maybe. They then, disregard CH''s tactics and think ''we''re never going to win by playing this way''. This would explain the breath of fresh air we seem to see in the second half. Does anybody think this is happening now?[/quote]

If you consider the little insight that Hooper (think it was him) gave after the West Ham game about what went on in the dressing room at half time, then no, this theory doesn''t hold. 

[Nicko 0]

It was Snodgrass he came out and said that the players, notably John Ruddy vented their feelings. To me, that only proves the theory.

[Nicko 0]

Meant to say *who came out

[TCCANARY 263]

It doesn''t prove the theory, its what a lot of managers do, they leave the players alone for a few minutes to have a moan at each other then they speak to them, Wenger says that he listens at the door to hear what being said, Warnock said this morning on Talksport that he used to go into the showers and wait until the players had stopped shouting at each other before he would come in and shout at them all.