Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Yellow Wal

Be your own man today Neil.

Recommended Posts

I have been left frustrated all season watching the two inverted winger set up fail us badly and would put that as the main reason we are where we are and why our attacking play and strikers have looked so bad.

You were a winger with a very good and dangerous cross.

Please play with two conventional wingers in the way that you know a winger should play.

If you must play Snodgrass, play him where Gordon Strachan plays him for Scotland, where he has played well, in the centre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Norfolk Mustard"]I''d love to see what Yellow Wall suggests though; Snodgrass central and proper wingers...[/quote]Proper wingers to provide ammunition for our prolific target man?Oh....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear Morty, I didn''t realise you couldn''t play wingers without a prolific target man.

I actually thought they were allowed to provide service for more mobile strikers as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Oh dear Morty, I didn''t realise you couldn''t play wingers without a prolific target man.

I actually thought they were allowed to provide service for more mobile strikers as well.[/quote]Funny, you seem to know everything else.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Adams has been his own man and won just 1 point out of a possible 15 scoring just 2 goals....Thanks Neil, good luck working with the youth again next season...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="CanaryOne"]Adams is worse than Hughton and that takes some doing .
[/quote]

 

Agreed. He lost the plot in the last quarter at Stamford Bridge and his approach to this game is equally baffling and suggests that he hasn''t found it yet.

 

Elmander, a non-scoring, ageing journeyman who will be off tomorrow in the starting eleven for what was expected to be a bit of an exhibition (or at least attacking) game for the faithful to be able to leave CR on a high note.

 

I don''t beleeeeeve it.

 

Quite frankly, NA could not have done a worse job in his brief stint. It was a difficult ask admittedly, but I believe that he has done more harm than good by his treatment of some of the "star" players who many of us hoped would at least be the bedrock of our fight-back next season. I am particularly referring to Fer and Hooper and I don''t totally discount RVW or even Bassong for that matter.

 

I wouldn''t want Adams anywhere near our manager''s chair next season. He makes Clueless Chris look like a tactical genius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He might as well have had Hughton as his coach because he changed nothing.

It hadn''t worked all season but still we set out with two inverted wingers ........... and that was where all the problems started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Yellow Wall"]He might as well have had Hughton as his coach because he changed nothing.

It hadn''t worked all season but still we set out with two inverted wingers ........... and that was where all the problems started.[/quote]
But if inverted wingers are such a massive failure, why do so many teams and mangers persist with them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only teams that successfully play with inverted wingers are those who have monopolised the best players and have quality throughout their team.

How many teams play with more direct wingers who look to get behind defences and provide ammunition for strikers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yellow Wall: The only teams that successfully play with inverted wingers are those who have monopolised the best players and have quality throughout their team.

How many teams play with more direct wingers who look to get behind defences and provide ammunition for strikers?[/quote]
Well based on the first XI''s from todays games:
Cardiff
Chelsea
Fulham (1)
Palace
Newcastle
Sunderland
Swansea
West Ham
Aston Villa 
Norwich
West Brom (1)
Stoke (1)
Man Utd.
13 out of 20 or 65% of teams play at least 1 inverted winger. 50% of teams play two inverted wingers. 
And some teams (Man City, Spurs, Sothampton) didn''t even play any wingers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
[quote user="Phillip J Fry"]Yellow Wall: The only teams that successfully play with inverted wingers are those who have monopolised the best players and have quality throughout their team.

How many teams play with more direct wingers who look to get behind defences and provide ammunition for strikers?[/quote]
Well based on the first XI''s from todays games:
Cardiff
Chelsea
Fulham (1)
Palace
Newcastle
Sunderland
Swansea
West Ham
Aston Villa 
Norwich
West Brom (1)
Stoke (1)
Man Utd.
13 out of 20 or 65% of teams play at least 1 inverted winger. 50% of teams play two inverted wingers. 
And some teams (Man City, Spurs, Sothampton) didn''t even play any wingers.
[/quote]

Does that make it right though?

Does a manager stick with a style even though it is obvious it doesn''t work?

Snodgrass is over hyped in my opinion. And we may never know whether playing him on the left would have benefited the club or him.

Redmond appears to have the ability and pace to go past players but certainly can''t play that crucial final ball because he has to stop and pull it back to his good foot.

This tactic hasn''t worked all season and yet despite Redmond causing panic in the Chelsea defence by playing up the middle, today he was back in the usual unsuccessful position.

I gave Adams the benefit of the doubt until today but unless that line up was named just to earn us the £1.8M by staying third from bottom, then he showed no ambition and real naiveity in his line up and tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Philip,

Remembering we have virtually played that way all season - I do not have anywhere as much of a problem with one inverted winger (especially if he is quick enough and good enough) as we still have some width in attack. We operated with one very good inverted winger a few seasons ago but he was complimented with good width on the right.

Cardiff - Mats Daehli is a left winger/left midfielder - he played today. Cardiff have also often used Wilfied Zaha and his introduction against us proved to be part of our downfall in that game.

Chelsea - the quality of their players allow them to build attacks quite often at will and get behind defences.

Fulham - (1)

Palace - Tom Ince played today

Newcastle - Yoan Gouffran is a winger

Sunderland - Adam Johnson

Swansea - Nathan Dyer, Wayne Routledge

............ are you saying these players all play as inverted wingers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry Philip that was only the first seven on your list - the eight team is West Ham who had Stewart Downing today and also have Matt Jarvis who has played many times this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Cardiff - Mats Daehli is a left winger/left midfielder - he played today.[/quote]
Yes, on the right as an inverted winger, Bellamy played on the left.
[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Cardiff have also often used Wilfied Zaha and his introduction against us proved to be part of our downfall in that game.[/quote]
Yes and he has almost always played on the left as an inverted winger.
[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Palace - Tom Ince played today[/quote]
On the right, as an inverted winger
 
[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Newcastle - Yoan Gouffran is a winger[/quote]
Who plays on the left despite being right footed.
[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Sunderland - Adam Johnson[/quote] 
Left footed, plays on the right.
[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Nathan Dyer, Wayne Routledge [/quote]
Well, one''s inverted obviously Both are right footed and one (usually Routledge) plays on the left. I will admit I made a mistake on this one as I put Swansea down as playing two inverted wingers rather than 1. Despite this, playing inverted wingers still seems relatively common, wouldn''t you agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes Philip I will agree.

The only difference being that in most cases that you have cited it worked, for at least part of the season.

It has not worked for us - would you not agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Yes Philip I will agree.

The only difference being that in most cases that you have cited it worked, for at least part of the season.

It has not worked for us - would you not agree?[/quote]
Oh most definitely but I think it''s more a flaw in how the wingers have been utilised rather than a flaw in the theory itself. Pilkington, for example, has often played on the ''wrong'' side throughout his Norwich career yet, by and large, has been successful. Why is this? Because Pilkington has a variation to his game that makes playing on the ''wrong'' side more viable. He is equally adept at cutting inside to shoot, moving the ball onto his right for an in-swinging cross or driving down the outside to try and cut the ball back. Most inverted wingers you see show this variation and whilst some prefer one course of action over another (i.e. one winger might like to cut in more, one might like to play early inswinging crosses, some delayed) all (successful) inverted wingers show, in different degrees, a level of variation in their attacks. It''s what makes them such great attacking options as they are so hard for the full-back to read.
What happened at Norwich, I think, is that the wingers have either been told not to play with this level of variation (Redmond) OR they have been pandered too and allowed to ''get away'' with simplistic attacks (Snodgrass).
 Redmond against Southampton showed himself to be very adept at cutting inside to shoot, putting in in-swinging crosses or darting across the outside to put in a cross with his weaker foot. Unsurprisingly, Southampton was probably Redmond''s best performance and it remains the only league game he has scored in. He should''ve pushed on from there, developing into a multiple-threat inverted winger, who could shoot and cross both inside the full-back and outside. Instead he alarmingly regressed, relying too much on shots or poor in-swingers and completely neglecting the possibility of going on the outside. I can only think this was a deliberate instruction and if so, it is a damning indictment of the coaches trusted with his development.
Snodgrass was the opposite. He was allowed to do what he wanted which was (generally) carry the ball well into an attacking zone and then put in a poor in-swinging cross which became very easy for the full-back to read. It''s not a coincidence that Snodgrass has caused the most issues to full-backs the few times he adds variation to his attacks, feinting inside before driving outside. He should have not only have done that more, but he needed to improve his crossing generally, which (both when cutting the ball back on the outside and attempting in-swingers) has been very poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip, that is an excellent summation with which I can only agree.

I was disappointed after Josh Murphy was interviewed following his game against Fulham where he provided the cross from the byline for Snodgrass to head home.

When it was mentioned about getting in the supply he made it very clear that he was encouraged to come inside and shoot. This same advice I feel is what Redmond has been receiving most of the season and after Southampton, where Boric really should have saved his effort, his shooting and his variation has been poor.

Redmond is a talented young player but, my goodness, he needs some good advice, coaching and development so that he can truly fulfill his potential.

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...