[Albion] Between two teams

[macbeth]

after the frustration from last night has passed, i’ve been having a think on my own theories about what is going wrong currently, and where that leaves us with FH.

it was actually something i posted on the ‘supported frustration’ thread, about not liking the way we play two men in midfield as it means we get outnumbered in the buildup and overrun for counter attacks, as well as it meaning we play this flat front four with the two strikers and wingers almost in a straight line across the pitch, which makes the box far too congested, especially when we play the bottom half teams who put ten men behind the ball, that got me thinking.

my theory right now, and i don’t know how this would go down given TB has spent a good few years turning us into a possession-based side, is that FH wants us to be a more counter-attacking team. it makes sense imo, thinking about that newcastle away game, where we executed our gameplan almost perfectly, and that fantastic first 45 at anfield, where we scored from a counter attack. that flat front four has advantages in pressing from the front, which is one of the few clear principles i can see from FH, and has the potential for some nice numerical overloads, but those would only really work in a situation where we play on the counter and can have a numerical advantage going forward. having four players minimum around a packed penalty area offers nothing.

which brings me onto what i think is going wrong now, and it seems quite obvious when you say it, and is kind of alluded to when people say we’re in a transition period right now. the example that comes to mind is the west ham home game last season under RDZ. there, something similar was going on. we had this flat front four trying to break down a packed box and it wasn’t working at all. there were other issues, such as groß and gilmour (i think?) being our midfield pair, and welbeck and ferguson playing together, neither of which ever really worked. but right now i think the problem is that we’re simply in between the team we were under RDZ and the team FH wants us to be (duh!). and my mind goes back to when FH was hired this summer and said he didn’t want to change too much too soon (rightly or wrongly, i don’t know) so, he’s brought in this flat front four, which suits a more counter attacking style imo, but the team still hasn’t moved on from a lot of the core RDZ ideals of wanting to build out from the back, trying to bait the press and wanting to pin teams into their own area, and FH hasn’t tried to force them to yet. this is why i think we look confused and lack identity a lot of times, we’re caught in between being two different types of teams. and as a result we’re seeing repeat after repeat of that west ham game from last season, where the current combination just isn’t working.

any thoughts? have i totally misread what’s going on? and would you be happy with us adopting a less possession-based style?

 

[tigertim68]

We don’t press high enough or with enough players to make it effective
we play a back 4 with one very attacking full back
we need 2 defensive midfielders to balance the team , and to protect the back 4
no one covers PE when he goes forward, and we get over run in midfield, this is what Southampton did to us ,
at the moment we have too many attackers who get in each others Way , there is no space to run into,
but our wide men need to stop cutting inside they just run into defenders, go on the outside and cross from the byline ,
basically the team is not balanced too many attacking players

 

[Guinness Boy]

after the frustration from last night has passed, i’ve been having a think on my own theories about what is going wrong currently, and where that leaves us with FH.

it was actually something i posted on the ‘supported frustration’ thread, about not liking the way we play two men in midfield as it means we get outnumbered in the buildup and overrun for counter attacks, as well as it meaning we play this flat front four with the two strikers and wingers almost in a straight line across the pitch, which makes the box far too congested, especially when we play the bottom half teams who put ten men behind the ball, that got me thinking.

my theory right now, and i don’t know how this would go down given TB has spent a good few years turning us into a possession-based side, is that FH wants us to be a more counter-attacking team. it makes sense imo, thinking about that newcastle away game, where we executed our gameplan almost perfectly, and that fantastic first 45 at anfield, where we scored from a counter attack. that flat front four has advantages in pressing from the front, which is one of the few clear principles i can see from FH, and has the potential for some nice numerical overloads, but those would only really work in a situation where we play on the counter and can have a numerical advantage going forward. having four players minimum around a packed penalty area offers nothing.

which brings me onto what i think is going wrong now, and it seems quite obvious when you say it, and is kind of alluded to when people say we’re in a transition period right now. the example that comes to mind is the west ham home game last season under RDZ. there, something similar was going on. we had this flat front four trying to break down a packed box and it wasn’t working at all. there were other issues, such as groß and gilmour (i think?) being our midfield pair, and welbeck and ferguson playing together, neither of which ever really worked. but right now i think the problem is that we’re simply in between the team we were under RDZ and the team FH wants us to be (duh!). and my mind goes back to when FH was hired this summer and said he didn’t want to change too much too soon (rightly or wrongly, i don’t know) so, he’s brought in this flat front four, which suits a more counter attacking style imo, but the team still hasn’t moved on from a lot of the core RDZ ideals of wanting to build out from the back, trying to bait the press and wanting to pin teams into their own area, and FH hasn’t tried to force them to yet. this is why i think we look confused and lack identity a lot of times, we’re caught in between being two different types of teams. and as a result we’re seeing repeat after repeat of that west ham game from last season, where the current combination just isn’t working.

any thoughts? have i totally misread what’s going on? and would you be happy with us adopting a less possession-based style?

Interesting stuff.

The players we bought, mainly attacking, mainly quick would be better suited to pressing from the front and countering with pace. If Weiffer and Baleba are both fit they can also win the ball back, even in a two.

Unfortunately we then have the defence. One full back who’s a proper defender, one who plays on the opposition corner flag and two of the slowest centre backs in the league. Totally unsuitable for a high line and front press with little midfield cover.

There’s a lot in what you say but our unbalanced transfer window hasn’t helped IMO.

 

[Chicken Run]

As much as I love the Albion and indeed played regular weekend footy till i was 25 i’m afraid i don’t understand the game enough to offer any insightful opinion, what i do know is I'm really pissed off with the points gained from the last 6 games, unacceptable imho!

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

My feeling is that whilst RDZ, and Potter on the most part, were system managers - they designed a system and trained/ acquired the players to do it - Fab is more the kind of manager that plays to the strengths of its individual players, and is flexible to counter the oppositions way of playing. More like a Marco Silva type of manager perhaps.

But it's way too early to be sure of that.

 

[Coldeanseagull]

As much as I love the Albion and indeed played regular weekend footy till i was 25 i’m afraid i don’t understand the game enough to offer any insightful opinion, what i do know is I'm really pissed off with the points gained lost from the last 6 games, unacceptable imho!

I done a little correction

 

[Chicken Run]

I done a little correction

I did think about saying that

 

[Hometownglory]

Well whatever the team was doing at the beginning of the season perhaps it would be wise to revert back to that. If he is trying to change it, it's lost us a criminal amount of points in favourable fixtures. Now we are hpping for any sort of result to stop this rot. The players certainly look more at sea now than they did during the beginning months... why change what isn't broken?

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

My feeling is that whilst RDZ, and Potter on the most part, were system managers - they designed a system and trained/ acquired the players to do it - Fab is more the kind of manager that plays to the strengths of its individual players, and is flexible to counter the oppositions way of playing. More like a Marco Silva type of manager perhaps.

But it's way too early to be sure of that.

If he’s playing to the strength of the players it’s to the detriment of the overall output. Just because we’ve got several wingers we shouldn’t be forcing them into the XI at the expense of central midfielders which is a glaring hole for us.

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Do we play a flat front 4?

 

[macbeth]

Do we play a flat front 4?

that’s how i see it. admittedly we see that when pedro or rutter play alongside welbeck, they will drop a little bit in behind in the buildup, but they’re still very much ‘up top’ in relation to the central midfielders. the wingers tend to play almost as high as the strikers when we get the ball, so what you often see is almost that ‘flat line’ shape across the front four

 

[Han Solo]

Graham Potter and RDZ both had the idea that games should be controlled and dominated whenever even remotely possible.

They had different approaches: GP is and will likely remain the only PL manager to play ~15 different formations in any given season. RDZ more of a "we take this system and try to reach perfection. But both wanted very similar things.

Hurz indeed seems to be less interested in control and yes there may be something of a culture clash right now.

Exactly what the "football style plans" from the club and the manager are not exactly vividly clear right now... but as unsexy as it seems we also need to understand that the business side of things play a part in this.

Those who normally benefit most from chaotic games are the wingers who get spaces and opportunities they otherwise doesn't get. And we have wingers to sell, so we want them to perform, which they sometimes struggle with when teams "over-control" games; see last season for some prime examples.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Graham Potter and RDZ both had the idea that games should be controlled and dominated whenever even remotely possible.

They had different approaches: GP is and will likely remain the only PL manager to play ~15 different formations in any given season. RDZ more of a "we take this system and try to reach perfection. But both wanted very similar things.

Hurz indeed seems to be less interested in control and yes there may be something of a culture clash right now.

Exactly what the "football style plans" from the club and the manager are not exactly vividly clear right now...

I think this is essentially the root of why I'm not fully on board the FH train. I loved how we played(when it worked...) under Potter and RDZ. I loved us controlling games. I don't like the ceding of control, particularly as at the moment it's not gaining anything in return.

 

[7dialssouthpaw]

I think we have more left-footers than we need
we need to change the soil at the training ground to prevent injuries
Brighton is not as much of a lure for foreign players (weather/food) - need to improve our due diligence

 

[Barnet Seagull]

I like what we're trying to do, particularly the speed of moving the ball forward and the flexible positioning in attack. I think we've caused everyone problems this season, albeit we've also caused ourselves plenty and it's been frustrating.

As I've said previously, due to the structured chaos we create, it's probably more likely to be successful long term once we're dialled in as it doesn't rely on the traditional methods of transition i.e. counter-attack or the "suck them in" forced transition style of RDZ.
Yes we cede the perception of control but it's all part of the drama.

So for now, I'm very much still in the "trust the process" gang.

...For those who want to nerd out, here's a read which does a pretty good job of describing the FH approach.

Fabian Hürzeler Tactics In Build-Up At Brighton & Hove Albion

Tactical analysis of Fabian Hürzeler tactics and Brighton's build-up tactics shares tactical analysis of Fabian Hürzeler's build-up play.

totalfootballanalysis.com

 

[Weststander]

We don’t press high enough or with enough players to make it effective
we play a back 4 with one very attacking full back
we need 2 defensive midfielders to balance the team , and to protect the back 4
no one covers PE when he goes forward, and we get over run in midfield, this is what Southampton did to us ,
at the moment we have too many attackers who get in each others Way , there is no space to run into,
but our wide men need to stop cutting inside they just run into defenders, go on the outside and cross from the byline ,
basically the team is not balanced too many attacking players

Excellent post.

I’d add there are one too many passes, on repeat, allowing the opposition to get set. After winning the ball in our half, MOR with options would instead pass to Baleba 5 yards away and vice versa. Gruda, Mitoma, Adingra, Minteh, all passing in very advanced positions, not taking responsibility, allowing Brentford to have an 11 man defence in place.

 

[deslynhamsmoustache1]

Excellent post.

I’d add there are one too many passes, on repeat, allowing the opposition to get set. After winning the ball in our half, MOR with options would instead pass to Baleba 5 yards away and vice versa. Gruda, Mitoma, Adingra, Minteh, all passing in very advanced positions, not taking responsibility, allowing Brentford to have an 11 man defence in place.

The speed of our transition and attack ?? That's the one thing I was expecting from a Hurzeler side. I was told when young that to determine the attacking intent of a team watch how quickly they take throw ins - ours seems like minutes to take, next to no movement and little intensity. It will be interesting to compare villa's tomorrow.

 

[Justice]

Excellent post.

I’d add there are one too many passes, on repeat, allowing the opposition to get set. After winning the ball in our half, MOR with options would instead pass to Baleba 5 yards away and vice versa. Gruda, Mitoma, Adingra, Minteh, all passing in very advanced positions, not taking responsibility, allowing Brentford to have an 11 man defence in place.

This or as I said we play a high a line for no reward yet take all the risk, the two who did the commentary on prime said exactly the same thing we aren’t quick enough in transition.

 

[GT49er]

Graham Potter and RDZ both had the idea that games should be controlled and dominated whenever even remotely possible.

They had different approaches: GP is and will likely remain the only PL manager to play ~15 different formations in any given season. RDZ more of a "we take this system and try to reach perfection. But both wanted very similar things.

Hurz indeed seems to be less interested in control and yes there may be something of a culture clash right now.

Exactly what the "football style plans" from the club and the manager are not exactly vividly clear right now... but as unsexy as it seems we also need to understand that the business side of things play a part in this.

Those who normally benefit most from chaotic games are the wingers who get spaces and opportunities they otherwise doesn't get. And we have wingers to sell, so we want them to perform, which they sometimes struggle with when teams "over-control" games; see last season for some prime examples.

Kick and rush was always good fun, wasn't it.

 

[trueblue]

Do we play a flat front 4?

Front 5 a lot of the time in the second half against Brentford. 4 -1- forty yard hole - 5 formation.

Players are very spread out, which seems like a nice idea to open teams up in theory. In reality, it meant they were individually carrying the ball from defence and midfield, eventually running into 3 opposition players and losing it. We used to hunt in packs and play quickly in intricate triangles/quadrangles on the attack. That seems to be disappearing.