[Albion] Bye-bye PotterBall, hello DeZerbiWay

[giveusfalmerplease]

I claim the right to officially name our new style of play "DeZerbiWay". Sort of rolls off the tongue nicely .

I think the main difference between PotterBall and DeZerbiWay is we have moved away from mainly wing play and passing down the middle more, encouraging more direct shots and I even see the goalies doing more kick-outs rather than 99% play from the back.

Obviously the Charlton result shows we still have room for improvement but on our day we can now definitely beat any other team in the league now. We may even need to change the rules of the staying up tracker because a home match against the top 10 is no longer an assumed loss. In fact let's BAN THE STAYING UP TRACKER, from now on we should only follow the Europe tracker...

 

[A1X]

We may even need to change the rules of the relegation tracker because a home match against the top 10 is no longer an assumed loss. In fact let's BAN THE STAYING UP TRACKER, from now on we should only follow the Europe tracker...

Someone’s been on the booze early this morning

 

[giveusfalmerplease]

Someone’s been on the booze early this morning

Drunk on success

 

[A mex eyecan]

I claim the right to officially name our new style of play "DeZerbiWay". Sort of rolls off the tongue nicely .

I think the main difference between PotterBall and DeZerbiWay is we have moved away from mainly wing play and passing down the middle more, encouraging more direct shots and I even see the goalies doing more kick-outs rather than 99% play from the back.

Obviously the Charlton result shows we still have room for improvement but on our day we can now definitely beat any other team in the league now. We may even need to change the rules of the staying up tracker because a home match against the top 10 is no longer an assumed loss. In fact let's BAN THE STAYING UP TRACKER, from now on we should only follow the Europe tracker...

can i have a pint of what you’ve been on?, oh and do you need any paracetamol this morn8ng?

 

[Machiavelli]

I claim the right to officially name our new style of play "DeZerbiWay". Sort of rolls off the tongue nicely .

I think the main difference between PotterBall and DeZerbiWay is we have moved away from mainly wing play and passing down the middle more, encouraging more direct shots and I even see the goalies doing more kick-outs rather than 99% play from the back.

Obviously the Charlton result shows we still have room for improvement but on our day we can now definitely beat any other team in the league now. We may even need to change the rules of the staying up tracker because a home match against the top 10 is no longer an assumed loss. In fact let's BAN THE STAYING UP TRACKER, from now on we should only follow the Europe tracker...

Hadn't noticed the wing-play versus middle. Do you -- or anyone else -- have any heat maps to support this claim? Disagree about the kick-outs versus play out from the back: haven't noticed any difference on that front but, again, willing to change my view if there's some robust stats to support it; on that, however, one big difference is that under RdZ, we take more risks in playing out from the back, deliberately attempting to draw in the press so that, if/when we play through it, there's more space to exploit.

 

[Simster]

I can't say I've noticed much difference at all between Potterball at its best and life under RDZ.

Potter took 3 seasons to get the team playing like this, and that path was a frustrating one at times. The best thing about RDZ is that he's managed to keep the team doing as well as they had been previously. No learning curve required. Pleasing.

 

[WATFORD zero]

The only differences I've noticed,

We are taking more risks at the back, drawing the opposing team on more

We are moving the ball quicker in the midfield with a lot of one/two touch

We are scoring goals

Think that's about it

 

[Swansman]

Some of these claims are quite simply false.

Sanchez definitely does not make more long goal kicks now than under Potter. It's the opposite, and with no small margin.

It is true that more of the build-up play now happens centrally. With the opposition in defensive positions, the boys would under GP circulate the ball between defenders, including the wing-backs, to find some angle where you could pass between the lines. With RDZ the strategy is to have the central defenders standing on the ball until one or two opponents bites and then you can play through the lines into the space those players left. These strategies are different, but with pretty similar flaws and flavours: it works nicely as long as the opponent says "ok, I'll bite and go pressure". Against the likes of Spurs, Nottingham and Villa it turns a lot more difficult. They just stood their in their defensive positions thinking "ok, you can stand there with the ball underneath your foot... good luck scoring any goals that way". For this to truly change, the team needs more players able to carry it past opponents, decreasing the need for available spaces to pass it into.

Past the build-up play, RDZs does not have the boys playing more centrally than before. The main strategy to create chances is to have the striker and the AMC dropping deeper making the opponent push their back line higher which creates spaces for the wingers (Mitoma and March usually) to run in behind it - sometimes centrally but usually staying on the wing. This is slightly different from how GPs boys usually (I say usually because GP - for good and bad - was more tactically flexible) played where there was less emphasis on these runs and more on getting someone like Trossard to challenge defenders and shoot/play a one-two/a short through ball past the defense.

GP and RDZ was/is getting similar results from similar types of games while struggling in similar types of games, though of course historical revisionism have somehow created the false illusion of GPs Brighton creating zero chances per game with Dunk and Webster passing the ball in between eachother for eternity... which just wasn't the case. The reason for the similar results against similar oppositions are quite simple: the players remain the same, with the same set of strengths and weaknesses: players like Gross and Lallana remain excellent playmakers without the explosivity to carry the ball past multiple players, Trossard remains a player with brilliant technique but without the cleverness to find open spaces if the opposition try to shut him down, and so forth.

 

[Simster]

The only differences I've noticed,

We are taking more risks at the back, drawing the opposing team on more

We are moving the ball quicker in the midfield with a lot of one/two touch

We are scoring goals

Think that's about it

Nah. We've had no trouble scoring goals all season!

I do think your other observations are fair though, come to think of it. We do move the ball on quickly. No player really holds onto the ball for any length of time. That's the biggest difference for me. I don't think Potter cared how long our players held the ball, as long as we had possession. With RDZ, it's like he's instilled a mindset that says if you don't know immediately what you want to do with the ball, move it on.

 

[Icy Gull]

Biggest difference I’ve seen is that we break much quicker and look alot more dangerous when attacking. The lovely dicking about at the back is more risky too

 

[Pondicherry]

Our three great leaps forward. Poyet was 3 touch. Potter was 2 touch. De Zerbi is one touch. I have no evidence to back this up.

 

[CaptainDaveUK]

Quick passing centrally through the press is more prevalent under DeZerbi. It’s riskier but it creates more attacking scenarios where the opposition defenders are running back towards their own goal.

 

[SeagullsoverLondon]

Our three great leaps forward. Poyet was 3 touch. Potter was 2 touch. De Zerbi is one touch. I have no evidence to back this up.

I think there was a Lallana stat shown at half time which I think said something like 44 touches and 30 completed passes, suggesting two thirds of the time he was playing one touch football.

I think that makes a difference in trying to recycle the ball quickly.

 

[drew]

Didn't all three goals come from out wide? Cross for Lallana, Estupian low cross for the OG and Solly cutting inside from out wide?

 

[zefarelly]

Biggest difference is confidence and bravery over pragmatism.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Biggest difference is confidence and bravery over pragmatism.

It's easy to be confident and brave when you're playing a team as shit as Southampton were.

 

[dazzer6666]

Some of these claims are quite simply false.

Sanchez definitely does not make more long goal kicks now than under Potter. It's the opposite, and with no small margin.

It is true that more of the build-up play now happens centrally. With the opposition in defensive positions, the boys would under GP circulate the ball between defenders, including the wing-backs, to find some angle where you could pass between the lines. With RDZ the strategy is to have the central defenders standing on the ball until one or two opponents bites and then you can play through the lines into the space those players left. These strategies are different, but with pretty similar flaws and flavours: it works nicely as long as the opponent says "ok, I'll bite and go pressure". Against the likes of Spurs, Nottingham and Villa it turns a lot more difficult. They just stood their in their defensive positions thinking "ok, you can stand there with the ball underneath your foot... good luck scoring any goals that way". For this to truly change, the team needs more players able to carry it past opponents, decreasing the need for available spaces to pass it into.

Past the build-up play, RDZs does not have the boys playing more centrally than before. The main strategy to create chances is to have the striker and the AMC dropping deeper making the opponent push their back line higher which creates spaces for the wingers (Mitoma and March usually) to run in behind it - sometimes centrally but usually staying on the wing. This is slightly different from how GPs boys usually (I say usually because GP - for good and bad - was more tactically flexible) played where there was less emphasis on these runs and more on getting someone like Trossard to challenge defenders and shoot/play a one-two/a short through ball past the defense.

GP and RDZ was/is getting similar results from similar types of games while struggling in similar types of games, though of course historical revisionism have somehow created the false illusion of GPs Brighton creating zero chances per game with Dunk and Webster passing the ball in between eachother for eternity... which just wasn't the case. The reason for the similar results against similar oppositions are quite simple: the players remain the same, with the same set of strengths and weaknesses: players like Gross and Lallana remain excellent playmakers without the explosivity to carry the ball past multiple players, Trossard remains a player with brilliant technique but without the cleverness to find open spaces if the opposition try to shut him down, and so forth.

Yep. The 'standing on it' didn't work v Charlton at all either - they were quite happy to stand still and wait for us to move. My (unproven) sense is that under DeZ we are a) moving the ball faster, risking one-touch passes rather than making more certain and b) we wait until the press is right on top of the player with the ball (leading a few in the stands to piss their pants because they still don't get it)

 

[AstroSloth]

I can't say I've noticed much difference at all between Potterball at its best and life under RDZ.

Potter took 3 seasons to get the team playing like this, and that path was a frustrating one at times. The best thing about RDZ is that he's managed to keep the team doing as well as they had been previously. No learning curve required. Pleasing.

Potter preferred players always to be playing passes quickly from the back.

De Zerbi asks his CBs to slow it down and draw out the opposition before playing balls into our CMs, the false 9 who has dropped or our fullbacks.

It's a small change but really noticeable, you could see Colwill strolling with the ball at times, that's because he's been asked to do it. The Saints striker pushes up to press and the ball gets played into Caicedo or Groß bypassing the initial press.

 

[deslynhamsmoustache1]

Yep. The 'standing on it' didn't work v Charlton at all either - they were quite happy to stand still and wait for us to move. My (unproven) sense is that under DeZ we are a) moving the ball faster, risking one-touch passes rather than making more certain and b) we wait until the press is right on top of the player with the ball (leading a few in the stands to piss their pants because they still don't get it)

This. possession, passing, pace and purpose. We are quicker and more purposeful in attack now.

 

[Bodian]

I think there was a Lallana stat shown at half time which I think said something like 44 touches and 30 completed passes, suggesting two thirds of the time he was playing one touch football.

I think that makes a difference in trying to recycle the ball quickly.

Not sure that 44 touches means exactly that? I always thought that the 'touch' stat related to moves? So, if a player traps the ball, knocks it to his right, then passes it - I assumed that was one touch for stats purposes rather than three? But I don't actually know!