[Albion] Potter's tactics against Newcastle?

[Munkfish]

Could have been seen as a 3-5-2 but Gross and Moder were false wing backs it was more Like a 3-4-3 Maupay and Welbeck wide leaving a hole for everyone else to run into. Newcastle didnt have a clue as to what was going on.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Thanks for posting.
[MENTION=23795]Hugo Rune[/MENTION]: what do you think in light of my response to you?

I think you described the formation perfectly. Asymmetrical, Moder & Maupay tucked in, Groß & Welbeck out wide.

Not sure how this will translate into PPP though. It’s clearly 3 at the back......or was it just 1?

 

[Sarisbury Seagull]

An example of why Pep likes him so much. He would have been pleased with that set up last night.

The genius positioning of Moder similar to Pep’s this season with Cancelo.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

I don't agree. Hodgson and Allardyce both parked the bus, ceding us space in front of them and on the wings, allowing us to create more chances, but of poorer quality because we were repeatedly shooting in or through packed spaces. Bruce's Newcastle were unambitious, but failed to pack the central spaces. Tactically, their approach was stupid and gave them the worst of both worlds, not positioning their midfield to help the low block, but still not pushing up on the ball to try to force turnovers. Whereas Palace and WBA parked the bus, Newcastle seemed to have parked Sonny Corleone's Lincoln Continental.

We missed 2 pens and an open goal against West Brom, with a goal chalked off to boot!

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

As these heat maps show, we almost completely avoided playing within the Newcastle area, forcing them to come out and engage with our forwards. Potters masterplan essentially destroyed thier plan to play a low block.

 

[Stat Brother]

As these heat maps show, we almost completely avoided playing within the Newcastle area, forcing them to come out and

View attachment 135135

You can superimpose Biss' onto Lallana's have the entire midfield covered but with no overlap.

That might be completely normal but I'm impressed anyway.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I'll have a go.

What we saw last night was an evolution on again from the Sheffield United and Palace games.

Against the low block we've struggled to score as teams sit in.

How do you beat a low block? Width. The gameplan was to overload the wide area on one side and create space through the middle.

Maupay playing as a False 9 meant the CBs were isolated or drawn out. Then the midfield and wide men, looked to overload out wide or in the half spaces, creating space in behind the Newcastle defence. The runs of whomever was coming from deep were flexible, either out wide or into the half space giving options. Wellbeck's goal was helped by the run of Moder into the half space, drawing out Lascelles.

Trossards was made by Wellbeck coming deep, drawing the fullback out and Moder attacking the half space and drawing the midfield and defence.

The hardest part was creating the space as Newcastle sat. There was lots of playing it around the back trying to draw Newcastle forward. When they eventually did, the plan as always is to quickly and incisively move the ball forward and overload.

A decent summary. And using only three at the back is much less risky when you know a team will deploy a low block, which Bruce did. Had he gone more positive and perhaps used Gayle or Caroll to keep Dunk busy it might have got interesting, but he seemed to resolutely stick to his tactics, perhaps fearing we'd then adapt and hit them on the break, which we probably would.

Game set and match Potter, this one,

 

[Machiavelli]

A decent summary. And using only three at the back is much less risky when you know a team will deploy a low block, which Bruce did. Had he gone more positive and perhaps used Gayle or Caroll to keep Dunk busy it might have got interesting, but he seemed to resolutely stick to his tactics, perhaps fearing we'd then adapt and hit them on the break, which we probably would.

Game set and match Potter, this one,

I was expecting Bruce to deploy a low/deep block, but am not entirely convinced that he did.

 

[Barnet Seagull]

I was expecting Bruce to deploy a low/deep block, but am not entirely convinced that he did.

I'm not entirely convinced what the Newcastle plan was either. I think it was meant to be a diamond but the Centre mids sat deeper and the forwards were out wide; there didn't seem to be any recognised striker, all I saw was a lot of bodies centrally.

 

[Mellotron]

We basically played with just three defenders. No wonder Bruce got confused. Master class from Potter.

I guess it’s the sort of thing we need to do when the other side has no intention whatsoever of trying to attack us.

 

[MJsGhost]

A lovely article on football365 from Daniel Storey - he touched on it in the latest Totally Football Show podcast

https://www.football365.com/news/premier-league-winners-losers-newcastle-steve-bruce

It's not paywalled, so I assume I'm OK to post an excerpt at least (I'd recommend reading the whole thing):

On a truncated Premier League weekend there was still plenty to praise (mostly Brighton) and plenty to bemoan (mostly Steve Bruce)…

Winners

Brighton, the opposite of Newcastle
If you’ll forgive me for going all Marks & Spencer, this wasn’t just a 3-0 win. It was emphatic proof that Brighton and Newcastle United are two opposites, two extremes on the football spectrum that provoke two entirely opposing emotional reactions from the neutral.

Brighton are the provincial club without the rich history of winning trophies that currently have the best first XI and deepest squad in their history and are on their longest top-flight run too. Newcastle are not so much a sleeping giant as one knocked to the floor by a series of self-administered punches to the face. They have been in worse slumps than this, not least in the late 1970s and early 1980s when they spent six straight seasons in the second tier, but it is hard to imagine a time when this club has so consistently infuriated its own supporters.

Brighton have one of the most progressive, forward-thinking managers in the Premier League, whose route to the top came via Ostersund and Swansea and who is in his first top-flight managerial role. Newcastle have Steve Bruce, now on his fifth Premier League club and who is accused by supporters of resorting to risk-averse football which lacks tactical courage and innovation.

Brighton have an owner who is prepared to spend freely on augmenting the playing staff but who is constantly looking to tomorrow, buying young with the aim of selling high and reinvesting in pursuit of a sustainable future. Newcastle spend money on sticking plasters required by self-imposed crises, reacting to situations rather than proactively designing their own future.

Brighton have won the two games between the two clubs this season, scoring six times and having 12 shots on target. Newcastle have lost the two games between the two clubs this season, failing to score and mustering a single shot on target.

Brighton and Newcastle may occupy consecutive places in the Premier League table, but that is where the similarities end...

​

 

[Hugo Rune]

I'll have a go.

What we saw last night was an evolution on again from the Sheffield United and Palace games.

Against the low block we've struggled to score as teams sit in.

How do you beat a low block? Width. The gameplan was to overload the wide area on one side and create space through the middle.

Maupay playing as a False 9 meant the CBs were isolated or drawn out. Then the midfield and wide men, looked to overload out wide or in the half spaces, creating space in behind the Newcastle defence. The runs of whomever was coming from deep were flexible, either out wide or into the half space giving options. Wellbeck's goal was helped by the run of Moder into the half space, drawing out Lascelles.

Trossards was made by Wellbeck coming deep, drawing the fullback out and Moder attacking the half space and drawing the midfield and defence.

The hardest part was creating the space as Newcastle sat. There was lots of playing it around the back trying to draw Newcastle forward. When they eventually did, the plan as always is to quickly and incisively move the ball forward and overload.

Great analysis but there is an implication in your premise that we have perhaps struggled to create chances against the likes of Sheff Utd and Palace.

I believe that we created better chances against those two than against Newcastle. The difference was ‘top six’ finishing by Tross, Welbeck and Maupay instead of League 2 finishing.

 

[vagabond]

As these heat maps show, we almost completely avoided playing within the Newcastle area, forcing them to come out and engage with our forwards. Potters masterplan essentially destroyed thier plan to play a low block.

View attachment 135134

View attachment 135135

View attachment 135136

Brilliant post.

It’s been said that GP played what is also known as a “WM” formation (where in training defenders wear a “W” and attackers an “M”). Which aligns with your heatmap above.

The manager got it absolutely spot on tactically and the players executed it to perfection. Poor old Bruce didn’t have a clue how to counter it. Having that aligned with setting up the squad as if it were an away match, staying at a hotel and so on, and you have to give 10 out of 10 to manager and coaching staff alike.

 

[Peter Grummit]

We basically played with just three defenders. No wonder Bruce got confused. Master class from Potter.

Potter looked at the measly forward options the barcodes had and thought: "we only need 3 decent defenders". So we played a fluid 3-5-2, running rings around them in midfield.

Lallana revelled in his deeper role, he has the ability to keep the ball and play clever passes to help unlock the press or, further forward, find the likes of Trossard in those space pockets.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

Great analysis but there is an implication in your premise that we have perhaps struggled to create chances against the likes of Sheff Utd and Palace.

I believe that we created better chances against those two than against Newcastle. The difference was ‘top six’ finishing by Tross, Welbeck and Maupay instead of League 2 finishing.

Agreed. Results drive the narratives, but while tactically different, thought we played as well against Villa, Palace and West Brom with only 1 point to show for it. Both Allardyce and Hodgson merely had great fortune that they weren’t on the end of similar 3 goal margin beatings as Bruce has just been handed. To be fair to Allardyce, first half West Brom at least were the most adventurous out of the 3 approaches against us.

But then for some, and you see it across these boards, results are far more important than performance, progress, or whatever else. For most 32 pts is nowhere near a fair reflection of how good we’ve been this season. I’m not talking about luck or good fortune, just outright performing well.

 

[sydney]

Better that than Bruce without a space suit

 

[Guinness Boy]

I was expecting Bruce to deploy a low/deep block, but am not entirely convinced that he did.

I'm not entirely convinced what the Newcastle plan was either. I think it was meant to be a diamond but the Centre mids sat deeper and the forwards were out wide; there didn't seem to be any recognised striker, all I saw was a lot of bodies centrally.

"Low block" may be the wrong modern phrase but in dinosaur language they parked the bus. As Barnet says their midfield was FAR too deep and they showed no ambition at all.

They have been playing a diamond recently and this looked like they had tried to sit deep in that same shape.

Potter learned from the middle of the field being comprehensively blocked up by the likes of Sheffield Utd. As I said, credit to him.

 

[Eeyore]

Great analysis but there is an implication in your premise that we have perhaps struggled to create chances against the likes of Sheff Utd and Palace.

I believe that we created better chances against those two than against Newcastle. The difference was ‘top six’ finishing by Tross, Welbeck and Maupay instead of League 2 finishing.

Yup. Albion did things differently on Saturday. But the reason for the win was the taking of some opportunities which were nothing more than, well, opportunities ( a couple almost half chances).

It was lovely to see, and frustrating in equal measure. If only a small number of other, and better, chances had been taken like that previously we'd be more than safe now. We'd be mid-table and looking up.

But what I like is the ability to look at matches coming up and write of none of them as opportunities to get something from. That's why the current management has given me so much confidence at present.

Sure, Manchester United are good. Sure, we should come away empty handed. But it's not a match that a point would cause me a shock from.

 

[Barnet Seagull]

Great analysis but there is an implication in your premise that we have perhaps struggled to create chances against the likes of Sheff Utd and Palace.

I believe that we created better chances against those two than against Newcastle. The difference was ‘top six’ finishing by Tross, Welbeck and Maupay instead of League 2 finishing.

I don't dispute the finishing was better but I also think that if we'd been 1-1, you'd have seen us create a lot more in the final 30 mins as we chased the game. I think we'd have had a hatful of better quality chances as the intensity dropped, we just didn't need to.
The marked difference was the way we got at Newcastle and overloaded them out wide. Against Sheff Utd in particular, we overloaded out wide only towards the end of the game as we had struggled for large portions of the match to break them down through the centre. For 70 odd minutes we were trying to walk it through them which was painful to watch.

 

[Hugo Rune]

I don't dispute the finishing was better but I also think that if we'd been 1-1, you'd have seen us create a lot more in the final 30 mins as we chased the game. I think we'd have had a hatful of better quality chances as the intensity dropped, we just didn't need to.
The marked difference was the way we got at Newcastle and overloaded them out wide. Against Sheff Utd in particular, we overloaded out wide only towards the end of the game as we had struggled for large portions of the match to break them down through the centre. For 70 odd minutes we were trying to walk it through them which was painful to watch.

I think you're right, we had a few more gears to go in but didn't really need to, chasing the game would have been interesting.

I think we created 4 big chances against Newcastle (Moder 2, Maupay 2) which is quite low for us (Tross & Welbeck goals were individual brilliance). Back to the Sheff Utd home game, I've got it down as 8 big chances (Connolly 2, Maupay 2, Webster 1, Welbeck 1, Tross 1, AJ 1) but countless more shots go in at range with a number of deflections that fall perfectly for Sheff Utd. (none of this walking it into the net myth).

I get that Potter did very well to lure the Newcastle defence out of their parked bus but Sheff Utd would have been at least a 4-1 victory with Premier League level finishing from us: https://youtu.be/MtK8RhsBQk4