[Football] Ranieri genius

[hans kraay fan club]

I'm a little perplexed by the circle-jerk over Ranieri in a load of today's post-mortem threads.

Yes, he made changes that altered the course of the game. He had to - to rectify the ridiculous unbalanced side he sent out at the start! People accuse Hughton of being defensive - Ranieri started last night with a back 5, and another centre back (Chambers) in front of them, and with his best, and most creative player (Cairney) on the bench.

Even with six defenders on the field they still couldn't cope, because they were unable to stem the flow of deliveries into attacking areas.

It wasn't genius to bring Cairney on for a surplus defender, at 2-0 down - it was an enforced, and obvious swap - that would anyway have been too little, too late, if Pröpper's drive had gone in under the bar - and one that he shouldn't have ever needed to make

(Credit for making the change quite as early as he did though - that is something we could learn from.)

 

[Official Old Man]

(Credit for making the change quite as early as he did though - that is something we could learn from.)

Which sums up what everybody is talking about. He could see it all going wrong and so did something after 27 minutes and one at half time.
CH changes 71 & 77 minutes when the entire Putney end could see we were in trouble.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Which sums up what everybody is talking about. He could see it all going wrong and so did something after 27 minutes and one at half time.
CH changes 71 & 77 minutes when the entire Putney end could see we were in trouble.

The one at HT was enforced as Schurrle went off injured.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I'm a little perplexed by the circle-jerk over Ranieri in a load of today's post-mortem threads.

Yes, he made changes that altered the course of the game. He had to - to rectify the ridiculous unbalanced side he sent out at the start! People accuse Hughton of being defensive - Ranieri started last night with a back 5, and another centre back (Chambers) in front of them, and with his best, and most creative player (Cairney) on the bench.

Even with six defenders on the field they still couldn't cope, because they were unable to stem the flow of deliveries into attacking areas.

It wasn't genius to bring Cairney on for a surplus defender, at 2-0 down - it was an enforced, and obvious swap - that would anyway have been too little, too late, if Pröpper's drive had gone in under the bar - and one that he shouldn't have ever needed to make

(Credit for making the change quite as early as he did though - that is something we could learn from.)

Gross (not Pascal) overreaction to 45 minutes that went wrong from some on here. Some people seem to expect Mr H to have made changes before even Ranieri did anything.


Just a quick thought - is the team bus big enough to block the goal completely? If yes, could we name the bus driver as a substitute?

Just a bit of whimsy on a dark day. This and all the political shenanigans is getting me down.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

I'm a little perplexed by the circle-jerk over Ranieri in a load of today's post-mortem threads.

Yes, he made changes that altered the course of the game. He had to - to rectify the ridiculous unbalanced side he sent out at the start! People accuse Hughton of being defensive - Ranieri started last night with a back 5, and another centre back (Chambers) in front of them, and with his best, and most creative player (Cairney) on the bench.

Even with six defenders on the field they still couldn't cope, because they were unable to stem the flow of deliveries into attacking areas.

It wasn't genius to bring Cairney on for a surplus defender, at 2-0 down - it was an enforced, and obvious swap - that would anyway have been too little, too late, if Pröpper's drive had gone in under the bar - and one that he shouldn't have ever needed to make

(Credit for making the change quite as early as he did though - that is something we could learn from.)

Disagree.

He experimented, failed.

Adapted, reviewed what we were doing and posed questions we couldn’t answer.

Good management and use of personnel. Tactically he was better on the night.

Genius? I don’t know, but credit is due IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Betfair Bozo]

I'm a little perplexed by the circle-jerk over Ranieri in a load of today's post-mortem threads.

Yes, he made changes that altered the course of the game. He had to - to rectify the ridiculous unbalanced side he sent out at the start! People accuse Hughton of being defensive - Ranieri started last night with a back 5, and another centre back (Chambers) in front of them, and with his best, and most creative player (Cairney) on the bench.

Even with six defenders on the field they still couldn't cope, because they were unable to stem the flow of deliveries into attacking areas.

It wasn't genius to bring Cairney on for a surplus defender, at 2-0 down - it was an enforced, and obvious swap - that would anyway have been too little, too late, if Pröpper's drive had gone in under the bar - and one that he shouldn't have ever needed to make

(Credit for making the change quite as early as he did though - that is something we could learn from.)

Exactly. Lauding a man for doing his job, eventually, is very telling.

 

[dingodan]

Tbh he probably just told them he'd rather they lose 4 - 0 trying to play, rather than 2 - 0 playing the way they are. They went out with a much greater sense of freedom in the second half. They were bold and fearless. Apart from telling his players to exploit our left back position (which they did repeatedly in the second half), I think most of what he did at half time was get in their heads. It was their change in mentality which changed the game, more than any particular tactical adjustment.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Disagree.

He experimented, failed.

Adapted, reviewed what we were doing and posed questions we couldn’t answer.

Good management and use of personnel. Tactically he was better on the night.

Genius? I don’t know, but credit is due IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, but he is a genius:

Ranieri has peripheral vision (with a strong sense of knowing how to solve problems)
Hughton has tunnel vision (usually centered around stopping goals)

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

Hughton got us to half time unlucky not to be 4-0 up. He has to get credit for that. He orchestrated the approach and the players implemented it perfectly. We were superb.

The second half we conceded very early doors. The players then proceeded to bottle it. I feel like Hughton deserves credit for the good half and the players need to shoulder the blame for the awful second half. THEY bottled it. IMO

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I agree, but he is a genius:

Ranieri has peripheral vision (with a strong sense of knowing how to solve problems)

If that is true, why does his £200m squad only have 12 points from the 12 games since he took over?

After-timing is easy. He picked a terrible line-up (tactical genius?), failed to correct it until they were 2-0 down at home (genius?), in a game that would have been all over, had either of Murray's two decent late chances, or Pröpper's drive gone in. There is good reason, why Fulham were roundly booed off at half-time, and there were not many Fulham fans lauding his 'genius' at that point.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

I'm a little perplexed by the circle-jerk over Ranieri in a load of today's post-mortem threads.

Yes, he made changes that altered the course of the game. He had to - to rectify the ridiculous unbalanced side he sent out at the start! People accuse Hughton of being defensive - Ranieri started last night with a back 5, and another centre back (Chambers) in front of them, and with his best, and most creative player (Cairney) on the bench.

Even with six defenders on the field they still couldn't cope, because they were unable to stem the flow of deliveries into attacking areas.

It wasn't genius to bring Cairney on for a surplus defender, at 2-0 down - it was an enforced, and obvious swap - that would anyway have been too little, too late, if Pröpper's drive had gone in under the bar - and one that he shouldn't have ever needed to make

(Credit for making the change quite as early as he did though - that is something we could learn from.)

Twas ever thus. See also Holloway and his triple substitutions. Carlos Carvalhal and his "meat on the barbecue" undid his tactical genius for a while.

 

[Giraffe]

Which sums up what everybody is talking about. He could see it all going wrong and so did something after 27 minutes and one at half time.
CH changes 71 & 77 minutes when the entire Putney end could see we were in trouble.

Exactly.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Hughton got us to half time unlucky not to be 4-0 up. He has to get credit for that. He orchestrated the approach and the players implemented it perfectly. We were superb.

The second half we conceded very early doors. The players then proceeded to bottle it. I feel like Hughton deserves credit for the good half and the players need to shoulder the blame for the awful second half. THEY bottled it. IMO

Exactly how I saw it - if that ball hadn't fallen so sweetly on the volley for a cracking finish and we'd weathered the storm for 5 minutes then it would likely have been very different. They have spent a lot of money on some good players that seem to need a kick to get them going. They got one, grew massively in confidence and our defence crumbled. Massively disappointing but the overreaction from some is lunacy as far as I can see.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Hughton got us to half time unlucky not to be 4-0 up. He has to get credit for that. He orchestrated the approach and the players implemented it perfectly. We were superb.

The second half we conceded very early doors. The players then proceeded to bottle it. I feel like Hughton deserves credit for the good half and the players need to shoulder the blame for the awful second half. THEY bottled it. IMO

IMO too.

 

[symyjym]

Which sums up what everybody is talking about. He could see it all going wrong and so did something after 27 minutes and one at half time.
CH changes 71 & 77 minutes when the entire Putney end could see we were in trouble.

What changes could have been made earlier though? Replace 2nd choice Bong with who? Would Locadia for Knockaert any earlier made any difference. Murray had a good game and could have scored 5 so would Andone have done any better in a straight swap? Bissouma for Stephens at half time Maybe? Making bad tackles at 2-0 up is a good sign of being outpaced.

One change at half time then possibly with Bissouma to keep it fresh and unpredictable. Taking into consideration that Stephens was on a yellow that should have been red and I wanted to take him off before half time for a valid reason, and I think other managers would have done too. That would be my criticism of Hughtons tactics last night. Not taking Stephens off.

 

[lawros left foot]

Hughton got us to half time unlucky not to be 4-0 up. He has to get credit for that. He orchestrated the approach and the players implemented it perfectly. We were superb.

The second half we conceded very early doors. The players then proceeded to bottle it. I feel like Hughton deserves credit for the good half and the players need to shoulder the blame for the awful second half. THEY bottled it. IMO

This, Fulham got an early second half goal, and our players panicked.

 

[Hamilton]

I'm a little perplexed by the circle-jerk over Ranieri in a load of today's post-mortem threads.

Yes, he made changes that altered the course of the game. He had to - to rectify the ridiculous unbalanced side he sent out at the start! People accuse Hughton of being defensive - Ranieri started last night with a back 5, and another centre back (Chambers) in front of them, and with his best, and most creative player (Cairney) on the bench.

Even with six defenders on the field they still couldn't cope, because they were unable to stem the flow of deliveries into attacking areas.

It wasn't genius to bring Cairney on for a surplus defender, at 2-0 down - it was an enforced, and obvious swap - that would anyway have been too little, too late, if Pröpper's drive had gone in under the bar - and one that he shouldn't have ever needed to make

(Credit for making the change quite as early as he did though - that is something we could learn from.)

I think you're right. He's no genius, he just made a change fast. It was sort of obvious that he'd have to stick an attacking midfielder on in place of a defender.

The question should have been, how could Albion exploit the space at the back. Too many balls down the wing and not enough through the centre of the park. I think a Bissouma for Stephens swap earlier - maybe straight after the first Fulham goal - would have pegged the Fulham midfield back a little more. Biss is just that little more aggressive and a perfect impact sub at the moment.

My view is that this, combined with Solly and Locardia not attacking the wings enough just invited Fulham on. This is no great surprise. It's the way we play. With a more conservative mindset. But there are times when that needs to be mixed up a bit.

I'm not too worried. The team will get themselves sorted and are strong enough to stay up, but sometimes we have to recognise that it's a little easy to work us out.

Agree that had Pröpper's shot gone in, then that may have killed them off. But, it didn't, and we should have anticipated the reaction and maybe given them something to think about before they did the same to us.

 

[Giraffe]

The only change I'd have made would have been Bissouma for Gross, just to get some more physicality and mobility into midfield.

In some respects the game was very marginal, we missed a lot of chances in the first half, had they been taken that comeback would not have happened.

 

[symyjym]

The only change I'd have made would have been Bissouma for Gross, just to get some more physicality and mobility into midfield.

In some respects the game was very marginal, we missed a lot of chances in the first half, had they been taken that comeback would not have happened.

Bissouma for Stephens at half time and then Andone for Gross on 60m if we are speculating alternative tactics. Oh yeah and then Kayal to replace the next player who was spent.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I agree, but he is a genius:

Ranieri has peripheral vision (with a strong sense of knowing how to solve problems)
Hughton has tunnel vision (usually centered around stopping goals)

It’s oh so simple from your armchair, isn’t it?