[Albion] The high line is great

[brighton_tom]

A high line only works if the team press and don't give the opposition any time. If the opposition has time and space they'll pick an easy pass over the top with ease.

In the first half we were nowhere near at it, apart from Baleba. Jack was a hologram in midfield, and the wingers didn't press either. In the second half every one of them threw themselves into tackles and Tottenham couldn't respond. It was night and day.

This is it for me. One tactic (a high line) only works if its done in tandem with the other tactic (midfield and attacking players pressing the opposition high up the pitch). If you dont do the second part then you're just giving opposition an easy day at both ends of the pitch.

 

[Guinness Boy]

The "problem with the high line" has been mentioned a lot.

The core of this "problem", bit like the "problem of fannying around at the back" that emerged five years ago, is that Fabian Hurzeler is a brave coach and football fans are anxious cowards. But its time to accept it.

People have been going on and on about "you can't play like that unless you have Van der Ven in defense!!!", as if it exists a central defender who can turn around, accelerate his run and catch up with whatever sprinter that made his run behind the defense line.

Can we put to bed that the magical paranormal solution to the made up problem isn't to sign some sort of Martian cheetah?

The high line and offside trap is here to stay. Just like in most of the previous games, it worked excellent yesterday and the opponents were allowed no more than the "normal" amount of chances that will likely happen regardless of how you play.

There was nothing "naive" about the first half yesterday, that wasn't the cause of the issues; the cause was being as cowardly as us watching it. "Oh no, a Tottenham player is pressuring me, I need to hoof it randomly into the stands or to their defenders". "Oh no, they're doing those runs again, I don't trust our trap gonna run home and cover the goal". Lazy, cowardly, useless.

Second half, at least until 3-2, we pushed our "naive high line" higher, took more risk in "fannying about at the back" and ran past their allegedly invincible super quick back line through sheer determination and willpower.

I hope there won't be TOO much of the "we only concede goals in football matches due to high defense line" over the season. Teams like Wolves that have 48 players inside their own box also concede goals. In fact, everyone does. So at the end of the season, lets just wait and see what the "Conceded goals" column has to say about the success of our "naive high defense line" compared to lets say the "best football I've ever seen", which was the narrative last season.

Can you find the quote where someone said “you can’t play like that unless you have Van der Ven in defence”? Those precise words in that precise order?

 

[Han Solo]

Its a little fun how when I five years ago said "well, we're playing very nice football and creating a bunch of chances every game" and people mouthed off, "I don't care about the football!!! I only care about the results and the league table!!!"

Now five years later we've just won 3-2 against Tottenham, taking us to the top 6 in the league, and a bunch of people are going "I don't care about the results or the league table!!! All I want is 11 players forming a box around our penalty area!!!"

Football fans are odd.

 

[Han Solo]

Can you find the quote where someone said “you can’t play like that unless you have Van der Ven in defence”? Those precise words in that precise order?

Probably not, no. Dozens of posts telling the exact same thing in other words is easy to find though.
Thanks for asking.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Its a little fun how when I five years ago said "well, we're playing very nice football and creating a bunch of chances every game" and people mouthed off, "I don't care about the football!!! I only care about the results and the league table!!!"

Now five years later we've just won 3-2 against Tottenham, taking us to the top 6 in the league, and a bunch of people are going "I don't care about the results or the league table!!! All I want is 11 players forming a box around our penalty area!!!"

Football fans are odd.

I think I can explain

Nobody said anything like that

 

[Beanstalk]

The "problem with the high line" has been mentioned a lot.

The core of this "problem", bit like the "problem of fannying around at the back" that emerged five years ago, is that Fabian Hurzeler is a brave coach and football fans are anxious cowards. But its time to accept it.

People have been going on and on about "you can't play like that unless you have Van der Ven in defense!!!", as if it exists a central defender who can turn around, accelerate his run and catch up with whatever sprinter that made his run behind the defense line.

Can we put to bed that the magical paranormal solution to the made up problem isn't to sign some sort of Martian cheetah?

The high line and offside trap is here to stay. Just like in most of the previous games, it worked excellent yesterday and the opponents were allowed no more than the "normal" amount of chances that will likely happen regardless of how you play.

There was nothing "naive" about the first half yesterday, that wasn't the cause of the issues; the cause was being as cowardly as us watching it. "Oh no, a Tottenham player is pressuring me, I need to hoof it randomly into the stands or to their defenders". "Oh no, they're doing those runs again, I don't trust our trap gonna run home and cover the goal". Lazy, cowardly, useless.

Second half, at least until 3-2, we pushed our "naive high line" higher, took more risk in "fannying about at the back" and ran past their allegedly invincible super quick back line through sheer determination and willpower.

I hope there won't be TOO much of the "we only concede goals in football matches due to high defense line" over the season. Teams like Wolves that have 48 players inside their own box also concede goals. In fact, everyone does. So at the end of the season, lets just wait and see what the "Conceded goals" column has to say about the success of our "naive high defense line" compared to lets say the "best football I've ever seen", which was the narrative last season.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Probably not, no. Dozens of posts telling the exact same thing in other words is easy to find though.
Thanks for asking.

So you just made up a quote, presented it as fact and backtracked then.

 

[Han Solo]

So you just made up a quote, presented it as fact and backtracked then.

Yup. I had this evil plan about falsifying a quote and presenting it as a factually exact representation of reality and then I chickened out when asked about it. That is correct.

It certainly wasn't an attempt to catch a real existing sentiment and put a generalised verison of it into quotation marks as a "you get the gist" (I've not actually said 'you get the gist', but you get the gist, or maybe you don't) thing.
Nothing like that; I admit, I had a plan to con the world into believing someone had said exactly the thing I put within quotation marks, and your sherlockholmesery destroyed the whole bluff.

Is that a satisfying answer? Can we move on to talk about high lines?

 

[Hiheidi]

 

[Reddleman]

This is all to do with the pressing. Yesterday first half we didn’t press as a unit which meant Spurs players had loads of time to bring the ball down and pick a pass through or over the high line . Second half the intensity increased and it meant they didn’t have the time to break the high line. That started with the forwards being much more aggressive in the press.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Yup. I had this evil plan about falsifying a quote and presenting it as a factually exact representation of reality and then I chickened out when asked about it. That is correct.

It certainly wasn't an attempt to catch a real existing sentiment and put a generalised verison of it into quotation marks as a "you get the gist" (I've not actually said 'you get the gist', but you get the gist, or maybe you don't) thing.
Nothing like that; I admit, I had a plan to con the world into believing someone had said exactly the thing I put within quotation marks, and your sherlockholmesery destroyed the whole bluff.

Is that a satisfying answer? Can we move on to talk about high lines?

It just invalidates that whole paragraph as does the fact Van der Ven would have caught Glenn Murray even if he’d had a ten years head start.

 

[Screaming J]

I have no problem with the high line tactic as long as:-

1) We also do the pressing further upfield to stop the balls in behind the defence

2) The defenders know what they should be doing (Ferdi was out of step yesterday) and

3) We are flexible enough to change during a game if/when it's not working.

 

[Mellotron]

A week ago or so I was critical. I now understand what we’re trying to do. I’m on board. As I said in another post, it’s a red-herring.

It's quite scary but once you accept it's going to continue (and the benefits at the other end), it gets a little easier to watch.

Ish.

 

[Seagull on the Hill]

......... a ten years head start.

I'm not sure if this is a typo, or if you were being sarcastic about Glenn's lack of pace?

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

So to clarify, the high line is a good tactic if done well and a bad one if it's done poorly?

 

[GT49er]

A high line only works if the team press and don't give the opposition any time. If the opposition has time and space they'll pick an easy pass over the top with ease.

Deny them time and space to pass the ball around by all means, but it doesn't need much time and space to hoof it hard - and with your fastest player poised to spring from the centre line, the job's a good 'un. I'm thinking there'll be a load of League 2 clubs just licking their lips at the hope of drawing us in the third round of the cup!

 

[GT49er]

So to clarify, the high line is a good tactic if done well and a bad one if it's done poorly?

It's a good tactic if the other team agree to play like gentlemen and not kick the ball over your head and run after it very fast, considerably faster than you.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I don’t think the high line is costing us goals,
It’s not the issue in that respect.

I think Chelsea illustrated it better but even when it’s working fine and offside works, it’s shit watching the other team outsprint us and score constantly - even if the goals subsequently don’t count.

This is quite an interesting point, because in the old days the lino would put his flag up and we'd be smug about catching them offside before taking the free kick. Nowadays they are allowed to break, we chase after them, slide around all keystone cops, they score and then the flag goes up. We have to catch our breath and gather our composure before taking the free kick, often after the big screen is telling us they're doing a VAR check for a minute or two. Outcome the same but the second version feels worse, and people go on about how lucky we are, two disallowed goals, etc etc.

Imagine if this rule was around in the days of George Graham, Tony Adams, Lee Dixon. We'd have seen those guys stepping forward and raising their arms - but then chasing back and falling over helplessly, before the flag went up. It would seem different, somehow.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

The issue being that those three opportunities in this last game should’ve been three goals, and all from the first half - and against Chelsea were consistently punished.

I get the idea, I just worry that we don’t have the pace to execute it.

None of Chelsea's goals were from a player receiving a ball passed through our high line

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

So you just made up a quote, presented it as fact and backtracked then.

I heard them say pretty much exactly that on Talksport, on Guardian football weekly and on BBC 5live in the match build up. Two teams playing high lines but Brighton aren't suited to it because we have slow Dunk and Webster CBs, whereas Spurs are suited to it because they have quick CBs like VDV. Works for them, suicide for us. It's been pretty standard punditry all week.