Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] What do you think our style of football is?
- Thread starter Guinness Boy
- Start date
Bore the opposition to death
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,673
We are collateral damage.
I get the impression Fab has ideas and a vision for football, but it’s not translating into a progressive style on the pitch.
It’s back to potterball at the moment - kings of possession , toothless where it matters and vulnerable on the counter
It’s back to potterball at the moment - kings of possession , toothless where it matters and vulnerable on the counter
Taybha
Whalewhine
Iggle Piggle
Well-known member
- Sep 3, 2010
- 6,106
Wrong thread ffs
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Don't normally quote myself, but I think the above is the case, as is the following:
We've got a clear identity: it's to play with intensity, to press high up the pitch, to play possession football, to take risks. One way to do this for as long as possible is to do this with 16 top quality players. That's why we've got a deep squad, particularly with attacking (non-striker) players. Unfortunately for the past three months, we haven't been able to do that due to injuries. Today we had such a strong bench. It means that you can bring three top player on after an hour and then go again using the subs to really go for it.
The boss just said 'play football' - Rutter.
- Oct 12, 2022
- 2,872
In my head (it’s a magical place lads) I almost see it as competing visions of management.
Systems managers: Guardiola. RDZ etc - focus on ensuring everything is drilled to the nth degree, everyone knows exactly where they should be and when, individual thought is frowned upon. The style is set entirely by the manager. When it works it’s really effective, but it doesn’t make footballers better in any way, except it makes them obedient, and able to follow detailed instructions quickly.
Player improvement managers: Klopp, Potter, Hürzeler etc - there is still work on patterns of play and positioning, but the onus is more on improving each player, and getting them to be the best version of themselves. A bit of individual leeway is permitted, giving the players confidence that they can cope in an unexpected situation.
Systems managers can get results much quicker than player improvement managers, they just need players who can follow instructions, but when the manager leaves, the player is left just looking for the new coach to tell them what to do.
Player improvement managers take longer to bed in, and longer to work through problems. They ask more from the players, they ask them to know and trust their teammates, and understand how they play, so the team at any point can play to the strengths and weaknesses of the people currently on the pitch. This gives more flexibility in how the team performs dependent on who happens to be on the pitch at any given time. You also need a squad with footballing brains, and not just footballing feet.
Now obviously there isn’t some magical demarcation, systems managers will still try to improve players, and player improvement managers will still coach systems, but I picture it as a spectrum with every team somewhere on a sliding scale, toward one end or the other.
TLDR? I can’t say I blame you, other nonsense is available. I think we’re going to continue to be frustrated by what we see through the rest of this season and most of next. At some point it will start going right more than it’s going wrong, and that’s when Chelsea will swoop.
Systems managers: Guardiola. RDZ etc - focus on ensuring everything is drilled to the nth degree, everyone knows exactly where they should be and when, individual thought is frowned upon. The style is set entirely by the manager. When it works it’s really effective, but it doesn’t make footballers better in any way, except it makes them obedient, and able to follow detailed instructions quickly.
Player improvement managers: Klopp, Potter, Hürzeler etc - there is still work on patterns of play and positioning, but the onus is more on improving each player, and getting them to be the best version of themselves. A bit of individual leeway is permitted, giving the players confidence that they can cope in an unexpected situation.
Systems managers can get results much quicker than player improvement managers, they just need players who can follow instructions, but when the manager leaves, the player is left just looking for the new coach to tell them what to do.
Player improvement managers take longer to bed in, and longer to work through problems. They ask more from the players, they ask them to know and trust their teammates, and understand how they play, so the team at any point can play to the strengths and weaknesses of the people currently on the pitch. This gives more flexibility in how the team performs dependent on who happens to be on the pitch at any given time. You also need a squad with footballing brains, and not just footballing feet.
Now obviously there isn’t some magical demarcation, systems managers will still try to improve players, and player improvement managers will still coach systems, but I picture it as a spectrum with every team somewhere on a sliding scale, toward one end or the other.
TLDR? I can’t say I blame you, other nonsense is available. I think we’re going to continue to be frustrated by what we see through the rest of this season and most of next. At some point it will start going right more than it’s going wrong, and that’s when Chelsea will swoop.
A genuinely thought-provoking and insightful post
London Irish
Well-known member
I still don’t really know, we tried possession in the first half tonight and nearly got done twice on the counter without creating anything threatening. We went longer second half and that looked messy until we actually fashioned a very good build up goal. I don’t think we have a strong tactical DNA any more
Yeah our game out of possession is pretty good. Tonight it was great. High-press, Baleba as a shield/cover for full backs advancing, organised but not averse to risk taking.
In possession there are glimpses of a really exciting possession based game where the striker will stay on the last man, look to run in behind, whilst the 3 forwards slightly behind are fluid in position. Despite that, when we play against a low block, we don’t move the ball quickly enough on those turnovers to attack the defending team before they get into position. I have faith that will come sooner rather than later.
Iggle Piggle
Well-known member
- Sep 3, 2010
- 6,106
'arry vibes that interview
Harry told Roman to 'run about'
Harry Redknapp has revealed his instructions to match-winner Roman Pavlyuchenko were to run about.
BBassic
I changed this.
- Jul 28, 2011
- 13,269
I mentioned it briefly in the match thread but I'm routinely baffled by where our players end up on the pitch.
Ayari in the 2nd half last night seemed to be popping up all over the place. I saw Pedro deep in our own half fairly often. Estupinan almost playing as a CM when we had the ball.
Maybe that's part of our style now? Players shifting around to be impactful in areas of the pitch you wouldn't necessarily expect them.
Ayari in the 2nd half last night seemed to be popping up all over the place. I saw Pedro deep in our own half fairly often. Estupinan almost playing as a CM when we had the ball.
Maybe that's part of our style now? Players shifting around to be impactful in areas of the pitch you wouldn't necessarily expect them.
Forum | Hang on, I thought Brighton played super attractive by thebooks
progressive football. Worse than fůcking Lincoln. At least Everton were well organised and actually just played well. Ugliest, dirtiest team I’ve seen at PR for a long time. Hope they’re
tronnogull
Well-known member
- May 17, 2010
- 625
A team playing a low block with all players back like they did in the first half stifles most opportunities for their opposition to play attractive footy.Forum | Hang on, I thought Brighton played super attractive by thebooks
progressive football. Worse than fůcking Lincoln. At least Everton were well organised and actually just played well. Ugliest, dirtiest team I’ve seen at PR for a long time. Hope they’rewww.twtd.co.uk
Loved reading that tbh. Exactly how you want the opposition feeling about us. FWIW I think the plan FH is striving for is high press, very high intensity ball retrieval and overloads, and ball domination and we saw glimpses of it before our slump in form. I'm not sure all our players are up to it and when Welbeck and Velts arent on the pitch we struggle a lot and it sort of fell apart. I think the last issue is down to the recruitment leaving us unbalanced, any team would be struggling having to field such young starting 11s without experienced pros guiding them and helping to translate the managers ideas.Forum | Hang on, I thought Brighton played super attractive by thebooks
progressive football. Worse than fůcking Lincoln. At least Everton were well organised and actually just played well. Ugliest, dirtiest team I’ve seen at PR for a long time. Hope they’re
The Fits
Well-known member
- Jun 29, 2020
- 10,208
Echoes the things I’ve been hearing from supporters of other teams.
Lots of ‘unlike Brighton’, ‘boring’, ‘direct’, ‘dirty’, ‘time wasting’.
But that’s the bulk of the chat here about other teams too. Interesting though as there’s still a lot of people who think we are still both entertaining and angels (we’ve not been angels for quite some time, past couple of years we were particularly guilty of play acting, this season Veltman has taking dark arts to another level and Pedro is rapidly becoming one of the dirtiest players in the league).
Nice that some admitted it was at least effective. More of that second half of the season please.
I’m really hoping that from the first match next season we see a distinct and drastic change in the way we play and our general approach. I’m still very hopeful Fab just sees this season as bedding in and has held back on quite a lot of things.