• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

O'Neil In, Out and Shaking it all about

Deutsch Wolf said:
It doesn't have to be negative, it frequently is though.

We had 4 shots on target vs City and Villa combined, not sustainable. Why do we need three centre halves and wingbacks who rarely score or assist against Sheff Utd?

Putting the improvement down to the formation alone and writing everything else off is very Matt Hill, King of PPG.
Click to expand...
How many shots on target did we have with 4 at the back against Luton before the sending off.....
 
How many did we have at Old Trafford?

We were just crap at Luton.

In the second half in particular yesterday it was so obvious how limiting it was to have three centre halves on the pitch who can't carry the ball or pass between the lines with any reliability. It's not like when we had Coady, Boly and Saiss.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
How many did we have at Old Trafford?

We were just crap at Luton.

In the second half in particular yesterday it was so obvious how limiting it was to have three centre halves on the pitch who can't carry the ball or pass between the lines with any reliability. It's not like when we had Coady and Saiss.
Click to expand...
You brought up the shot stats! Last time we played 4 at the back, we had far fewer shots, and against shit opposition. I can't understand the desire to go back to it, it wasn't working.

Our upturn in form has happened since the formation change, not sure how there is an argument there.
 
It's the equivalent of "leave Edwards in because we won last game, even though he did nothing at all". I know it's the wrong formation against Sheff Utd, why would I want to wait for us to waste our own time in a game we need to win?
 
I wouldn't say it was. We didn't match their intensity and couldn't put anything together. It happens, like City didn't match us. Doesn't mean you forever write that shape off.

Also we made a tactical switch even before Bellegarde got sent off and had Hwang in a weird RWB-ish role.

As you might note I haven't said anything about next week. I'm fine with us playing three at the back against Newcastle. Not against Sheff Utd. It's about flexibility.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
It doesn't have to be negative, it frequently is though.

We had 4 shots on target vs City and Villa combined, not sustainable. Why do we need three centre halves and wingbacks who rarely score or assist against Sheff Utd?

Putting the improvement down to the formation alone and writing everything else off is very Matt Hill, King of PPG.
Click to expand...
Tactically we are much better with 3 at the back, we take up much better positions off the ball and both Toti and Kilman have stepped out with the ball well (Not Saiss and Boly well). Hwang, Cunha and Neto have noticeably taken up better angles and both wing backs have better distribution.

It's also noticeable balls into the central pair are on more rather than the horseshoe of doom under late Nuno.

Agree with the Villa lack of creativity but I think that's down to them being a very good team and matching us up. Horses for courses and all that.

We were rubbish against Luton and the 4 proceeding league games with no tactics and 4 at the back. It was the lack of tactics that was most worrying.

That has been the biggest change. It is nice to see patterns of play and an actual vision of how we want to play.
 
All this nonsense of changing managers etc to get away from 3 ATB and we're back where we started
 
Johnny75 said:
Tactically we are much better with 3 at the back, we take up much better positions off the ball and both Toti and Kilman have stepped out with the ball well (Not Saiss and Boly well). Hwang, Cunha and Neto have noticeably taken up better angles and both wing backs have better distribution.

It's also noticeable balls into the central pair are on more rather than the horseshoe of doom under late Nuno.

Agree with the Villa lack of creativity but I think that's down to them being a very good team and matching us up. Horses for courses and all that.

We were rubbish against Luton and the 4 proceeding league games with no tactics and 4 at the back. It was the lack of tactics that was most worrying.

That has been the biggest change. It is nice to see patterns of play and an actual vision of how we want to play.
Click to expand...
It's almost as if this sort of thing doesn't come straight away and requires a bit of time in training to get right...
 
Sheffield United have started playing 4 at the back themselves. Personally I wouldn't be comfortable playing Dawson/Kilman in a 2 up against Archer & McBurnie, that's their only real 'strength' at the moment and losing a numerical advantage in that area would play right into their hands.

I'd look to nullify their threat first and back the players we have in attacking areas to create more than enough to win the game in a 3-4-3. I mean look at the GK & back 4 they played against United.

Foderingham

Bogle - Trusty - Robinson - Thomas

Just look at it.

Hwang - Cunha - Neto with RAN and Semedo supporting is more than enough to create against that shambles. We've always got the fall back of throwing on Kalajdzic or Sarabia on for a CB if the game does turn in their favour.
 
Robinson as a Prem left back is an abomination, but as a CB!? There are no words.
 
He's been LCH for them in a three for years. Always, always, always looks awful (no shock there) but somehow still gets a gig.

Him, Pennant and Gorkss as our mid-season signings in 2012/13. Jesus. No wonder we went down.
 
Johnny75 said:
Tactically we are much better with 3 at the back, we take up much better positions off the ball and both Toti and Kilman have stepped out with the ball well (Not Saiss and Boly well). Hwang, Cunha and Neto have noticeably taken up better angles and both wing backs have better distribution.

It's also noticeable balls into the central pair are on more rather than the horseshoe of doom under late Nuno.

Agree with the Villa lack of creativity but I think that's down to them being a very good team and matching us up. Horses for courses and all that.

We were rubbish against Luton and the 4 proceeding league games with no tactics and 4 at the back. It was the lack of tactics that was most worrying.

That has been the biggest change. It is nice to see patterns of play and an actual vision of how we want to play.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. If we can take the game to teams there’s no reason to change 3ATB and to some extent against Bournemouth (particularly second half) we did take the game to them, even prior to the formation shift. Often under Nuno our problem with the teams at the bottom was that we had no answer when teams stuck ten men behind the ball - he could play a team who attacked us very well. And then it all fell apart when Jota left and Jimenez picked up an awful injury.

I think there are a lot of green shoots with Hwang, Cunha and Neto to mean we can attack perfectly fine with 3ATB and both of our first choice full-backs are more suited to playing as a wing back anyway. It’s why they’ve both improved hugely this season.
 
According to MOTD they only went 4 at the back yesterday because of circumstance and the number of injuries they have to defenders rather than by desire
 
It's not very complicated, it's what happens at a lot of clubs when it goes sour, he and his immediate superior no longer had any working relationship so one had to go.

The idea that we brought Lage in to play better/more expansive football is for the birds, especially as Lage plays abysmal football.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

darlowolf64
  • Locked
The Clique and how to join it...
Replies
6
Views
2K
The Bear
The Bear
Back
Top