Wolves 0-1 Man Utd: Verdict Thread

[Wilf Wolf]

Too many shots lacking power. They need to be absolutely perfect to go in and as we have seen they’re far from that. Raul’s chance is a good example, rather than a pathetic side foot put your boot through it.

The top striker in the PL in recent years has been Kane and the one thing I’ve noticed when watching him live - apart from being a twat - is how hard he strikes the ball. I’m pretty sure that you can coach people to smack it as hard as they can!

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Not as good as Jane, but it was always something Defoe would do too. Smash it as hard as he could he said he often aimed for the keepers head as the keeper would by the time the shot got to him be on his arse, so the ball would fly over his head.

 

[redvictor]

Taking on board feedback seems like a sensible grown up thing to do...so I've amended the thread title welcoming him as it was just a copy of the spelling the Wolves social admin person had said to welcome Hwang.

Fair enough, as also my post was edited the same. Maybe back to the real reason for the thread, as in the match verdict...

 

[WsWolf]

See a lot of comments re lack of goals in the squad. Mainly due to lack of chances created really, we were solid and took a high proportion of the few chances we got the first 3 years.

If we keep creating the levels we have this 3 games we will start scoring as players are calmer realising we will be in the position again and takes the pressure off. Rauls effort in the first half for me showed someone who just wanted to hit the target incase we didn't get another one, lack of confidence really.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Raul and Trincao both in double figures for goals this year, plus Hwang, Neto, Podence and Adama with 5+ each. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

[Johnny75]

Sorry, just noticed others had been debating this more eloquently than me

As someone who has never played football well, and knowing there are a few on here who do/did, is this something that really can be improved that much in training?

Is there truth to the cliche that you either have the 'knack' or not when it comes to goalscoring?

From a coaching point of view it can be and is taught but it relies on players having ability to execute what you are coaching and some are clearly better than others.

Bully is a great example as Dan points out, his technique would not have been taught in those days as training was diabolical, mainly crap like ‘put your laces through it’. I’m sure if Bully were around today he would be technically better than he was AND have that knack you can’t teach.

I’m fairly sure Lukaku isn’t a natural goalscorer and neither is Raul whereas Aubameyang, Ings and Salah are.

From a coaching point of view Haaland and Kane are perfection, they’ve got an instinct, have unwavering confidence in their ability but are willing to learn and better themselves at all points of their game. They make early decisions which gives them time, that might simply be to delay the shot or to take it early and their placement is key. Watching Haaland stroll around keepers is a decision he makes when the ball hasn’t even got to him sometimes and that genius. Kane will strike with both feet to unsettle keepers and Salah will try to bend the ball first time to give a keeper no time. This might be natural but with coaching it is refined.

Coaches might concentrate on improving technique, decision making, position, runs off the ball etc and compose and execute sessions to help players get to the point of making a difference in their style of play.

It’s that ability of the player to take the coaching into their heads that marks good players from bang average. And great players will challenge coaches to do something different and show things can be done in collaboration.

Bruno looks like he can be that type of coach as he’s done it with Felix.

TL;dr - Yes coaching works, but only with talent in the first place.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

That's a really pointless statement isn't it? Of course that's true, and if Marcal had defended better Greenwood doesn't score, is this really up for debate? Are we saying that Marcal wasn't at fault/couldn't have done more?

I can’t be held responsible for how you interpret what I write. If you think it is pointless then it is…. to you. My “point” is that most goals can be dissected endlessly to demonstrate either a player shortcoming or mistake..
it’s football, it is how most goals are scored.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

I can’t be held responsible for how you interpret what I write. If you think it is pointless then it is…. to you. My “point” is that most goals can be dissected endlessly to demonstrate either a player shortcoming or mistake..
it’s football, it is how most goals are scored.

It just seems a really pointless thing to say. We as fans analyse goals we score and concede, and say what was good and bad, yeah. So?

Oh and it isn't much of a dissection to say the defender (Marcal) nearest to the player who scored (Greenwood) could have done a lot more.

 

[Alan]

Just me that thought Sa was probably a bit unsighted on the goal?

Not sure that totally forgives him of blame but that was why he got down to it late, I thought.

 

[The Bear]

Just me that thought Sa was probably a bit unsighted on the goal?

Not sure that totally forgives him of blame but that was why he got down to it late, I thought.

Nah. He thought he had to save it and make a bad connection with his hand.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

It just seems a really pointless thing to say. We as fans analyse goals we score and concede, and say what was good and bad, yeah. So?

Oh and it isn't much of a dissection to say the defender (Marcal) nearest to the player who scored (Greenwood) could have done a lot more.

What’s your point?

 

[Throbber3]

For me three of Traores best five games for wolves have been under Lage. The system is suiting him well.

 

[Del Woppio]

For me three of Traores best five games for wolves have been under Lage. The system is suiting him well.

Agree with that. I'd have had him sold the second the window opened if I was in charge, but I think having him off the left and with a new mentality he's going to be bang in the mix of things. He'll get 5 goals and 10 assists pretty comfortably I think, and that's as one of his biggest critics

 

[Wolvensam]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1432325161533988869

This is a great little graphic of Wolves under Lage. It demonstrates how he has retained the defensive solidity of Nuno but transformed the transitions and turnovers to capitalise on the strengths of Neves and the threat of our attacking players. But it hasn’t been to the detriment of our defenders.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

That is interesting stuff. I thought we were going to get torn open with Lage ball but against three really good sides so far that hasn’t happened at all. And we are very committed to a lot of attacking play.

 

[Tredman]

We are very good at interceptions between our penalty box and the centre circle - often by Kilman and Saiss rushing out. There can be an obvious downside to that.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Neves is doing that too don’t forget.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

I know people don't like to give him any credit lately, but Coady has been striding into those areas and winning the ball too.

 

[YoungWolf]

I know people don't like to give him any credit lately, but Coady has been striding into those areas and winning the ball too.

Noticeably so. Think he is now being asked to do a lot more of everything, interesting to see if he can handle that

 

[Throbber3]

Noticeably so. Think he is now being asked to do a lot more of everything, interesting to see if he can handle that

His future under Lage may depend on it.

 

[Dire Wolf]

For me three of Traores best five games for wolves have been under Lage. The system is suiting him well.

I think the same could be said of Neves. 3 out of his top 10 performances in a Wolves shirt. He’s been magnificent.