marshy Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Listening to GJ after last week's game it seems we are 'looking at' why we leak late goals and are trying to find a common denominator, so far with no luck apparently. The first question to ask is whether or not we actually do leak late goals, or is that just the way it appears. If we split a match into 9 ten-minute sections and add on, say, five mins. for added time then around 13% percent of goals should be conceded in the final ten mins. + added time.(1.25/9.5*100). Our % is around 36%(8/22 conceded in last 10 mins.) which is almost 3 times the expected amount if goals were spread evenly throughout the 95 mins. More goals tend to be conceded generally in football as a match reaches its climax so how do we compare to other clubs? Well there are only so many spare hours in a day so I've just looked at the top 6, bottom 6, and middle 6 in the CCC. Figures range from 0 % to 35% and average out at approx. 17%. So it looks as though we do have a problem as we're over double the average! OK, next move was to have a quick look at Player to refresh my memory on their winning goal last weekend. As they move forward with the ball our four defenders appear to be sucked into the ball, indicative to me of a team where individuals have little idea of what their team-mates are going to do, or confidence in them to deal with the situation. I hope I'm not being too harsh here , it's just the way I read it. As it happened a fortuitous bounce took the ball to Henderson, but a slipped ball to their right, our left, to an unmarked player could just as easily have led to a goal. Well thinking that McAllister would have been there(hopefully) if he'd still been on the pitch, and bearing in mind that he's been substituted a number of times recently, I thought I'd take a look at outcomes when McAllister is substituted, and when he completes a match. Here are the figures:- Completing the game (WDL) Home 4-3-0 Points 15/21 =71% Away 1-4-1 7/18 =39% When substituted Home 1-0-1 3/6 =50% Away 0-2-1 2/9 = 22% Quite a big difference but a statistician would obviously require more data to be convinced. Unfortunately we've only played 18 games. McAllister is a regular starter, but what if there are other changes to the defence during a match? We have conceded late goals in 7 games this season and in 4 of those matches a change had been made to the defence during the course of the game. What about the defence at the start of the game? I shouldn't have been surprised when I looked into this because it's something I've touched on in previous posts, but the changes to the defensive set-up this season have been quite staggering. Out of the 18 games played so far(in the league) we have taken the field with 11 different defensive line-ups, Orr, Carey, Nyatanga, McAllister have started together 3 times as have Orr, McCombe, Fontaine, McAllister. Many of these changes have been forced of course, but I would tentatively suggest that it's a major contributor to the leaking of late goals. In any form of combat or contest when the going gets toughest is when patterns of learned behviour come to the fore. Everyone needs to know instinctively what his team-mate is going to do and to have full confidence in them doing it. So the common denominator? In a sense there isn't one and there should be, namely, build from the back with a settled defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Listening to GJ after last week's game it seems we are 'looking at' why we leak late goals and are trying to find a common denominator, so far with no luck apparently. The first question to ask is whether or not we actually do leak late goals, or is that just the way it appears. If we split a match into 9 ten-minute sections and add on, say, five mins. for added time then around 13% percent of goals should be conceded in the final ten mins. + added time.(1.25/9.5*100). Our % is around 36%(8/22 conceded in last 10 mins.) which is almost 3 times the expected amount if goals were spread evenly throughout the 95 mins. More goals tend to be conceded generally in football as a match reaches its climax so how do we compare to other clubs? Well there are only so many spare hours in a day so I've just looked at the top 6, bottom 6, and middle 6 in the CCC. Figures range from 0 % to 35% and average out at approx. 17%. So it looks as though we do have a problem as we're over double the average! OK, next move was to have a quick look at Player to refresh my memory on their winning goal last weekend. As they move forward with the ball our four defenders appear to be sucked into the ball, indicative to me of a team where individuals have little idea of what their team-mates are going to do, or confidence in them to deal with the situation. I hope I'm not being too harsh here , it's just the way I read it. As it happened a fortuitous bounce took the ball to Henderson, but a slipped ball to their right, our left, to an unmarked player could just as easily have led to a goal. Well thinking that McAllister would have been there(hopefully) if he'd still been on the pitch, and bearing in mind that he's been substituted a number of times recently, I thought I'd take a look at outcomes when McAllister is substituted, and when he completes a match. Here are the figures:- Completing the game (WDL) Home 4-3-0 Points 15/21 =71% Away 1-4-1 7/18 =39% When substituted Home 1-0-1 3/6 =50% Away 0-2-1 2/9 = 22% Quite a big difference but a statistician would obviously require more data to be convinced. Unfortunately we've only played 18 games. McAllister is a regular starter, but what if there are other changes to the defence during a match? We have conceded late goals in 7 games this season and in 4 of those matches a change had been made to the defence during the course of the game. What about the defence at the start of the game? I shouldn't have been surprised when I looked into this because it's something I've touched on in previous posts, but the changes to the defensive set-up this season have been quite staggering. Out of the 18 games played so far(in the league) we have taken the field with 11 different defensive line-ups, Orr, Carey, Nyatanga, McAllister have started together 3 times as have Orr, McCombe, Fontaine, McAllister. Many of these changes have been forced of course, but I would tentatively suggest that it's a major contributor to the leaking of late goals. In any form of combat or contest when the going gets toughest is when patterns of learned behviour come to the fore. Everyone needs to know instinctively what his team-mate is going to do and to have full confidence in them doing it. So the common denominator? In a sense there isn't one and there should be, namely, build from the back with a settled defence. Nice Job So it could be construed that any tinkering with the back four unit is likely to increase uncertainty and therefore a higher chance of conceding a goal. Obviously there arent to many like for like swaps concerning the centre back two normally (injury not withstanding) and the full-backs tend to be substituded to in some way change the games tactical perspective. Moral? dont make changes to starting the back four/five unit unless you are looking to come from behind?? (have nothing to lose!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mindjuicer Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 You have to remember that GJ took off both fullbacks in a gamble to try and scrape a point. That third goal was bloody extraordinary. Sheff U passed it back to the keeper, Ikeme, directly from the kick-off. Ikeme hoofed it 70 yards first time and somehow aimed it inch-perfect on to the target man's head. Carey had no chance stopping the flick-on. All credit to Henderson for exploiting the space where Skuse was taken off and his finishing looked nice too. Elliott was the closest but it's debatable who should have been following Henderson. McCoombe has got the blame on here but he was nowhere near Henderson with either their first or third goal. McAllister was one player who watched the ball go over his head requiring Gerken to punch and leave the goalmouth exposed. The other at the far post I think is Hartley. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00p7...010_28_11_2009/ 40m30 in. Anyway back to the question. You either have to believe in some group luck that somehow empowered Ikeme to make a dream 'pass' or there is no common denominator. In previous games, I've seen the whole team getting anxious around 80 mins, playing stiff and either getting beaten on the counter or with some lucky deflection involved. Make of that what you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 If we defend better further up the pitch instead of inviting teams on to us it would be a start to stopping the rot. Too often I have seen opposition players running at us and the first time a tackle is attempted is at our penalty area. We could make a start this weekend by closing down more quickly in midfield higher up the pitch, inviting teams on to us will see the same pattern of late goals continuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Listening to GJ after last week's game it seems we are 'looking at' why we leak late goals and are trying to find a common denominator, so far with no luck apparently. The first question to ask is whether or not we actually do leak late goals, or is that just the way it appears. If we split a match into 9 ten-minute sections and add on, say, five mins. for added time then around 13% percent of goals should be conceded in the final ten mins. + added time.(1.25/9.5*100). Our % is around 36%(8/22 conceded in last 10 mins.) which is almost 3 times the expected amount if goals were spread evenly throughout the 95 mins. More goals tend to be conceded generally in football as a match reaches its climax so how do we compare to other clubs? Well there are only so many spare hours in a day so I've just looked at the top 6, bottom 6, and middle 6 in the CCC. Figures range from 0 % to 35% and average out at approx. 17%. So it looks as though we do have a problem as we're over double the average! OK, next move was to have a quick look at Player to refresh my memory on their winning goal last weekend. As they move forward with the ball our four defenders appear to be sucked into the ball, indicative to me of a team where individuals have little idea of what their team-mates are going to do, or confidence in them to deal with the situation. I hope I'm not being too harsh here , it's just the way I read it. As it happened a fortuitous bounce took the ball to Henderson, but a slipped ball to their right, our left, to an unmarked player could just as easily have led to a goal. Well thinking that McAllister would have been there(hopefully) if he'd still been on the pitch, and bearing in mind that he's been substituted a number of times recently, I thought I'd take a look at outcomes when McAllister is substituted, and when he completes a match. Here are the figures:- Completing the game (WDL) Home 4-3-0 Points 15/21 =71% Away 1-4-1 7/18 =39% When substituted Home 1-0-1 3/6 =50% Away 0-2-1 2/9 = 22% Quite a big difference but a statistician would obviously require more data to be convinced. Unfortunately we've only played 18 games. McAllister is a regular starter, but what if there are other changes to the defence during a match? We have conceded late goals in 7 games this season and in 4 of those matches a change had been made to the defence during the course of the game. What about the defence at the start of the game? I shouldn't have been surprised when I looked into this because it's something I've touched on in previous posts, but the changes to the defensive set-up this season have been quite staggering. Out of the 18 games played so far(in the league) we have taken the field with 11 different defensive line-ups, Orr, Carey, Nyatanga, McAllister have started together 3 times as have Orr, McCombe, Fontaine, McAllister. Many of these changes have been forced of course, but I would tentatively suggest that it's a major contributor to the leaking of late goals. In any form of combat or contest when the going gets toughest is when patterns of learned behviour come to the fore. Everyone needs to know instinctively what his team-mate is going to do and to have full confidence in them doing it. So the common denominator? In a sense there isn't one and there should be, namely, build from the back with a settled defence. Excellent analysis Sir. This season and last we've been very weak in the final minutes and thrown away possible promotion gaining points with all the late opposition wins/equalizers. This really is a major failing in Gary Johnson's team. Something that can and should be corrected. Perhaps we should time waste more in the final minutes or run the ball into the opposition team's corner flag and keep it there until the final whistle? Other teams often do that against us !!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest redbert Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Listening to GJ after last week's game it seems we are 'looking at' why we leak late goals and are trying to find a common denominator, so far with no luck apparently. The first question to ask is whether or not we actually do leak late goals, or is that just the way it appears. If we split a match into 9 ten-minute sections and add on, say, five mins. for added time then around 13% percent of goals should be conceded in the final ten mins. + added time.(1.25/9.5*100). Our % is around 36%(8/22 conceded in last 10 mins.) which is almost 3 times the expected amount if goals were spread evenly throughout the 95 mins. More goals tend to be conceded generally in football as a match reaches its climax so how do we compare to other clubs? Well there are only so many spare hours in a day so I've just looked at the top 6, bottom 6, and middle 6 in the CCC. Figures range from 0 % to 35% and average out at approx. 17%. So it looks as though we do have a problem as we're over double the average! OK, next move was to have a quick look at Player to refresh my memory on their winning goal last weekend. As they move forward with the ball our four defenders appear to be sucked into the ball, indicative to me of a team where individuals have little idea of what their team-mates are going to do, or confidence in them to deal with the situation. I hope I'm not being too harsh here , it's just the way I read it. As it happened a fortuitous bounce took the ball to Henderson, but a slipped ball to their right, our left, to an unmarked player could just as easily have led to a goal. Well thinking that McAllister would have been there(hopefully) if he'd still been on the pitch, and bearing in mind that he's been substituted a number of times recently, I thought I'd take a look at outcomes when McAllister is substituted, and when he completes a match. Here are the figures:- Completing the game (WDL) Home 4-3-0 Points 15/21 =71% Away 1-4-1 7/18 =39% When substituted Home 1-0-1 3/6 =50% Away 0-2-1 2/9 = 22% Quite a big difference but a statistician would obviously require more data to be convinced. Unfortunately we've only played 18 games. McAllister is a regular starter, but what if there are other changes to the defence during a match? We have conceded late goals in 7 games this season and in 4 of those matches a change had been made to the defence during the course of the game. What about the defence at the start of the game? I shouldn't have been surprised when I looked into this because it's something I've touched on in previous posts, but the changes to the defensive set-up this season have been quite staggering. Out of the 18 games played so far(in the league) we have taken the field with 11 different defensive line-ups, Orr, Carey, Nyatanga, McAllister have started together 3 times as have Orr, McCombe, Fontaine, McAllister. Many of these changes have been forced of course, but I would tentatively suggest that it's a major contributor to the leaking of late goals. In any form of combat or contest when the going gets toughest is when patterns of learned behviour come to the fore. Everyone needs to know instinctively what his team-mate is going to do and to have full confidence in them doing it. So the common denominator? In a sense there isn't one and there should be, namely, build from the back with a settled defence. GET A LIFE ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 OK, next move was to have a quick look at Player to refresh my memory on their winning goal last weekend. As they move forward with the ball our four defenders appear to be sucked into the ball, indicative to me of a team where individuals have little idea of what their team-mates are going to do, or confidence in them to deal with the situation. I think the being sucked into the ball was only as a result of the main error, which for me was Fontaine and McCombe failing to win the second ball. It wasn't so much failing to win it, it was a failure to even challenge for it when arguably either one could have got there first. Was it a schoolboy error of leaving it to your team mate? Was it a case of Fontaine not thinking it was his ball as it was quite central and he was playing left back and if he lost out in the challenge he would have been way out of position? But even then Elliott was in no man's land when it fell to Henderson. As with so, so many of our important conceded goals this season it was the result of 2 or 3 utterly avoidable mistakes in a very short space of time by different players. That is the common denominator for me. Be it a lack of concentration, a lack of composure or a lack of ability I don't know but usually we have had 2 or 3 chances to stop the fateful attack. It was never better emphasised than with the Scunny equaliser when Sno gave away a stupid free kick in an area well away from our area. This gave them the chance to launch a high ball into the box. This ball was met by the best flick goalwards any attacker could wish for. By Jamie McCombe. Then Lee Johnson was totally unchallenged in his attempt to execute the simplest of clearances. It went a couple of yards to the goalscorer. Luck has played a part - pen at Preston, Scunny shot gets deflected away from comfortable save, Boyd's flick was outrageous and lucky - but I'd say it is generally something Gary Johnson has very little control over. Apart from not persisting with the offending players, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshy Posted December 3, 2009 Author Share Posted December 3, 2009 GET A LIFE ! Well tomorrow I'm off to Exeter races, Saturday it's up to the Gate for the Ipswich game, and next week off to Portugal to catch up with some old mates. Good news for you is that you won't have to plough through my sleep-inducing posts for a while! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Well tomorrow I'm off to Exeter races, Saturday it's up to the Gate for the Ipswich game, and next week off to Portugal to catch up with some old mates. Good news for you is that you won't have to plough through my sleep-inducing posts for a while! Exeter races !!!! - I thought your initial post seemed a bit like a horse form write up. Anyway, yours was a top post and the best statistical constructive critical analysis I've read on here in ages. I was so impressed that I've now put a link to it on ziderheads so that they'll read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest westy Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 The obvious common denominator is GARY JOHNSON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOLMANDAN Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 GET A LIFE ! What a stupid statement .I think its you that needs to get a life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 We could always try and have more than a one goal lead?! Without being funny, if you do have more than one goal lead, the opposition are usually demoralised because deep in their hearts they know that they're not going to get 2 goals back in the last couples of minutes. However, if it's only one goal, then there's everything to play for! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red_Mat Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Listening to GJ after last week's game it seems we are 'looking at' why we leak late goals and are trying to find a common denominator, so far with no luck apparently. The first question to ask is whether or not we actually do leak late goals, or is that just the way it appears. If we split a match into 9 ten-minute sections and add on, say, five mins. for added time then around 13% percent of goals should be conceded in the final ten mins. + added time.(1.25/9.5*100). Our % is around 36%(8/22 conceded in last 10 mins.) which is almost 3 times the expected amount if goals were spread evenly throughout the 95 mins. More goals tend to be conceded generally in football as a match reaches its climax so how do we compare to other clubs? Well there are only so many spare hours in a day so I've just looked at the top 6, bottom 6, and middle 6 in the CCC. Figures range from 0 % to 35% and average out at approx. 17%. So it looks as though we do have a problem as we're over double the average! OK, next move was to have a quick look at Player to refresh my memory on their winning goal last weekend. As they move forward with the ball our four defenders appear to be sucked into the ball, indicative to me of a team where individuals have little idea of what their team-mates are going to do, or confidence in them to deal with the situation. I hope I'm not being too harsh here , it's just the way I read it. As it happened a fortuitous bounce took the ball to Henderson, but a slipped ball to their right, our left, to an unmarked player could just as easily have led to a goal. Well thinking that McAllister would have been there(hopefully) if he'd still been on the pitch, and bearing in mind that he's been substituted a number of times recently, I thought I'd take a look at outcomes when McAllister is substituted, and when he completes a match. Here are the figures:- Completing the game (WDL) Home 4-3-0 Points 15/21 =71% Away 1-4-1 7/18 =39% When substituted Home 1-0-1 3/6 =50% Away 0-2-1 2/9 = 22% Quite a big difference but a statistician would obviously require more data to be convinced. Unfortunately we've only played 18 games. McAllister is a regular starter, but what if there are other changes to the defence during a match? We have conceded late goals in 7 games this season and in 4 of those matches a change had been made to the defence during the course of the game. What about the defence at the start of the game? I shouldn't have been surprised when I looked into this because it's something I've touched on in previous posts, but the changes to the defensive set-up this season have been quite staggering. Out of the 18 games played so far(in the league) we have taken the field with 11 different defensive line-ups, Orr, Carey, Nyatanga, McAllister have started together 3 times as have Orr, McCombe, Fontaine, McAllister. Many of these changes have been forced of course, but I would tentatively suggest that it's a major contributor to the leaking of late goals. In any form of combat or contest when the going gets toughest is when patterns of learned behviour come to the fore. Everyone needs to know instinctively what his team-mate is going to do and to have full confidence in them doing it. So the common denominator? In a sense there isn't one and there should be, namely, build from the back with a settled defence. Interesting, and detailed piece of work, which clearly some people struggle with understanding: GET A LIFE ! If you can't single one player out to shout abuse at, it's not valid, obviously... Anyway, you made some good points, and I'm sure there are lots of other factors to count in and consider, too. But certainly the unsettled line-up in defence - much of which has been forced on City - has played a part. At some point this season, we have lost Orr, McAllister, Fontaine, Carey and Nyatanga with injury. I think the only player who hasn't is McCombe who has arguably been the worst defender of the lot - but playing alongside various different players doesn't help his cause. The same has to be one of the causes in midfield and up front as to why we don't create and score enough, too. We have five midfielders and strikers (Hartley, Sno, Haynes, Clarkson and Saborio) who have all played at various times. But you could argue that each of them has suffered from injury, illness and loss of form which has meant they've all been in and out of the side too. Unfortunately, I don't have the stats to hand as you do, but I would say Maynard has not had a chance to play alongside the same individual enough to develop a decent partnership - and he himself has played a mixture of centre forward and inside left. Whilst I think rotation done well is a good thing, I think it has to be introduced once a team is settled and playing well, and players are ready for a change. At the moment, we seem to be making too many changes and too often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eskay Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 We need to start pressuring teams in the final 5 minutes instead of letting them do it to us (especially at home). We should be parked in their half until the whistle blows. A very simplistic view I know but is it any more complicated than that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 McCoombe has got the blame on here but he was nowhere near Henderson with either their first or third goal. . I think you have given the answer there, although not intendid. It was MCcombes job to be "near him"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 We need to start pressuring teams in the final 5 minutes instead of letting them do it to us (especially at home). We should be parked in their half until the whistle blows. A very simplistic view I know but is it any more complicated than that? If you play with a wide man and width that wide man could be by the oppo corner flag wasting time in the 95th min, or, as often used to happen(with our wingers) they could counter attack and we get a late goal ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tunley Legend Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 If you play with a wide man and width that wide man could be by the oppo corner flag wasting time in the 95th min, or, as often used to happen(with our wingers) they could counter attack and we get a late goal ourselves. Another excellent reason to have a wideman in your line-up. Our players do not have the luxury of being able to knock the ball out wide to a good player with nice footwork who can literally waste 20 seconds in injury time. At the moment we have to go through the middle either by lumping the ball or along the deck and it makes it that much easier for the opposition to win the ball back and put pressure on us. So what we gain by being "compact" we also lose by not being able to spread the play in these situations. I suppose as a manager you pays your money and takes your choice - I just wish GJ's choice involved a wide player!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 If you play with a wide man and width that wide man could be by the oppo corner flag wasting time in the 95th min, or, as often used to happen(with our wingers) they could counter attack and we get a late goal ourselves. Excellent shout to marshy for giving us the raw information about the 'common denominator' and you've derived a great recommendation from it. OK, posters have been writing for months that we need a wide player and you've come up with another valid reason for having one - i.e. to waste the seconds away when we're defending a slender one goal lead in the final minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City1970 Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Listening to GJ after last week's game it seems we are 'looking at' why we leak late goals and are trying to find a common denominator, so far with no luck apparently. The first question to ask is whether or not we actually do leak late goals, or is that just the way it appears. If we split a match into 9 ten-minute sections and add on, say, five mins. for added time then around 13% percent of goals should be conceded in the final ten mins. + added time.(1.25/9.5*100). Our % is around 36%(8/22 conceded in last 10 mins.) which is almost 3 times the expected amount if goals were spread evenly throughout the 95 mins. More goals tend to be conceded generally in football as a match reaches its climax so how do we compare to other clubs? Well there are only so many spare hours in a day so I've just looked at the top 6, bottom 6, and middle 6 in the CCC. Figures range from 0 % to 35% and average out at approx. 17%. So it looks as though we do have a problem as we're over double the average! OK, next move was to have a quick look at Player to refresh my memory on their winning goal last weekend. As they move forward with the ball our four defenders appear to be sucked into the ball, indicative to me of a team where individuals have little idea of what their team-mates are going to do, or confidence in them to deal with the situation. I hope I'm not being too harsh here , it's just the way I read it. As it happened a fortuitous bounce took the ball to Henderson, but a slipped ball to their right, our left, to an unmarked player could just as easily have led to a goal. Well thinking that McAllister would have been there(hopefully) if he'd still been on the pitch, and bearing in mind that he's been substituted a number of times recently, I thought I'd take a look at outcomes when McAllister is substituted, and when he completes a match. Here are the figures:- Completing the game (WDL) Home 4-3-0 Points 15/21 =71% Away 1-4-1 7/18 =39% When substituted Home 1-0-1 3/6 =50% Away 0-2-1 2/9 = 22% Quite a big difference but a statistician would obviously require more data to be convinced. Unfortunately we've only played 18 games. McAllister is a regular starter, but what if there are other changes to the defence during a match? We have conceded late goals in 7 games this season and in 4 of those matches a change had been made to the defence during the course of the game. What about the defence at the start of the game? I shouldn't have been surprised when I looked into this because it's something I've touched on in previous posts, but the changes to the defensive set-up this season have been quite staggering. Out of the 18 games played so far(in the league) we have taken the field with 11 different defensive line-ups, Orr, Carey, Nyatanga, McAllister have started together 3 times as have Orr, McCombe, Fontaine, McAllister. Many of these changes have been forced of course, but I would tentatively suggest that it's a major contributor to the leaking of late goals. In any form of combat or contest when the going gets toughest is when patterns of learned behviour come to the fore. Everyone needs to know instinctively what his team-mate is going to do and to have full confidence in them doing it. So the common denominator? In a sense there isn't one and there should be, namely, build from the back with a settled defence. The common denominator is McCombe. He has no confidence, No positional sense and creates problems for others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
internetjef Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Great post marshy I have always been a firm believer in having a regular defensive unit. We did great twith the Basso, Orr, McCallister, Carey and Fonts combo that has worked so well for us in recent seasons. I would even stretch to elliot somewhat in front of those 5 getting tackles in. That was one hell of a defensive 6 In fact my only concern with defence at this time last year was who would we get to replace carey as he got older. Considering how settled that seemed to be i bet none of us would have believed how much change to that we have had this season. This isnt a dig at GJ, much of it has been forced by injury, and no one could have seen Basso situation coming, although the formation changes have contributed to it somewhat. Interesting to see if the changes continue once injuries clear up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigdave60 Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 If we defend better further up the pitch instead of inviting teams on to us it would be a start to stopping the rot. Too often I have seen opposition players running at us and the first time a tackle is attempted is at our penalty area. We could make a start this weekend by closing down more quickly in midfield higher up the pitch, inviting teams on to us will see the same pattern of late goals continuing. Agreed. Especially after we have scored a goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.