Width

[cushynumber 25,178]

I get why we need width but I just dont get why we play with two wingers as well as two overlapping full backs.

If we played with no wingers at all it doesn't necessarily mean we lack width because Tav and wallace can still get forward. Similarly if we played with fullbacks that want to defend and dont like getting forward then I see the point of wingers on both flanks - But how many teams actually play with both two wingers AND two attacking overlapping full backs?

One or the other - yes - but both? 

[Getstiffed 8,863]

This is a legitimate tactical gripe and its lost amongst all the white noise.

Left foot wide right, right foot wide left boils my piss. Always has always will.

I suppose the logic may be that both FBs are supposed to use the space created by wide men cutting in but we've rarely done it this season compared to last, especially in Tav's case. He's been really measured with his runs forward this season so far.

[eejay the dj 31,964]

Simply put .We are not Barcelona and never will be

It's a crock of shite now 

The need to mix it up and adapt will always be crucial 

Even Pepe might be finding that out in the most competive league in the world  

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,510]

11 minutes ago, Getstiffed said:

This is a legitimate tactical gripe and its lost amongst all the white noise.

Left foot wide right, right foot wide left boils my piss. Always has always will.

I suppose the logic may be that both FBs are supposed to use the space created by wide men cutting in but we've rarely done it this season compared to last, especially in Tav's case. He's been really measured with his runs forward this season so far.

This is the general idea but we execute it so poorly.

[Getstiffed 8,863]

3 minutes ago, TheLoudenTavernier said:

This is the general idea but we execute it so poorly.

Doesn't help that its usually a number 10 and a (blatantly obvious) centre forward that play wide right and left.

[Bears r us 30,796]

15 minutes ago, Getstiffed said:

This is a legitimate tactical gripe and its lost amongst all the white noise.

Left foot wide right, right foot wide left boils my piss. Always has always will.

I suppose the logic may be that both FBs are supposed to use the space created by wide men cutting in but we've rarely done it this season compared to last, especially in Tav's case. He's been really measured with his runs forward this season so far.

That is a tactic that only works on the odd occasion and like yourself I do not like it. If a winger is on the left then he should be left footed or on the right, right footed IMO.  

[Getstiffed 8,863]

Just now, Bears r us said:

That is a tactic that only works on the odd occasion and like yourself I do not like it. If a winger is on the left then he should be left footed or on the right, right footed IMO.  

Only got one player that plays out there that wants to get to the byline and he's usually sat on the bench or in the stands.

[pollok-bear 7,537]

33 minutes ago, cushynumber said:

I get why we need width but I just dont get why we play with two wingers as well as two overlapping full backs.

If we played with no wingers at all it doesn't necessarily mean we lack width because Tav and wallace can still get forward. Similarly if we played with fullbacks that want to defend and dont like getting forward then I see the point of wingers on both flanks - But how many teams actually play with both two wingers AND two attacking overlapping full backs?

One or the other - yes - but both? 

Probs the best football post I've read in here in ages. I think your spot on with that mate. 

Next week our tactics have to be 100% spot on and if they are we can do it. 

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,510]

2 minutes ago, Getstiffed said:

Doesn't help that its usually a number 10 and a (blatantly obvious) centre forward that play wide right and left.

It works much better on the right IMO.

Sometimes on the left, Wallace has a tendency to run up on the inside and take a pass from McKay rather than overlapping and getting a cross in which would probably lead to more opportunities like the one we scored from on Friday.

[Bears r us 30,796]

Just now, Getstiffed said:

Only got one player that plays out there that wants to get to the byline and he's usually sat on the bench or in the stands.

This is true, I would love him to get a wee run of games and see if he can get balls back from the byline on a regular basis. I think it is the most effective way to get goals. 

[Bad Robot 21,150]

Correct me if I'm wrong but Waghorn is left footed and he's put on the right wing and we wonder why he struggles there.

What I also see with our play is that some players just don't stay ahead of the play and allow the player behind them whose just recieved the ball on the inside to overtake as they all run forward. Dodoo done it on Friday night and it's frustrating to watch and frankly it's just laziness or poor pitch geography ?

[loyalfollower 1,543]

Going forward either wide or through the middle has become a passing exercise and atm playing 2 wingers and overlapping fullbacks won't change it. I like holt but watch how many times he takes 5-6 paces to the left then passes 5 yds. It's the same in defence aswell.  Only niko and the odd McKay pass will pick another wide man out and out of 10 outfield players that is unacceptable but I can't see it being fixed any time soon.

this is my biggest gripe with the players and the only gripe I have with the manager really.

just watched the hudds vs weds game there and watch hudds was like watching us at times but the only difference is when the center backs split a deep lying midfielder almost adopts a sweeper role and is quite a good passer. Knocking balls diagonal to the forwards and wingers.  Something we lack

[Vanoli 4,625]

We stretch the park too much sometimes for me. Everyone's fucking miles away from each other, especially up top. It's a big factor in why our tempo is too slow and we end up moving the ball across the park and back again. 

[VladimirWeiss69 802]

MOH is the only player we have who is the most natural winger and is the only player who hits the byline for the ball to be cut back. The least we could do is actually start the guy. Our forwards aren't exactly firing on all cylinders and I think Mckay only has something like one assist in the league so far. Put it this way he couldn't do any worse than what our forwards have been so far.

[Ace 3,556]

What annoys me is the constant demand to play the ball wide, it's incredibly predictable and slows our game down.

What's wrong with a more direct (on the ground not big hoofs up the park) style of play?

Get on top of the CH and force him to turn.

[there'sonlyoneamoruso 1,724]

I agree with the OP about this. It is a totally unnecessary tactic for us right now.

One goes and the other covers, but both going leaves us too exposed. I am also in agreement about the wingers being played on the wrong side and asked to cut in. Why oh why are we doing it when it isn't working?

We definitely need to mix up our play as we are way to predictable. I'd love to see the occasional ball over the top for McKay to run onto.

I hope MW can learn to evolve his tactics as this is vital to success.

[TMB 14,167]

3 hours ago, cushynumber said:

I get why we need width but I just dont get why we play with two wingers as well as two overlapping full backs.

If we played with no wingers at all it doesn't necessarily mean we lack width because Tav and wallace can still get forward. Similarly if we played with fullbacks that want to defend and dont like getting forward then I see the point of wingers on both flanks - But how many teams actually play with both two wingers AND two attacking overlapping full backs?

One or the other - yes - but both? 

We don't play with wingers.  We're shoehorning guys like Miller, Waghorn, and McKay out wide.  If we had actual wingers we would probably be doing a lot better.

[Gandhi1872 186]

58 minutes ago, Ace said:

What annoys me is the constant demand to play the ball wide, it's incredibly predictable and slows our game down.

What's wrong with a more direct (on the ground not big hoofs up the park) style of play?

Get on top of the CH and force him to turn.

Everytime someone gets the ball in between the lines or in the final third their first thought is to go sideways or back. There is no urgency or ruthlessness to penetrate/play the killer pass. 

[Bears 792]

If we have 3 upfront then play as a winger and an inside forward. If the balls wide on the left then the right sided attacker must come inside (and vice versa). His full back can cover the wing area for width. At the moment we spend too much time camped around 30 yards out in a semi circle. There must be more penetration with players to get the ball in the box without losing possession.

[Truth_is_out_there 197]

3 hours ago, loyalfollower said:

Going forward either wide or through the middle has become a passing exercise and atm playing 2 wingers and overlapping fullbacks won't change it. I like holt but watch how many times he takes 5-6 paces to the left then passes 5 yds. It's the same in defence aswell.  Only niko and the odd McKay pass will pick another wide man out and out of 10 outfield players that is unacceptable but I can't see it being fixed any time soon.

this is my biggest gripe with the players and the only gripe I have with the manager really.

just watched the hudds vs weds game there and watch hudds was like watching us at times but the only difference is when the center backs split a deep lying midfielder almost adopts a sweeper role and is quite a good passer. Knocking balls diagonal to the forwards and wingers.  Something we lack

You make some very interesting points, but to be fair, Niko is the only player we have with the class & ability to do the kind of passes you're referring to. He was very good on Friday night, before he tired. It will be interesting to see if our manager plays him from the start against 'them'.

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

5 hours ago, cushynumber said:

I get why we need width but I just dont get why we play with two wingers as well as two overlapping full backs.

If we played with no wingers at all it doesn't necessarily mean we lack width because Tav and wallace can still get forward. Similarly if we played with fullbacks that want to defend and dont like getting forward then I see the point of wingers on both flanks - But how many teams actually play with both two wingers AND two attacking overlapping full backs?

One or the other - yes - but both? 

It looks like McKay doesn't even get it. I'm sure he just doesn't know what his role is anymore. If we could get goals for his despondency, we'd be top of the league.Wallace spends most of the game running past him.

The we we have left footed Waggy on the right. The we have Tav's who knows no other to pass to, then can't find his way back.

TBH, it's torrid stuff and I honestly think players are struggling with the whole MW concept as it now is, whatever the fuck that is, because I can't see it anymore.

 

[siddiqi_drinker 14,635]

5 hours ago, cushynumber said:

I get why we need width but I just dont get why we play with two wingers as well as two overlapping full backs.

If we played with no wingers at all it doesn't necessarily mean we lack width because Tav and wallace can still get forward. Similarly if we played with fullbacks that want to defend and dont like getting forward then I see the point of wingers on both flanks - But how many teams actually play with both two wingers AND two attacking overlapping full backs?

One or the other - yes - but both? 

Good question with what may be a simple answer.  It worked well last season and the manager assumes, perhaps incorrectly, that it should always work.  When executed well it is a joy to watch, when players Wallace/McKay don't link well (most of this season) then both players look off form and the tactic fails.  

Does the manager persevere and push both full backs forward and hope it works out or does he tell Tav and Wallace to restrict the forward runs, which has been the case so far this season, a tactic which does not help p,ayers such as McKay.  Quite a conundrum.

[The Dude 20,026]

5 hours ago, TheLoudenTavernier said:

This is the general idea but we execute it so poorly.

There's also the idea that you create a better angle either for a shot or a pass than hitting the by-line and crossing it. Not to mention more potential for a penalty when the winger comes onto what is, in theory, the full-backs weaker side.

[Getstiffed 8,863]

9 minutes ago, The Dude said:

There's also the idea that you create a better angle either for a shot or a pass than hitting the by-line and crossing it. Not to mention more potential for a penalty when the winger comes onto what is, in theory, the full-backs weaker side.

There's never enough players in the box even on the odd occasion someone does get to the byline and put a ball in and when McKay or Waghorn do cut in neither full back is making the run into the space wide (or overlapping) its always a run back into traffic.

When we played they horrible bastards last season both players playing wide, McKay and Shiels, played right on the touch line for most of the game. It stretched them which seems ass backwards to me because unlike every other team outside of them and ourselves, they don't try and squeeze the game narrow against us. We should be stretching teams like that especially at Ibrox. At the very least it allows our FBs or the MFs making runs in gaps created which are invariably on the inside of the opposition FBs.

[Moody Blue 9,352]

At the moment, watching Waghorn wide right is killing me; he's fucking dreadful.  Same applies on the other side.....McKay has been crap.  I know it comes down to formations, but i'd seriously consider bringing in Hodson at full back and shoving Tavernier up one position...he's one of the best crossers of the ball in our team and would remove the need for him to waste energy coming back.  Recognise his defending has improved but I'm thinking of what he can give by his crossing / forward play.   He couldn't play in a 4-3-3- but if it was more of 4-4-2 or 4-5-1, then I'd play Tav on the right of midfield.  He's better than MOH and Forrester and they're the obvious candidates to replace Waghorn.  On the left?  fuck knows.