Jump to content

Corners


Recommended Posts

 

20 hours ago, The Godfather said:

We had about 10 last night and every one was shite :lol:

Something that clearly needs work on as we are brutal at them

Nonsense. NK's goal came after an excellent short corner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 25 July 2016 at 6:14 PM, Misteral said:

Short corners are preferred choice these days and we should all get used to 9/10 being one. I like it TBH, they add more variety to our play. 

If 9/10 are taken short, that's hardly variety, is it?

Not averse to them, but we are completely predictable, making it easier to defend, as well as giving the defenders confidence that nothing will come of it.

We need to shake it up a bit, even if it's 60/40 in favour of short ones - you've got to keep people guessing at times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Godfather said:

Talk pish

an excellent short corner is when it bounces about off opposition? :lol: aye nae bother

It created an opening which  eventually resulted in a goal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 25/07/2016 at 7:17 PM, RFCRobertson said:

Tallest striker that ever was was a Chinease lad by the name of "Yang Changpeng" who was measured at being 6ft9.

Played 613 minutes over 20 appearances netting 5 goals in that time. (2016) 

Paul Millar is the tallest soccer player in Britain, the tallest outfield player in the world and the second tallest soccer player in the world. The giant striker stands at a staggering 6-foot-10. Millar plays for Elgin City, where he signed in 2010 and has remained ever since.

Changpeng is 6-foot-8 and a half inches tall

Source - http://www.thesportster.com/soccer/top-15-tallest-soccer-players-in-the-world/

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, The Godfather said:

Aye by luck not by planning. Our corners are woeful 

NIMO.  Our corners more often than not result in a ball into the box or an attempt on goal, and sometimes a goal.  That may come after a few passes but I don't think they are less successful than our conventional corners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7/26/2016 at 9:50 AM, .Williamson. said:

Our corners are pointless 

That's quite good actually!  Our corners appear to be used to retain possession; I'm not sure I agree with that, but I've slightly given up on us looking to score from them. From what I sense, I'm getting used to the fact that the team use them to keep the ball in an attacking area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Turnberry18 said:

That's quite good actually!  Our corners appear to be used to retain possession; I'm not sure I agree with that, but I've slightly given up on us looking to score from them. From what I sense, I'm getting used to the fact that the team use them to keep the ball in an attacking area.

Then do very little but pass the ball side ways along the front of the box 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, .Williamson. said:

Then do very little but pass the ball side ways along the front of the box 

Yeah, that's what I mean. But we appear, on recent showing anyway, to be using them to keep possession of the ball in attacking areas. I'm not sure if that is because of the level of opposition we were facing, but it seemed a little more refined than last season. I personally like to see a greater number being put into the box, but it does seem like that will happen very rarely. (Was the corners being "pointless" not intentional?!). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 25/07/2016 at 5:52 PM, Briton said:

I must one of the few who prefer the short corners.  I don't have any figures but my intuition is they are more successful than most Bears think.  They end up with a decent ball into the box or an attempt on goal at least as often as 'ordinary' corners. 

I agree, keeping posession is important.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, HG5 said:

If 9/10 are taken short, that's hardly variety, is it?

Not averse to them, but we are completely predictable, making it easier to defend, as well as giving the defenders confidence that nothing will come of it.

We need to shake it up a bit, even if it's 60/40 in favour of short ones - you've got to keep people guessing at times.

I just think we create different scenarios with them rather than front post, back post or around the penalty spot which are just about your only options with corners direct in to the box. Keeping the CDs back like we mostly do gives us a better chance of defending a counter attack and retaining possession.  In terms of the game as a whole they are more effective in my book. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Misteral said:

I just think we create different scenarios with them rather than front post, back post or around the penalty spot which are just about your only options with corners direct in to the box. Keeping the CDs back like we mostly do gives us a better chance of defending a counter attack and retaining possession.  In terms of the game as a whole they are more effective in my book. 

Fair enough, but keeping CD's back smacks of worrying more about what they'll do to us, rather than confidence in what damage we can inflict on the opposition.

Agree that there's a limit to what balls you can put into the box but, if you've got the right delivery & the right guy on the end, it's easy pickings.

It can be made to work with practice (which we should have learned from Hibs) - we seem to be practicing these short efforts a lot, without any great return, as yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...