Playing out from the back

[Teddybear123 215]

This is something that I really liked about our team last season. However, today, and most of the games this season, we just end up having all of our possession in our own half. When we are failing to play it out effectively, why do we not put it up to the striker from the goal kick?- especially on a day like today when garner has the beating of the centre half in the air.

By no means am I saying we should abandon our possession based style, I just think that we should get it into better areas in a direct fashion before we start playing if carving out the attack from the back isn't working. 

[northern bear 2,894]

There were times today when we were trying to keep possession I'm the full back areas and it was far too tight. I'm all about keeping the ball but at certain times it has to go long. 

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,540]

1 minute ago, Teddybear123 said:

This is something that I really liked about our team last season. However, today, and most of the games this season, we just end up having all of our possession in our own half. When we are failing to play it out effectively, why do we not put it up to the striker from the goal kick?- especially on a day like today when garner has the beating of the centre half in the air.

By no means am I saying we should abandon our possession based style, I just think that we should get it into better areas in a direct fashion before we start playing if carving out the attack from the back isn't working. 

Punting it up the park to the striker just gives a 50/50 chance of the ball coming straight back into our half anyway.

I'd rather have possession in our own half than take the chance of just turning the ball over to them.

[Teddybear123 215]

Just now, TheLoudenTavernier said:

Punting it up the park to the striker just gives a 50/50 chance of the ball coming straight back into our half anyway.

I'd rather have possession in our own half than take the chance of just turning the ball over to them.

Why? Having the ball in our own half without building an attack from it does absolute fuck all other than get our possession stats up.

[Bad Robot 21,462]

I was suprised to see we had 43% possesion although not much would have been in the attacking third.

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,540]

2 minutes ago, Teddybear123 said:

Why? Having the ball in our own half without building an attack from it does absolute fuck all other than get our possession stats up.

Because I'd rather have possession than punt the ball up the park and risk giving it straight back to them.

Its significantly harder for the opposition to score a goal against us when we have possession ??

[Teddybear123 215]

5 minutes ago, TheLoudenTavernier said:

Punting it up the park to the striker just gives a 50/50 chance of the ball coming straight back into our half anyway.

I'd rather have possession in our own half than take the chance of just turning the ball over to them.

I agree with the principle- the semi final last year we were excellent at playing out when put under pressure, but today most of their attacks came from our defence misplacing passes when under extreme pressure and risking giving away sloppy goals.

[Inigo 32,608]

Don't have a problem with it. Have a problem with people not being able to pass or control it any more.

[Teddybear123 215]

Quote

Because I'd rather have possession than punt the ball up the park and risk giving it straight back to them.

Its significantly harder for the opposition to score a goal against us when we have possession ??

going by that logic, you'd rather 80% possession with the game finishing 0 0 than 55% possession with us winning 3 1

[loyalfollower 1,543]

4 minutes ago, TheLoudenTavernier said:

Because I'd rather have possession than punt the ball up the park and risk giving it straight back to them.

Its significantly harder for the opposition to score a goal against us when we have possession ??

Unless kiernan is the one in possession 

[bluenose_n1 536]

Playing out is ok in theory 

but they hounded it off us which forced us into making mistakes 

if kiernan goes long instead trying to play out we don't lose second goal

sometimes the keeper has to punt it just to take the pressure and allows to take natural shape again

sat to deep which in turn allowed them to come on to us then they grow more and more confident and they took they're chances

but if McKay scores the one just after half time it's a different game

 

[Wearethepeople72 1,847]

It's okay when you have the time and the space to do it. Too many times today we risked it in tight areas, something you can't afford to do in a game like this.

You also need to have the ability to do it. Something Rob Kiernan doesn't have...

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,540]

2 minutes ago, Teddybear123 said:

I agree with the principle- the semi final last year we were excellent at playing out when put under pressure, but today most of their attacks came from our defence misplacing passes when under extreme pressure and risking giving away sloppy goals.

We just need to sharpen up our passing, it was very sloppy at times today. More movement from the players off the ball as well so that whoever has the ball has plenty of options.

Couple of times today we were knocking the ball around their players in wee triangles and it's good football but other times we had a player on the ball and nobody showing for him other than the option of a square ball.

I'm all for the possession and playing out from the back approach but the player on the ball should always have at least 2/3 options. It's when there's a lack of movement in midfield and our defence end up with no option other than to play the ball between themselves that the problems will come because it invites pressure.

[frazer89 93]

our passing at the back was sketchy. Barton almost scored an OG

[OnwardsandUpwards 834]

11 minutes ago, Teddybear123 said:

Why? Having the ball in our own half without building an attack from it does absolute fuck all other than get our possession stats up.

And allows the opposition to organise effectively and just allow us pointless possession.Possession for possession sake wins you nothing.We need to be able to mix things up a little and hopefully Garner will be the ideal outlet for this.

[Teddybear123 215]

1 minute ago, bluenose_n1 said:

its ok in theory 

but they houses it off us which forced us into making mistakes 

if kiernan goes long instead trying to play out we don't lose second goal

sometimes the keeper has to punt it just to take the pressure and allows to take natural shape again

sat to deep which in turn allowed them to come on to us then they grow more and more confident and they took they're chances

but if McKay scores the one just after half time it's a different game

 

obviously if he does then yes, there is no goal. However, he should not have to do this. If you look at the Killie game, we played so many long balls from the defenders, but these balls are going to be less accurate than if we play it long from the goal kick. This is why I think if we are being forced down this route within the course of the match then imo we might aswell ask wes to put it long anyway as we have more chance of winning the ball back than if the centre backs are forced to pump it forward.

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,540]

6 minutes ago, Teddybear123 said:

going by that logic, you'd rather 80% possession with the game finishing 0 0 than 55% possession with us winning 3 1

Not at all, winning is the most important thing of course. 

If it's keeping the ball just for the sake of it then it's pointless but when it's done right then possession football is very effective as we showed last season. Just because it's not working as well just now I don't think we should go to a punt up the park in the hope that our striker wins it.

[frazer89 93]

Too much possession without making it count and its not the first time this year either.  

[Teddybear123 215]

5 minutes ago, TheLoudenTavernier said:

 Not at all, winning is the most important thing of course. 

If it's keeping the ball just for the sake of it then it's pointless but when it's done right then possession football is very effective as we showed last season. Just because it's not working as well just now I don't think we should go to a punt up the park in the hope that our striker wins it.

I'm not saying  that's hould become our style of play, I'm saying that if it's 30 mins in and it's not working, then we should try putting it long and then play possession in the better areas from the knock downs. This would also make us far less predictable.

[bluenose_n1 536]

3 minutes ago, Teddybear123 said:

obviously if he does then yes, there is no goal. However, he should not have to do this. If you look at the Killie game, we played so many long balls from the defenders, but these balls are going to be less accurate than if we play it long from the goal kick. This is why I think if we are being forced down this route within the course of the match then imo we might aswell ask wes to put it long anyway as we have more chance of winning the ball back than if the centre backs are forced to pump it forward.

Exactly my point,he needs to go long even if it goes out for a shy on they're box It allows us the chance to shape up and go again

we got deeper and deeper and certain points which caused us problems

how the manager even allows kiernan to have the ball at his feet is beyond me

 

[Teddybear123 215]

1 minute ago, bluenose_n1 said:

Exactly my point,he needs to go long even if it goes out for a shy on they're box It allows us the chance to shape up and go again

we got deeper and deeper and certain points which caused us problems

how the manager even allows kiernan to have the ball at his feet is beyond me

 

Agreed. In fairness to Kiernan, he was outstanding with the ball in the  semi final, I'm one of the few that believes he's capable of playing with the ball and has potential to be a player. Don't forget today he was forced to play left centre back.

[Ibroxholm 2,281]

Part of our game last year was to hound the opposition out of possession in their defensive third.  We seem to have lost that from our game so far this season.

[Teddybear123 215]

Just now, Ibroxholm said:

Part of our game last year was to hound the opposition out of possession in their defensive third.  We seem to have lost that from our game so far this season.

definitely, any idea why that is? I cant bloody work it out.

[NeoGeo7 10,613]

Had been thinking the same thing and effectively what we have is this sort of situation:

When teams don't press us high up the park we have time on the ball and Barton would drop deep, collect it and distribute wide. However when teams do press our centre backs we end up in a situation where the centre backs have to play the ball forward and thats when we lose possession and then are totally vulnerable to a counter attack (prime example would be their second goal today).

I think when we have this sort of situation we need the full backs to stay back. This gives the keeper 4 outballs so it's not always entirely predictable where the ball is going to go. If it goes to a fullback and they have space they can run with the ball, or they can play inside to centre back or the defensive midfielder or indeed if there is space to the central midfielders.

The only other way to handle it is to go over their high line but the team we have had put together in the last 14 months is all set up to play on the deck and pass through teams. For this to work the players movement off the ball has to be drastically improved hence the reason Barton and Kranjcar in the same midfield don't work.

I also believe the other issue is the 3 forward players since the main striker is isolated. I've never been a huge fan of lone strikers and always think its quite pessimistic and if you are going to go with that then you need quality of service which this year has been lacking big time. McKay and Wallace have been very poor on the left and we lost Waggy to injury for the right and also MOH doesn't seem to be the flavour of the month. Only Tav has actually posed any real threat out wide and with a 4-3-3 we need to have width and players that can hurt the opposition from out wide. If the players aren't cutting it and the manager won't change formation then players need to be dropped. When Garner scored you saw him and Miller switch causing confusion in their defence allowing Miller to peel away and get space and Garner to get the position to score. I feel thats where two strikers works provided they are different from each other but also compliment each other e.g. McCoist and Hateley. Would Waghorn and Garner work? Who knows and we probably never will find out if the manager is insistent on 4-3-3

[Ibroxholm 2,281]

4 minutes ago, Teddybear123 said:

definitely, any idea why that is? I cant bloody work it out.

I can only put it down to change in personnel and maybe loss of confidence.