Lack of the Counter...?

[Bruno's Manbun 2,631]

Apologies if this has been touched on, but I was thinking about it this morning and honestly can't think of any examples where we have created chances from a counter attack.

Counter attacking is a basic part of the game, and any team should have the ability to turn defence into attack, but do we ever do it??

My mind draws back to thinking of Wes loitering with the ball after gathering a corner, instead of distributing it quickly to catch opponents off guard - another fundamental flaw in Warburton's 'build from the back' style of play. Maybe Wes is scared he'd fuck it up, or maybe Mark's voice is niggling in the back of his head? 

 

[cr3_bear 14,892]

11 minutes ago, 55Bear said:

Apologies if this has been touched on, but I was thinking about it this morning and honestly can't think of any examples where we have created chances from a counter attack.

Counter attacking is a basic part of the game, and any team should have the ability to turn defence into attack, but do we ever do it??

My mind draws back to thinking of Wes loitering with the ball after gathering a corner, instead of distributing it quickly to catch opponents off guard - another fundamental flaw in Warburton's 'build from the back' style of play. Maybe Wes is scared he'd fuck it up, or maybe Mark's voice is niggling in the back of his head? 

 

It's shocking , even back at the 5-1 game at the piggery we had countless chances to hit them on the break when we were still in the game . First time I really noticed it and it has annoyed me more and more as the weeks have went on 

[Captain Hilts 12,819]

Foderingham usually takes an age to get the ball out (probably under instruction from the manager), meaning that the opposition players are given time to get pack in to their positions.  In the rare occasions he does distribute it quickly, the ball is 9 times out of 10 passed sideways instead of forward.

[Bruno's Manbun 2,631]

2 minutes ago, Captain Hilts said:

Foderingham usually takes an age to get the ball out (probably under instruction from the manager), meaning that the opposition players are given time to get pack in to their positions.  In the rare occasions he does distribute it quickly, the ball is 9 times out of 10 passed sideways instead of forward.

This is what I'm thinking as well, he'd rather us slow the play down than take a chance. 

Thinking about it actually, I seem to recall one perfectly pass he played against Hearts all the way up to McKay on the LW. He obviously has the ability, so why not do it more often. Even if 4 or 5 times out of 10 it opened something up surely it's worth it. Risk reward and all that.

[donegal_ger 253]

We used to counter very quickly in the first half of last season, in fact we used to do a lot of things well during that time we pressed better won the ball higher up the pitch, the space between our defence/midfield/attack was smaller (many times Wes was the only player in our half), we scored more and created more chances and conceded less.

Then St Johnstone game came along we got beat and the manager was criticised for the goals we conceded and the odd consolation goal we gave up in other matches so he changed it, now our back 4 sit along our 18 yard box so the don't get caught out with pace and therefore we mess about with the ball at the back more costing us more goals, there is so much space between our defence/midfield/attack that we are disjointed and struggle to perform as a team.

Now if we went back to playing as we did then I am sure our results would improve although we would still be vulnerable to the break away goal I still think we would score more and concede less in the long run. 

[TMB 14,167]

We're not direct enough to counter.  When you watch the Old Firm games you can see this as a real night and day issue between the two teams.  Celtic's players are very direct and they look to make something happen quickly.  We fuck about and it gives the opposition time to get back in numbers and reorganise.  Barrie McKay often doesn't defend (some have suggested it's tactical) so we break, he gets the ball high up the pitch, only to pass it back to midfield and we fanny about again. 

We need more direct players and better attackers to give us a cutting edge.  We're not scoring anywhere near enough goals. 

[Gandhi1872 186]

13 minutes ago, cr3_bear said:

It's shocking , even back at the 5-1 game at the piggery we had countless chances to hit them on the break when we were still in the game . First time I really noticed it and it has annoyed me more and more as the weeks have went on 

Not exactly giving yourself the best chance of counter attacking in that game when you play 37 year old Kenny Miller on the right wing. 

[Gandhi1872 186]

28 minutes ago, 55Bear said:

Apologies if this has been touched on, but I was thinking about it this morning and honestly can't think of any examples where we have created chances from a counter attack.

Counter attacking is a basic part of the game, and any team should have the ability to turn defence into attack, but do we ever do it??

My mind draws back to thinking of Wes loitering with the ball after gathering a corner, instead of distributing it quickly to catch opponents off guard - another fundamental flaw in Warburton's 'build from the back' style of play. Maybe Wes is scared he'd fuck it up, or maybe Mark's voice is niggling in the back of his head? 

 

Even in general play with this team, there seems to be no urgency to play the decisive pass or attempt to penetrate. Too often when players get the ball between the lines or on the wing their first thought is to go back or sideways. 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,810]

It's not about scoring.

It's about playing pretty, possession based football. Pitch geography and corners.

That's the stats you want to be looking at...

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

The good old why play 3 passes when 33 will be so much better. 

[Captain Hilts 12,819]

8 minutes ago, 55Bear said:

This is what I'm thinking as well, he'd rather us slow the play down than take a chance. 

Thinking about it actually, I seem to recall one perfectly pass he played against Hearts all the way up to McKay on the LW. He obviously has the ability, so why not do it more often. Even if 4 or 5 times out of 10 it opened something up surely it's worth it. Risk reward and all that.

Yeah I remember that pass against Hearts. It was sublime.  He's got that in his locker.  I do feel for him when he holds on to the ball for ages and the crowd gets on his back. 

The best way to combat teams who play every man behind the ball (which is most teams in this league) is to counter them as much as possible.  Pissing about with the ball between the centre halves and the midfield more than suits the opposition most of the time, as all they have to do is camp inside their own 18 yard box.

[Bruno's Manbun 2,631]

4 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

It's not about scoring.

It's about playing pretty, possession based football. Pitch geography and corners.

That's the stats you want to be looking at...

[Big Al 55 9,276]

Big Wes played a stunning pass to setup a counter against Hearts. Drilled a kickout low through to Barry I think it was. Anyway was soon after that I stopped watching.

[Bruno's Manbun 2,631]

2 minutes ago, Big Al II said:

Big Wes played a stunning pass to setup a counter against Hearts. Drilled a kickout low through to Barry I think it was. Anyway was soon after that I stopped watching.

Yeah that's the one I mentioned a couple posts above. It was sublime. Why not just take a chance and do it more often! Like I say even if it only comes off 40-50% of the time surely it must be worth it trying to play more direct

[MasterD 7,436]

29 minutes ago, THE_MIGHTY_BEARS said:

We're not direct enough to counter.  When you watch the Old Firm games you can see this as a real night and day issue between the two teams.  Celtic's players are very direct and they look to make something happen quickly.  We fuck about and it gives the opposition time to get back in numbers and reorganise.  Barrie McKay often doesn't defend (some have suggested it's tactical) so we break, he gets the ball high up the pitch, only to pass it back to midfield and we fanny about again. 

We need more direct players and better attackers to give us a cutting edge.  We're not scoring anywhere near enough goals. 

Been saying this for about 14 months.

The first couple of months when MW came in everything was done quickly, we got the ball we went forward with pace and with few passes to get from our 3rd to the final 3rd. The ball went out of play our players were sprinting to get the ball and take a quick throw in/free-kick. A lot of play was off the cuff quick attacking.

About the middle of October that year that went to fuck and it seemed to be about keeping possession and everything is slow. 30secs for the keeper to throw it out and he gives it to a defender 5 yards away, kick-out take ages and usually go to the same place. Too many passes that don't have any purpose, back and forward left and right, the opposition could get deck chairs out at times because we don't look to have any intent on going anywhere. Most of our play looks scripted and you could call out every pass 5secs before it happens.

It's brutal to watch ,and piss easy for the opposition to set-up against.

[Gandalf the Blue 1,384]

Slow and predictable in our attacking for months

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

14 minutes ago, 55Bear said:

Yeah that's the one I mentioned a couple posts above. It was sublime. Why not just take a chance and do it more often! Like I say even if it only comes off 40-50% of the time surely it must be worth it trying to play more direct

Warburton will tell you it's simply giving away possession. 

While he has a point you only have to watch the midfield when Wes collects the ball not one of them makes a run forward into space. 

[RFCRobertson 11,789]

In wes's defence,  I keep noticing opposition players run in  front of him,  effectively blocking him and by the tine they've moved the player making their run is too far forward to receive and it causes confusion/pain in the ass since wes has to then asses who to give the ball too. 

 

[Bruno's Manbun 2,631]

1 minute ago, Courtyard Bear said:

Warburton will tell you it's simply giving away possession. 

While he has a point you only have to watch the midfield when Wes collects the ball not one of them makes a run forward into space. 

Spot on. And lack of movement off the ball, that's another thread in itself 

[Johnny Dangerously 7,562]

Remember big gas meters hoofs up the park, lot to be said for it, helped us win the Cup Winners Cup. Those were the days "Get it up the fuckin park"

[WGOH 2,344]

We tried to do it on Saturday a few times. Big Fod pinged a ball up to Garner and it bounced over the defender I'm sure and he was in the box, but he lifted his head looking to square the ball and no one was within 20 yards of the box and he had to hit it straight at the keeper. 

We're just shite. 

[wotmeworry 92]

1 hour ago, Gandhi1872 said:

Even in general play with this team, there seems to be no urgency to play the decisive pass or attempt to penetrate. Too often when players get the ball between the lines or on the wing their first thought is to go back or sideways. 

Except in the last 10 minutes when we're 1 down.

[ritchieshearercaldow 22,190]

I think the consensus is we don't play attacking football we play (or try to play) passing football, all too often with no end result

[jim89 342]

I also think there's a massive lack of just having a shot, it's like the players are instructed to only shoot when they are 100% sure they will score, else it's not worth giving up possession. We could have so many more goals if we just took more shots and chased up saves/rebounds. But now, because we never seem to shoot, we are terrible at it, half the shots are along the ground at a pace you could chuck your hat on. (Apart from Hyndman, who can put the laces through it still, it hasn't been drilled out of him yet.)

[gersandy 594]

3 hours ago, 55Bear said:

Apologies if this has been touched on, but I was thinking about it this morning and honestly can't think of any examples where we have created chances from a counter attack.

Counter attacking is a basic part of the game, and any team should have the ability to turn defence into attack, but do we ever do it??

My mind draws back to thinking of Wes loitering with the ball after gathering a corner, instead of distributing it quickly to catch opponents off guard - another fundamental flaw in Warburton's 'build from the back' style of play. Maybe Wes is scared he'd fuck it up, or maybe Mark's voice is niggling in the back of his head? 

 

The problem being that most teams have stuck 10 men behind the ball, so no possability of a counter attack.