Welcome. This site is an archived version of the previous UpTheSaddlers forum (December 2004 to May 2018). To visit the new UTS website, please click here.

Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Reports and reaction from the 2014-2015 season as Walsall finished 3rd in League 1
Forum rules
Be nice or face the consequences
User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:20 pm

chunkster wrote:how many times are we going to say "we should have won that" really??? :( , we only have one proven striker. we have a better defender in the reserves that we don't use??? we have a striker on the bench that doesn't score??? ffs


part of the reason is only having one striker on the pitch.....the guys on bench are then not in practice nor in tune with the game....this is why 2 strikers is better....one of the many reasons

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:25 pm

WFC_Rob wrote:.... We didn't need another striker today anyway - we just needed Forde or Bradshaw to bury one of their chances from inside the six yard box.


Well when u have 2 strikers and someone doesn't bury a chance the second striker has a chance of scoring from a rebound, secondly the additional striker can create more space for the shot by drawing away defenders....

THIRDLY.....if u have 2 strikers on the pitch if one is not on shooting form the other might be.....so it gives you a second bite always....whereas depending on one man is stupid....as if he has off day u r screwed, or if he gets injured....and it is not simply solved by subs on the bench as they have to get into the flow of the game and find their touch....as well as warm up.... there is a whole list of reasons why single isolated striker is a bad idea.....sure its fine if it is working and u are scoring a bucketload of goals anyway....but we are not

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:34 pm

WFC_Rob wrote:
PT wrote:Second half was loads better but I think we only really stretched their keeper the once and bad finishing isn't unlucky and neither is it due to a mystical force field. It's just bad finishing.

It is, but when two of those bad finishes were from a guy who's scored 25 goals for us from similar positions, I think those of us pointing towards bad luck are justified.

Aside from the obvious 'sticking the ball in the onion bag', I don't really think today's performance lacked much.


Well that is the whole point of having a second striker on the pitch, so someone else is accustomed to SHOOTING at goal REGULARLY rather than just one guy who carries the whole burden of scoring.....see what Mourinho said "They missed him as he gives a lot of solutions"....

Are we going to blame Baxendale, Morris, Bakayoko, Cook and others this season for not scoring again when they are on the bench and only get a chance to score once in five games....due to Dean Smith not understanding the benefits of two striker attack systems....ESPECIALLY TO A TEAM STRUGGLING To SCORE ENOUGH

Yes we have been scoring some more...but this is due to 1) Our overall good play in other areas 2) Reliance on one hard working striker

But in reality we are not scoring the amount that our play merits.....and again this season I think this is a formation issue....although we have improved on chance creation and shot taking it seems

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:40 pm

Magic Man Fan wrote:Without wanting to repeat myself, Downing is the weak link and cost us again with his fannying around. If anyone is querying why we are being linked to Man City's Plummer then they are watching different games to me.

Yes back up for Bradshaw is required, but we've only failed to score in one game. Keep clean sheets and we'd be walking this league.

I've seen criticism of Etheridge. Yes, he's been patchy but will improve with experience. Downing has shown no signs of improvement in the last couple of years and 's involved is so many mistakes leading to goals including today.

If no one is going to come in on loan then Preston MUST play. We need defenders who can defend and can play a short pass to the full backs or midfielders, not a weak centre half who's positional sense is woeful and gifts possession away. 40 yard passes are pretty, but pointless if you can't get the basics right.


1-0 results and relying on clean sheets is not sensible strategy for victory...you are likely to concede at least one goal in 90minutes even against teams with a weak attack.... a lapse in concentration or crucial bad contact with the ball is likely at some point in a game.... more emphasis needsto be on goal turnover...and the main issue there is a supporting formation, two men dedicated to getting into scoring positions and shooting....and supporting eachother. ESPECIALLY when our goal tally is hindering our progress...we should be top of the division, but single striker formation is hurting us again.

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:47 pm

latviancheese wrote:For years people have been crying out for us to have solid striker who will score 15-20 goals.

Now we have one people think we should have two. Daft. The fact is the rest of the tea need to chip in, especially now Bradshaw has two centre backs marking him alone every week.



That is another reason why it is silly to always play with one striker, with a second striker...both strikers have more chance of breaking free of the defenders and of causing confusion amongst them, not to mention the second often being in a better position for the pass, creating space with diversion runs and scoring from rebounds and jumping on misplaced passes etc....

ALSO two strikers have more chance of dispossessing the central defenders....

There are TOO MANY reasons to play a second striker....ESPECIALLY when we are not scoring enough

Walsallone
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1901
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:43 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:50 pm

But Sallion if we played 2 up front we might not create many chances. The system we play creates lots of chances and that is good and it is the modern way. A few weeks ago I reminded or told(depending on age) my fellow posters about how football used to be played in the 50s/60s and I was told I was talking rubbish!.Perhaps I was but I am convinced that in the modern game playing 2 "up front" won't work most of the time against the systems used by most teams.
Do you go to matches? If you went yesterday you will know that it wouldn't have mattered if the team had played with 2,3,4 or 5" up front" because for most of the second half we had most of the team"up front" Hence the right back hitting the bar and our defensive midfielder missing a great headed chance!

Walsallone
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1901
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:43 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:54 pm

Incidentally Chris Nichol and Ray Graydon loved 1-0 results and I think you will find during their seasons many such results. Indeed despite our frustration from yesterday we would have won but for a silly freekick conceded by our centre back!

Gripper
Glitterati
 
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 12:08 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:55 pm

I think yesterday told me that our killer instinct still isn't there, saying that I thought the subs were quite good in changing the pace and urgency.

Just fudge release Cook and Baxendale and get another striker in.

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:07 pm

Andy_Petterson wrote:...
In general, the reasons you give about rebounds, missed chances being good reasons to play two up front are no longer valid. The game has developed
so defenses don't let you get away with that anymore.


No sir, these reasons will apply even if we are living in the year 3076...unless the laws of physics change.

How did we score against Chelsea? That's right a rebound....because they happen even against the most expensive teams on the planet....a ball can and will always be miss-hit, or hits the cross bar or post, or rebounds from a keeper's save....But to remind you of the factors which DO NOT change with time, these points apply whoever and whenever you play, no matter what their tactics are and no matter what their formation is:-

1) Two men have a wider circle of coverage....that means more of an area for the midfield or wingers to pass to

2) The above point applies to rebounds...a greater rebound area to pick up and shoot

3) Two strikers have more chance of dispossessing the defenders, which means more goal opportunities in vital areas

4) Two strikers create space by diversion runs...drawing away defenders

5) Two strikers means not being screwed by an injury to your single striker

6) Two strikers means two men are used to shooting for goal...rather than bench warmers who forget how to hit the ball and where the goal is.....like all sports these things are tuned by repetition

7) Two strikers causes confusion among central defenders

8) A second striker can pass the ball to his better placed partner

9) Two strikers have more chance of holding the ball up than one alone who is surrounded...so that midfield can join attack

10) Goalkeepers and defenders have two styles and separate sets of capabilities to deal with rather than just one....If they succeed against your isolated guy, it can mean a goal drought....Having a double success (in closing out a dual attack) is much more difficult.

I don't stick to this issue of 2 strikers dogmatically.....if we were scoring freely regardless, then it wouldn't matter so much but we are not... And its advantages are undeniable.

There are games we win 1-0 that perhaps should be 3-0 (this can cost us)

There are games we score 1 or none and we should've won.

Another advantage is that is unleashes more of our attacking talent rather than keeping it all pointlessly in the refrigerator all season.....like we did with Grimes and Baxendale last season.

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:12 pm

Walsallone wrote:Incidentally Chris Nichol and Ray Graydon loved 1-0 results and I think you will find during their seasons many such results. Indeed despite our frustration from yesterday we would have won but for a silly freekick conceded by our centre back!


Hoping for 1-0 is very risky and very boring....you pay £25 or whatever so should be entertained with goals

I'd rather win 5-3 than 1-0... Yes defence is very important, overall play and possession is very important....but this game is about converting possession into goals....and we are not efficient enough at that.... We all know that we should be top of the table at this stage. We should not have low ambitions when we can see our play merits more goals....even Mourinho praised us above our division norm so we should have higher ambitions ourselves....

Tactics and formation always must be geared towards creating most chances and scoring most goals....especially when we are struggling to score and not giving our own attackers a fair crack of the whip....can't place it all on one guy...if he leaves, injured or a day off then we are screwed

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:22 pm

Gripper wrote:I think yesterday told me that our killer instinct still isn't there, saying that I thought the subs were quite good in changing the pace and urgency.

Just fudge release Cook and Baxendale and get another striker in.


Baxendale would be a very silly release of a player if we did...we really do waste him...He can open up holes in defences, poor guy not given a proper chance. It is not easy to come across such players who can open things up...He can also be a big impact sub if he is given enough time.

Gripper
Glitterati
 
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 12:08 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:29 pm

sallian wrote:
Gripper wrote:I think yesterday told me that our killer instinct still isn't there, saying that I thought the subs were quite good in changing the pace and urgency.

Just fudge release Cook and Baxendale and get another striker in.


Baxendale would be a very silly release of a player if we did...we really do waste him...He can open up holes in defences, poor guy not given a proper chance. It is not easy to come across such players who can open things up...He can also be a big impact sub if he is given enough time.


He's a great ball player, dont get me wrong but I'm looking from the perspective of him being a wasted wage mate.

Cook would be earling more than most in the team don't doubt that, I'd imagine before Bradshaws new contract cook would've been on more.

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:33 pm

Walsallone wrote:But Sallion if we played 2 up front we might not create many chances. The system we play creates lots of chances and that is good and it is the modern way. A few weeks ago I reminded or told(depending on age) my fellow posters about how football used to be played in the 50s/60s and I was told I was talking rubbish!.Perhaps I was but I am convinced that in the modern game playing 2 "up front" won't work most of the time against the systems used by most teams.
Do you go to matches? If you went yesterday you will know that it wouldn't have mattered if the team had played with 2,3,4 or 5" up front" because for most of the second half we had most of the team"up front" Hence the right back hitting the bar and our defensive midfielder missing a great headed chance!


Yes but it is not about having a whole load of players in the opposition half so that there is no space and you are in a stalemate 11 man wall...it is about having 2 strikers in a normal open field of play always ready to pounce and launch a two man attack as soon as possession is gained. It also gives you a long ball option.... A long ball to one isolated man marked by two rarely works but if the ball is released quickly to two up there you do have a chance of scoring.

Yes I agree there is an opportunity cost as there has to be, but this doesn't have to be the cost of less chances....From another angle two strikers can create more of their own chances and give a better target for passes from midfield, defence and wings....there are many ways to do it...obviously something has to be sacrificed but it doesn't have to be a step backwards.

They need to try it more, Dean Smith seems to try something for one game and then regard it as a failure then abandons it...

Think how many times Bradshaw is marked and there is no-one to pass to in a dangerous position. I think it is very silly to talk about outdated systems, formations etc... Nothing is outdated, if you change your formation then the opposition will usually have to adjust theirs. A pitch is a pitch and it still 11 versus 11... Also if you do something that is being abandoned by many, then teams will not be used to dealing with it...and maybe it is a good idea to switch to it at half time if the one man up front routine has not yielded a 2 goal advantage.

There are so many potential formations...but two strikers for a team weak in goals seems like a must....so many ways of configuring the rest of the ship around and behind them.

User avatar
WFC_Rob
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:29 pm
Location: Birmingham/Shrewsbury

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:02 pm

Gripper wrote:Just fudge release Cook and Baxendale and get another striker in.

Ah yes, simple as that. You do realise we'd have to pay up their salaries to get rid of them, don't you?

The stick Jordan Cook's getting on this thread is so typically Walsall. He did absolutely nothing wrong when he came on yesterday, yet reading some of the comments on here, you'd think our failure to win was purely down to him. He's not the best, but let's be at least try and be fair.

User avatar
IHTC.
Site Addict
 
Posts: 5389
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 1:08 pm
Location: West Bromwich

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:20 pm

WFC_Rob wrote:
Gripper wrote:Just fudge release Cook and Baxendale and get another striker in.

Ah yes, simple as that. You do realise we'd have to pay up their salaries to get rid of them, don't you?

The stick Jordan Cook's getting on this thread is so typically Walsall. He did absolutely nothing wrong when he came on yesterday, yet reading some of the comments on here, you'd think our failure to win was purely down to him. He's not the best, but let's be at least try and be fair.


Cannot do anything wrong if you don't do anything in the first place, he's crap end of and to have him as our main back up striker is just ridiculous. Chambers looked more of an attacking threat than him.

User avatar
Andy_Petterson
Glitterati
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:38 pm

sallian wrote:
Andy_Petterson wrote:...
In general, the reasons you give about rebounds, missed chances being good reasons to play two up front are no longer valid. The game has developed
so defenses don't let you get away with that anymore.


No sir, these reasons will apply even if we are living in the year 3076...unless the laws of physics change.

How did we score against Chelsea? That's right a rebound....because they happen even against the most expensive teams on the planet....a ball can and will always be miss-hit, or hits the cross bar or post, or rebounds from a keeper's save....But to remind you of the factors which DO NOT change with time, these points apply whoever and whenever you play, no matter what their tactics are and no matter what their formation is:-

1) Two men have a wider circle of coverage....that means more of an area for the midfield or wingers to pass to

2) The above point applies to rebounds...a greater rebound area to pick up and shoot

3) Two strikers have more chance of dispossessing the defenders, which means more goal opportunities in vital areas

4) Two strikers create space by diversion runs...drawing away defenders

5) Two strikers means not being screwed by an injury to your single striker

6) Two strikers means two men are used to shooting for goal...rather than bench warmers who forget how to hit the ball and where the goal is.....like all sports these things are tuned by repetition

7) Two strikers causes confusion among central defenders

8) A second striker can pass the ball to his better placed partner

9) Two strikers have more chance of holding the ball up than one alone who is surrounded...so that midfield can join attack

10) Goalkeepers and defenders have two styles and separate sets of capabilities to deal with rather than just one....If they succeed against your isolated guy, it can mean a goal drought....Having a double success (in closing out a dual attack) is much more difficult.

I don't stick to this issue of 2 strikers dogmatically.....if we were scoring freely regardless, then it wouldn't matter so much but we are not... And its advantages are undeniable.

There are games we win 1-0 that perhaps should be 3-0 (this can cost us)

There are games we score 1 or none and we should've won.

Another advantage is that is unleashes more of our attacking talent rather than keeping it all pointlessly in the refrigerator all season.....like we did with Grimes and Baxendale last season.


Sweet Lord, it's like England getting their backsides handed on a plate in international tournaments for the last 50 years never happened.

1) if you are outnumbered in midfield you don't have the ball to get to your forwards in the first place. I've no idea why you think one up front limits the range of passing options. Did you not see us spread the ball out to the wing yesterday?

2) And what proportion of goals over the course of a season are scored from rebounds nowadays. If you are relying on rebounds to score you are not going to have a very successful season.

3) Said defenders would pass to full backs or midfield where they outnumber the side with two strikers.. Two strikers are then just bystanders as other side retain possession for the rest of the game

4)Space is then covered by the defensive midfielder. You are out of touch by about 30 years.

5) really? I would have thought you'd be more screwed as you would need four players who can play that role rather than two. I can see you haven't thought this through.

6)The whole team should be capable of shooting. You've obviously never encountered the concept of universality.

7)Defenders are better than that these days. I can see how you get easily confused though.

8 - Are the rest of the team not allowed to pass and get into good positions or something?

9)See point 1). They don't get the ball in the first place as they are outnumbered in midfield

10) Again you only looking at the advantages of two up front, completely ignoring any disadvantages.

Just as a final thought. Why does every team we play against these days just have 1 up front. Are all these managers wrong?

Anything is hard to find, when you will not open your mind.
Last edited by Andy_Petterson on Sun Sep 27, 2015 9:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Andy_Petterson
Glitterati
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:45 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=An-h3PLMBBE

Players who can do this aren't that bad.

User avatar
PT
Site Addict
 
Posts: 3733
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 8:04 pm
Location: Liverpool and skaville

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:04 pm

Andy_Petterson wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=An-h3PLMBBE

Players who can do this aren't that bad.


Exactly the reason managers should never ever consider signing players based on a "showreel".

User avatar
kshammer
Site Addict
 
Posts: 3624
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 2:51 pm
Location: Paradise City

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:06 pm

That Jarvis looks handy. What a goal against Liverpool.....

If you'd watched me play back in the day I scored the odd worldly... trust me though I was barclays. So is Cook. I'll not get on his back at games but he's at best, a cop out player who offers nothing and gets away with it because he's not done much wrong. What could he ever have offered yesterday that Rico couldn't have? Hope I'm proven wrong I sincerely do but I see no strengths in his game at all.

latviancheese
Site Addict
 
Posts: 13000
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:35 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:10 pm

IHTC. wrote:So please explain what happens if/when Bradshaw gets injured?


Please explain where we can find another "proven" striker that will sit on the bench at walsall while he waits for Bradshaw to pull his hamstring. He will also need to take a pay cut.

This is a good squad for us, no need to panic and if Bradders gets a knock for a few months there are players out there we can sign.

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:40 pm

Andy_Petterson wrote:
sallian wrote:
Andy_Petterson wrote:...
In general, the reasons you give about rebounds, missed chances being good reasons to play two up front are no longer valid. The game has developed
so defenses don't let you get away with that anymore.


No sir, these reasons will apply even if we are living in the year 3076...unless the laws of physics change.

How did we score against Chelsea? That's right a rebound....because they happen even against the most expensive teams on the planet....a ball can and will always be miss-hit, or hits the cross bar or post, or rebounds from a keeper's save....But to remind you of the factors which DO NOT change with time, these points apply whoever and whenever you play, no matter what their tactics are and no matter what their formation is:-

1) Two men have a wider circle of coverage....that means more of an area for the midfield or wingers to pass to

2) The above point applies to rebounds...a greater rebound area to pick up and shoot

3) Two strikers have more chance of dispossessing the defenders, which means more goal opportunities in vital areas

4) Two strikers create space by diversion runs...drawing away defenders

5) Two strikers means not being screwed by an injury to your single striker

6) Two strikers means two men are used to shooting for goal...rather than bench warmers who forget how to hit the ball and where the goal is.....like all sports these things are tuned by repetition

7) Two strikers causes confusion among central defenders

8) A second striker can pass the ball to his better placed partner

9) Two strikers have more chance of holding the ball up than one alone who is surrounded...so that midfield can join attack

10) Goalkeepers and defenders have two styles and separate sets of capabilities to deal with rather than just one....If they succeed against your isolated guy, it can mean a goal drought....Having a double success (in closing out a dual attack) is much more difficult.

I don't stick to this issue of 2 strikers dogmatically.....if we were scoring freely regardless, then it wouldn't matter so much but we are not... And its advantages are undeniable.

There are games we win 1-0 that perhaps should be 3-0 (this can cost us)

There are games we score 1 or none and we should've won.

Another advantage is that is unleashes more of our attacking talent rather than keeping it all pointlessly in the refrigerator all season.....like we did with Grimes and Baxendale last season.


Sweet Lord, it's like England getting their backsides handed on a plate in international tournaments for the last 50 never happened.

1) if you are outnumbered in midfield you don't have the ball to get to your forwards in the first place. I've no idea why you think two up front limits the range of passing options. Did you not see us spread the ball out to the wing yesterday?

2) And what proportion of goals over the course of a season are scored from rebounds nowadays. If you are relying on rebounds to score you are not going to have a very successful season.

3) Said defenders would pass to full backs or midfield where they outnumber the side with two strikers.. Two strikers are then just bystanders as other side retain possession for the rest of the game

4)Space is then covered by the defensive midfielder. You are out of touch by about 30 years.

5) really? I would have thought you'd be more screwed as you would need four players who can play that role rather than two. I can see you haven't thought this through.

6)The whole team should be capable of shooting. You've obviously never encountered the concept of universality.

7)Defenders are better than that these days. I can see how you get easily confused though.

8 - Are the rest of the team not allowed to pass and get into good positions or something?

9)See point 1). They don't get the ball in the first place as they are outnumbered in midfield

10) Again you only looking at the advantages of two up front, completely ignoring any disadvantages.

Just as a final thought. Why does every team we play against these days just have 1 up front. Are all these managers wrong?

Anything is hard to find, when you will not open your mind.


Only an argumentative person could have argued with those hard rational facts!

"1) if you are outnumbered in midfield you don't have the ball to get to your forwards in the first place...."
Outnumbered by a grand total of ONE.... And the strikers can't run back to support can they, it is prohibited, and the other players can't move around either can they! Thirdly....guess what....midfielders also have to be drawn back into defence when you have two central strikers....as they need to defend before it reaches the final gate....So think again!!!

2) And what proportion of goals over the course of a season are scored from rebounds nowadays. If you are relying on rebounds to score you are not going to have a very successful season.

Well you don't score many if you have NO-ONE there to score them! Secondly...I didn't say we need to rely on rebounds! Be straight and sensible, I said it is an advantage.... The ball hits the post, defenders legs, weak clearances, cross bar, goal keeper saves.....there are a whole range of pathways to a loose ball in opposition territory....and 2 strikers CLEARLY is an advantage is such situations which occur SEVERAL TIMES in EVERY MATCH....Football at any level does not consist of pin ball, ping-ping precision passing you know! I think you will find quite a few of our goals are scrappy goals with rebounds etc too....and those scored against us.

Have you ever noticed crosses to Bradshaw either being too short, too long or ahead or behind him? 4 ways to get it wrong....a second striker clearly helps pick up some of those inaccuracies.

"3) Said defenders would pass to full backs or midfield where they outnumber the side with two strikers.. Two strikers are then just bystanders as other side retain possession for the rest of the game"
And there is no option for our wingers or wing backs to try and dispossess them when they do that right? Nor anyway our strikers can stray wide to anticipate it?!!! Nor does it mean that we are forcing the opposition to pass out onto the wings when they don't want to, to our own advantage!!! COme on you are not thinking through to the next step in all of these scenarios.

"4)Space is then covered by the defensive midfielder. You are out of touch by about 30 years."
You really do say some silly things...this one is not even worthy of response, although I sort of did

"5) really? I would have thought you'd be more screwed as you would need four players who can play that role rather than two. I can see you haven't thought this through." We have enough players who can fill in for that, and obviously if injuries hinder you...you can change the system....so don't be silly.... If we only play one way with one key component then we are really stuck....at least in the case of two strikers you will have two guys with playing attacking time, even if they are left alone by injury. Dual striker role is less demanding than a single striker role....probably

6)The whole team should be capable of shooting. You've obviously never encountered the concept of universality.
Indeed I agree there, you are not as dumb as you sound maybe :lol: But still, there is difference having to run 30 yards and shoot or shoot from 30yards and being in a better advanced position dedicated to finding shooting space...

"7)Defenders are better than that these days. I can see how you get easily confused though."
You really are in cuckoo land about the advance of football in our time....Guess what defenders make mistakes all day long, or even if not making mistakes...they fail due to speed or being tricked etc...They do indeed get confused by all sorts of on-ball and off ball activity....please watch the defensive holes and mistakes in the weekly goals shows at all levels. You always hear the managers say "Shocking defending" etc... Please realize we are not living in some utopian age of perfect football....people are just over-hyped and overpaid.

"Again you only looking at the advantages of two up front, completely ignoring any disadvantages."
No, I know there are disadvantages and things that will lack somewhere, but it needs to be an option especially when not scoring many....and I think many managers are actually overlooking its advantages, what will you do if teams start switching back? And by the way, many do play with two strikers and they regularly change formations...even Dean Smith does it but not enough.

Its better not to follow fads and fashions but that which makes most sense and which is most effective, keeping opposition guessing is good...but keeping them occupied and struggling for cover is even better.

There are also lots of variations on two strikers, one advanced...free revolving, wider, narrower, alternating sides etc. Can cause a wad-load of problems for defences. As a general rule...two strikers is better in my view than single striker

And by the way, single striker is not some new thing....Teams were doing it even in the 1980's and decades before, even Walsall did it some matches in the 80's and 90's.... And even the old wartime W-M formation can be regarded as a type of one striker system...or it can be regarded as a 3 or 5 striker system...different ways of viewing it and playing it... But don't be daft thinking that Barcelona invented it and now football has moved on....VERY SILLY FUTURIST UTOPIANISM
Last edited by sallian on Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
saddla
Site Addict
 
Posts: 2932
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:18 am
Location: too far

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:41 pm

I remember chatting to a couple of the players who played under Chris Nichol. They said he loved it when we won 1-0 if we won 3-2 he would go balistic over the 2 goals conceded. First and foremost keep a clean sheet was his motto.

User avatar
IHTC.
Site Addict
 
Posts: 5389
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 1:08 pm
Location: West Bromwich

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:48 pm

latviancheese wrote:
IHTC. wrote:So please explain what happens if/when Bradshaw gets injured?


Please explain where we can find another "proven" striker that will sit on the bench at walsall while he waits for Bradshaw to pull his hamstring. He will also need to take a pay cut.

This is a good squad for us, no need to panic and if Bradders gets a knock for a few months there are players out there we can sign.


Who said he needs to be proven? Just something better than that bag of shite. Lets hope he does not get injured and then he struggles to find someone and we are left with Cook upfront for a period of time.

User avatar
IHTC.
Site Addict
 
Posts: 5389
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 1:08 pm
Location: West Bromwich

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:50 pm

PT wrote:
Andy_Petterson wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=An-h3PLMBBE

Players who can do this aren't that bad.


Exactly the reason managers should never ever consider signing players based on a "showreel".


Gnapka, Manshit and Clifford look world beaters on youtube

User avatar
Andy_Petterson
Glitterati
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:23 pm

sallian wrote:
Andy_Petterson wrote:
sallian wrote:
Andy_Petterson wrote:...
In general, the reasons you give about rebounds, missed chances being good reasons to play two up front are no longer valid. The game has developed
so defenses don't let you get away with that anymore.


No sir, these reasons will apply even if we are living in the year 3076...unless the laws of physics change.

How did we score against Chelsea? That's right a rebound....because they happen even against the most expensive teams on the planet....a ball can and will always be miss-hit, or hits the cross bar or post, or rebounds from a keeper's save....But to remind you of the factors which DO NOT change with time, these points apply whoever and whenever you play, no matter what their tactics are and no matter what their formation is:-

1) Two men have a wider circle of coverage....that means more of an area for the midfield or wingers to pass to

2) The above point applies to rebounds...a greater rebound area to pick up and shoot

3) Two strikers have more chance of dispossessing the defenders, which means more goal opportunities in vital areas

4) Two strikers create space by diversion runs...drawing away defenders

5) Two strikers means not being screwed by an injury to your single striker

6) Two strikers means two men are used to shooting for goal...rather than bench warmers who forget how to hit the ball and where the goal is.....like all sports these things are tuned by repetition

7) Two strikers causes confusion among central defenders

8) A second striker can pass the ball to his better placed partner

9) Two strikers have more chance of holding the ball up than one alone who is surrounded...so that midfield can join attack

10) Goalkeepers and defenders have two styles and separate sets of capabilities to deal with rather than just one....If they succeed against your isolated guy, it can mean a goal drought....Having a double success (in closing out a dual attack) is much more difficult.

I don't stick to this issue of 2 strikers dogmatically.....if we were scoring freely regardless, then it wouldn't matter so much but we are not... And its advantages are undeniable.

There are games we win 1-0 that perhaps should be 3-0 (this can cost us)

There are games we score 1 or none and we should've won.

Another advantage is that is unleashes more of our attacking talent rather than keeping it all pointlessly in the refrigerator all season.....like we did with Grimes and Baxendale last season.


Sweet Lord, it's like England getting their backsides handed on a plate in international tournaments for the last 50 never happened.

1) if you are outnumbered in midfield you don't have the ball to get to your forwards in the first place. I've no idea why you think two up front limits the range of passing options. Did you not see us spread the ball out to the wing yesterday?

2) And what proportion of goals over the course of a season are scored from rebounds nowadays. If you are relying on rebounds to score you are not going to have a very successful season.

3) Said defenders would pass to full backs or midfield where they outnumber the side with two strikers.. Two strikers are then just bystanders as other side retain possession for the rest of the game

4)Space is then covered by the defensive midfielder. You are out of touch by about 30 years.

5) really? I would have thought you'd be more screwed as you would need four players who can play that role rather than two. I can see you haven't thought this through.

6)The whole team should be capable of shooting. You've obviously never encountered the concept of universality.

7)Defenders are better than that these days. I can see how you get easily confused though.

8 - Are the rest of the team not allowed to pass and get into good positions or something?

9)See point 1). They don't get the ball in the first place as they are outnumbered in midfield

10) Again you only looking at the advantages of two up front, completely ignoring any disadvantages.

Just as a final thought. Why does every team we play against these days just have 1 up front. Are all these managers wrong?

Anything is hard to find, when you will not open your mind.


Only an argumentative person could have argued with those hard rational facts!

"1) if you are outnumbered in midfield you don't have the ball to get to your forwards in the first place...."
Outnumbered by a grand total of ONE.... And the strikers can't run back to support can they, it is prohibited, and the other players can't move around either can they! Thirdly....guess what....midfielders also have to be drawn back into defence when you have two central strikers....as they need to defend before it reaches the final gate....So think again!!!

2) And what proportion of goals over the course of a season are scored from rebounds nowadays. If you are relying on rebounds to score you are not going to have a very successful season.

Well you don't score many if you have NO-ONE there to score them! Secondly...I didn't say we need to rely on rebounds! Be straight and sensible, I said it is an advantage.... The ball hits the post, defenders legs, weak clearances, cross bar, goal keeper saves.....there are a whole range of pathways to a loose ball in opposition territory....and 2 strikers CLEARLY is an advantage is such situations which occur SEVERAL TIMES in EVERY MATCH....Football at any level does not consist of pin ball, ping-ping precision passing you know! I think you will find quite a few of our goals are scrappy goals with rebounds etc too....and those scored against us.

Have you ever noticed crosses to Bradshaw either being too short, too long or ahead or behind him? 4 ways to get it wrong....a second striker clearly helps pick up some of those inaccuracies.

"3) Said defenders would pass to full backs or midfield where they outnumber the side with two strikers.. Two strikers are then just bystanders as other side retain possession for the rest of the game"
And there is no option for our wingers or wing backs to try and dispossess them when they do that right? Nor anyway our strikers can stray wide to anticipate it?!!! Nor does it mean that we are forcing the opposition to pass out onto the wings when they don't want to, to our own advantage!!! COme on you are not thinking through to the next step in all of these scenarios.

"4)Space is then covered by the defensive midfielder. You are out of touch by about 30 years."
You really do say some silly things...this one is not even worthy of response, although I sort of did

"5) really? I would have thought you'd be more screwed as you would need four players who can play that role rather than two. I can see you haven't thought this through." We have enough players who can fill in for that, and obviously if injuries hinder you...you can change the system....so don't be silly.... If we only play one way with one key component then we are really stuck....at least in the case of two strikers you will have two guys with playing attacking time, even if they are left alone by injury. Dual striker role is less demanding than a single striker role....probably

6)The whole team should be capable of shooting. You've obviously never encountered the concept of universality.
Indeed I agree there, you are not as dumb as you sound maybe :lol: But still, there is difference having to run 30 yards and shoot or shoot from 30yards and being in a better advanced position dedicated to finding shooting space...

"7)Defenders are better than that these days. I can see how you get easily confused though."
You really are in cuckoo land about the advance of football in our time....Guess what defenders make mistakes all day long, or even if not making mistakes...they fail due to speed or being tricked etc...They do indeed get confused by all sorts of on-ball and off ball activity....please watch the defensive holes and mistakes in the weekly goals shows at all levels. You always here the managers say "Shocking defending" etc... Please realize we are not living in some utopian age of perfect football....people are just over-hyped and overpaid.

"Again you only looking at the advantages of two up front, completely ignoring any disadvantages."
No, I know there are disadvantages and things that will lack somewhere, but it needs to be an option especially when not scoring many....and I think many managers are actually overlooking its advantages, what will you do if teams start switching back? And by the way, many do play with two strikers and they regularly change formations...even Dean Smith does it but not enough.

Its better not to follow fads and fashions but that which makes most sense and which is most effective, keeping opposition guessing is good...but keeping them occupied and struggling for cover is even better.

There are also lots of variations on two strikers, one advanced...free revolving, wider, narrower, alternating sides etc. Can cause a wad-load of problems for defences. As a general rule...two strikers is better in my view. And single striker


1) what is your point? If you are outnumbered, even just one, in midfield you are likely to lose possession? As for strikers running back to help? I thought your argument was that they were there to offer a wider area to pass to. How can they do this if they have dropped back to midfield? I am all for fluid movement. You are now changing the parameters of your original argument which was two up front.

2) We don't have NO-ONE there to score them. Again I don't think you watch us.

Your argument is about getting men into the box, which is a fair point. However that is very different to playing two up front and ignores the counter attack risk of throwing too many men forward. Please think things through before posting in future

Also your Chelsea example is made to look a little bit retarded by the fact that it was James O'connor who scored. Hardly your typical number 9 is he?

3) If we close down their full backs they just bypass to the midfield where there is even more space for them as our players have closed down their full backs. You are the one not thinking things through.

4) Why is this a silly point? You say two strikers pull away the central defenders to create space. I say that space is then covered by the defensive midfielder. Adam Chambers does this many times. Seems to me you have no coherent response to my perfectly valid point. Is it because you are out of touch?

5) So we have enough players to cover if we were to play 2 up front, but not enough if we play 1 up front :? You do know 2 is bigger than 1?

6) Of course all else being equal it is better to have a player nearer the opposition goal. I will say again though that you are ignoring the disadvantages of this in terms of losing control of the midfield.

7) Some defenders do yes, they are not yet perfect, but they are vastly improved to the last time you watched a game.

Watch the goals here. Bear in mind this is from a higher division :idea: :idea: :idea:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tygH64XfkL4

8 Please give examples of teams that we have played with two up front? Because certainly Crewe or Bury didn't. Even Chelsea only played one up front but with two very wide attacking midfielders. They can get away with that though because of their quality.

If you are talking about Walsall, Romaine Sawyers plays as a trequartista and occupies the space between midfield and attack. That is a very different role to an out and out striker. Maybe the problem is the lack of your vocabulary when discussing these things.

If teams start switching to two out and out strikers, then great. What is your point here? Walsall will absolutely smash them with the space left in the rest of the pitch.

And what is your point about keeping the opposition guessing? Walsall have switched formation plenty this season. Again, you are talking from a position of ignorance.

Finally, please answer why all other teams have abandoned playing the second striker?

User avatar
Andy_Petterson
Glitterati
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:30 pm

Here you go Salian, I've found some people who share your level of tactical insight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4CXY6TVBMc

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:36 pm

saddla wrote:I remember chatting to a couple of the players who played under Chris Nichol. They said he loved it when we won 1-0 if we won 3-2 he would go balistic over the 2 goals conceded. First and foremost keep a clean sheet was his motto.


It is the wrong motto, though...because even if you play excellent defensively...you can still be beaten by things that have nothing to do with bad defending e.g.:-

* speed
* trickery
* bad decisions
* dodgy pitches
* injury causing tackles/stretches etc
* unstoppable cannon-ball shots

Of course you must try and keep a clean sheet, you wont lose if you don't concede, but you can't win if you don't score....and you can still win even if you score several times if you score more.....and a win is worth more than a draw...so attack is better than defence as a way to victory although both are important.

If we score 2 or 3 a game...we can afford to let in one a game.... But if we can only score one a game...then a good defence will not be enough to get promoted.

User avatar
Andy_Petterson
Glitterati
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:43 pm

sallian wrote:
saddla wrote:I remember chatting to a couple of the players who played under Chris Nichol. They said he loved it when we won 1-0 if we won 3-2 he would go balistic over the 2 goals conceded. First and foremost keep a clean sheet was his motto.


It is the wrong motto, though...because even if you play excellent defensively...you can still be beaten by things that have nothing to do with bad defending e.g.:-

* speed
* trickery
* bad decisions
* dodgy pitches
* injury causing tackles/stretches etc
* unstoppable cannon-ball shots

Of course you must try and keep a clean sheet, you wont lose if you don't concede, but you can't win if you don't score....and you can still win even if you score several times if you score more.....and a win is worth more than a draw...so attack is better than defence as a way to victory although both are important.

If we score 2 or 3 a game...we can afford to let in one a game.... But if we can only score one a game...then a good defence will not be enough to get promoted.


You are looking at it from the wrong angle

You get the same number of points for winning 3-0 or 2-0 as 1-0. But you lose two points if you draw 1-1.

In that sense an extra goal scored is worth far less than an extra goal conceded.

And that is why you are so very wrong.

I have no idea why you are so dense and stubborn though.

User avatar
saddla
Site Addict
 
Posts: 2932
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:18 am
Location: too far

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:48 pm

sallian wrote:
saddla wrote:I remember chatting to a couple of the players who played under Chris Nichol. They said he loved it when we won 1-0 if we won 3-2 he would go balistic over the 2 goals conceded. First and foremost keep a clean sheet was his motto.


It is the wrong motto, though...because even if you play excellent defensively...you can still be beaten by things that have nothing to do with bad defending e.g.:-

* speed
* trickery
* bad decisions
* dodgy pitches
* injury causing tackles/stretches etc
* unstoppable cannon-ball shots

Of course you must try and keep a clean sheet, you wont lose if you don't concede, but you can't win if you don't score....and you can still win even if you score several times if you score more.....and a win is worth more than a draw...so attack is better than defence as a way to victory although both are important.

If we score 2 or 3 a game...we can afford to let in one a game.... But if we can only score one a game...then a good defence will not be enough to get promoted.


His managerial record at walsall:

Walsall from 1 August 1994 to 21 May 1997 played 157 won 71 drew 41 lost 45 win % 45.22
that would suggest you are wrong.

User avatar
sallian
Glitterati
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 am

Re: Crewe Alexandra (H) League One 26th Sept, 3pm

Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:50 pm

Andy_Petterson wrote:Here you go Salian, I've found some people who share your level of tactical insight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4CXY6TVBMc


Without looking I remember it....smoking pipes and things.... the funny thing is....I think this is your view of anything pre-barcelona 2000's!!!! So maybe the joke is on you! Show the video to someone who knows how to use a computer and video....I don't know how to use these things as I am 40....well after my time all this....

don't confuse me with your knowledge of position names and formations....I only know attack and defence and the old W-M positions and numbers...

Everyone in the whole of English and world football has abandoned playing with two strikers....as every pundit knows :?

so obviously anything other than that is wrong and wont work....obviously, I wish all managers of the past and all coaches and players of future would have/do meet and learn from your insight!
Last edited by sallian on Sun Sep 27, 2015 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

PreviousNext
Return to 2015-16 Season

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests