** Match thread ** Tue 30/6 20:15 WES1 Boardeaux -v- Bareassalona

_blank_

Back to back tough games coming up now lads.

We are THE team to beat now, being top, so that's going to mean extra pressure. We'll need to play like we did last week for the rest of the season now.

Goalkeepers -

Daryl -
Clayton - Yes

Defence -

Keith - Yes
Martin - Yes
Ed -
Dan - Yes
Michael - Yes
Cathal -
Geoff - Away
Mick Mc - Yes

Midfield -

Gav - Yes
Iain -
Lepo -
Dave - Yes
Pat - Yes
Conor - Injured
Collie -

Strikers -

Ciaran - Yes
Jules - Yes
Eddie -
Art - Yes

homerjay2005

massive game, dare i say the biggest and most important game of the season so far. this will be very very tough and i expect a close game with plenty of chances from both team if we play like we did last week.

im in anyway. just got your text des.

thelepo

Goalkeepers -

Daryl -
Clayton - Yes

Defence -

Keith - Yes
Martin - Yes
Ed - Yes
Dan - Yes
Michael - Yes
Cathal - Injured
Geoff - Away
Mick Mc - Yes

Midfield -

Gav - Yes
Iain - Away
Lepo - Yes
Dave - Yes
Pat - Yes
Conor - Injured
Collie - Yes

Strikers -

Ciaran - Yes
Jules - Yes
Eddie - Yes
Art - Yes

homerjay2005

2-0 win, very lucky to do so, took a great performance from Clay in goals from start to finish, pulling off 3 great saves in both halves. rode our luck a little, they over ran us throughout the field and seemed to have 4 up top all the time, but we held out somehow. dan(i think) and mick both cleared off the line late on too, so overall happy to take 3 points from what was a tough game in which nobody bar clay played anywhere near what we are capable of. they had 3 very good players, especially the number 14 on the wing who everything came through.

on the positive sides, we won again playing poorly, kept a clean sheet and has to be said, cracking finishes by Martin and gav for both goals. our 2 goals were probably the only 2 clear cut chances we had in the whole game, both were counter attacks, with Jules involved in both.

LeixlipRed

Poor performance alright. I'm ****ing wrecked from my new job and I'm only just starting it. Showed as I was a disaster in the first half. And how dare Des suggest I didn't mean that, quality it was

Gileadi

*cough* slice *cough*

helimachoptor

Wasn't a vintage performance but Clay was solid in goals. As Ed said they seem to always have 4 upfront when they came at us but we contained them for the most part. I thought we were very good on the counter and broke with speed and we got both goals through that.
Martins cross which some how ended up in the net was good to watch:D:D

LeixlipRed

Only you score goals like that Keith

FrankGrimes

He meant it lads. I could tell by the way he was lining up for it that he was going for an outside of the boot half volley which is why I was able to get out of the way in time. Peach of a goal in fairness.

Strange game. Almost a reversal of those previous games where we weren't performing very well going forward but were still rarely threatned defensively. Last night I thought we did very well going forward with the relatively limited supply we had and there were a few more counters we did well on.

But we've rarely ever had to rely so much on a great performance from our keeper and some truly woeful finishing by the opposition - their strikers reminded me of John Aldridge in that game away to some minnow in the early 90s where he just had such an offnight he could've been there all day and he still wouldn't have scored.

The distance from the strikers to the defence was massive at times and that just gives the midfield far too big a territory to marshal. The misconception that sitting deep is the correct response when the opposition push men forward was proved to be totally misguided once again last night. Deciding that we need to sit deep because they are pushing men forward and might overrun us becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and we really need to show more faith in our ability to go and close out a game instead of trying to prevent the opposition getting back into it.

So what if there's 4 men pushed up? We're 2-0 up and if the backline all push up that gives the midfield a better chance of stopping their possession at the source meaning they'll need to pick one hell of a pass to get the one on ones we seem to be so fearful of - even if that happens you've got to have belief that our defenders are good enough to deal with it. I just don't buy any argument that in a tighter game like that, which will by definition result in us winning more ball in the middle of the park and therefore get it to our wingers and forwards more often, that our attackers won't take more out of those situations than any other team in this league.

helimachoptor

FrankGrimes wrote: »

He meant it lads. I could tell by the way he was lining up for it that he was going for an outside of the boot half volley which is why I was able to get out of the way in time. Peach of a goal in fairness.

Strange game. Almost a reversal of those previous games where we weren't performing very well going forward but were still rarely threatned defensively. Last night I thought we did very well going forward with the relatively limited supply we had and there were a few more counters we did well on.

But we've rarely ever had to rely so much on a great performance from our keeper and some truly woeful finishing by the opposition - their strikers reminded me of John Aldridge in that game away to some minnow in the early 90s where he just had such an offnight he could've been there all day and he still wouldn't have scored.

The distance from the strikers to the defence was massive at times and that just gives the midfield far too big a territory to marshal. The misconception that sitting deep is the correct response when the opposition push men forward was proved to be totally misguided once again last night. Deciding that we need to sit deep because they are pushing men forward and might overrun us becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and we really need to show more faith in our ability to go and close out a game instead of trying to prevent the opposition getting back into it.

So what if there's 4 men pushed up? We're 2-0 up and if the backline all push up that gives the midfield a better chance of stopping their possession at the source meaning they'll need to pick one hell of a pass to get the one on ones we seem to be so fearful of - even if that happens you've got to have belief that our defenders are good enough to deal with it. I just don't buy any argument that in a tighter game like that, which will by definition result in us winning more ball in the middle of the park and therefore get it to our wingers and forwards more often, that our attackers won't take more out of those situations than any other team in this league.

Jules I'd have to disagree with some of that, Before we scored they were crowding our box with a lot of men. Generally what I found last night is we would be on the defensive and then break. We would then lose the ball and they would break and our midfield would be slow in getting back leaving the defenders trying to mop up a lot of men and that's why they had so many chances.

We got 2 quick goals but they were still a threat. In the 2nd half I felt we were a lot more attacking but in pushing up we left some holes and they could have easily scored a number of times apart from some last second tackles/blocks.

homerjay2005

i agree with keith, but is always the same, Jules v the defence . maybe they just were a very well organised team with some very good players and on the night they were better than us?

we simply didnt have the possession last nite to push up and indeed our cms spend alot of time defending. collie cleared a pile of ball for example and didnt get forward much, simply as we werent able to. they seemed to play with 3 at the back, 3 up top and then the rest just packed the middle with 14 roaming all over the place. we were under pressure throughout the whole game

going forward, we were poor last nite. in all fairness, we created nothing and gave the ball away all the time, from the first minute to the the last. this was not down to the any individual, this was down to the fact that as a team, we had an off night. everyone of us sliced clearrance, mis controlled, gave a bad pass, mis shot, and as i said on my first post, only Clay played well and i dont think anybody can argue with that. just see it as 3 points gained and take the positives from it. its 3 points closer to the league and they will take points off roys who have us, ketamine and ravenhill also to play too.

if football was that simple Jules, sure every team would be winning all the time

FrankGrimes

The thing is lads, I'm observing clear undeniable problems with what has actually happened: many, many times this season we have sat back more and more later in games that we were clearly in control of and then somehow we end up coming away with only scraping the win in a backs to the wall finale.

You are arguing that there may possibly be problems that result from actually pushing forward. I disagree and believe that the benefits of doing so would outweigh the negatives by a long way. Just once, just once, it'd be nice to actually give it a shot and play with the belief of league leaders and push up and see what happens.

So I think it's a case of shying away from what might happen without realising that what might happen isn't any worse than what is happening. You can focus solely on the results or you can be realistic and admit that had Shacktar or Bareasscelona had half decent strikers, we'd have dropped points against at least one of them.

Last week was the first time we've got a left full into the opposition half in a threatening way all season and coincidentally, it was the first time in ages we've torn a team apart (if only in spells).

It actually is pretty simple: you either play your own game or you worry about what the opposition might do and then whatever way you're setup you either have the talent to beat the opposition or you don't. The reason every team doesn't win is they either get the approach wrong or they don't have the talent. We have the best team in this league but I think our approach has led to us getting away with things too often when a more aggressive approach would lead to us closing out games earlier.

If the opposition push men up big deal - that leaves even more space for us when our defenders win it (and they have shown themselves to be at least the match of every strike force in this league).

helimachoptor

FrankGrimes wrote: »

The thing is lads, I'm observing clear undeniable problems with what has actually happened: many, many times this season we have sat back more and more later in games that we were clearly in control of and then somehow we end up coming away with only scraping the win in a backs to the wall finale.

You are arguing that there may possibly be problems that result from actually pushing forward. I disagree and believe that the benefits of doing so would outweigh the negatives by a long way. Just once, just once, it'd be nice to actually give it a shot and play with the belief of league leaders and push up and see what happens.

So I think it's a case of shying away from what might happen without realising that what might happen isn't any worse than what is happening. You can focus solely on the results or you can be realistic and admit that had Shacktar or Bareasscelona had half decent strikers, we'd have dropped points against at least one of them.

Last week was the first time we've got a left full into the opposition half in a threatening way all season and coincidentally, it was the first time in ages we've torn a team apart (if only in spells).

It actually is pretty simple: you either play your own game or you worry about what the opposition might do and then whatever way you're setup you either have the talent to beat the opposition or you don't. The reason every team doesn't win is they either get the approach wrong or they don't have the talent. We have the best team in this league but I think our approach has led to us getting away with things too often when a more aggressive approach would lead to us closing out games earlier.

If the opposition push men up big deal - that leaves even more space for us when our defenders win it (and they have shown themselves to be at least the match of every strike force in this league).

While I would say no matter who the defensive 4 are we have a strong unit, I find a flaw in your logic. you are saying if you push men forward we'll win games. But the problem is that teams wont bring all their men or all bar 1 back to defend most will leave 2 up front sometimes 3 and everytime we push up we are not going to score so when they other team breaks which they will do and ask Gav and Dave are generally involved in the build up play and looking for goals they are in and around a box, ok we may have Collie/Pat hanging back the odd time but we then face a situation that you are saying we should do because it benefits. The other team pushes men forward and as happened last night they had a lot of men over and thanks to Clay and some last ditch defending we got the result.

Last weeks game was a one off, yes we played well but the opposition we incredibly poor on the night and we punished them. That is nto going to happen in every game.

Also I wouldnt say we were in control last night. Things were hectic in the first half but it could have went either way. In regards to the full backs getting forward again I would have to disagree both myself and Mick have been pushing forward a lot in recent games (Des having to call us back a few times :rolleyes:) but in last nights game that just didnt work as when they broke Dan Ed/Martin were left 2 V 2 and it very nearly led to them getting goals.

So to summarise, Jules your point has merit, last week we destroyed a team because we had the opportunity to play your system, that wont work every week a la Shacktar we should have got a bag ful of goals but we didnt. Astro isnt predictable, As seen with Shacktar we tried to play a game where we pushed forward a lot but we only scored 1. Each game will be different. If we go out against RR next week and start defensively if we get on top I assume we'll push forward. We are playing a fluid game which can change in an instant, thinking only that we will win by throwing everything into attack and leaving the back 4 as an isolated unit I think is wrong. We are a team from 1-11 and I think as a team we have been untouchable this year (bar one result). Each player gives 100% in every game and for the most part we support each other during the game both with options and encouragement.

Each point has its right/wrongs but eahc individual game will dictate the response I think.

Go Bordeaux!

_blank_

Lads, just a quick point.

I've been warned off Boards in work recently, so I'm not on as much, and unable to make long posts.

That doesn't mean I'm not reading, or taking on board the points being made.

homerjay2005

ill just make one final point on this - all out attack is great and defo the way to go and i am all for it, me and des/mikie had at least one "discussion" per game to keep me back as i love pushing forward , so i am all for it, but we need to do it correctly, which has been my thoughts from the day i started playing soccer.

If your playing that way, its dangerous and you can concede chances, when people cant get back. most of our attacks broke down last nite and we didnt get back quick enough. that is what happened last nite, it was simple sheer numbers. one attack i can remember 2 free men in behind us and another i can remember 3 free men, despite the defence being man to man. we also lost control of the middle, but again this was sheer numbers, there number 14 walked from half way 2 times in the second half, one was a great save and he put the other wide, both came from attacks that broke down. i mean, you said yourself jules that we barely put 3 passes together in the game. this is unusual for us, the past 2 seasons we have been playing beautiful football.

you also need to take into account the opposition, if they sit back, then we can go gung ho, but if not, then its a shootout and the team who takes their chances wins and defence goes out the window.

its simple maths really, more men over, more chances. you can only mark one man at a time. we did it to great effect last week, but it was done to us last night.

form here on in, we need to work harder, its only 60 minutes. going from the reports, we have been playing poorly over the past month, except last week and have had both attacking and defensive styles,so there is a balance. bottom line however, is we are still winning, so we must be doing something right.

_blank_

homerjay2005 wrote: »

ill just make one final point on this - all out attack is great and defo the way to go and i am all for it, me and des/mikie had at least one "discussion" per game to keep me back as i love pushing forward , so i am all for it, but we need to do it correctly, which has been my thoughts from the day i started playing soccer.

It's not discussion Ed, it's instruction.

You may love pushing forward, but if you are picked as a Centre Half, I expect you to play as a Centre Half, not as some Lothar Mattheus wannabe Libero, strolling around the midfield when the notion pops into your head. If, as last night, you notice gaps appearing in the midfield you don't fill them yourself, you have a word with the midfield players to plug the gaps. Because guess what. If you plug that gap, then another gap appears behind you, closer to our goal, and even more dangerous.

I can't make it any clearer than that. Players play in the positions they are picked in, and they do what they are asked to do, or they don't play. It's that simple. It's for that reason that we have the best defence in the league, it's on that defensive foundation that we have gone to the top of the league. Gaps have not being appearing in our defence this season. Our record of only 8 goals conceded is testament to that. As Keith said, it's the 3rd best defence over 12 divisions. A well regulated defence with people doing what they are tasked to do, instead of what they think is best is why we are doing so well.

That's just a little something to think about.

WeAreShels

I agree with Jules that the gap between the strikers and defence was way too sizeable at times. Speaking for myself, I would be trying to gamble off the lads up front to get in on goal, but if their defender won the ball and they broke, it was next to impossible for me to get back and help out my full back given the gap. At 2-0 we should have been pushing for the third goal to kill off the game rather than sit back and invite pressure onto us.

FrankGrimes

It's good to hear the varied thoughts on this subject, can only help to understand where we're all coming from better. And yeh, for the broader context, we are obviously doing a lot right given our excellent form. This is about identifying the warning signs and remedying them before we actually end up posting on here saying 'if we only had've pushed on when we were 1-0 up we could've killed the game no bother instead of sitting back and then conceding'.

I'm not advocating a gung-ho all-out attack, what I'm talking about is pressing up as a unit to squeeze the middle of the park more. Think of it as defending by forcing more of the game to be played further up the pitch.

As a winger for a side 2-0 up, Dave is dead right to be pushing on going for the overlap and should know that his fullback and defence have pushed up behind him accordingly so that if the ball does go by him, we're well placed to win it back straight away and then release Dave or another attacker. Keith generally does that pushing up very effectively, though last night that then meant there was a big gap between him and his centre-halves because they were generally very deep (bar Ed's couple of adventures ).

With the no offside rule, if the centre-halves decide to set their line on where the furthest forward opposition striker is, they'll never leave the 18 yard line. Even teams like Shacktar have figured out that the no offside thing generally doesn't affect the shape of the game and their centre-halves pushed up and left our strikers in behind knowing that it would take a miracle ball to play it through in a way that the striker could finish it before the defender got to him (well, that and they spotted our reluctance to even attempt those balls).

Time and again last night I thought that if our defence just left the hatcher sit and pushed up they would actually be winning the balls that our midfield were going for 10 yards outside our box and that would allow our midfield to stop their attacks at source on the halfway line instead of sitting deep.

Attacks break down all the time by their nature but last night the breaking balls were going to their players in space because we were too deep. Push up and win those breaking balls and we'll score more from the resulting possession and stop the opposition building moves earlier. If we can't get beyond the fear of 'but what if I leave this striker in 10 yards of space even though the ball is at the other end of the pitch?' then we're not playing our own game and effectively letting the opposition strikers dictate our shape.

helimachoptor

FrankGrimes wrote: »

As a winger for a side 2-0 up, Dave is dead right to be pushing on going for the overlap and should know that his fullback and defence have pushed up behind him accordingly so that if the ball does go by him, we're well placed to win it back straight away and then release Dave or another attacker. Keith generally does that pushing up very effectively, though last night that then meant there was a big gap between him and his centre-halves because they were generally very deep (bar Ed's couple of adventures ).

I think this the the crux of the problem. As we are a team we don't want to leave anyone in the s**t, if the LWB/RWB push up the CH's are left exposed and they could face a 2v2 situation. This is managed fine at set pieces as it's normally 2 v 1 and then another defender sits forward of the 2 remaining defenders but during the game its a lot more fluid and if they break quickly as happened last night we are placed under serious pressure.

There could be 2 ways around this.

1) The CH's call it, If they are happy to cover they tell either the RBW/LWB to push on, or both of them.
2) Des/Michael call it from the sideline.

Just on another note one thing which I think has really improved in our attack and something which even in last nights performance is the interplay between RWB/RW & LWB/LM has improved greatly. From playing regularly with Dave in front I tend to know what to expect when he has the ball and I'm sure its the same for Mick/Gav.

dfx-

From a spectator's point of view with a bias towards defence, I would always be in favour of dropping back when players are pushed forward. The problem last night and other nights has been the distance between the defence and midfield.

If the defence are tasked with not coming out and the midfield tasked with getting forward, the gap between them will be exploited and it was last night which is why Ed was coming out, I think. Either a defender comes out or midfield drops in. You can't have the situation last night where as Des said at half time, no-one was putting a foot in, but that's because that's precisely where the gap between MF and DF was...where you could drive a 747 through. With recent games against not-as-tough opposition as Roy's Rovers and Ketamine, we are offering too many chances and at the moment they're not being put away. It's a risky lottery.

The more men upfront to mark, the more you have to come back. Man-on-man, I don't see anyone getting through our backline. Start pushing forward against a side throwing men forward and all bets are off. There is nothing wrong with the defence coming out into that space, IF there is enough to cover him. Whereas if there isn't enough cover, questions have to be asked about the set-up of the team and altered like two weeks ago to great effect.

homerjay2005

some good debate that i think will still be the same until we all stop playing football! defenders will look for more support when defending and attackers will look for more support when attacking. you need to be super fit to do so, theres very few players that can do 100% running for a full game. the balance is somewhere in between, but the most important factor is the opposition. some games suit more than others.

we have lost one game in 20 and in that time conceded around 15 goals and kept 12 clean sheets, so while we are not playing anywhere as near as we can, we are doing something right.

and by the way, we defend as a team, not as 4 players. i think a massive improvement over the last 6 months has come from more chasing down upfront and a more stable midfield where he have players playing in their best positions. in my opinion, your 2 center midfielders are as important as your 2 center halves in terms of defending. by in large, in this run we have had, they are doing it to great effect. i think last night was just a one off where everybody was well off the pace and people just couldnt get into the game.