villalad21 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Why can't we play that high pressure game we have done with success with against the likes of Liverpool and Norwich? It would be so damn typical of Lambert to again change the system against Chelsea and play that dreadful 3-5--------2 formation.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 We have been reducing the wage bill since MON's departure. It actually went up this year though. Prove it to me. Go and have a look in the Accounts thread. It's there in black and white. Total staff costs last year were £69.6m, this year were £71.9m. Playing staff? That's for all staff, but the vast majority of the cost will be playing staff. Non-playing staff numbers reduced across all areas, in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Being able to press high against two teams doesn't really mean we are capable of doing it every game. New game, new rules. Liverpool had already won the game before it started, that mentality can come back and haunt every team in the league. At the end of that game we were lucky to get away with a point when Suarez (I think) squandered a chance, it's not like we torturing them for 90 minutes. Norwich were extremely poor the other day, their defense didn't hold up at all and their midfielders didn't bother to track back. It happens, just like our team refuse to play sometimes and we leak in goals right, left and centre. It's naive to think we can just "play the way we did against Liverpool", one game out of many, like that will fix all our problems. Chances are we would lose a hell of a lot more games with that approach, because other teams will be more pumped up and tactically aware against us. Putting it in a different way, we have probably gone out with the same attacking mentality several times this season and still looked lost. When the other team is ready, they will put us back no matter what. If they are not, we might have a chance, but it's not like we always dictate a game against a better team. I don't want us to play a possession game for the sake of it, it goes without saying that our players aren't remotely good enough to do so. However, there are many possibilities between hoof and tiki taka. By possession, I don't mean Vlaar passing to Westwood, who then passes it back to Vlaar for five minutes. That is not possession, that is two players who don't know how to put the ball in an attacking position. A very high pressure from us (a la Dortmund) would kill us on the counter ten times each game, our players don't possess the level of passing ability to exploit the other team and our defensive unit it too weak to sustain the pressure that would come on the other side. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaForever1970 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 We have been reducing the wage bill since MON's departure. It actually went up this year though.Prove it to me. Go and have a look in the Accounts thread. It's there in black and white. Total staff costs last year were £69.6m, this year were £71.9m.Playing staff? That's for all staff, but the vast majority of the cost will be playing staff. Non-playing staff numbers reduced across all areas, in any case.Yes but taking out the playing staff and looking at them on their own, has that reduced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Yes but taking out the playing staff and looking at them on their own, has that reduced? It's not broken down in detail, but there's no way that the playing staff wages have declined. All of the head office staff and match day staff numbers have gown down considerably, so the only reason that overall staff costs have gone up is due to playing staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted March 7, 2014 Moderator Share Posted March 7, 2014 I'm not saying you are wrong Risso, I've not seen the accounts and had I done so I'm no way as capable of understanding them as you. I just can't begin to comprehend how our playing staff wage bill hasn't declined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArteSuave Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I'm not saying you are wrong Risso, I've not seen the accounts and had I done so I'm no way as capable of understanding them as you. I just can't begin to comprehend how are playing staff wage bill hasn't declined. We signed some players, gave others new contracts and didn't shift enough of the high earning deadwood. The wages of the match day squad has almost certainly come down though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I'm not saying you are wrong Risso, I've not seen the accounts and had I done so I'm no way as capable of understanding them as you. I just can't begin to comprehend how our playing staff wage bill hasn't declined. Because we were still paying most of the bomb squad wages, even though they were out of sight and out of mind. All of the other wages for non-playing staff is an absolute drop in the ocean, and as I said, the total number of people employed on the non-playing side dropped significantly anyway. It also means that the players we did sign are probably not earning thruppence hapenny a week as most people suppose either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 It also means that the players we did sign are probably not earning thruppence hapenny a week as most people suppose either. I was just about to post something similar. The transfer fees for various players were made out to much lower than they actually were, so I assume the wages have been, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArteSuave Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) It also means that the players we did sign are probably not earning thruppence hapenny a week as most people suppose either.I was just about to post something similar. The transfer fees for various players were made out to much lower than they actually were, so I assume the wages have been, too. We got rid of Collins, Cuellar, Heskey and eventually Warnock and signed about 10 players (one of which was Holman on a Bosman). I'm not sure what those four were earning though so I'm not sure if this helps at all. Edited March 7, 2014 by ArteSuave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) I had this discussion on Twitter yesterday. If I understood correctly, then the wage payments mentioned only cover between March 2012 and March 2013. So the outgoings and new contracts in the summer are not covered. I assume then it went up due to the fact that Lambert brought in a lot of players in 2012 without many departures. Thus the departures and subsequent freeing of wages of Heskey, Cuellar, Collins and Makoun (I assume Rennes payed most, if not all, his wages) was outdone by the wages paid to our signings last season? Edited March 7, 2014 by Isa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Why can't we play that high pressure game we have done with success with against the likes of Liverpool and Norwich? It would be so damn typical of Lambert to again change the system against Chelsea and play that dreadful 3-5--------2 formation.. Hasn't that been really effective defensively this year? Why not do that against a top team. Pressing Norwich and even Liverpool isn't like pressing Chelsea's brilliant counter attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 We should just play against Chelsea how we did earlier in the season, very unlucky not to come away with anything there. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avfc96 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 We should just play against Chelsea how we did earlier in the season, very unlucky not to come away with anything there. Agree, we should have beat them and we would have if the ref hadn't been a complete word removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 We should just play against Chelsea how we did earlier in the season, very unlucky not to come away with anything there. It's a different Chelsea side now though, they're playing a lot better and matic has really helped sure up the midfield. Different game completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 There is no 'perfect' football I beg to differ. Perfect football is where your team is totally in control, retains the ball, has the opposition chasing shadows and scores lots of goals. Like I said, possession football, even if it's tippy tappy around the back four, is STILL only one pass away from being perfect football. If you keep the ball, the other team doesn't have it. If the other team doesn't have it, they can't score, if you create chances, you CAN score. There's nothing more perfect in the game than not letting the other team have the ball and scoring goals. It doesn't matter who you're playing against, what style they use, or what the conditions are, if you do that you're playing the game perfectly 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 (edited) But there will always be a team that somehow defeats that sort of game, meaning eventually it will be flawed and in turn not perfect. Bayern are 49 games unbeaten, but that run won't go on forever and they haven't won all of those games. Man City scored 2 against us, retained the ball, had us chasing shadows and were in total control. They had 67% possession, 20 shots, 13 corners. We still won though, somehow. In that game, being as we got the win, who was closer to playing the perfect game? Us or them? The same goes for the Southampton game, there will always be a flaw in the system and eventually a team will find it and take advantage of it, which is why one specific style of football can never be perfect IMO. Edited March 11, 2014 by samjp26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 But very few teams are skilled enough to break down sides when they first prioritize possession and then go for goals after the other teams defense has already set up. Trying to play slow build up possession works for the top couple teams, but it doesn't work for the lower teams, and the teams that actually overachieve compared to their finances like Dortmund and atletico are more focused on fast attacks. So if you can afford all the best players, maybe slow possession buildup is "perfect" football, but it's not for most teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vandaq Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Perfect football for me is high intensity, I love great counter attacks or for example the goal bacuna did against Norwich, just fantastic. I really hate static central midfielders, you need to have constant movement so you are not marked. That is basically my only gripe, you can play the game in a lot of different ways but it will mostly be variation on certain styles of play. Love the way Lambert makes us play when we are at our best, unfortunately it doesn`t happen that often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 There's nothing more perfect in the game than not letting the other team have the ball and scoring goals. We've allowed far too many teams to play perfect football against us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts