Wesley Moraes

[KentVillan]

2 hours ago, villalad21 said:

4-4-2... What?

Are you still living in the 90's? Football has evolved.

Real Madrid won the 2018 Champions League with a 4-4-2 diamond in the final.

Jurgen Klopp sometimes switches to a 4-4-2 with wide midfielders and two box-to-box midfielders depending on player availability.

Bournemouth and Palace regularly play a 4-4-2.

It might not be ubiquitous in English football like it used to be, but it's still an option. Personally I don't think we have the right players for it at the moment, and I also think people put too much stock in formations being "defensive" or "attacking" when in fact you can make any formation more defensive or more attacking. A lone striker supported by two inside forwards is already an attacking formation IMO, and I'm not really concerned that our lone striker may only be a 10-15 goal player.

[briny_ear]

10 hours ago, Stuartc445 said:

Not necessarily as the best form of defence is attack. If we are able to make the ball stick upfront then that'll protect our defence. 

I think Norwich gave the lie to that idea on Saturday.

[A'Villan]

8 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

I think Norwich gave the lie to that idea on Saturday.

Not sure I'm interpreting this post as it's intended, but alternatively you could argue we showed how true it is.

[A'Villan]

11 hours ago, sne said:

It's a nice cliché if nothing else.

Granted with Dunne gone we won't concede while we have the ball, but to think we could Barcelona or Man City us through the league is IMO very naive.

Even Man City are unable to do it atm.

It's interesting, I think there's much truth to it, even if it is cliche, but it goes both ways..

For example, there's that famous quote that favours defensive prowess:

"Offense will bring in the crowds, but defense will win you championships"

I tend to think creative players, which are essentially attacking players, are most pivotal.

Name the last defender to win the ballon d'or?

You could argue that this is in line with the above quote, as it's essentially the crowd favourite who wins it.

Still, ultimately which is more important most of the time, a clean sheet, or victory (outscoring the opponent)?

Add to all this, I think the following is what gave birth to the philosophy and adage that attack is the best for of defense..

Having the ball is the only way to ensure your opponent can't score, because they don't have the opportunity. End of, simple as.

Another truth to the saying, is that when defending, if you were to sit back and passively follow the play until the opponents scores, it's useless.

So with that in mind, what is the best form of defense? Well, it's to attack, to pressure the opponent into a mistake and nullify his threat, making a move for the ball.

Also, when you are in attack with the ball at your feet, you are the first to know what your next move is, a defender can only anticipate or intervene.

 

[ozvillafan]

3 hours ago, A'Villan said:

It's interesting, I think there's much truth to it, even if it is cliche, but it goes both ways..

For example, there's that famous quote that favours defensive prowess:

"Offense will bring in the crowds, but defense will win you championships"

I tend to think creative players, which are essentially attacking players, are most pivotal.

Name the last defender to win the ballon d'or?

You could argue that this is in line with the above quote, as it's essentially the crowd favourite who wins it.

Still, ultimately which is more important most of the time, a clean sheet, or victory (outscoring the opponent)?

Add to all this, I think the following is what gave birth to the philosophy and adage that attack is the best for of defense..

Having the ball is the only way to ensure your opponent can't score, because they don't have the opportunity. End of, simple as.

Another truth to the saying, is that when defending, if you were to sit back and passively follow the play until the opponents scores, it's useless.

So with that in mind, what is the best form of defense? Well, it's to attack, to pressure the opponent into a mistake and nullify his threat, making a move for the ball.

Also, when you are in attack with the ball at your feet, you are the first to know what your next move is, a defender can only anticipate or intervene.

 

 

[KenjiOgiwara]

Ultimately if you don't concede you will get points. If you score, but are shit in defence,  your opponent may simply outscore you.  There's a reason why most managers agree on that idea that all good teams are built from the back. 

I do think however there are situations where the best defence is attack is a legitimate thing. Especially when you are pushed back the last 20 minutes of a match against a superior opponent. Being able to bring your team out and waste time on futile attacks are essential in my opinion. Something we failed to do against Arsenal amongst others. 

As for 442 I think we only got 2 midfielders suited to that centrally, and that's McGinn and Marvelous. And we definately don't have the pace upfront for it. 

Edited October 10, 2019 by KenjiOgiwara

[Vive_La_Villa]

44 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Ultimately if you don't concede you will get points. If you score, but are shit in defence,  your opponent may simply outscore you.  There's a reason why most managers agree on that idea that all good teams are built from the back. 

I do think however there are situations where the best defence is attack is a legitimate thing. Especially when you are pushed back the last 20 minutes of a match against a superior opponent. Being able to bring your team out and waste time on futile attacks are essential in my opinion. Something we failed to do against Arsenal amongst others. 

As for 442 I think we only got 2 midfielders suited to that centrally, and that's McGinn and Marvelous. And we definately don't have the pace upfront for it. 

Good post.

Agree with most of it but sometimes putting 11 men behind the ball  to see a game out  can help too.  Look at Wolves against city. They literally had every player behind the ball for an entire half and city just had no idea how to beak them down. Then when the chance came they hit them on the break twice. 

I think against Arsenal we had no plan to defend the lead and wanted to keep attacking but whilst under pressure the players kept sitting deep. This lead to a poor shape and no organisation and eventual errors which cost us the game.   I think this is where we will come unstuck against better teams.  We need to accept there will be periods of the games we’ll come under immense pressure and we have to deal with it better.  

Keeping on topic it’s these situations were I think we need Wesley to do a lot more In trying to hold the ball up and relieve some pressure.

Raul for Wolves was fantastic on Sunday. 

Edited October 10, 2019 by Vive_La_Villa

[Stuartc445]

8 hours ago, briny_ear said:

I think Norwich gave the lie to that idea on Saturday.

Yeah but unlike them we have Mings and Engels in defence with Nakamba infront of them so we have a better chance of coping 

[briny_ear]

13 hours ago, Stuartc445 said:

Yeah but unlike them we have Mings and Engels in defence with Nakamba infront of them so we have a better chance of coping 

So really you’re saying defence is the best form of defence...

[Stuartc445]

8 hours ago, briny_ear said:

So really you’re saying defence is the best form of defence...

You've lost me. 

You said Norwich showed that attack isn't the best form of attack. 

I'll say again Norwich don't have Mings, Engels and Nakamba so I'm confident we'd be able to play 2 up front and still cope. 

Anyway when did putting 2 up front become all out attack. 

[villalad21]

On 10/10/2019 at 07:40, KenjiOgiwara said:

Ultimately if you don't concede you will get points. If you score, but are shit in defence,  your opponent may simply outscore you.  There's a reason why most managers agree on that idea that all good teams are built from the back. 

I do think however there are situations where the best defence is attack is a legitimate thing. Especially when you are pushed back the last 20 minutes of a match against a superior opponent. Being able to bring your team out and waste time on futile attacks are essential in my opinion. Something we failed to do against Arsenal amongst others. 

As for 442 I think we only got 2 midfielders suited to that centrally, and that's McGinn and Marvelous. And we definately don't have the pace upfront for it. 

I think we all need to accept we will concede loads under Dean Smith.

If you look at his track record as a manager his teams have always leaked lots of goals.

But it's ok because he's teams score enough for it not to be an issue.

We've scored as many goals in PL so far as Arsenal, which is pretty damn impressive for a promoted side.

[Brumstopdogs]

[MaVilla]

the ball hold up and pass from 1m 02s onwards......

 

 

[Ghost]

 

  

[mikeyjavfc]

Did he take tickets with him especially just so he could make this gag?  Legend.

[TRO]

On 10/10/2019 at 00:02, KentVillan said:

Real Madrid won the 2018 Champions League with a 4-4-2 diamond in the final.

Jurgen Klopp sometimes switches to a 4-4-2 with wide midfielders and two box-to-box midfielders depending on player availability.

Bournemouth and Palace regularly play a 4-4-2.

It might not be ubiquitous in English football like it used to be, but it's still an option. Personally I don't think we have the right players for it at the moment, and I also think people put too much stock in formations being "defensive" or "attacking" when in fact you can make any formation more defensive or more attacking. A lone striker supported by two inside forwards is already an attacking formation IMO, and I'm not really concerned that our lone striker may only be a 10-15 goal player.

So do I

Formations maybe set up in a static sense,

but Its dynamic, it varies/mutates with the ebb and flow of a game.

How often do managers say, they didn't stick to the plan, that's because other forces trump instructions.

If one or more players are struggling to cope with their opposite number, it encourages a colleague to help out, that alone can alter the plan.

One of the reasons why we have looked better balanced with Targett as opposed to Taylor....he adds value to his position and copes, which subsequently means players don't have to come to his aid so readily.

Edited October 14, 2019 by TRO

[Philosopher]

I think is says it all that the two most successful teams of the last decade have been the ones with the two best players / attackers in the world in their teams. Not a coincidence. Every successful team needs a good defense, but similarly they need a great attack. The way the game is played today is geared towards the attacker. With diving, penalties given for the lightest of touches, no tackles from behind, studs up tackles being red card offences, two footed tackles being red card offences. Promoted teams need a decent defense and a clinical striker generally to stay up.  They ultimately go hand in hand. If you score more than you concede you will stay up! How you go about doing that is arbitrary in terms of result, but not so in terms of enjoyment! 

[MotoMkali]

2 hours ago, Philosopher said:

I think is says it all that the two most successful teams of the last decade have been the ones with the two best players / attackers in the world in their teams. Not a coincidence. Every successful team needs a good defense, but similarly they need a great attack. The way the game is played today is geared towards the attacker. With diving, penalties given for the lightest of touches, no tackles from behind, studs up tackles being red card offences, two footed tackles being red card offences. Promoted teams need a decent defense and a clinical striker generally to stay up.  They ultimately go hand in hand. If you score more than you concede you will stay up! How you go about doing that is arbitrary in terms of result, but not so in terms of enjoyment! 

Whilst yes the 2 best teams had the best attackers but much more importantly they had by far the best midfields. Xavi iniesta and busquets were all the best midfielders in the world same with madrids Midfield trio as well. 

[Philosopher]

Yep and they're midfields only had one proper holding player, the rest were technical and more attack minded.

[VillaJ100]

On 10/10/2019 at 00:02, KentVillan said:

Real Madrid won the 2018 Champions League with a 4-4-2 diamond in the final.

Jurgen Klopp sometimes switches to a 4-4-2 with wide midfielders and two box-to-box midfielders depending on player availability.

Bournemouth and Palace regularly play a 4-4-2.

It might not be ubiquitous in English football like it used to be, but it's still an option. Personally I don't think we have the right players for it at the moment, and I also think people put too much stock in formations being "defensive" or "attacking" when in fact you can make any formation more defensive or more attacking. A lone striker supported by two inside forwards is already an attacking formation IMO, and I'm not really concerned that our lone striker may only be a 10-15 goal player.

4-4-2 still works but is pretty attacking and you need two absolute titans of CM's to be able to do it with success.