Team shape, tactics and personnel

[OutByEaster?]

6 hours ago, a-k said:

If we are playing 4-4-2, I don't understand why we play with Bailey on the right (he's better on the left) and not Buendia there (best form has come on the right)

Bailey isn't in the four, he's in the two - Buendia is the right-est of the four in midfield. 

 

[DJBOB]

8 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

 

I'm not sure that's entirely correct - I certainly don't have McGinn down as a pacey/direct player at least - I think the midfielders are given both licence and instruction to drift - in forward areas, they can either pull wide to try to get the attention of the full back (allowing Watkins or Bailey to make runs in behind) or stay narrow to allow our full backs to overlap; in defensive situations they withdraw to a deep position outside of the full backs that gives us that six-at-the-back look and allows the back four to be really compact. It's a position that takes a lot of energy to play - they get through a hell of a lot of work. 

 

Historically at Villareal and Arsenal - but that relates to the problem we have with our personnel. Too many same-y midfielders and not enough pace and dribblers.

[a-k]

15 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Bailey isn't in the four, he's in the two - Buendia is the right-est of the four in midfield. 

 

I know, I meant that the two would include Watkins and Ings, forgot to write that

[OutByEaster?]

5 minutes ago, DJBOB said:

Historically at Villareal and Arsenal - but that relates to the problem we have with our personnel. Too many same-y midfielders and not enough pace and dribblers.

Perhaps so. I think at the moment the reason we see Buendia staying a little more central is that the striker on his side is more naturally a winger and want to get out there rather than it being about the qualities of the fullbacks. It'll be interesting to see it develop as he gets more players that fit shape he wants.

Out of interest, who were his two advanced midfielders at Arsenal? Ozil? Ramsey?

[OutByEaster?]

1 minute ago, a-k said:

I know, I meant that the two would include Watkins and Ings, forgot to write that

I sort of understand, but wouldn't Watkins and Ings mean dropping Bailey?

[DJBOB]

13 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Perhaps so. I think at the moment the reason we see Buendia staying a little more central is that the striker on his side is more naturally a winger and want to get out there rather than it being about the qualities of the fullbacks. It'll be interesting to see it develop as he gets more players that fit shape he wants.

Out of interest, who were his two advanced midfielders at Arsenal? Ozil? Ramsey?

He wasn't so set on the time at Arsenal with his 4222. Think he used a combination of 4231 and some diamonds, some 3 at the back. One of the complaints from Arsenal fans was his lack of a set XI.

But in his time, Auba played out wide during their best run of form and he would also have Mkhitaryan and Iowbi as pacey wide options as well. Ozil he tried to shoehorn in a lot, but we know the history there. During his last season before he got sacked, he would often have Saka and Nicolas Pepe both out wide.

He was a lot less set in the 4222 during his time there.

Regardless - we will need wide pacey options however he ends up deploying them to at least have options against certain teams. Right now - we suffer a lot of the Gerrard-ball when allowed a lot of the ball. I think the last 20 minutes vs Wolves, we ran out of options and just started giving it to Bailey on the right to try and make something happen.

[CVByrne]

I think we need 3 CMs in the starting 11. When I saw the line up against Wolves I voiced my concerns. Swapping McGinn for Cash is a very big change. We lose a CM player essentially who will be tucking in more and is live for a passing option etc.. Emery saw the error and made the change at half time.

The midfield 4 needs the right balance, an attacking mid / wide player, a proper 6, a 6/8 and an 8. 

So for me it needs a Coutinho/Buendia/Bailey and Luiz/tbc, Kamara/Dendoncker, McGinn/Ramsey. 

We're a CM short and maybe we can include Bailey as a forward. 

[tomsky_11]

On 03/01/2023 at 19:21, duke313 said:

I don’t see Coutinho anywhere other than the front two in your example . There is no way Coutinho could have put the shift that Buendia put it, he doesn’t have the legs for it. Buendia and McGinn were basically playing as wing backs in the back 6, no way Coutinho could have done that.

He could take the place of Bailey in the current system, versus a low block. Other than a complete change of shape (which wouldn’t surprise be with Emery), I don’t see where else he fits.

 

 

I think where Coutinho comes into play is in games or periods of games where we expect or are pushing to be higher up the pitch with lots of possession. Basically like the Wolves second half, where we switched from 442 to 4231 and Coutinho took the wide left of the three, with Buendia coming central and Bailey wide right.

[TomC]

23 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

Bailey isn't in the four, he's in the two - Buendia is the right-est of the four in midfield. 

 

Agreed that Bailey is in the two and Buendia is in the 4, but against Wolves, Buendia was definitely on the left, not right.

 

[TomC]

23 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I sort of understand, but wouldn't Watkins and Ings mean dropping Bailey?

Dropping Bailey might be justified based on recent performances.

But given that Unai is in full experimentation mode, I won't be surprised to see all three combinations Ings-Watkins, Watkins-Bailey, Bailey-Ings over the next few months...and maybe another combination if we bring someone else in. I was surprised when Ings came on for Watkins instead of Bailey on Wednesday, but it's obvious that Unai will keep trying different things until he figures out what works.

[TomC]

6 hours ago, CVByrne said:

Swapping McGinn for Cash is a very big change.

That was another case of Unai experimenting. I don't expect to see that ever again, or at least not very often. I think that he tried it against Spurs and it worked because we were defending a lead; essentially, Cash was more like a second right back with Young in a 6-2-2. It failed completely against Wolves. Cash was trying to operate as a true midfielder/winger and was out of place, plus Young's 38 year old legs couldn't handle two games that close together.

Don't forget that McGinn wasn't even on the bench; I read that he strained his hamstring. Unai should have put Donck in the midfield instead of Cash.

 

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, TomC said:

That was another case of Unai experimenting.

I think it was a case of running out of options - no McGinn, Luiz not fit enough for ninety minutes, Dendoncker not fit enough for ninety minutes, no Ramsey, and Coutinho maybe not the right choice for the role from the start - the most natural selection would have been Sanson I'd have thought, but it looks like that ship has sailed, so the choice was Young or Cash - they've both done it before, but I think I'd have gone with Young in the middle and Cash at right back. However, I'm an idiot from the internet and our manager has won some of Europe's major trophies on multiple occasions so I'll go with his choice.

 

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, TomC said:

Agreed that Bailey is in the two and Buendia is in the 4, but against Wolves, Buendia was definitely on the left, not right.

 

He was, but I think that's fair enough given how much of a right sided player Cash is. I don't think we could have asked Cash to play as the left-er of the midfielders. Buendia moved over to the right centre when Coutinho came on.

[CVByrne]

3 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

He was, but I think that's fair enough given how much of a right sided player Cash is. I don't think we could have asked Cash to play as the left-er of the midfielders. Buendia moved over to the right centre when Coutinho came on.

I'm pretty sure Bailey went to wide midfield and Coutinho played off Watkins. 

[TomC]

8 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

so the choice was Young or Cash - they've both done it before, but I think I'd have gone with Young in the middle and Cash at right back.

I would have too. I suspect that he thought that he was saving Young's legs and giving Cash more of the running by putting Cash in the midfield. As it turns out, Young's legs were just plain shot.

 

[OutByEaster?]

6 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

I'm pretty sure Bailey went to wide midfield and Coutinho played off Watkins. 

Bailey was up front but to the right and drifting wide, with Buendia behind/inside him, Watkins up top and drifting less with Coutinho the left of the two advanced central midfielders to my eye.

Bailey's instincts tend to take him wide I think and when Buendia is on that side it can work for us because it leaves a hole for him.

 

[Tom13]

79% possession and one clear cut chance. WTF?

Our lack of invention in the final third is just embarrassing at times.

I've only ever seen Leon Bailey be dangerous when he's played on the left. He certainly doesn't help us at the mo when trying to build an attack - getting his head down and running into blind alleys.

[May-Z]

3 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

79% possession and one clear cut chance. WTF?

Our lack of invention in the final third is just embarrassing at times.

I've only ever seen Leon Bailey be dangerous when he's played on the left. He certainly doesn't help us at the mo when trying to build an attack - getting his head down and running into blind alleys.

I think we had the opportunities to be inventive and create, but just made the wrong choices. We were patient and move Stevenage fairly well, but **** it up when the opening presented itself.

Bailey had numerous opportunities to find a player, but either pirouetted or kicked it out of play. 

Ramsey could have made a cut back but passed it to the keeper. 

Coutinho kept using Augustinsson as a decoy and that should've been alternated more. 

It was so lethargic today that the poor play on top made it very slow to watch. 

[stewiek2]

We're far too slow and pedestrian. Our lack of tempo allows teams to reorganise against us. We simply have to play at a higher tempo, with more off the ball movement, starting on Friday as Leeds will be fully high press from the front against us.

[Risso]

7 minutes ago, stewiek2 said:

We're far too slow and pedestrian. Our lack of tempo allows teams to reorganise against us. We simply have to play at a higher tempo, with more off the ball movement, starting on Friday as Leeds will be fully high press from the front against us.

We just haven't got the players for it though. There's very little actual pace in the team, and also they all mostly take too many touches or play it backwards.