| The Italian Garry Monk? 17:08 - Feb 28 with 11210 views | VetchitBack |
Negative. Seemingly purposely giving away possession. Not closing down. No pressure on the ball. Allowing Spurs to attack and for the inevitable to happen. The erosion of our principles/not playing the "Swansea Way" - wasn't this what Garry was sacked for?
|  |
| The orthodox are always orthodox, regardless of the orthodoxy.
|
| |  |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 11:31 - Feb 29 with 2175 views | jack247 |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 09:21 - Feb 29 by blaine_scfc |
Exactly how I saw it.
Hoofing it out of defence to no one after half hour, there was not a chance we were holding onto to a clean sheet. As you said, lower league side playing against a premier league team. |
The hoofing was what annoyed me the most. If we are going to play a containing game, we need an outlet. Paloschi and Ayew can do that normally. I think we just have to accept we won't be playing Spurs every week. As much as they looked like a free flowing side, they were also well drilled defensively and much fitter than us. Every time we dispossessed them near our box they immediately cut off all the easy out balls and pressured the player in possession, forcing him to just launch it rather than lose possession in a dangerous area.
Most teams won't be able to do that and I'd hope that we retain possession and build from the back a lot better, if not against Arsenal, then certainly for the following games. |  | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 12:15 - Feb 29 with 2155 views | tomdickharry |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 08:49 - Feb 29 by Pegojack |
Yesterday was an embarrassment. We looked like a League Two team who were playing away at a Premiership club in the FA Cup and who had fluked a goal early on, then decided to hang on and defend like grim death.
From the time we scored until Spurs equalized, I never once thought "we are going to fluke a win here", it was just a matter of time. Our passing game just evaporated and it became a training exercise for Spurs, attack against defence.
What worries me is that if we get the players into this mentality, it will carry through to the 'must win' games coming up soon - Norwich, Villa, etc.
Guidolin needs to start playing a formation that has an even chance of scoring goals and winning games through attacking football. Stop surrendering the initiative. No more fear, go out and believe in ourselves. |
Excellent summation in respect of Sunday's debacle. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 12:52 - Feb 29 with 2126 views | Oldjack |
Yesterday i was unable to watch the game or listen to it ,then one of my mates got the scores up on his phone just after half time 0-1 ,I instantly thought to myself we're gonna lose this ,why is that ? FUKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK you cannot sit back and try to defend a 1-0 lead . Attack is one of the best forms of defense ,an old cliche but very true |  |
| Prosser the Tosser dwells on Phil's bum hole like a rusty old hemorrhoid ,fact
You Greedy Bastards Get Out Of OUR Club!
|
| |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 14:20 - Feb 29 with 2065 views | Davillin |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 12:52 - Feb 29 by Oldjack |
Yesterday i was unable to watch the game or listen to it ,then one of my mates got the scores up on his phone just after half time 0-1 ,I instantly thought to myself we're gonna lose this ,why is that ? FUKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK you cannot sit back and try to defend a 1-0 lead . Attack is one of the best forms of defense ,an old cliche but very true |
I agree.
For some time, my "signature line" was something I firmly believe: "The best way to defend a one-goal lead is to make it a two-goal lead."
The reasons why this is true are too obvious to repeat.
I've put it back. |  |
| |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 14:50 - Feb 29 with 2033 views | jasper_T |
2-0 is the most dangerous scoreline, though.
Safer not to get that second goal imo. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 15:47 - Feb 29 with 1991 views | londonlisa2001 |
After we scored we didn't decide to sit back - Spurs upped their tempo noticeably and we couldn't deal with it - they had more pace throughout the team and their players were also technically better than ours.
We resorted to defending rather than chose to do it as we were swamped all over the pitch and couldn't hold on to the ball for two seconds.
Anyone that thinks we decided to play in that way is simply not acknowledging the quality of side that we were up against. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 15:50 - Feb 29 with 1992 views | jack247 |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 12:52 - Feb 29 by Oldjack |
Yesterday i was unable to watch the game or listen to it ,then one of my mates got the scores up on his phone just after half time 0-1 ,I instantly thought to myself we're gonna lose this ,why is that ? FUKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK you cannot sit back and try to defend a 1-0 lead . Attack is one of the best forms of defense ,an old cliche but very true |
It's a great adage, but it's overly simplistic. Defence is the best form of defence. Otherwise teams would be full of attackers. If we had attacked Spurs at 1-0 we may have pinned them back a bit, but they were picking holes in our midfield as it was, they would have ruined us if we had given them more space.
Having said that, I do feel we defended a little too much yesterday and really suffered from not having an outlet. Our best outlets were on the pitch, they were just marked out of being an option.
Our system is primarily set up to contain teams, but I can't remember us bring as defensive as we were yesterday. I'm hoping it was just because Spurs were that much better and fitter than us that they were able to dictate where we played. Not many teams will be able to do that. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:07 - Feb 29 with 1953 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 15:47 - Feb 29 by londonlisa2001 |
After we scored we didn't decide to sit back - Spurs upped their tempo noticeably and we couldn't deal with it - they had more pace throughout the team and their players were also technically better than ours.
We resorted to defending rather than chose to do it as we were swamped all over the pitch and couldn't hold on to the ball for two seconds.
Anyone that thinks we decided to play in that way is simply not acknowledging the quality of side that we were up against. |
I cannot entirely agree with your analysis, we obviously decided to give up closing down or even tackling their players until they got to the penalty area.
That is absolute suicidal "defending", you cannot give up the whole mid field like that to a team that good.
The proof is that as soon as they scored their 2nd goal we reverted to a more confrontational attacking style. When Fer came on he continually closed down and stole the ball from their players, breaking up their attack down that wing.
He showed the rest of the team how to do so, especially Ki, who had backed off their players the whole game and to a lesser extent Taylor who started his usual "hiding" behind Ash when the game got tough. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:11 - Feb 29 with 1953 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:07 - Feb 29 by A_Fans_Dad |
I cannot entirely agree with your analysis, we obviously decided to give up closing down or even tackling their players until they got to the penalty area.
That is absolute suicidal "defending", you cannot give up the whole mid field like that to a team that good.
The proof is that as soon as they scored their 2nd goal we reverted to a more confrontational attacking style. When Fer came on he continually closed down and stole the ball from their players, breaking up their attack down that wing.
He showed the rest of the team how to do so, especially Ki, who had backed off their players the whole game and to a lesser extent Taylor who started his usual "hiding" behind Ash when the game got tough. |
As soon as we resorted to a more confrontational attacking approach they had two break away opportunities where they should have scored (one was marginally off side, the first was them cocking up the break).
We had no option at that point so it was fine as a gamble but if we had done that throughout we would have lost by more than 1 goal. Goal difference could well be our saviour, so we shouldn't underestimate the difference between losing by 1 goal and 3 goals, however unpalatable the nature of our play is. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:13 - Feb 29 with 1951 views | monmouth |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 15:50 - Feb 29 by jack247 |
It's a great adage, but it's overly simplistic. Defence is the best form of defence. Otherwise teams would be full of attackers. If we had attacked Spurs at 1-0 we may have pinned them back a bit, but they were picking holes in our midfield as it was, they would have ruined us if we had given them more space.
Having said that, I do feel we defended a little too much yesterday and really suffered from not having an outlet. Our best outlets were on the pitch, they were just marked out of being an option.
Our system is primarily set up to contain teams, but I can't remember us bring as defensive as we were yesterday. I'm hoping it was just because Spurs were that much better and fitter than us that they were able to dictate where we played. Not many teams will be able to do that. |
I thought it was even simpler. Don't retreat the whole team 10 yards. It's not a case of attacking them, it's a case of keeping them at bay further out which inevitably gives you more options when you win the ball doesn't it? Probably not, which is why I'm not a football manager.
If you have 9 men in your own box and win it and they are all over you because you're all so deep, then there is no option but to hoof it, no? It shouldn't just be a case of 'attack' or 'defend' as a binary option set. Reducing arguments to 'optimists or pessimists', 'positive or negative', 'gung ho attack or bus park defend' is ridiculous.
Edit - the last bit isn't aimed at the quoted post Mr 247. It just helped me frame the first bit. [Post edited 29 Feb 2016 16:15]
|  |
| |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:18 - Feb 29 with 1939 views | fbreath |
It looked like someone had moved the halfway line 15m closer to our box the way were defending so deep and midfield players so far back.
Saying that Spurs players movement off the ball was fantastic and they made it easy to pass around and through us.
2-1 flattered us as Fab was man of the match |  |
| We are the first Welsh club to reach the Premier League Simples |
| |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:20 - Feb 29 with 1930 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:11 - Feb 29 by londonlisa2001 |
As soon as we resorted to a more confrontational attacking approach they had two break away opportunities where they should have scored (one was marginally off side, the first was them cocking up the break).
We had no option at that point so it was fine as a gamble but if we had done that throughout we would have lost by more than 1 goal. Goal difference could well be our saviour, so we shouldn't underestimate the difference between losing by 1 goal and 3 goals, however unpalatable the nature of our play is. |
Lisa, you and I know that there is a great deal of difference betwen good advorsorial contention in the mid field and the all out frantic attack to get the goal back that we showed.
The fast attack after our corner should not have been a problem because there should have been 4 players back at our Penalty Area to prevent exactly that kind of breakaway.
We achieve nothing with our corners, so having 10 players in their half is asking for exactly that kind of attack, we just do not learn to have some players stay back when playing against teams with pacy players and it has cost us quite a few goals this season. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:30 - Feb 29 with 1923 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:20 - Feb 29 by A_Fans_Dad |
Lisa, you and I know that there is a great deal of difference betwen good advorsorial contention in the mid field and the all out frantic attack to get the goal back that we showed.
The fast attack after our corner should not have been a problem because there should have been 4 players back at our Penalty Area to prevent exactly that kind of breakaway.
We achieve nothing with our corners, so having 10 players in their half is asking for exactly that kind of attack, we just do not learn to have some players stay back when playing against teams with pacy players and it has cost us quite a few goals this season. |
I honestly just think that it was a matter of them being hugely better than us all over the pitch rather than us 'deciding' what to do. I think they decided for us.
Being 5 or 10 yards quicker than us in midfield pushed us back - by the time we reacted to anything they were almost on the edge of our penalty area. Their speed in turning from going back to going forward just murdered us - by the time we turned, they had moved 30 yards forward. Our speed in midfield was terrible.
As an example - there was an occasion fairly late in the second half where we broke quite nicely for once. A lovely ball was played to Siggy on about the halfway line and he had options outside and in front and was in acres of space. Rather than moving to the ball, he waited for it and it was nicked. Spurs then blasted forward so quickly all of our players were miles behind the action. Different class I'm afraid. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:32 - Feb 29 with 1920 views | jasper_T |
Class A or B? | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:34 - Feb 29 with 1917 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:32 - Feb 29 by jasper_T |
Class A or B? |
It'd be a start if some of ours didn't look like they were on valium. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:05 - Feb 29 with 1629 views | Joe_bradshaw |
“It wasn’t our intention to play like this,” Swansea coach Alan Curtis said after the 2-1 defeat to Tottenham. “They just had wave upon wave of attack.” |  |
| |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:18 - Feb 29 with 1614 views | monmouth |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:05 - Feb 29 by Joe_bradshaw |
“It wasn’t our intention to play like this,” Swansea coach Alan Curtis said after the 2-1 defeat to Tottenham. “They just had wave upon wave of attack.” |
To be fair, sometimes you go with a plan and you are just left reeling and then your head is spinning and you're just clinging on for dear life getting more and more frazzled....and that's just me speaking from a one person experience, never mind trying to coherently pull together 11 people. A few tactical cramps may have helped or earlier subs to break up the constant barrage and gibvethem time to get together.
Lisa is right of course, Tott were just too good and relentless (which is even more depressing really in its own way, as they are hardly barcalona, despite the awe they seem to now be held in on here. I reckon Arsenal and a few others will beat them in the run in) but I'm glad it wasn't the plan. Doesn't explain why we adopt the defend deep approach every time we go ahead though? If it isn't the plan why do we do it all the time? | |
| |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:24 - Feb 29 with 1600 views | Oldjack |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:18 - Feb 29 by monmouth |
To be fair, sometimes you go with a plan and you are just left reeling and then your head is spinning and you're just clinging on for dear life getting more and more frazzled....and that's just me speaking from a one person experience, never mind trying to coherently pull together 11 people. A few tactical cramps may have helped or earlier subs to break up the constant barrage and gibvethem time to get together.
Lisa is right of course, Tott were just too good and relentless (which is even more depressing really in its own way, as they are hardly barcalona, despite the awe they seem to now be held in on here. I reckon Arsenal and a few others will beat them in the run in) but I'm glad it wasn't the plan. Doesn't explain why we adopt the defend deep approach every time we go ahead though? If it isn't the plan why do we do it all the time? |
Exactly ,and it's doing my swede in now ,we also don't have an outlet theses days leaving us exposed to wave after wave of attacks no matter who we play | |
| Prosser the Tosser dwells on Phil's bum hole like a rusty old hemorrhoid ,fact
You Greedy Bastards Get Out Of OUR Club!
|
| |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:49 - Feb 29 with 1569 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:24 - Feb 29 by Oldjack |
Exactly ,and it's doing my swede in now ,we also don't have an outlet theses days leaving us exposed to wave after wave of attacks no matter who we play |
Your point re no outlet is exactly our problem.
Wilf was wonderful at being that outlet - we haven't had anyone since who can do it. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:57 - Feb 29 with 1562 views | karnataka |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:49 - Feb 29 by londonlisa2001 |
Your point re no outlet is exactly our problem.
Wilf was wonderful at being that outlet - we haven't had anyone since who can do it. |
There aren't many who can do it the way he did though. Against Everton I was screaming for Barrow to come on and stay on the halfway line and chase anything hoofed up towards him. Because of his pace, Everton would have known they would need at least 2 defenders back which meant 2 players fewer attacking our half of the pitch.
It's all very well hoofing the ball into the opponent's half but you either have to have someone it will stick to like Wilf or someone who can outpace defenders like Barrow. So the occasional long ball over the top would have given them something to think about other than just attacking us. If we are going to defend deep, we don't have a Wilf clone so Barrow is our only out ball because he's the fastest we've got. |  | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:58 - Feb 29 with 1561 views | Oldjack |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:49 - Feb 29 by londonlisa2001 |
Your point re no outlet is exactly our problem.
Wilf was wonderful at being that outlet - we haven't had anyone since who can do it. |
It's because we have all 11 defending ,instead of leaving at least one if not two players near the halfway line ,Theses are very desperate times and if we stay like this i'm fearing the worse | |
| Prosser the Tosser dwells on Phil's bum hole like a rusty old hemorrhoid ,fact
You Greedy Bastards Get Out Of OUR Club!
|
| |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 18:04 - Feb 29 with 1553 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:57 - Feb 29 by karnataka |
There aren't many who can do it the way he did though. Against Everton I was screaming for Barrow to come on and stay on the halfway line and chase anything hoofed up towards him. Because of his pace, Everton would have known they would need at least 2 defenders back which meant 2 players fewer attacking our half of the pitch.
It's all very well hoofing the ball into the opponent's half but you either have to have someone it will stick to like Wilf or someone who can outpace defenders like Barrow. So the occasional long ball over the top would have given them something to think about other than just attacking us. If we are going to defend deep, we don't have a Wilf clone so Barrow is our only out ball because he's the fastest we've got. |
I suggested using Barrow as the second front man in a diamond formation as my favoured line up for the next game for exactly that reason. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 18:06 - Feb 29 with 1548 views | jack247 |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 16:13 - Feb 29 by monmouth |
I thought it was even simpler. Don't retreat the whole team 10 yards. It's not a case of attacking them, it's a case of keeping them at bay further out which inevitably gives you more options when you win the ball doesn't it? Probably not, which is why I'm not a football manager.
If you have 9 men in your own box and win it and they are all over you because you're all so deep, then there is no option but to hoof it, no? It shouldn't just be a case of 'attack' or 'defend' as a binary option set. Reducing arguments to 'optimists or pessimists', 'positive or negative', 'gung ho attack or bus park defend' is ridiculous.
Edit - the last bit isn't aimed at the quoted post Mr 247. It just helped me frame the first bit. [Post edited 29 Feb 2016 16:15]
|
Don't worry, I agree with you.
We played the way we normally do, but allowed them to impose themselves on us far more than anyone else has. They dictated that we played deeper than we wanted to, simply by being fitter, better and dragging our players into positions they didn't want to be in.
Pressuring the man on the ball and double marking his outlets sounds so simple, but it worked a treat.
Even after going 1-0 up, I don't think it was out intention to park the bus, it just doesn't work when you invite wave after wave of pressure.
I'm just hoping no one else can do it to us. | | | |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 22:12 - Feb 29 with 1441 views | RevJames |
| The Italian Garry Monk? on 17:57 - Feb 28 by jack247 |
It's the Brian Flynn conundrum. It will probably go down to the last few games, keep us up and he is a legend, take us down and he is a pariah.
Nobody will care how he keeps us up, as long as he does. |
Players must take a lot of responsibility as well.
It's not his fault we concede two cr@p goals that should have been relatively straightforward to defend against.
Where are the leaders on the pitch? He can only do so much from the sidelines. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
