• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Game of two halves

Pirate55

Pirate55

The Last Man Standing 17/18
has anyone noticed that we appear to be good in one half and poor in another half this season?

Interestingly it isn't consistent which half will be which. Originally, we were poor in first halves ( Everton, Liverpool, Palace) and more recently in second halves (WBA and Bayer). Probably only against City have we put it together in both halves.

Any thoughts why this should be?
 
Pirate55 said:
has anyone noticed that we appear to be good in one half and poor in another half this season?

Interestingly it isn't consistent which half will be which. Originally, we were poor in first halves ( Everton, Liverpool, Palace) and more recently in second halves (WBA and Bayer). Probably only against City have we put it together in both halves.

Any thoughts why this should be?
Click to expand...
Because it's a game of two halves?*













*My coat is always on
 
There's another club out on the pitch. Those eleven players and their manager are also changing, adapting, energy waxes and wanes. Unless you're playing a markedly inferior side (i.e., not another Premier League side, Champions or Europa League side), it's difficult if not impossible to dominate an entire match.
 
Dr Rosenrosen said:
There's another club out on the pitch. Those eleven players and their manager are also changing, adapting, energy waxes and wanes. Unless you're playing a markedly inferior side (i.e., not another Premier League side, Champions or Europa League side), it's difficult if not impossible to dominate an entire match.
Click to expand...

But we largely did dominate against City, who one would expect to have a fair share of domination. Also, dominance more often than not comes in phases rather than entire halves - and it is mainly entire halves where we have been Jekell and Hydish this season.
 
Pirate55 said:
But we largely did dominate against City, who one would expect to have a fair share of domination. Also, dominance more often than not comes in phases rather than entire halves - and it is mainly entire halves where we have been Jekell and Hydish this season.
Click to expand...

So because we managed to dominate one game against another very good team we should be able to do that every time or most of the time?

Leverkusen are a very good team. Everton had a very good start to the season. We dominated for most of the games against both WBA and Palace I think, but struggled to create clear cut chances at times in those games. Not opening up a Pulis managed WBA side with consistency is hardly Jekyll and Hyde, or if it is every (good) team in the league would fit that description.
 
braineclipse said:
So because we managed to dominate one game against another very good team we should be able to do that every time or most of the time?

Leverkusen are a very good team. Everton had a very good start to the season. We dominated for most of the games against both WBA and Palace I think, but struggled to create clear cut chances at times in those games. Not opening up a Pulis managed WBA side with consistency is hardly Jekyll and Hyde, or if it is every (good) team in the league would fit that description.
Click to expand...

I think you missed my point. I am not saying that we should dominate every game, all game - nor that there will be phases in virtually every game where the opposition will dominate. My essential proposition is that it seems to me, in most games this season, we have had one good half and one bad half. The most obvious examples of this are Everton, Palace, Liverpool, WBA and Leverkusen - hence my Jekyll and Hyde comment. The strange thing is that sometimes it's the first half and other times it's the second half. But most worryingly, most recently we seemed to lose the second half badly against WBA and Bayer and failed to capitalise on our definite first half dominance in both those games.
 
Pirate55 said:
I think you missed my point. I am not saying that we should dominate every game, all game - nor that there will be phases in virtually every game where the opposition will dominate. My essential proposition is that it seems to me, in most games this season, we have had one good half and one bad half. The most obvious examples of this are Everton, Palace, Liverpool, WBA and Leverkusen - hence my Jekyll and Hyde comment. The strange thing is that sometimes it's the first half and other times it's the second half. But most worryingly, most recently we seemed to lose the second half badly against WBA and Bayer and failed to capitalise on our definite first half dominance in both those games.
Click to expand...

Very different games you describe, not really some overarching problem to be identified for those very different situations. I think what you're describing happens to a lot of very good teams. Arguably other than the big 3 in Europe (Real, Barca and Bayern) I think it happens to everyone with a decent frequency, probably it also happens to them quite a lot.

Remember under Ferguson how they won games at the death and always kept trying and were praised for it. They weren't always great in those first halves. Or remember how most big teams that are defensively solid and well organized keep hold of 1 goal leads despite average second half performances with a really good frequency. Those seem like equally valid descriptions of some of our games this season as trying to paint this as Jekyll and Hyde.
 
I think its deliberate and planned. We only go into extreme press mode for about ¼ of a match. I thing Poch decides which quarter it would be most effective to blitz a specific opponent for.
 
Another game of two halves today (v Bournemouth). Absolute kak in the first half (and really fortunate to be level at the break).
Much better in the second half until Poch mysteriously decided to kill our momentum and sub Son and Alli for VJ and Sissoko. Weird.
 
Pirate55 said:
Another game of two halves today (v Bournemouth). Absolute kak in the first half (and really fortunate to be level at the break).
Much better in the second half until Poch mysteriously decided to kill our momentum and sub Son and Alli for VJ and Sissoko. Weird.
Click to expand...

Are we really supposed to be so good that having a close fought first half against what looks like a mid table side in form makes us "absolute kak"?

They had the one chance early on, but after that they didn't really create much. We finished the first half with 7 shots to their 5 and 56.9% possession.
 
braineclipse said:
Are we really supposed to be so good that having a close fought first half against what looks like a mid table side in form makes us "absolute kak"?

They had the one chance early on, but after that they didn't really create much. We finished the first half with 7 shots to their 5 and 56.9% possession.
Click to expand...

I was at the game and if the statistics are indeed the ones that you quote, then it certainly didn't reflect that first half. In most peoples views (including El G above and Graham Souness, who I chatted to at half time) we were second best in that first half and extremely lucky to be on terms at the interval, and with 11 men still on the park.

I don't recall any of the so called 7 shots you refer to (unless they count blocked efforts) and the Lamela shot, which I was right behind, was not nearly as close to a goal as hitting the outside of the post seemed to make it - it didn't look like it had a chance of going in and a late swerve to take it against a post was most unexpected.

Compared to the way we improved and dominated in the second half, I would say this game only added to my proposition that we have largely been good in one half and poor in another half this season.
 
Pirate55 said:
I was at the game and if the statistics are indeed the ones that you quote, then it certainly didn't reflect that first half. In most peoples views (including El G above and Graham Souness, who I chatted to at half time) we were second best in that first half and extremely lucky to be on terms at the interval, and with 11 men still on the park.

I don't recall any of the so called 7 shots you refer to (unless they count blocked efforts) and the Lamela shot, which I was right behind, was not nearly as close to a goal as hitting the outside of the post seemed to make it - it didn't look like it had a chance of going in and a late swerve to take it against a post was most unexpected.

Compared to the way we improved and dominated in the second half, I would say this game only added to my proposition that we have largely been good in one half and poor in another half this season.
Click to expand...

Stats were from whoscored.com. It includes blocked shots from them and us.

What were their other chances of note other than the early save from Lloris? Surely if we were "extremely lucky to be on terms at the interval" they had more than one big chance? (A chance that wasn't a result of them dominating or opening us up iirc, it was a result of set piece wasn't it?).

We improved in the second half partly as a result of them putting a lot of effort in during the first half. They worked their socks off whereas we were a bit more composed with our energy I think. This seems pretty typical for a game between two good teams, and Bournemouth on form are a good team.
 
IIRC, Lloris made at least three saves in that first half (including the one against the bar). In addition, Bournemouth had a header flash just over, and a couple of balls fizz across our goal).

Can you identify the seven shots we had?
 
Pirate55 said:
IIRC, Lloris made at least three saves in that first half (including the one against the bar). In addition, Bournemouth had a header flash just over, and a couple of balls fizz across our goal).

Can you identify the seven shots we had?
Click to expand...

I trust whoscored to count up the shots fairly accurately.

Had a look at the highlights to refresh my memory

In addition to Lamela hitting the post we had a deflected shot from Eriksen that Boruc saved. They also showed the situation early on where we won the ball in a great position, but Alli played it to Son in an offside position. Surely as good a situation to score as some of the situations you mention for Bournemouth. The highlights (Sky) didn't show any other Bournemouth chance than the goal, not that this is the end of a conversation about chances, but it doesn't make it sound like Bournemouth had a lot of very good chances in that half.
 
The above "shot" count no where near adds up to seven though. The only two chances I can recall are Lamela's effort against the post and Eriken's deflected shot. Apart from that, we created diddly squat and were second best in that first half whatever the "statistics" say.

Do you agree we were poor in the first half but much better in the second?

If so, you agree with my basic proposition.
 
Pirate55 said:
The above "shot" count no where near adds up to seven though. The only two chances I can recall are Lamela's effort against the post and Eriken's deflected shot. Apart from that, we created diddly squat and were second best in that first half whatever the "statistics" say.

Do you agree we were poor in the first half but much better in the second?

If so, you agree with my basic proposition.
Click to expand...

And the shots you mention doesn't add up to 5. I didn't claim that all 7 were good chances or that I remembered them, just the basic stats from the game.

I think the first half was a closely fought half. Their one chance was the better one, but neither team created a lot. They played well and defended well, but we had more of the ball and weren't outplayed by any stretch of the imagination. Well done to Bournemouth for going toe to toe with us, but it didn't really surprise me as I think they're a good footballing side on their day. I don't agree that we were "absolute kak".

I agree that we were clearly better in the second half. But I'm not surprised by this and I think it's common for most good teams to have quite a few games like this during a season. In fact it would be stranger for most good teams to consistently perform well in every half of most games. I don't find this "pattern" particularly troubling or worrying. Especially as we're sitting a point off first having spent most of the season so far without our one real attacking superstar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back