There were many times Sunderland had bodies forward in the first half and we had the opportunity to counter, but didn't take it. See the early pages of this thread - lots of people commenting our countering is too slow.
I think AVB does trust our team not to commit individual errors. But even if they do, we can usually come back from a goal down and did it a fair few times last season. 2 goals is obviously more difficult, but it's difficult to come back from 2 goals down using any approach.
There is a clear, clear difference in the positions the players take up, the speed of their passing, the choices and runs that they make in different periods of the game. It is deliberate. It's so we can attack the opposition with increased intensity when they are at their weakest. It's near enough fact man, it's not my opinion. It's been documented.
we had the opportunity to counter, but didn't take it.
So we could score goals, but deliberately choose not to in order to 'increase our intensity' in the second half.
I think AVB does trust our team not to commit individual errors. But even if they do, we can usually come back from a goal down and did it a fair few times last season.
Se we are completely fine with going 1 goal down and then trusting in our 'higher intensity' to score more than the opposition in the second half, even though our entire team has just one more goal than Luis Suarez alone this season and even though we evidently can't finish for toffee even when we do make chances.
It's so we can attack the opposition with increased intensity when they are at their weakest.
Masterful strategy: "Lads, here's the plan. Go one nil down as soon as you can. Don't take any counter-attacking opportunities in the first half, even if they present themselves to you on a plate: we'll wait for the second. Once the second half begins go out there and be intense, so we can score two goals to their one." Essentially, throw away a half and start from one nil down so we can 'attack with intensity' in the second half.
There are an awful lot of illogical points to this 'strategy', surely? We have 90 minutes to score as many goals as we can. We basically throw the first forty five minutes away and wait for the second forty-five to start playing. We have chances to score goals in the first half, but we deliberately bumble along to avoid scoring them because we're so intent on 'increasing the intensity' in the second half. We're even okay with starting from 1-0 down after 45 minutes.
That is a very, very strange strategy to pursue. Flat out illogical, actually. I don't think AVB is a fool: far from it, I think he's one of the most intelligent men at the club. Ergo, I cannot believe that, having looked at the countless individual errors we've committed this season, he says 'no, don't worry, THIS GAME will be the one where we won't make any'. I cannot believe that, having seen the opprobrium the fans, the media and the wider footballing public have heaped on our lack of goals, he says 'Also, we will throw away the first half so we can be INTENSE in the second'. And I cannot believe that he believes that we can overcome both our individual errors and our lack of cohesion in front of goal to regularly reverse 1-0 deficits like we did today. Cannot believe it.
Yes, we probably play better in the second half: we run faster, pass faster, and make better choices. That is probably because AVB turns things around at half-time after regularly lethargic performances, in all probability by shouting loudly. It is likely no because we decide to surrender one entire half of football to play with some 'intensity' later on.