• 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

Antonio Conte - officially NOT the coach of THFC

metalgear said:
We attack when we want to
b6a2afc683915e7701e0e0851fddde91.jpg
Click to expand...

I think that makes sense. We press less and with less intensity than quite a few teams.

Bit surprised our turnover numbers are that low, we do seem to get quite a few of them when we do press higher. Perhaps just that we do it less compared to most.

Would be interesting if "press got played through" could be quantified. I think we're more cautious in our pressing, minimising the number of times we get played through, at the cost of fewer turnovers.

I also think our pressing is more about directing the opposition to where we want them to go than about turnovers compared to at least some of those teams with "better" numbers.

Kandi1977 said:
In my youth we often had a guest coach for periods, and he had a pretty simple philosophy. Defend when you have to, attack when you can.

He later went on to manage Bodø Glimt, Rosenborg, Club Brugge, and Olympiacos among others, so I guess he knew a little bit about football.
Click to expand...

With Conte out sometimes feels more like "we defend because we can" and we're rather good at both that defending and turning deeper turnovers into good counter attacking moves (most of the time).

Defending well being a viable avenue to attacking well. And sometimes, for some teams, a better avenue then trying to control possession and the game.
 
braineclipse said:
I think that makes sense. We press less and with less intensity than quite a few teams.

Bit surprised our turnover numbers are that low, we do seem to get quite a few of them when we do press higher. Perhaps just that we do it less compared to most.

Would be interesting if "press got played through" could be quantified. I think we're more cautious in our pressing, minimising the number of times we get played through, at the cost of fewer turnovers.

I also think our pressing is more about directing the opposition to where we want them to go than about turnovers compared to at least some of those teams with "better" numbers.



With Conte out sometimes feels more like "we defend because we can" and we're rather good at both that defending and turning deeper turnovers into good counter attacking moves (most of the time).

Defending well being a viable avenue to attacking well. And sometimes, for some teams, a better avenue then trying to control possession and the game.
Click to expand...
Most of the football watching masses are blinded by the possession stat, while I do agree that having possession gives a degree of control if you dont use it effectively its pointless, as we have proved in the past.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
If you want to know why games aren’t won in the middle…. That pair got us to the CL final
We have had many better pairings achive much less
Click to expand...

I think you'll find it was others in that campaign that got us to the CL final; most games played in that CL run did NOT have Winks and Sissoko starting together.
Our downturn which we are only just reversing started when they became our starting pairing rather than subs/backups....

Like @Kandi1977 you have a fair point re having good strikers AND good defenders being able to trump having a good midfield only, but you are vastly overstating it...
 
glorygloryeze said:
I think you'll find it was others in that campaign that got us to the CL final; most games played in that CL run did NOT have Winks and Sissoko starting together.
Our downturn which we are only just reversing started when they became our starting pairing rather than subs/backups....

Like @Kandi1977 you have a fair point re having good strikers AND good defenders being able to trump having a good midfield only, but you are vastly overstating it...
Click to expand...
Strange as they both played in 10 games in the CL that season which is more than any other CMs
 
Jordinho said:
Given the players missing and the opponent's way of playing, today should have been 3-5-2.
Click to expand...

Maybe like at Chelsea his stubborn nature will be broken and he plays to better strengths.

At the minute I not sure this formation is suiting us and there is a glaring refusal to play the new signings in areas.

I'm hoping there is some kind of masterplan but I'm yet to see it
 
Getting done by Pep's cone man will hurt him, for sure.

But he deserves it - this loss is, in huge part, down to him. He is stubborn, he'll stick with things until an absolute horror show forces him to change.

Today, he got punished for it twice. First by sticking to that 3-4-3 that sees us get overrun in midfield again and again and again. And secondly, by being so wedded to his system that, when we went down to 10, he spent 10 minutes fiddlnig around humming and hawing about subs - is it 2 subs? 5? 4? While the team were being run ragged.

Eventually we conceded another, and then he finally throws on his jumble of second-rates to keep us from conceding more, when proactive management might have kept us in it.

Two big shocks today, and I hope it forces him to change. Play the 3-5-2, stick Bissouma in between Bentancur and Hojbjerg. Drop one of Sonny or Richy to the bench, and try to exert more control over games.

And never play that fool Emerson again - today was the most brainless thing I've seen a footballer do in ages, and I utterly cannot stand a player so stupid as to do that in an NLD.

Bin him, bin the 3-5-2. We have the players to play it - use it, Antonio, I beg you. Salvage some good out of this.
 
I hope he learned a lot today, we have players who can talk the talk but not walk the walk.
The lack of fight is not something I expected from a conte team.
 
metalgear said:
we don't have the players that conte needs. whose fault is that?
Click to expand...

Nah, mate. I think I've made my past views about ENIC abundantly clear, and I am peeved we never got Conte a proper RWB. But he's not using the olayers he does have.

We had Biss - we could have played him and gone 3-5-2 to start with, then brought on Richy against tiring legs in the 60th minute.

That we didn't is down to Conte, imo. You play the hand you're given, snd he has been given a better hand than Poch ever had - and Poch is the best manager we've probably had since Bill Nick.
 
DubaiSpur said:
Nah, mate. I think I've made my past views about ENIC abundantly clear, and I am peeved we never got Conte a proper RWB. But he's not using the olayers he does have.

We had Biss - we could have played him and gone 3-5-2 to start with, then brought on Richy against tiring legs in the 60th minute.

That we didn't is down to Conte, imo. You play the hand you're given, snd he has been given a better hand than Poch ever had - and Poch is the best manager we've probably had since Bill Nick.
Click to expand...
Phone for you. It’s Keith Burkinshaw. He says he’ll wait for you to finish your tea, but he won three trophies and got to four cup finals.
 
mjc23 said:
And two wingbacks that are good at wingback.
Although I actually wish he'd play 4 at the back and 3 in the middle, but like all great managers, think he's a bit stubborn.
Click to expand...
I don’t think we have good enough centre backs to play with 4 at the back…. None of Romero, Dier or Davies are suited to it (haven’t seen enough of Lenglet yet to judge). We hide our CBs defensive frailties by playing them in a three and accept that it often means our two will be dominated in the middle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back