milo
Jack L. Jones
With the players that we had at our disposal last season, how do you think our league position would have been affected if we had "valued possession above all else"?
-
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
AVB & Spurs Tactics and Formations discussion thread
- Thread starter BAE
- Start date
With the players that we had at our disposal last season, how do you think our league position would have been affected if we had "valued possession above all else"?
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
I'm not sure, that would depend on a whole other raft of factors. Maybe if would have helped us break down teams that sat back on us, maybe we would have struggled even more because it would have been a new style of play. Maybe we would have finished mid-table or maybe the players may have taken to it like a duck to water and we finished 2nd or 1st. Impossible to say.
What I was trying to get at, and why I was asking the questions on the previous pages, is asking does the system really matter? Is there actually much point in one? Basically what I was trying to say is that maybe it doesn't matter at all, because good players will ultimately prevail, so what is the point of implementing this system. I said that a couple of pages ago, I'm not trying to say that having a possession system would solve all our problems.
I don't think systems as such really exist. I cringe when I read about "the AVB system." It makes everything seem to robotic. I don't think football is a particularly systematic game. Maybe I'm being fussy and over critical, but all we are really talking about is a formation and within that the tweaks each manager makes to it. I just don't think system is the right term and makes AVB sound mechanical.
In my opinion a coach should just play in a way the best takes advantage of our players key attributes when we are attacking and stifles the opposition when defending. Given we will never have a set team and the opposition change each week, then a set system doesn't really seem appropriate. Different players have different skill sets. If Bale is injured and we play Dempsey on the left, surely we need to play differently, as the players have very different styles.
Robero Martinez really impressed during the Euros when he said all you do is ask players to do what they are good at. Basically he's saying you set the team up in a way that allows the players to play to their strengths. So a good manager has to be flexible and have a strong ability to recognise his teams strengths, the oppositions weaknesses and be able to quickly adapt if things aren't working.
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
'‘People say it is the same personnel but it is a different way of playing, a different system this year, so that is going to take time.''
Quote there from Defoe 2 days ago. I think systems definitely do exist. There are formations, there are tactics within that formation, but I think a system is defined as a clear way of playing that runs through the whole team. Defoe is talking about a system here, Benny has said there is more tactical work than before. Maybe a system is a way of playing that values the team over individual freedom for the players, and I think that definitely does exist.
Swansea, and what Rodgers is trying to implement at Liverpool, can definitely be defined as a system IMO. Yes it's all individual tactics, but all brought together they are made up to have a very specific way of playing, creating chances and defending. What Martinez put together at the end of last season was definitely a system too - he's even said he sat there studying his big TV until a lightbulb went off in his head and he came up with a system that got the best out of the players at his disposal.
I would argue you can be playing the same system but in a different formation. Swansea switching to a 3-4-3 at the end of last season, they had a different formation, but still the same objective in terms of how to play the game, and what they were going to play for.
I think there are more 'robotic' managers out there, not as many in this country but certainly abroad. Some managers value the team over the individual, and some managers value the individual over the team. In AVB, we definitely have someone who values the team more, and maybe that's why the transition is so hard.
Can I ask, if you don't believe in systems, why do you think we are not playing well right now? Do you think AVB is a bad manager? Do you think he can't motivate them, or play to the players strengths? Do you think we don't have a good enough squad, even before the transfer window closed, to beat West Brom and Norwich at home - or at the very least create some good chances against Norwich? If we aren't trying to play to a new system, what do you think is going wrong? Genuinely interested.
I don't not believe in certain ways of playing, I just think system is a bad word and think Defoe has used a poor description by using it. The word system to me seems to rigid. But really that is just semantics and why i said I'm probably being too fussy. So I'm not saying we aren't trying to play in different ways than before, but there will be more flexibility to this and so it isn't so much a set system. Every team will have it's own characteristics, but you can't play the same way when the personnel isn't always the same.
At the moment I don't think we are playing well due to numerous reasons. We play at too slow tempo. We are passing the ball between the defence and midfield too much. Our strength in recent seasons has been high tempo football and mixing things up. We are playing too slowly and without sufficient variation. We also seem vulnerable to counter attacks and this to me looks like it is causing the defenders to be uncertain. We seem to be lacking confidence at the back. We have no creativity in the middle and looked much better when Rafa and then Dembele were on the pitch. I think having Defoe up front on his own is just plain bad for us. No one is playing diagonals for our wingers.
Basically so far I don't think we've chosen a way of playing that brings out the best in our players. We definitely had a good enough squad to win all our games so far. I think tactics have cost us, as have team selection. I don't think lack of motivation has been a problem, but maybe the absence of our "leaders" has.
As regards AVB I think it will be clear if he is or isn't good enough by mid December. If I take emotion out of it and refuse to be influenced by reputation etc and just look at the information I have available and judge him on what he's done in the Prem, then I'm inclined to say he seems fairly incompetent. This could change, but I'm to date simply judging it on what I've seen.
If we are being honest as fans, i think we should all hold that opinion. This isn't to say he is incompetent, but purely that is the impression we should have so far. It's in no way definitive and there is no reason for anyone to get the knickers in a twist over it. If we go on a great run over the coming games and play some great football, then all our opinions should change.
I certainly don't think he should be judged in his time at Porto. Mainly because it's highly unlikely any of us watched them on a regular basis, both before and during AVB's tenure. So we really don't know that much about his impact. Also the difference of competition is so great and we certainly aren't the best team in our league or cups. The fact is many average managers have won the biggest titles in football, so this alone should mean we don't have blind faith in AVB based on that year at Porto, but judge him fairly on what we actually see during his time with us. Hence I think it's much more rational to be hugely skeptical of him and to date unimpressed.
So far his time in the Prem we've largely seen him asking players to play in ways that don't suit them, making some odd team selections and substitutions, getting rid or trying to get rid of senior players and mainly getting poor results. That sounds very harsh, but I think it's true and if we are honest, it's all the vast majority of us have to go on. So, I don't think it's anyway unreasonable to be concerned, but at the same time, feel it's important that we change or uphold these opinions based on results and how we play. There is no point saying he's brick and that's that and likewise there is no point having blind faith in him based on the very little most of us know of his true influence/contribution to Porto's success. Wait and see and let our opinions form further and change over time. But to date, he looks more likely to be another Ramos than a Mourinho. People keep saying we can't judge him based on 3 games with us and twenty odd with Chelsea. Yet I bet the vast majority of those people never saw more than 1 game from his tenure at Porto, but many will judge him on his time there.
"System" might be the wrong word - maybe "strategy" is better to distinguish from "tactics." Harry's "strategy" was to just simply send the players out to play the game. AVB's strategy is more specific - keep possession, play it out from the back, etc etc. We've heard it many times. Tactics apply to each game, analyzing the opponents weaknesses and how to exploit them. We know that Harry didn't really "do" tactics either.
I see a problem with each way. HR's way, it's like sending an army out on to the battlefield with no instructions, just to do what they do and fight. In that case the only battles they will win, will be against either unorganized opponents, or opponents that are significantly weaker. That army will never beat a well-drilled, strategic and organized army of comparative strength, and that's why we rarely beat the top teams in the league and never once beat Manchester United while Harry was in charge.
In AVB's way, there's a danger that the army becomes confused and overburdened by excessive strategy and instruction, and that would make them one of the unorganized armies that might be beaten by the army lacking instructions.
But over time, AVB's army becomes a well organized unit with a winning strategy that is very hard to fight against. Also that army gets the advantage of in depth understanding of their opponents weaknesses and so exploit them to win, which Harry's army either does only superficially, or not at all. But that's why we have to give AVB time and press on with this "project" because in the long run it will be better.
The Moonlit Knight
Banned
a) we don't know that.
b) Harry also told the players (if you believe him in interviews anyway) that some of his instructions were to play it out from the back, keep it on the deck as much as possible and don't give the ball away cheaply, control the possession in the middle of the park.
The whole Redknapp told them to go out and do their thing is complete and utter BS. Of course he did. Whether it be get the ball wide as early as possible, or play it up to Crouchie as soon as possible up front, Crouchie you then hold it and bring others into play etc. he did give instructions. What he probably didn't do was go into great detail about what to do when certain players had the ball, e.g. Scotty when Luka's got the ball make sure you drop about 15 yards behind him at a 7 o'clock angle to dovetail the attack etc.
tynesidespur
Terry Yorath
Some great posts Joey.
Have to say I agree that we were a possession based team. When at our best last year, we had 11 players on the pitch who were comfortable with the ball at their feet. Everyone was in form so the passes weren't just going to the right person, they were weighted correctly in order to allow the receiver to look up and assess his options before receiving the ball. Consequently everything clicked during that amazing run we had.
A lot of people on here also complained about Parker last year (during the poor run) as all he did was pass sideways and backwards. Surely that is a hallmark of a possession team? Its better to keep the ball by playing sideways/backwards than always choosing the forward option?
Have to say I agree that we were a possession based team. When at our best last year, we had 11 players on the pitch who were comfortable with the ball at their feet. Everyone was in form so the passes weren't just going to the right person, they were weighted correctly in order to allow the receiver to look up and assess his options before receiving the ball. Consequently everything clicked during that amazing run we had.
A lot of people on here also complained about Parker last year (during the poor run) as all he did was pass sideways and backwards. Surely that is a hallmark of a possession team? Its better to keep the ball by playing sideways/backwards than always choosing the forward option?
Actually, Parker is a great user of the ball. its funny saying that as most people don't think he is. What he's not good at is the long-range raking through-ball, but in terms of knowing when and where to release the ball short, he is very good. He also is quite good with the ball at his feet, in terms of twisting and turning in a tight space to make a passing angle.
I think he was central to some of the great football we played last season. I also think he wins the ball back very quickly and actually he's so aggressive in his pressing, that the rest of the team seem to get caught up in it and in that respect he really dose lead by example.
People seemed to think Sandro will always be first choice under AVB, but I personally think Parker is almost genetically engineered to be perfect for how AVB likes the game to be played.
africanspurs
Justin Edinburgh
anyone mention the quality of chances we created. creating the most chances doesnt mean they were good chances
I
indianspur
Guest
this was always a problem under Redknapp and now also under AVB....stats always showed plenty of attempts on goal, but how many are/were genuine goalscoring chances created by good attacking moves
a problem that i dont see being resolved anytime soon
I
indianspur
Guest
Former Burnley chief executive Paul Fletcher claims the club turned down Andre Villas-Boas' application to manage at Turf Moor because they were baffled by his football jargon.
Villas-Boas, now at Tottenham after an ill-fated stint with Chelsea, first looked to make his mark on the Premier League when he applied to succeed Owen Coyle at Burnley following his departure to Bolton in January 2010.
Fletcher says the Clarets opted against the Portuguese boss after his application left the club's chiefs perplexed, turning instead to Brian Laws, who took the club down.
In his new book Magical: A Life In Football, ex-Burnley chief Fletcher said: "(Former Scotland manager) Tommy Docherty used to say he never said anything to his players that his milkman wouldn't understand.
"I don't think any milkman would fathom the meaning of a lot of Andre's presentation.
"The language and jargon of football gets worse by the day. Villas-Boas uses a lot of it. Would Burnley players have ever understood what he wanted if he'd told them to 'solidificate' or some of his other terms?
"He sent a very detailed and lengthy application for the job. His CV and power-point presentation was amazing. If you'd showed it to some of our old managers, they'd have said, 'Blazes, what the hell does it all mean?'
"Even by today's standards there was some complicated stuff in it, with some things that I didn't understand.
"With hindsight, we might have appointed him, but at the time it would have been too big a risk."
--------------
you have to wonder dont you, Chelsea players seemed confused by what was being asked of them, at Spurs things havent started so well and players are saying it takes time to understand the new formation and tactics
footballers, especially British ones, are simple creatures. Complicated blabber wont catch their attention.
AVB's attention to detail is essential for example when he used to compile those scouting reports for Mourinho, but now he is a manager in a big league maybe he has to adjust the level of technical input and allow the players the freedom to express themselves more
Villas-Boas, now at Tottenham after an ill-fated stint with Chelsea, first looked to make his mark on the Premier League when he applied to succeed Owen Coyle at Burnley following his departure to Bolton in January 2010.
Fletcher says the Clarets opted against the Portuguese boss after his application left the club's chiefs perplexed, turning instead to Brian Laws, who took the club down.
In his new book Magical: A Life In Football, ex-Burnley chief Fletcher said: "(Former Scotland manager) Tommy Docherty used to say he never said anything to his players that his milkman wouldn't understand.
"I don't think any milkman would fathom the meaning of a lot of Andre's presentation.
"The language and jargon of football gets worse by the day. Villas-Boas uses a lot of it. Would Burnley players have ever understood what he wanted if he'd told them to 'solidificate' or some of his other terms?
"He sent a very detailed and lengthy application for the job. His CV and power-point presentation was amazing. If you'd showed it to some of our old managers, they'd have said, 'Blazes, what the hell does it all mean?'
"Even by today's standards there was some complicated stuff in it, with some things that I didn't understand.
"With hindsight, we might have appointed him, but at the time it would have been too big a risk."
--------------
you have to wonder dont you, Chelsea players seemed confused by what was being asked of them, at Spurs things havent started so well and players are saying it takes time to understand the new formation and tactics
footballers, especially British ones, are simple creatures. Complicated blabber wont catch their attention.
AVB's attention to detail is essential for example when he used to compile those scouting reports for Mourinho, but now he is a manager in a big league maybe he has to adjust the level of technical input and allow the players the freedom to express themselves more
I
indianspur
Guest
i didnt like the man, but fair play to Redknapp and his coaches, 4-5-4 in the PL is a pretty damn decent record so something they said/did must have worked
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
Most of our good chances came from getting the ball wide quickly, when we had to play patiently and break down a packed defence showing no ambition to move forward against us we struggled to create good chances, barely any chances to be honest.
Following is from Goal.com, but it says it's Jonathan Wilson, so maybe worth a read.
The Dossier: Villas-Boas' Tottenham transition needs players to abandon the Redknapp way
Jermain Defoe was left isolated in Spurs' 1-1 draw with Norwich at White Hart Lane, highlighting the club's need to steadily adapt to the Portuguese manager's system
ANALYSIS
By Jonathan Wilson
Three games gone and Tottenham Hotspur have just two points. There was booing after the game against Norwich City on Saturday as another late equaliser cost Spurs a win.
The frustration is understandable: Harry Redknapp left after being denied Champions League qualification only by a quirk of Uefa’s rules and Chelsea winning the competition. If Andre Villas-Boas achieves anything less than qualification it will feel like a terrible let-down.
Yet Redknapp wasn’t the only departure. Not including loan deals, 12 players left Spurs over the summer, including Luka Modric and Rafael van der Vaart. Six players have arrived, but this is a time of transition, something evident in the tactical hodge-podge in the first half on Saturday, which led to Jermain Defoe playing as a lone central striker with minimal support.
Defoe is a classic example of the sort of centre-forward in danger of being refined out of existence by the evolution of the modern game. He is quick and he is a fine finisher, but he lacks the bulk or hold-up play to operate as a lone centre-forward – at least in the present Spurs set up.
Perhaps if he had a different type of support from the flanks, if he had inverted wingers who could cut in and score goals or central midfielders who could get forward to help, there wouldn’t be such an issue. As Defoe himself said: “I have been playing the lone striker for my club and I have enjoyed it. To be honest playing with good players it is not really a problem if people get close.”
But Gareth Bale and Aaron Lennon are classic British wide-men: they’re quick, perfectly equipped to beat a full-back and get crosses into the box but not naturally adept at the sort of fluid link-up play required to play a front three without a physically robust central presence. Lennon is in his eighth season at Spurs and has only scored 21 league goals.
Bale is rather more prolific, having cemented his reputation with his hat-trick against Inter at the San Siro and scored 17 goals over the past two league seasons.
He can hit shots from range and he is excellent coming in at the back post, but even he is stronger on his left – that is his outside – foot. Despite the experiments with him in more central positions towards the end of last season, he is a wide-man who scores goals rather than being a player like, say, Edinson Cavani or Fabio Borini, essentially forwards who frequently start in wide positions.
In the first half against Norwich, Spurs started with two holding midfielders in Jake Livermore and Sandro, with Gylfi Sigurdsson stroking the ball about smoothly in front of them. It was all sedate and neat enough, but there was nobody driving through the centre of midfield to support Defoe.
Again and again the ball was swept wide by Sigurdsson to either Bale or Lennon who would then look to cross and realise they had only Defoe to aim at, at which they’d check back and the momentum of attacks would be lost.
The arrival of Mousa Dembele at half-time helped, and it was he who got the Spurs goal, turning in exactly that space on the edge of the box that Spurs hadn’t been attacking in the first half. Even with his dynamism, though, it was notable how much better Spurs looked when Emmanuel Adebayor came on.
At last there was a target in the box for Lennon and Bale to aim at, somebody to draw defenders away from Defoe, somebody for Spurs’ midfield to play off.
Villas-Boas’ essential problem is that this was a squad constructed to play in the Redknapp way, that is, in the classic British manner of getting the ball wide and getting crosses into the box. It’s a squad suited to a 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 set-up.
Villas-Boas, though, has historically preferred a 4-3-3: it was what he was used to at Chelsea when he worked under Jose Mourinho and it is what he played at Porto – when he did have a great wide forward in the form of Hulk.
The period of transition may be awkward. Dembele will help, as will Clint Dempsey. Villas-Boas already seems to have learned the lessons of Chelsea, where it is generally accepted he tried to impose his style too quickly.
Notably this season, he has not insisted on the high line he clearly favours, recognising the problems that would cause William Gallas given his waning pace. Perhaps the first step is a 4-2-3-1, using Dempsey or Dembele to link the back of the midfield to the front three.
Given his ability to drift in, Dempsey perhaps could be used in one of the wide roles to provide that link between midfield and attack (he preferred the left at Fulham, which would mean Bale either being left out or switching flank, but he has played on the right for the USA).
However he does it, though, from an attacking point of view the priority is to get players breaking through that key central area to support his centre-forward.
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
What that is saying is that we were better getting the ball wide to Bale and Lennon, letting them beat the man and get a cross in. By implication, this means we are better when the are given the ball quickly, because we want them facing one man, or no man. If we give them the ball slowly, it gives the other team the chance to double team, and makes them less effective. That's why I say we weren't a possession team. Yes we had possession, often because teams would sit back themselves more often, meaning we naturally had more. We were not a patient team, though.
There are some people that say we play at too slow a tempo, and even in that article above it says we lose our momentum when we cut back. But we can play at a slow, patient tempo if we use our players well and break teams down with it. It's just our players are in the mode of get the ball wide and cross. But only Defoe is in there so either the cross fails and we then go backwards. But it's like we haven't fully learned how to be patient yet. Patience can work. It gives the players the opportunity to get in central, threatening positions and create good chances.
But I think that is one of the problems. We seem to be playing kind of patiently, but not totally. So by AVB not wanting to change too much, we are just stuck in the middle and not really being anything. We aren't giving Bale and Lennon the ball quick enough to be effective, and yet we are still trying to force the ball forward too quickly before players can get into central attacking positions and give Defoe support.
There are some people that say we play at too slow a tempo, and even in that article above it says we lose our momentum when we cut back. But we can play at a slow, patient tempo if we use our players well and break teams down with it. It's just our players are in the mode of get the ball wide and cross. But only Defoe is in there so either the cross fails and we then go backwards. But it's like we haven't fully learned how to be patient yet. Patience can work. It gives the players the opportunity to get in central, threatening positions and create good chances.
But I think that is one of the problems. We seem to be playing kind of patiently, but not totally. So by AVB not wanting to change too much, we are just stuck in the middle and not really being anything. We aren't giving Bale and Lennon the ball quick enough to be effective, and yet we are still trying to force the ball forward too quickly before players can get into central attacking positions and give Defoe support.
jts1882
Dean Richards
I agree with BoL that we are not, or were not, a possession team in the sense that our primary tactic/strategy was to get the ball wide and hit teams on the break, rather than the Barcelona style of getting possession and then patiently probing for opportunities. Our high possession was because we have good players rather than part of the strategy.
P.S. On the terminology, I would say the system includes formation, tactics and strategy. The formation is obvious, the tactics are how the team responds to events when in possession (movement off ball, getting ball wide, lumping it to the CF, etc) or on change of possession and defending (e.g. pressing, high/low defensive line, offside trap), and the strategy the combination of tactics employed (e.g. possession and pressing for Barca).
P.S. On the terminology, I would say the system includes formation, tactics and strategy. The formation is obvious, the tactics are how the team responds to events when in possession (movement off ball, getting ball wide, lumping it to the CF, etc) or on change of possession and defending (e.g. pressing, high/low defensive line, offside trap), and the strategy the combination of tactics employed (e.g. possession and pressing for Barca).
I thought it was supposed to be entertainment for the whole family...
I agree that we're not really a possession-based team. Or at least that's not our strength.
Honestly I don't think we're suited to it, because being a possession-based team generally involves your nominal wide midfielders actually drifting into the centre, to come closer to the ball. I was at the WBA game, and at times there was a HUGE space in the centre of the pitch as Bale and Lennon were hugging the touchline and Defoe was playing on the shoulder of the last defender. It's hard to keep possession (aside from knocking it between defenders and CMs) when your players are so spread out.
The thing that worries me about AVB is that he seems to have a system that he wants to implement, rather than implementing a system that suits his players. With Bale, Lennon, Adebayor and Dembele we could be absolutely vicious on the counter-attack. AVB seems to prefer a style in which you up the tempo when you don't have the ball and slow it down when you do; I think we're far more suited to doing the opposite.