braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
He has been backed. But the way he's been backed, particularly this summer, has mostly been with younger players that will need time. For me only fair to give him and those players quite a bit of time, as long as there's some improvement over time (not game to game).I think part of the issue is whilst the base technical level of our players is at a historically good standard, it's not actually high enough for what Ange demands. The quality of the first touch and the press resistance isn't where it needs to be, nor the range and quality of the pass into players under pressure.
If Ange is unwilling to adapt he's going to need the backing of the board to purchase him ever more suitable players or he's going to keeping coming unstuck, because what's he's trying to do here isn't anything new or even innovative. I've watched many teams over the years and across leagues attempt to play this way and at its core it requires a level of technical ability and tactical versatility that I just don't see enough of across the range of players in our squad.
So we are going to have to wait and hope that Ange is the right man to invest in. I generally like his plan and I appreciate the style he has implemented but I'm not so strong on his lack of adaptability. I'm not calling for wholesale changes but I think he could be a little more flexible or at least as you've mentioned have a little more direct game planning versus the opposition. We simply aren't that good that we can ignore what they bring to the table and just "play our way".
I'm quite pleased with his "lack of adaptability" (I see it as him adapting, but in a limited way within certain principles). I think that's the way to go.
We're capable of playing much better against a high press than we did against Palace. We've seen it. Repeatedly. Ange, the coaches and the players need to figure out why that didn't happen against Palace and go again imo. The players need to learn how to deal with those situations better.