How to defend these cutbacks?

[RedDevilCanuck]

Liverpool, City and Chelsea just keep scoring from cutbacks pretty much every game or multiple times a game.

How do you stop this?

Double up on the fullbacks and dare to be beaten in the centre?

Use a CDM as another defender?

This is annoying to watch.

 

[Teja]

It's the current meta in football. Some tactical genius will figure out a way to neutralize that threat and people watching 10 years from now will be watching the City highlights and wondering why the hell were there so many cutbacks.

We'll start doing that too if Ten Hag comes in.

EDIT

I think this also links to a thread idea that's been in my head for a while and I'm too lazy to write it all up.

Basically, what is good football? Is it the German style going direct, counter pressing and creating chances? Or is it the vertical tiki taka where the whole game plan is to generate cut backs into the box to create high xG chances?

Also leads to the question, is modern football too efficient / boring? Flair players have been on the decline in favor of more physical, pacy players. You can't carry pure technicians like Ozil anymore let alone players like Ronaldo. We've basically turned players into robots to hunt for that little bit of incremental performance. Everything they do is tracked by data, every micro movement on the pitch is analyzed with GPS tracking devices.

Has all of this really resulted in better football?

 

[Bebestation]

I'm not sure but this is why I love hybrid CB/CDM players - allows you to play 5 at the back, 4 at the back and 3 at the back depending on the situation.

 

[Murray3007]

poor positions in the area, and not tracking runners, but ultimately man mark the full backs, you stop the goal at the main source which is the cross, still cant get my head around how much space players are giving in wide areas.

years ago it used to be a whip low cross attacked at the front post, Fletcher was excellent for us doing this, Giroud as well more recently

 

[Hoof the ball]

poor positions in the area, and not tracking runners, but ultimately man mark the full backs, you stop the goal at the main source which is the cross, still cant get my head around how much space players are giving in wide areas.

years ago it used to be a whip low cross attacked at the front post, Fletcher was excellent for us doing this, Giroud as well more recently

Take City for example.

If Bernardo holds the width, De Bruyne in the half-space will jog inside the full-back and Bernardo will play the ball round the outside of the full-back for a cut back.
If Bernado comes inside, Walker will be in Bernardo's wide position and Bernardo will occupy the half-space, jog inside the full-back and the same situation as the above with occur.

They've created a system entirely based around moving the opposition defence in order to create numerical superiority on the wings. Always 2v1. Man-marking is pointless because the person doing the underlapping and the person holding the width alternate all the time, so having assigned men to follow will just destroy any organisation.

Three CB's theoretically would have an easier time negating the numerical superiority on the wings and be in a place to clog the channels, but as always, there's always a compromise elsewhere on the field to make this happen. At the end of the day you can't prevent numerical superiority as a factor in football. It's impossible. You just have to decide which areas of the field to allow it in and which areas to not.

 

[Cheimoon]

I think this also links to a thread idea that's been in my head for a while and I'm too lazy to write it all up.

Basically, what is good football? Is it the German style going direct, counter pressing and creating chances? Or is it the vertical tiki taka where the whole game plan is to generate cut backs into the box to create high xG chances?

Also leads to the question, is modern football too efficient / boring? Flair players have been on the decline in favor of more physical, pacy players. You can't carry pure technicians like Ozil anymore let alone players like Ronaldo. We've basically turned players into robots to hunt for that little bit of incremental performance. Everything they do is tracked by data, every micro movement on the pitch is analyzed with GPS tracking devices.

Has all of this really resulted in better football?

I feel like both topics have actually been discussed a fair bit this week and the last. The 'what is good football' question was basically behind the 'Managers who play the most attractive brand of football' thread. And the thing about modern football being more system-based with less flair was discussed a couple of times in the 'How much has football changed in the last 20 years?' thread.

- Don't forget to vote for this year's RedCafe Awards.

 

[Teja]

I feel like both topics have actually been discussed a fair bit this week and the last. The 'what is good football' question was basically behind the 'Managers who play the most attractive brand of football' thread. And the thing about modern football being more system-based with less flair was discussed a couple of times in the 'How much has football changed in the last 20 years?' thread.

- Don't forget to vote for this year's RedCafe Awards.

Thanks! I missed both the threads.

 

[Cheimoon]

Thanks! I missed both the threads.

There are some real awesome posts in that second thread that exactly cover what you're saying about flair.

 

[RedDevilCanuck]

If I'm playing liverpool, I'm not letting their fullbacks beat me. I'm defending the flanks and stopping the supply line.

I can live with Salah beating me by cutting in and working magic but there is no way I can live with crosses and cut backs slicing me open.

I'd play 5 at the back. Pace up to hit hard on the counter.

 

[Murray3007]

Take City for example.

If Bernardo holds the width, De Bruyne in the half-space will jog inside the full-back and Bernardo will play the ball round the outside of the full-back for a cut back.
If Bernado comes inside, Walker will be in Bernardo's wide position and Bernardo will occupy the half-space, jog inside the full-back and the same situation as the above with occur.

They've created a system entirely based around moving the opposition defence in order to create numerical superiority on the wings. Always 2v1. Man-marking is pointless because the person doing the underlapping and the person holding the width alternate all the time, so having assigned men to follow will just destroy any organisation.

Three CB's theoretically would have an easier time negating the numerical superiority on the wings and be in a place to clog the channels, but as always, there's always a compromise elsewhere on the field to make this happen. At the end of the day you can't prevent numerical superiority as a factor in football. It's impossible. You just have to decide which areas of the field to allow it in and which areas to not.

again, your winger follows the full back no matter if he goes inside or outside, the LB goes wide and the CM player takes who is ever central. its all about communication and discipline doing it for 90 mins with wave after wave is a extremely difficult.

 

[Bebestation]

It's the current meta in football. Some tactical genius will figure out a way to neutralize that threat and people watching 10 years from now will be watching the City highlights and wondering why the hell were there so many cutbacks.

We'll start doing that too if Ten Hag comes in.

EDIT

I think this also links to a thread idea that's been in my head for a while and I'm too lazy to write it all up.

Basically, what is good football? Is it the German style going direct, counter pressing and creating chances? Or is it the vertical tiki taka where the whole game plan is to generate cut backs into the box to create high xG chances?

Also leads to the question, is modern football too efficient / boring? Flair players have been on the decline in favor of more physical, pacy players. You can't carry pure technicians like Ozil anymore let alone players like Ronaldo. We've basically turned players into robots to hunt for that little bit of incremental performance. Everything they do is tracked by data, every micro movement on the pitch is analyzed with GPS tracking devices.

Has all of this really resulted in better football?

I feel that football has turned in to Chess more than ever.

It's like 2 sides trying to tactically out do either - even if Pep takes on Norwich, its still Norwich's duty to tactically balance that game. To have such tactics you got to plan ahead and buy the right players.

It's like your watching intelligence.

But as we all probably know, Chess is an intelligent interesting game but it isn't the most beautiful thing to the eye and at sometimes it can be straight boring.

Football used to be more gungho like watching an action film. My favourite being the dodgy Serie A where the defence was so compact on both sides that it took individual brilliance to over come it.

Now it feels like the match is worn more so ever by the managers decision rather than the player. The whole team is literally in your face one second and compact together the next.

 

[Kentonio]

I feel that football has turned in to Chess more than ever.

It's like 2 sides trying to tactically out do either - even if Pep takes on Norwich, its still Norwich's duty to tactically balance that game. To have such tactics you got to plan ahead and buy the right players.

It's like your watching intelligence.

But as we all probably know, Chess is an intelligent interesting game but it isn't the most beautiful thing to the eye and at sometimes it can be straight boring.

Football used to be more gungho like watching an action film. My favourite being the dodgy Serie A where the defence was so compact on both sides that it took individual brilliance to over come it.

Now it feels like the match is worn more so ever by the managers decision rather than the player. The whole team is literally in your face one second and compact together the next.

The bolded part confuses me. I get thinking that old football was more gungho, but then you say you liked the old Italian stuff where its was all very tight and tactical. Those two things don't seem to go together well.

 

[OleTheGreat]

If I'm playing liverpool, I'm not letting their fullbacks beat me. I'm defending the flanks and stopping the supply line.

I can live with Salah beating me by cutting in and working magic but there is no way I can live with crosses and cut backs slicing me open.

I'd play 5 at the back. Pace up to hit hard on the counter.

That's apparently a negative tactic..

 

[redshaw]

Arsenal in the Pires days used to do a lot of cutback goals, always had runners coming in around the box. it seemed to take a while to stop. Pretty annoying watching it happen over and over, you get a spread of players getting the goals with easy to make shots on goal.

 

[Champ]

That period last season where Liverpool were struggling, teams played a compact defence, and gifted them space on the flanks but closed the wide players immediately down to stop the cross, or from getting to the byline. This seems to have stopped for whatever reason.

It's all about staying with runners in the middle of the ball does go in the box.

One way to stop this is to play a deep back line constantly. This however opens up a gap between midfield and defence, which is why a holding CM is vital as a link between the lines.

 

[OleTheGreat]

I think we are probably the only top team who has no idea when our wingbacks get up the pitch. We either pass sideways or put in a cross blindly.

 

[KingCavani]

These things come in cycles and as the game adapts to deal with certain styles and profile of player other options open up.

I think we're seeing more athletic and technically proficient CB's coming in and it wouldn't shock me if in time less emphasis is placed on height and strength because the top team wont be using target men or playing low percentage passes/crosses - Right now it's sort of between both worlds. Once that happens you could then see a resurgence of big men up front, of two strikers as the teams that adapted to one thing wont be prepared for another. One of my favourite games of the post Fergie era was the Europa League Final in 2017 when this young, modern, progressive Ajax side that played beautiful football couldn't handle a 40 yard pass to Fellaini. They couldn't matchup physically and we bullied them off the park.

I don't think football has been "figured out" - it will constantly evolve and already we've seen styles that dominated a decade ago become vulnerable to counters. Pep's CL record is pretty reflective of this - As great as he is his teams left space that better sides could punish. His sides went out in the same way - being blitzed with 2-3 goals in a few minutes - Quite a few times. He has adapted a bit more to that and City weren't leaving the same spaces they were against Monaco and Spurs.

 

[diarm]

Pep and Klopp arriving late to the party. I was absolutely bossing Pro Ev with this in the mid 2000's.

 

[arthurka]

Play 5-4-1 one CB plays a kind of Libero and helps out on the wide while the DCM drops into the CB role. Keep two pace merchants high to cover the Highline and long ball the shit out of them into the wide spaces. And remember to attack the space..

 

[Mb194dc]

You can't essentially. That's why teams do it.

Even in computer football games it becomes default tactics usually. Developers have to gimp it fot balance!

 

[GlasgowCeltic]

Felt like David Silva through back leading to a cutback goal for Aguero happened every game under Mancini

 

[passing-wind]

Game is very tactical nowadays. Can't remember the league ever having so much quality managers in one sitting.

 

[adexkola]

If I'm playing liverpool, I'm not letting their fullbacks beat me. I'm defending the flanks and stopping the supply line.

I can live with Salah beating me by cutting in and working magic but there is no way I can live with crosses and cut backs slicing me open.

I'd play 5 at the back. Pace up to hit hard on the counter.

Elite teams have become very good at defending the counter nowadays. You can't be a great side with the counter attack as your primary weapon, because savvy teams will sit back and give you the ball, and then you look clueless. It's happened with Mourinho, Conte at Chelsea, and a few others.

 

[bond19821982]

The cut backs became so popular under Pellegrini, when Nasri and Silva played as half wingers.

What's embarrassing is that , we haven't done anything like that for almost 8 years now.

 

[AngeloHenriquez]

The way to defend it is zonal marking simply to cut out that ball, we man mark which allows that ball to come in...

 

[paraguayo]

I really don’t understand this.

teams are too enamored with zonal marking, bit why not change it to man marking once the ball is near the box? The objective is to not allow goals at that point, not some silly pressing idea.

ive seen lectures where coaches say “we cannot changs defensive concept” well ok then, get scored on by a free man

 

[B20]

It's not exactly new. Ferguson had that as his go to attacking strategy for decades.

 

[tomaldinho1]

That's apparently a negative tactic..

5 at the back done right can be offensive. We, unfortunately, played 5 at the back as a way to contain teams, not to impose ourselves.

Best way to stop Pool isn’t to try and negate TAA and Robertson by doubling up, marking them or having some grand plan, it’s simply to make them defend for as long as possible.

 

[MUFC OK]

Liverpool, City and Chelsea just keep scoring from cutbacks pretty much every game or multiple times a game.

How do you stop this?

Double up on the fullbacks and dare to be beaten in the centre?

Use a CDM as another defender?

This is annoying to watch.

Praise the lord that someone else has noticed this as the primary tactic of City, Liverpool, yet something that we not only don't do, but also defend against horrifically.

You have to stop the supply, crossed should not make it past the fullback 8/10, defenders should man mark rather than zonal and get goalside of their man (basic stuff). CDM/holding mids need to drop in and cut out the cutrback.

 

[Adam-Utd]

Most teams defend with filling the penalty box, so the best teams now know over lapping down the wings and turning the defence around is the best way to attack. This is something we've struggled with since the Valencia/Rafael days.

The best way to defend it is to give more space in the middle of the pitch with a 4-5-1, wingers and fullbacks man marking and the extra midfielder blocking off space.

It's easier said than done though of course. Dropping deep is the main issue, you just have to be able to keep a high enough defensive line.

 

[MUFC OK]

Take City for example.

If Bernardo holds the width, De Bruyne in the half-space will jog inside the full-back and Bernardo will play the ball round the outside of the full-back for a cut back.
If Bernado comes inside, Walker will be in Bernardo's wide position and Bernardo will occupy the half-space, jog inside the full-back and the same situation as the above with occur.

They've created a system entirely based around moving the opposition defence in order to create numerical superiority on the wings. Always 2v1. Man-marking is pointless because the person doing the underlapping and the person holding the width alternate all the time, so having assigned men to follow will just destroy any organisation.

Three CB's theoretically would have an easier time negating the numerical superiority on the wings and be in a place to clog the channels, but as always, there's always a compromise elsewhere on the field to make this happen. At the end of the day you can't prevent numerical superiority as a factor in football. It's impossible. You just have to decide which areas of the field to allow it in and which areas to not.

It's the 4 or 5 number 10's idea from the Cyuyff era Ajax school of thought, later adapted by Barca and of which Ten Haag is a big proponent. It's incredibly hard to defend against. That style of play is about 3 things; possession, creating overloads and pressing cohesively when disposessed. It works.

 

[spiriticon]

It's a great question. Everyone's so focused on the attackers in the box they leave tons of space for the playings hanging on the edge of the box.

Also when Liverpool cross, someone please mark their other wingback. Sometimes they just ping it back and forth, wingback to wingback, until something sticks.

Cut the damn supply.

 

[Deery]

Match the attacker.

 

[El Jefe]

Barcelona have been doing this for decades so there's nothing particularly current about it. I remember them scoring from loads of cutbacks in the Rijkaard days which only further improved under Pep. Seen a lot of videos of Cruyff's Barca and they did the same too.

If you have highly technical players that are good in tight spaces and pass precisely you will score a tonne from cutbacks. Hazard used to set up goals like this for fun at Chelsea.

 

[MUFC OK]

Most teams defend with filling the penalty box, so the best teams now know over lapping down the wings and turning the defence around is the best way to attack. This is something we've struggled with since the Valencia/Rafael days.

The best way to defend it is to give more space in the middle of the pitch with a 4-5-1, wingers and fullbacks man marking and the extra midfielder blocking off space.

It's easier said than done though of course. Dropping deep is the main issue, you just have to be able to keep a high enough defensive line.

Valencia is one of the most underrated players we’ve had in recent years.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Simple. Never allow the fullbacks a minute's space to cross nor cut back. Period. In the modern game too much space is left for players, especially fullbacks to cross or cut back unmolested

 

[adexkola]

It's a great question. Everyone's so focused on the attackers in the box they leave tons of space for the playings hanging on the edge of the box.

Also when Liverpool cross, someone please mark their other wingback. Sometimes they just ping it back and forth, wingback to wingback, until something sticks.

Cut the damn supply.

If you do that you leave gaps in the defensive line and provide a literal highway for their midfielders or attackers to cruise through to goal.

The alternate is to move with the ball and hope that the defender on the far side can handle an attacker 1 on 1 when the ball is switched.

Either way you pick your poison with highly coached sides.

 

[Harry190]

We used to score plenty of those.

 

[B20]

We were easy to defend against last season because all we did was cycle it to the fullbacks.

We're harder to defend against now because our midfield is engaging much better than the front three and the fullbacks can exploit those spaces.

I think the right idea above was to make us defend as much as possible. Focus on the midfield battle.

 

[adexkola]

We were easy to defend against last season because all we did was cycle it to the fullbacks.

We're harder to defend against now because our midfield is engaging much better than the front three and the fullbacks can exploit those spaces.

I think the right idea above was to make us defend as much as possible. Focus on the midfield battle.

Most teams nowadays decline that midfield battle and just sit back, allowing Liverpool/City to probe for openings and switch ad-nauseum. It's riskier looking to engage their midfielders further ahead but the potential reward is much greater than hoping the opposition have an off day at both ends.

Villa/City was the prototypical example of a tale of two halves. Villa became more aggressive in midfield and could have snagged a draw with a little more luck. Who knows what would have happened if that was their approach from kick off?