Long balls in behind. We try it all the time with Rashford. But in general I think we want to be a quick transition team, in the ground or in the air. We've shown this all season. I don't need a YouTube analysis to tell me what I can see at the stadium better than they can on their screens. Our shape and structure doesn't lend itself to possession football or pressing football. We don't give enough options to the players on the ball to be a possession team. I don't care if our keeper can't play from the back when I don't see it when the defenders or midfielders are on the ball.
The first two games of the season are a good reference point as it is ingrained in all our memories. Think about the shape when playing from the back, Fred was like an island in midfield. Obviously it was tweaked after we got took apart by Brighton and Brentford, but the principles were still on display for the rest of the season. Albeit with a bit more of a safety factor and willingness to go long.
I said myself that we try to play from the back, but that doesn't equal possession football. If you think that then I give up.
Maybe utilising analysis from multiple sources would do you a world of good then, sounds rather arrogant to assume that simply being at the game offers you more insight, as opposed to spliced builds of play, stats and everything in between.
We play possession based, you don't want to hear it, but it's the truth.
We aren't sat back, soaking up pressure and unleashing long balls to Ol' Rashie down the channel like we did under Ole.
That said, we aren't unnecessarily plodding around in a modified 442 begging for someone to just do something, anything like with Rangnick either.
ETH obviously wants to play out from the back (it's important, to do so in a possession system, you see).
We try and pass it around the press, as opposes to over it, i.e defence to attack in transition. Instead, passing it around, even having inverted wingbacks to support the central midfield, then we fortunately have 3 outlets to pass from - typically Bruno, Cas and Eriksen
as all 3 are good passers. This prevents one single playmaker being marked out of the game.
If we pushed up too high, we cannot abuse the glaring strength of Rashford - pace.
We pass the ball around, make runs etc and pull people out of position and then get a pass in to either another playmaker higher up, or to someone like Anthony or Rashford.
It's using possession to invite a press so that we can use our strengths against it.
Funnily enough, it's how ETH played w/ Ajax. I believe it's been referred to as 'slow-slow-fast' transitions or something to that affect.
We also use the same formation in build up play 3-2-4-1 with Shaw or Dalot tucking in besides the CB's / Cas + 1 other - Fred or Eriksen/ Rashford, Bruno, AWB or Dalot/Shaw on the left and Anthony with Werg or Martial up top.
If you want, coach some kids, try sitting back and hoofing longballs from the back with such a formation and let me know how it works out.
It's made to cluster midfield on defence and stretch backlines in attack. Which is becoming very common as of this season, nearly all teams are doing it.
This is a bit mad. You’re judging EtH off a single season. We played a whole season with a keeper that can’t pass, started it with a 9 that couldn’t run, and has midfielders that can either pass but not run, or run but not pass. In addition… In January we didn’t spend a penny.
EtH so clearly wants us to own and control the ball. Less like Pep and more like Klopp. Transitions should be fast and seek to exploit, but if that’s not possible they should reset. He doesn’t want possession for the sake of it, but he wants to own the balance of possession. He’s somewhat similar to Arteta. Pressing in areas that make sense. Concession when it doesn’t. Control the ball when there are no spaces, risk losing it when there are.
I don’t think that that’s hard to spot when you watch us at our best.
Thank you for understanding Possession football as a philosophy, unlike someone else in this thread.
