I keep reading that the standard of defenders is worse than it has ever been. It's a common view espoused by ex-players, pundits, journalists and fans, who all seem united in the belief that there just aren't many good defenders around right now. Even Specsavers have released an advert this morning poking fun at PL defenders!
The trouble with this view is that it can't possibly be true. It makes absolutely no sense that somehow defenders are worse now than they were 10/15yrs ago.
The reason I say that is that in every single professional sport, the standard has gone up markedly across the board over the last 20yrs. Understanding of fitness, diet, tactics, how to prepare for a game, coaching and the psychology of sport have all improved immeasurably. We might look back on football games, even as recently as the 90s and early 00s with rose-tinted glasses, but if you watch those games now it's almost like a different sport!
So what's going wrong then? Pep Guardiola has spent £500m+ on defenders and is still struggling to find any who look half-competent. Utd have spent £80m on Maguire, who looked a banker having proven himself internationally and in the PL, now it looks like he is regressing every single game he plays, as do the full backs at Utd. Chelsea have shipped goals at a comical rate, despite having tried numerous defensive partnerships and numerous players at full back. We have seen Liverpool increasingly ship goals since lockdown was lifted. Already this season they have conceded 11 goals in 4 games...and that includes a clean sheet!
So, if I'm arguing that defenders can't possibly have gotten worse (i.e. worse at playing football/worse at the actual art of defending), yet teams are leaking goals at alarming rates and defenders are getting panned week-in, week-out by pundits...then what is going on?
My belief is that the systems employed by modern managers at 'elite' clubs are increasingly exposing the defences. Now, this isn't really a ground-breaking theory, we know that Pep Guardiola and Klopp have advocated intense high-presses and a high line for years. They do this to close down the amount of space the opposition have to play in and to win the ball back high up the pitch in dangerous attacking areas.
Nevertheless, I believe that in an ever-increasing desire to gain more control and score more goals, teams are now getting the balance majorly wrong. Look at the Liverpool and United games yesterday as prime example, or even City vs Leicester last week. It has become so predictable, and these teams are so high, that the opposition know that one pass and they can be in on goal. Vardy, Son and Watkins had absolutely field days' with half of a Premier League-sized football pitch to run into. The trouble is, these teams don't even attempt to beat the press. They have worked out that this is futile and not worth the trouble.
Dean Smith said in his interview yesterday 'we know they shift the line very well and press very well, so we worked on switching the play and deploying deep runs to beat the press'. The plan couldn't have worked out any better and Grealish, Watkins and Barkley made van Dijk and Gomez look like Sunday League players.
Likewise, Utd, with just an ageing Matic in the DM role and no pressing from the midfield, were cut apart time and time again by Tottenham. Jose knew exactly how to beat United's limp press, keeping players high and wide to stretch our full backs and then utilising Kane's hold-up abilities and Son's pace to scythe through us at will. Jose knew Pogba is a liability, that Matic wouldn't have the legs and that Shaw and Maguire would struggle with the raw pace of Son.
Now, at this point, you can blame the players...and sure, there were individual errors, particularly by United players. However, part of me thinks some of these individual errors can be traced back to players constantly feeling uncomfortable, having to play the game an unnatural way and putting themselves in positions they don't want to be in. It shouldn't be the case that the opposition can turn the back four/five so easily. It shouldn't be the case that one pass can dissect an entire team. It shouldn't be the case that defenders are forced into 2 vs 2 or 3 vs 3 situations multiple times in a game. It shouldn't be the case that the opposition forwards and midfielders are able to pick up the ball between the lines so easily. It shouldn't be the case that CBs are constantly having to cover for full backs who are asked to play halfway up the pitch for no obvious reason.
I believe football is easier for the attackers IF they are allowed the space to play. Most competent attackers will make most defences/defenders look very average if they have 30yards of space to play in and run into every time.
At what point do you blame the managers? At what point do you say that what you're trying to do for the attackers is making life so hard for the defenders that it's actually a net-negative tactic? Teams with players the calibre of United, City and Liverpool shouldn't be conceding 18 in one round of fixtures, that is beyond bizarre. In cricket, you talk about the balance between 'bat and ball' i.e. is the game currently weighted in favour of batsmen or bowlers? I think in football right now, the balance is firmly weighted in favour of attackers. They have so much space to play in, they find themselves 1 vs 1 against defenders so easily and so regularly.
Of course, in saying all this, I'm talking about the so-called top teams. The teams who are expected to play on the front-foot. Of course, most teams set-up deep and look to counter, mainly because this is a far easier way of playing football. Stay tight, stay compact, don't leave space and don't expose individuals. In many ways, this just further proves my point. Take a player like Maguire (or even Otamendi, Smalling, Jones, Rudiger, Zouma, Shaw, Alonso etc...) and stick them in a team who play a low-block. They would look a cut-above. Fans and pundits alike would be talking them up as top defenders, ready for the step up to a 'big' club. The problem is, when they then make that step-up, they can no longer defend their own penalty box or mark one-centre forward between two or have their full back five yards away from them or have two sitting midfielders in-front of them. Suddenly they are exposed. No protection, high-line, gaps everywhere, pacey forwards looking to hit them in-behind...you are on an absolute hiding to nothing. As I said, there can't just 'not be any good defenders', it's got to be tactical.
The only reason these tactics have worked previously for City and Liverpool is because their press has been incredible, and yes, in an ideal world, with the right players, the right press and the right system, it is preferable to have your back line nice and high. However...it requires the whole team to be on it. Take out Mane and take out Henderson yesterday, Villa exposed them. City haven't looked the same for 18mnths as their pressing game and tailed off and United...well we just don't have the players with the mindset or physical attributes to do it and we don't have the coaching staff to implement it in any case.
I think we can forgive Liverpool because it was one game (although their defensive record post-lockdown hasn't been great), however, United and City need to change. Stop with this fantasy idea that 'the next CB' or the 'next full back' will be the one that solves the problem. You can keep throwing money at players and working your way through every defender in Europe (if your Pep) but at one point do you look at your set-up and say 'these can't all be bad players?'.
Time to go back to basics? We won games last year playing counter-attacking football. Drop the defensive line 20yrds, get Pogba out of the side, stick Fernandes, van de Beek and Matic as a flat three in midfield. Keep Mason and Rashford high and wide with Martial/Cavani through the middle. I guarantee we will finish with 20 more pts than if we keep up with this debacle of a 'tactic'.
The trouble with this view is that it can't possibly be true. It makes absolutely no sense that somehow defenders are worse now than they were 10/15yrs ago.
The reason I say that is that in every single professional sport, the standard has gone up markedly across the board over the last 20yrs. Understanding of fitness, diet, tactics, how to prepare for a game, coaching and the psychology of sport have all improved immeasurably. We might look back on football games, even as recently as the 90s and early 00s with rose-tinted glasses, but if you watch those games now it's almost like a different sport!
So what's going wrong then? Pep Guardiola has spent £500m+ on defenders and is still struggling to find any who look half-competent. Utd have spent £80m on Maguire, who looked a banker having proven himself internationally and in the PL, now it looks like he is regressing every single game he plays, as do the full backs at Utd. Chelsea have shipped goals at a comical rate, despite having tried numerous defensive partnerships and numerous players at full back. We have seen Liverpool increasingly ship goals since lockdown was lifted. Already this season they have conceded 11 goals in 4 games...and that includes a clean sheet!
So, if I'm arguing that defenders can't possibly have gotten worse (i.e. worse at playing football/worse at the actual art of defending), yet teams are leaking goals at alarming rates and defenders are getting panned week-in, week-out by pundits...then what is going on?
My belief is that the systems employed by modern managers at 'elite' clubs are increasingly exposing the defences. Now, this isn't really a ground-breaking theory, we know that Pep Guardiola and Klopp have advocated intense high-presses and a high line for years. They do this to close down the amount of space the opposition have to play in and to win the ball back high up the pitch in dangerous attacking areas.
Nevertheless, I believe that in an ever-increasing desire to gain more control and score more goals, teams are now getting the balance majorly wrong. Look at the Liverpool and United games yesterday as prime example, or even City vs Leicester last week. It has become so predictable, and these teams are so high, that the opposition know that one pass and they can be in on goal. Vardy, Son and Watkins had absolutely field days' with half of a Premier League-sized football pitch to run into. The trouble is, these teams don't even attempt to beat the press. They have worked out that this is futile and not worth the trouble.
Dean Smith said in his interview yesterday 'we know they shift the line very well and press very well, so we worked on switching the play and deploying deep runs to beat the press'. The plan couldn't have worked out any better and Grealish, Watkins and Barkley made van Dijk and Gomez look like Sunday League players.
Likewise, Utd, with just an ageing Matic in the DM role and no pressing from the midfield, were cut apart time and time again by Tottenham. Jose knew exactly how to beat United's limp press, keeping players high and wide to stretch our full backs and then utilising Kane's hold-up abilities and Son's pace to scythe through us at will. Jose knew Pogba is a liability, that Matic wouldn't have the legs and that Shaw and Maguire would struggle with the raw pace of Son.
Now, at this point, you can blame the players...and sure, there were individual errors, particularly by United players. However, part of me thinks some of these individual errors can be traced back to players constantly feeling uncomfortable, having to play the game an unnatural way and putting themselves in positions they don't want to be in. It shouldn't be the case that the opposition can turn the back four/five so easily. It shouldn't be the case that one pass can dissect an entire team. It shouldn't be the case that defenders are forced into 2 vs 2 or 3 vs 3 situations multiple times in a game. It shouldn't be the case that the opposition forwards and midfielders are able to pick up the ball between the lines so easily. It shouldn't be the case that CBs are constantly having to cover for full backs who are asked to play halfway up the pitch for no obvious reason.
I believe football is easier for the attackers IF they are allowed the space to play. Most competent attackers will make most defences/defenders look very average if they have 30yards of space to play in and run into every time.
At what point do you blame the managers? At what point do you say that what you're trying to do for the attackers is making life so hard for the defenders that it's actually a net-negative tactic? Teams with players the calibre of United, City and Liverpool shouldn't be conceding 18 in one round of fixtures, that is beyond bizarre. In cricket, you talk about the balance between 'bat and ball' i.e. is the game currently weighted in favour of batsmen or bowlers? I think in football right now, the balance is firmly weighted in favour of attackers. They have so much space to play in, they find themselves 1 vs 1 against defenders so easily and so regularly.
Of course, in saying all this, I'm talking about the so-called top teams. The teams who are expected to play on the front-foot. Of course, most teams set-up deep and look to counter, mainly because this is a far easier way of playing football. Stay tight, stay compact, don't leave space and don't expose individuals. In many ways, this just further proves my point. Take a player like Maguire (or even Otamendi, Smalling, Jones, Rudiger, Zouma, Shaw, Alonso etc...) and stick them in a team who play a low-block. They would look a cut-above. Fans and pundits alike would be talking them up as top defenders, ready for the step up to a 'big' club. The problem is, when they then make that step-up, they can no longer defend their own penalty box or mark one-centre forward between two or have their full back five yards away from them or have two sitting midfielders in-front of them. Suddenly they are exposed. No protection, high-line, gaps everywhere, pacey forwards looking to hit them in-behind...you are on an absolute hiding to nothing. As I said, there can't just 'not be any good defenders', it's got to be tactical.
The only reason these tactics have worked previously for City and Liverpool is because their press has been incredible, and yes, in an ideal world, with the right players, the right press and the right system, it is preferable to have your back line nice and high. However...it requires the whole team to be on it. Take out Mane and take out Henderson yesterday, Villa exposed them. City haven't looked the same for 18mnths as their pressing game and tailed off and United...well we just don't have the players with the mindset or physical attributes to do it and we don't have the coaching staff to implement it in any case.
I think we can forgive Liverpool because it was one game (although their defensive record post-lockdown hasn't been great), however, United and City need to change. Stop with this fantasy idea that 'the next CB' or the 'next full back' will be the one that solves the problem. You can keep throwing money at players and working your way through every defender in Europe (if your Pep) but at one point do you look at your set-up and say 'these can't all be bad players?'.
Time to go back to basics? We won games last year playing counter-attacking football. Drop the defensive line 20yrds, get Pogba out of the side, stick Fernandes, van de Beek and Matic as a flat three in midfield. Keep Mason and Rashford high and wide with Martial/Cavani through the middle. I guarantee we will finish with 20 more pts than if we keep up with this debacle of a 'tactic'.