Time to abandon "progressive" football...until we fix the foundations

[b82REZ]

We pretty mch sat back after the goal and let then come at us. We were trying to counter attack but we weren't too effective.

And I didn't see DdG try to play it out from the back a single time. Whch means ETH has given up on him and he's going to get binned in the next 12 months

Sitting back isn't counterattacking.

There are still quite obvious mental barriers running through the squad. The losing streak was clearly a monkey on the back of a few players and they resorted to old habits when they got the goal. That is somewhat understanding considering the previous two managers were very risk averse and most of our squad played under those conservative managers.

I think Erik has recognised, way before the season started, this is going to a slow evolution of play style. But it's lazy to claim he's just reverted back to sitting deep and hitting teams on the break.

The goal today was an example of us playing more intricate, passing football. I think by new year we'll see us playing far more on the front foot.

 

[Lentwood]

We didn't play counterattacking football today...

Have to disagree. Look at the positions Varane, Martinez and McTominay took up. Look how high and wide the wide forwards played.

To me, it looked like sit deep, be narrow, be compact and hit the forwards early.

Might be a fancier name for it now but we used to call that "counter attack"

 

[Lentwood]

Playing over the press is something all progressive teams do, it's part of the reason Ederson and Alisson are so important to their clubs. Ten Hag actually said we were supposed to do that in the 4-0 game.

Yes I dont disagree with that...but they invite the press and then go long. We didnt do that.

Plus, we were really deep. Varane and Martinez basically defended the box and I dont recall Malacia crossing the halfway line in a wide position (he did to make up the numbers in midfield which is progressive I suppose)

 

[Fooza]

After the Brentford game, I said EtH had to adapt and grind out 1-0's

He's doing exactly that. It does feel me with confidence that he can adapt and grind out wins. Today wasn't anywhere he's style of play and it maybe a while (perhaps 2-3 seasons even) till he gets there.

 

[glazed]

Sitting back isn't counterattacking.

Well it's part 1 of counter attacking. There were glimmers of part 2 that suggested that this was the aspiration. But we don't really have anyone up front to make it work. Ronaldo got found out for pace looking slow even against tired defenders. And Rashford is...Rashford.

 

[Dion]

Yes I dont disagree with that...but they invite the press and then go long. We didnt do that.

Plus, we were really deep. Varane and Martinez basically defended the box and I dont recall Malacia crossing the halfway line in a wide position (he did to make up the numbers in midfield which is progressive I suppose)

We didn't do it well. It's pretty clear everyone other than De Gea was playing around or over the press though.

And Varane and Martinez were pretty clearly not deep though outside of the last half hour, which again Ten Hag criticised.

 

[b82REZ]

Have to disagree. Look at the positions Varane, Martinez and McTominay took up. Look how high and wide the wide forwards played.

To me, it looked like sit deep, be narrow, be compact and hit the forwards early.

Might be a fancier name for it now but we used to call that "counter attack"

It sounds like you're seeing what you want to see for confirmation bias for your thread.

As has been pointed out to you; the best football playing teams tend to sit deep and hit it long to beat the press.

I explained the rationale behind the team dropping deep in another reply. The squad have been coached for a long time to drop into a low block when we take the lead. What was promising today was we did still try and play football and not rely solely on fast transitions on the counter. We just don't have a squad and lungs to do if for 90 minutes, yet.

I also think ten Hag is aware that teams are attempting to exploit our supposed weak, and short left side of defence (which statistically isn't the case); but recognises the midfield personnel are not able to beat the press if we try and play short. As Casemiro gets integrated more and the technically weaker midfielders become more accustomed to playing out of trouble you will see less plays that may appear to us reverting to type.

I fully expect by the turn of the year you will see us impose our style on teams more and this idea we are "counter attacking" will disappear.

 

[b82REZ]

Well it's part 1 of counter attacking. There were glimmers of part 2 that suggested that this was the aspiration. But we don't really have anyone up front to make it work. Ronaldo got found out for pace looking slow even against tired defenders. And Rashford is...Rashford.

It's being alleged we have reverted to playing counterattacking football, we haven't.

 

[Boondog]

Of course EtH isn't going to be able to force a press on every opponent. Let alone when he's installing a new playstyle for the players.

Of course EtH knows how to have his team counterattack when that happens. This is basic shit. It's going to happen in every game too, at least until your unit becomes dominant at it which is a long way off.

Prioritizing possession is a philosophy that is incorporated into the ruleset he has these guys following. But to assume he is completely inflexible is nonsense. Nobody gets to the manager level in the PL by only being able to play one way. It's a ridiculous thought and I find pushing it in order to puff your chest out by bumping your thread to be even more ridiculous.

 

[glazed]

It's being alleged we have reverted to playing counterattacking football, we haven't.

Well that is certainly true but only because Ronaldo is so slow. But we did ditch high press once we scored.

 

[avgp_1]

Well he has ditched the lone #6, and is now playing with a double pivot which is fair, provides more cover in front of the defence.

He is letting us defend deep trying to hold onto the lead in both these games, understandable considering our opponents and our terrible away records. It's good that he is being more pragmatic. Till he can get his players, we'll have to do a bit of adapting

 

[Lentwood]

Of course EtH isn't going to be able to force a press on every opponent. Let alone when he's installing a new playstyle for the players.

Of course EtH knows how to have his team counterattack when that happens. This is basic shit. It's going to happen in every game too, at least until your unit becomes dominant at it which is a long way off.

Prioritizing possession is a philosophy that is incorporated into the ruleset he has these guys following. But to assume he is completely inflexible is nonsense. Nobody gets to the manager level in the PL by only being able to play one way. It's a ridiculous thought and I find pushing it in order to puff your chest out by bumping your thread to be even more ridiculous.

Well...not really...my point was we needed to adapt after Brighton and Brentford in recognition of the personnel we have at our disposal and we have adapted. If people can't see the difference between what we did against Brighton, for example, and yesterday, then I'm not sure football is for them.

I just find it very interesting that people are complaining. Apparently playing a style of football that suits your squad and makes it easier to pick up points is somehow not 'the United way' or whatever. Go over to the ETH thread or the post-match thread, there are tonnes of people moaning.

People moaned when Jose played his low-block and came 2nd and people moaned when Ole played his double-pivot middle block and came 2nd. I just think it's stupid. You setup in the way which gives you maximum chance to earn points. ETH did that yesterday but I fear the numpties will complain if we're still playing like that this time next year, even if we're still grinding out results

 

[DJ_21]

According to Southampton manager, he can see a clear identity of our style of play. Dunno how after 4 games. Could see what we was trying to do against Brighton and more so Brentford with the playing out from the back but then against Liverpool we changed it and went more direct which shows the signs of a top manager, he’s willing to change the way we play depending on the opponent. I still don’t see a clear style yet but I know that it will come as the season progresses.I like the fact ten Hag is making us a lot more compact and organised compared to how we’ve been over the past seasons.

 

[Borys]

According to Southampton manager, he can see a clear identity of our style of play. Dunno how after 4 games. Could see what we was trying to do against Brighton and more so Brentford with the playing out from the back but then against Liverpool we changed it and went more direct which shows the signs of a top manager, he’s willing to change the way we play depending on the opponent. I still don’t see a clear style yet but I know that it will come as the season progresses.I like the fact ten Hag is making us a lot more compact and organised compared to how we’ve been over the past seasons.

This. Indeed ETH was very naive in the first two games, trying to do something (single pivot, and DDG building attacks from the back) that most of us saw as a big mistake. Unfortunately it turned out to be true, but I like how Erik adjusted and took a bit more conservative approach in many aspects. He also recognised we're going nowhere without a DM so I'm very excited for Casemiro.

Paradoxically, Ten Hag retreating from Ten Hag style and adopting for the current situation speaks very highly of him IMO. This is a very good sign, because it also means the manager understands our weaknesses.

That said, what we're playing now is definitely not ETH ball.

To be honest I am very very surprised Ten Hag still sees Bruno as focal attacking point, personally I understand this approach in xurre current situation but I am afraid this will hold us back in the future.

 

[Drz]

He is spot on we have too many players who make shite decisions. De Gea passing to Eriksen is a prime example of that, why pass to someone who is man marked, just because he is closest to you? Absolute brain dead decision making, that's something ten Hag absolutely can't plan for. And good to see, that like I said before, he isn't strictly bound to playing one way, he is flexible in his tactical approach, but if the players can't think for themselves on the pitch it's all for nothing.

Agreed, and if I'm not mistaken he is not the first manager to have complained about this.

 

[Dve]

Well it's part 1 of counter attacking. There were glimmers of part 2 that suggested that this was the aspiration. But we don't really have anyone up front to make it work. Ronaldo got found out for pace looking slow even against tired defenders. And Rashford is...Rashford.

Playing on the break does not necessarily say anything about how you defend, but rather how you act when you regain possession - wherever it happens on the pitch. I.e., if you win the ball in the middle, do you pass it backwards to secure possession, or do you try a more risky forward pass. There is nothing contradictory in pressing high and playing counterattacking fotball.

 

[Lassitude42]

Nearly every PL team has fast strikers these days, and if sitting in a medium rather than high block means we don't concede nearly as many goals, then I'm all for it. Top teams are built on a solid defence and we have enough quality and flair to create given the players at our disposal. Keep a clean sheet and you only need one goal to win.

 

[glazed]

There is nothing contradictory in pressing high and playing counterattacking fotball.

I don't agree. Counter attacking football allows the opponent to have more of the ball and draws them out by sitting deep and then hitting them on the break. High press means regaining possession quickly and pinning the opponent into his own final third.

 

[Hammondo]

Playing on the break does not necessarily say anything about how you defend, but rather how you act when you regain possession - wherever it happens on the pitch. I.e., if you win the ball in the middle, do you pass it backwards to secure possession, or do you try a more risky forward pass. There is nothing contradictory in pressing high and playing counterattacking fotball.

You cannot play counter attacking without letting the opponent have the ball and create space behind them.

 

[Dve]

You cannot play counter attacking without letting the opponent have the ball and create space behind them.

Playing counter attacking football means you're taking bigger risks with your passing, hence you are more likely to lose the ball. That's different from "letting" your opponent have the ball. I've never seen a team voluntarily passing the ball to the opponent.

 

[Dve]

I don't agree. Counter attacking football allows the opponent to have more of the ball and draws them out by sitting deep and then hitting them on the break. High press means regaining possession quickly and pinning the opponent into his own final third.

No, that's an old fashion way of looking at it, and hardy any team play like that. Letting your opponent play around your box is simply too risky. Most teams that are sitting deep, do so because they are forced deep by a stronger opponent.

There are many articles about counting attacking football, but e.g. in Fifa's training centre, there is not one sentence about sitting deep in their description of counter attacking football. Instead,

"Teams must try to regain the ball as high up the pitch as possible. For a successful counter, a key element is the players' desire to get forward to stretch the opposition, with the wide players playing a pivotal role. The ball should be moved forward with as few touches as possible, and it needs to be moved at pace, preferably into space to exploit the opposition, either in the gaps in front of the defence or in the space behind the defensive line. If all of these elements are incorporated into the attack and the final ball is accurate and well timed, the counter will often lead to a good goalscoring opportunity."


https://www.fifatrainingcentre.com/...ransition-to-attacking/the-counter-attack.php

 

[Hammondo]

Playing counter attacking football means you're taking bigger risks with your passing, hence you are more likely to lose the ball. That's different from "letting" your opponent have the ball. I've never seen a team voluntarily passing the ball to the opponent.

Letting your opponent have the ball is how it works, you cannot counter attack unless they are attack you just before.

 

[DevilRed]

Every single team is now trying to press us VERY high up the pitch.

How to counter this? By leaving our forwards higher up on both of the wings and playing the long/medium ball over the top to release them.

 

[noodlehair]

I'm not sure, there's a definite difference between how we approached the last two games and the naivety that was on display against Brighton and especially Brentford.

We're playing long towards pace a lot more often, which is a good way to bypass some of the midfield build up problems and use our attacking players. It takes the spotlight off DeGea and his weaknesses. There aren't the same gaps between midfield and defence as in the early games, we are far more compact and I would not say we pressed much.

I think it's going to depend a lot on the opposition and whether we're at home or away.

I think he has a point tbh. We didn't press from the front or do anything "progressive" against Brighton. We played the exact same nothing shite we served up most of last season. And then Brentford was so bad tactics didn't even come into it. So where the idea this had anything to do with "progressive" football came from I have no idea. What did anyone see in these two games that was in anyway attempting to be progressive?

The most "progressive" we've looked so far was against Liverpool, where we actually pressed as a unit and had a structure in possession. We also ran out of energy midway through both halves and were playing a better team than us, but this was a type of performance and tactical approach we never saw once under Ole.

Then yesterday we didn't counter well or play a low block and hit Southampton on the break. Our defence was excellent and much better organised/more aggressive than previously, but the midfield and especially forwards not being able to hold the ball or pressure Southampton if anything was a hindrance. Our best spell of the game and when we scored was when we were able to actually string some football together higher up the pitch.

 

[Dve]

Letting your opponent have the ball is how it works, you cannot counter attack unless they are attack you just before.

No, that's absolutely not how it works.

 

[glazed]

No, that's an old fashion way of looking at it, and hardy any team play like that. Letting your opponent play around your box is simply too risky. Most teams that are sitting deep, do so because they are forced deep by a stronger opponent.

Perhaps I'm out of date. I thought the whole point is draw the opposition players out in order to create space for the counter to work. The word counter attack itself implies that you first allow the other team to attack. What you are describing is a high press.

 

[Dve]

Perhaps I'm out of date. I thought the whole point is draw the opposition players out in order to create space for the counter to work. The word counter attack itself implies that you first allow the other team to attack. What you are describing is a high press.

I think most teams would prefer the other team not to attack at all...

 

[glazed]

I think most teams would prefer the other team not to attack at all...

Well maybe. That's parking the bus and can be harder to score against.

 

[Borys]

Every single team is now trying to press us VERY high up the pitch.

How to counter this? By leaving our forwards higher up on both of the wings and playing the long/medium ball over the top to release them.

Play 3 man midfield and make make them move opposition players around and drag them higher in central areas (we did that a bit already vs Southampton at the beginning of second half, once ETH recognised to pull them apart as SOT players were marking 1to1).
Exploit the gap by going long to Martial who can play back to his goal quite well (Martinez/Eriksen will be key for that).
Have two pacy wingers who can run behind.
In essence, drop Bruno and move to 433 with Casemiro holding and two 8's in Eriksen and somebody else (Fred/McTominay/van de Beek).
Use Bruno in latter stages of the game when there's more space and time.

I think he has a point tbh. We didn't press from the front or do anything "progressive" against Brighton. We played the exact same nothing shite we served up most of last season. And then Brentford was so bad tactics didn't even come into it. So where the idea this had anything to do with "progressive" football came from I have no idea. What did anyone see in these two games that was in anyway attempting to be progressive?

The most "progressive" we've looked so far was against Liverpool, where we actually pressed as a unit and had a structure in possession. We also ran out of energy midway through both halves and were playing a better team than us, but this was a type of performance and tactical approach we never saw once under Ole.

Then yesterday we didn't counter well or play a low block and hit Southampton on the break. Our defence was excellent and much better organised/more aggressive than previously, but the midfield and especially forwards not being able to hold the ball or pressure Southampton if anything was a hindrance. Our best spell of the game and when we scored was when we were able to actually string some football together higher up the pitch.

I think by "progressive" football it was meant that we wanted to build from the back, starting with De Gea and progressing through midfield. This was no longer the case against Liverpool and Southampton, as we were happy to go long and then fight for the second ball. It worked against Liverpool and it worked against Southampton until Eriksen was exhausted and we spent the last 30mins defending. Which we've gotten much better at, but still this is surely not what ETH wants.

 

[Hammondo]

No, that's absolutely not how it works.

The literal definition of a counter-attack is a response to an attack by someone else.

 

[croadyman]

Yeah won't see this Erik style of football work properly until we have fixed GK (commanding sweeper keeper)RB,CM(progressive) & ST

 

[Swordsman]

if we are going to play counter attack football all season long, might as well stick with mourinho or ole, why bother hire ten hag ?

 

[Beans]

if we are going to play counter attack football all season long, might as well stick with mourinho or ole, why bother hire ten hag ?

I think Arsenal are a good example, not that I watch them, but I've read that he didn't try to play Pep ball right away but worked on defense first. Or is that wrong?

Our men need to be training Tiki-taka everyday, getting it ready to be unleashed. In the meantime we may need to make some compromises while we build to that. If not, all the better of course.

 

[Pronewbie]

if we are going to play counter attack football all season long, might as well stick with mourinho or ole, why bother hire ten hag ?

Have you seen how much poorer we are compared to Ajax in passing and build-up drills? We got him for his clout, discipline and training sessions. Rome wasn't built in a day. I appreciate his pragmatism and successes with it thus far.

 

[Escobar]

This. Indeed ETH was very naive in the first two games, trying to do something (single pivot, and DDG building attacks from the back) that most of us saw as a big mistake. Unfortunately it turned out to be true, but I like how Erik adjusted and took a bit more conservative approach in many aspects. He also recognised we're going nowhere without a DM so I'm very excited for Casemiro.

Paradoxically, Ten Hag retreating from Ten Hag style and adopting for the current situation speaks very highly of him IMO. This is a very good sign, because it also means the manager understands our weaknesses.

That said, what we're playing now is definitely not ETH ball.

To be honest I am very very surprised Ten Hag still sees Bruno as focal attacking point, personally I understand this approach in xurre current situation but I am afraid this will hold us back in the future.

Imo we see his style of football only next season. It will take time and the players need to be transformed first. But it is a huge improvement already and we can see that the foundation is developing as well

 

[londonredmaniac]

if we are going to play counter attack football all season long, might as well stick with mourinho or ole, why bother hire ten hag ?

Because, I assume, it's about the end game.

ETH will eventually play the style of football he wants, but he needs the right players to do so.

Our next few windows, presumably, will bring in the right tools for that job.

 

[londonredmaniac]

Have you seen how much poorer we are compared to Ajax in passing and build-up drills? We got him for his clout, discipline and training sessions. Rome wasn't built in a day. I appreciate his pragmatism and successes with it thus far.

Yes indeed.

 

[Pronewbie]

I think Arsenal are a good example, not that I watch them, but I've read that he didn't try to play Pep ball right away but worked on defense first. Or is that wrong?

Our men need to be training Tiki-taka everyday, getting it ready to be unleashed. In the meantime we may need to make some compromises while we build to that. If not, all the better of course.

Yes and Arsenal was always a technical team that played football on the ground. We've lost all that and need a rebuild while training the players to play Ten Hag ball.

 

[Beans]

Yes and Arsenal was always a technical team that played football on the ground. We've lost all that and need a rebuild while training the players to play Ten Hag ball.

Agree completely, they had better building blocks for that style. Meanwhile our players don't even know how to press before Rangnick showed up.

 

[Swordsman]

Because, I assume, it's about the end game.

ETH will eventually play the style of football he wants, but he needs the right players to do so.

Our next few windows, presumably, will bring in the right tools for that job.

He also have to get rid of all the deadweights who can't play his style of football.

you can't teach an old dog new tricks.