Tippy Tappy football without MK9. (1 Viewer)

shy_tall_knight · Aug 6, 2011

today we played posession football without any real impact in the final third creating very few chances. MK9 is gone but this system worked well under him. With a lack of punch up front Lestor were able to play further up the pitch and as the game proceeded we got caught in posession more often.

I believe had there been a reasonable goal threat such as an MK9 the opposition would not play so far up the pitch as they need to provide cover at the back.

very fustrating in a local derby when only a goal behind to not even threaten the opposition for any period of time.

My other fear is that we are slow to counter attack that it will only encourage the opposition to come at us. Clingan & GB rarely got into the final third Bell nearly aleways had his back to goal and Sheffers was awful. Juke worked very hard and did offer a threat.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Aug 6, 2011

I don't think the problem is MK missing although that is a blow, I think the problem is that at the end of last season players like Bell, Baker and Mcsheffery thrived under the system at the end of last season and today all 3 of them were terrible meaning no service to the striker.

Lord_Nampil · Aug 6, 2011

Was working fine when we had 11 players once baker went off the formation didn't work! Also Macca is better at the tip with 2 players in front of him not 1 really need a striker!

shy_tall_knight · Aug 6, 2011

The trouble with that style of football is that it is very difficult to up the tempo when chasing a game. Never looked like scoring.

Yorkshire SB · Aug 6, 2011

Bell was not awful today he had a good game. Looks much better playing in the middle rather than out wide. Baker was decent until he went off, but mcsheffrey was woeful, just wasn't in the game. Clingan and bigiramana linked up well and with those two we will outplay most sides and control most games. Agree with the post though, no threat upfront though juke did well I thought.
I was also surprised not to see wood in the starting line up considering our opposition, Mills and Bamba two of the biggest aerial threats in the division.

ashbyjan · Aug 6, 2011

Macca looks best when sat on the bench and not getting in the way of those who actually want to play football for Cov and are prepared to break sweat for the cause - thought he was a disgrace today.

Hibbert · Aug 6, 2011

Lack of tempo and movement off the ball is the problem.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Aug 6, 2011

templericoh said:
Bell was not awful today he had a good game. Looks much better playing in the middle rather than out wide. Baker was decent until he went off, but mcsheffrey was woeful, just wasn't in the game. Clingan and bigiramana linked up well and with those two we will outplay most sides and control most games. Agree with the post though, no threat upfront though juke did well I thought.
I was also surprised not to see wood in the starting line up considering our opposition, Mills and Bamba two of the biggest aerial threats in the division.

If you are happy with sideways or backwards 3 yard passes then yes Bell was exellent. Lets not kid ourselves Bell, Baker and Mcsheffery were awful.
Mcsheffery had about 10 touches all game. Bell just played simple 3 yard passes all game and nothing needs to be said about Baker. Our only attacking threat came from the full backs and Juke feeding on scraps all game trying to create something by himself.

shy_tall_knight · Aug 6, 2011

There were times today whilst behind when we won the ball the first thought was a square or a backwards pass, maybe if there was self-belief in the team ie a striker such as MK9 we would have played the ball forward quicker. The square and backwards passes are safe options allows us to retain posession but also gives the opportunity for the opposition to get back into position.

ashbyjan · Aug 6, 2011

Yep lets scrap this boring tippy tappy nonsense and get back to the hoofball that worked so well under AB. The style isn't the problem - as Hibbert says its players willing to make space and offer a run for the man in possession. Sheff didn't make one run into space and at one point the 12 year old Christie even had a go at him over it. Also the system is dependent on the full backs overlapping and Hussey was poor today and Christie did well at times but lacked the experience to know when to go and when to hold. The system is fine just needs more commitment and bravery from the players and I would rather see us tip tap it around and keep possession rather than lump it long for the opposition to get the ball back and attack us.

shy_tall_knight · Aug 6, 2011

My point is that in order for this style to be effective we need some penetration / impact in the final third.

shmmeee · Aug 6, 2011

Can we stop this "sideways pass" crap. It really shows you up as someone who knows not much about the game. We kept the ball, that's what good teams do. The problem was for the vast majority of the game that no-one was ahead of the ball. We had a similar problem under Boothroyd and Coleman. I'm convinced it's underdog syndrome and players are scared to make a run in case we lose the ball and they are stuck out of position.

We need confidence, and I wouldn't be surprised to see us do better away from home without the fans shouting "get it forward" "get rid" etc. all the time.

We missed a goal threat because we played McSheff up front and he was anonymous. Should have put O'Donovan there.

ajsccfc · Aug 6, 2011

The football we are trying to play demands patience from the supporters as much as it does from the players. If you have the ball the opposition can do little but chase after all; today we missed the necessary support up top to make real use of the possession, but this won't always be the case.

shy_tall_knight · Aug 6, 2011

I just think today we had to up the tempo and failed miserably to even chase the game. This posession football requires ball playing cetre halfs but the down isde is their goal was poor defending and Nugests header he hwas unchallenged may be McPake / wood would have challenged

ajsccfc · Aug 6, 2011

I'd have a fully fit McPake in the team every time, he's our most decisive defender.

PVA · Aug 6, 2011

We were absolutely fine when we had 11 on the pitch and we were the only team in it.

However the loss of Baker really hurt us as we didn't seem to adapt properly and our midfield formation became a little muddled. Had it been say McSheff who got sent off I don't think we'd have suffered as much because we'd still have the midfield three with clearly defined roles.

PVA · Aug 6, 2011

Shmeee, spot on with what you say about the crowd. Last season people were shouting and complaining each time we aimlessly hoofed it forward. Now the same idiots are shouting 'GET IT FORWARD'

To quote CC, bunch of Neanderthals.

Macca · Aug 6, 2011

People on here can be very patronising when they don't agree with something. There is nothing wrong with keeping possession but at some point it has to have an end ball forward with the intention of creating an opportunity. The stuff we played today was like watching some England games. In fact if you are passing the ball from side to side in your own half then the opposition will let you get on with it because you aren't hurting them. Shame there can't be a little middle ground sometimes instead of claiming that people who comment about a lack of end product means they want us to revert to hoofball. But then as pointed out earlier it probably means I know nothing about football.

JGazebo · Aug 6, 2011

Lets just hold onto the ball at the edge of our own penalty area, then. No point going forward according to some of you.

AB failed because of his immensely predictable long ball game that all other teams learnt by quarter way through the season.

When AT took over he mixed it up and we had possession, movement and a bit of tempo. Movement and tempo were lacking today. Stats show we had the most possession but we lost because it was all in our own half.

It's not neanderthal to expect that the team goes forward. Holding the ball doesn't score goals.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Aug 6, 2011

Macca said:
People on here can be very patronising when they don't agree with something. There is nothing wrong with keeping possession but at some point it has to have an end ball forward with the intention of creating an opportunity. The stuff we played today was like watching some England games. In fact if you are passing the ball from side to side in your own half then the opposition will let you get on with it because you aren't hurting them. Shame there can't be a little middle ground sometimes instead of claiming that people who comment about a lack of end product means they want us to revert to hoofball. But then as pointed out earlier it probably means I know nothing about football.

I agree we need to be keeping possession in the oppo half where it is dangerous. Leicester just stood off us today and let our defence maintain possesion, as soon as we made an attempt to go forward players like Mcsheffery/Bell/Baker lost the ball and the attack broke down.
Tbh I think it is just that too many of our attacking players had poor games.

BurbageSkyBlues · Aug 6, 2011

Hibbert said:
Lack of tempo and movement off the ball is the problem.

Spot on - this is what MK offered, over and above being a goal threat.

We seem focussed on a goal scorer, but in actual fact we forget the contribution made by others, who move around and pull defenders out of position, thereby making an opening for a telling pass from the player with the ball.

It's a team game, not a collective of individuals!

Macca · Aug 6, 2011

exactly I'm just analysing todays game, its not the end of the world, trouble is you make a comment and everyone thinks you are writing them off and starts crying

BurbageSkyBlues · Aug 6, 2011

Let's leave it to AT to sort out, as best he can with resources available!

shy_tall_knight · Aug 6, 2011

I don't think any of us on here were expecting to be running the team any time in the near future.

TommyAtkins · Aug 6, 2011

Marlon King did bugger all until the last 10 games of the season. He was a failure as a signing. When he arrived at CCFC, the team were doing relatively well but his arrival upset the balance of the team and he did nothing to justify his signing.

Macca · Aug 6, 2011

I would have loved to see him today when we were a man up

TommyAtkins · Aug 6, 2011

Macca said:
I would have loved to see him today when we were a man up

Giving us 12 players on the pitch?

Macca · Aug 6, 2011

TommyAtkins said:
Giving us 12 players on the pitch?

Didnt think i needed to qualify that but ok. I would have loved to have seen him as one of our 11 players whilst the opposition were down to 10. I think he would have revelled in the numerical superiority we were enjoying at that time

TommyAtkins · Aug 6, 2011

King was an epic failure as a signing for this club. And he repaid the loyalty shown to him by CCFC and by the fans by sodding off.

King only had an effect in the last 10 games of last season.

Nonleagueherewecome · Aug 7, 2011

TommyAtkins said:
King was an epic failure as a signing for this club. And he repaid the loyalty shown to him by CCFC and by the fans by sodding off.

King only had an effect in the last 10 games of last season.

OK so you don't think we'd have been more likely to score during the first half if King was playing for us instead of,say, McSheffrey? Really? I mean, I hated the bloke when he was doing great, never mind when he shat on us...but he was 3 times the goalscorer of anyone else we have, that's plain to see, surely?

Yorkshire SB · Aug 7, 2011

TommyAtkins said:
King was an epic failure as a signing for this club. And he repaid the loyalty shown to him by CCFC and by the fans by sodding off.

King only had an effect in the last 10 games of last season.

Ha, is this a joke or are you just irrationally against marlon king? Yeah he was disloyal, but without king I think we'd have come close to falling out of this division last season, when he was match fit he was absolutely quality. You cannot deny that. I agree with Macca, had King been in our XI today, during the first half I think we'd have been ahead, completely different game.

Tippy Tappy football without MK9. (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency