The Goals conceded Saturday - In depth.

[tajjuk]

Posted this in the 'Kelvin Davis' Thread but I was going off topic a bit so I thought I would start a new thread.

 

This post is to highlight some of the key defensive failings from the game on Saturday to illustrate that it's not simply just one or two individuals at fault.

 

I have higlighted player names in bold when I felt they have made an error.

 

 

Against Arsenal.

 

First Goal

 

- Starts with poor tackling in the midfield, Podolski easily gets away from Davis and Schneiderlin seems to get 'done' in the process, leaving space in front of the defence for Podolski to run into (question - is he supposed to be sitting? The 'anchor man' role? If he is then he shouldn't have made a run forward)

 

- Puncheon makes little effort to help out (even though he is quite close and was the one who failed to tackle him in the first place).

 

- Puncheon is then out of position and not tracking Gibbs. Defensive shape is pretty good, Fonte goes to close the ball but Clyne is ball watching and doesn't pick up the run of Gibbs on the outside. (OR if the players are marking Zonally, then Gibbs has left Puncheon's Zone and is now in Clyne's Zone and he should go out to meet him)

 

- Gervinho gets ahead of Hooiveld and is goal side even though he started behind him (Hoiveld).

 

- Gibbs shoots instead of crossing it and KD deflects it into play rather than out, but then Hooiveld doesn't react and the goal goes in off in when he probably should have cleared it.

 

Pretty much everyone at fault there, Puncheon, Schneiderlin, Davis, Hoiveld, Clyne and KD.

 

 

Second Goal

 

- KD's poor positioning nothing more, This was pointed out on 'Goals on Sunday', he gave up more than half of the goal and the shot was a good metre inside the top corner.

 

 

Third Goal

 

It was part Yoshidas fault, part Lallanas fault and part Kelvin's fault. (and possibly part Fox's fault)

 

- Lallana didn't press Arteta, he was allowed loads of time to very carefully play the ball through. (whoever passed to Arteta as well wasn't pressed)

 

- Yoshida was ball watching when he should have been marking Gervhinho, he gets sucked in and then is wrong footed by a fairly simple run from the attacker.

 

- KD shows Gervinho far too much space at the near post and doesn't come out to close the angle down. I don't rate Gervinho at all, all KD had to do was come out quickly and stay on his feet until the last minute, I don't Gervinho think is good enough to score in that situation, but he (KD) just made it too easy for him.

 

- Overall our midfield is standing off far too much, in fact several of them are actually just standing. If you watch the goal you will notice Podolski just runs past Puncheon and none of the midfield pick him, despite Fonte clearly pointing it out.

 

- The gap betweenFonte and Yoshida is huge as well. If Yoshida was closer to Fonte he would have had Gervinho in front of him not behind and made stopping him getting to goal a lot easier.

 

- Fox certainly doesn't help Yoshida, he doesn't seem to be marking the wide player or marking Gervinho, and also seems to get sucked forward. However it's far more Yoshidas fault he need to be goal side of Gervinho and not ball watch,unless Fox is supposed to be marking Gervinho? Fox was poor in this game, he didn't ever seem to press players, nor does he track runners, (also see Gervinho's second goal he just let him run past him and get free in the box and I'm sure at that point Gervinho was playing on his side of the pitch. Lack of quality is one thing but he's a pro footballer and a defender, not marking and not tracking your man is just laziness. )

 

 

4th Goal

 

- Pretty much like the first, Puncheon fails to tackle Gervinho who goes past him easily, Schneiderlin kind of just runs along side Gervinho, no pressing. No one is marking Gibbs who is wide left completely on his own. The whole team are inside our half and are very narrow.

 

- The actual goal off Clyne is unlucky but the situation shouldn't have happened. Something was off on the right hand side as no one was picking up Gibbs and Clyne seemed reluctant to go out to him, he is just marking some space.

 

5th Goal

 

- Again standing off in Midfield giving time to pick the pass out. Clyne is too narrow and gets done easily by Ramsey (who runs form deep and isn't tracked by anyone) (Who was playing wide right at this point?)

 

- KD should do better from what is a very weak toe poke shot from Ramsey.

 

- Fox just lets Gervinho run past him and get free in the box.

 

 

6th Goal

 

- Ramsey gets inside Clyne too easily.

 

- KDparries back into the middle too easily, and the rest of defence should have cleared the rebound.

 

 

Overall

 

 

From a lot of the goals it looks clear that we have no idea where some of the Arsenal players are playing and thus our players weren't sure who to mark. Their (Arsenals) formation had Podolski up front on his own, Gervinho/Chamberlain wide and Corzola playing behind Podolski. It would be logical (seeing as we played a pretty similar formation) for both full backs to pick up their respective wide men, one of the centre backs to pick up Podolski and Schneiderlin to pick up Corzola. Leaving the other centre back free to sweep up or pick up other midfield runners. However Arsenal's movement confused our players.

 

 

For the third goal, Gervinho is on the right hand side of pitch, presumably he had swapped sides with Chamberlain. Fox presumably didn't think he was the one to pick him up, thus Yoshida goes out to him. Zonal marking going wrong?

 

Certainly the two goals that come through Gibbs on the left highlight this problem, he is completely free both times to cross, now is Clyne supposed to be picking him up as he is in his 'zone'? In which case he should go out to him, OR is it Puncheon who failed to track him? (if we are man for man) We didn't allow that sort of space or free runners against Utd, (except maybe the last 10 minutes, tired minds and bodies?) but this was all in the first half so they can't have been tired.

 

I'm not sure if the way they have been told to play is wrong or some of the players aren't doing their jobs correctly. If we were marking man for man then too many players didn't pick their runners up. If we were zonal players weren't picking up players in their zone.

 

The Players

 

My piece though was to highlight that basically several players were at fault for most of the goals and all of them, bar maybe the 6th which was a very good, quick counter attack, could have been avoided with some hard work, some simple defending and some better goalkeeping (and even then if KD had palmed the shot AWAY from the goal they wouldn't have scored the rebound). Though I would advocate changing some of the personnel, I think more it's more getting them all to do their jobs correctly as a unit. An experienced Defensive coach to work with them would be my suggestion.

 

- Fonte defended pretty well on Saturday, you can't fault him for any of the goals.

 

- Yoshida made a very basic error, however he had only been on the pitch 7 minutes, when everyone else had been on for 30 mins so he probably wasn't up to speed in the game, it was his debut and he was partly let down by Fox.

 

- Clyne's positioning was poor on Saturday and has been in previous games, he great going forward and has plenty of pace to react to situations, but his starting position at times lets him down. I also think he was let down by Puncheon on Saturday.

 

- Fox is not tracking runners and is reluctant to close the ball down even when players are in the last third. Either he is worried about being done for pace if he gets to close or he is frankly being lazy. There is no excuse for not folowing the guy you are supposed to be marking.

 

- Schneiderlin is in the wrong position in my opinion. He is not tenacious enough in the tackle and getting the ball back. He is also too inclined to go froward. In this formation he should be sitting in front of the defence, picking up the oppositions AM and breaking up play. He should barely cross the half way line, especially away from home. Think Makele or Scott Parker. Whilst I think he is an excellent player he is not suited nor disciplined enough for this role. Cork might be a better option.

 

- Puncheon purely defensively he let down Clyne on Saturday, Gibbs was his man and he let him go free down the right side twice which directly led to two goals. In the formation we play, it should be a 451 when we don;t have the ball and the wide players have a big role to play helping out their full backs. Puncheon didn't do this on Saturday, Lallana was slightly guilty of it was well.

 

- Kelvin Davis Simply he could have done better with every single goal. His best attributes last season were shot stopping and he is not doing that. His distribution has been poor, he doesn't come out to close attackers down, he has flapped at crosses, he is getting beaten at his near post and his positioning has been poor. I don't want to overly pick at him but you can't ignore that facts.

[pingwing]

You don't blame Fox enough for the 3rd. For the whole game he was playing way too far forward and refused to be in line with the defence at ANY moment. The whole problem was that he was leaving masses of space for anyone and everyone because he seemed to want to be forward and a glory hog.

 

Punch was no better

[carljack]

Pretty good summing up taj,to be fair we have had a baptism of fire back in with the big boys,the holding cover midfielder is a key possi in this league and one which needs sorting out quickly I am not as worried about Kelvin as some others are and reckon he will come good.

[Thedelldays]

Did any of you watch football on sky last night

 

 

They broke down the goals we let in very well

[fanimal]

You have not mentioned Davis other than once, and JWP, they are not even getting near tackling! The midfield is our big problem right now, trying to fit in 3 new players who were not part of th eteam last season and then into a new style of play. Madness. Get back to basics and what we are good at!!

[alpine_saint]

Excellent piece. From that I conclude that throughout the game the team is being let down by Puncheon, Fox and Davis. Fox and Davis arent good enough for me, and I wonder if Puncheon is starting to get too cosy. For me the criticisms of Schneiderlin and Clyne will be solved by hard work and expereience, and Yoshida for me is almost blameless - he's only just got here.

 

I take a bit of heart from your comments about Fonte though; if the Davis and Fox issues are dealt with somehow, and he develops a good understanding with Yoshida quickly, there's hope.

[saintbob40]

JWP...the boy king.

 

Funnily enough he gets 5s or 6s in the Sunday papers but gets much higher praise when reading this forum. Are we making the mistake of looking at what he could be (which may be a top, top player by the way) rather than what he is currently.

 

He needs managing very carefully and still has a lot to learn.

[Thedelldays]

Excellent piece. From that I conclude that throughout the game the team is being let down by Puncheon, Fox and Davis. Fox and Davis arent good enough for me, and I wonder if Puncheon is starting to get too cosy. For me the criticisms of Schneiderlin and Clyne will be solved by hard work and expereience, and Yoshida for me is almost blameless - he's only just got here.

 

I take a bit of heart from your comments about Fonte though; if the Davis and Fox issues are dealt with somehow, and he develops a good understanding with Yoshida quickly, there's hope.

 

Except, when the goals were broken down and analysed..... You would be wrong

[Noodles34]

so basically, we're ****e!

[alpine_saint]

Except, when the goals were broken down and analysed..... You would be wrong

 

Nope, dont think so. I read the breakdown and the conclusions before summarising my own opinion takign into account the player's status and potential.

 

You like telling others they are wrong though, I've noticed. Hope that works for you.

[Saint Garrett]

Thought our CM was poor for our goals on Sat. Was the first game that JWP looked out of his depth for me, maybe he needs to be bedded in a bit more carefully rather than just throwing him in week in week out. Davis wasn't great and Schneiderlin had his worst game for us in the middle. That was the big problem, Arsenal just completely ran the game in the middle between Cazorla, Chambo, Podolski and Gervinho, along with Coquelin and Arteta. Although there is no doubt that midfield will do that to a lot of teams this season!

[Thedelldays]

Nope, dont think so. I read the breakdown and the conclusions before summarising my own opinion.

 

you like telling others they are wrong though, I've noticed. Hope that works for you.

 

Well.. I watched it on telly.... MnF breaking down our goals... Basically blamed Clyne and Fonte

 

But there you go

[tajjuk]

You don't blame Fox enough for the 3rd. For the whole game he was playing way too far forward and refused to be in line with the defence at ANY moment. The whole problem was that he was leaving masses of space for anyone and everyone because he seemed to want to be forward and a glory hog.

 

Punch was no better

 

I looked particularly at the goals, yes Fox was partly to blame for the 3rd goal IF Gervinho was his man, however Yoshida could have directly stopped the goal had he stayed goal side of Gervinho, there is no good reason for him to run past him towards the ball. You can have a witch hunt against Fox all you like and he certainly has his failings, however you can't blame him for that goal.

 

 

 

 

You have not mentioned Davis other than once, and JWP, they are not even getting near tackling! The midfield is our big problem right now, trying to fit in 3 new players who were not part of th eteam last season and then into a new style of play. Madness. Get back to basics and what we are good at!!

 

 

You can't blame the midfield for basic defensive errors, and I looked specifically at the goals. I mentioned on several occasions that the midfield despite being in good positions weren't pressing well enough, were standing still too often and miss their tackles. Davis and JWP were included in this, but the midfielder who should be primarily defending in that formation is Schneiderlin, hence why I think Cork would be better suited to this role as he is a better tackler and is more disciplined.

 

The central 3 were over run at times and didn't win their tackles, but only in the first goal did this lead to something, it was Puncheon who missed his tackle for the 4th. Puncheon should have also been tracking Gibbs, him being free down the left directly led to two goals.

 

Well.. I watched it on telly.... MnF breaking down our goals... Basically blamed Clyne and Fonte

 

But there you go

 

Didn't see it but can't personally see the blame for Fonte. Yes maybe he and Clyne should have been closer to Yoshida but I doubt that would have stopped the goal. You could also argue (as some here have) that Fox was way too far left and that pulled Yoshida across. I'm pretty sure Gervinho should have been picked up by fox.

Edited 18 September, 2012 by tajjuk

[alpine_saint]

Well.. I watched it on telly.... MnF breaking down our goals... Basically blamed Clyne and Fonte

 

But there you go

 

Deary me......

 

I havent seen MnF, so I've drawn my own conclusions from this thread.

 

If you want to point fingers based on what "MnF" tells you, good luck with that.

[Thedelldays]

Deary me......

 

I havent seen MnF, so I've drawn my own conclusions from this thread.

 

If you want to point fingers based on what "MnF" tells you, good luck with that.

 

Well... I think in will take notice of Gary Neville rather than thrush....

[shurlock]

The goals are one thing - and dont really say a lot. Blaming individual mistakes also misses the point. More worrying is that Arsenal were able to get into similar, dangerous positions - in between our midfielders and defenders and overrun us down the wings- with regular ease. If we had cut out individual mistakes, they would have almost certainly scored from other chances.

[alpine_saint]

Well... I think in will take notice of Gary Neville rather than thrush....

 

Oh, were down to silly name calling, are we ?

 

In fact, it is tajjuk that posted the analysis, all I did was describe the way I interpret his analysis. If you have a problem because you are confused between this thread and Gary Neville, take it up with tajjuk...

[Saint Charlie]

Neville said, and clearly demonstrated that the midfield setup was fine, actually, good.

 

Defensive shape and individual errors were costly with some poor keeping added to the mix.

 

Off the top of my head I can only really think of Di Santo's goal for Wigan that realistically was a 'good' goal - all of the others we have condeded are down to defensive errors - mostly basic individual mistakes in positioning and marking.

Edited 18 September, 2012 by Saint Charlie

[Saint Garrett]

I think it was the original setup which was fine, but then one or two passes and the whole of our midfield was bypassed.

[Guest flickjax]

Neville said, and clearly demonstrated that the midfield setup was fine, actually, good.

 

Defensive shape and individual errors were costly with some poor keeping added to the mix.

 

Off the top of my head I can only really think of Di Santo's goal for Wigan that realistically was a 'good' goal - all of the others we have condeded are down to defensive errors - mostly basic individual mistakes in positioning and marking.

 

This, our midfield was fine, defence and keeper out of shape. Neville talks a hell of a lot of sense, he should join this forum so then we would have atleast 1 sensible poster

[tajjuk]

The goals are one thing - and dont really say a lot. Blaming individual mistakes also misses the point. More worrying is that Arsenal were able to get into similar, dangerous positions - in between our midfielders and defenders and overrun us down the wings- with regular ease. If we had cut out individual mistakes, they would have almost certainly scored from other chances.

 

 

See Saint Charlie's post below about 'good goals'. Arsenal are a top team in excellent form. They have very very clever midfielders in the likes of Arteta and Corzola who will trouble most midfields and teams in this league. However Arsenal didn't score any 'good goals' in my opinion (neither did Utd), we made things too easy for them through a combination of lazy pressing/tracking, poor positioning at times and individual mistakes.

 

That 3rd goal was a mess from start to finish and ANY team in this league would have scored that.

 

 

This, our midfield was fine, defence and keeper out of shape. Neville talks a hell of a lot of sense, he should join this forum so then we would have atleast 1 sensible poster

 

Set up is one thing, execution is another. The shape and formation of the team is set up correctly, in fact it's a very good formation to counter most teams in this league, as long as players do their jobs and we have the right players in the right positions.

Edited 18 September, 2012 by tajjuk

[Colinjb]

Neville said, and clearly demonstrated that the midfield setup was fine, actually, good.

 

Defensive shape and individual errors were costly with some poor keeping added to the mix.

 

Off the top of my head I can only really think of Di Santo's goal for Wigan that realistically was a 'good' goal - all of the others we have condeded are down to defensive errors - mostly basic individual mistakes in positioning and marking.

 

Which indicates that this may be a quality/concentration issue rather then anything particularly wrong behind the scenes.

 

It took Swansea a little while to adapt last year, and having been thrown in at the deep end this, we are also needing to adjust swiftly. Whether we have players who are resilient enough to adapt to the Premier League remains to be seen. The games against Villa and Everton will be far better indications of our true standing then matches against three champions league hopefulls. (Wigan, as said above, the Di Santo goal was superb.... Fonte for the second.... symptomatic of my point. Needless.)

[alpine_saint]

Excellent piece. From that I conclude that throughout the game the team is being let down by Puncheon, Fox and Davis. Fox and Davis arent good enough for me, and I wonder if Puncheon is starting to get too cosy. For me the criticisms of Schneiderlin and Clyne will be solved by hard work and expereience, and Yoshida for me is almost blameless - he's only just got here.

 

I take a bit of heart from your comments about Fonte though; if the Davis and Fox issues are dealt with somehow, and he develops a good understanding with Yoshida quickly, there's hope.

 

Right, so the only deviation from what Neville said really and my surmising is what role Puncheon plays in putting pressure on our defence to make mistakes. I've said Fox and Davis arent good enough, I think we all know that, and expressed the expectation that Clyne can Schneiderlin can improve and hopefully Fonte is on his way back.

 

REALLY contrary view, TDD...

[Pilchards]

Neville said, and clearly demonstrated that the midfield setup was fine, actually, good.

 

Defensive shape and individual errors were costly with some poor keeping added to the mix.

 

Off the top of my head I can only really think of Di Santo's goal for Wigan that realistically was a 'good' goal - all of the others we have condeded are down to defensive errors - mostly basic individual mistakes in positioning and marking.

 

Totally agree the shape is good but not getting the tackles in or back tracking means it does not matter what the shape is as its going to crumble.

 

 

Im sure we will see a better performance on Saturday and the wide midfielders will be subbed after 70 minutes as they have been run into the ground.

[Sour Mash]

You have not mentioned Davis other than once, and JWP, they are not even getting near tackling! The midfield is our big problem right now, trying to fit in 3 new players who were not part of th eteam last season and then into a new style of play. Madness. Get back to basics and what we are good at!!

Agreed. I've been critical of various members of our defence for a while, but some of the criticism is unfair. We lost Saturday's game in midfield . It was where we'd been really strong against Man Utd, but were as good as anonymous against Arsenal. JWP and S. Davis are too similar in my eyes as well.

[The9]

Anyone who doesn't blame Fonte at least in part for goal 3 really has no right to be criticising.

 

Gary Neville saying "Arsenal were fantastic" is also at least partially relevant. Their speed of thought outstripped ours in most situations - that will come with experience.

[dubai_phil]

Just one input into the "Midfield Set Up" debate.

 

From my lofty position sitting at the bar in the pub, it seemed to me that AL & JP became drawn into a deeper 4-5-1 than we had perhaps planned and picked a side for.

 

By being drawn back, they left RL alone up front with virtually no close support in the early part of the game. Any balls up towards him were a piece of cake for the two CB's and there were no supporting players in range to pick up any second balls. In fact I would add JWP into that criticism.

 

So anytime we picked the ball up it was heading back from space in front of our MF 5 with plenty of chances for the two FB's to have acres of space to join the attacks and time for Arsenal's MF to play the perfect ball.

 

Second half (when Arsenal had re-tuned to a practice game) JWP started to play further up the pitch and started to find Saints players with his passing skills, in the first half he looked like a 17 year old Kid on a Saga Holiday.

 

So while the MF shape may have been right (who is Gary Neville?) (that's an overseas fans response btw) they were too deep, and somehow ALL AND JP ended up being in never never land - they weren't supporting RL & holding the ball up in their final 3rd and they sure as hell weren't helping out either FB as seen from the goals.

 

The only "evidence" I have in my input is HT stat 42% of the game was played in OUR final 3rd of the pitch.

 

Somehow, someone in MF chickened out of the role they were SUPPOSED to play and sat too deep. NA showed this with his repeated attempts to wave players forward.

 

We compressed ourselves, set up went to pot and we let them play.

 

Do that against ANY team in the PL and we will get walloped

[shurlock]

Neville said, and clearly demonstrated that the midfield setup was fine, actually, good.

 

Defensive shape and individual errors were costly with some poor keeping added to the mix.

 

Off the top of my head I can only really think of Di Santo's goal for Wigan that realistically was a 'good' goal - all of the others we have condeded are down to defensive errors - mostly basic individual mistakes in positioning and marking.

 

Neville wasn't at the game, so his word is hardly gospel.

Yes the goals may have come from errors, though that's more or less true of every goal conceded (its a matter of degree). More importantly Arsenal worked lots of similar situations and our midfield, played a large role in our undoing. Watching or analysing a few highlights gives you no sense of that.

[shurlock]

Just one input into the "Midfield Set Up" debate.

 

From my lofty position sitting at the bar in the pub, it seemed to me that AL & JP became drawn into a deeper 4-5-1 than we had perhaps planned and picked a side for.

 

By being drawn back, they left RL alone up front with virtually no close support in the early part of the game. Any balls up towards him were a piece of cake for the two CB's and there were no supporting players in range to pick up any second balls. In fact I would add JWP into that criticism.

 

So anytime we picked the ball up it was heading back from space in front of our MF 5 with plenty of chances for the two FB's to have acres of space to join the attacks and time for Arsenal's MF to play the perfect ball.

 

Second half (when Arsenal had re-tuned to a practice game) JWP started to play further up the pitch and started to find Saints players with his passing skills, in the first half he looked like a 17 year old Kid on a Saga Holiday.

 

So while the MF shape may have been right (who is Gary Neville?) (that's an overseas fans response btw) they were too deep, and somehow ALL AND JP ended up being in never never land - they weren't supporting RL & holding the ball up in their final 3rd and they sure as hell weren't helping out either FB as seen from the goals.

 

The only "evidence" I have in my input is HT stat 42% of the game was played in OUR final 3rd of the pitch.

 

Somehow, someone in MF chickened out of the role they were SUPPOSED to play and sat too deep. NA showed this with his repeated attempts to wave players forward.

 

We compressed ourselves, set up went to pot and we let them play.

 

Do that against ANY team in the PL and we will get walloped

 

You probably had a better view of the game than me, then.

Agree with all of this.

[Saint Without a Halo]

seven of the 14 goals we have conceded have occured in the last 15 mins of each game (2 in each of Manu Manc and Arsenal and 1 against Wigan). Are we still not fit enough as a team or are we doing too much in the first 75 mins, which means we are falling away at the end?

[The9]

Re: "leaving Lambert isolated".

 

Significant differences between "linking Lambert" against Man U and "isolated Lambert" v Arsenal, all because the midfield was further back and the defenders played the second ball much more intelligently.

 

I know I'm going to get the usual "you hate Lambert" nonsense for this, but how easy is it for Arsenal to prevent him doing ANYTHING when they know we have absolutely no threat in behind them whatsoever ? Mertesacker and Vermaelen only needed one to jump and one to sweep up in front of him, and that was it. With the rest of the team miles back, he was never going to have the time to win the ball, get it down, hold it up and link play. Against Man U it worked because the supporting players were in and around, on Saturday they were way too far back and Arsenal's CBs (unlike Vidic and Ferdinand) were able to sweep up everything.

 

It is SO much easier to be a target man if there's the chance you can get it down and create something for yourself, or peel in behind occasionally so your markers have to consider dropping off sometimes instead of attacking every header.

[Sour Mash]

Re: "leaving Lambert isolated".

 

Significant differences between "linking Lambert" against Man U and "isolated Lambert" v Arsenal, all because the midfield was further back and the defenders played the second ball much more intelligently.

 

I know I'm going to get the usual "you hate Lambert" nonsense for this, but how easy is it for Arsenal to prevent him doing ANYTHING when they know we have absolutely no threat in behind them whatsoever ? Mertesacker and Vermaelen only needed one to jump and one to sweep up in front of him, and that was it. With the rest of the team miles back, he was never going to have the time to win the ball, get it down, hold it up and link play. Against Man U it worked because the supporting players were in and around, on Saturday they were way too far back and Arsenal's CBs (unlike Vidic and Ferdinand) were able to sweep up everything.

 

It is SO much easier to be a target man if there's the chance you can get it down and create something for yourself, or peel in behind occasionally so your markers have to consider dropping off sometimes instead of attacking every header.

True, but that's more the fault of our midfield being anonymous against Arsenal than much to do with Lambert.

[Andy Durman]

Excellent piece. From that I conclude that throughout the game the team is being let down by Puncheon, Fox and Davis. Fox and Davis arent good enough for me, and I wonder if Puncheon is starting to get too cosy. For me the criticisms of Schneiderlin and Clyne will be solved by hard work and expereience, and Yoshida for me is almost blameless - he's only just got here.

 

I take a bit of heart from your comments about Fonte though; if the Davis and Fox issues are dealt with somehow, and he develops a good understanding with Yoshida quickly, there's hope.

 

Blameless except Yoshida was to blame for Third Goal!!!!!

[Andy Durman]

Just how good a manager is NA? Well we are about to see and this is back to the walls time. Personally I think he will prove that he's an excellent manager and that he can learn fast. Fingers crossed. Not sure if we go down how quickly we will get out of the Championship.

 

In NA I trust!!!

[The9]

True, but that's more the fault of our midfield being anonymous against Arsenal than much to do with Lambert.

 

It is and it isn't. If he offers a threat himself it becomes much more difficult that to just stand two people next to him to compete the header and pick up the loose ball. Vidic and Ferdinand could have done the same but chose to sit goalside with only one of them competing the header - that allowed Lambert to pick up the loose ball himself and get the rest of the team involved in the opposition's half, which Arsenal only allowed once (we scored from that too).

 

If we're going to play the "long ball to target man" which we we so keen to do for the last 15 minutes against Man U, then he has to be someone who can threaten behind or it's just too predictable. Every other direct side that does that has a pacy target man - even Holt can spin in behind. Maybe not Steve Morison, come to think of it. But the likes of Bent, Papis Cisse, Demba Ba, Pogrebnyak, Rodallega, even Andy Carroll can go in behind.

 

Without that option, we're stuck playing "facing the wrong way football" up front, hoping for the knockdown to go somewhere good so we can get possession high up the pitch. As it happens, our goal came from the usual "Lambert to feet, out to the wing, cross to the far post" routine again, the one time we had the ball under control in Arsenal's half. That wasn't happening often enough - but as you've said, it was fine at home to Man U when the support was there.

 

The key to our season so far has been getting the ball far enough up the pitch to get Lambert into the box with bodies around him to pick up loose balls. Kind of ironic for a side used to keeping possession.

[tajjuk]

Just one input into the "Midfield Set Up" debate.

 

From my lofty position sitting at the bar in the pub, it seemed to me that AL & JP became drawn into a deeper 4-5-1 than we had perhaps planned and picked a side for.

 

By being drawn back, they left RL alone up front with virtually no close support in the early part of the game. Any balls up towards him were a piece of cake for the two CB's and there were no supporting players in range to pick up any second balls. In fact I would add JWP into that criticism.

 

So anytime we picked the ball up it was heading back from space in front of our MF 5 with plenty of chances for the two FB's to have acres of space to join the attacks and time for Arsenal's MF to play the perfect ball.

 

Second half (when Arsenal had re-tuned to a practice game) JWP started to play further up the pitch and started to find Saints players with his passing skills, in the first half he looked like a 17 year old Kid on a Saga Holiday.

 

So while the MF shape may have been right (who is Gary Neville?) (that's an overseas fans response btw) they were too deep, and somehow ALL AND JP ended up being in never never land - they weren't supporting RL & holding the ball up in their final 3rd and they sure as hell weren't helping out either FB as seen from the goals.

 

The only "evidence" I have in my input is HT stat 42% of the game was played in OUR final 3rd of the pitch.

 

Somehow, someone in MF chickened out of the role they were SUPPOSED to play and sat too deep. NA showed this with his repeated attempts to wave players forward.

 

We compressed ourselves, set up went to pot and we let them play.

 

Do that against ANY team in the PL and we will get walloped

 

I mainly agree, similar to away at Man City the whole team was set up to defend deep, yet this leaves Lambert isolated and the midfield far too much to do between supporting him and closing Arsenal down, so essentially we just let them have the ball easily in front of us with no real pressure. Against Man Utd our defensive line was much higher and this allowed us to press all over the pitch, when we regained possession form Utd we were in their half, even their third. Against Arsenal when we did get the ball back we were always in our third with few options, especially as we don't have the ball over the top option with RL up front.

 

Another point is that as far as I could tell we had no width, both AL and JP played very narrow and got involved in areas where our central midfielders were, see the first goal for example were Puncheon is in no mans land, makes a half aresed takcle in central midfield and leaves the whole left hand side of the pitch for Gibbs to attack.

 

Neville wasn't at the game, so his word is hardly gospel.

Yes the goals may have come from errors, though that's more or less true of every goal conceded (its a matter of degree). More importantly Arsenal worked lots of similar situations and our midfield, played a large role in our undoing. Watching or analysing a few highlights gives you no sense of that.

 

We conceded 6 goals, that's a lot even against a good team. To defend well you have to always be on it, 6 goals conceded showed in the large that people weren't doing their jobs. It;s not also about one or two errors but a catalogue of them. Arsenal's goals were not from great play, they were not made to work for their goals but instead gifted the openings due to several errors from several players.

 

seven of the 14 goals we have conceded have occured in the last 15 mins of each game (2 in each of Manu Manc and Arsenal and 1 against Wigan). Are we still not fit enough as a team or are we doing too much in the first 75 mins, which means we are falling away at the end?

 

Against Man Utd I think we had tired minds, we had been franticly closing them down all over the pitch. Against Arsenal however these errors were early in the game, and as pointed out at several occasions our midfield is standing around letting Arsenal play the ball about, this is in the first half so they can't have been tired. Again the situations where people let runners go un-tracked is in the first half and again is laziness not fitness

[The9]

Blameless except Yoshida was to blame for Third Goal!!!!!

 

Fonte as well, for being too far away to cover his CB partner, and Yoshida for getting spun and not chasing back flat out. And Kelv a bit. Along with whoever in the midfield was meant to be stopping the ball being played forward (very similar to the Tevez goal actually).

[The9]

I thought Puncheon was pretty poor on Saturday, his usual reaction to a good performance, like the one he had agaisnt Man U. He's just not a player who likes doing the work towards his own goal.

[Hedge End Ranger]

Absolutly. Well said.

You cant keep giving the ball away and expect a team as good as Arsenal not to open you up.

 

Is Ricky the right player to play up on his own in a game like this?

Just one input into the "Midfield Set Up" debate.

 

From my lofty position sitting at the bar in the pub, it seemed to me that AL & JP became drawn into a deeper 4-5-1 than we had perhaps planned and picked a side for.

 

By being drawn back, they left RL alone up front with virtually no close support in the early part of the game. Any balls up towards him were a piece of cake for the two CB's and there were no supporting players in range to pick up any second balls. In fact I would add JWP into that criticism.

 

So anytime we picked the ball up it was heading back from space in front of our MF 5 with plenty of chances for the two FB's to have acres of space to join the attacks and time for Arsenal's MF to play the perfect ball.

 

Second half (when Arsenal had re-tuned to a practice game) JWP started to play further up the pitch and started to find Saints players with his passing skills, in the first half he looked like a 17 year old Kid on a Saga Holiday.

 

So while the MF shape may have been right (who is Gary Neville?) (that's an overseas fans response btw) they were too deep, and somehow ALL AND JP ended up being in never never land - they weren't supporting RL & holding the ball up in their final 3rd and they sure as hell weren't helping out either FB as seen from the goals.

 

The only "evidence" I have in my input is HT stat 42% of the game was played in OUR final 3rd of the pitch.

 

Somehow, someone in MF chickened out of the role they were SUPPOSED to play and sat too deep. NA showed this with his repeated attempts to wave players forward.

 

We compressed ourselves, set up went to pot and we let them play.

 

Do that against ANY team in the PL and we will get walloped

[The9]

Would I get a hammering on here if I said "the 451 at Arsenal with Lambert up top showed what could have happened at the Etihad against City if we'd started with him there" ?

[up and away]

Neville said, and clearly demonstrated that the midfield setup was fine, actually, good.

 

Defensive shape and individual errors were costly with some poor keeping added to the mix.

 

Off the top of my head I can only really think of Di Santo's goal for Wigan that realistically was a 'good' goal - all of the others we have condeded are down to defensive errors - mostly basic individual mistakes in positioning and marking.

 

I deliberately have stayed away from blaming individuals (apart from Kelvins positioning for the free kick) because the whole team were not doing their jobs. It was a domino effect from the start of the attack where someone gets space they should have been denied, the next person not knowing where to cover, with the holes getting bigger the more the move advances. If the first person presses intelligently the second line has a far easier job, simples.

 

The team got caught out by Arsenal because of partly what they had experienced with ManU and ManC. Arsenal drove down rhe flanks far more and pressed our team from the start with a more defensive set upto nullify us. Not a recognised front pair of strikers to mark but players coming through the midfield into space. When Ricky gets isolated as he did, there is little point in playing him. He does not have the pace to keep their defence honest and most of the time can be disregarded as an attacking threat, allowing them to push us back at will. Adkins said he was going to address the issue of players lasting for 95 minutes. He did that but in the process we started offf too far off the pace. Just too many over corrections from our previous games.

[maysie]

Would I get a hammering on here if I said "the 451 at Arsenal with Lambert up top showed what could have happened at the Etihad against City if we'd started with him there" ?

 

Probably,if you are blaming Lambert for our woeful defensive display.

[The9]

Probably,if you are blaming Lambert for our woeful defensive display.

 

Keeping possession (which we did at the Etihad with Lallana and Rodriguez dribbling down the left) is a handy way of stopping the opposition attacking.

[david in sweden]

part of last season's success....and a while before that, was the great service that the strikers got from.... overlapping full backs who could center well into the box.

I did see some stat. that said Fox gave 11 assists last season...and the figure for Richardson was not far behind that.

 

Suddenly, we're saying (someone) is a good full back because he can attack, but a bad defender when he gets caught upfield, or doesn't have the pace to track back and tackle a fast-moving winger. !

 

...If he's a defender, shouldn't he be rooted in his own penalty area all the time ? (someone suggested) .and NEVER cross the halfway line !

Well ..we had decades of full backs like that, and that wasn't any better then. I really don't know what we are supposed to expect from our defenders.

Much of the criticism of the goals in the threads above - was placed on our midfield players !..and not the defenders.

 

We don't mind when they put pin-point crosses in to the box....and someone scores, but criticise them like h*ll ...when they can't tackle back.

Anyone who suggests we were bad on saturday because we couldn't take care of Ox should think back a bit to when he was in our first team. He was almost unplayable then, and he's even better now.

 

Present day formations rely on strikers dropping back to defend.. . and full backs who can attack. It doesn't always work..even Rickie conceded an own goal last season whilst trying to help defend.

When playing against sides like Arsenal ....it is always going to be difficult, the number of times we've won at Highbury (during our prev. 27 year Prem. spell) ... can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

Edited 18 September, 2012 by david in sweden

[rooney]

Tajjuk's coments about our Players didnt know who they were supposed to be marking is very relevant. In the close-up TV shots they looked bewildered at times. Arsenal were certainly on song but our players did not look like this against Man City and Man U. Perhaps the occasion and size of Stadium got to them but certainly a win V Wigan is so important now to breed confidence.The reality check is that the Premier League is so much different than the Championship.

[yateleysaint]

Sorry if I've missed this but I don't think anyone has mentioned that Steve Davis gave away a needless free kick after the ball had gone. KD's positioning was poor but the free kick should never have been conceded.

[Sour Mash]

Would I get a hammering on here if I said "the 451 at Arsenal with Lambert up top showed what could have happened at the Etihad against City if we'd started with him there" ?

I'd watch that Man City game back again if I was you. City created even more chances than Arsenal, the only thing that stopped City scoring six or more was their woeful finishing.

[dubai_phil]

Would I get a hammering on here if I said "the 451 at Arsenal with Lambert up top showed what could have happened at the Etihad against City if we'd started with him there" ?

 

It's a fair point. At Citeh Guly at least had more "threat from his movement" than Rickie would have for CB's. However it did not take them long to realise that they just had to let him have the ball .

 

Personally in the first 15 mins at Citeh I think if we had had Lambert on the pitch we would have scored, we had a lot of play in their 3rd.

 

Against any team, Lambert will struggle IF our midfield lose confidence and sit too deep. But then TBF just about ANY current PL striker would have the same issue, they cannot do anything without a football and even the paciest strikers struggle to win every 40 yard hoof and beat an entire defence on their own. It might happen for them a few times in a season but as a match day tactic...????

 

Still believe it was the depth that our MF sat in, not their shape and I put that down to being very young, very inexperienced and not having a wise old head in there. Perhaps AWAY from home instead of 1-2-3-4 more of a 1-1-3-1-4.

 

I also think that NA & his team will have been working on that depth/confidence issue all week in training and still see us playing some teams off the park this year. The ONE thing we do have in our team now are players with brains who will learn, the issue is how quickly that happens.

 

Or of course, perhaps we just missed Guly........

[tajjuk]

 

Much of the criticism of the goals in the threads above - was placed on our midfield players !..and not the defenders.

 

 

Correct, I attribute a lot of the blame to the goals that cam from breaks down our right to Puncheon not tracking Gibbs, the first goal essentially cam from this because Gibbs was allowed a free run in behind our defence. Our central midfield also gave the Arsenal midfield, particularly Arteta and Corzola far too much time and space.

 

 

We don't mind when they put pin-point crosses in to the box....and someone scores, but criticise them like h*ll ...when they can't tackle back.

Anyone who suggests we were bad on saturday because we couldn't take care of Ox should think back a bit to when he was in our first team. He was almost unplayable then, and he's even better now.

 

 

Modern full backs do both, this isn't an unreasonable expectation, however this isn't what I criticised them for. It was their marking/closing down/tracking of players when they were already in good defensive positions, not when they were running back after an attack.

 

 

 

 

Present day formations rely on strikers dropping back to defend.. . and full backs who can attack. It doesn't always work..even Rickie conceded an own goal last season whilst trying to help defend.

When playing against sides like Arsenal ....it is always going to be difficult, the number of times we've won at Highbury (during our prev. 27 year Prem. spell) ... can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

 

Agree, although RL only really would have a defensive duty from set pieces due to his height. In general play though both wide men have defensive duties, they should be tracking back turning the 4-3-3 into a 4-5-1 when we don't have the ball. This didn't happen on Saturday particularly with Puncheon.

 

I also agree it was a long shot to beat Arsenal at home, however we also made it too easy for them, we conceded 6 goals when we essentially played a very defensive, deep lying formation with 10 men behind the ball. That is poor, other teams will go to Arsenal playing that way and frustrate them, not wave a sign that says 'run through here for an easy goal'.

 

I have come the conclusion that we can't play this way. We have tried it in both away games, tried to sit deep, get men behind the ball (the traditional small club v big club park the bus) and yet have given away far too many chances (City could have scored a lot more in the first half, Arsenal scored 4 and it could have been more). Yet when we press high, actually play more positively like we did at home to Utd, the opposition get far less chances and we score goals. We need to adopt this approach for all our games, whilst we might tire and give away chances against the likes of Utd, we might catch the 'lesser' big teams (Spurs, Liverpool) off guard away from home, and we could potentially blow away some of the teams around us. Our players look happier doing it, we score goals and we concede less chances.

 

The old adage of 'attack is the best form of defence' seems to be very true of our team.

Edited 19 September, 2012 by tajjuk

[Wes Tender]

Sorry if I've missed this but I don't think anyone has mentioned that Steve Davis gave away a needless free kick after the ball had gone. KD's positioning was poor but the free kick should never have been conceded.

 

Absolutely. It is naive to think that the type of players available to Arsenal would not put away a free kick more often than not and a player of Davis' experience really ought to have known better. So that is certainly one goal that probably wouldn't have happened. Add in the two own goals and that is three of their six that may not have been scored on another day. But the defending was really poor for their other goals. Had Cork been available, we might have made it a bit harder for them