Premier League 2016-17 review: what we learned tactically from the season

[doddisalegend]

Article in the guardian nothing to in depth but it does throw up some interesting little points

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2017/may/23/premier-league-tactics-three-at-back-pressing-season

 

Unquestionably the Premier League’s dominant tactical trend was the three-man defence. A remarkable 17 of the 20 sides started with a back three at some point in the season, with only Southampton, West Bromwich and Burnley doggedly sticking to a back four.

 

While many of the bottom-half clubs remained focused on dropping deep and staying solid in two banks of four, the general trend for the bigger sides was to press aggressively in more advanced positions. Although it was relatively rare to see a full-pitch press in the Premier League, midfield zones have become based around regaining the ball as much as retaining it.

 

A few years ago, when Barcelona and Spain’s possession football was at its most revered, Premier League midfielders played calm roles, keeping their shape and using possession with care. Now everything has become considerably more frantic, based around constant sprinting, closing down and blocking off passing angles. The physical demands are extraordinary and it is notable Chelsea – like Leicester the previous season – had the benefit of no European football.

Quality in possession has taken something of a backseat and it is significant N’Golo Kante was voted the PFA player of the year. Ball-winning has rarely been so vaunted.

 

This season’s rise underlines that the majority of Premier League teams have generally played positive football. Perhaps only Middlesbrough, Sunderland and Watford were unduly negative – others may have defended deep but usually offered a sufficient counterattacking threat too.

 

The final day of the season, when the top four sides defeated the bottom four sides by an aggregate scoreline of 20-2, rather underlined the disparity and, while a high goals-per-game rate is usually celebrated as a good thing, it is worth considering the numbers in more detail. Often it is simply a sign of inequality, whereas the Premier League has marketed itself as a league where anyone can beat anyone.

[John Boy Saint]

If you go back to last December - January we were having a bit of a stinker. Koeman stopped the rot by going to a back 3 sliding Bertrand in alongside VVD allowing Targett and (probably) Martina free-er reign to slide up and down the sides.

 

Brother in Law is a Chelsea ST holder, he said that at the beginning of the season they were pants, then Conte switched to a back 3 and hey presto! He also said that the often maligned Moses suddenly was having an effective impact.

 

As I said on another thread, wouldn't mind seeing Stephens, Yoshida, and (if he is still here) VVD as a back 3 next season.

[doddisalegend]

If you go back to last December - January we were having a bit of a stinker. Koeman stopped the rot by going to a back 3 sliding Bertrand in alongside VVD allowing Targett and (probably) Martina free-er reign to slide up and down the sides.

 

Brother in Law is a Chelsea ST holder, he said that at the beginning of the season they were pants, then Conte switched to a back 3 and hey presto! He also said that the often maligned Moses suddenly was having an effective impact.

 

As I said on another thread, wouldn't mind seeing Stephens, Yoshida, and (if he is still here) VVD as a back 3 next season.

 

 

The three at the back is interesting. My recollection about Koeman was he went three at the back because we were leaking goals badly and he wanted to make us more defensively solid. The stats this season suggest our defence was pretty decent overall and we top the league for crosses so our full backs were having no problem getting forward. I guess the main thing going three at the back would have given us was two up top (assuming 3-5-2) which alot of fans wanted.

[The9]

The three at the back is interesting. My recollection about Koeman was he went three at the back because we were leaking goals badly and he wanted to make us more defensively solid. The stats this season suggest our defence was pretty decent overall and we top the league for crosses so our full backs were having no problem getting forward. I guess the main thing going three at the back would have given us was two up top (assuming 3-5-2) which alot of fans wanted.

 

We went three at the back to utilise Targett as an attacking midfielder where he seemed to thrive once he had Bertrand supporting him defensively so he was no longer torn about going forward, which he seemed reluctant to do playing from a conventional left back position. That only lasted about 3 games though as (I think) Targett got injured, and after that we had Bertrand at left wing-back and Yoshida in the back 3 which still worked but not as well - but still better than the times we played Yoshida at full back, where he made Martina look adventurous!

[Graffito]

The three at the back is interesting. My recollection about Koeman was he went three at the back because we were leaking goals badly and he wanted to make us more defensively solid. The stats this season suggest our defence was pretty decent overall and we top the league for crosses so our full backs were having no problem getting forward. I guess the main thing going three at the back would have given us was two up top (assuming 3-5-2) which alot of fans wanted.

 

I think it probably was largely for defensive reasons, with the three becoming a five when defending. We have the players for it, if we keep them. I would have liked to have seen Austin and Gabbiadini together last weekend, if only for 10 minutes, as I think two would benefit both.