Porro & Udogie Have The Same Flaw

Is Werner is our second highest earner ? Gutting if true

He should never have been bought back

If there was any player I’d want in down the left it’s Mitoma

comment by Blackpolespur (U9242)
posted 5 hours, 22 minutes ago
Is Werner is our second highest earner ? Gutting if true

He should never have been bought back

If there was any player I’d want in down the left it’s Mitoma
----------------------------------------------------------------------

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 13 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 3 hours, 56 minutes ago
We have a very good back four...
Porro, Romero, VDV, Udogie.
Injuries etc aside, this is as good a back four as any in the league.
But the problem lies with how they are expected to play by their manager.
If they are told "all out attack" and leave Romero & VDV to defend... then Porro & Udogie can be caught upfield by the long ball over the top played to very good wingers like Mitoma. Actually Porro did quite well against him, but it was not always successful. I would call it a draw between the two.

I remember thinking during the Brighton match that we could do with Mitoma!

Our midfield let us down in the second half, again due to the "attack at all times" management directive.
At 0-2 up it was time to play more defensively and depend on counter attack.
Yes, we could have had more goals in first half, but at half-time you change tactics to suit what you've got....a good game position and let the opposition take the risks.


----------------------------------------------------------------------


SO this attack at all times directive you talk about.

When Wellbeck scores their third, whoever crossed it in got to the byeline and it was Benatncur, a midfielder, also on the byeline who failed to stop the cross.

If you rewatch the game, look at the moment that the crosser beats Udogie and drives for the byeline. We have all 11 players in or on the edge of the box.. No one more than 20 yards from our goal. Bentacur, deep in our box, comes over to cover the cross but makes a really weak attempt. This summed up that second half for me, BHA really wanted it, their player drove forward and full stretch got a great cross in, meanwhile Bentancur almost jumped out of teh challenge and Wellbeck, marked by 2 easily lost a sleeping Romero to score.

So this "all out attack directive" clearly wasnt being followed by the players for their 3rd goal.

1st goal - Mitoma gets the ball down our right and has Porro for company and Romero as back up. 2 defenders in the middle, with 2 attackers. Udogie takes up a good position to stop their back post attacker....but then totally fluffs his clearance.

So again, how is this "all out attack directive" impacting our defending here. If Udogie puts his laces through the ball then it stays 2-0.

Their equaliser is pretty good play from BHA and in this instance comes from a poor press from us, standing off them in possession, letting them play out from the back under no pressure. Deki stands off, BJ lets their FB go free. These are the sorts of details that need to trigger action. If Deki is not in teh face of the ball carrier, then BJ has to drop with their FB. For me that's not a function of any sort of "all out attack" approach, its a result of switching off. We weren't caught with all our players up field, we were caught with all our players marking space and not pressing. BJ is usually very diligent at tracking his runner so this isnt an ongoing issues that he hangs around up front and doesnt work hard enough.

The narrative that we are losing games or conceding goals because we are an aggressive attacking team who only know how to all out attack is totally baseless. Lazy, ill-informed labelling of our issues that totally fails to understand what is actually happening on the pitch.


------ t----------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. If we were set up better to defend the last gasp situations you describe wouldn't happen.

comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 10 hours, 17 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 13 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 3 hours, 56 minutes ago
We have a very good back four...
Porro, Romero, VDV, Udogie.
Injuries etc aside, this is as good a back four as any in the league.
But the problem lies with how they are expected to play by their manager.
If they are told "all out attack" and leave Romero & VDV to defend... then Porro & Udogie can be caught upfield by the long ball over the top played to very good wingers like Mitoma. Actually Porro did quite well against him, but it was not always successful. I would call it a draw between the two.

I remember thinking during the Brighton match that we could do with Mitoma!

Our midfield let us down in the second half, again due to the "attack at all times" management directive.
At 0-2 up it was time to play more defensively and depend on counter attack.
Yes, we could have had more goals in first half, but at half-time you change tactics to suit what you've got....a good game position and let the opposition take the risks.


----------------------------------------------------------------------


SO this attack at all times directive you talk about.

When Wellbeck scores their third, whoever crossed it in got to the byeline and it was Benatncur, a midfielder, also on the byeline who failed to stop the cross.

If you rewatch the game, look at the moment that the crosser beats Udogie and drives for the byeline. We have all 11 players in or on the edge of the box.. No one more than 20 yards from our goal. Bentacur, deep in our box, comes over to cover the cross but makes a really weak attempt. This summed up that second half for me, BHA really wanted it, their player drove forward and full stretch got a great cross in, meanwhile Bentancur almost jumped out of teh challenge and Wellbeck, marked by 2 easily lost a sleeping Romero to score.

So this "all out attack directive" clearly wasnt being followed by the players for their 3rd goal.

1st goal - Mitoma gets the ball down our right and has Porro for company and Romero as back up. 2 defenders in the middle, with 2 attackers. Udogie takes up a good position to stop their back post attacker....but then totally fluffs his clearance.

So again, how is this "all out attack directive" impacting our defending here. If Udogie puts his laces through the ball then it stays 2-0.

Their equaliser is pretty good play from BHA and in this instance comes from a poor press from us, standing off them in possession, letting them play out from the back under no pressure. Deki stands off, BJ lets their FB go free. These are the sorts of details that need to trigger action. If Deki is not in teh face of the ball carrier, then BJ has to drop with their FB. For me that's not a function of any sort of "all out attack" approach, its a result of switching off. We weren't caught with all our players up field, we were caught with all our players marking space and not pressing. BJ is usually very diligent at tracking his runner so this isnt an ongoing issues that he hangs around up front and doesnt work hard enough.

The narrative that we are losing games or conceding goals because we are an aggressive attacking team who only know how to all out attack is totally baseless. Lazy, ill-informed labelling of our issues that totally fails to understand what is actually happening on the pitch.


------ t----------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. If we were set up better to defend the last gasp situations you describe wouldn't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What last gasp situations?

Which of BHA goals were last gasp situations?

comment by look like modric (U7431)
posted 17 hours, 7 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by look like modric (U7431)
posted 3 minutes ago
Just on the subject of the defence we offer too little protection.

There has been a change this season where a midfielder will sit deeper Biss or Bentancur. So there was some attempt to address it at least.

We are far too easy to play through like a wafer. We are spread too far across the pitch. Love the idea of using the full pitch but we need two defensive midfielders who sit in order to make this work.

Alas any other manager in the league gets better results out of Porro/udogie/vdv and Romero. Even Dyche who would put them in a god awful low block.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I dont fully agree with this.

Poor goals conceded this season have been crosses by Leicester, 2 crosses from BHA, corner from Arsenal, and the bad high line with Romero not tracking a runner vs NUFC.

I agree we could be more defensive, but fundamentally i don't think its a lack of protection when you analyse where the goals come from.

If we start with 2 DM then the whole approach to how we attack changes. I feel we have to accept the set up and the approach and just have to rely on the team executing properly, which, judging by the many errors leading to goals, they are not doing so currently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the Murphy/isak goal is the classic 3 passes and your in against an Ange side which i always go on about.

The real culprits of the goal was Bissouma and Kulu. Both out of position centrally allowing the ball to go through them taking out 6 players.

It is the whole way we play which is naive kids in the playground.

When you really delve deep in the stats they are so so good but with a high possesion percentage we should control a game but we do not. Stats like.... tackled with take ons are a clear signal we are in the bottom 4 with palace everton brentford where players run through us like butter.

The problem is the balance and positioning in the centre not actually the defence in my opinion.

The problem is tactically and lies with the manager. Only Werner is truly underperforming. Unfair to single him out but he is our second highest earner should be a star player.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

We have let in 1 goal like the Isak goal and the vast majority of goals from crosses. To me the ability to get down teh side of us and get crosses in is a bigger concern and one that is borne out by the stats - Leicester, Arsenal, Newcastle, Brighton (2) Brentford all from crosses. 2 through the middle including 1 on a counter. Further, you could account for Leicester, Newcastle, Arsenal and Brighton(2) goals as resulting from big individual errors - 5 of 8 goals.

What you are basically asking for is the ceasing of the press.

Instead of going man to man, you want players sitting off the opposition, shielding the back 4.

What the Isak goal is is an example of a poor execution of the press and then poor decision making by Romero. If you changed Deki & Bissouma's position to be in front of the back 4 (and Biss already was) then nothing changes when Joelinton breaks the press IF Romero makes the same decisions in terms of his positioning, body shape and decision step up and not track Murphy.

You could look at any team who plays a high line, pause it at a certain moment and see potential for an attack. It happens ALL the time. It isnt tactical naivety to play a high press, to have your no.10 pressing their deep lying CM, to have the other 2 CMs picked up by ours in the middle of the park. It is the minor details of what went wrong in that moment, the actions and decisions of a couple individuals that allowed for a one ball through situation, not a flawed system.

Show me a team that sets up with 2 DMs shielding the back 4 that also effectively completes a press. Even when City have kovacic and Rodri in the same midfield, they don't just park themselves in the CM standing off the opposition, they are as active in their press as everyone else is. But even Ipswich scored a break away goal against them. The high press is risk and reward but is totally dependant on each individual executing their role in it.

Devon do you type your comments on a laptop? They’re always so lengthy!

comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
Devon do you type your comments on a laptop? They’re always so lengthy!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah, mostly

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
Devon do you type your comments on a laptop? They’re always so lengthy!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah, mostly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought so!

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 14 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 10 hours, 17 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 13 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 3 hours, 56 minutes ago
We have a very good back four...
Porro, Romero, VDV, Udogie.
Injuries etc aside, this is as good a back four as any in the league.
But the problem lies with how they are expected to play by their manager.
If they are told "all out attack" and leave Romero & VDV to defend... then Porro & Udogie can be caught upfield by the long ball over the top played to very good wingers like Mitoma. Actually Porro did quite well against him, but it was not always successful. I would call it a draw between the two.

I remember thinking during the Brighton match that we could do with Mitoma!

Our midfield let us down in the second half, again due to the "attack at all times" management directive.
At 0-2 up it was time to play more defensively and depend on counter attack.
Yes, we could have had more goals in first half, but at half-time you change tactics to suit what you've got....a good game position and let the opposition take the risks.


----------------------------------------------------------------------


SO this attack at all times directive you talk about.

When Wellbeck scores their third, whoever crossed it in got to the byeline and it was Benatncur, a midfielder, also on the byeline who failed to stop the cross.

If you rewatch the game, look at the moment that the crosser beats Udogie and drives for the byeline. We have all 11 players in or on the edge of the box.. No one more than 20 yards from our goal. Bentacur, deep in our box, comes over to cover the cross but makes a really weak attempt. This summed up that second half for me, BHA really wanted it, their player drove forward and full stretch got a great cross in, meanwhile Bentancur almost jumped out of teh challenge and Wellbeck, marked by 2 easily lost a sleeping Romero to score.

So this "all out attack directive" clearly wasnt being followed by the players for their 3rd goal.

1st goal - Mitoma gets the ball down our right and has Porro for company and Romero as back up. 2 defenders in the middle, with 2 attackers. Udogie takes up a good position to stop their back post attacker....but then totally fluffs his clearance.

So again, how is this "all out attack directive" impacting our defending here. If Udogie puts his laces through the ball then it stays 2-0.

Their equaliser is pretty good play from BHA and in this instance comes from a poor press from us, standing off them in possession, letting them play out from the back under no pressure. Deki stands off, BJ lets their FB go free. These are the sorts of details that need to trigger action. If Deki is not in teh face of the ball carrier, then BJ has to drop with their FB. For me that's not a function of any sort of "all out attack" approach, its a result of switching off. We weren't caught with all our players up field, we were caught with all our players marking space and not pressing. BJ is usually very diligent at tracking his runner so this isnt an ongoing issues that he hangs around up front and doesnt work hard enough.

The narrative that we are losing games or conceding goals because we are an aggressive attacking team who only know how to all out attack is totally baseless. Lazy, ill-informed labelling of our issues that totally fails to understand what is actually happening on the pitch.


------ t----------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. If we were set up better to defend the last gasp situations you describe wouldn't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What last gasp situations?

Which of BHA goals were last gasp situations?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read your own descriptions. Everybody back defending...

comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 12 hours, 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 14 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 10 hours, 17 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 13 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 3 hours, 56 minutes ago
We have a very good back four...
Porro, Romero, VDV, Udogie.
Injuries etc aside, this is as good a back four as any in the league.
But the problem lies with how they are expected to play by their manager.
If they are told "all out attack" and leave Romero & VDV to defend... then Porro & Udogie can be caught upfield by the long ball over the top played to very good wingers like Mitoma. Actually Porro did quite well against him, but it was not always successful. I would call it a draw between the two.

I remember thinking during the Brighton match that we could do with Mitoma!

Our midfield let us down in the second half, again due to the "attack at all times" management directive.
At 0-2 up it was time to play more defensively and depend on counter attack.
Yes, we could have had more goals in first half, but at half-time you change tactics to suit what you've got....a good game position and let the opposition take the risks.


----------------------------------------------------------------------


SO this attack at all times directive you talk about.

When Wellbeck scores their third, whoever crossed it in got to the byeline and it was Benatncur, a midfielder, also on the byeline who failed to stop the cross.

If you rewatch the game, look at the moment that the crosser beats Udogie and drives for the byeline. We have all 11 players in or on the edge of the box.. No one more than 20 yards from our goal. Bentacur, deep in our box, comes over to cover the cross but makes a really weak attempt. This summed up that second half for me, BHA really wanted it, their player drove forward and full stretch got a great cross in, meanwhile Bentancur almost jumped out of teh challenge and Wellbeck, marked by 2 easily lost a sleeping Romero to score.

So this "all out attack directive" clearly wasnt being followed by the players for their 3rd goal.

1st goal - Mitoma gets the ball down our right and has Porro for company and Romero as back up. 2 defenders in the middle, with 2 attackers. Udogie takes up a good position to stop their back post attacker....but then totally fluffs his clearance.

So again, how is this "all out attack directive" impacting our defending here. If Udogie puts his laces through the ball then it stays 2-0.

Their equaliser is pretty good play from BHA and in this instance comes from a poor press from us, standing off them in possession, letting them play out from the back under no pressure. Deki stands off, BJ lets their FB go free. These are the sorts of details that need to trigger action. If Deki is not in teh face of the ball carrier, then BJ has to drop with their FB. For me that's not a function of any sort of "all out attack" approach, its a result of switching off. We weren't caught with all our players up field, we were caught with all our players marking space and not pressing. BJ is usually very diligent at tracking his runner so this isnt an ongoing issues that he hangs around up front and doesnt work hard enough.

The narrative that we are losing games or conceding goals because we are an aggressive attacking team who only know how to all out attack is totally baseless. Lazy, ill-informed labelling of our issues that totally fails to understand what is actually happening on the pitch.


------ t----------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. If we were set up better to defend the last gasp situations you describe wouldn't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What last gasp situations?

Which of BHA goals were last gasp situations?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read your own descriptions. Everybody back defending...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, I don't follow what you mean.