Our wingers

[cricketfieldclarets]

Are they coached / instructed to go backwards rather than try and be skillful or direct?

I alwys saw Brady and JBG as attacking, creative wingers. But for us it seems theyre told to hold position and cut back.

Same with Boyd and Kightly who before us were always tricky, quick and offered a regular goal threat.

Brady was very frustrating today but cant help thinking its instructions hindering our wwingers not talent.

[lovebeingaclaret]

Seriously lacking pace.

[dougcollins]

We don't have wingers, neither does anybody else.

Right back and left back are your wingers.

[wilks_bfc]

The thing is by playing them on opposite wings they have no choice but to cut back.

It really frustrating when a play beats his man, gets to the touch line, then comes back to get the cross in.

The only time having a winger on the wrong side is if they drive in to have a shot - which ours don't

[FactualFrank]

Seriously lacking pace.

Summed up well. Wells isnt a winger. He performs best with a strong target man alongside in a 442 but he might be forced into it.

[Bin Ont Turf]

No they aren't coached to go backwards or instructed to.

If there's nowt in front of you or making a run then there's only so much running with the ball that you can do before you lose it.

Hence the backwards pass to keep possession.

[Barry_Chuckle]

"I always saw Brady and JBG as attacking, creative wingers"

They were and then they signed for us.

[Steve1956]

I think Brady needs to warm the bench for a while, running out of patience with this guy, is he ever going to justify that price tag?

[The Enclosure]

What wingers?

[piston broke]

Mentioned on a thread the other day.
Bradys pea roller to their keeper would have been over him and into the far top corner from any number of league 1 or 2players
Anybody who watchs the goal round up shows sees that all the time.

[Quickenthetempo]

It was the full backs that were poor today for me in an attacking sense. When the widemen are on opposite wings then the full backs need to get forward.
Time for Taylor to start in the home games.

[MDWat]

I think Brady needs to warm the bench for a while, running out of patience with this guy, is he ever going to justify that price tag?

Created 33% of our chances this season, scored 2 excellent goals, got a couple of assists. He's frustrating but he's bound to be. Give him a chance.

[claretspice]

You can only pick the ball up and run forwards if you don't have your opposite number up your backside when you get the ball. If he is up your backside, the only thing you can do is to get your body between him and the ball. You then either lay it backwards or try and spin the defender, which is a tactic you can only use intermittently.

And that's why our wingers tend to play backwards. They tend to receive the ball with the defender in close attendance. Sometimes that is deliberate, to create space for the full back where the opposing full back would otherwise be, and to some extent that is a function of the modern game whereby full backs are seen as the outside backs in attacking play. But its also because in part because we don't move the ball that quickly - even Defour doesn't have a raking cross field pass in his locker - and also because our wingers don't have the pace to run onto a ball played inside their marker.

I'm sure if we got them the ball in acres, Brady, JBG and Arfield would all look to go forwards. In fact, they do. But partly because of their limitations, partly because of the way the game is played these days, and partly because of our limitations as a team, they don't get that chance that often.

We rely on our full backs to give the real width, but the problem we had today was that on our right, we had no "winger" to fix the full back in the first place, so apart from once at the end of the first half we didn't ever manage to spring Lowton in behind the full back. They were pretty comfortably able to focus on cutting down our space down our left hand side.

[Steve1956]

Created 33% of our chances this season, scored 2 excellent goals, got a couple of assists. He's frustrating but he's bound to be. Give him a chance.

I hate criticising any of our players he's been with us long enough now to prove himself, he hasn't justified that 13 million pound transfer fee though has he?

[dougcollins]

Jeez spice, it took you all that to say what I said in #3.

[Ric_C]

Think I read somewhere this week that Brady has created 13 chances for us this season, the next on the list... Defour on 4

Make of that what you will

I agree he is frustrating though

[claretspice]

Jeez spice, it took you all that to say what I said in #3.

Nah, you made on point that I agree with and have reiterated, but I've also made a few other points besides.

[daveisaclaret]

Dyche has a very specific view of wingers, and one that's seen him right. Scott Arfield is the embodiment of it. They are players who can support their full backs first, can complement their central midfield second and can attack third. It's been a massively successful model but it's been a model that everyone other than Scott Arfield has taken time to settle into. Even when George Boyd signed and started running a mile further than anyone else in the league.

Gudmondsson is a pure attacking winger, Brady is a massively inconsistent winger but decent ex-left back. I'm sure there are reasons Dyche thinks they can come over to his system, I've no reason to believe he won't be right, but we're still in a position where they don't really fit.

[dougcollins]

Only jesting spice.

I like reading your stuff tbh.

[boatshed bill]

Summed up well. Wells isnt a winger. He performs best with a strong target man alongside in a 442 but he might be forced into it.

I can't see that, Frank. Our "wingers" have to have defensive quailties, Wells will surely play off a target man as a second forward.

[KRBFC]

Its absolutely a system thing hindering the wide players and has been since Dyche arrived. Our defence and midfield play so deep the wide players end up defending in our own third and have to run the length of the pitch to attack often with very little support. Wood was so isolated today because the defensive line was so deep, an enormous gap between midfield and front because the midfield had to drop back because the defence didnt push out.

[KRBFC]

If you push the defensive line up to the halfway line the game can only be played in the opponents half. Press high and end up with bodies forward around a lone striker. Compact the pitch and dictate the game by playing inside the opponents half. That big carthorse striker of Huddersfields had absolutely no pace to stretch us in behind yet we decide to sit off thus isolating our own striker.

[claretspice]

I can't see that, Frank. Our "wingers" have to have defensive quailties, Wells will surely play off a target man as a second forward.

I think Wells played wide a fair bit in a 433 for Huddersfield last season with some success.

Clearly, if he played there, we'd have to tweak thr framework slightly. But its easy to imagine how it might work to give him the freedom to make runs inside beyond the striker, whilst Hendrick has a brief to drift wide to cover the gap.

Thats the sort of flexibility weve got to embrace to improve and get our best players on the pitch. No reason why Dyche shouldn't embrace it.

[daveisaclaret]

Its absolutely a system thing hindering the wide players and has been since Dyche arrived. Our defence and midfield play so deep the wide players end up defending in our own third and have to run the length of the pitch to attack often with very little support. Wood was so isolated today because the defensive line was so deep, an enormous gap between midfield and front because the midfield had to drop back because the defence didnt push out.

Bit wary of responding to a troll but do you not think the club's trajectory since hiring Dyche justifies hindering the wingers?

[boatshed bill]

I think Wells played wide a fair bit in a 433 for Huddersfield last season with some success.

Clearly, if he played there, we'd have to tweak thr framework slightly. But its easy to imagine how it might work to give him the freedom to make runs inside beyond the striker, whilst Hendrick has a brief to drift wide to cover the gap.

Thats the sort of flexibility weve got to embrace to improve and get our best players on the pitch. No reason why Dyche shouldn't embrace it.

I can't see us ever playing 4-3-3, Spice. Who would be detailed to track back? A point well made by KRBFC's analysis on this thread BTW.

[daveisaclaret]

I can't see us ever playing 4-3-3, Spice. Who would be detailed to track back? A point well made by KRBFC's analysis on this thread BTW.

What do you think we were playing today?

[boatshed bill]

What do you think we were playing today?

Didn't see the game.
But who did the tracking back? And does this tactic mean that they can't get forward quickly enough to really have an impact as forwards in a 3?

[daveisaclaret]

Didn't see the game

I'm sorry to announce we attempted an approximation of a 4-3-3

[claretspice]

I can't see us ever playing 4-3-3, Spice. Who would be detailed to track back? A point well made by KRBFC's analysis on this thread BTW.

We disagree then. I don't see why Dyche wouldnt embrace that sort of change away from two banks of 4. I don't see why any manager would be that inflexible, especially one with aspirations to manage at a higher level. Dyche's requirement will be to ensure the full back is covered - I think its unfair to imply he can only countenance one way of achieving that.

Dave - id describe our set up today as 4411, but you'd be right to say Arfield had plenty if licence.

[tiger76]

Think I read somewhere this week that Brady has created 13 chances for us this season, the next on the list... Defour on 4

Make of that what you will

I agree he is frustrating though

I suspect most of those chances were from set pieces, and not open play though,the problem is no-one can take games like today by the scruff of the neck, and create something out of nothing,fortunately we are defending solidly to gain results,the lack of creativity is an issue despite the points total.

[boatshed bill]

We disagree then. I don't see why Dyche wouldnt embrace that sort of change away from two banks of 4. I don't see why any manager would be that inflexible, especially one with aspirations to manage at a higher level. Dyche's requirement will be to ensure the full back is covered - I think its unfair to imply he can only countenance one way of achieving that.

Dave - id describe our set up today as 4411, but you'd be right to say Arfield had plenty if licence.

Spice, I'll get to watch it later. What always impresses me is how quickly and accurately we pull back in two lines of four when defending, which is why I doubt our validity in a 4-3-3.
I like 4-5-1, but in effect we play 4-4-1-1, because we do that excellent two banks of four in defence

[daveisaclaret]

Dave - id describe our set up today as 4411, but you'd be right to say Arfield had plenty if licence.

Definitely semantics and nothing more to talk in numbers, but imo the main part is Hendrick was a midfielder and nothing more

[claretspice]

I think the problem today was largely that Hendrick was playing ahead of the midfield 4 as the 'one' behind the striker. Withdraw him so he's playing less with his back to goal and release someone pacier than Arfield to play a bit higher up on the right flank (Wells when fit?), and i reckon the team set up feels very different. But you're right, thr tweak is still relatively small.

[Spijed]

I think the problem today was largely that Hendrick was playing ahead of the midfield 4 as the 'one' behind the striker. Withdraw him so he's playing less with his back to goal and release someone pacier than Arfield to play a bit higher up on the right flank (Wells when fit?), and i reckon the team set up feels very different. But you're right, thr tweak is still relatively small.

The curious thing is that we created far more against West Brom, a team with far more PL experience than Huddersfield.

[Wo Didi]

Bit wary of responding to a troll but do you not think the club's trajectory since hiring Dyche justifies hindering the wingers?

Exactly. It's as if someone else has done all the hard work getting us into the premier league, not to mention all the off the pitch development too only for Sean Dyche to turn up and ruin it all, it's madness. Where we would be had he not joined us when he did is anybody's guess but I doubt we'd be starting a second successive year in the prem.

[Sfw]

This is not a slight at Sean Dyche and his tactics, but I remember a similar thread in previous two seasons. George Boyd was regularly criticised for not being an out and out wide man. It doesn't really matter who we play on the wing regarding an attacking threat because it goes against shape we set up. Now we play with three central midfielders (2 holding) it's imperative we get our full backs and wingers further up and providing chances for wood or vokes. Just hitting balls up from all angles is no good

[KRBFC]

Bit wary of responding to a troll but do you not think the club's trajectory since hiring Dyche justifies hindering the wingers?

My comment was criticism based on games like Yesterday when we are at home and teams sit deep and we struggle to break them down. I'm not sure why you instantly jumped on the defence like I was attacking Dyches entire Burnley career. The 442 system has worked throughout Dyches time here but he's given that up and adopted a system to retain more of the ball but we are still not quite there in terms of creativity when we do have the ball Imo and I believe its down to the expected work from the wide players and the real lack of a spark centrally. I'm sure you can form your own opinion and I certainly won't be calling you a troll if I disagree with your thoughts on the inability to break teams down.

[claret10]

Brady is frustrating but my feeling is at least he is involved enough to he seen as frustrating. Not sure any of our other options have contributed enough yet. We would create even less without Robbie in the team I fear