Mee and Tarks
Mee and Tarks
First rule of defending is to close the space down.
How many more goals do we have to give away before they start closing the attackers down
How many more goals do we have to give away before they start closing the attackers down
-
- Posts: 18095
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
- Been Liked: 3874 times
- Has Liked: 2073 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
It's Dyches tactics to back off.
Even the hard tackling Bardsley backed off for Citys first goal when there was 10 yards between them.
Even the hard tackling Bardsley backed off for Citys first goal when there was 10 yards between them.
-
- Posts: 17108
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
- Been Liked: 4384 times
- Has Liked: 15117 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Tbf Bardsley was banged in the back by tarkowski early doors...might account for that.Quickenthetempo wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 12:41 pmIt's Dyches tactics to back off.
Even the hard tackling Bardsley backed off for Citys first goal when there was 10 yards between them.
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Isn't the issue that, by going towards a forward who is running at you at pace, you commit yourself and therefore make yourself more vulnerable to being skinned/having a ball played beyond you?
had no problem with the principle of Bardsley back-peddling against Palace/Zaha and City/Jesus, nor Tarks doing the same against Spurs/Son (for their second goal). But if I had a criticism - more of Bardsley than Tarks - would be that if you're backpeddling, then I assume most defenders would say you've got to make sure you're doing more than just shadowing the forward into an area that he wants to go into, and allowing yourself to be used as a screen for a shot.
As for Kane's two goals on Saturday - the second struck me as rank bad defending (too passive) and the first one which with hindsight we should have defended better, but was in truth mainly a wonderful goal from a striker who took advantage of a split second of hesitation from defenders a bit worried about the movement of Son and Moura.
had no problem with the principle of Bardsley back-peddling against Palace/Zaha and City/Jesus, nor Tarks doing the same against Spurs/Son (for their second goal). But if I had a criticism - more of Bardsley than Tarks - would be that if you're backpeddling, then I assume most defenders would say you've got to make sure you're doing more than just shadowing the forward into an area that he wants to go into, and allowing yourself to be used as a screen for a shot.
As for Kane's two goals on Saturday - the second struck me as rank bad defending (too passive) and the first one which with hindsight we should have defended better, but was in truth mainly a wonderful goal from a striker who took advantage of a split second of hesitation from defenders a bit worried about the movement of Son and Moura.
-
- Posts: 6904
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
- Been Liked: 2758 times
- Has Liked: 4325 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
The huge void in front of them ( aka our 'midfield' ) doesnt exactly help.
These 3 users liked this post: HunterST_BFC Colburn_Claret Stayingup
Re: Mee and Tarks
Both been allowed to become too comfortable. The prospect of being dropped might shake them up a bit?
-
- Posts: 17108
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
- Been Liked: 4384 times
- Has Liked: 15117 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
What midfield?randomclaret2 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 2:04 pmThe huge void in front of them ( aka our 'midfield' ) doesnt exactly help.
Re: Mee and Tarks
claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 2:02 pmIsn't the issue that, by going towards a forward who is running at you at pace, you commit yourself and therefore make yourself more vulnerable to being skinned/having a ball played beyond you?
had no problem with the principle of Bardsley back-peddling against Palace/Zaha and City/Jesus, nor Tarks doing the same against Spurs/Son (for their second goal). But if I had a criticism - more of Bardsley than Tarks - would be that if you're backpeddling, then I assume most defenders would say you've got to make sure you're doing more than just shadowing the forward into an area that he wants to go into, and allowing yourself to be used as a screen for a shot.
As for Kane's two goals on Saturday - the second struck me as rank bad defending (too passive) and the first one which with hindsight we should have defended better, but was in truth mainly a wonderful goal from a striker who took advantage of a split second of hesitation from defenders a bit worried about the movement of Son and Moura.
Decent shot but he could have lit a cigar up before he hit it
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Mee and Tarks
Partly, but also the likelihood of our player committing a foul and receiving a yellow card. Which is likely against a team like City.claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 2:02 pmIsn't the issue that, by going towards a forward who is running at you at pace, you commit yourself and therefore make yourself more vulnerable to being skinned/having a ball played beyond you?
-
- Posts: 2602
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:29 pm
- Been Liked: 858 times
- Has Liked: 265 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Amazing how some people’s opinion can be so distorted by a couple of heavy defeats by top, top quality opponents.
Over the time we’ve been in the Premier League, I’d be surprised if there’s a centre back pairing in the division who’ve made more blocks than Mee and Tarks. Certainly it was singled out as one of the major factors in our success a couple of years ago.
-
- Posts: 30707
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11052 times
- Has Liked: 5660 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Mee and Tarks
like I said on the matchday thread, Gibson must be dicking about in training big time to not be getting a look in at the moment
Re: Mee and Tarks
Ben Mee's main strength is his ariel ability. Take a look at the matches where he's scored highly in our ratings: its usually because he was dominant over his opponent in the air pretty much throughout. His reading, timing of jumps and heading are usually very good to excellent, as commented upon by TV commentators. Against sides like Man City and Spurs, however, he is in a completely different situation: very few aeriel duals to win and instead fast paced opponents, with razor sharp passing and movement. He, like most defenders playing for "lower half sides", is not likely to come out on top nearly as often. I rather doubt that Gibson or Long would've fared any better against those two.
Re: Mee and Tarks
Or maybe Dyche just isn't willing to consider dropping one of his favourites?Vegas Claret wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 3:59 pmlike I said on the matchday thread, Gibson must be dicking about in training big time to not be getting a look in at the moment
-
- Posts: 4476
- Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:55 pm
- Been Liked: 1160 times
- Has Liked: 182 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
I don't think the issue lies with the centre backs as such (Though Ben Mee always has a mistake in him) it's the almost total lack of a midfield,teams have been slicing through us. I know we've badly missed Drinkwater or certainly his potential,but to have to rely on a slowing Cork and Hendrick in midfield almost defies belief at this level.While Westwood can do a job with some high quality at his side,he's no magic bullet. Though just having our "core" of Taylor,Westwood,Barnes,Bardsley would steady the ship a bit.I'd really liek to see intent from the board though
These 2 users liked this post: FactualFrank tiger76
Re: Mee and Tarks
MotD were criticising Mee for not joining Tarkowski in closing down Kane for goal 4 on Saturday. But they didn't mention that to Mee's left there were two more Spurs players in or around the box, and not a lot of cover. It was an all round problem on Saturday - Spurs had four or five players who were all faster than anyone in our team all bombing forward at once. We were overwhelmed and they scored three belters and one fluke (and one "normal" goal) as a result.
-
- Posts: 17108
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
- Been Liked: 4384 times
- Has Liked: 15117 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
I'm glad someone at last has realised sons goal was indeed a fluke....dsr wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 5:39 pmMotD were criticising Mee for not joining Tarkowski in closing down Kane for goal 4 on Saturday. But they didn't mention that to Mee's left there were two more Spurs players in or around the box, and not a lot of cover. It was an all round problem on Saturday - Spurs had four or five players who were all faster than anyone in our team all bombing forward at once. We were overwhelmed and they scored three belters and one fluke (and one "normal" goal) as a result.
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
AlargeClaret wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 5:25 pmI don't think the issue lies with the centre backs as such (Though Ben Mee always has a mistake in him) it's the almost total lack of a midfield,teams have been slicing through us. I know we've badly missed Drinkwater or certainly his potential,but to have to rely on a slowing Cork and Hendrick in midfield almost defies belief at this level.While Westwood can do a job with some high quality at his side,he's no magic bullet. Though just having our "core" of Taylor,Westwood,Barnes,Bardsley would steady the ship a bit.I'd really liek to see intent from the board though
Just to be absolutely clear, not a single one if the 5 goals we conceded on Saturday came from Spurs slicing through our midfield. Not one.
The theme, if there is one, is teams going round or over our midfield, primarily by exploiting the fact our wide midfielders (particularly McNeil) are less secure defensively than their predecessors, and also the fact that our full backs are not as good as they used to be.
That's what Spurs exploited for the first two goals, with Son and Moura staying high to exploit that vulnerability. The first two city goals also involved exploiting our weakness defensively out wide.
If there's an argument about midfield two it's that there was too much space between them and the back four. But that's not necessarily a failure on their part. They're the wrong target here - I'm one of Westwood's biggest fans but he (like Barnes) played against Sheffield Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea when we've had similar problems.
Re: Mee and Tarks
Not convinced it's as clear as you suggest. Could easily be argued that Son sliced through our midfield (and defence) when he carried the ball almost the full length of the pitch and the same applies for Sissoko's goal (and also when he hit the post and should've scored).claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:17 pmJust to be absolutely clear, not a single one if the 5 goals we conceded on Saturday came from Spurs slicing through our midfield. Not one.
The theme, if there is one, is teams going round or over our midfield, primarily by exploiting the fact our wide midfielders (particularly McNeil) are less secure defensively than their predecessors, and also the fact that our full backs are not as good as they used to be.
That's what Spurs exploited for the first two goals, with Son and Moura staying high to exploit that vulnerability. The first two city goals also involved exploiting our weakness defensively out wide.
If there's an argument about midfield two it's that there was too much space between them and the back four. But that's not necessarily a failure on their part. They're the wrong target here - I'm one of Westwood's biggest fans but he (like Barnes) played against Sheffield Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea when we've had similar problems.
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Son's goal came from our attacking set play, so all semblance of normal shape did not apply.taio wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:28 pmNot convinced it's as clear as you suggest. Could easily be argued that Son sliced through our midfield (and defence) when he carried the ball almost the full length of the pitch and the same applies for Sissoko's goal (and also when he hit the post and should've scored).
The other two occasions you suggest - you've hit a point, but they're both super quick counter attacks after we've lost the ball deep in their half, which is something we'll always be vulnerable to against the top sides (like all the other also rans). If you're criticising us for being unable to cope with Sissoko and Son in full flight on the counter then we're guilty. To be done that way twice in 90 on a day when Spurs were full of confidence is hardly a damning indictment.
Our defensive problems om Saturday were predominantly our wide and at full back.
-
- Posts: 17108
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
- Been Liked: 4384 times
- Has Liked: 15117 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Long.....
Re: Mee and Tarks
I was saying it wasn't as clear cut as this:claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:38 pmSon's goal came from our attacking set play, so all semblance of normal shape did not apply.
The other two occasions you suggest - you've hit a point, but they're both super quick counter attacks after we've lost the ball deep in their half, which is something we'll always be vulnerable to against the top sides (like all the other also rans). If you're criticising us for being unable to cope with Sissoko and Son in full flight on the counter then we're guilty. To be done that way twice in 90 on a day when Spurs were full of confidence is hardly a damning indictment.
Our defensive problems om Saturday were predominantly our wide and at full back.
"Just to be absolutely clear, not a single one if the 5 goals we conceded on Saturday came from Spurs slicing through our midfield. Not one."
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
And like I say, if you want I'll qualify that to leave aside the fifth goal. It's arguable because it's broadly a break down our right (Lowton blamelessly caught up field when Lennon lost the ball) which is why I included it originally, but I'm not going to lose time arguing the point.
The broader point stands. To attribute our problems on Saturday to the midfield being sliced through a non existent midfield is just not accurate. That wasn't the source of our problem on Saturday at all.
The broader point stands. To attribute our problems on Saturday to the midfield being sliced through a non existent midfield is just not accurate. That wasn't the source of our problem on Saturday at all.
Re: Mee and Tarks
The midfield were as equally as culpable as the other players for Son's goal - Cork and Hendrick were in slightly deeper positions than Son when he collected the ball. Dyche seemed particulary frustrated at that goal and rightly so.claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:51 pmAnd like I say, if you want I'll qualify that to leave aside the fifth goal. It's arguable because it's broadly a break down our right (Lowton blamelessly caught up field when Lennon lost the ball) which is why I included it originally, but I'm not going to lose time arguing the point.
The broader point stands. To attribute our problems on Saturday to the midfield being sliced through a non existent midfield is just not accurate. That wasn't the source of our problem on Saturday at all.
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
I'm not sure what point your making. I think we'd all agree that collectively someone - possibly a midfielder, possibly a full back, possibly a wide player, none of whom were actually in those positions at the time - should have stopped Son. But it's not a goal resulting from a team slicing through our midfield, which is where we started.
Re: Mee and Tarks
The point I'm making is it could easily be argued when you categorically said Spurs did not slice through our midfield for any of the goals. When a player collects the ball on the edge of his own box and carries it before scoring big questions have to be asked of the midfield. Same with Sissoko's goal.claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:09 pmI'm not sure what point your making. I think we'd all agree that collectively someone - possibly a midfielder - should have stopped Son. But it's not a goal resulting from a team slicing through our midfield, which is where we started.
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Going round in circles, but if you're not going to acknowledge the difference when a goal scored is from our set piece, compared to normal play, then this is a waste of both our time.
Re: Mee and Tarks
Yes there's normally a difference. But a player picking up the ball on the edge of his own box when we have several players behind the ball, including both central midfielders, and scoring like that inevitably raises questions about how he's allowed to travel through our midfield. Dyche understandably frustrated too.claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:19 pmGoing round in circles, but if you're not going to acknowledge the difference when a goal scored is from our set piece, compared to normal play, then this is a waste of both our time.
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
He's allowed to travel that far because lots of players allowed him to travel that far. That might include Cork and Hendrick, but McNeil is probably the most culpable. it's no more a goal that reflects on our central midfield than on our full backs or left wing. That's the point.
But it's undoubtedly a bad and frustrating goal to concede, not least because we were having a good spell at the time and were on top.
But it's undoubtedly a bad and frustrating goal to concede, not least because we were having a good spell at the time and were on top.
Re: Mee and Tarks
claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:17 pmJust to be absolutely clear, not a single one if the 5 goals we conceded on Saturday came from Spurs slicing through our midfield. Not one.
The theme, if there is one, is teams going round or over our midfield, primarily by exploiting the fact our wide midfielders (particularly McNeil) are less secure defensively than their predecessors, and also the fact that our full backs are not as good as they used to be.
That's what Spurs exploited for the first two goals, with Son and Moura staying high to exploit that vulnerability. The first two city goals also involved exploiting our weakness defensively out wide.
If there's an argument about midfield two it's that there was too much space between them and the back four. But that's not necessarily a failure on their part. They're the wrong target here - I'm one of Westwood's biggest fans but he (like Barnes) played against Sheffield Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea when we've had similar problems.
Ha ha Son ran through the middle of it
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
-
- Posts: 6652
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
- Been Liked: 2006 times
- Has Liked: 3346 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Exactly this. It's a massive part of the issue and tbf when everyone was slagging off Howe because his Burnley team were playing ok and scoring a few, but had a very leaky defence, I said just this. The defence weren't that bad, but they got absolutely no cover from midfield and were constantly exposed and that's become an issue again right now. I've always liked Westwood, but felt he was rather limited, but crumbs do we need him back!!randomclaret2 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 2:04 pmThe huge void in front of them ( aka our 'midfield' ) doesnt exactly help.
-
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 3:39 am
- Been Liked: 68 times
- Has Liked: 9 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Funny just a few weeks ago people were saying they should be in the England squad, I even heard a commentator say Mee should get a call up.
It's the end of the world when we lose a few games, and we are world beaters with future England manager when we win some.
It's the end of the world when we lose a few games, and we are world beaters with future England manager when we win some.
-
- Posts: 9473
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1185 times
- Has Liked: 779 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
It’s pretty much what I was thinking he had all the space in the world unopposed, their was nothing really to slice through to be honest it wasn’t existent to begin with. Powder puff resistance take your pick.taio wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:28 pmNot convinced it's as clear as you suggest. Could easily be argued that Son sliced through our midfield (and defence) when he carried the ball almost the full length of the pitch and the same applies for Sissoko's goal (and also when he hit the post and should've scored).
-
- Posts: 7066
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:43 pm
- Been Liked: 2240 times
- Has Liked: 1618 times
- Location: Baxenden
Re: Mee and Tarks
Apparently most teams play with one. I don't know if it's a new concept but it involves players being able to tackle (to break down attacks early) and pass (to start their attacks). It is sometimes called the 'engine room'. Oddly many teams spend most of their time knocking the ball around in the middle of the pitch (thus the term 'midfield') and creating chances for their forwards, some teams even have midfielders who contribute regularly with goals. Of course apart from the occasional visiting team I have never really seen this concept in action so I don't know if it works or not.
Re: Mee and Tarks
claretspice wrote: ↑Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:38 pmSon's goal came from our attacking set play, so all semblance of normal shape did not apply.
The other two occasions you suggest - you've hit a point, but they're both super quick counter attacks after we've lost the ball deep in their half, which is something we'll always be vulnerable to against the top sides (like all the other also rans). If you're criticising us for being unable to cope with Sissoko and Son in full flight on the counter then we're guilty. To be done that way twice in 90 on a day when Spurs were full of confidence is hardly a damning indictment.
Our defensive problems om Saturday were predominantly our wide and at full back.
Does not mean you cant tackle to win the ball back - there was 6 or 7 around him for gods sake
-
- Posts: 1392
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:51 am
- Been Liked: 236 times
- Has Liked: 442 times
Re: Mee and Tarks
Couldn't have put it better myself, problem is that it's dyche's tactic to get 10 men behind the ball, as close to goal as possible as quick as they can and rely on blocks here and blocks there and missed chances, thing is by then it's in the bloody net. But when I say close to goal as possible I mean all in 18 yard box, which simply gives space and time for wingers to exploit and pressure and simply pin us back, we're simply not interested in getting the ball back.
-
- Posts: 1450
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 12:45 pm
- Been Liked: 664 times
- Has Liked: 379 times
-
- Posts: 8144
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
- Been Liked: 3082 times
- Has Liked: 5063 times
- Location: Catterick N.Yorks
Re: Mee and Tarks
Its always been our preference, to allow people to shoot from distance.
Weve coceded some pearlers the last few games. Sometimes they end up in row Z, sometimes...........
Im more concerned about how flat we start games. We hand the initiative to the opposition from kick off, Watford, Sheff U, Palace. You can't do that in this league and expect not to get punished.
If we dont get in the Geordies faces from the off, we will get turned over again, and they are full of confidence at the moment.
Weve coceded some pearlers the last few games. Sometimes they end up in row Z, sometimes...........
Im more concerned about how flat we start games. We hand the initiative to the opposition from kick off, Watford, Sheff U, Palace. You can't do that in this league and expect not to get punished.
If we dont get in the Geordies faces from the off, we will get turned over again, and they are full of confidence at the moment.