What is the Game Plan?

[Mattster]

Fans can typically have biased views and emotional views, while things like style can also be subjective - for example I found Oxford and 1st half Plymouth enjoyable, others commented on it being dull.

If you don’t like the Athletic piece then fine, here’s an extract from Jacob Tanswell in the DorsetLive (now chief Villa reporter for Athletic), who watched them every week, and from his readings seems to ‘get’ football and the tactical side:

And local reporters tend to need to keep managers/clubs sweet in order to continue getting access.

Ultimately, we've seen very little that fits Tanswell's assessment and plenty that aligns with the Fulham fans.

[claretspice]

I've posted on another thread that I think Anthony's chance on 27 minutes shows quite well what we're trying to do. Having worked the ball down the right touchline, Cullen ferries the ball to Pires who is now free in the left sided central midfield channel, and we have a number of options further forwards - Koleosho for the long pass out right, Foster has come short, Brownhill is breaking from midfield and Hannibal is at centre forward, with Anthony then making a run off the left flank which Pires finds superbly. The backwards and side ways probing freed up a dangerous forward passer, we made the pitch big and we had options as a result.

So that's the plan - probe patiently, get a ball player into space fairly deep, and have runners beyond with a centre forward acting as a decoy. It worked well on that occasion but a lack of composure, a hesitancy from Anthony, and a very odd reluctance from Hannibal in particular to get into the box despite being goalside when Anthony gets the ball means we butchered the chance.

There are lots of reasons why we're not doing it consistently - we could do with another creative player to play those passes, and Foster isn't a false 9 and Hannibal isn't going to get into lots of goalscoring positions from 10 - but I think our biggest problem is right at the start of our build up. That chance came because we made the pitch big, but for whatever reason early in our build up we aren't doing it enough, and we aren't allowing Cullen to get on the ball from deep and play the sort of risk/reward passes to break a press we saw under Kompany. We're a bit safe in our build up and basically teams are letting our centre halves have the ball and pressing everyone else because they are fairly confident we won't take them on. If Parker wants to play that way he has to get a bit braver - I'm willing to allow that it may be that we've been more careful because of the fact our back line has been a bit makeshift but I think sooner rather than later we've got to be a bit braver in playing out and give Cullen the responsibility to lead that.

One additional mitigation that I think it is important to throw into the mix - not only is Parker coaching a pretty new team, but he's doing it with a very new coaching team. All of him, Jensen and Jackson are brand new to each other and only Jackson is familiar to the players. That is quite unusual. Whilst I accept that there are echoes of reviews of Parker from other clubs, it is fair to say he had a similar mitigation in each of those jobs in that he won promotion in his first season, having turned over players and assembled his coaching team. It's not a surprise that the football would be a bit stilted against that backdrop.

[TsarBomba]

Excellent as ever, Spice.

[Goliath]

I've posted on another thread that I think Anthony's chance on 27 minutes shows quite well what we're trying to do. Having worked the ball down the right touchline, Cullen ferries the ball to Pires who is now free in the left sided central midfield channel, and we have a number of options further forwards - Koleosho for the long pass out right, Foster has come short, Brownhill is breaking from midfield and Hannibal is at centre forward, with Anthony then making a run off the left flank which Pires finds superbly. The backwards and side ways probing freed up a dangerous forward passer, we made the pitch big and we had options as a result.

So that's the plan - probe patiently, get a ball player into space fairly deep, and have runners beyond with a centre forward acting as a decoy. It worked well on that occasion but a lack of composure, a hesitancy from Anthony, and a very odd reluctance from Hannibal in particular to get into the box despite being goalside when Anthony gets the ball means we butchered the chance.

There are lots of reasons why we're not doing it consistently - we could do with another creative player to play those passes, and Foster isn't a false 9 and Hannibal isn't going to get into lots of goalscoring positions from 10 - but I think our biggest problem is right at the start of our build up. That chance came because we made the pitch big, but for whatever reason early in our build up we aren't doing it enough, and we aren't allowing Cullen to get on the ball from deep and play the sort of risk/reward passes to break a press we saw under Kompany. We're a bit safe in our build up and basically teams are letting our centre halves have the ball and pressing everyone else because they are fairly confident we won't take them on. If Parker wants to play that way he has to get a bit braver - I'm willing to allow that it may be that we've been more careful because of the fact our back line has been a bit makeshift but I think sooner rather than later we've got to be a bit braver in playing out and give Cullen the responsibility to lead that.

One additional mitigation that I think it is important to throw into the mix - not only is Parker coaching a pretty new team, but he's doing it with a very new coaching team. All of him, Jensen and Jackson are brand new to each other and only Jackson is familiar to the players. That is quite unusual. Whilst I accept that there are echoes of reviews of Parker from other clubs, it is fair to say he had a similar mitigation in each of those jobs in that he won promotion in his first season, having turned over players and assembled his coaching team. It's not a surprise that the football would be a bit stilted against that backdrop.

I don't mean this as a criticism of Parker but the idea that him having a new coaching team being one of the reasons for a cautious style is actually quite ridiculous.

The coaches and Parker will have committed to a way of working early doors in probably hundreds of private meetings without the players.

[claretspice]

I don't mean this as a criticism of Parker but the idea that him having a new coaching team being one of the reasons for a cautious style is actually quite ridiculous.

The coaches and Parker will have committed to a way of working early doors in probably hundreds of private meetings without the players.

I didn't say it was a reason for the cautious style, if anything I'm saying it might be one of many reasons that is exacerbating it and meaning its not yet being effective.

I think the style we're working towards is clear enough (per the Anthony chance that I use as a case study). The execution is the problem and that isn't either/or - it can be partly because we're being too cautious in our build up play, and partly because the players and coaches are all still adapting to each other. Kompany talked about needing 120 training sessions for things to click and we're nowhere near that yet, and fact Jensen is still getting intimate with what Parker wants can't help mitigate that.

[burnley007]

Our Danish assistant...is this drab style of play how his side were playing last season, or is this just Parker's doing?

[Goliath]

I didn't say it was a reason for the cautious style, if anything I'm saying it might be one of many reasons that is exacerbating it and meaning its not yet being effective.

I think the style we're working towards is clear enough (per the Anthony chance that I use as a case study). The execution is the problem and that isn't either/or - it can be partly because we're being too cautious in our build up play, and partly because the players and coaches are all still adapting to each other. Kompany talked about needing 120 training sessions for things to click and we're nowhere near that yet, and fact Jensen is still getting intimate with what Parker wants can't help mitigate that.

Jensen will have been clear about what Parker wanted in week 1, I'd have no doubts about that.
You might be right but If you've got only got one example of what we are trying to achieve it suggests something isn't right.

Personally I think we are trying to play in a way that requires extremely talented and creative players which we don't have. We could play this way with this squad for 5 years and still not be a big attacking threat, Anthony, Koleosho and Hannibal just aren't at the technical level and don't have the football iq required to break down packed defences every week.

If we are to continue this way I think we basically need a miracle with Mike Tresor to finish top 2.

[ClaretPete001]

Jensen will have been clear about what Parker wanted in week 1, I'd have no doubts about that.
You might be right but If you've got only got one example of what we are trying to achieve it suggests something isn't right.

Personally I think we are trying to play in a way that requires extremely talented and creative players which we don't have. We could play this way with this squad for 5 years and still not be a big attacking threat, Anthony, Koleosho and Hannibal just aren't at the technical level and don't have the football iq required to break down packed defences every week.

If we are to continue this way I think we basically need a miracle with Mike Tresor to finish top 2.

I don't think you are wrong in terms of the lack of midfield creativity but the lack of creative central midfield players is why you use wide players, which is why the full backs are so important.

Ramsey or Flemming might make a big difference when they are properly fit.

[GetIntoEm]

this is the game plan we are seeing, solid defensively, bide the time in offensive positions and look to carve out a goal scoring opportunity.

its working, but not as exciting as the gung-ho tactics of Kompany.

its not going to massively change over what you're seeing. get used to it, or its going to be a miserable season for some of you.

[gandhisflipflop]

Game plan looks to be too narrow. Full backs who don’t overlap, midfielders who don’t pass forward and a number 10 who goes missing for large parts of the game and is nowhere near creative enough for the role.

The result is a team who doesn’t create anywhere near enough chances, and is happy to concede possession despite being the clear better team on paper. Preston was a fine example.

Southgatesque

[Goliath]

I don't think you are wrong in terms of the lack of midfield creativity but the lack of creative central midfield players is why you use wide players, which is why the full backs are so important.

Ramsey or Flemming might make a big difference when they are properly fit.

But then we don't have creative wide players and we don't have creative full backs. We desperately need Tresor to show something for this reason, he could be the key to this whole team if Parker can get him on side.

[Colburn_Claret]

this is the game plan we are seeing, solid defensively, bide the time in offensive positions and look to carve out a goal scoring opportunity.

its working, but not as exciting as the gung-ho tactics of Kompany.

its not going to massively change over what you're seeing. get used to it, or its going to be a miserable season for some of you.

It isn't working, if it was we wouldn't be having all these threads on how poor we are.
Since the first 2 games of the season we have consistently failed to work the oppositions goalkeeper. If we continue in the same vane we will continue to struggle in front of goal.
We can all argue about the abilities or shortcomings of individual players, but the real problem is the way we are playing as a team.

[daveisaclaret]

It is working. We're third, we've conceded four goals, the only defeat was in the absolute turmoil of the Sunderland game and this Saturday past was our first genuinely bad result.

It's not fun or entertaining but I don't think it's meant to be.

[Mattster]

It is working. We're third, we've conceded four goals, the only defeat was in the absolute turmoil of the Sunderland game and this Saturday past was our first genuinely bad result.

It's not fun or entertaining but I don't think it's meant to be.

It's not. It is not sustainable to continue getting these results with this level of chance creation. I pointed this out after Leeds and was laughed (and sl*gged) off because we'd scored 11 goals in 5 games, but the signs were there.

We've since scored 3 in 4 against sides expected to be in and around the relegation places. The results have been OK but we're dropping points and the goals are drying up in line with the chances created.

Fortunately, we've got more bottom half teams coming up next, I'd dread to be coming up against some in form teams at the moment. If the results and performances over the next 4 improve over the last 4 then great but the concern is that, if anything, we appear getting worse rather than better.

[claretspice]

If the results and performances over the next 4 improve over the last 4 then great but the concern is that, if anything, we appear getting worse rather than better.

I don't think this is quite right is it? I wasn't at Oxford but the general consensus was it was a notable step up on the performance against Portsmouth, and the first half performance against Plymouth - in which we could easily have had a couple more goals - was the best I've seen us play this season in terms of possession football (and again was generally viewed as a step up on Oxford, in turn). There have been 3 somewhat concerning halves since then but I don't think it's right to say we're progressively getting worse. Whether as a whole we're getting better, certainly at the rate we'd want - that seems to me to be a better and fairer question.

[what now !]

lets put this into context

if someone had said to you , you will be 3rd in the league a point off top spot after 9 games , would you have taken it , yes you would , however that said i get that its about performances but, given we haven't really caught fire yet and we are in the position we are in then if we do click and start playing well then we could be 9 points clear at Christmas, lets wait and see , we are having our 'blip' at the moment others will have theirs and we will get better

i don't know where we were after 9 games under Kompany but we certainly weren't in 3rd 1 point off top

[Mattster]

I don't think this is quite right is it? I wasn't at Oxford but the general consensus was it was a notable step up on the performance against Portsmouth, and the first half performance against Plymouth - in which we could easily have had a couple more goals - was the best I've seen us play this season in terms of possession football (and again was generally viewed as a step up on Oxford, in turn). There have been 3 somewhat concerning halves since then but I don't think it's right to say we're progressively getting worse. Whether as a whole we're getting better, certainly at the rate we'd want - that seems to me to be a better and fairer question.

Oxford was an improvement on Portsmouth but I felt Plymouth was a step back on that as Plymouth were much more open but we created less whilst conceding more than we did against Oxford. Then Preston was an obvious step back from that.

[daveisaclaret]

It's not. It is not sustainable to continue getting these results with this level of chance creation. I pointed this out after Leeds and was laughed (and sl*gged) off because we'd scored 11 goals in 5 games, but the signs were there.

We've since scored 3 in 4 against sides expected to be in and around the relegation places. The results have been OK but we're dropping points and the goals are drying up in line with the chances created.

Fortunately, we've got more bottom half teams coming up next, I'd dread to be coming up against some in form teams at the moment. If the results and performances over the next 4 improve over the last 4 then great but the concern is that, if anything, we appear getting worse rather than better.

I think it's just the nature of what we are that there will be downswings in goals like this, especially because we're lacking so far the kind of striker Parker has been able to rely upon in the past. I suppose how concerning it is to you is basically linked to how much trust you have in our attacking players to do enough over the course of the season.

[GetIntoEm]

I think you're struggling to grasp the difference between "pleasing on the eye, free flowing football" and "getting a result".

It's intentional the way we are playing, parker gets results. It may not be conventionally great to watch, but it's about points tally.

Like I said previously, this is the way, get used to it or he prepared to be disappointed.

We ain't going out to beat teams 4 and 5 nil. It's just the style.

[Mattster]

I think you're struggling to grasp the difference between "pleasing on the eye, free flowing football" and "getting a result".

It's intentional the way we are playing, parker gets results. It may not be conventionally great to watch, but it's about points tally.

Like I said previously, this is the way, get used to it or he prepared to be disappointed.

We ain't going out to beat teams 4 and 5 nil. It's just the style.

I think it's just the nature of what we are that there will be downswings in goals like this, especially because we're lacking so far the kind of striker Parker has been able to rely upon in the past. I suppose how concerning it is to you is basically linked to how much trust you have in our attacking players to do enough over the course of the season.

But as RVClaret has been pointing out, being so impotent in attack is not consistent with what Parker has been before. Previously the football has been this dull but at least it created chances. So I don't think it is his plan to not create goalscoring chances. It's either his game plan has been completely sussed out or he's not able to get the squad to implement it.

He can't continue to get results if we don't create chances, as we've seen from the past 3 games. It's not sustainable.

[TPClaret]

But as RVClaret has been pointing out, being so impotent in attack is not consistent with what Parker has been before. Previously the football has been this dull but at least it created chances. So I don't think it is his plan to not create goalscoring chances. It's either his game plan has been completely sussed out or he's not able to get the squad to implement it.

He can't continue to get results if we don't create chances, as we've seen from the past 3 games. It's not sustainable.

Was Parker not in charge when we scored 9 in 2 games at the start of the season

[ClaretAL]

Guys, I asked a question in the opening post about the game plan, not single out players who are failing or the managers past. Simply just what is the game plan the players are trying to produce on the pitch, at least then I can form a better view in my own opinion of where it seems to be failing and also see where it is improving. Thankfully Claretspice seems to have answered that, and I can see the theory but do wonder how the overlap can happen with our full backs, but then Parker must be seeing it on the training pitch, so its just a case of embedding it further in to the players so it becomes second instinct, and it will be interesting to see the progression.

[Mattster]

Was Parker not in charge when we scored 9 in 2 games at the start of the season

Yes. And I said that wasn't sustainable with the level of chance creation then. And lo and behold we scored 4 goals from open play in the following 7 games.

Because it wasn't sustainable.

[ClaretPete001]

Guys, I asked a question in the opening post about the game plan, not single out players who are failing or the managers past. Simply just what is the game plan the players are trying to produce on the pitch, at least then I can form a better view in my own opinion of where it seems to be failing and also see where it is improving. Thankfully Claretspice seems to have answered that, and I can see the theory but do wonder how the overlap can happen with our full backs, but then Parker must be seeing it on the training pitch, so its just a case of embedding it further in to the players so it becomes second instinct, and it will be interesting to see the progression.

The game plan looks pretty straightforward. We have a 3 man central midfield (Cullen, Brownhill and Hannibal) with width from two wingers (Anthony, Kolosheo) and central focal point when attacking.

In attack the wingers create the width supported by two attacking fullbacks and two midfield runners. In defence, it becomes a 5 man midfield.

Defending it is working as it should because at Turf on Saturday there was two parked buses on the pitch and no drivers.

Going forward hardly any of it is working. The wingers are often double marked and isolated. the three man midfield is bogged down in the middle third of the pitch. The Right back is all over the place (depending upon who it is) and the Left Back occasionally gets it right but as often as not doesn't.

The attacking focal point struggles to play with his back to goal and in the one duel he won against PNE we nearly scored.

The patient game plan ClaretSpice refers to is fine except when teams park the bus there is no space and the midfield becomes congested.

The consequence is just about the only opportunity we created is when Anthony beat his man and cut inside to the box other than that it's the M62 near Leeds when there are road traffic restrictions in place. Slow moving traffic with lots of congestion.

The upside is that even with these problems we are right up there...! Much better than being Luton - that's for sure.