Team shape, tactics and personnel

[TRO]

I am loving the way we play, but I feel we are not there yet, despite massive strides forward.....but really enjoying it, overall.

However, I still get nervy, when we are defending or without the ball.

maybe, I shouldn't be, but I am.

Edited August 29, 2023 by TRO

[brommy]

9 minutes ago, TRO said:

I am loving the way we play and I feel we are not there yet, despite massive strides forward.....but really enjoying it, overall.

However, I still get nervy, when we are defending or without the ball.

maybe, I shouldn't be, but I am.

I'm the same but put it more to extreme emotional investment in wanting us to succeed than our tactics or style of play.

Edited August 29, 2023 by brommy

[KentVillan]

6 minutes ago, TRO said:

I am loving the way we play and I feel we are not there yet, despite massive strides forward.....but really enjoying it, overall.

However, I still get nervy, when we are defending or without the ball.

maybe, I shouldn't be, but I am.

The thing with Emery is when we knock it about at the back, although it makes me nervous, I can see the purpose in it. It's not just possession for the sake of possession, it's more like a trap for the oppo.

You watch the oppo front 4 push up to press, and suddenly there is a huge space for Diaby, Watkins, etc to attack if we can find them.

[TRO]

3 hours ago, KentVillan said:

I think this is a bit pedantic.

Formations are fluid, and they depend on who's playing in each spot. Cash in for Bailey, and Konsa moving over to Cash's spot is basically a back 3 with wing backs in terms of personnel, and then they take different shapes depending on where the ball is. But you're right, we often settled into a 4-4-2 shape.

With a manager like Emery, the formation is constantly shifting in line with how he's drilled the players to react to different game situations. It's impossible to just say 3-2-2-2 or 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 because it can be all of these at different points in the game.

Konsa was the one for me who really showed how much of an impact Emery has had on our players' tactical understanding.

Never a truer word spoken.

The game is dynamic, ever moving, ever shifting, morphing through reactive forces, from the opposition.

Overloads create underloads, like the weather with low pressure and high pressure, moving all the time.

The better players, are quick to react, they sense these things quicker, than lesser players.....the sharper brains are clear to see.

when we venture up this league and look over our shoulder at the championship....we see how the intelligence of these players is, now, it's far in advance of yesteryear.

We play with intelligence now both players and coaching staff....and are still learning all the time.

Ps I think the crowd/ fanbase are also watching, with a more discerning eye too, as we learn, as we watch.

Edited August 29, 2023 by TRO

[villan95]

All this talk of boxes

 

[TRO]

3 hours ago, KentVillan said:

The thing with Emery is when we knock it about at the back, although it makes me nervous, I can see the purpose in it. It's not just possession for the sake of possession, it's more like a trap for the oppo.

You watch the oppo front 4 push up to press, and suddenly there is a huge space for Diaby, Watkins, etc to attack if we can find them.

I honestly can see all that....and I understand, why he does what he does.

I just feel at times, some of the goals we concede are sloppy or passive......I accept a goal against of high calibre skill, because we can't keep every threat out.

I know it seems like nit picking, because if we win, who cares....but i just feel nervy, when we haven't got the ball....and particularly when the opposition venture in to our box.

Edited August 29, 2023 by TRO

[brommy]

31 minutes ago, TRO said:

I honestly can see all that....and I understand, why he does what he does.

I just feel at times, some of the goals we concede are sloppy or passive......I accept a goal against of high calibre skill, because we can't keep every threat out.

I know it seems like nit picking, because if we win, who cares....but i just feel nervy, when we haven't got the ball....and particulalry when the opposition venture in to our box.

We've still got players with some weaknesses and there will be occasions when the tactics don't work. Knowing we're still way off the elite level, I'm guarded against the expectation of winning all the time whilst not conceding some avoidable goals, in the knowledge and enjoyment of definitely heading in the right direction. UTV!

[TRO]

2 hours ago, brommy said:

We've still got players with some weaknesses and there will be occasions when the tactics don't work. Knowing we're still way off the elite level, I'm guarded against the expectation of winning all the time whilst not conceding some avoidable goals, in the knowledge and enjoyment of definitely heading in the right direction. UTV!

I should probably digest that ....and take it in, it really makes sense.

 My problem is, I am a perfectionist, and sometimes it gets in the way of practicality......

I know, you are right, in what you are saying.

Thanks.

Edited August 29, 2023 by TRO

[brommy]

1 minute ago, TRO said:

I should probably digest that ....and take it in, it really makes sense.

 My problem is, I am a perfectionist, and sometimes it gets in the way of practicality......

I know, you are right in what you are saying.

Thanks.

You're welcome.

I'm still smiling that you've chosen this era at Villa to reinforce you are a perfectionist?! Most of the previous Villa eras must have been torture for you!!! 

[TRO]

1 minute ago, brommy said:

You're welcome.

I'm still smiling that you've chosen this era at Villa to reinforce you are a perfectionist?! Most of the previous Villa eras must have been torture for you!!! 

They was, but you can only look for incremental improvement within the scope of reason, for the era we are in......I think we all factor in the ability level, that we function at.

Pep with Trophies coming out of his ears, is still looking to improve......progress holds no bounds, because all competitors are progressing too, stand still and we are toast.

However, having said all that.....I fully endorse your sentiment of enjoying it, even if I see shortfalls, in what we do.....that is the essence of it......I am generally, really enjoying what we are doing.

I do tend to be more tolerant, of offensive errors, than defensive errors, I don't know why, its just me.....I just love, clean sheets as building blocks.

 

[brommy]

1 minute ago, TRO said:

They was, but you can only look for incremental improvement within the scope of reason, for the era we are in......I think we all factor in the ability level, that we function at.

Pep with Trophies coming out of his ears, is still looking to improve......progress holds no bounds, because all competitors are progressing too, stand still and we are toast.

However, having said all that.....I fully endorse your sentiment of enjoying it, even if I see shortfalls, in what we do.....that is the essence of it......I am generally, really enjoying what we are doing.

I do tend to be more tolerant, of offensive errors, than defensive errors, I don't know why, its just me.....I just love, clean sheets as building blocks.

 

Honestly, I'm fairly similar. I'm annoyed at Burnley's goal and as for the Newcastle goals - I was so annoyed I tried to totally blank football out for a couple of days. Being a 'glass half full' guy usually helps me override the extreme annoyance which is much easier now we are usually scoring and winning.

[CVByrne]

2 hours ago, KentVillan said:

I think this is a bit pedantic.

Formations are fluid, and they depend on who's playing in each spot. Cash in for Bailey, and Konsa moving over to Cash's spot is basically a back 3 with wing backs in terms of personnel, and then they take different shapes depending on where the ball is. But you're right, we often settled into a 4-4-2 shape.

With a manager like Emery, the formation is constantly shifting in line with how he's drilled the players to react to different game situations. It's impossible to just say 3-2-2-2 or 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 because it can be all of these at different points in the game.

Konsa was the one for me who really showed how much of an impact Emery has had on our players' tactical understanding.

Well you can say pedantic I'll just say accurately describing our set up. 

Saying we played with wing backs for example would mean to most people we defend in a 5, three centre backs and two wing backs. Hence the term back means defender as in back line. 

So saying we played with 4 backs in a 4 4 2 is accurate in terms of the old we only quote one formation. It's always the out of possession formation and we always play 4 4 2 

In possession we build with a back 4 or a back 3 there's only two ways we've done. So a 4 2 2 2 or a 3 2 2 3 ( also quoted as 3 2 4 1).

Every game has a tweak or two. But people thinking we change formation because of what players were selected are just wrong.

The only thing the team selection tells us is. Are we going back 3 in build up with three CBs or are we going a back 4 build up with two full backs. 

[DJBOB]

8 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Well you can say pedantic I'll just say accurately describing our set up. 

Saying we played with wing backs for example would mean to most people we defend in a 5, three centre backs and two wing backs. Hence the term back means defender as in back line. 

So saying we played with 4 backs in a 4 4 2 is accurate in terms of the old we only quote one formation. It's always the out of possession formation and we always play 4 4 2 

In possession we build with a back 4 or a back 3 there's only two ways we've done. So a 4 2 2 2 or a 3 2 2 3 ( also quoted as 3 2 4 1).

Every game has a tweak or two. But people thinking we change formation because of what players were selected are just wrong.

The only thing the team selection tells us is. Are we going back 3 in build up with three CBs or are we going a back 4 build up with two full backs. 

Pedantry alert!

Sometimes we defend in a back 5 with Kamara dropping in or one of the wide midfielders making up a back 5 and in the later stages of the Burnley game, we played essentially a 622, the bane of every attacks existence. 

[KentVillan]

17 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Well you can say pedantic I'll just say accurately describing our set up. 

Saying we played with wing backs for example would mean to most people we defend in a 5, three centre backs and two wing backs. Hence the term back means defender as in back line. 

So saying we played with 4 backs in a 4 4 2 is accurate in terms of the old we only quote one formation. It's always the out of possession formation and we always play 4 4 2 

In possession we build with a back 4 or a back 3 there's only two ways we've done. So a 4 2 2 2 or a 3 2 2 3 ( also quoted as 3 2 4 1).

Every game has a tweak or two. But people thinking we change formation because of what players were selected are just wrong.

The only thing the team selection tells us is. Are we going back 3 in build up with three CBs or are we going a back 4 build up with two full backs. 

Mmmm, ok, I'm not sure where all these universal laws of football tactics have come from, but I get what you're saying.

Players have natural inclinations to track back, drift forwards, cover space, etc. Who you select makes a huge difference to how a formation plays out in practice. Bailey, Cash and Konsa are three completely different players, so when we do the Bailey/Cash or Cash/Konsa swaps, you get a completely different setup IMO.

[TRO]

I think with all the changes to the laws, I am not sure, in depth what the offiside laws are anymore......I used to know, but now ,it seems complex.

Is it only the goal scorer that has to be offside?......any other player in an offside position, is ok, is it?

It used to be any player in an offside position, was offside and a goal ruled out.

My brain hurts.

[villan95]

13 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think with all the changes to the laws, I am not sure, in depth what the offiside laws are anymore......I used to know, but now ,it seems complex.

Is it only the goal scorer that has to be offside?......any other player in an offside position, is ok, is it?

It used to be any player in an offside position, was offside and a goal ruled out.

My brain hurts.

I believe it's still about being active/interfering with play so can be subjective. For example they were checking the other day if Watkins obscured the keeper's view for Diaby's goal.

[TRO]

14 minutes ago, villan95 said:

I believe it's still about being active/interfering with play so can be subjective. For example they were checking the other day if Watkins obscured the keeper's view for Diaby's goal.

I think that scenario can be subjective.....where is a player supposed to stand, in the heat of battle?

The problem with "subjective" it can easilly morph in to "Bias", and who can call that out?

Edited August 29, 2023 by TRO

[villan95]

5 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think that scenario can be subjective.....where is a player supposed to stand, in the heat of battle?

The problem with "subjective" it can easilly morph in to "Bias", and who can call that out?

Yep the rules are a bit of a mess at the moment. Same with all subjective VAR decisions, it will basically come down to what officials you get on the day. And like you say, can't help but feel there is an element of bias particularly looking at recent decisions involving Man Utd.

[CVByrne]

4 hours ago, TRO said:

I am loving the way we play, but I feel we are not there yet, despite massive strides forward.....but really enjoying it, overall.

However, I still get nervy, when we are defending or without the ball.

maybe, I shouldn't be, but I am.

I am used to it now, the key is when we're getting worried as the opposition press has almost got us it really means we've opened up all the space we need to strike. Draw them out and then strike. 

[Keener window-cleaner]

1 hour ago, CVByrne said:

Well you can say pedantic I'll just say accurately describing our set up. 

Saying we played with wing backs for example would mean to most people we defend in a 5, three centre backs and two wing backs. Hence the term back means defender as in back line. 

So saying we played with 4 backs in a 4 4 2 is accurate in terms of the old we only quote one formation. It's always the out of possession formation and we always play 4 4 2 

In possession we build with a back 4 or a back 3 there's only two ways we've done. So a 4 2 2 2 or a 3 2 2 3 ( also quoted as 3 2 4 1).

Every game has a tweak or two. But people thinking we change formation because of what players were selected are just wrong.

The only thing the team selection tells us is. Are we going back 3 in build up with three CBs or are we going a back 4 build up with two full backs. 

I paid some extra attention to the formation as well when I saw the line up and agrre with you, in defence the basic formation was the 4-4-2 we are used to, but with Konsa RB and Cash RW. 

In attack we often did what we usually do: the LB pushes up, LCB drifts out wide left and creates a back three with the RCB and the RB. The LW drifts centrally and creates space for the LB to push forward.

Then as said there are often some tweaks in the formation and tactics, for example I thought Cash played a bit more as a traditional winger, whereas Bailey in the last games played slightly higher up.

In addition to what you have said one feature I think I noticed was that when we were under much pressure in defence, it at times looked like the wingers dropped back on the outside of the full backs, making it almost a straight 6 man backline.

Another thing is that in the basic 4-4-2 in defence it looks like Kamara has a slightly more defensive position than Luiz. I think that's interesting, I would have thought that Luiz and Tielemans would be the first choice, I thought Tielemans was an even more intelligent player and better passer than Kamara. But as Kamara has been first choice, and played in that seemingly more defensive position, I guess he is picked as he is better defensively and faster than Tielemans. Perhaps better suited to our high defensive line.