| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? 23:41 - Oct 20 with 8722 views | Dr_Parnassus |
So we finally now find ourselves in a bit of form.
But there has been a notable shift from 800 passes a game with no willingness to go long to a more mixed direct approach which many were calling for very early on.
An earlier conversation got me thinking, is plan A now dead? For me that would be extremely encouraging.
I will work out the figures now, will post them regardless. But my money is on a distinct downturn in short balls and possession in our wins compared to our ‘non wins’. Here they are:-
Our 4 wins this season:-
Possession: 62.7%
Long ball %: 12.5%
Our 9 winless games this season:-
Possession: 67.2%
Long ball %: 8.1%
Doing these stats it was actually striking how poorly we perform when restricted to short passing.
That’s a 35% decrease in short passes in our wins vs the games we don’t win. That’s gigantic. Our possession also noticeably less in our wins.
It’s very interesting from a statistical stand point that our wins correlate with a more direct approach and I wonder if the Swansea analysts are earning their money and fed that to Martin. There does seem a distinct change.
I’m very grateful that despite what we were told by some, Martin is adaptable and can absolutely bin his plan A when it clearly isn’t bearing fruit.
Deserves credit for that, without question. |  |
| |  |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 07:47 - Oct 21 with 1126 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 07:42 - Oct 21 by PatchesOHoulihan |
Maybe it’s an evolution that we needed a bit of time to get to but you weren’t having that at the start.
If only the game was as simple as short balls or long balls to make a difference. The way we create the space with our movement has increased tenfold which now allows us the option of short or long balls.
You accused me of wanting tika taka football in the early days when all I wanted mad more entertainment than Cooperball - the 2nd half last night was exactly what I was looking for. A threat of short and long balls depending on opposition tactics.
Whether it Martins tactics or just a purple patch from a couple of influential players we’ll need to wait and see |
what do you mean ''you weren't having that''?
I was the epitome of backing him to make the change that was required.
In fact I stated it clearly, this way of playing is ludicrous and wont work (96% short passes) and I back him as an intelligent manager to change that to a more mixed style to get results.
I said that almost word for word, repeatedly
I was told that he only has a plan A, can't adapt... and I had to lump it.
Seems those who said that were incorrect. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 08:02 - Oct 21 with 1100 views | Private_Partz |
Horses for courses. There is a plan A and B. Maybe even C.
We are still passing teams off the park but when we get the high press we mix it by going long thereby leaving the 'pressers' exposed.
Martin has always said it was getting the defence sorted was the priority. We are now working on the attack. He looks forward to the day when he no longer has to 'scream like and idiot on the sidlines' and can sit back and enjoy the performance. |  |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 08:05 - Oct 21 with 1091 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 08:02 - Oct 21 by Private_Partz |
Horses for courses. There is a plan A and B. Maybe even C.
We are still passing teams off the park but when we get the high press we mix it by going long thereby leaving the 'pressers' exposed.
Martin has always said it was getting the defence sorted was the priority. We are now working on the attack. He looks forward to the day when he no longer has to 'scream like and idiot on the sidlines' and can sit back and enjoy the performance. |
But we were told there is only a plan A, which was the short passing at all costs game.
And there wasn't at the start, I did extensive post match analysis showing the areas we are losing the ball in and it being due to our insistence to go short. The criticism Martin got was in relation to that and pretty much that alone.
He has since done away with that and we have noticeably gone more long. 35% increase in long balls in our wins and triple the long balls in the current games than the ones being complained about earlier on in the season.
This is exactly what those criticising were calling for. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 08:26 - Oct 21 with 1079 views | JJJack |
One thing we do need to sort is our slow starts - we got away with it against Cardiff but Fulham, Luton, Stoke, WBA to name a few we have been dreadful for 15-30mins . Gave ourselves mountains to climb. Hull home we started quickly then lost the plot by HT and never recovered. But our 2nd half performances have been great when we've had to put performances in. Personally not sure about the supposed "increased fitness"....but no late goals conceded all season suggests we've had it all season? I freely admit we looked very tired in some games late last season. But think that was more Cooper's lack of tinkering/lack of using subs. |  | | |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:14 - Oct 21 with 1041 views | PatchesOHoulihan |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 07:47 - Oct 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
what do you mean ''you weren't having that''?
I was the epitome of backing him to make the change that was required.
In fact I stated it clearly, this way of playing is ludicrous and wont work (96% short passes) and I back him as an intelligent manager to change that to a more mixed style to get results.
I said that almost word for word, repeatedly
I was told that he only has a plan A, can't adapt... and I had to lump it.
Seems those who said that were incorrect. |
You weren’t having that it was going to take a bit of time. I know stats are your source of info but they clearly do not tell the whole story of our transition in football since the end of last season.
We came up against a West Brom team yesterday who tried to steam roll us with their press and in order to stop that there had to be a threat that we’d move it quicker however calling some of our play long ball yesterday is doing it a disservice.
We still played a huge amount of good short passing football to create half openings to play people in and that is where our performance has been so much better the last week even if the next ball has been a bit longer
It’s evolution not adaption in my eyes however we all see things differently |  |
| This is Patches O'Houlihan saying "Take care of your balls, and they'll take care of you." |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:20 - Oct 21 with 1037 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:14 - Oct 21 by PatchesOHoulihan |
You weren’t having that it was going to take a bit of time. I know stats are your source of info but they clearly do not tell the whole story of our transition in football since the end of last season.
We came up against a West Brom team yesterday who tried to steam roll us with their press and in order to stop that there had to be a threat that we’d move it quicker however calling some of our play long ball yesterday is doing it a disservice.
We still played a huge amount of good short passing football to create half openings to play people in and that is where our performance has been so much better the last week even if the next ball has been a bit longer
It’s evolution not adaption in my eyes however we all see things differently |
I always ensured I asked ''time for what'' when people were discussing time. Nobody would ever answer me.
I didn't want to give endless time to plan A, no. I still don't, its a plan that cannot work and will not work with our players.
I always insisted that it may well take time to perfect a plan, but the right game plan will return results along the way. More than happy to give time to perfect a gameplan that is showing it works.
Plan A never worked, has never worked and will never work. Martin has changed the system to one many of us were calling for - and we are now reaping the rewards.
Short passing is fine, but we used to it in every situation, no matter the position on the pitch. Those 4% long balls before were largely made up of keepers passes, we literally did almost nothing in the outfield, just ludicrous and egotistical stuff.
Teams used to press us and pick us apart.
To play 3 times the amount of long balls and have 40% less passes is not natural evolution, that's realising a better way to play and executing it. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:34 - Oct 21 with 1025 views | andypitt56 |
He said it himself after the game, that they couldn't implement everything they wanted to do straight away. its been an evolution of the style he wants. Pretty simple really you start with the basics and build up. The players are more confident, its more fluid so we have the time and space to play more probing passes. |  | | |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:44 - Oct 21 with 1020 views | Flynnidine_Zidownes |
Our form has improved with the removal of Benda. A lot of the goals we conceded at the start of the season was him thinking he was prime beckenbauer. He’s a very good keeper in terms of saving and catching etc but he was terrifying in this team. Hamer has given us a lot of stability and the defence obviously has confidence in him.
On the long ball front somebody has obviously finally noticed the incredibly intelligent runs Piroe has been making in behind. Teams play high up against us to press and counter us knocking it around the back which gives the likes of Piroe or laird more space to run in behind. We’ve had more one on ones with the keeper this season than I can remember in a long time. We suck teams in with excessive hogging of possession then well timed ball and we’re in.
I’m not sure it’s an abandonment of plan A, I think it’s a case of a group of players growing more aware that these runs are being made. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:53 - Oct 21 with 1005 views | PatchesOHoulihan |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:20 - Oct 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
I always ensured I asked ''time for what'' when people were discussing time. Nobody would ever answer me.
I didn't want to give endless time to plan A, no. I still don't, its a plan that cannot work and will not work with our players.
I always insisted that it may well take time to perfect a plan, but the right game plan will return results along the way. More than happy to give time to perfect a gameplan that is showing it works.
Plan A never worked, has never worked and will never work. Martin has changed the system to one many of us were calling for - and we are now reaping the rewards.
Short passing is fine, but we used to it in every situation, no matter the position on the pitch. Those 4% long balls before were largely made up of keepers passes, we literally did almost nothing in the outfield, just ludicrous and egotistical stuff.
Teams used to press us and pick us apart.
To play 3 times the amount of long balls and have 40% less passes is not natural evolution, that's realising a better way to play and executing it. |
I'm sure we answered you however I'm not preoared to go back and look to check
It was time for the principles to bed in. we are far more comfortable in posession at the back now than we were which in turn has provided better opportunities to get the ball forward earlier - a different game plan of "get it forward quicker" at the start of the season would have led to aimless forward 50/50 balls in my opinion
I believe this is still plan A and we will only ever jave plan A which is to control the game with the ball which Russell has stated many times. the difference now is not an abandon of style but just that we are getting more effective at what we are doing now everyone is a bit more comfortable | |
| This is Patches O'Houlihan saying "Take care of your balls, and they'll take care of you." |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:59 - Oct 21 with 993 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:53 - Oct 21 by PatchesOHoulihan |
I'm sure we answered you however I'm not preoared to go back and look to check
It was time for the principles to bed in. we are far more comfortable in posession at the back now than we were which in turn has provided better opportunities to get the ball forward earlier - a different game plan of "get it forward quicker" at the start of the season would have led to aimless forward 50/50 balls in my opinion
I believe this is still plan A and we will only ever jave plan A which is to control the game with the ball which Russell has stated many times. the difference now is not an abandon of style but just that we are getting more effective at what we are doing now everyone is a bit more comfortable |
Nope, nobody did.
''Time'' was being asked for plan A to work, at no point was time asked to adapt to a more pragmatic game. We were in fact told that it was off the agenda, he only had this plan A so he couldn't do it and we should just lump it ... or advocate for his sacking (which I continuously refused to).
We laid it out in simple terms. The ball needs to be moved quicker forward, we need to resort to clearances and long balls when the occasion calls for it and we need to transfer some of that pointless possession into direct attacks.
This is chalk and cheese to the early Plan A, I have shown why previously with the heat maps, touches, long ball composition and attacking shape. Happy to do so again.
It is a distinct change of plan, identical to the one being called for by those ironically people are now having a go at. They were correct. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:03 - Oct 21 with 988 views | onehunglow |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 07:44 - Oct 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
You said something along the lines of you not thinking there was a relation and you would like to see the stats kept up all season to see.
Except you now seem offended when the stats are continuing and keeping the trend which I said would be the case months ago.
He has not stuck to his guns at all, we used to have 5% long balls, play the ball across the back 4 constantly and as a result have around 800 passes.
Now we have around 550 passes, less possession and long balls have tripled. |
Morn Doc.
It is obvious to a visually impaired person we have changed tack and well done to Russy for that.We really were messing about stroking the ball aimlessly getting nowhere especially when nearing opponents box.
People should see it as it is - we are far more direcy and are happier to both clear the ball when in defensive danger and to pass it LONG to give the lethal Piroe a chance.
This fella is dynamite and we face a tough January because vultures will be gathering.
And he is not a great header of the ball either and something for him to work on | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:06 - Oct 21 with 988 views | Flynnidine_Zidownes |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:59 - Oct 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
Nope, nobody did.
''Time'' was being asked for plan A to work, at no point was time asked to adapt to a more pragmatic game. We were in fact told that it was off the agenda, he only had this plan A so he couldn't do it and we should just lump it ... or advocate for his sacking (which I continuously refused to).
We laid it out in simple terms. The ball needs to be moved quicker forward, we need to resort to clearances and long balls when the occasion calls for it and we need to transfer some of that pointless possession into direct attacks.
This is chalk and cheese to the early Plan A, I have shown why previously with the heat maps, touches, long ball composition and attacking shape. Happy to do so again.
It is a distinct change of plan, identical to the one being called for by those ironically people are now having a go at. They were correct. |
I think it was always part of the plan, hence Bidwell and laird playing almost like wide strikers. It’s only recently we’ve been manoeuvring into positions and having the vision to find them and Piroe. | | | |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:09 - Oct 21 with 987 views | JJJack |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:03 - Oct 21 by onehunglow |
Morn Doc.
It is obvious to a visually impaired person we have changed tack and well done to Russy for that.We really were messing about stroking the ball aimlessly getting nowhere especially when nearing opponents box.
People should see it as it is - we are far more direcy and are happier to both clear the ball when in defensive danger and to pass it LONG to give the lethal Piroe a chance.
This fella is dynamite and we face a tough January because vultures will be gathering.
And he is not a great header of the ball either and something for him to work on |
Good post. If you look at the heat maps and see that Bidders and Laird are our most advanced players then it's clear that we are looking to play longer balls to get them in behind. The only problem with this is that Bidwell lacks the pace and attacking eye to make this work properly. Manning at LWB would be preferable. As a tactic this is pretty rogue but as you say - a direct ball to Piroe, Laird or Paterson is something that will create far more chances than the nonsense earlier this season where we were creating very little. | | | |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:10 - Oct 21 with 983 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:06 - Oct 21 by Flynnidine_Zidownes |
I think it was always part of the plan, hence Bidwell and laird playing almost like wide strikers. It’s only recently we’ve been manoeuvring into positions and having the vision to find them and Piroe. |
Longer balls was never part of the plan, that was made clear right from the Blackburn game right through to the Stoke game.
The Stoke game was particularly painful where they were praying on our reluctance to go long and dispossessed us twice in the defensive third when we refused to go long and scored twice.
The players took it into their own hands in Bristol and it sort of developed off and on since then. But it took the Bristol game to put a rocket up Martin that his plan may not be the best way forward. It clearly was the wrong on, lets be honest.
Some of the long balls have looked very dangerous recently and keeps the other team guessing, they could play as high as they liked before and know we wouldn't do anything about it. It was silly stuff, it really was. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:12 - Oct 21 with 982 views | Professor |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:59 - Oct 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
Nope, nobody did.
''Time'' was being asked for plan A to work, at no point was time asked to adapt to a more pragmatic game. We were in fact told that it was off the agenda, he only had this plan A so he couldn't do it and we should just lump it ... or advocate for his sacking (which I continuously refused to).
We laid it out in simple terms. The ball needs to be moved quicker forward, we need to resort to clearances and long balls when the occasion calls for it and we need to transfer some of that pointless possession into direct attacks.
This is chalk and cheese to the early Plan A, I have shown why previously with the heat maps, touches, long ball composition and attacking shape. Happy to do so again.
It is a distinct change of plan, identical to the one being called for by those ironically people are now having a go at. They were correct. |
I agree. The basis of play is the same around possession and passing, but, unlike for a number of years, the fast longer (and decisive) pass is being utilised. Thankfully players like Piroe, Paterson and Laird are able to execute this well. I would not even say it's a Plan B, more a Plan A.2.
Like you I had concerns that we were too laborious in building up to attacks, but Piroe's goal last night and Bidwell's Sunday are clear illustrations of the small change in approach. Well done to RM and his team for recognising this and the players (especially Paterson) for its execution. Last two results are perhaps the most exciting since we had another RM at the helm. | | | |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:18 - Oct 21 with 974 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:12 - Oct 21 by Professor |
I agree. The basis of play is the same around possession and passing, but, unlike for a number of years, the fast longer (and decisive) pass is being utilised. Thankfully players like Piroe, Paterson and Laird are able to execute this well. I would not even say it's a Plan B, more a Plan A.2.
Like you I had concerns that we were too laborious in building up to attacks, but Piroe's goal last night and Bidwell's Sunday are clear illustrations of the small change in approach. Well done to RM and his team for recognising this and the players (especially Paterson) for its execution. Last two results are perhaps the most exciting since we had another RM at the helm. |
Agreed.
Under Brendan it was Williams' long diagonal balls out to Dyer that used to cause huge problems. Along the way a myth developed that we never went long under Brendan or Roberto, that's so far from the truth.
Earlier on this season it seemed like to were trying to emulate that mythical way of playing that never really existed in the first place - for good reason.
I think Martin has learned more in his 13 league games for us than he did in 18 months at MK Dons where they just seemed happy to pad the stat sheet. Although towards the end they were getting frustrated. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:25 - Oct 21 with 965 views | onehunglow |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:09 - Oct 21 by JJJack |
Good post. If you look at the heat maps and see that Bidders and Laird are our most advanced players then it's clear that we are looking to play longer balls to get them in behind. The only problem with this is that Bidwell lacks the pace and attacking eye to make this work properly. Manning at LWB would be preferable. As a tactic this is pretty rogue but as you say - a direct ball to Piroe, Laird or Paterson is something that will create far more chances than the nonsense earlier this season where we were creating very little. |
Thanks.
Like many do I winge ,we all do ,and it's what all fans do.Those who do not are either liars or dead from the neck up.
We were light years away from that appalling Stoke performance and it has to be said. Those saying they knew Martin was always right are wrong .He was not. It is entirely possible the players told him so.
Bottom line is, we are now clearly energised and more pragmatic.
No amount of forum fanboy posting fools all. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:48 - Oct 21 with 941 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:03 - Oct 21 by onehunglow |
Morn Doc.
It is obvious to a visually impaired person we have changed tack and well done to Russy for that.We really were messing about stroking the ball aimlessly getting nowhere especially when nearing opponents box.
People should see it as it is - we are far more direcy and are happier to both clear the ball when in defensive danger and to pass it LONG to give the lethal Piroe a chance.
This fella is dynamite and we face a tough January because vultures will be gathering.
And he is not a great header of the ball either and something for him to work on |
Sorry missed this first time round.
You are absolutely correct, the time spent aimlessly knocking at around in our defensive third has reduced markedly and as a result we make around 200 passes less per game. Its a gigantic change.
Those claiming nothing has changed are kidding themselves to save face. The change is obvious and the stats show this.
Interesting to see the stat tracker on Jamie Patterson's torso as he removed his shirt in celebration. Clearly our management disagree with the stat haters on here and we are reaping the rewards as a result. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:49 - Oct 21 with 940 views | Professor |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:18 - Oct 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
Agreed.
Under Brendan it was Williams' long diagonal balls out to Dyer that used to cause huge problems. Along the way a myth developed that we never went long under Brendan or Roberto, that's so far from the truth.
Earlier on this season it seemed like to were trying to emulate that mythical way of playing that never really existed in the first place - for good reason.
I think Martin has learned more in his 13 league games for us than he did in 18 months at MK Dons where they just seemed happy to pad the stat sheet. Although towards the end they were getting frustrated. |
Paul Anderson was key in RM's League 1 winning team-often a quick, longer ball to use his pace/skill outside-then in time Nathan. Often (like Leroy Lita's goal at Blackburn) it was quick passing, not just possession that reaped rewards. | | | |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:52 - Oct 21 with 938 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 10:49 - Oct 21 by Professor |
Paul Anderson was key in RM's League 1 winning team-often a quick, longer ball to use his pace/skill outside-then in time Nathan. Often (like Leroy Lita's goal at Blackburn) it was quick passing, not just possession that reaped rewards. |
We are absolutely on the same page with this one, great insight. I had forgotten about Anderson, but you are right. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 11:03 - Oct 21 with 930 views | magicdaps10 |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 09:20 - Oct 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
I always ensured I asked ''time for what'' when people were discussing time. Nobody would ever answer me.
I didn't want to give endless time to plan A, no. I still don't, its a plan that cannot work and will not work with our players.
I always insisted that it may well take time to perfect a plan, but the right game plan will return results along the way. More than happy to give time to perfect a gameplan that is showing it works.
Plan A never worked, has never worked and will never work. Martin has changed the system to one many of us were calling for - and we are now reaping the rewards.
Short passing is fine, but we used to it in every situation, no matter the position on the pitch. Those 4% long balls before were largely made up of keepers passes, we literally did almost nothing in the outfield, just ludicrous and egotistical stuff.
Teams used to press us and pick us apart.
To play 3 times the amount of long balls and have 40% less passes is not natural evolution, that's realising a better way to play and executing it. |
You were always told that time was needed to implement his style... Always told it by myself and others and now that his style is coming through as the players are getting fitter and used to it, you are trying to spin it off as what you have stated since day 1 in relation to there only being a Plan A.
Trouble with you, it's not about other people and how they achieve things and giving them plaudits but all about you being correct and putting people in their place.....your self obsession is off the scale and God forbid you are wrong, issue is that you have dug your heels in so much that you see being wrong as a defeat when it's just about being a normal human being(we are all wrong now and again). |  |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 11:09 - Oct 21 with 928 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 11:03 - Oct 21 by magicdaps10 |
You were always told that time was needed to implement his style... Always told it by myself and others and now that his style is coming through as the players are getting fitter and used to it, you are trying to spin it off as what you have stated since day 1 in relation to there only being a Plan A.
Trouble with you, it's not about other people and how they achieve things and giving them plaudits but all about you being correct and putting people in their place.....your self obsession is off the scale and God forbid you are wrong, issue is that you have dug your heels in so much that you see being wrong as a defeat when it's just about being a normal human being(we are all wrong now and again). |
I was, yes.
My reply was that if it is the right system then he may need time to 'perfect' it. but it should show results relatively quickly.
This is why I said plan A was never going to work and time is not a factor in a system that cannot work, hence why I wanted a more direct and mixed passing approach.
Martin has now changed to that (three times more long balls than earlier on in the season) and as a result we are seeing results. NOW it may take some time to perfect it, time was not a factor with the other plan, it was inherently flawed - as it was explained back then.
Where was I wrong? Give me a single quote of mine in relation to this that is incorrect. Just one.
I said we will perform better with a longer ball and more direct approach, and backed Martin to see that and change it - that is exactly what has transpired.
You, as usual, want me to say I am wrong about something I am clearly correct about. That's your problem, I can't help you with that. | |
| |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 11:15 - Oct 21 with 921 views | jackal |
The long ball over the top for Piroe or Laird to run on to has been our most effective weapon for a long time.
The possession football is pretty but usually ends up back with the keeper. Last night it cost us the goal.
A combination of the two, a variety in play, would be the way to go.
Martin's approach is starting to take effect. |  | | |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 11:18 - Oct 21 with 918 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Long balls vs forced short passing - is plan A dead? on 11:15 - Oct 21 by jackal |
The long ball over the top for Piroe or Laird to run on to has been our most effective weapon for a long time.
The possession football is pretty but usually ends up back with the keeper. Last night it cost us the goal.
A combination of the two, a variety in play, would be the way to go.
Martin's approach is starting to take effect. |
Correct, this mixed approach was clearly always going to be more effective. It's lethal at times.
As you say, it was the short passing at the back that gave WBA the lead. We often need to shock before we ditch it. Was the same at Luton, second half we came out all guns blazing in a direct game.
Martin has ditched the MK Dons way of doing things, that just doesn't cut it at this level as teams will dispossess you and punish you. You can maybe get away with it more in League 1. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
