Our xG (from FBref) against Hull yesterday was 3.7 (Hull 0.9). With the exception of Sheffield Wednesday's trouncing of Plymouth on the opening weekend (xG 4.4), this is the highest recorded by any Championship team so far, the next best being Leeds's 3.3 against Portsmouth, also on the opening weekend. Individual contributions to the cumulative total were 1.5 (Sargent, 0.7 if you exclude the penalty), Sainz 0.7, Núñez 0.5, Gordon and Marcondes (both 0.3), with the balance made up by low quality chances falling to four other players.
Most coaches would be content with a comfortable 4-0 win, but there's a ruthlessness about Thorup lurking behind his placid manner, as Duffy pointed out after the game: "When we get comfortable leads, we're not doing it on purpose, but we step off it a little bit when we could keep going and punish teams more. It could have seven or eight today. That's the ruthlessness that the manager is trying to get. He's not fully happy because we sat off a bit after we missed the penalty. Goals change games, and that's his point - a goal there would have made things nervy. He wants us to be killers. That's what we need to bring to the group. We have a lot of young players, and it's just about adapting to that mindset." There's a certain viking like conviction in that, perhaps bolstered by the three Danes; Marcondes, Slimane, and Sørensen providing some steel down the spine of the team.
Re. that quote from Duffy, if anyone's mindset needs changing, I'd say it was the older players's, not the younger ones. "Get ahead, slow the game, shut them out" is not a mindset instilled at youth level. Also, I don't actually hear Thorup grumbling about not going all out e.g. for a fifth, after scoring four without reply. What I hear him complaining about is dropping the tempo before the game is secured, as in the example Duffy gives of the reaction after the penalty miss on Saturday. Going all out for a three goal lead makes good sense; going all out for a four or five goal lead much less so. Nor do I hear Thorup complaining about the team trying to manage the game; what I hear him complain about is trying to manage the game by dropping back and defending the penalty area. What he wants is game management through keeping possession in the opposition third of the pitch, stopping the opposition getting anywhere near our penalty area.
I find it very difficult to believe that the theme and content of Duffy’s interview wasn’t sanctioned by Thorup and the management team. You’re importing too much of your own views and suppositions of what Thorup said onto Duffy’s words, when Duffy’s words don’t say that. Now it may well be that Thorup is asking the players to say what you think he is - but there is no evidence of that from Duffy’s comments.
Are there any highlights available? Can only find sky which I am unable to access due to my location. Help would be greatly appreciated.
Having listened to Thorup's comments about this, I think Robbie is right about game management in the opposition third of the pitch both to keep possession and create scoring chances. The key to that lies in midfield through McLean, Núñez and Slimane in that game or others playing in that central trio, supported by the 3 attackers up front through good movement and space creation. That allows the defenders to keep a high line, especially the FBs providing outlets and overlaps. This is the 'aggressive play' Knapper wants and Thorup is achieving it sooner than most people, including me, expected. The challenge will come when opposing teams see this and try to exploit it.
I think it's this bit, Rob: "When we get comfortable leads, we're not doing it on purpose, but we step off it a little bit when we could keep going and punish teams more. It could have seven or eight today. That's the ruthlessness that the manager is trying to get." Put crudely, 'attack is the best form of defence'. Keep the opposition defending by threatening them. I was concerned that tactical theory would create tippy tappy football, but instead it's about crisp accurate passing and good movement.
Exactly, Rick. As Thorup put it during Saturday's post-match interview, “I hope in the future we can defend a little bit more with the ball instead of being defensive in our own half". There are two interconnected themes in that: first "defending with the ball", i.e. keeping possession; second, "instead of being defensive in our own half", i.e. defending high, in the opposition third -- the two being interconnected because the former requires space and movement which is simply not there when you retreat into a low block. The context of that reference to "the future" was Thorup recognising the physical demands of his approach on the players, and the need at times to slow things down in a game and take a bit of a breather. The point he went on to make, though, was about how he wanted that to be done, i.e. by sticking always to the possession-based approach, not temporarily abandoning it, which he acknowledged needed fitness levels that the players were yet to reach.
That’s all fine and I agree with it, but I’m not sure that there is some great need for Duffy’s mindset to change - or rather any indication that his mindset is not changing as much as Thorup needs. And he says Thorup wants them to ruthless, to be killers - which is consistent with all that, and isn’t suggesting Thorup was “grumbling” about not getting a fifth. It seems to be about not letting up, rather than explicitly about goals. So as I said Duffy’s interview has, to my mind, all the hallmarks of sanctioned theme and content, consistent with other comments to the media. And nothing about it to suggest it’s anything other than a true and accurate summary of the players’ (or even the senior players’) impression of Thorup’s instructions and expectations.
What drew my comment was Duffy saying "We have a lot of young players, and it's just about adapting to that mindset", as though it was the youngsters who tended to take their feet off the gas at certain points, whereas IMO, the younger players are less guilty of this than the older. This doesn't surprise me, since it's the older players who have recent experience of a significantly different approach playing under Wagner and, to a lesser extent, Smith. At the risk of being accused of yet again picking on Kenny (who, please note, I fulsomely praised not long ago while also explaining why I was doing so now when previously critical), I think he has the greatest influence in this respect, not just because of his current midfield role, but because he wears the armband and makes no bones about indicating to his teammates what he thinks they should do. My comment certainly wasn't aimed at Duffy specifically.
Another shout out for Ante Crnac, specifically his contribution to that fantastic second goal. The passing sequence is Gunn, Cordoba, McLean, Duffy, Crnac, Sargent, Nunez, Slimane, Sainz, Sargent, GOAL! OK, Crnac played a modest, if essential, part in that and was then no more than a spectator ...... Well, no actually; having released the ball to Sargent, he then runs infield and ends up unmarked in the centre of the Hull penalty area, in the space behind Sargent and the three Hull defenders shadowing him. As Sainz prepares to deliver his pass, Crnac is calling for the (easier) ball to him rather than the far more difficult, has-to-be-perfect cross in to Sargent. But it doesn't come, so, eight appearances and Crnac still hasn't scored .........
