All you can ask from a winger is to put the ball in the box. Granted, it has to be of a certain quality, but those in the area are expected to get on the end of them. We've put so many crosses into the box this Season, and hardly had anybody on the receiving end. Whether that's down to delivery or lack of movement is up for debate.
I think Elmo's crossing has gone down or is at least very inconsistent nowadays. But there were lots of decent crosses saturday. not amazing but decent but they just never seem to fall onto our player's heads so I think there's definitely a problem with movement in the box.
Hooray, the penny seems to have dropped! I thought the best observation was about Elmo' s crosses being too easy to defend. A defender has to get to the cross, a striker has to get to the cross . . . . . . . .how often do we see a striker attacking the ball? It is far more likely to be a pot-shots from a poor defensive clearance.
Which is the only game we've scored more than one goal in? The game against Toon. What was our strategy in that game? Unrelentlessly push down the left wing.
Sunderland have very good central defenders who can handle crosses from 25 yards off the goal line all day long. The box was packed with defenders and we didn't want to leave Fletcher on his own one on one waiting for a big clearance up to him because he could score a goal from that. I know a lot of people wanted a goal fest when they went down to nine men but the three points were what was important and we got them. I'm sure SB told the lads don't get carried away, keep the ball, be patient, keep your shape, and concentrate and this game is won.
Personally, I think Elmo has been crossing from too deep. I dont know if that's been tactical or of Elmo's own making. But those types of crosses are easy to defend against, and more difficult for the strikers to attack. Opposition will be more than happy to clear those types of crosses all day long and it wont make a difference who we had in the box.
At some point somebody's got to drive past his facing defender and get to the bye line, pull the ball back, create some variation and get the opposition defenders on the move. Saturday was predictable and woeful and easy to defend against.
I think this is one of those strange situations were everyone is a bit right. The nine men was always going to be hard to breakdown, especially when there is a tight-knit back four. We needed a strong target man amongst them so we brought on a player who has been said (by the manager) not to have the physical attributes to cope with the PL; I found that strange. We were looking at a game that would be akin to constantly attacking set pieces and a man who we would normally hustle up front for them was sat on the bench - Faye. His physical presence would have caused them problems others could open up; in other words we would have got inside of them or got them to step forward, either affecting their game-plan. It had to be a better gamble than NP.
Rosie had Ben Arfur in his back-pocket, that and Brady combining with Hudds made the left a better channel. Elmo was involved in some good clearances that released play - it's hard to have everything; second half he was more involved in an attacking role, in fact he was the player who put his head on the ball for a goal! I don't agree that it was all left sided though, as Sone Aluko caused a lot of mischief down the centre (ish). This is exactly what I mean by working to instruction; I think Bruce was more than happy to hold his wings back for defence, popping in the balls at their defence and hoping NP would get on the end of one - very optimistic IMO. You have a good point, the only way I would qualify it is that we need the variety and we are not getting it - we are far too predictable.
70% of our play was down the left, that was the stat at full time. All I'm saying is we scored 3 goals that game because we went down the left and Brady is a lot better at crossing - he got an assist, a goal, and Boyd crossed from the left for the third.
Did we? Brady's goal was created on the right, a pass through to Aluko who was central and then the assist to Brady on the near left, who finished it nicely. Elmo scored from a Brady free kick. Boyd made a sublime pass to Aluko - in this case, aye, from the left.
Brady got the ball from Aluko who was central, but Brady was on the left, Brady's free kick for Elmo was from the left into the centre, and Boyd's cross to Aluko was from the left into the centre. The stats at the end of the match showed the overwhelming majority of our play was down the left, and the commentators mentioned the fact that we seemed to be targeting Debuchy (their right back, meaning our play was down our left).
You've sort of come up with why we scored 3 against Newcastle then. Usually, Bruce will identify the weakest point of the oppositions defence, and whatever is decided ultimately leads to which wing we attack down. Obviously Bruce saw Dossena as Sunderland's weak link as opposed to Bardsley so City attacked down the right.
Exactly, it has nothing to do with any weakness of Elmo on the right - who became more involved in the second half. Our success had just as much to do with our level of intercepts, which was superb. The fact is that we are playing bloody good football and simply need that striker - which was the point in the first place.
