Unfortunately Ivor, you are one of the few, I think I have become cynical of nearly all jack posters due to antics on our board. I apologise if I have inferred anything that you might have taken offence to and hope to have future debates with you about football
Interesting how the same page where those come from show Cardiff being one of the worst passers in the league. http://www.whoscored.com/Regions/25...amStatistics/England-Premier-League-2013-2014
On evidence of first few home games, City have a style that is no it easy on the eye and with 2 successive home defeats and 3 difficult home games coming up, I foresee dark days unless the style is changed. It worked versus Man City more by luck (and poor Man City defending at corners) than judgment, and against Everton due to largely poor finishing by the toffees. they nearly got away with it v Spurs not least due to remarkable goalkeeping. The idea of sitting deep, defending tight and having one striker up front at home is unattractive, and depends for success on (i) the ability of the defence to keep a clean sheet (ii) the midfielders and forward closing down at every opportunity (iii) the lone forward being supported by midfielders getting up to support him (iv) the rare chances being converted and (v) more chances being created and shots on goal. I would prefer City to play more attacking football from the off; City only went on the attack after Newcastle had scored 2. They would not have done so had it been 0-0 at the interval. The team lacks real pace. There is no substitute for it (look at Townshend for England for example); City have Whittingham, Bellamy, Odemwinghie who have little pace and refuse to play the one quick winger they have, Noone. Away from home is another story but has any other poster got similar or differing views on the home tactics?
I haven't seen a lot of you this season, Ninian but what I have suggests your assessment is a fair one. The way Swansea play was developed over a long period, and well before we actually gained promotion. It veered between suicidal defending under Martinez to having no attack to speak of and passing it around our own half under Sousa. Elements of both remained under Rodgers but his signing of Sinclair changed us into a more formidable attacking team and that's what got us up. The current stats directly reflect our signing of Shelvey who is apt to play an accurate long ball or two. Sometimes it comes off, sometimes not, but that isn't hoofball as the OP wrongly suggests. I think the Manager correctly recognized that we have to mix it up a little sometimes as teams have long since found us out. Press us high up the pitch and not giving our players time on the ball is the way to go. When that happens, Shelvey is more than capable of dropping in a long ball to make them think twice - hence the stats. The point I'm making is that it has taken years to get to this stage, and I think you'll actually be better off forgetting about the style for now and concentrate on keeping clean sheets whilst nicking goals and winning ugly.
Agree with you Ninian and I also think it is predictable to plan against. The pressure will eventually tell on our defense and all that chasing will take a toll on fitness. I hope to see a more attacking arrow in Malkys bow before too long.
Ninian! For me, and this is something I've raised when Malky joined us, he doesn't utilise the squad enough. Something that was also highlighted at Watford. He sticks with a tight group. O.k. you could say when he first came that many weren't players he would have brought to the club so he didn't have faith in what was available. The current squad are all more or less his acquisitions so why persist with essentially 15 players again when results are saying change is needed? Early days I know, but I fear it will be more of the same. Note: The Development side have now won 9 out of 10 games so far this season, counting pre-season.
Good point ITI. Squad players really have to be patient. Mutch is an example of someone who seemed to be begging for a start, but has been held back.
Can't disagree Ninian, I would love to see open flowing football where we attack at every opportunity. I get frustrated when I see all the guys in our half defending for all they are are worth, it will tell and teams will set up to attack us from the 1st minute to last minute. I thought of all our home games the Everton game could have been more open had we attacked a bit more rather than sit back. Man city were not as classy or good as Spurs on the day and we punished them, Not saying we go all out against Man utd but a bit more attack minded and we can get something even if it's a good feeling for the future on the back of a heavy defeat.
True Taff and for me it is about setting up a style of play for the whole season that is suitable for the league. If we play a more attacking style of football the players will get used to it and as they improve in the PL and perhaps get another signing or two in January we will be more comfortable with that style. We don't want to all of a sudden with 10 games to go have to go from ultra defensive to ultra attacking as we try to stay up! Still it would just take a shock backs to the wall win against Chelsea and we would probably be thinking differently!
Why would you even care how you play so long as you stay up? Down the line, of course, you'll want to have a bit more finesse in your play but right now? Survival's got to be the priority, Holloway looks like he's going to be taking a second side down by naively trying to outplay their opponents. Bravery can very quickly become naivity in football. The important thing is becoming defensively solid, goals aren't easy to come by in the PL so when you score them you need to make them count, there's no sense pushing forward to score goals if you're conceding more at the back. Also, looking at the long ball stats, is the only thing people are taking away from it that Cardiff aren't at the top or bottom? The first thing I'd say it suggests that long passes are a significant part of every team in the league's game given that even the side with the least averages over 50 per game(more than 1 every 2 minutes!). That's something most people should realise anyway, even Arsenal are a more direct team these days, it doesn't mean they're not playing good football. Hoofball is different and if you're going to look for an indicator of that then you should probably look at possession and even then it's not fool proof. Besides short passing doesn't equal attractive football the sameway long passes don't equal bad football. I think what most people liked about Swansea in their first season is that they were brave, not many sides in the PL try to dominate possession against the top teams in the league, let alone do it successfully. Laudrop has made them more savvy, particularly away from home, and that involves defending deep and in numbers so there's not much they can hold over you in that regard.
Can't see us doing anything against Chelsea other than parking the bus, waiting for Chelsea to work out the weakest links for them to attack and get the win they no doubt expect to get. We need something a bit different, but are unlikely to produce anything but a defensive view against them. It's a bit of a pity because we can offer a lot more, the big teams are used to having to break down the lower teams, they have all the answers to that. Frazier playing a lonely figure up front gives us nothing, we have to be a little braver if we are to get enough points. Definitely set up a style of play that gives us more of an active strike force, as this will give us the best chance against teams of similar levels in the long run. We can still chop and change things while keeping a more attacking nature.
I think they'll be harder to beat than Man City. Man City plough a lot more players forward and try to camp in your half, so when you get the ball there's always a chance of a break. Chelsea don't do this so much and the fullbacks don't push up quite so much so I can't really see where our goals are going to come from.
We played extremely well against Man city, and even then we got luck on our side, we caught them a bit cold. We won't get that against Chelsea, certainly not at their place, I can't see anything but a loss, I just hope it's not a big margin. Our way of playing now relies on all hands to the pump, any player who isn't 100% will weaken that area tremendously, and a good team will take advantage of that.
Thing is against the likes of Chelsea away. MM should be more cavalier in his approach, as in reality, we have little or no chance of getting a result if we play as we have done. Have a go at them, lets get a bit of pace going forward and for me Noone fits the bill for a game like this, at least Faz would get a bit more service. Hull hung on there for a long time, and when they conceded there was little chance of pulling it back. Here's hoping for a positive attacking set up. By the way the silence is deafening wrt the fitness of Cornelius !!
Isaw, it would be a breath of fresh air should we take the view that there is nothing to lose, so go for it and at least pick up some pointers about our ability to play this way. We are going to park the bus and suffer when they score the first goal.
I saw the Hull game and I'm pretty sure they were 2-0 down in half an hour or less. Playing like you've got nothing to lose isn't a great idea, Villa got hammered 8-0 there last season which was followed up by as beating them 4-0 at their place and all of a sudden they were in crisis. Norwich approached the game well, I thought. They looked to play conservatively and use their wings to form attacks and once they went behind they just adjusted it so they were more attacking but playing the sameway. They were unlucky not to get something out of that game but I think trying to attack and outplay them from the off is suicidal, even if you made it through the first hour they've got an incredibly strong attacking bench they can utilise. Against Norwich they made 3 subs, the 2 who won them them the match cost £70mill. You don't beat them by going gung ho but by picking your moments and playing smart, Mourinho loves to play on the back foot and counter attacking and his team suit it too.
Yid I think we sound like we're saying throw everything at them, but thats not what we mean. We have been overly defensive and many see that as the reason we lost to Newcastle, we came out second half with a bit more of an attack mind and done better. We can sometimes offer so little in attack that it becomes a matter of time before we concede, such is the pressure we come under. We need to give the other team something to worry about at least a little.
