I actually don't think Shaw and Clyne do it enough. They don't go beyond the full back, they hold back rather than push on and this frustrates me hugely. We absolutely must get the full backs to push in properly. Against Sunderland, Clyne did it once in the second half and we nearly scored; that was it. I also don't think we know how good Clyne and Shaw at crossing from advanced positions as we just don't see them within ten yards of the byeline with only one defender to beat.
I think all our full backs are told to be cautious. Clyne scored against villa the one time he did go beyond the opposing defence last season. Frazer was excellent in the Championship at getting behind teams and we scored lots like that and our two full backs now are more capable than Frazer. This is why I believe that we can have very good width without signing wingers (although I wish we had) but Clyne and Shaw must be pushed on when right to do so. This is why I started this post. I wanted us to sign a winger, but since we did not i have been looking at what we have, what we have been doing and what I think MP maybe thinking.
Maybe. I've seen them cross quite a lot and Shaw's tend to be pretty aimless, while Clyne's are floaty and easy to deal with by defenders. For all their good points it's odd to think that Fox and Richardson were much better at putting the ball into the box.
Definately. For me, I don't think we've seen them cross from beyond the full back and by this I mean in that channel down the side of the box. I don't mean from a standing spot with everyone in there, I mean from having taken on the defender and whipped one across. Clyne has got close to the byeline on occasions but for me, they too often stop when they could push on. They also do this when looking to receive the ball. In our last home game, when a CB or CM was looking to pass to them, they were either level or a few yards advanced. If they just made a run into the area beyond the defender, this would create loads of space in the middle, or, if they were given space by making that run, they could receive a forward pass and then be able to cross from a more advanced position.
Maybe we're talking at crossed (ha) purposes. Crosses from the byline tend to be more dangerous and I agree with you I've not seen too many of those, though in fairness it's far from certain Lambert has the pace to get onto the end of them!
Yes, we were. They both cross from deep as did JWP against Sunderland but as you rightly said, that is too easy to defend. I'd like us to be pushing players (whether FB or AM) beyond opposing fB's as this will definately stretch teams. And I fancy Osvaldo to get on the end of some of those!
I wouldn't say "deep" as they often get level with the penalty spot for example but it's still pretty ineffective generally. Yes perhaps Osvaldo would be more likely to reach them, if he is played far enough up the pitch of course!
By 'deep' I should also had said with a shed load of players already stood in the box because as you said, they are often crossed from near the box. If we started crossing, passing or pulling back when getting in behind teams it would be very fruitful.
Yep. And it's something that Lallana should be doing, as well...he's not a great crosser, but he has the necessary attributes to quickly receive the ball wide, get a step beyond the fullback and fire the ball square along the ground, with our strikers rushing to meet it. For my money, that's about the most dangerous ball one can deliver; assuming that the strikers react, any disorganization with the central defenders as they break the line to defend and it'll end with tears. It's also what I like about Shaw's attacks; they're quick, one-directional, and generally end with a hard, low cross or the ball cut back to the spot. Despite our heading prowess, I much prefer the low cross in those situations...most of our players are not exactly blessed with great touch on those lofted balls, and even a wildly-delivered low ball places considerable pressure on the defenders that a ball that harmlessly floats to the other side of the box does not.
I think by wide men, I mean a player that can dribble at pace. Something I dont think we really have. Especially now Puncheon has gone. They're never the best technical players but they can be effective from time to time. Much like Walcott at Arsenal, it's a different dynamic. I guess they would double up on the wide players, but could we not play with 1 winger and 1 attacker out wide? It's not black and white at all - which is why I feel, like many others, we're lacking an attacker of that mould.
The problem is that if the opposition defence sit deep or squeeze us out and our intricate passing is not perfect then we may lack an alternative strategy. We are not Barcelona, just yet, therefore it is crucial we develop an alternative even if it is an occasional diagonal long ball or into the channel behind.
Osvlado is a very good header of the ball and would be able to put away any decent cross. It's so true that our fullbacks don't get to the byeline enough, this has usually been because they have been crowded out. It was very noticeable on Saturday that there was acres of room wide of the penalty box, on two occasions lallana, playing centrally, got the ball and dribbled to about the penalty box, with Jwp wide of him, both times he ignored him but if a fullback had have joined the attack there would have been huge amounts of space to put in a very dangerous cross. The advantage of playing so narrow as we did on staurday and I believe we will continue to do, is that there will be much more space for the fullbacks. Previously the wide man was using the same space as the fullback and nothing came of the attack. Now the fullback will overload the attack and really punish the defence if used correctly. Its going to require a massive physical effort from clyne and shaw and 2 other good fullbacks would have been handy. I would have preferred aaron cresswell to a winger. If we brought in a winger they would be benched as they don't suit how we play and I'm not sure too many good wingers would want to come to us knowing we don't play wingers, I suppose it's even more true of bringing in a leftback unfortunately.
This is the key for me. The Sunderland game was a good example. As you say, let's hope so. BTW, that cross (from Osvaldo) you referred to in your OP; I think if it had been Rickie on the end of it, things may have been different so I totally agree that we should wait and see as we may have been sitting 2nd in the table after that game. Having said that, I do still have a slight niggle about the much discussed 'plan b...' I hope it's gone after 10 games.
An interesting debate guys, and a familiar one here at Norwich. As I see it, both CH and MP favour the modern trend of wide midfielders who play WITH the central attackers, rather than playing balls TO them. So we, for example, have Snodgrass, a left footed player, on the right, and Pilkington, a primarily right footed player, on the left (and now Redmond, who is two footed, able to play wide on either side). Whereas in our first two seasons back in the PL we tended to rely on getting the ball wide quickly and working up the touchline (orthodox wing play) leading to crosses in to Holt in the box, we are now seeing the wide midfielders stationed a bit in from the touchline, leaving space for the full backs to run past them on the outside. A pre-requisite of this is having central midfielders (Johnson and Fer in our case) in front of the back four and disciplined enough to cover for their respective full back when he bombs forward. There is an interesting analysis of Saturday's game HERE which illustrates the approach. Ideally, the wide midfielder will mix up his play, sometimes staying wide and indulging in wing play, other times cutting in to link with the central attackers or attack the box. Redmond did this well on Saturday, whereas Snodgrass, who is recovering from injury, had a quiet game from his point of view. Rather tellingly, a lot of comments on the match thread here on your board were to the effect that you would have benefitted from getting the ball quickly out wide with less attacking play through the middle; in contrast, a lot of recent criticism on our board has been that we do nothing but get the ball quickly out wide and do too little attacking through the middle! Which tells us, I guess, that what we both need is, not so much a Plan A and a Plan B, but rather balance and variation within the same general setup/approach.
Great reply Robbie. It is funny how we all get wrapped up in our teams tactics and fortunes and interesting to hear a snippet of the Canaries views. Makes me wonder if MP has it right and us fans no sod all .... nah, that can't be right. Good luck.
