I've been thinking about the difference between a defensive approach and defensive organisation.
Taking a more defensive approach (sitting 11 men behind the ball in your own half all the time) is not guaranteed to improve defensive performances by itself. It might even make it worse, as you invite more pressure.
Defensive organisation (everyone having a clear understanding of where to be at what point, what their jobs are, and how to work in conjunction with those around them) is what matters.
A few weeks ago it seemed to me that Sage's chosen approach was to commit bodies to attacking positions, then press the opposition high up the pitch when we lost the ball. I thought that was a highly questionable approach given the type and quality of our players. A poor fit, whether or not Sage was any good at coaching it.
After Fulham away in the league I thought perhaps Sage would persevere with that approach, and we would see if he could successfully coach it into the players. Organisation would follow approach, over time. Hopefully.
More recently I've found it harder to see what the approach is. We pressed Besiktas ferociously for 45 minutes. We dropped off very deep against Fulham, at least in the first half. Mostly, though, it's been quite non-descript.
I wonder if Sage has deliberately moved away from his original approach (hard to blame him) but, in so doing, lost his way when it comes to organisation? It can't be easy to drill a team into shape if you are moving around between approaches looking for something to stick.
I don't care what approach he chooses (although I really doubt pressing is wise). I want to see signs of coherent organisation. I want players to look like they know what they ought to be doing, even if they fail.
I'll take defeat against spurs and Liverpool if I see a clear plan it terms of defensive detail.
Sage needs to be clear in his mind on what it looks like, though, before we can ever find out if he can coach it.
England
Ireland
Veneto