Conundrum

[PatrickA]

A family member mentioned to me a preference for the style we are currently employing than that which was employed under Glasner i.e more front foot, more chances, more players pushed forward.

Is that a common view?

For me it's a little too gung ho.
You can't expect to win too many games if you're conceding around 2 goals a game, however good to watch it might be.

Initially I thought it was because our defenders might not be good enough or we hadn't got a settled defence.
Now I'm more inclined to the view that it's more a question of them being placed in positions they are uncomfortable with, i.e dragged wide , chasing attackers, exposed to forwards running at them in space, lack of defensive cover.
I don't see Sage changing approach or the system.
He will live or die with the full backs pushed high and the midfielders free to break forward, which will continue to leave the 3 central defenders exposed.
Good to watch, but leaves us continually vulnerable.
This is not a knee jerk view, but I don't see how Sage survives if we continue to leak goals at the current rate, however likeable he may be.
You may get lucky on occasions, but you can't get enough results if you're conceding as many goals as we are.

 

[eaglesdare]

He can tweak it if he wants as we seen against Leeds. A more defensive approach but we only had one of two chances the other end.

I expect against Brighton we will be more defensive...but who knows.

 

[MrRobbo]

The mob doesn't know what they want. All they know is that they want something different.

At least the constant droning on about 4 at the back has been a bit subdued of late

 

[doombear]

I expect the defending issues will be sorted by Christmas and we'll still be scoring at least 2 goals a game and be winning more games than we lose. I will be surprised if we see another 0-0 this side of Christmas. It will take time for everything to gel and we'll be fine

 

[OneStevePerrin]

I can understand the concern about the back three never being the same players and to some point I agree. However, the bigger problem is that our wingbacks play too far forward and when losing the ball whoever is in the back three are pulled all over the place trying to cover for the missing wingbacks. It won’t get resolved by new central defenders coming in. The style of play Sage is making us play just won’t work until those wingbacks are better with the ball and those that they pass it to (Pino for example) don’t then lose it. Larsen tonight was also a culprit. I just can’t see how we can make it work chucking everyone forward the way Sage sets us up? Brighton will stuff us if we play like Sunday and tonight :-(

 

[Painter]

The mob doesn't know what they want. All they know is that they want something different.

At least the constant droning on about 4 at the back has been a bit subdued of late

I want to watch goals and an exciting brand of football, not a constant passing it along the back line. Sage is bringing this, yes we let in goals, but we did with Richards, Lacroix and Guehi last season.

 

[Lanzo-Ad]

Sage is playing the system how it should be played, both WBs much higher up the pitch, almost a 3-2-4-1 formation, this leads to more goals at both end, under Glasner we basically played 5-4-1, which Forest are doing now, a back 4 is undoubtable the best defensive formation, but Sage prefers his system. as Painter says it is more exciting to watch, for me Sage is doing ok, the ref won last night not Lyon who are average at best it could have finished at 5-4 to either side, but it was never going to be 0-0.

 

[Lanzo-Ad]

I can understand the concern about the back three never being the same players and to some point I agree. However, the bigger problem is that our wingbacks play too far forward and when losing the ball whoever is in the back three are pulled all over the place trying to cover for the missing wingbacks. It won’t get resolved by new central defenders coming in. The style of play Sage is making us play just won’t work until those wingbacks are better with the ball and those that they pass it to (Pino for example) don’t then lose it. Larsen tonight was also a culprit. I just can’t see how we can make it work chucking everyone forward the way Sage sets us up? Brighton will stuff us if we play like Sunday and tonight :-(

That is the system played properly, they play deeper then we have 5.4.1, Glasner style, the WB is a tough role to play, open football, Sage has the courage of his convictions, rightly or wrongly, time will tell, but i think he needs at least half a season to deliver.

 

[ASCPFC]

I wouldn't be interested in signing Disasi currently.

 

[MarkA333]

Disasi looks slow and ponderous. Canvot always has a critical mistake in him. Richards is ok just. Tomiyasu is injury prone but good when fit. Honest is actually quite composed and decent for an 18 year old.

While Sage remains the manager, we are in for an exciting brand of football most likely not going our way.

 

[PatrickA]

The centre backs are being expected to cover too large an area.
If any of us were managing an opposing team we'd know exactly how to play against us.
Knock the ball past the advanced wing back who is in no position to defend the space behind him.
This in turn draws the centre back out wide to face the attacker, thereby leaving gaps in the penalty area for other attackers to exploit.

I don't see us changing the system, although it was noteworthy that post match Sage said the players were too high leaving the lines exposed.
Some are saying well we tweaked the system by playing a bit deeper v Leeds, but that was the only time we have done that this season.
There is a lack of balance between the defensive and attacking sides of our game and the coming weeks will reveal whether that lack of balance is resolved.

 

[doombear]

The big positive of Sageball for me is that I believe we can always score a goal so when we do go behind as we have done on several occasions, I'm not saying to myself "that's it, we're going to lose".

I can remember when if we conceded first, that was the game done as we rarely came back.

 

[park the bus]

I can understand the concern about the back three never being the same players and to some point I agree. However, the bigger problem is that our wingbacks play too far forward and when losing the ball whoever is in the back three are pulled all over the place trying to cover for the missing wingbacks. It won’t get resolved by new central defenders coming in. The style of play Sage is making us play just won’t work until those wingbacks are better with the ball and those that they pass it to (Pino for example) don’t then lose it. Larsen tonight was also a culprit. I just can’t see how we can make it work chucking everyone forward the way Sage sets us up? Brighton will stuff us if we play like Sunday and tonight :-(

When I see a player like Mitchell getting turned repeatedly I know something is wrong and needs fixing.

 

[mtp1958]

When I see a player like Mitchell getting turned repeatedly I know something is wrong and needs fixing.

Mitchell has spells of being turned but most of the time he is solid . Did notice that he is taking up the king Kenny position just outside the box on corners 👍🏻

 

[BromleyMonkey]

All I know is I go into games thinking there’s going to be goals in this game and when we go behind I’m confident we can score the other end and possibly get back into a game.
I remember under Roy, once the other team went in front it always felt like game over, especially at selhurst because we did little going forward, it was painfully turgid and to a certain extent under Ollie as well in the league, especially at selhurst, it always felt like if Munoz wasn’t firing up and down that line it was a struggle

It would obviously help if we had a settled defence with three good CB’s, selling two of the best defenders in the division was always going to hurt us

So what’s the answer? Sort the best back three out, Timber in front of them and keep on attacking 😁

 

[taylors lovechild]

I don't think it was a coincidence that our most (and perhaps only) solid defensive display was when Tomiyashu started in the back 3 against Leeds. He was composed, good on the ball and was organising the defence, something we've missed since Guehi. This, to me, suggests it's a recruitment issue. Towards the end of Glasner's reign, we conceded sloppy goals and struggled to score. After Guehi left, we only won three games in four months in the PL, including a fortuitous win over relegated Wolves and wins over terrible Newcastle and Spurs teams.

The club were clearly trying to address the centre-back issue during the summer, and for various reasons it seems they came up short, and so they were forced to make stop-gap deals. I don't currently see a strong centre-back pairing in our squad, so I don't see how switching to a back four fixes things, especially as our best right-back seems better going forward than defending. Like others, I'm also enjoying seeing us posing a threat going forward. It does remind me a little of the Pardew days, but hopefully it turns out better than that!

 

[JHB]

I think it is a case of being ready to tweak the tactics to ensure we aren’t so open. We can’t carry on conceding at the rate we have so far. Bar Lance Armstrong City we have had as benign a set of fixtures as we could hope for to start in the Premier League and we’ve conceded an average of 2 goals a game. Good teams will rip us to shreds if we carry on playing like that.

We did change it against Leeds playing the wing backs deeper, allowing the back three to stay central and dropping Kamada back to make a midfield three. It worked well as we looked much more solid and still quite lively in attack. I was disappointed we didn’t try and play more like that in the two games since the international break. Hopefully we do on Sunday or Brighton will pick us apart