Glasner, Part 2

[Lanzo-Ad]

See what I mean about your disrespectful posts ? 🤣

I think you take some beating in the list

 

[NEILLO]

Without wishing to get into name calling with fellow posters, perhaps it’s better to examine the core of the debate on Glasner.

Some are unwilling to even engage in the debate i.e ‘Glasner is our best manager in years’ ..’ he sees the players in training ‘ ….’he’s far more knowledgeable than a mere fan’ etc.

Some will engage in a debate and provide reasons why the system does suit our squad and point out that it’s not a rigid system as there’s flexibility built in depending upon whether we’re in or out of possession.

Some on here are of the opinion that our current squad would suit a back 4 better.
Nobody can say for sure because we have not tried it for any meaningful length of time.

It’s probably uncontroversial to say the wing back system suits Munoz, but not Mitchell.

It’s also fair to say that the system does not appear to suit Nketiah or Kamada , although no doubt some would say they’re not good enough regardless of the system!

In my view the system does not appear to get the best out of Eze as he operates in a very narrow area of the field making it far easier to contain him.
Back in the day when I played (a long time ago sadly) talented players were told to ‘find space’ on the field so they could best influence proceedings and hurt the opposition.
Surely this would be possible to achieve within a team structure.Let him drift and find the gaps.
I also don’t like a 2 man central midfield.
It leaves us frequently outnumbered and places huge demands on the players selected.

I also feel that Guehi and Lacroix are more than capable of forming a very solid partnership without the need for a 3rd ( often redundant) centre back.
It’s rare that we encounter more than one striker in any event and it’s noteworthy that, 3 centre backs or not , we still conceded from a header on Sunday.

I’m not saying Glasner is a bad manager, or suggesting I know more about football than Glasner.
I’m just suggesting that it would be interesting to see us play with a back 4 and extra man in midfield.

What's a nice post like you doing in a thread like this !

I like Glasner. He's a breath of fresh air compared to Roy ( who I always supported given the circumstances he was working under ). He's trying to play a different brand of football. A brand that he has had success with and has made his reputation by playing.

I recently engaged with a football journalist, discussing what criteria clubs use when appointing managers. Was it just their being successful ? Was it the style of play they employ ? Was it a mixture of both.

He had consulted with a few clubs when providing an answer. And it was, by a clear majority, the mixture.

So...when Glasner was appointed it would have been in the full knowledge of how he sets his teams up. Between Parish and Freedman they would have to evaluate Glasner's suitability in terms of the direction the club wanted to go in and how they were going to get there. That suitability match would also take into account the players currently at the club as well as future potential purchases.

Staying with the system then - I doubt that any manager / head coach would change their way of playing to accommodate one player, in this case, Eze. You can make a case for the system not suiting him, but I contend that doesn't extend to his carelessness in possession, sloppy passing and the recent trend of slowing the play down even when in space to carry the ball.

You don't like a back three, but it was successful at the end of last season together with the recent run of one defeat in eleven games. Moving to a four would certainly suit Mitchell - but what of Munoz on the other side ?

Glasner isn't perfect. And if he was a better manager than he is, he wouldn't be at our club. I will agree that a potential fault of his is his inflexibility in terms of set up. And I've tried to articulate above the reasons for that. It's not a question of blind acceptance, more a question of I trust Glasner's judgement in front of ANY poster on here including myself. He's the multi million pound professional who gets it right more often than he gets it wrong.

You sum up the various elements that make up the core of the debate just as I see them, just missing one thing and that is the way that the original poster presents himself in all of this.

 

[NEILLO]

I think you take some beating in the list

You like dishing it out but you don't like taking it 🤣

 

[PatrickA]

What's a nice post like you doing in a thread like this !

I like Glasner. He's a breath of fresh air compared to Roy ( who I always supported given the circumstances he was working under ). He's trying to play a different brand of football. A brand that he has had success with and has made his reputation by playing.

I recently engaged with a football journalist, discussing what criteria clubs use when appointing managers. Was it just their being successful ? Was it the style of play they employ ? Was it a mixture of both.

He had consulted with a few clubs when providing an answer. And it was, by a clear majority, the mixture.

So...when Glasner was appointed it would have been in the full knowledge of how he sets his teams up. Between Parish and Freedman they would have to evaluate Glasner's suitability in terms of the direction the club wanted to go in and how they were going to get there. That suitability match would also take into account the players currently at the club as well as future potential purchases.

Staying with the system then - I doubt that any manager / head coach would change their way of playing to accommodate one player, in this case, Eze. You can make a case for the system not suiting him, but I contend that doesn't extend to his carelessness in possession, sloppy passing and the recent trend of slowing the play down even when in space to carry the ball.

You don't like a back three, but it was successful at the end of last season together with the recent run of one defeat in eleven games. Moving to a four would certainly suit Mitchell - but what of Munoz on the other side ?

Glasner isn't perfect. And if he was a better manager than he is, he wouldn't be at our club. I will agree that a potential fault of his is his inflexibility in terms of set up. And I've tried to articulate above the reasons for that. It's not a question of blind acceptance, more a question of I trust Glasner's judgement in front of ANY poster on here including myself. He's the multi million pound professional who gets it right more often than he gets it wrong.

You sum up the various elements that make up the core of the debate just as I see them, just missing one thing and that is the way that the original poster presents himself in all of this.

I’m not averse to a back 3 with the right players.
Chelsea played it very successfully a few years ago and won the title with Moses and Alonso as extremely effective attacking wing backs.

I just don’t think that we are similarly blessed in our options and would prefer to play 3 in midfield than at the back.
This is the engine room that enables us to compete properly and hopefully create so my preference, with the current squad, would be to have more numbers deployed there.
It would also mean we weren’t outnumbered in midfield as we frequently are.

A lot of the time our back 3 spend time passing between themselves sideways and backwards.
We retain possession, but without purpose and it slows down attacks.
In recent weeks we have played more directly but it doesn’t always work when the opposition are resolute and defend with depth.

I accept the point about Eze not helping himself with his contribution, but I suppose I look at it from the standpoint of how can we unlock his undoubted talent.
He seems to be playing in a narrow straitjacket on the field and with little movement outside that left sided area either side of the halfway line.
It may suit the structure of the team organisation , but it sure as hell isn’t getting the best out of him.

 

[Palacesince64]

I’m not averse to a back 3 with the right players.
Chelsea played it very successfully a few years ago and won the title with Moses and Alonso as extremely effective attacking wing backs.

I just don’t think that we are similarly blessed in our options and would prefer to play 3 in midfield than at the back.
This is the engine room that enables us to compete properly and hopefully create so my preference, with the current squad, would be to have more numbers deployed there.
It would also mean we weren’t outnumbered in midfield as we frequently are.

A lot of the time our back 3 spend time passing between themselves sideways and backwards.
We retain possession, but without purpose and it slows down attacks.
In recent weeks we have played more directly but it doesn’t always work when the opposition are resolute and defend with depth.

I accept the point about Eze not helping himself with his contribution, but I suppose I look at it from the standpoint of how can we unlock his undoubted talent.
He seems to be playing in a narrow straitjacket on the field and with little movement outside that left sided area either side of the halfway line.
It may suit the structure of the team organisation , but it sure as hell isn’t getting the best out of him.

It didn’t stop young Esse moving across from right to left to find space within seconds of coming on the field. Was he ignoring instructions or using his initiative when we have the ball?

 

[Canterbury Palace]

I agree, sack him. We might be sixth in the form table over the last 11 games but that Brentford result was a disgrace.

Also think we should release Mateta. Other than his steady stream of goals and magnificent hold up play, what does he really add?

Henderson can go too. Zero goals or assists this season.

And don't get me started on Hughes. His tenacious and battling midfield qualities may please some deluded fans but there's no excuse for him showing up week after week looking like Casper the Friendly Ghost's pale cousin.

 

[crvenaeagle]

I’m not averse to a back 3 with the right players.
Chelsea played it very successfully a few years ago and won the title with Moses and Alonso as extremely effective attacking wing backs.

I just don’t think that we are similarly blessed in our options and would prefer to play 3 in midfield than at the back.
This is the engine room that enables us to compete properly and hopefully create so my preference, with the current squad, would be to have more numbers deployed there.
It would also mean we weren’t outnumbered in midfield as we frequently are.

A lot of the time our back 3 spend time passing between themselves sideways and backwards.
We retain possession, but without purpose and it slows down attacks.
In recent weeks we have played more directly but it doesn’t always work when the opposition are resolute and defend with depth.

I accept the point about Eze not helping himself with his contribution, but I suppose I look at it from the standpoint of how can we unlock his undoubted talent.
He seems to be playing in a narrow straitjacket on the field and with little movement outside that left sided area either side of the halfway line.
It may suit the structure of the team organisation , but it sure as hell isn’t getting the best out of him.

Previously Andersen would make clinical passes that cut through the oppositions lines effortlessly, but now we're missing that skill.
Opposing teams know they can just hold and wait whilst the ball goes back and forth, eventually leading to Henderson who will hoof it up to Mateta.
I was hoping Riad or Lacroix would have that same skill, or at least develop it but no luck so far.

 

[park the bus]

Previously Andersen would make clinical passes that cut through the oppositions lines effortlessly, but now we're missing that skill.
Opposing teams know they can just hold and wait whilst the ball goes back and forth, eventually leading to Henderson who will hoof it up to Mateta.
I was hoping Riad or Lacroix would have that same skill, or at least develop it but no luck so far.

Yes, Andersen had an accurate range of passing, but now the ball needs be rolled into midfield and play proceed from there. The only problem is that the one midfielder with true accurate passing ability is out injured. It seems to me that the one crucial cog in the scheme of things is missing. It's not about Mitchell getting forward, or Eze looking out of place, or any of the other reasons that have been put forward - it comes down to having a two man midfield that can attrite but not create. Of course these are the players currently at Glasner's disposal and he is doing what he feels is best to put out a functional side. Resultswise one can say he is doing well enough, but the funny thing is, at times it reminds me of Roy, if only because it looks like a team made of disparate parts that the manager is trying to meld into a convincing whole.

 

[PatrickA]

There are strong rumours today that Ben Chilwell is going to join us.
Now that potentially would make a huge difference to the operation of Glasner's system.
He would be perfect for the LWB role in terms of progressive play and delivery from the left side.
If true, one has to assume it ends any interest in Diouf.
Futhermore, there are questions on Chilwell's fitness record and where this move would leave Mitchell.
Nonetheless, he would definitely strengthen our options.

 

[Lanzo-Ad]

I’m not averse to a back 3 with the right players.
Chelsea played it very successfully a few years ago and won the title with Moses and Alonso as extremely effective attacking wing backs.

I just don’t think that we are similarly blessed in our options and would prefer to play 3 in midfield than at the back.
This is the engine room that enables us to compete properly and hopefully create so my preference, with the current squad, would be to have more numbers deployed there.
It would also mean we weren’t outnumbered in midfield as we frequently are.

A lot of the time our back 3 spend time passing between themselves sideways and backwards.
We retain possession, but without purpose and it slows down attacks.
In recent weeks we have played more directly but it doesn’t always work when the opposition are resolute and defend with depth.

I accept the point about Eze not helping himself with his contribution, but I suppose I look at it from the standpoint of how can we unlock his undoubted talent.
He seems to be playing in a narrow straitjacket on the field and with little movement outside that left sided area either side of the halfway line.
It may suit the structure of the team organisation , but it sure as hell isn’t getting the best out of him.

very good post, i looked back at that Chelsea lineup that won the Premier league at a stroll, as you say the key thing was the midfield set up, Alonso, Matic, Kante and Moses, the back three, Cahill, Luiz, Azpilicuueta. and front 3 from 4 Willian, Hazard, Pedro and Costa, Conte was Manager at the time, the only changes they made was in attack, 1-2, 2-1.

​

 

[Lanzo-Ad]

There are strong rumours today that Ben Chilwell is going to join us.
Now that potentially would make a huge difference to the operation of Glasner's system.
He would be perfect for the LWB role in terms of progressive play and delivery from the left side.
If true, one has to assume it ends any interest in Diouf.
Futhermore, there are questions on Chilwell's fitness record and where this move would leave Mitchell.
Nonetheless, he would definitely strengthen our options.

Chilwell is very similar to Alonso, more of an attacker than a defender, would make a big difference

 

[MrRobbo]

It didn’t stop young Esse moving across from right to left to find space within seconds of coming on the field. Was he ignoring instructions or using his initiative when we have the ball?

I've had a simular conversation with anyone who will listen this week.

Would you ever see Eze tapping in the opposite (to his position) back post? Not in a month of Sundays.

Not only did Esse make a run across the box into the channel to give Eze an option, when it wasn't passed to him and instead Eze crossed it deep, he got himself into a dangerous position. Hugely impressive movement.

 

[MrRobbo]

I’m not averse to a back 3 with the right players.
Chelsea played it very successfully a few years ago and won the title with Moses and Alonso as extremely effective attacking wing backs.

I just don’t think that we are similarly blessed in our options and would prefer to play 3 in midfield than at the back.
This is the engine room that enables us to compete properly and hopefully create so my preference, with the current squad, would be to have more numbers deployed there.
It would also mean we weren’t outnumbered in midfield as we frequently are.

A lot of the time our back 3 spend time passing between themselves sideways and backwards.
We retain possession, but without purpose and it slows down attacks.
In recent weeks we have played more directly but it doesn’t always work when the opposition are resolute and defend with depth.

I accept the point about Eze not helping himself with his contribution, but I suppose I look at it from the standpoint of how can we unlock his undoubted talent.
He seems to be playing in a narrow straitjacket on the field and with little movement outside that left sided area either side of the halfway line.
It may suit the structure of the team organisation , but it sure as hell isn’t getting the best out of him.

It might not be perfect for him, but he seamed to do ok in it last year.

Eze's issue at present is Eze. The odd flash of brilliance, but too few and far between. Build up play is laboured, often gets dispossessed.

 

[PatrickA]

It might not be perfect for him, but he seamed to do ok in it last year.

Eze's issue at present is Eze. The odd flash of brilliance, but too few and far between. Build up play is laboured, often gets dispossessed.

He had an excellent spell at the end of last season when the team (including Wharton and Olise) were firing on all cylinders.
Otherwise Eze didn't really pull up any trees last season.

In discussing his recent form, I'm not seeking to absolve Eze from responsibility for his lacklustre performances.
I'm trying to be constructive and see if there's a way to unlock his talent.
One poster suggested that he had to play in this 'restricted ' role on the left to maintain the team shape and structure.
My point is that I'm sure he could be allowed to find pockets of space around the field rather than being restricted in too rigid a formation.

What none of us can know is if he's following Glasner's instructions by sticking to his position, or if he's just not playing as fluidly for other reasons .

 

[Badger11]

He had an excellent spell at the end of last season when the team (including Wharton and Olise) were firing on all cylinders.
Otherwise Eze didn't really pull up any trees last season.

In discussing his recent form, I'm not seeking to absolve Eze from responsibility for his lacklustre performances.
I'm trying to be constructive and see if there's a way to unlock his talent.
One poster suggested that he had to play in this 'restricted ' role on the left to maintain the team shape and structure.
My point is that I'm sure he could be allowed to find pockets of space around the field rather than being restricted in too rigid a formation.

What none of us can know is if he's following Glasner's instructions by sticking to his position, or if he's just not playing as fluidly for other reasons .

When Wharton is back we will see a different, better Eze.

 

[MrRobbo]

He had an excellent spell at the end of last season when the team (including Wharton and Olise) were firing on all cylinders.
Otherwise Eze didn't really pull up any trees last season.

In discussing his recent form, I'm not seeking to absolve Eze from responsibility for his lacklustre performances.
I'm trying to be constructive and see if there's a way to unlock his talent.
One poster suggested that he had to play in this 'restricted ' role on the left to maintain the team shape and structure.
My point is that I'm sure he could be allowed to find pockets of space around the field rather than being restricted in too rigid a formation.

What none of us can know is if he's following Glasner's instructions by sticking to his position, or if he's just not playing as fluidly for other reasons .

Agree. And whilst he's going to have to maintain some discipline out of possession. I find it hard to believe that he can't roam a bit. (He was inside for that flick to JPM in the first half on Sunday).

(I said above, but Esse managed to find himself on the back post for his goal, so there is clearly some flexibility)

One of the big benefits of playing 3 at the back, is that we have some more cover negating the need to always be working back.

Also worth noting that Glasner often calls Eze and Sarr as his 10's. He clearly doesn't see them as chalk on the boots wingers, but slightly narrower and closer to JPM.

 

[Skip]

I'd like to see Eze and Sarr swap sides every now and again. Last season, when we were really good you would often see Olise pop up on the left and Eze drift over to the right. Sometimes they occupied the same area and combined with good effect. I don't remember seeing us get overloaded when we did lose the ball and they were both very difficult for the oppostion to contain.

Perhaps the shape of the team this season has been more important whilst we try and navigate our way out of trouble. Once OG considers we are clear we may see a change in how we approach games.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

That, more eloquently put, is what i am saying, Players first, Formation Second, adapt to the needs of the players, not the reverse, in the end unless 2 or 3 players are added to suit the style, i feel a struggle to stay up will ensue, Esse has played all of his games at Millwall on the RW, of a 4-2-3-1, so another player out of position

We've owned Esse for 11 days, he's a complete unknown at this level, and the success of this 'oh so obvious' 4-2-3-1 is entirely dependent on him being able to contribute regularly at this level - we have no alternatives for his spot in that line-up, nor would we for Sarr off the left - they are the only two wingers in the squad.

But at least Eze could walk around a more central area of the pitch.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

He had an excellent spell at the end of last season when the team (including Wharton and Olise) were firing on all cylinders.
Otherwise Eze didn't really pull up any trees last season.

In discussing his recent form, I'm not seeking to absolve Eze from responsibility for his lacklustre performances.
I'm trying to be constructive and see if there's a way to unlock his talent.
One poster suggested that he had to play in this 'restricted ' role on the left to maintain the team shape and structure.
My point is that I'm sure he could be allowed to find pockets of space around the field rather than being restricted in too rigid a formation.

What none of us can know is if he's following Glasner's instructions by sticking to his position, or if he's just not playing as fluidly for other reasons .

Is he particularly restricted though?

Including heatmaps below for Eze and Gakpo this season - Gakpo being an example of someone actually being asked to play left-wing...

 

[MrRobbo]

Is he particularly restricted though?

Including heatmaps below for Eze and Gakpo this season - Gakpo being an example of someone actually being asked to play left-wing...

View attachment 583

View attachment 584

Dont let the truth get in a good story 'Glasner out!' 'Change the formation!'