TFC's Tactical Analysis Thread

  • There is only one thing weirder than posting on internet forums... lurking on internet forums!
    Registration only takes a minute and removes most of the adverts. You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Register to remove

I don't think that is quite right, because they generally played a high defensive line. Perhaps they did not attack in numbers, but that's a slightly different matter.
I think their line definitely got deeper and deeper as the second half wore on, and there was virtually no high pressing second half. I looked at things like tackle events, and their only two successful tackles second half for example were just over the half way line.
 

Register to remove

'full back less' 3-5-2 formation.

There seems to be a lot made of the full back role in the modern game, so I thought about what would happen if a team didn't play any lol.



That formation would require:

two centre backs that are able to play / cover the full back position (vertonghen / alderweireld)

a defensive midfielder that could drop into the back three to create a back four as well as shield the centre backs (dier)

both the 4 and the 8 need to be good on the ball, contribute defensively and be able to transition defensive into attack, break pressing lines (winks / sissoko)

a number 10 that could drop back and add to the numbers in the middle of the field when the opposite has the ball (dele)

two, speedy 'wingers' that could cover the flanks, as a modern day full back is supposed to (son / moura)

a number 9 with decent hold up play, good on the ball (kane)
 
'full back less' 3-5-2 formation.

There seems to be a lot made of the full back role in the modern game, so I thought about what would happen if a team didn't play any lol.



That formation would require:

two centre backs that are able to play / cover the full back position (vertonghen / alderweireld)

a defensive midfielder that could drop into the back three to create a back four as well as shield the centre backs (dier)

both the 4 and the 8 need to be good on the ball, contribute defensively and be able to transition defensive into attack, break pressing lines (winks / sissoko)

a number 10 that could drop back and add to the numbers in the middle of the field when the opposite has the ball (dele)

two, speedy 'wingers' that could cover the flanks, as a modern day full back is supposed to (son / moura)

a number 9 with decent hold up play, good on the ball (kane)
The way teams like us (City) play, even with 2 CB’s, our full backs aren’t really part of a back 4, they are part of the midfield in terms of where they spend most of their time.

Now, with City, that makes a midfield 5 in defence and 3 in attack (or without/withthe ball). In our case in often meant a 4 without 2 with. (Just I’m overly simplistic terms for the sake of this example)

So you can see how we expose fb’s more than any other team in this league (Liverpool also usually play a CM3 like City)

Also, Big flaw in your model, Sissoko (and Dier) are terrible in terms of transition (neither want the ball under pressure or play quick, incisive passes).

Can I ask where you got or did your diagram?
 
Also, Big flaw in your model, Sissoko (and Dier) are terrible in terms of transition (neither want the ball under pressure or play quick, incisive passes).

Can I ask where you got or did your diagram?
didn't want to turn every thread into a transfer thread so i only included the players we currently have. there are many names that could replace sissoko in the number 4 role to better transition the ball. number 6 wouldn't have that responsibility

 
'full back less' 3-5-2 formation.

There seems to be a lot made of the full back role in the modern game, so I thought about what would happen if a team didn't play any lol.



That formation would require:

two centre backs that are able to play / cover the full back position (vertonghen / alderweireld)

a defensive midfielder that could drop into the back three to create a back four as well as shield the centre backs (dier)

both the 4 and the 8 need to be good on the ball, contribute defensively and be able to transition defensive into attack, break pressing lines (winks / sissoko)

a number 10 that could drop back and add to the numbers in the middle of the field when the opposite has the ball (dele)

two, speedy 'wingers' that could cover the flanks, as a modern day full back is supposed to (son / moura)

a number 9 with decent hold up play, good on the ball (kane)
worked nicely with Ajax mid 90s - they had exactly the right players though...
 
worked nicely with Ajax mid 90s - they had exactly the right players though...
you could argue that we have the right players, depending on lo celso for the number 4, transition role....


the 'weaker' or should i say; unproven, would be sessegnon and edwards. you could also add skipp and onomah. they would very much be our second string so to speak.

i do think mr x will be an important signing however, which could plug a few gaps.

the back three are perfect (vertonghen, alderweireld and sanchez), moura and son have the pace and if they can contribute defensively, they would also work. dele and kane have the minerals, as would winks and lo celso. sissoko not so much (i did think he could make an excellent ball recycler mind, in the number 6 role, as would dier
 
Only Man City had a higher XG (3.16) so far this weekend than us (2.57) (Liverpool 1.68) and nobody has a better XG against than the (0.64) we limited Villa to. and that was half our average per game for last season.
 
Only Man City had a higher XG (3.16) so far this weekend than us (2.57) (Liverpool 1.68) and nobody has a better XG against than the (0.64) we limited Villa to. and that was half our average per game for last season.
Surprised Liverpool was so low - I watched much of the game on a Friday and in the first half they were all over Norwich and the 4-0 at half time didn't flatter them. In the 2nd half Norwich were certainly better organised and trying to compete better and didn't give Liverpool time on the ball so Liverpool fluffed a number of decent chances in 2nd half.

Spurs seemed to be generally in control without doing anything to make it count pretty much until Eriksen came on, although we had looked better in 2nd half before he came on too.
 
Surprised Liverpool was so low - I watched much of the game on a Friday and in the first half they were all over Norwich and the 4-0 at half time didn't flatter them. In the 2nd half Norwich were certainly better organised and trying to compete better and didn't give Liverpool time on the ball so Liverpool fluffed a number of decent chances in 2nd half.

Spurs seemed to be generally in control without doing anything to make it count pretty much until Eriksen came on, although we had looked better in 2nd half before he came on too.
And that is why stats can be so misleading.
 
And that is why stats can be so misleading.
No, it’s the other way round Stevee, x/g stats actually quallify not just quantify. They measure (based on analysis of100s of 1000s of events) the quality of chances not just the quantity and the likelihood that chances lead to a goal based on all the circumstances. And what they are saying is though we think Liverpool had lots of chances, the actually likelihood of them scoring from them wasn’t necessarily as good as the perception and we actually had better quality chances to score overall. With our naked eye we see chances and register pressure and emotion but we don't always separate those things and weigh it up clinically without separating the actual emotion from it. X/G does this.
 
No, it’s the other way round Stevee, x/g stats actually quallify not just quantify. They measure (based on analysis of100s of 1000s of events) the quality of chances not just the quantity and the likelihood that chances lead to a goal based on all the circumstances. And what they are saying is though we think Liverpool had lots of chances, the actually likelihood of them scoring from them wasn’t necessarily as good as the perception and we actually had better quality chances to score overall. With our naked eye we see chances and register pressure and emotion but we don't always separate those things and weigh it up clinically without separating the actual emotion from it. X/G does this.
The only thing that bothers me with team/ players stats is that they don't factor in the quality of the opposition or the quality of the league.
 
The only thing that bothers me with team/ players stats is that they don't factor in the quality of the opposition or the quality of the league.
I believe x/g and xa stats do this, as well as the situation, I believe they evaluate the players involved and their prior metrics - but I’m not 100% on that, or it might be that some do and some don’t.

Either way, they are far more unbiased metric over a wider control body than us, our eye and our emotional bias (even subconscious or subliminal emotional bias).
 

Register to remove

Top Bottom