Seasidesage
New member
I voted no as we are in with a decent shout of staying up. If we stay up and play like this next season on the other hand...
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Are Hughton’s tactics too negative?
- Thread starter Triggaaar
- Start date
Not Andy Naylor
Well-known member
A big part of the reason we play defensively is that the other team has the ball more than us.
A big part of the reason the other team has the ball more than us is that we give it to them too often.
A big part of the reason we give it to them too often is that our players are not as good as their opponents - either our passing isn't good enough, or our players don't get into good enough positions to receive the ball, or the opponents read the passes, or are well-positioned to intercept, or work hard to press and challenge.
A big part of the reason our players are not as good as their opponents is that we are new to the Premier League and our rivals have often had longer to build their squads, or more money for longer to invest in better players.
A big part of the reason the other team has the ball more than us is that we give it to them too often.
A big part of the reason we give it to them too often is that our players are not as good as their opponents - either our passing isn't good enough, or our players don't get into good enough positions to receive the ball, or the opponents read the passes, or are well-positioned to intercept, or work hard to press and challenge.
A big part of the reason our players are not as good as their opponents is that we are new to the Premier League and our rivals have often had longer to build their squads, or more money for longer to invest in better players.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,312
Its OK to soak up pressure if you have the defense, which we do, as long as you have the ability to switch rapidly into direct attack, which we dont. we dont offer enough threat going forward on counter-attack for counter-attack to work. its usually a slow transition and the opposition regroup, then we only play to the wings, who nearly always cut inside, so we're also predictable.
we're played a couple of teams when theyy were out of sorts and didnt get enough from those games. they were the ones where we played to the teactics and didnt adjust to their poor form, allowing them into the game. Everton i recall was like this. Only at West Ham did we get a really good result. we've probably lost 4-6 points this way.
we're played a couple of teams when theyy were out of sorts and didnt get enough from those games. they were the ones where we played to the teactics and didnt adjust to their poor form, allowing them into the game. Everton i recall was like this. Only at West Ham did we get a really good result. we've probably lost 4-6 points this way.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
In a nutshell. I agree with all of this.
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
Thats true. I wrote it when only your OP was written, and then saw the eight posts published whilst I was were ranting were, on the whole, considered replies. Feel free to transplant it to any of the other ten or so threads on the front page where my post would fit right in
- Thread starter
- #48
Even if they lose 90% of the time, that's not bad for teams a few divisions below the club they're playing. We lost 100% of the time to the top 6. And all the GD in the world isn't worth as much as 1 extra point.
I imagine that's what he's trying to do, I'm just not sure if it's working.
I don't think we're good enough to play 442 properly in this league. It's too much to ask our central 2 midfielders to compete against 3 from other PL teams, which means our wingers are constantly defending. 442 rarely works at top international level for the same reason.
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
But if its not working for us, one has to ask what West Brom, Swansea, Southampton, Stoke and Huddersfield are doing that is working even worse?
coz apparently this managing in the premier league thing is very straightforward ..... attack attack attack!
I think we've been a bit unlucky at times against the top 6. Man Utd was very unfortunate. We were looking fairly comfortable at Spurs until their fuke goal too. First half at Chelsea was good, they didn't get much of a sniff, granted their early 2nd half goal was not related to luck or fortune though. Arsenal could have been more interesting if that March shot had hit the post and gone in. Equally, we very nearly lost 2 points at Swansea in the last minute when they hit the bar, we've shot ourselves in the foot with the stupid Bruno penalty against Everton etc.
It's a fair question anyway, I'm not sure anyone can say with conviction if it is or isn't working but from the OP I'm not convinced it's cost us points. I'd like us to be a bit more attacking but not convinced we'd have won any more points.
For spells last night, it was basically 4-5-1, with Stephens sitting behind Gross and Propper in a 3 man midfield. I think we are quite flexible with Gross, when attacking or pressing he can get forward and beyond the striker but when we have spells without the ball he would often drop in.
Charlies Shinpad
New member
We will find out how negative he could be when we have all our new signings match fit
We have an abundance of strikers now so no excuse for letting getting splinters on the bench
We have an abundance of strikers now so no excuse for letting getting splinters on the bench
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
I don't think the balance is quite right, especially against the teams in the bottom half. I think the wingers are asked to play too negatively, too much in their own half, and this has contributed quite considerably to our lack of goal threat. The last couple of seasons, it's been all about being solid and then getting the ball quickly to the wingers when we have opportunities to attack. This season, the wingers spend too much time on defensive duties, which makes it hard to transition to an attacking mindset when we do have the ball. I also think we are missing Sam Baldock massively - he would create a lot of space for our wingers, which would allow them to play better. There's no one else really creating that space this season - hopefully Locadia will help with that, once he's finally able to play. Overall, I feel Chris should have more confidence in our players to produce the goods against the bottom half teams. He tends to sound very defeatist before we even play teams, and doesn't seem to have the confidence in our players to compete at this level all things being equal, which results in a very conservative setup. He also seems unwilling to change things up with subs due to a fear of altering with the stability of our set up. Of course he knows the players better than me, so I'm probably wrong, but I just wish he had a bit more confidence in the players to have a go at the bottom half teams. The whole team looks short of confidence at the moment as well, which of course doesn't help. I'm still 100% Hughton in, as I'm sure most people are - but this does not stop me having frustrations.
Charlies Shinpad
New member
Fans aren’t turning they are expressing their opinion and our managers tactics are exactly rocket science to opposition teams are they
We seem to have no plan b and it’s costing us points
Saints went 1-0 down and he changed it to 4-4-2 at halftime
CH would have waited until 70 mins to do that as he did at West Brom but by then it’s too late
GT49er
Well-known member
My thoughts are yes he is, but I haven't voted - there are so many who will react to a 'yes' vote with comments like, "So you think we should go gung-ho and all attack?" - no, I don't. Or "Don't you realise that if we try and go toe-to-toe with some of these teams we'll get slaughtered?" - yes I do. Or, "So you'd be happy to lose 5-2 or 6-2 all the time as long as we were 'having a go', would you?" - no, I wouldn't.
What I would like to see is just a little more emphasis on attack - even something relatively small like leaving a player up field to provide an out ball, and to reduce the number of attacking players available to camp out in our penalty area. And not crowding our own penalty area quite so much - at least two goals that we've recently conceded (Chelsea's first, and Southampton's yesterday) were the direct result of the ball deflecting off a Brighton player - who was not a defender! - away from a covering player and straight to the opposition scorer.
And lastly, no, I don't think I know more about football than Hughton, but the OP asked a question and my opinion is, fantastic manager though he is, he is just a little bit too defensive.
What I would like to see is just a little more emphasis on attack - even something relatively small like leaving a player up field to provide an out ball, and to reduce the number of attacking players available to camp out in our penalty area. And not crowding our own penalty area quite so much - at least two goals that we've recently conceded (Chelsea's first, and Southampton's yesterday) were the direct result of the ball deflecting off a Brighton player - who was not a defender! - away from a covering player and straight to the opposition scorer.
And lastly, no, I don't think I know more about football than Hughton, but the OP asked a question and my opinion is, fantastic manager though he is, he is just a little bit too defensive.
maffew
Well-known member
Has @Dr No posted yet
Skaville
Well-known member
People often talk about teams going through the gears. We have two gears - first and reverse.
The question is a little misleading as the word tactics is a plural, so implies we have more than one way of playing. We don’t. 4-4-1-1, inverted wingers, cram the middle of the pitch and defend for your lives as soon as we score. The only time we altered it was Chelsea. One solitary game.
Once sides worked us out (it took until October) it’s been too predictable, too inflexible and ineffective. I want to support Hughton, he’s a hero and a decent man but it’s painful watching us at the moment.
The question is a little misleading as the word tactics is a plural, so implies we have more than one way of playing. We don’t. 4-4-1-1, inverted wingers, cram the middle of the pitch and defend for your lives as soon as we score. The only time we altered it was Chelsea. One solitary game.
Once sides worked us out (it took until October) it’s been too predictable, too inflexible and ineffective. I want to support Hughton, he’s a hero and a decent man but it’s painful watching us at the moment.
Last edited:
bn1&bn3 Albion
Well-known member
"Too" negative? No, we are still outside the relegation zone, anyone who thought we'd be in a better position than this in the pre season was living in Lala Land.
Are they negative, yes.
Are they negative, yes.
jasetheace
New member
- Apr 13, 2011
- 712
No that was the Brexit referendum
Skaville
Well-known member
Sitting on a lead against the worst team (on form) in the league with 75 minutes to go? I would call that too negative.
- Thread starter
- #60
Unfortunately, maybe Swansea were doing it worse than us, but having changed manager, they're now doing it better. With a point covering the 4 teams directly below us, and us having 5 of our remaining 13 games left against top 6, I'm not sure we're in a better place than them.
I'm not sure if that's just a general point, or aimed at me. It feels like the latter, which is weird, as I'm one of those constantly pointing out that the footy geniuses on here don't know half as much as our manager, and that we're about where we'd expect to be given our squad. In fact, having not had a new striker since last season, we've done a little better than I feared.