I agree he has made them more defensive, but he does not shackle his potential match winners into defending before attacking.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Are Hughton’s tactics too negative?
- Thread starter Triggaaar
- Start date
I agree he has made them more defensive, but he does not shackle his potential match winners into defending before attacking.
I guess after 38 games we will know if it was the right thing to do.
- Thread starter
- #183
It worked well when we were 2-0 down and Chelsea didn't need to score. That's pretty inconclusive.
Well obviously they did that too.
Who says it wasn't fine tuned? What on earth makes you think he could have fine tuned it in training, but didn't?
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
They're a lot more similar than either with de Boer. Anyway, the point was that de Boer switched BFS tactics to a more progressive style, it didn't work, and Hodgson has got them back playing more to their strengths.
We can go round in circles, the main thing is, if you want a more attacking style, then you probably need to change the manager. You can't ask CH to suddenly abandon whats he's been doing his whole career half way through a season. The rest of the argument is just nuance, between those of us who thinks his style is working and those who think it isn't. I'm surprised that 3/4 of people think his style isn't working having seen what it achieved the last two years, and considering the limitations of the players at his disposal and our current league position, but hey ho
Should have been left on the training ground until we play a team that if used properly we could rip apart like Soton.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
You see, you are putting everything at the manager's door, it is not the manager that steps out onto the field.
The biggest difference – Lanzini and Arnautovic started to perform. Now you can call that tactics, it could be that they just found form, or just clicked a training, or preferred Moyes attitude and approach. All this shackling, and preventing players doing this or that, in reality, it's far less tactics and much more the manager understanding their players, and the players giving 100%.
erkan
Well-known member
Please can everyone who posted negative crap on this thread about our brilliant manager now just do the decent thing and apologise.
[emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2]
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
[emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2][emoji2]
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
NorthStand-bipolar-Chat.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
Don't be a dick, it's two different games.
We battered West Ham today, I wonder what the score would've been on Wednesday if they'd gone out with the intent they showed today. For me it proves that it's tactics and not ability
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Attacking today, great stuff! 
- Thread starter
- #191
Hughton:
"The most pleasing thing was that at 2-1 we could have been nervous and sat back on it, but we didn't."
Sounds like when we sit back and nervously defend a lead, it's not always at Chris's request, it's often just the way games develop against teams that have been strengthening in this division longer than us.
"The most pleasing thing was that at 2-1 we could have been nervous and sat back on it, but we didn't."
Sounds like when we sit back and nervously defend a lead, it's not always at Chris's request, it's often just the way games develop against teams that have been strengthening in this division longer than us.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #192
I disagree - we were great today and kept attacking, but West Ham played their part in our success. They were poor, and Southampton didn't let us play as we did today. You can't just decide you want to keep attacking and dominate a game.
Kneon Light
Well-known member
Absolutely this.
There are 2 teams involved in a game and it is not just us that sets the pattern.
If one team is dominating it may be that they are playing better and going for it (more likely when they are behind) rather than us sitting back.
GT49er
Well-known member
Nothing for anyone to apologise for. The only idiots were the ones who insisted that anybody who wondered if we could be a little less defensive was advocating going gung-ho, attack, attack, attack, suicidal in this league. Nobody did suggest that. I didn't see any suggestions that CH was anything but an excellent manager either.
So, maybe today the players broke from defence more effectively than usual, and took enough of our chances to win the match. Or maybe Hughton decided that he should - ever so slightly, and ever so carefully - take the brakes off a bit?
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I said this on the match day thread, sometimes you can only play as well as the opposition allow you to.
Look at Southampton's result today, & it puts our 1-1 result into perspective.
....
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
EXACTLY this!!!
Why? Shackles came off today & we won 3-1 proving the 75% right.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
Whilst I agree with the sentiment that there are two teams involved in a game, and it's not always down to us how the game goes, Southampton were absolute GASH on Wednesday and it's a game I think we could have taken control of and won had we had gone at them a bit more and had a bit more belief. I still believe the balance was wrong Wednesday - today's fantastic display an result doesn't change that (actually, it reinforces it because today I saw what I know this team is capable of attacking-wise, as I previously alluded to in this thread prior to today).
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
Complete opposite, surely? We played exact same tactics that we've played for three years, and today proved that these tactics are capable of providing attacking football