242 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

For decades in the PL teams have played defensive football.  Now we have Conte and it is all about his personal genius.  Sam Allardici must be hugely jealous.

Allardyce ! I wondered what managers style of football we were playing and it's Allardyce.

Said no-one ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, PeteRobbo said:

So if that's the only conclusion that one can take, then it can't be inferred that it's a predominately counter-attacking team as well. Not if that was the only conclusion it was possible to take.

Interesting to note that Droy studiously ignored this post and instead responded to another, bringing up the name of Allardyce for some reason (known only to himself)

Edited by Bob Singleton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Martin1905 said:

I think we do start games a in very particular way, I wouldn't call it cautious as I don't think we are particularly worried about the oposition but we do start off playing deep. I can see some would call it cautious or defensive and they would have a case but to me it is a very deliberate way of playing.

A way that allows the other team to have the ball with little pressure up until our defensive third but we are extremely confident in our ability to limit the amount of chances they have and very rarely score. That's how good this side is defensively. 

After the first 30 minutes we then push/press further up the field and play with a lot more intensity and attacking threat. We repeat this for the first  15-30 minutes of the second half and then drop deep again. Or if the opposition is so tired from chasing us all over the pitch without the ball we can generally dominate possession in the final third.

The united match is a good example of this. The media thought they were great but in reality we allowed them to play for a while then as soon as we decided to up the intensity and push further forward we absolutely dominated them.

It seems to me that it is a very deliberate tactic by Conte, one that I really like. I absolutely love the fact that we allow teams to play however they want at the beginning of the match, fully confident that we will not let them score, whilst conserving enery ourselves. We then say 'now it's our turn' and play them off the park for the middle third of the game. It's incredible to watch and genius tactics from Conte. 

Spot on. We certainly start cautiously for most of the time and focus on quick breaks and opponents mistakes. 

Then we have periods of the game when we are on the front foot. I feel our strategy is to minimise risks of making mistakes and then try to make the most of the periods when we are on top of the game (which happens to every team and is inevitable). 

Micro manage the small parts of the game is a huge part of being successful and often something that passes by the general viewer. 

13 hours ago, zaffo said:

Certainly a deliberate method Conte employs at times. What it does is it actually lulls the opposition onto the front foot and aids us with more space going forward, as long as we move the ball quickly. Opposition sides are likely to want to pressure us excessively early on and look to score on the break. This essentially flips the script and gives the opposition more of the ball at times early, essentially dragging them further up the pitch and leaving us with space to exploit - either on the counter or by simply good passing and movement within general play. For what can be perceived as a rather cautious approach it's also quite attack minded in a sense if we're able to capitalise. Which, from some stats posted earlier, shows we tend to score a high percentage of goals within that first 30 min block. Clearly works. 

This is a funny post, if not because you actually seem to agree with me and even use the same terms. 

Yet somehow we don't focus on defensive stability and quick transitions? Is this yet another 74 mins is more than 1,600 mins type of discussion? I mean, the video you posted at the start of Conte's reign was well argued and described how he plays with us quite accurately I'd say. Yet when others point that out you somehow deny it? Sometimes you are quite hard to grasp. 

12 hours ago, Blue_In_Every_Way said:

I think the standard, performance wise, I am using to compare our performances against would be that Everton game at home when I felt that we were sublime.

I feel like I haven't seen enough of those performances this season. I am not talking about the scoreline to be perfectly honest.. I am talking about the speed at which we moved the ball and the way we created chance after chance.

I haven't seen enough of that this year. I have seen a lot of games where we were good (certainly much better than the opposition) but not great. 

Certainly deserving of our place at the top through sheer consistency though. I am definitely not disputing that.

We absolutely haven't seen enough of those performances. You know the ones when we blow the opposition away. 

In many ways this season is panning out a lot like Jose's first season with us. We started cautiously, found our rhythm and played amazing counter-attack and quick break football only to go into a game management mode second half when we had a big lead. Certainly the right strategy to use at this stage and it's very similar to what Jose also did in 2014/15.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bob Singleton said:

Interesting to note that Droy studiously ignored this post and instead responded to another, bringing up the name of Allardyce for some reason (known only to himself)

Yeh, I noticed that myself Bob. Can't imagine why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bob Singleton said:

Interesting to note that Droy studiously ignored this post and instead responded to another, bringing up the name of Allardyce for some reason (known only to himself)

If I state the stats don't support an argument, then if someone adds that the stats don't support the opposing argument then why get drawn into a pointless discussion.

Not much point in you raising it either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sleeping Dave said:

This is a funny post, if not because you actually seem to agree with me and even use the same terms. 

Yet somehow we don't focus on defensive stability and quick transitions?

Yes.  Allardici or PL teams do it - it is gross incompetence.  Italian teams do it and it is a fine art.

As for the story that Conte says we don't practice counter-attack.  Yes he probably said it.  But does anyone seriously believe it?
This isn't Italian football - people actually do watch Chelsea - we know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2017 at 2:57 PM, Sleeping Dave said:

Yes I am. And no, the issue is not with me stating we are predominantly a counter-attacking side. 

You have people who seriously claim we only use it sparingly. It's our main attacking outlet. Deny that and there really isn't any point for us to discuss this further. Cause we'd be so far from each other that it's pointless and quite frankly, a waste of time. 

Hi Dave. Yes it is me, the slow kid in the class. Help me, because I'm confused. When you claim that we are "predominantly a counter-attacking side" and that it is "our main attacking outlet", can you please explain how that fits when we play teams like Stoke? They defend deep and set themselves up to avoid being counter-attacked, forcing us in to other footballing strategies. And please do not cite the last few minutes of the game after Cahill's goal when they had to chase the game.

Against many of the teams in the Premier League we have long stretches of the game when the counter-attack is unavailable to us. Because of this we are unable to be a "predominantly counter-attacking" team, and have to rely on other methods for "our main attacking outlet". And please don't use big words because I'm the slow kid in the class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2017 at 4:12 AM, A Blue Essien said:

Get in. Great result and one of those title clinching away days you don't forget (similar to Blackburn 05, Liverpool 10, and QPR 15). 

It's been said already but Stoke were nasty. Their entire back 4 as well as Cameron put in one snide tackle after another. I blame the ref though; he allowed it to happen. Clamp down early and they would have either taken a step back or had someone sent off. Instead it was allowed to continue. In retrospect it's good Hazard didn't play this one; he would have been broken in half.

Some thoughts:

1) Let's start off with individuals and look no further than Luiz. What a performance. That was honestly one of the best performances at CB I've seen in some time. Intercepted everything, tackled everything, and passed the ball beautifully. It was the sort of manic day in windy conditions that could have been difficult for him to maintain control but he did so with grace and class. Fabulous performance. MOTM.

2) It's become the norm now, but Kante was brilliant again. You can tell Conte's been working on his forward passing because he played some wonderful through balls that could have resulted in goals. So happy for Cahill too. IMO there's no way that was a penalty so it was great to see him get the winner. He's truly the unsung hero of this campaign. Thought Costa was very good too, after a testy first half. Worked his arse off as usual and despite being targeted, he held his own in the physical battles. He's one of the reasons you can't kick us off the park. There's too much resilience, too much fortitude.

3) That resilience and fortitude comes straight from the manager. Love Antonio. He does not back down. Will change formation 3 times in 15 minutes if need be. You could see what the winner meant to him...and straight to the fans right after. It's not for show, it's not for the cameras. He feels it, he means it. 

4) Spurs aside, good set of results for us. City are now out of it, so only one side remains. 10 clear with 10 to go? I know 21 is the max we need but I reckon around 15-16 points will do it. We're getting closer... 

Blue Essien, thanks for this post. For me it highlights the contributions of those players that excelled in the game.

Costa is different than the Costa of two years back. He rightly gets upset when he is continuously fouled and targeted by the Stoke hatchet men, but he manages to control himself and stay on the field to help our cause. I think Conte should be credited for excellent man management with Costa. Diego is an extremely hard worker and makes defenses work and tire themselves out in trying to keep him shackled.

My only criticism of the team in a few of our games lately is failing to take our chances. A three goal margin would of more accurately represented our display against Stoke. Having said that, I'm kind of glad the game was close because the team were able to show their resilience and determination under pressure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Faramir said:

Hi Dave. Yes it is me, the slow kid in the class. Help me, because I'm confused. When you claim that we are "predominantly a counter-attacking side" and that it is "our main attacking outlet", can you please explain how that fits when we play teams like Stoke? They defend deep and set themselves up to avoid being counter-attacked, forcing us in to other footballing strategies. And please do not cite the last few minutes of the game after Cahill's goal when they had to chase the game.

Against many of the teams in the Premier League we have long stretches of the game when the counter-attack is unavailable to us. Because of this we are unable to be a "predominantly counter-attacking" team, and have to rely on other methods for "our main attacking outlet". And please don't use big words because I'm the slow kid in the class.

When the counter isn't an outlet due to how the opposition is set up, what do we usually do? Do we attack in numbers and camp outside their box? Sure, it happens like it happens to every team out there. But it's not the main strategy we use.  

Mostly we play the ball in the back 3 and two CMs/WBs to try and draw them out of their shell and create space between their lines to quickly transition into. 

Why do you think we do that and not the Barca approach of passing the opposition into submission?

Hint: it's not our tactics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sleeping Dave said:

When the counter isn't an outlet due to how the opposition is set up, what do we usually do? Do we attack in numbers and camp outside their box? Sure, it happens like it happens to every team out there. But it's not the main strategy we use.  

Mostly we play the ball in the back 3 and two CMs/WBs to try and draw them out of their shell and create space between their lines to quickly transition into. 

Why do you think we do that and not the Barca approach of passing the opposition into submission?

Hint: it's not our tactics. 

Remember, I'm the slow kid. Spell it out for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now