eenfish
Well-Known Member
Seive
You keep saying that word but I don't understand what you mean? Because our defence is bad? Is that it?
-
Join ccmfans.net
ccmfans.net is the Central Coast Mariners fan community, and was formed in 2004, so basically the beginning of time for the Mariners. Things have changed a lot over the years, but one thing has remained constant and that is our love of the Mariners. People come and go, some like to post a lot and others just like to read. It's up to you how you participate in the community!
If you want to get rid of this message, simply click on Join Now or head over to https://www.ccmfans.net/community/register/ to join the community! It only takes a few minutes, and joining will let you post your thoughts and opinions on all things Mariners, Football, and whatever else pops into your mind. If posting is not your thing, you can interact in other ways, including voting on polls, and unlock options only available to community members.
ccmfans.net is not only for Mariners fans either. Most of us are bonded by our support for the Mariners, but if you are a fan of another club (except the Scum, come on, we need some standards), feel free to join and get into some banter.
RD 19 Mariners V P Ants
- Thread starter midfielder
- Start date
You keep saying that word but I don't understand what you mean? Because our defence is bad? Is that it?
sydmariner
Well-Known Member
Yes cos of him
Roy Law
Well-Known Member
I thought Monty had just served a suspension for five cards?
Wombat
Well-Known Member
That's pretty childish.
I don't hate Hutcho at all.
I think he is a great bloke and a fantastic club man.
He was in my starting 11 for the first 3 seasons and in sometimes in more recent years, just not in centre midfield.
He was our captain when we finally won the league......but I'm tipping we might have had another 10 or 11 blokes that might have chipped in a little bit as well.
tsd
Well-Known Member
You started it
You can't win football games on the unhappy side of 65 - 35 % possession and Hutch is the no 1 possession keeping player in the league
Wombat
Well-Known Member
Hmmm.....do they do a statistic on the least amount of metres gained on those passes or the most amount of back passes completed.
It's not really his fault.
He is old now and plays within himself simply trying to survive the full 90.
I heard some bullshit on this site about his passes but pretty sure they had a graphic on fox saying Monty had a higher passing success rate.
It's not really his fault.
He is old now and plays within himself simply trying to survive the full 90.
I heard some bullshit on this site about his passes but pretty sure they had a graphic on fox saying Monty had a higher passing success rate.
Wombat
Well-Known Member
Sorry Dibs
Been a bit busy to write a proper answer.
We got away with that system last year due to all the other sides apart from the Drive bys being terrible. We also got away with it due to Dutchy who singlehandedly carried us at times.
Almost of all of our attacking came via the flanks with our bombing fullbacks.
This year we have let too much quality go to play the same system yet we have persisted and have been found out terribly.
It was a clever system when Arnie first devised it....now it's killing us.
Been a bit busy to write a proper answer.
We got away with that system last year due to all the other sides apart from the Drive bys being terrible. We also got away with it due to Dutchy who singlehandedly carried us at times.
Almost of all of our attacking came via the flanks with our bombing fullbacks.
This year we have let too much quality go to play the same system yet we have persisted and have been found out terribly.
It was a clever system when Arnie first devised it....now it's killing us.
dibo
Well-Known Member
The diamond relied on our fullbacks as well!
In our last year of the diamond (2011/12) Bozanic and McGlinchey would sit relatively deep and narrow (especially Bozanic) while releasing Rose and Bojic respectively. Bozanic played a role quite similar to Monty now.
The defensive structure was also the same as what we presently play - two banks of four with the strikers pressing high.
The main difference when you get down to it is who the second pressing player is.
In the diamond it's a striker (the 10 drops in next to the line DM), in the 4-2-3-1 it's the 10 because there is a second screener behind.
I think a lot rests on who we have at 10. With Amini we dropped him in the scrum, with Roger and Flores we didn't.
That (for me) is the main factor that determines the shape and pretty well the only practical difference.
The other shapes we form in other phases of play (including, crucially, how we play out) are very similar either way.
In our last year of the diamond (2011/12) Bozanic and McGlinchey would sit relatively deep and narrow (especially Bozanic) while releasing Rose and Bojic respectively. Bozanic played a role quite similar to Monty now.
The defensive structure was also the same as what we presently play - two banks of four with the strikers pressing high.
The main difference when you get down to it is who the second pressing player is.
In the diamond it's a striker (the 10 drops in next to the line DM), in the 4-2-3-1 it's the 10 because there is a second screener behind.
I think a lot rests on who we have at 10. With Amini we dropped him in the scrum, with Roger and Flores we didn't.
That (for me) is the main factor that determines the shape and pretty well the only practical difference.
The other shapes we form in other phases of play (including, crucially, how we play out) are very similar either way.
nebakke
Well-Known Member
On the quality - I think you're wrong, wombat, in your assessment of the other teams last season. Roar definitely weren't at their best, but I still think a lot of that was closer related to everyone lifting a notch than it was about a heavy drop in qualitty. It's not like everyone were brilliant, but the quality was an overall improvement on the season before, which is why that was also the first season where you would note that the teams were starting to struggle with the traditional run down the flank followed by a pass into the penalty area, by last season, most defenses had finally caught on to that.
This leads into the tactical bit... Could I suggest, with my limited understanding of the tactics, that perhaps the shape is of less concern than how we use it (much like the size ;P~~). My gut feel is that the 442 could work well, if we tried to play the ball into position rather than the current tendency to regress a couple of seasons and always trying to pass it in, high. I think Matty is strong enough to make up for the relative lack of technical skills, to hold the ball up and get through a defence, if he doesn't have to deal with all four defenders at a time, I'm less certain about Duke, but I'm certainly willing to give it a try, if nothing else then simply because he might still provide the good countering opportunities, so perhaps, in a sense, really play something like the 4-2-3-1 but with Matty as one of the 3, sitting a bit higher, so-to-speak.. I dunno, it's probably complete insanity as I'm sure the tendency would be for him to quickly end up as a #10 without the skills. It's just that, I think that he has better defensive skills and intent than most forwards... That's not to say that he's defensive, just more so than many of his ilk
Anyway, the idea being that it would free Duke to play in that high line, much like Bernie and Macca used to and let Matty try to work the ball though... Oh I dunno, it's sounding more and more like a regular #10 anyway, wtf do I know? But I'm posting it anyway, 'cos it's the Intarweb and if I can't air out my ridiculous thoughts here, where can I?
This leads into the tactical bit... Could I suggest, with my limited understanding of the tactics, that perhaps the shape is of less concern than how we use it (much like the size ;P~~). My gut feel is that the 442 could work well, if we tried to play the ball into position rather than the current tendency to regress a couple of seasons and always trying to pass it in, high. I think Matty is strong enough to make up for the relative lack of technical skills, to hold the ball up and get through a defence, if he doesn't have to deal with all four defenders at a time, I'm less certain about Duke, but I'm certainly willing to give it a try, if nothing else then simply because he might still provide the good countering opportunities, so perhaps, in a sense, really play something like the 4-2-3-1 but with Matty as one of the 3, sitting a bit higher, so-to-speak.. I dunno, it's probably complete insanity as I'm sure the tendency would be for him to quickly end up as a #10 without the skills. It's just that, I think that he has better defensive skills and intent than most forwards... That's not to say that he's defensive, just more so than many of his ilk
Anyway, the idea being that it would free Duke to play in that high line, much like Bernie and Macca used to and let Matty try to work the ball though... Oh I dunno, it's sounding more and more like a regular #10 anyway, wtf do I know?
But I'm posting it anyway, 'cos it's the Intarweb and if I can't air out my ridiculous thoughts here, where can I?
tsd
Well-Known Member
Arnie didnt devise the 4231, it has become the most popular shape in football. I think if you did a little reading up on the subject you may grow an appreciation for it. I'd recommend leopold method where there is an article on why 7 of 10 aleague teams are playing it
Last edited:
dibo
Well-Known Member
If we were willing to:
The starting XI I'd probably go with right now would be:
-------------Reddy--------------
Roux Anderson* Bosnar* Rose
---------Monty Hutch----------
------------Caceres-------------
Duke-----------------------Ibini
-------------Simon--------------
There's really not that much that changes, aside from that when we're defending we press higher out wide, but instead of having a wide block of 3 in defence, our little triangle of three will flatten out a little and slide from side to side. That means as we slide to one side, the opposite-side winger needs to be willing to drop to cover any runner and negate switching balls.
It would probably work *best* if we changed the defensive tendency to a higher press and try to use our athleticism up higher to force errors and then capitalise quickly, but we'd have to be willing to sometimes sit deeper and soak too - even turning our midfield 3 into a 4 or 5 if under sustained pressure to clog up a team that is passing particularly well.
We'd play out the same way, the broad shape of our attack would be pretty similar, it's mostly the defensive structure and transition from possession to not having possession that would change.
The problem is that normally even that amount of change would be at least a pre-season's worth of work, and you're bound to bugger it up a few times.
Last year as we were switching to a 4-2-3-1, we were still working on the old shape at the same time - at the open day at Mingara in the first XI vs second XI game, they played the first half in the 'old' shape and the second in the 'new' shape - that was the first time we got to see it.
I'd expect that if we considered a shift to a 4-3-3, we'd probably be looking to still train in the 4-4-2 *and* the 4-2-3-1 because sometimes the shape won't suit either the opponent or the cattle.
*We're going to have to settle on a combination at some point, this seems as likely to work as any...
- change the defensive structure to play with a higher press, and
- get our wide runners working deeper
The starting XI I'd probably go with right now would be:
-------------Reddy--------------
Roux Anderson* Bosnar* Rose
---------Monty Hutch----------
------------Caceres-------------
Duke-----------------------Ibini
-------------Simon--------------
There's really not that much that changes, aside from that when we're defending we press higher out wide, but instead of having a wide block of 3 in defence, our little triangle of three will flatten out a little and slide from side to side. That means as we slide to one side, the opposite-side winger needs to be willing to drop to cover any runner and negate switching balls.
It would probably work *best* if we changed the defensive tendency to a higher press and try to use our athleticism up higher to force errors and then capitalise quickly, but we'd have to be willing to sometimes sit deeper and soak too - even turning our midfield 3 into a 4 or 5 if under sustained pressure to clog up a team that is passing particularly well.
We'd play out the same way, the broad shape of our attack would be pretty similar, it's mostly the defensive structure and transition from possession to not having possession that would change.
The problem is that normally even that amount of change would be at least a pre-season's worth of work, and you're bound to bugger it up a few times.
Last year as we were switching to a 4-2-3-1, we were still working on the old shape at the same time - at the open day at Mingara in the first XI vs second XI game, they played the first half in the 'old' shape and the second in the 'new' shape - that was the first time we got to see it.
I'd expect that if we considered a shift to a 4-3-3, we'd probably be looking to still train in the 4-4-2 *and* the 4-2-3-1 because sometimes the shape won't suit either the opponent or the cattle.
*We're going to have to settle on a combination at some point, this seems as likely to work as any...
bikinigirl
Well-Known Member
. ok ... you got me ... our athleticism?
. my overall generalisation is that we are lacking in speed and stamina ... some may have a bit of either but rarely both
. initially i thought it was all just part of clarkie's injury prevention strategy to see us through a season with acl and finals games at the end. but here we are late in the season (yes i know there has been changes) and before the acl has started i would have expected us to be at peak fitness ... yet it seems we are being slaughtered across the park by speed and stamina (yes skill, confidence and cohesion play a role, but you know what i mean)
dibo
Well-Known Member
If we've got a front three of Duke, Simon and Ibini, there would be unkind people who would be inclined to suggest that all we had is athleticism.
I don't think speed is generally a problem. If we're scared of people running at us either when we have the ball or when they have the ball, we shouldn't be in this league. If we're unable to control the ball sufficiently to be able to control it and move it on quickly, we shouldn't be in this league. We don't need to be speedsters, we need to be composed, smart and do our jobs.
With the ball, our back 6 (Reddy, the back 4, Hutch) should be making the field big, and make it hard to be pressed. Getting forward we've got plenty of speed, what we're missing at the moment is composure.
Without the ball, our defensive structure should close down space and force them to try to play around or over us. Neither of these require speed. We have enough out wide to cover against the "oh shit" ball that opens up a flank, and thereafter we should be able to deal with it through our normal structures.
I don't think speed is generally a problem. If we're scared of people running at us either when we have the ball or when they have the ball, we shouldn't be in this league. If we're unable to control the ball sufficiently to be able to control it and move it on quickly, we shouldn't be in this league. We don't need to be speedsters, we need to be composed, smart and do our jobs.
With the ball, our back 6 (Reddy, the back 4, Hutch) should be making the field big, and make it hard to be pressed. Getting forward we've got plenty of speed, what we're missing at the moment is composure.
Without the ball, our defensive structure should close down space and force them to try to play around or over us. Neither of these require speed. We have enough out wide to cover against the "oh shit" ball that opens up a flank, and thereafter we should be able to deal with it through our normal structures.
nebakke
Well-Known Member
Actually, on the speed/stamina thing... In previous seasons, one of the things that has made us strong, is the shape in which we return as well after a handover... For corners etc for example, the CBs would come up and the FBs would largely hang behind together with at least one of the DMs, to provide cover. On a handover, we'd then have the CMs high-tailing it back without having to worry too much about whether they passed the ball along the way as the FBs would have them covered untilthey reached their normal positions... That doesn't seem to be happening as much this season... I think (from memory) that that was in effect what happened with the second goal last weekend.. EVERYONE were involved VERY high... There's nothing wrong with wanting to push up, but if the backs aren't necessarily providing an advantage up there, then there's no reason to have them sitting where they're easily circumvented.
bikinigirl
Well-Known Member
. fair enough ... i s'pose i was thinking more along the lines of the way we have been playing and the system we have been playing. matty seems a lot fitter than he was at the start of the season (the reason i think he stays on for the full 90 and duke comes on out wide). but although they have speed, i don't think duke and bernie have the same level of fitness and stamina (but they haven't played that much either)
. regardless, the issue we have had with speed and stamina is further back down the park. it may be well and good to say that we can make the field big to call on the speed up front ... but the fact is we haven't - and our 'composure' is not likely to change with a change in system. if the back 6 don't have the composure to control the ball and speed of play, then they need the speed and stamina to snuff out the opposition ... we used to have this as well (which was my point)
dibo
Well-Known Member
The players are either capable or they're not. If they are, we need to give them time to work into the shape.
If not, the people who signed them ought to carry the can. Arnie's already gone, but his record on signings was not 100% positive (Mrdja, Perez*, McDonald, Pellegrino, Musialik, McClenahan, Sutton...).
*Yes, really, I'm putting him in this list. He did pretty things, but in my view he wasn't as effective as he might have been had he not lingered on the ball (see also Rogic, T.) and allowed the defence to close up his options, and he got homesick part way through the year - that's not the mark of a successful signing.
If not, the people who signed them ought to carry the can. Arnie's already gone, but his record on signings was not 100% positive (Mrdja, Perez*, McDonald, Pellegrino, Musialik, McClenahan, Sutton...).
*Yes, really, I'm putting him in this list. He did pretty things, but in my view he wasn't as effective as he might have been had he not lingered on the ball (see also Rogic, T.) and allowed the defence to close up his options, and he got homesick part way through the year - that's not the mark of a successful signing.
Online statistics
- Members online
- 7
- Guests online
- 531
- Total visitors
- 538
