Assorted thoughts on the current moment's aggravations, tactics, and lessons. Then: Kai Havertz and one area that can boost open-play chances: more presence, runners, and risk-taking in the box
I agree that Timber at LB is like Tomi at LB - diligent at preventing left-footed attackers from cutting inside, but of limited value in terms of attacking threat.
To extend the point, our best attacking performances this season have been Leicester, Southampton, Forest, Sporting and West Ham. It's no coincidence that Calafiori started all of those games.
Listening to Mikel yesterday, it was clear that he had planned to ease Calafiori into the team - squad injuries have increased his loading, which have resulted in his own repeated injuries. Perhaps we'll only see him flourish next season.
In the meantime, let's note that the main thrust of the summer transfer market business was to open up the LHS with Calafiori and Merino. Given their extended injury problems, perhaps it's no surprise we've still been a bit underwhelming there. But it doesn't really make sense that so many people on social media (not uncommon, of course) should decide the summer business was rubbish - can't conclude anything unless players are out on the pitch.
Really interested to see your causation data when it’s available. As you know only too well, anyone can take a few screenshots and create whatever narrative they want to. And many do just this. It’s often meaningless but unfortunately it happens an awful lot. It’s why I try to follow only the best analysts – which you undoubtedly are.
Two dynamics you have flagged are IMO particularly apposite:
“ …the team needs to be more aggressive with crashing (with numbers) behind him. The sheer volume of aggressive, in-behind, central, goal-conscious runs can and should increase. This includes Saka, who is excellent and immediate at them.”
When all said and done, goal scoring is about creating numbers and overloads at the right time in the right places. I sometimes think we simply don’t have enough bodies in goal scoring positions. Yes, having “elite executioners” clearly helps, but for goal scoring to be sustainable, it has to be about more than individuals.
Your second point:
“The team needs to up the risk in a few areas: more low-percentage passes; more attackers in the box; more “lower efficiency” shots. The feel of “chasing a goal late” shouldn’t be reserved for “chasing a goal late.””
This is so true. One bugbear of mine is that “pass accuracy” is sometimes (often?) used as the killer metric. The trouble is that can easily be a negative. It’s progressive passes that invariably matter. It’s very easy (guilty as charged) to berate a player when he gives away the ball, but I suspect the majority of goals are created from someone at some stage playing a “risky pass” , i.e. a ball that has a strong chance of being intercepted. We need to be riskier as a team. I believe the collective is so good that the positives of this approach outweigh the negatives. In other words, we can afford to give the ball away more!
Very good, Billy.
I agree that Timber at LB is like Tomi at LB - diligent at preventing left-footed attackers from cutting inside, but of limited value in terms of attacking threat.
To extend the point, our best attacking performances this season have been Leicester, Southampton, Forest, Sporting and West Ham. It's no coincidence that Calafiori started all of those games.
Listening to Mikel yesterday, it was clear that he had planned to ease Calafiori into the team - squad injuries have increased his loading, which have resulted in his own repeated injuries. Perhaps we'll only see him flourish next season.
In the meantime, let's note that the main thrust of the summer transfer market business was to open up the LHS with Calafiori and Merino. Given their extended injury problems, perhaps it's no surprise we've still been a bit underwhelming there. But it doesn't really make sense that so many people on social media (not uncommon, of course) should decide the summer business was rubbish - can't conclude anything unless players are out on the pitch.
We drew at Fulham! It just felt like a loss
😵💫. Haha, thank you.
Billy, excellent as always.
Really interested to see your causation data when it’s available. As you know only too well, anyone can take a few screenshots and create whatever narrative they want to. And many do just this. It’s often meaningless but unfortunately it happens an awful lot. It’s why I try to follow only the best analysts – which you undoubtedly are.
Two dynamics you have flagged are IMO particularly apposite:
“ …the team needs to be more aggressive with crashing (with numbers) behind him. The sheer volume of aggressive, in-behind, central, goal-conscious runs can and should increase. This includes Saka, who is excellent and immediate at them.”
When all said and done, goal scoring is about creating numbers and overloads at the right time in the right places. I sometimes think we simply don’t have enough bodies in goal scoring positions. Yes, having “elite executioners” clearly helps, but for goal scoring to be sustainable, it has to be about more than individuals.
Your second point:
“The team needs to up the risk in a few areas: more low-percentage passes; more attackers in the box; more “lower efficiency” shots. The feel of “chasing a goal late” shouldn’t be reserved for “chasing a goal late.””
This is so true. One bugbear of mine is that “pass accuracy” is sometimes (often?) used as the killer metric. The trouble is that can easily be a negative. It’s progressive passes that invariably matter. It’s very easy (guilty as charged) to berate a player when he gives away the ball, but I suspect the majority of goals are created from someone at some stage playing a “risky pass” , i.e. a ball that has a strong chance of being intercepted. We need to be riskier as a team. I believe the collective is so good that the positives of this approach outweigh the negatives. In other words, we can afford to give the ball away more!
Anyway, keep spreading the good word Billy.