Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [7th - 11th February 2015]
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,280
- Location
- Cornwall
Our pressing game has won us the last few fixtures against Spurs so I'm guessing Allen will come in for him and play alongside Henderson.
Mignolet
Can - Skrtel - Sakho
Markovic - Henderson - Allen - Moreno
Coutinho - Gerrard
Sturridge
Mignolet
Can - Skrtel - Sakho
Markovic - Henderson - Allen - Moreno
Coutinho - Gerrard
Sturridge
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 10,477
- Location
- Bath, England
Is Lallana fit? Rather him or Markovic for Gerrard. Put Ibe rwb.
Sterling's out of tonights game now
Is he round his agents house trying to get more than the 100k we've offered?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
He has a point that people completely miss in general in recent weeks. Comparing Utd's long ball total vs Burnley when they have significantly higher number of passes per game doesn't mean much, checking on it Utd pass around 50% more than Burnley per game.
Chelsea average 12% long balls, Utd 16%, Burnley 27%, is it sensible to put Utd and Burnley in the same bracket just because the totals are similar?
In fact for the sake of it, the entire list to compare.
Palace 22%
Burnley 21.5%
QPR 21%
Leicester 20%
West Ham 19%
Hull 17.5%
West Brom 17%
Villa 16.5%
Sunderland 16%
Stoke 15.5%
Newcastle 15.5%
Southampton 15%
Man Utd 14.5%
Everton 13%
Spurs 12%
Swansea 12%
Liverpool 11.5%
Chelsea 11%
Arsenal 8.7%
City 8.5%
Rounded them to the nearest 0.5%. EDIT:- misread numbers, I thought it was long balls and total passes I saw in the stats but it was long and short, this had more effect the lower short passes and higher long passes got so had very little change on the low numbers and a significant change on the higher percentages. whoops.. also didn't change a single position in the list.
So are Utd long ball specialists regardless of the direction of said long balls... errm, nope. Are Southampton considered a long ball team? Stoke were, Hughes has had a large impact on how they play. West Ham are WAY more 'long ball' than Utd so if I was LVG I would be massively irked by Fat Sam's comments, though I did presume he was rather sarcastic with it but who knows.
They are fourth in the list of highest passes per game to go with it. While West Ham are 16th, in general when you call a team long ball it's both they don't pass much and a high percentage of their play is long ball. Utd fit neither of these characteristics.
Chelsea average 12% long balls, Utd 16%, Burnley 27%, is it sensible to put Utd and Burnley in the same bracket just because the totals are similar?
In fact for the sake of it, the entire list to compare.
Palace 22%
Burnley 21.5%
QPR 21%
Leicester 20%
West Ham 19%
Hull 17.5%
West Brom 17%
Villa 16.5%
Sunderland 16%
Stoke 15.5%
Newcastle 15.5%
Southampton 15%
Man Utd 14.5%
Everton 13%
Spurs 12%
Swansea 12%
Liverpool 11.5%
Chelsea 11%
Arsenal 8.7%
City 8.5%
Rounded them to the nearest 0.5%. EDIT:- misread numbers, I thought it was long balls and total passes I saw in the stats but it was long and short, this had more effect the lower short passes and higher long passes got so had very little change on the low numbers and a significant change on the higher percentages. whoops.. also didn't change a single position in the list.
So are Utd long ball specialists regardless of the direction of said long balls... errm, nope. Are Southampton considered a long ball team? Stoke were, Hughes has had a large impact on how they play. West Ham are WAY more 'long ball' than Utd so if I was LVG I would be massively irked by Fat Sam's comments, though I did presume he was rather sarcastic with it but who knows.
They are fourth in the list of highest passes per game to go with it. While West Ham are 16th, in general when you call a team long ball it's both they don't pass much and a high percentage of their play is long ball. Utd fit neither of these characteristics.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 10,477
- Location
- Bath, England
The cringe on the press officers face
She won't be making that face when she's clearing her desk in the morning
That team set up looks decent personally id play Rooney a bit higher than mata and di maria.
and totally agree doesn't matter who plays were or why or when we just need to get scoring
You're playing him out of position in my opinion. When he was exceptional earlier this season and for Madrid, he was starting deeper, able to get the ball in space and run. Now he's having to get the ball up against a DM or CB and do something with it often with his back to goal or on the half turn under pressure. He should either be able to start deeper in midfield as he did for Madrid, or play wide where he can isolate players. Currently he just gets swamped.
I actually think that 3-5-2 is the right formation for the players you have. Your full backs are poor (although Shaw is improving and will continue to). Your CBs aren't much better but at least you have depth. You have a lot of strikers but no wingers. And playing three CMs allows Di Maria to be one of them and roam, without that meaning that you lose a battle in midfield.
I appreciate that 3-5-2 has not worked, but your players aren't morons, and other teams have managed it. Three at the back has improved Liverpool significantly, and they have a less experienced manager and player for player a worse side.
DDG
Jones--Smalling--Rojo
Raf/Valencia--Di Maria--Blind--Herrera--Shaw/Young
Rooney--RvP/Falcao/Wilson
Its a joke newbie007
The frothing rage against lovren has you seeing things
Regardless we are ****ed in midfield, Gerrard playing that role after having not done it for a long time is even worse than a tired one doing it, now he's both, we ded
The frothing rage against lovren has you seeing things
Regardless we are ****ed in midfield, Gerrard playing that role after having not done it for a long time is even worse than a tired one doing it, now he's both, we ded
Last edited:
I dont like Lovren very much
Agreed, Gerrard doesnt work in the middle as a 2, let alone in his current dotage and let alone against a team that works like Spurs
Not sure I agree actually, Spurs' central midfield is a real weakness for them. Gerrard is poor in high tempo games which pass him by, but against a poor midfield could still do a job. Worst comes to the worst, Ibe comes off at half time, Gerrard moves forward and Allen/Lallana comes on.
Yes, but their midfield is pants. Gerrard can sit deep and control the play against them.