MATCHWATCH : Charlton Athletic (a)

[Hound]

Not sure how much to actually read into this but flicked back through the heat maps on all our games this season as they basically look identical to the opposition. Ie majority of possession down the flanks when attacking

A couple of games we have more possession centrally than tbe opposition going forward but these we games we were fairly dominant in so to be expected

Again just think the whole formation thing really is overblown, and this makes me think more so

Maybe I'm coming round to this. Most of our away losses have big misses at 0-0 or 1-0 down that could change the game. Knibbs' free header at Charlton on Saturday at 0-0. Knibbs' 1 on 1 at Orient at 1-1. Knibbs' last minute miss at Cambridge.

Moving on to other culprits, Azeez hitting the post against Exeter at 1-1, the save from Vickers at Northampton when 1-0 down. The winner we conceded at Orient was a goalkeeping howler.

Of course, contriving to find a new way to lose every week and collapsing when things go against us is infinitely harder to solve than tactical issues.

Yeah that basically

Last season when we were having zero/1/2 shots on target a game, getting rinsed on possession stats game after game - that’s where you have a major tactical problem

We’ve been in every game except Blackpool from what I’ve seen. If you constantly miss chances and make mistakes at the back, you lose whatever bloody formation you put out

[Clyde1998]

I get Ian’s point - whether it’s 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 the issue is that we are playing too narrow

I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It annoys me a bit when Twitter etc just keep ranting about 4-2-2-2 as though just changing to 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would make a world of difference. As you say YR it won’t. Not without changing the personnel and significantly their roles

Too much noise about the formation and not enough on why we can’t finish, can’t keep a clean sheet or crumble the minute we go one down

I get that 4231 will still be weak down the flanks if the wide men aren't trained to track back. But that's semantics; you can call it system or formation but it stems from Selles. And it's a big reason why we don't keep clean sheets. How many times do opening goals come from a cross we don't stop because we're asking too much of our full backs? Opener on Saturday, Cambridge's winner and the move that led to Blackpool's opening penalty for starters from my memory.

Part of the reason we may not be using out-and-out wingers is how many we actually have who can play there. Mukairu, Camara (injured still?), Azeez. I wouldn't describe Knibbs or Elliott as wingers. We're limited by that. I've said before I think NGW should be tried at LM - he'd certainly be able to provide defensive cover to whoever's playing LB.

[Hound]

Absolutely agree. It's a simple game so PLEASE STOP EMPLOYING THESE "HEAD COACH" TYPES WHO ALL WANT TO TRY AND RE-INVENT THE GAME IN PLAYING TEDIOUS OVER COMPLICATED CONTINENTAL CR@P, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES, AND RETURN TO GOOD OLD FASHIONED UNCOMPLICATED FOOTBALL.

Urgh ‘Good old fashioned’. Awful phrase

Remember when English teams first went back into Europe and got destroyed tactically by anyone half decent?

That’s what would happen if teams went ‘good old fashioned’ again.

Wasn’t Ince playing ‘good old fashioned’ 4-4-2 last season? And that was fun

Don’t recall Ince using 4-4-2. Was that turgid 5-3-2

Anyway, think your point is somewhat moot in terms of where we are. We’re not in Europe trying to compete with the elite. We’re playing Fleetwood and Carlisle

It’s not really moot. The game has moved on massively. Even clubs like Fleetwood and Carlisle spend hours and hours every single week on tactics and looking at the opposition

We turn to our lads and say ‘4-4-2, get it down the wings and crosses in’ each week and we’d do even worse I expect

It’s not really a simple game at all. It’s massively complex at pro level. The players are still incredibly good players - far better than most of us have ever played with , it’s not Dave playing Sunday league on a mud Bath at the local rec

[Clyde1998]

Not sure how much to actually read into this but flicked back through the heat maps on all our games this season as they basically look identical to the opposition. Ie majority of possession down the flanks when attacking

A couple of games we have more possession centrally than tbe opposition going forward but these we games we were fairly dominant in so to be expected

Again just think the whole formation thing really is overblown, and this makes me think more so

Maybe I'm coming round to this. Most of our away losses have big misses at 0-0 or 1-0 down that could change the game. Knibbs' free header at Charlton on Saturday at 0-0. Knibbs' 1 on 1 at Orient at 1-1. Knibbs' last minute miss at Cambridge.

Moving on to other culprits, Azeez hitting the post against Exeter at 1-1, the save from Vickers at Northampton when 1-0 down. The winner we conceded at Orient was a goalkeeping howler.

Of course, contriving to find a new way to lose every week and collapsing when things go against us is infinitely harder to solve than tactical issues.

Yeah that basically

Last season when we were having zero/1/2 shots on target a game, getting rinsed on possession stats game after game - that’s where you have a major tactical problem

We’ve been in every game except Blackpool from what I’ve seen. If you constantly miss chances and make mistakes at the back, you lose whatever bloody formation you put out

Agreed - Blackpool aside - we've had big chances to take the lead in matches and have had plenty of chances to score; we're not getting rolled over by most sides. You can add the missed penalty at Port Vale to that list above too. You score any of the chances we've missed and those games could've turned out very differently. It's the fine margins at the moment that are going against us.

[Mr Angry]

Absolutely agree. It's a simple game so PLEASE STOP EMPLOYING THESE "HEAD COACH" TYPES WHO ALL WANT TO TRY AND RE-INVENT THE GAME IN PLAYING TEDIOUS OVER COMPLICATED CONTINENTAL CR@P, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES, AND RETURN TO GOOD OLD FASHIONED UNCOMPLICATED FOOTBALL.

Urgh ‘Good old fashioned’. Awful phrase

Remember when English teams first went back into Europe and got destroyed tactically by anyone half decent?

That’s what would happen if teams went ‘good old fashioned’ again.

Wasn’t Ince playing ‘good old fashioned’ 4-4-2 last season? And that was fun

Don’t recall Ince using 4-4-2. Was that turgid 5-3-2

Anyway, think your point is somewhat moot in terms of where we are. We’re not in Europe trying to compete with the elite. We’re playing Fleetwood and Carlisle

At this level I would have thought that, where we currently are and the restrictions we have on player recruitment, the thing to do is look at the squad of players see what their strengths are and play the best players in a system that best suits them (and with players playing in their best positions), rather than trying to shoe horn players into a system alien to them, compounded by then having players out of position.

Aesthetically it might not resemble what the Champions League armchair pundits want to see, but right now we have to do something otherwise come April, we will be convincing ourselves that it will be fun to go to all those new League 2 grounds that none of us have ever been to, and that, by being in League 2 we will win a few games and be better entertained...................

[URZZZZ]

Urgh ‘Good old fashioned’. Awful phrase

Remember when English teams first went back into Europe and got destroyed tactically by anyone half decent?

That’s what would happen if teams went ‘good old fashioned’ again.

Wasn’t Ince playing ‘good old fashioned’ 4-4-2 last season? And that was fun

Don’t recall Ince using 4-4-2. Was that turgid 5-3-2

Anyway, think your point is somewhat moot in terms of where we are. We’re not in Europe trying to compete with the elite. We’re playing Fleetwood and Carlisle

It’s not really moot. The game has moved on massively. Even clubs like Fleetwood and Carlisle spend hours and hours every single week on tactics and looking at the opposition

We turn to our lads and say ‘4-4-2, get it down the wings and crosses in’ each week and we’d do even worse I expect

It’s not really a simple game at all. It’s massively complex at pro level

Sure, it isn’t just about playing a 4-4-2. It was part of a wider point though that for how “dominant” we were that such a simple goal was our downfall. And it hasn’t (and won’t) be the last time.

Look at Stam’s time here. The 4-3-3 he used was relatively simple. You could close your eyes and you know where every player would be. I’d argue that what we did was fairly predictable and simple and yet aside from a few thumping, teams didn’t really know how to counter it. Until, of course, he introduced that “complex” nature to it, tried to make it fluid with false 9’s, Aluko wandering around etc etc. And ended up failing miserably.

[Sanguine]

1 - None of this is 'simple'. we won't just do x or y and start winning games.
2 - Too much talk about formations and not enough focus, still, on how inexperienced how team is. seriously. If we avoid relegation this season this squad will have done quite astoundingly well. Stunningly well. Two thirds of them basically didn't have a league season behind them when we started this campaign. That absence of experience is critical at this level.
3 - We are not losing games because we lack ability. In fact imho the technical footballing ability of this is squad is pretty high. We lack game-craft, experience, nerve, a lot of stuff you can't teach and that only comes with time.

[Hound]

Don’t recall Ince using 4-4-2. Was that turgid 5-3-2

Anyway, think your point is somewhat moot in terms of where we are. We’re not in Europe trying to compete with the elite. We’re playing Fleetwood and Carlisle

It’s not really moot. The game has moved on massively. Even clubs like Fleetwood and Carlisle spend hours and hours every single week on tactics and looking at the opposition

We turn to our lads and say ‘4-4-2, get it down the wings and crosses in’ each week and we’d do even worse I expect

It’s not really a simple game at all. It’s massively complex at pro level

Sure, it isn’t just about playing a 4-4-2. It was part of a wider point though that for how “dominant” we were that such a simple goal was our downfall. And it hasn’t (and won’t) be the last time.

Look at Stam’s time here. The 4-3-3 he used was relatively simple. You could close your eyes and you know where every player would be. I’d argue that what we did was fairly predictable and simple and yet aside from a few thumping, teams didn’t really know how to counter it. Until, of course, he introduced that “complex” nature to it, tried to make it fluid with false 9’s, Aluko wandering around etc etc. And ended up failing miserably.

Yes it was fairly simple but it was also a novelty first season. Keep possession at all costs, bore the opposition into making a mistake etc

Thing is it did also get found out regularly as well - hence the hammerings we took

But again think this is my central point - you had Yann, GMc, Beerens, Williams, Swift, McShane, Moore, AAH, Obita all having brilliant runs of form. We took our chances (often one of very few) and defended excellently

We didn’t steam roll teams, we were just very efficient and to give Stam his dues, his man management seemed excellent

Was similar when Pauno took us top. Very efficient, Defence not making mistakes and Joao and even Puscas putting away the chances

Whatever system you have basically relies on the small margins and not making errors - we just make far too many of them at both ends

(This isn’t giving Selles a free pass btw, some of his selections have been poor and it’s up to him and his coaches to get the players to make less mistakes)

[WestYorksRoyal]

1 - None of this is 'simple'. we won't just do x or y and start winning games.
2 - Too much talk about formations and not enough focus, still, on how inexperienced how team is. seriously. If we avoid relegation this season this squad will have done quite astoundingly well. Stunningly well. Two thirds of them basically didn't have a league season behind them when we started this campaign. That absence of experience is critical at this level.
3 - We are not losing games because we lack ability. In fact imho the technical footballing ability of this is very high. We lack game-craft, experience, nerve, a lot of stuff you can't teach and that only comes with time.

I guess the question from this is, are we capable of a run of form over 10 games or so that makes all the difference?

We need to finish chances better, stop making mistakes and cope with difficult moments better so we don't lose even games 4-0. None of these are technical issues. Could a couple of wins make the difference and give us a run of form that takes us up the table?

[Snowflake Royal]

There's a reason that through the years 4-4-2 has been popular.

It's simple, it's fairly rigid and everyone's responsibilities and play is fairly clearly defined.

Unfortunately, we now have a generation of coaches who all want to play like Barcelona or Real Madrid and are incapable of recognising that to play any form of fluid total football, your players need to be excellent decision makers, fairly smart, and significantly better than most of your opposition, when this simply isn't the case outside the top 6 or 7 clubs in the country.

This all over

We were the better side on Saturday up until their first but what did that translate to? A few pot shots and a couple of set plays. For all the intricate passing in and around the box, Charlton scored with one pass out wide, being direct out wide and a simple cross and header

Football is a very simple game and yet we have manager after manager who try and overcomplicate it. Have any of our managers since Adkins ventured back into English football (as manager) since leaving here? Reason for that perhaps

Could have an interesting* discussion on this

Found myself having the same argument in youth football where coaches were confusing kids with funky formations to seemingly strike their own ego rather than keep it simple

But really professional footballers should be able to deal with different formations than 4-4-2. It is simple but then its rigidity also makes it pretty simple to counter and defend against . You can overload the centre by playing 3 in there or a diamond when in possession - you need to have some flexibility

Not saying Selles system is correct but don’t think football is quite as simple as that at that level.

Anyway as mentioned really don’t buy a lot into whether the formation itself is correct, it’s the personnel having the quality and making least mistakes that makes the most difference. And we’re making tons

I am a huge fan of the Coppell approach. Do something simple and well to the point it doesn't matter that your opposition know what it is, you do it well enough it can't easily be countered. The old Pardew, put 20 crosses in a game and you'll score from a few.

You can’t do that too well with constant change though. Not that constant change helps the more intricate stuff either.

In the old days you gave 0-2 players a free role. Now everyone wants the entire team to have a free role. No wonder things go to shit when there's a turnover... no one is in any sort ot defensive shape.

[Snowflake Royal]

Not sure how much to actually read into this but flicked back through the heat maps on all our games this season as they basically look identical to the opposition. Ie majority of possession down the flanks when attacking

A couple of games we have more possession centrally than tbe opposition going forward but these we games we were fairly dominant in so to be expected

Again just think the whole formation thing really is overblown, and this makes me think more so

Maybe I'm coming round to this. Most of our away losses have big misses at 0-0 or 1-0 down that could change the game. Knibbs' free header at Charlton on Saturday at 0-0. Knibbs' 1 on 1 at Orient at 1-1. Knibbs' last minute miss at Cambridge.

Moving on to other culprits, Azeez hitting the post against Exeter at 1-1, the save from Vickers at Northampton when 1-0 down. The winner we conceded at Orient was a goalkeeping howler.

Of course, contriving to find a new way to lose every week and collapsing when things go against us is infinitely harder to solve than tactical issues.

This should tell us our chances are falling to the wrong people. Because we're playing the wrong way.

[Snowflake Royal]

Urgh ‘Good old fashioned’. Awful phrase

Remember when English teams first went back into Europe and got destroyed tactically by anyone half decent?

That’s what would happen if teams went ‘good old fashioned’ again.

Wasn’t Ince playing ‘good old fashioned’ 4-4-2 last season? And that was fun

Don’t recall Ince using 4-4-2. Was that turgid 5-3-2

Anyway, think your point is somewhat moot in terms of where we are. We’re not in Europe trying to compete with the elite. We’re playing Fleetwood and Carlisle

It’s not really moot. The game has moved on massively. Even clubs like Fleetwood and Carlisle spend hours and hours every single week on tactics and looking at the opposition

We turn to our lads and say ‘4-4-2, get it down the wings and crosses in’ each week and we’d do even worse I expect

It’s not really a simple game at all. It’s massively complex at pro level. The players are still incredibly good players - far better than most of us have ever played with , it’s not Dave playing Sunday league on a mud Bath at the local rec

Football is pretty great example of a simple complex system.

Huge variables and interactions at any one time but simple aims. Which is why you need to simplify what you try to do.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Not sure how much to actually read into this but flicked back through the heat maps on all our games this season as they basically look identical to the opposition. Ie majority of possession down the flanks when attacking

A couple of games we have more possession centrally than tbe opposition going forward but these we games we were fairly dominant in so to be expected

Again just think the whole formation thing really is overblown, and this makes me think more so

Maybe I'm coming round to this. Most of our away losses have big misses at 0-0 or 1-0 down that could change the game. Knibbs' free header at Charlton on Saturday at 0-0. Knibbs' 1 on 1 at Orient at 1-1. Knibbs' last minute miss at Cambridge.

Moving on to other culprits, Azeez hitting the post against Exeter at 1-1, the save from Vickers at Northampton when 1-0 down. The winner we conceded at Orient was a goalkeeping howler.

Of course, contriving to find a new way to lose every week and collapsing when things go against us is infinitely harder to solve than tactical issues.

This should tell us our chances are falling to the wrong people. Because we're playing the wrong way.

Knibbs, Azeez and Vickers? Our forward players?

[Hound]

Don’t recall Ince using 4-4-2. Was that turgid 5-3-2

Anyway, think your point is somewhat moot in terms of where we are. We’re not in Europe trying to compete with the elite. We’re playing Fleetwood and Carlisle

It’s not really moot. The game has moved on massively. Even clubs like Fleetwood and Carlisle spend hours and hours every single week on tactics and looking at the opposition

We turn to our lads and say ‘4-4-2, get it down the wings and crosses in’ each week and we’d do even worse I expect

It’s not really a simple game at all. It’s massively complex at pro level. The players are still incredibly good players - far better than most of us have ever played with , it’s not Dave playing Sunday league on a mud Bath at the local rec

Football is pretty great example of a simple complex system.

Huge variables and interactions at any one time but simple aims. Which is why you need to simplify what you try to do.

I wouldn’t say Selles over complicates what we’re trying to do. His system is no more complex than any other really. May even be too simple if anything

[Hound]

This all over

We were the better side on Saturday up until their first but what did that translate to? A few pot shots and a couple of set plays. For all the intricate passing in and around the box, Charlton scored with one pass out wide, being direct out wide and a simple cross and header

Football is a very simple game and yet we have manager after manager who try and overcomplicate it. Have any of our managers since Adkins ventured back into English football (as manager) since leaving here? Reason for that perhaps

Could have an interesting* discussion on this

Found myself having the same argument in youth football where coaches were confusing kids with funky formations to seemingly strike their own ego rather than keep it simple

But really professional footballers should be able to deal with different formations than 4-4-2. It is simple but then its rigidity also makes it pretty simple to counter and defend against . You can overload the centre by playing 3 in there or a diamond when in possession - you need to have some flexibility

Not saying Selles system is correct but don’t think football is quite as simple as that at that level.

Anyway as mentioned really don’t buy a lot into whether the formation itself is correct, it’s the personnel having the quality and making least mistakes that makes the most difference. And we’re making tons

I am a huge fan of the Coppell approach. Do something simple and well to the point it doesn't matter that your opposition know what it is, you do it well enough it can't easily be countered. The old Pardew, put 20 crosses in a game and you'll score from a few.

You can’t do that too well with constant change though. Not that constant change helps the more intricate stuff either.

In the old days you gave 0-2 players a free role. Now everyone wants the entire team to have a free role. No wonder things go to shit when there's a turnover... no one is in any sort ot defensive shape.

Yes but the counter to that is someone like the boss at Brighton. Very average team on paper - players like Milner, Welbeck etc - and yet due to some brilliant tactical thinking can go toe to toe with the best. Gets the absolute best out their players who inevitably go back to being average when they move on

Obviously you have to do that very well, which Selles certainly isn’t

[Snowflake Royal]

Maybe I'm coming round to this. Most of our away losses have big misses at 0-0 or 1-0 down that could change the game. Knibbs' free header at Charlton on Saturday at 0-0. Knibbs' 1 on 1 at Orient at 1-1. Knibbs' last minute miss at Cambridge.

Moving on to other culprits, Azeez hitting the post against Exeter at 1-1, the save from Vickers at Northampton when 1-0 down. The winner we conceded at Orient was a goalkeeping howler.

Of course, contriving to find a new way to lose every week and collapsing when things go against us is infinitely harder to solve than tactical issues.

This should tell us our chances are falling to the wrong people. Because we're playing the wrong way.

Knibbs, Azeez and Vickers? Our forward players?

You know what striker is right?

[WestYorksRoyal]

This should tell us our chances are falling to the wrong people. Because we're playing the wrong way.

Knibbs, Azeez and Vickers? Our forward players?

You know what striker is right?

Sorry, got to side with YR. The idea that a system which creates chances for attacking midfielders is inherently wrong is ridiculously.

[Hound]

This should tell us our chances are falling to the wrong people. Because we're playing the wrong way.

Knibbs, Azeez and Vickers? Our forward players?

You know what striker is right?

Kelv and Ballard have had plenty - and missed plenty - as well

[YorkshireRoyal99]

This should tell us our chances are falling to the wrong people. Because we're playing the wrong way.

Knibbs, Azeez and Vickers? Our forward players?

You know what striker is right?

Not exactly what I'd class as falling to the wrong players though, just because they aren't your ideal one. Not every chance is going to fall to Smith, Kelvin E or Ballard and I'd still be expecting our forward players to be chipping in with the goals as well rather than being reliant on a couple of players, again.

[Royal_jimmy]

I will say one thing, I've loved reading this discussion. Some great analysis and opinions on everything.

Maybe the fact we've not been outplayed in many games is why Selles has kept the formation as it is and is hinting that our problems aren't formation but making the little things that are going against us go our way.