| The Defence: A Thought 16:39 - Sep 14 with 3337 views | Antti_Heinola |
Was thinking about defence over the weekend.
There's a sort of wisdom been building up, not without its own evidence, that Warbs 'cannot organise a defence.'
It's an interesting thing when you line it up against other thoughts that we as fans have in general. For example, I think most of us probably think that when it comes to coaching, 'organising a defence is the basics, playing lovely attacking football is really hard.'
But why do we think, generally, that defending should be more simple? Should be something that can be fixed in training relatively easily? Why do we attach less skill to that? There's a sense that you should just be able to 'practise' 'defending' in training and it'll work out next week. You don't ever get fans saying, 'why don't you practise free-flowing passing attacking moves in traning that might help us watch you score amazing goals?' The closest we get to that is telling our strikers to practise shooting all week. But why is the specific skill of shooting put in the same category as literally all defending? When a team can't score goals it's generally blamed on the attackers lacking creativity or because the striker can't hit a barn door with a banjo. When a team lets in too many, the manager can't organise a defence. Why does a manager get blamed more for one than the other? I'm not saying this is hard and fast, but just saying generally.
I was thinking about this at the weekend as I watched the very enjoyable Liverpool-Leeds game, and I had forgotten that Klopp, too, received the same criticisms once upon a time as Warbs gets now (not comparing them - just saying similar criticisms were levelled). Luckily, Klopp is a great coach so he fixed it. You know, by spending £75m on Van Dijk and another £68m on Allison. Plus the emergence of the excellent Trent. And, at least until Saturday, those accusations went away. But he solved the problem by buying big. Same with Guardiola. He is constantly criticised for his defence not being strong enough, but the answer is not in his coaching, but in the fact that people believe he needs to buy better defenders.
Now conceding more than 70 goals in a season isn't good enough, but is our perception of coaching a defensive unit a little off? The two best coaches in the country have similar ideas to Warbs in terms of attacking football, high press, play from the back, etc etc, and both of them have had issues at the back. I suppose what I was thinking was two things: is all Warbs needs a CB (maybe it's Dickie) and a keeper and maybe a left back away from having those accusations quelled? And, perhaps more importantly, does this magical coach who can deliver a solid, hard-hitting defence allied to front-to-back 'through-the-thirds' football actually exist?
I suppose if he did, he wouldn't be with us. Other than the freakish year under Warnock, which owed a lot to one player supplying the attacking bit (and that was hardly 'coached'), the closest anyone got to it, for me, was De Canio, who fashioned a defence out of gossamer and also had us playing quite nice attacking stuff.
|  |
| |  |
| The Defence: A Thought on 17:54 - Sep 14 with 2726 views | VancouverHoop |
Defence is hard. You can't rely on a single midfield general, or a supremely gifted striker to deliver the goods. It has to work as a unit, which most of the time, will include almost half the team. It takes time and consistent manpower to achieve that. These days it's harder than it was when George Graham's Arsenal ruled their penalty area. Yes we can be better. But when – for example – was the last time we had the same back four from one season to the next? |  | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 18:59 - Sep 14 with 2629 views | nix |
I think I agree with you regarding defending from open play. There must be a certain amount of ability to read the game and natural sense of positioning. But I do think you can coach people to deal with set pieces better: corners and freekicks but also throw ins.
Also when playing against particular teams, does an attacker always cut in a particular way? Who do we need to double up against? Do they hook the ball over the top? Where do the wingers like to cross from, the byline or the beginning of the penalty area etc. Sometimes it seems like other teams are better at neutralising our threats than the other way round.
But I also think that we have rarely had a settled defence over the last few years and that makes a massive difference. If Dickie, Barbet, Kakay, one of our goalies plus whoever is playing left back play four fifths of this season's games together, I belief that alone could seriously improve our goals against stat. |  | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 20:03 - Sep 14 with 2475 views | CiderwithRsie |
Werrlll, I know nothing about coaching but my observation of coaches at QPR and elsewhere is that it is relatively easy, even with limited players, to produce a defence
- with a couple of big bastards in the middle who can win headers, kick the bejesus out of strikers and hoof the loose ball into touch.
- that plays in a certain, fairly simple, formation and sticks to it
- that's drilled on set-pieces especially corners
- that works like f*ck because the players all know the oppo have more skill
- that gets 10 men behind the ball every time the oppo has it
- maybe has a couple of stoppers in midfield too.
If you're in free fall that sort of approach will tend to stop a run of defeats, keep the GD down, and get you a few points, especially against the more limited teams (who are probably your rivals in a relegation scrap.)
But a lot of that is inconsistent with trying to play attacking football. The Klopp/Guardiola solution is spend a fortune on defenders who can defend without half the rest of the team helping out and can do it by keeping the ball and playing it out.
I doubt Warburton can't coach defence, more that he's not willing to sacrifice attack to defend if he doesn't have good enough defenders (yet) | | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 20:49 - Sep 14 with 2385 views | bosh67 |
De Canio generally played a back 4 that seemed to be able to snuff out most attacks by tracking runners and shutting down space and that was with a far less talented group of defenders than we have now. But they worked well and talked well.
Paul Parker in his time read the game so well. He was always looking to where a player may be running and those first 10 yards he was always there first. That is where I still think we are weak. That first ten yards that back line has to be reading the game quicker and anticipating better over those sprint yards. |  |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 21:32 - Sep 14 with 2317 views | joolsyp |
| The Defence: A Thought on 20:49 - Sep 14 by bosh67 |
De Canio generally played a back 4 that seemed to be able to snuff out most attacks by tracking runners and shutting down space and that was with a far less talented group of defenders than we have now. But they worked well and talked well.
Paul Parker in his time read the game so well. He was always looking to where a player may be running and those first 10 yards he was always there first. That is where I still think we are weak. That first ten yards that back line has to be reading the game quicker and anticipating better over those sprint yards. |
The last player I thought did exactly that was Kyle Walker (on loan) Bosh. He baled out the defence on many occasions because of his pace. Turned out to be quite good as well. |  | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 09:27 - Sep 15 with 2083 views | blacky200 |
| The Defence: A Thought on 20:49 - Sep 14 by bosh67 |
De Canio generally played a back 4 that seemed to be able to snuff out most attacks by tracking runners and shutting down space and that was with a far less talented group of defenders than we have now. But they worked well and talked well.
Paul Parker in his time read the game so well. He was always looking to where a player may be running and those first 10 yards he was always there first. That is where I still think we are weak. That first ten yards that back line has to be reading the game quicker and anticipating better over those sprint yards. |
I see there are examples being picked out (Parker, Walker) etc. but you have to remember these are top quality players. With the resources available to us at the moment the only way we will get one of those is by being extremely lucky and finding a hidden gem. It's a real conundrum with the level we are playing at. It seems to me that we can defend solidly as a team but that will be at the expense of attack or we accept that we are going to concede more than we would like but give the chance to midfield and attackers to set up chances.
I have no solution  |  | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 10:08 - Sep 15 with 2024 views | NW5Hoop |
People talk about defence as if it's a self-contained unit, that simply has to stop goals. So you sort that out and leave the rest of the team to do what it does. But it's not. You can't just pick the perfect back four and then treat the rest of the team separately. If the defence can't work with and interact with the rest of the team seamlessly, then it has failed just as much as if it concedes four goals a game. Warburton needs his defence to feed into the rest of the team seamlessly, and that has meant it concedes.
I'm not saying I'm completely fine with that, but it's not as simple as: pick two big centre backs who'll win everything in the air, because that would kill the midfield. | | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 11:22 - Sep 15 with 1930 views | daveB |
one of many issues with the defence is that clearances don't go very far, a few times on the weekend the ball was cleared from the edge of our box but went straight to a Forest player still in our half or a player would try and pass out of trouble under pressure and give it away and we were back under pressure straight away, fortunately Forest were not very good and I thought the full backs tucking in and blocking space made us a bit more difficult to cut open than usual but I think sometimes a row z approach when under pressure rather than try and play a pass which gets cut out might help |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Defence: A Thought on 11:55 - Sep 15 with 1840 views | DavieQPR |
The other difference is, take last season, Hugill scored a few but missed an awful lot. If the defence had the same missed ratio then we would have conceded far more. But Hugill was looked on as a success and the defence as pretty poor. |  | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:12 - Sep 15 with 1804 views | Hunterhoop |
| The Defence: A Thought on 11:22 - Sep 15 by daveB |
one of many issues with the defence is that clearances don't go very far, a few times on the weekend the ball was cleared from the edge of our box but went straight to a Forest player still in our half or a player would try and pass out of trouble under pressure and give it away and we were back under pressure straight away, fortunately Forest were not very good and I thought the full backs tucking in and blocking space made us a bit more difficult to cut open than usual but I think sometimes a row z approach when under pressure rather than try and play a pass which gets cut out might help |
Very good point, Dave. I thought the same a few times watching the stream. When they had that spell after we scored, as you’d expect, too many times we failed to just welly it out or miles up the pitch and regroup. As a result they kept having another attack whilst our team shape was all over the place.
Row Z isn’t about just defending that attack, it’s about buying time to regroup and get your entire team’s shape back ahead of the next attack.
Too often, when under the cosh, we look to play out. No problem as the main approach, but when under a spell of pressure and players out of position, you do need to just boot it out and get organised again.
I liked the look of Dickie on this front. He seemed more pragmatic in his approach. |  | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:15 - Sep 15 with 1800 views | Antti_Heinola |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:12 - Sep 15 by Hunterhoop |
Very good point, Dave. I thought the same a few times watching the stream. When they had that spell after we scored, as you’d expect, too many times we failed to just welly it out or miles up the pitch and regroup. As a result they kept having another attack whilst our team shape was all over the place.
Row Z isn’t about just defending that attack, it’s about buying time to regroup and get your entire team’s shape back ahead of the next attack.
Too often, when under the cosh, we look to play out. No problem as the main approach, but when under a spell of pressure and players out of position, you do need to just boot it out and get organised again.
I liked the look of Dickie on this front. He seemed more pragmatic in his approach. |
yeah i sometimes think just getting it clear doesn't solve a lot - you just give possession back, and actually keeping possession for a minute or two is more effective. But I do agree to an extent. And agree about Dickie. One ball down the right, he came across barged the attacker out the way and when he wellied it into touch it was like the ghost of Clint Hill. I'd take that! | |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:22 - Sep 15 with 1783 views | toboboly |
Agree with Nix, get the conceded set piece goals down. Imagine that is 20+ a season. |  |
| Sexy Asian dwarves wanted. |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:45 - Sep 15 with 1740 views | A40Bosh |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:15 - Sep 15 by Antti_Heinola |
yeah i sometimes think just getting it clear doesn't solve a lot - you just give possession back, and actually keeping possession for a minute or two is more effective. But I do agree to an extent. And agree about Dickie. One ball down the right, he came across barged the attacker out the way and when he wellied it into touch it was like the ghost of Clint Hill. I'd take that! |
I just skim read this thread and hark back to Warbs interview with Clive and "overdraftgate".
I get the impression that Warbs BELIEVES that every week they do COACH the defensive drills religiously but the problem is that is stop, correct, repeat, stop again, correct again, repeat....ad nauseam.
It's the execution of those drills by individuals who have been coached that continues to let us down is what I am reading from his comments.
I think he referenced the Plymouth game where at a set piece two of our defenders/players attacked the same ball where as they should have known the drill for dealing with it.
Perhaps with letting BFG go they have recognised that they need to bring in quality and experience and the scouts have seen something in Dickie that delivers a defender that will execute the coached defensive drills to the letter and as a result it will lesson the number of goals we concede from set pieces.
For all the praise Kakay got on Saturday evening, had Ameobi (it might have been someone else) not hit the near post side netting and had beaten Lumley would the masses be calling for Kane for an obvious mistake by Kakay when he misread the bounce of the ball he was trying to intercept - or would it have been another "Lumley has to go" for not saving it.
As said above about how good Paul Parker was when defending for us - but he was not playing for us and getting those plaudits as an inexperienced defender, the had played over 150 games for Fulham before we got him.
It's clear that QPR are trying to improve the defence during the window but we have to have patience and realism about how much we can improve things immediately by our sourcing those better players who need experience at this level and attracting experience that does not come with budget busting contracts |  |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:55 - Sep 15 with 1708 views | TheChef |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:15 - Sep 15 by Antti_Heinola |
yeah i sometimes think just getting it clear doesn't solve a lot - you just give possession back, and actually keeping possession for a minute or two is more effective. But I do agree to an extent. And agree about Dickie. One ball down the right, he came across barged the attacker out the way and when he wellied it into touch it was like the ghost of Clint Hill. I'd take that! |
Much as I'd like to pass the ball to death, when you're defending you need a certain level of pragmatism.
Or, 'in in doubt, get rid'.
I think playing as a back four helped too in terms of shape and defending more narrow. |  |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:14 - Sep 15 with 1660 views | Antti_Heinola |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:55 - Sep 15 by TheChef |
Much as I'd like to pass the ball to death, when you're defending you need a certain level of pragmatism.
Or, 'in in doubt, get rid'.
I think playing as a back four helped too in terms of shape and defending more narrow. |
I don't disagree - my point was when under the cosh, clearing to nowehere and gifting possession back might relieve pressure momentarily but doesn't stop momentum. Keeping the ball, slowing it down, denying possession is what truly will stop an onslaught. That doesn't mean don't clear your lines, but it does mean be smart! | |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:32 - Sep 15 with 1620 views | ted_hendrix |
Looking back you could watch Clive Wilson bring the ball out of our half time and time again he was excellent with the ball at his feet and always gave you confidence (well me anyway).
In addition there have been umpteen times over the years when we've conceded a goal and I've thought to myself strewth we had possession all we had to do was welly the bloody ball down the pitch.
I haven't really got an answer if i'm honest. |  |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:45 - Sep 15 with 1590 views | qprd |
Its not just about drilling down on skills its also a lot about MW's philosophy.
Take a look at Chair's goal against Forest. We're winning 1-0, trying to hold on and take 3 points. Grabban had just had a one v one with the keeper and barely missed an equaliser
Who missed the shot before Chair's goal? Dom ball- who was brought on as a defensive sub, was for some reason, making a (clever) striker's run into the box.
Who passed the ball to him? Geoff Cameron, who was occupying a number 10 role despite being our CDM
I'm not going to complain much b/c we won, and that was a great goal to kill the game... but that couldve easily ended with Ball scuffing the shot, our 2 CDMs being totally out of the game, and Forest 2 v 2 going the other way in the dying seconds of the match....
A lot of that is the manager's philosophy- I believe Warburton has said he doesnt believe in cynically killing off games and would rather always try to keep scoring.... [Post edited 15 Sep 2020 13:45]
| | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:52 - Sep 15 with 1563 views | A40Bosh |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:45 - Sep 15 by qprd |
Its not just about drilling down on skills its also a lot about MW's philosophy.
Take a look at Chair's goal against Forest. We're winning 1-0, trying to hold on and take 3 points. Grabban had just had a one v one with the keeper and barely missed an equaliser
Who missed the shot before Chair's goal? Dom ball- who was brought on as a defensive sub, was for some reason, making a (clever) striker's run into the box.
Who passed the ball to him? Geoff Cameron, who was occupying a number 10 role despite being our CDM
I'm not going to complain much b/c we won, and that was a great goal to kill the game... but that couldve easily ended with Ball scuffing the shot, our 2 CDMs being totally out of the game, and Forest 2 v 2 going the other way in the dying seconds of the match....
A lot of that is the manager's philosophy- I believe Warburton has said he doesnt believe in cynically killing off games and would rather always try to keep scoring.... [Post edited 15 Sep 2020 13:45]
|
or maybe he realises that with us at the moment the best form of defence is attack and had we not pushed Ball and Cameron up, they would have likely won back possession back earlier anyway and had another attack :-) | |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:56 - Sep 15 with 1551 views | Antti_Heinola |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:45 - Sep 15 by qprd |
Its not just about drilling down on skills its also a lot about MW's philosophy.
Take a look at Chair's goal against Forest. We're winning 1-0, trying to hold on and take 3 points. Grabban had just had a one v one with the keeper and barely missed an equaliser
Who missed the shot before Chair's goal? Dom ball- who was brought on as a defensive sub, was for some reason, making a (clever) striker's run into the box.
Who passed the ball to him? Geoff Cameron, who was occupying a number 10 role despite being our CDM
I'm not going to complain much b/c we won, and that was a great goal to kill the game... but that couldve easily ended with Ball scuffing the shot, our 2 CDMs being totally out of the game, and Forest 2 v 2 going the other way in the dying seconds of the match....
A lot of that is the manager's philosophy- I believe Warburton has said he doesnt believe in cynically killing off games and would rather always try to keep scoring.... [Post edited 15 Sep 2020 13:45]
|
I can't recall, but fairly sure they were that high because we had either won or lost a throw near the corner flag and we were rightly trying to press them high rather than funnelling back and inviting them on? | |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 14:11 - Sep 15 with 1527 views | R_from_afar |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:14 - Sep 15 by Antti_Heinola |
I don't disagree - my point was when under the cosh, clearing to nowehere and gifting possession back might relieve pressure momentarily but doesn't stop momentum. Keeping the ball, slowing it down, denying possession is what truly will stop an onslaught. That doesn't mean don't clear your lines, but it does mean be smart! |
I agree that keeping the ball is the best way but if you clear the ball and give it back to the opposition in their half, that does remove the immediate danger and give you some breathing space.
Sometimes, trying to pass the ball out of defence when under attack is difficult because there are bodies everywhere and very little time or space to work with, plus you are very close to your own goal, meaning a mistake can be immediately be very costly.
In my experience, the best *players* - not just defenders - read the game so well that they realise when a situation is developing which requires a "just get rid" approach rather than a calmer "pass it out" strategy.
Good communication is vital when defending too. It can make a huge difference, for the whole team. Defenders and the 'keeper have the best view of the game and can spot - and communicate about - problems and opportunities developing.
Teams - and fans - should celebrate good defending more, but defending should be treated as something which the team, not just certain players, does. |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 14:42 - Sep 15 with 1461 views | Esox_Lucius |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:45 - Sep 15 by qprd |
Its not just about drilling down on skills its also a lot about MW's philosophy.
Take a look at Chair's goal against Forest. We're winning 1-0, trying to hold on and take 3 points. Grabban had just had a one v one with the keeper and barely missed an equaliser
Who missed the shot before Chair's goal? Dom ball- who was brought on as a defensive sub, was for some reason, making a (clever) striker's run into the box.
Who passed the ball to him? Geoff Cameron, who was occupying a number 10 role despite being our CDM
I'm not going to complain much b/c we won, and that was a great goal to kill the game... but that couldve easily ended with Ball scuffing the shot, our 2 CDMs being totally out of the game, and Forest 2 v 2 going the other way in the dying seconds of the match....
A lot of that is the manager's philosophy- I believe Warburton has said he doesnt believe in cynically killing off games and would rather always try to keep scoring.... [Post edited 15 Sep 2020 13:45]
|
It worked well for Terry Venables when he was our manager. |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| The Defence: A Thought on 15:13 - Sep 15 with 1422 views | joe90 |
Warbs mentioned Wallace/Kakay getting forward with another player tucking in behind, I guess if this doesn't work we get pulled out of shape? |  | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 15:50 - Sep 15 with 1378 views | stevec |
I think Warnock proved beyond doubt you can train an ethos into a defence that will stop the goals flooding in and, depending on your situation, they don’t need to be the best in the business.
Orr, Connolly, Gorkss and Hill were no world beaters but Warnock had them all over attackers at the first smell of trouble.
As good as Walker was, far superior to Orr, if memory serves our goals against record was far tidier when Orr was playing to orders.
That said, or I think Nix said, the set piece defending is atrocious and there’s no way Warnock would have seen that happen whoever he had out on the pitch. |  | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 16:33 - Sep 15 with 1335 views | Hunterhoop |
| The Defence: A Thought on 13:14 - Sep 15 by Antti_Heinola |
I don't disagree - my point was when under the cosh, clearing to nowehere and gifting possession back might relieve pressure momentarily but doesn't stop momentum. Keeping the ball, slowing it down, denying possession is what truly will stop an onslaught. That doesn't mean don't clear your lines, but it does mean be smart! |
But you’re missing my point, Antti; I’m not saying clear it downfield and gift possession straight back, I’m saying clear it out so the game stops and your side can regroup and get in shape again. Big difference. | | | |
| The Defence: A Thought on 19:17 - Sep 15 with 1203 views | daveB |
| The Defence: A Thought on 12:15 - Sep 15 by Antti_Heinola |
yeah i sometimes think just getting it clear doesn't solve a lot - you just give possession back, and actually keeping possession for a minute or two is more effective. But I do agree to an extent. And agree about Dickie. One ball down the right, he came across barged the attacker out the way and when he wellied it into touch it was like the ghost of Clint Hill. I'd take that! |
yeah i don't think you should just lump it every time but when under pressure getting the ball as far away from your goal as possible to give you time to regroup and organise is not a bad way to go about things | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
