27 Passes

[FrancosLoveChild]

Most of you lot would of seen the full goal online right about now, but Gelhardts goal came from a passage of play which contained 27 passes.

Now, The goal was taken very well, patience in keeping the ball, the diagonal passes had actual intent and went towards someone, and we kept our composure in difficult areas.

Now, why are we hoofing it? It should not matter who is up front, Moore, or Garner, keep this style of play, we play miles better than the hoofball dross, the players quite clearly prefer the ball being played on the floor, its much less tedious to watch, and it helps get results away from home.

Moore is a big player, but he will be much more effective if the ball is being played on the floor and we get into positions where we can cross it in. Where he then can use his height to score instead of knocking it onto nobody near him.

Cook, please scrap this horrible hoofball and play to the squads strength, hoofball is not anyones strength whatsoever.

Its clear night and day in how well we play when comparing the two.

Williams is a starter for me now.

 

[moonay]

As I posted on the other thread Franco, folk would have gone apoplectic with some of those passes at home.

 

[N"Zogbia's fan club]

Most of you lot would of seen the full goal online right about now, but Gelhardts goal came from a passage of play which contained 27 passes.

Now, The goal was taken very well, patience in keeping the ball, the diagonal passes had actual intent and went towards someone, and we kept our composure in difficult areas.

Now, why are we hoofing it? It should not matter who is up front, Moore, or Garner, keep this style of play, we play miles better than the hoofball dross, the players quite clearly prefer the ball being played on the floor, its much less tedious to watch, and it helps get results away from home.

Moore is a big player, but he will be much more effective if the ball is being played on the floor and we get into positions where we can cross it in. Where he then can use his height to score instead of knocking it onto nobody near him.

Cook, please scrap this horrible hoofball and play to the squads strength, hoofball is not anyones strength whatsoever.

Its clear night and day in how well we play when comparing the two.

Williams is a starter for me now.

Does that include Geldhart's 4 passes to himself?

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

The 27 passes conjure up impressions of us pulling them all over the place and playing fast smart little one-twos and give and goes. When in reality the first 15 or so passes are largely slow, all in our own final third under no pressure down to us lacking any options and going sideways and back looking void of ideas. It was 2 or 3 excellent longer passes from Joe Williams that made the real difference and gained us ground and opened up play. Without him taking responsibility like that we weren't going to get anywhere. The move only gets any momentum when Williams puts the cross field ball out to Byrne which is about halfway through.

I think most of the credit goes to Williams and Geldhartd for creating something out of nothing rather than it being an expansive sexy team goal. It's obviously much better to keep posession than hoof it to no one but unless we add more tempo and movement we are still going to struggle to make openings even if we keep the ball down. We need to get more players taking responsibility off the ball to create the space and give everyone better options in posession so we dont have to rely on individual moments of quality like Williams difficult cross field switch or Geldhartd turn.

 

[moonay]

Surely KDZ, you acknowledge that all the early slow, sideways, void of ideas stuff is (partly at least) essential to lure opponents out of position, thereby leaving one of our players available for the "killer pass", from where, the good stuff happens.

Sure, the early stuff could have been a little prettier. More comfortable. Less last minute.

But it worked. It provided the platform. It created the goal.

Well done Cook and players for having the nerve.

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

Surely KDZ, you acknowledge that all the early slow, sideways, void of ideas stuff is (partly at least) essential to lure opponents out of position, thereby leaving one of our players available for the "killer pass", from where, the good stuff happens.

Sure, the early stuff could have been a little prettier. More comfortable. Less last minute.

But it worked. It provided the platform. It created the goal.

Well done Cook and players for having the nerve.

But we weren't dragging opponents out of position or getting player into better positions to create space - there was just nothing on and no one knew what to do with it until Williams got hold of it and played a very difficult pass very well to open up the play. He had to attempt that ball or we wouldn't have ever got anywhere because Hull were so comfortable due to us moving the ball far too slow and having so little movement. As we shifted the ball from one side to another we did it as such a low tempo Hull could shift accross easily in time to close down any potential new passing lanes before we even attempted to use it. Passing needs the tempo and movement otherwise you'll never get the opporunity to play the killer pass and you'll always be looking for moments of magic to gain ground create any chances.

 

[Coddenchips]

So basically we kept possession until the opportunity came to take advantage of the situation?

 

[Yon Mon]

But we weren't dragging opponents out of position or getting player into better positions to create space - there was just nothing on and no one knew what to do with it until Williams got hold of it and played a very difficult pass very well to open up the play. He had to attempt that ball or we wouldn't have ever got anywhere because Hull were so comfortable due to us moving the ball far too slow and having so little movement. As we shifted the ball from one side to another we did it as such a low tempo Hull could shift accross easily in time to close down any potential new passing lanes before we even attempted to use it. Passing needs the tempo and movement otherwise you'll never get the opporunity to play the killer pass and you'll always be looking for moments of magic to gain ground create any chances.

So what if most of the passes where at our end?
We kept the ball for 27 passes. We didn't panic and give it away. We didn't lump it forward or put it out of play.
We kept hold of the ball and were patient until an opportunity arose.
Yes it was a cracking pass from Williams. If that's what he's capable of then it gives us another option.
Maybe it was a struggle at times on Saturday. But we fought hard and came from behind to grab a point.
I can see small steps being taken and progression being made.

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

So what if most of the passes where at our end?
We kept the ball for 27 passes. We didn't panic and give it away. We didn't lump it forward or put it out of play.
We kept hold of the ball and were patient until an opportunity arose.
Yes it was a cracking pass from Williams. If that's what he's capable of then it gives us another option.
Maybe it was a struggle at times on Saturday. But we fought hard and came from behind to grab a point.
I can see small steps being taken and progression being made.

You are missing the point - the opportunity didn't arise from the short passing game, Williams forced it open by going for a much longer pass as there were no shorter passes.

You can play the short passing game to create opportunities all the time but you can't if there isn't any pace or movement.

 

[moonay]

But we weren't dragging opponents out of position or getting player into better positions to create space - there was just nothing on and no one knew what to do with it until Williams got hold of it and played a very difficult pass very well to open up the play. He had to attempt that ball or we wouldn't have ever got anywhere because Hull were so comfortable due to us moving the ball far too slow and having so little movement. As we shifted the ball from one side to another we did it as such a low tempo Hull could shift accross easily in time to close down any potential new passing lanes before we even attempted to use it. Passing needs the tempo and movement otherwise you'll never get the opporunity to play the killer pass and you'll always be looking for moments of magic to gain ground create any chances.

Very often KDZ, your analysis of a game is excellent. Occasionally though, you seem unwilling to acknowledge anything that contradicts your key mantra - in this case, we've reverted from being a passing team to being a hoofball team, and Cook is out of his depth, and doesn't have the team on his side.

Of course players were pulled out of position, If they weren't, how did the players become available for Williams to deliver his pass(es)?

It's clear to see that we gradually moved up the field. We started deep in our own half, then moved up toward the half way line, and then managed to cross it. We played it left and we played it right. We had quite a few passes between 20 to 30 yards our before the final clinical play into the young lad, for him to show his skills.

We gradually drove Hull deeper and deeper. Why deny it?

As for the tempo, so what. Hull weren't able to stop the short little interplays, and neither were they able to stop the "killer pass", (created by those interplays) nor the goal. You don't need tempo all of the time. You only need it when it's appropriate.

I'm sure you won't agree ......... but that doesn't mean that the goal was created (as you say) by a killer pass. It was created with patient build up play, which allowed a killer pass to be delivered, which led to an increase in tempo, which led to the goal.

In my opinion.

 

[Yon Mon]

I'm not missing the point. I think you're just being negative for the sake of it.
Williams was nearly half way into Hulls half when he received the ball so we'd progressed up the pitch with short passes.
There was a few options in front of him but Lowe was unmarked so a longer pass was made which led to a few more short passes up the pitch leading to our goal.
If there was no movement how did we get the ball up the pitch?

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

I'm not missing the point. I think you're just being negative for the sake of it.
Williams was nearly half way into Hulls half when he received the ball so we'd progressed up the pitch with short passes.
There was a few options in front of him but Lowe was unmarked so a longer pass was made which led to a few more short passes up the pitch leading to our goal.
If there was no movement how did we get the ball up the pitch?

No he wasn't, Williams was still in our half when he played his first cross field pass and that then opened up the space and got the move going it was after about 15 passes in - prior to that there were no good short forward passes open that would've gained us any ground over the previous 15 passes. Prior to that Hull had comfortably kept us in areas they were happy for us to have it. Williams didn't have a better pass open either but he picked out his long pass exceptionally well and that broke us into the Hull half and disrupted the previously comfortable Hull shape.

Very often KDZ, your analysis of a game is excellent. Occasionally though, you seem unwilling to acknowledge anything that contradicts your key mantra - in this case, we've reverted from being a passing team to being a hoofball team, and Cook is out of his depth, and doesn't have the team on his side.

Of course players were pulled out of position, If they weren't, how did the players become available for Williams to deliver his pass(es)?

It's clear to see that we gradually moved up the field. We started deep in our own half, then moved up toward the half way line, and then managed to cross it. We played it left and we played it right. We had quite a few passes between 20 to 30 yards our before the final clinical play into the young lad, for him to show his skills.

We gradually drove Hull deeper and deeper. Why deny it?

As for the tempo, so what. Hull weren't able to stop the short little interplays, and neither were they able to stop the "killer pass", (created by those interplays) nor the goal. You don't need tempo all of the time. You only need it when it's appropriate.

I'm sure you won't agree ......... but that doesn't mean that the goal was created (as you say) by a killer pass. It was created with patient build up play, which allowed a killer pass to be delivered, which led to an increase in tempo, which led to the goal.

In my opinion.

As i said above the issue was no one was pulled out of position for the first 15 or so passes when Williams played his cross fireld ball when there was no other options to get forward. After that i've not got any issues, we played with more tempo and had more movement and it was much better and we started to give Hull issues. The point was the first 15 passes are somewhat redundant and if we are going to talk about a 27 pass move - it probably creates a different impression. It took Williams taking that risk to get things moving, the idea of pass and move is you can open up the space all over the pitch constantly and you wont have to play a riskier longer pass. We saw when the tempo and movement increased it made a big difference, but we need to do that all over the pitch.

 

[moonay]

KDZ, you have your view. I have mine. Others have theirs. It's good to discuss stuff.

For me, the first pass that started to pull them out of shape was Mulgrew's to Williams,and then onto Byrne. We'd pulled them forward, then quickly pushed them back, and then we switched play. Subsequently, after switching play again, out to the left, it was Robinson's run that sucked in their defence, making the space out on the right. Then, a quick increase in tempo, and hey presto.

Each phase led to the start of the next. The keyword was patience. It was a cracking goal.

 

[Coddenchips]

If the first 15 passes hadn't happened and we'd done something different it's highly unlikely to have progressed the way it did. It was a means to an end.

It's like saying a 10,000 metre runner wasted the first 9,600 metres because he only sprinted for the last 400.

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

KDZ, you have your view. I have mine. Others have theirs. It's good to discuss stuff.

For me, the first pass that started to pull them out of shape was Mulgrew's to Williams,and then onto Byrne. We'd pulled them forward, then quickly pushed them back, and then we switched play. Subsequently, after switching play again, out to the left, it was Robinson's run that sucked in their defence, making the space out on the right. Then, a quick increase in tempo, and hey presto.

Each phase led to the start of the next. The keyword was patience. It was a cracking goal.

Yes i'll agree that Mulgew to Williams which was directly before the one i refrenced was decent too. I wasn't talking about the second Williams crossfield ball which i think was something like pass 24, i was talking about his first one you mentioned which was about 15 deep into the move.

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

If the first 15 passes hadn't happened and we'd done something different it's highly unlikely to have progressed the way it did. It was a means to an end.

It's like saying a 10,000 metre runner wasted the first 9,600 metres because he only sprinted for the last 400.

No one is suggesting you don't pass, just that you need tempo and movement if you want those first 15 or so to gain any ground which they didn't. It's very hard to play out from the back if you don't.

 

[moonay]

Yes i'll agree that Mulgew to Williams which was directly before the one i refrenced was decent too. I wasn't talking about the second Williams crossfield ball which i think was something like pass 24, i was talking about his first one you mentioned which was about 15 deep into the move.

I assumed that. My point is that by Mulgrew threatening to go down the line, that then pulled their defence across, just a little, so that when it went to Williams, he could see there was no-one marking Byrne ......... because our play had pulled them over to our left.

It looked for all the world like we were going to go down our left ......... they covered for that, and Byrne became free. A similar thing happened when Robinson cut inside.

Of course, it could all have gone tits up when Dunkley's heavy touch almost gave the ball away much earlier on. That said, the best players can get caught too. Have you seen the goals conceded by City and Arsenal yesterday.

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

I assumed that. My point is that by Mulgrew threatening to go down the line, that then pulled their defence across, just a little, so that when it went to Williams, he could see there was no-one marking Byrne ......... because our play had pulled them over to our left.

It looked for all the world like we were going to go down our left ......... they covered for that, and Byrne became free. A similar thing happened when Robinson cut inside.

Of course, it could all have gone tits up when Dunkley's heavy touch almost gave the ball away much earlier on. That said, the best players can get caught too. Have you seen the goals conceded by City and Arsenal yesterday.

Absolutely that is what we need more of, but my point was we didn't get enough of that earlier in the move. Think Morsy and Evans used to be very good for coming and picking the ball up in those areas and being the water carrier but not seen enough of it from either in a while.

Not seen any goals except our game this weekend.

 

[moonay]

Absolutely that is what we need more of, but my point was we didn't get enough of that earlier in the move......

That's like saying "goalscoring, that's what we need more of"!

The early stuff enabled the middle bit, which framed the move that created the goal.

From little acorns, great oaks do grow.
?

 

[Made in Wigan]

Great debate gents, I’ll take over the still warm vacant spot on the fence on this one.

Make the most of it, I’m sure we’ll revert back to plan A of hoofball on Saturday.