The College Dropout

Thought he was slightly better than Lewis today. One thing I’ve probably only fully appreciated is Gordon doesn’t provide the cover as the Joe’s - nowhere near. Gordon is great at winning it high but he doesn’t always come all the way back like the Joe’s do. Point is Livra was really left 1v1 with the Arsenal wingers and they got absolutely nothing. Livra just locked them down. Gordon helped but not like the other side. Obviously Saka is better than Martinelli but Saka did have some joy going on the outside and there was more of a 2-man job on him at all times. That created space on the other side for Martinelli who didn’t have the ability to take advantage because Livra.

We didn’t get Livra from Chelsea. Their academy is top 2 in the country.

Reece James is an ultimate technician. He’s a blend of both Hall’s ability on the ball (and better crossing), Livra’s athleticism and a footballing IQ that has seen him play effectively at RB, RWB, CB and DM/CM at an elite level. The comparison to Livramento on the ball (and I love Livra) is disrespectful to James. on Hall he showed great defensive nous at the end of last season. I thought at worst he would rotate with Kelly but I and many others never thought Kelly would entirely displace him. Hall is a far more talented player - you can see that instantly.

Aye and he’s going to have more ropey games. But he’s shown he can play at this level. Similar to Livra whose has had a slow start to the season. He can perform.

It was obvious at the end of last season when he got in the team that Hall was ready for a lot of minutes this season. He looked immense in those last half dozen games. Had he had a run a little earlier he may have gone to the euros imo. That run was caused by the injury crisis but I think it changed Howe’s view of Hall.

Think most people here prefer that. It’s wor Eddie that seems hesitant.

That aggression and sharpness was back today. That’s the magic of this squad you know. Aggression, first to the punch, quickness of mind and body.

Aye. Fairly early goal. Good finish too - not a super high Xg chance that. From there Arsenal pushed but didn’t create much. We didn’t create much either ‘game state’.

Against lower blocks definitely. The way we play we are hyper dependent on Bruno’s touch and dribbling ability to ease pressure in defence which Tonali can’t do. Agree Longstaff almost plays for Bruno. You need a runner I’ll run. You want a 1-2 here, you attack - I defend. Tonali still trying to figure out how he fits in.

Took his goal well. Got his swagger back. why can’t he play for 90 minutes though? Done again by 75 minutes. Having someone else lead the press from the front does give him another 15 minutes in the legs tbf. And makes the press more effective.

ATM we lose a little something with Tonali & Barnes. With Barnes I think it’s off the ball intensity and lack limited all round game. With Tonali it’s more there’s something Longstaff adds that I can’t quantify or articulate. Maybe it’s just the relationship with Bruno.

I agree with this. But there also changes that I think are positive long term and increased confidence. Joe’s on the left offensively and defensively gives us Great balance. The relationship is A1. Gordon and Tino on the right showed some positive signs. Longstaff and Bruno works in a way that can’t be ignored. That 442 press is better than whatever other press we’ve been trying this season. The relationships helped us play better football overall.

LOL. I do think it’s easier to setup well tactically defensively than offensively. Biggest tactical shift was the OOP press which was impressive. Otherwise going back to old working relationships and more importantly attitudes got us the win. Arsenal biggest issue is they only have one route to goal without Odegaard. And they were off it physically and mentally. We beat them to the punch time and again which is crucial. All wingers lost their individual battles. They looked good at 0-0 I thought. But once we scored they didn’t have answers. Last 20 went to that 451 shape that invites attack after attack that I really hate. But Arsenal didn’t have any inventiveness to take advantage and our lads gave it 100%. Bodies on the line etc. That low block 451 no press, is hard on our players mentally and physically and needs them to be right up for it to work.

Aye. Thinking back to last season and the issues Burn had. I do think he suffered from not having the Joe’s infront. And Hall benefitted from their protection.

Always great 1v1. Good performance.

Transition monster. Pressing monster. Great relationship with Joelinton.

Interesting and effective mix of going back to old ways and introducing new elements. Big Joe, Little Joe combination down the left. Longstaff in midfield. No Tonali. dark arts. Aggressive. First to the ball. But also more of a 442 shape off the ball worked a lot better. Allowed us to press higher. Less pressing from Isak but Joe’s pressing so high helps us.

Good performance this.

The midfield shape and press is working great too

We look great overall today. We are so much better when teams come and play especially at home. Look fit strong and motivated

It’s Schar. Who has been poor.

No I don’t think he parked the bus. He was astute tactically defensively and built a platform to get the best out of his attacking players. But tactics weren’t the edge that won those European trophies imo. His ability to build a team so focussed, determined, great team spirit imo gave him the edge along with the defensive tactics and platform for the attackers. The UEFA Cup they were outright the best. But the 2 CLs particular the Man au and Barca games - his ability to get young men to lock in and put it all on the line, find a bit of magic when needed is what gave him the edge imo. Again - not to say tactics aren’t important. But it’s not the be all and end all. What made Mourinho truly great was a human thing. That’s what all the ex-pro’s say - he got into their heads and unlocked something. Until it stops working.

Don’t agree. At his pomp Mourinho was tactically great but he was never a manager to have a strong offensive tactical approach game to game. He let his offensive players express themselves. But he was a brilliant man manager at his pomp. The players believed in him and would run through brick walls for him. Which was needed because his management approach focussed on working extremely hard and putting bodies on the line. And he would bring fanbases with him. And that would always be his undoing - his abrasive motivation style stops working and it implodes. In 2024 tactically he’s not kept up with the elite - same as Rafa and to a lesser extent Carlo (who was always less tactically focussed anyway). But the bigger issue is he’s not able to bring players/fans under his spell anymore. Or for long enough. A lot of that is personality. The broadly defensive tactics doesn’t help with buy-in either. That buy-in is everything in football. A team that buys into the manager is a good team. Fast to the ball, sharp mentally etc. Similarly losing the dressing room is everything too.

You’re missing the fundamental point. I’m not claiming these managers have no tactics, are tactically incompetent etc. That’s impossible given their success. I’m saying that wasn’t what made them the best, not their USP. You’re doing the thing I’m rallying against. ‘Tactics’ isn’t the holy grail of football management. You’re reducing the rest of football management to ‘pep talks’ and it’s not that simple. The game is about getting the best out of 11 talented young men. Telling them in great detail what to do, isn’t always the best way to succeed. ‘Tactics’ aren’t the best and end all of football management is my core point - the best managers don’t have to be the best tacticians. Like the best player in the world doesn’t have to be the best athlete. The best player in the world can’t be a bad athlete, he has to be god enough but his relative strengths can lay elsewhere (substitute athleticism for technical ability or whatever else). —- Carlo’s ability to get the best out of elite players is his USP. He saw something in Jude no other manager saw and supported it tactically with the false 9. Or moving Pirlo to 6 from 10 then flanking him with runners. Thats how he finds his margins - creating platforms for the best players to express themselves. That can be more important than managers who focus more on tactical setups and coaching. That’s Howe moving Joelinton to midfield (although that was serendipitous). Like I said - listen to players talk about managers. Every player talks about how specific Rafa is tactically. Most of the more talented players don’t talk positively of it - it’s stifling. Henry complained about Pep telling him where to stand, where to run until he saw that it worked.

I’m saying ‘tactics’ aren’t their strongest point. Ancelotti doesn’t coach specific routes of attack. He has certain ideas and wants players in certain areas they can do damage. But it’s not a highly tactical and coached setup like Guardiola or a lot of modern German managers. He puts the most talented players in positions to succeed and lets them get on with it with a bit of direction. Listen to ex-Chelsea players or even Jude re: Carlo. They all love him. But he doesn’t provide detailed tactical direction compared to a Guardiola. Incidentally- Carlo was less popular at Bayern whose players preferred a more detailed tactical plan and intense coaching. Benitez is specific. He wants attackers to make certain runs again and again. Certain moves. And has deep analysis of the opposition and how to stop them. Benitez took over from Carlo at Madrid. It was reported that The players hated the meticulous training sessions and felt overloaded by tactical instruction. And Rafa is notorious for being a poor communicator and man manager. He succeeded through coaching and tactical edges. Listen to any Liverpool player they all say Rafa was hard to get along with. But he was so detailed as a coach and knew how to setup the side to succeed in a one-off game. i don’t know how you lot can watch a sport for 30+ years and not back yourself to understand more than 50% of what a coach is trying to do tactically.