Not sure if this is the right thread to talk tactics rather than specifically about Eddie, but here goes nothing...
At the game last night, something I'd already noticed for several weeks became really, really evident to me and it was relating to our defensive tactics on both wings. Everyone is so focused on Dan Burn in particular, and the game that he is specifically playing, but not so much analysis of why he's playing it the way he is.
Don't get me wrong, whilst I have a massive soft spot for Dan Burn, being a lanky, Geordie who played defence, I know he's no Roberto Carlos, but he is a very steady and solid defender. (I am going to refrain from saying anyone "gives there all" throughout this as that is a prerequisite nowadays not a nicety. Thanks Eddie!)
But what is very, very clear is that our midfield 3 are always either very narrow or simply not capable of covering the ground we're expecting of them. That may be down to fatigue (which we can ultimately attribute to injuries) or maybe the physicality of certain personnel but they certainly don't provide protection to the full backs.
That raises the question of "should they be?"
In a traditional 4-4-2 if the ball was switched to your (defensive) right. The left back would usually sit ever so slightly deepest and command the line, telling everyone what's going on. At which point the opposition RW would be pushed up against your LB and the opposition RB would occasionally press forward, being picked up by your LW. That isn't happening now.
I've been questioning to myself whether this was through a tactical design, an element of risk if you like - shit or bust, or whether it was the personnel again (in this case Gordon). Since the return of Barnes, and watching us play, it appears it was the former, and this was only further highlighted last night when Almiron came on - with zero protection then becoming available to Trippier (and later Tino), who was doubled-up-upon a few times in his short time on the pitch.
To me the idea appears to be that, alright, we might be punished, but if they don't, we can punish them, and the fortune of the game lies in the oppositions hands whether they're willing to take that chance.
It's a confident approach, having faith in our attacking capability, and that has arguably worked, but what it has done has been a catalyst in us conceding a lot more, and subsequently losing a lot more confidence. The way we began the season and our season up until our 5th CL game was by and large positive, but once the hour mark in that last CL game was hit, it's been a very slow downward spiral of perceived confidence and poor performance for me.
I say this in hindsight, and of course, hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I do wonder if - had we returned to our defensive rigidity and ability to see games out 'to nil' from early last season where we'd be now, if not in terms of league position but in terms of mentality.
I wonder if this is something we should still resort to.
There was always something quite - I'm gonna use "romantic" but that's not quite right when we were simply unbeatable and teams couldn't score past us, given our motto is Fortiter Defendit Triumphans.
Footballers don't become bad footballers overnight, so that's why I find it difficult to swallow when people berate the likes of Burn. What I do question though, is how much communication is being made when any of our full-backs find themselves in these predicaments.
Our midfield 3, they're just lacking that tenacity to really grab a game by the bollocks. That's not a reflection on their ability but moreso their athleticism and personality. That's why Joelinton or an equivalent being missing has been somewhat catastrophic for us in my opinion. I do wonder, not just of our midfield but of our 'leaders' whether we have a real 'bastard' in the team. The shithousery has all but gone and we seem to lack aggression. A bi-product of low confidence, I suspect.
Yet we have one technical wizard in Bruno, one work horse in Longstaff and a very smart, tidy, technical player in Miley.
This brings me to the forwards, or moreso our forward play, when I watch Isak up top with Gordon et al, I cannot help but feel Isak is somewhat chained. With Gordon and at present Murphy or Miggy hugging those bylines, it's occupying the space for Isak to spin out into, and I'd like to see those wide forwards perhaps making reverse runs back across inside as Isak spins into the channels more.
On nights like last night though, whether we release the ball into said channels in a timely manner is another thing. Our intent wasn't there last night, and things by and large down to a nervousness and lack of confidence. Too many short passes to make our way from one side of the pitch to the other and so slow it simply allowed the opposition to reset. We did it at goal kicks too, Dan Burn in acres of space as our front men jogged forward and we waited 30 seconds for them to get in and reset with 3 men around Burn only to pump it to him when he was marked.
(Apologies if this is a TLDR but I promise I'm nearly done)
The irony of this post is that ultimately, I struggle to see what's wrong. It truly dumbfounds me. This same team, a similar set up, is and can ultimately be so, so effective and I know it. Unbeatable on its day even. Yet the only solution I can provide is to revert to shutting up shop a bit and returning to last years tactics. Self preservation if you like. We just need to get our mojo back and not let a decent season peter out.
This isn't all on Howe, it's not on anyone, we've just had a multitude of contributory factors in us not having quite what we need to really have that 'edge', but we must stick with him and with 'it', because we absolutely will find the answer in time.