Steve McClaren

[BrettNUFC]

You can't be in control out of possession man.

You can't be in control out of possession man.

 

How not?

[Fatwax]

"An opponent is at their most threatening when they don't have the ball".

 

Alan 'Shit For Brains' Pardew.

[mrmojorisin75]

You can't be in control out of possession man.

We've literally been here before with TCD, he'll relentlessly argue the same shit until everyone gives up or gets banned in anger. Best let him think he's right.

[BrettNUFC]

Or when Madrid beat Bayern in the CL.

 

This is a brilliant recent example where Madrid were in complete control of the match despite having very little of the ball. I'm fairly sure the possession was something like 70-30 in Bayern's favour but Madrid were always bossing the game and won 4-0.

[TRon]

I would say we controlled most games that season but on the back foot. We where rarely over run and desperate. Most of the wins where by narrow score lines but comfortable. Even in games like Swansea away where we had little of the ball we where comfortable defending and dangerous in attack. Tiote and Cabaye besides Pellegrini Man City sides are the only 442 midfielders to succeed in the last few years.  As a two - especially defensively. They where great. Didn't dominate possession but the team wasn't intended to do so most of the time.

 

I'm sorry but you can't control a game on the back foot. If you are on the back foot, you certainly can't be in control of the game.

 

I'd argue that you can't even control the game with a defensive tactic, unless you are very good at retaining possession.

 

Pardew never had a plan, other than to stop the opposition and it rarely worked.

The definition of control is the ability to define and manipulate something. That can be done with or without the ball.

 

All those times Mourinho beats Wenger. Those times SAF beat Wenger. Or when Madrid beat Bayern in the CL. Those teams controlled the game on the backfoot with much less possession. The aim of football is to score and not concede - you don't need loads of the ball to dictate that. IN games where a team has lots of possession but doesn't look like scoring and is susceptible to the counter, they're not in control. The other team is.

 

That's like saying you can't control a boxing bout on the backfoot. It's absurd.

 

As time has gone on and what he's doing at Palace, it's very clear he does have a plan. But it doesn't involve having much of the football.

 

I was agreeing with most of what you said but you had to put that in. Fuck what he's doing at Palace, those players just happened to be there when he arrived and they suit his game plan - the only game plan he's got btw. The point is, he didn't have a clue what to do with the players he had here, and he was instrumental in destroying the side which finished 5th and had real potential to go on and finish top six every season with the right additions. He was a fucking arsehole and there's every chance he degrade Palace's side as well given enough time.

[TRon]

Anyway, back to McClaren, while I loved that win against Liverpool, it might have been better for us long term if we lost. I'm pretty convinced by now that there is no way this team is going to put in 100% effort week in week out for such a wet blanket of a manager. He smiles while he takes criticism from the pundits and he probably does the same when the players tell him to go fuck himself. There's a real chance we are going down the longer he stays in charge.

[STM]

I would say we controlled most games that season but on the back foot. We where rarely over run and desperate. Most of the wins where by narrow score lines but comfortable. Even in games like Swansea away where we had little of the ball we where comfortable defending and dangerous in attack. Tiote and Cabaye besides Pellegrini Man City sides are the only 442 midfielders to succeed in the last few years.  As a two - especially defensively. They where great. Didn't dominate possession but the team wasn't intended to do so most of the time.

 

I'm sorry but you can't control a game on the back foot. If you are on the back foot, you certainly can't be in control of the game.

 

I'd argue that you can't even control the game with a defensive tactic, unless you are very good at retaining possession.

 

Pardew never had a plan, other than to stop the opposition and it rarely worked.

The definition of control is the ability to define and manipulate something. That can be done with or without the ball.

 

All those times Mourinho beats Wenger. Those times SAF beat Wenger. Or when Madrid beat Bayern in the CL. Those teams controlled the game on the backfoot with much less possession. The aim of football is to score and not concede - you don't need loads of the ball to dictate that. IN games where a team has lots of possession but doesn't look like scoring and is susceptible to the counter, they're not in control. The other team is.

 

That's like saying you can't control a boxing bout on the backfoot. It's absurd.

 

As time has gone on and what he's doing at Palace, it's very clear he does have a plan. But it doesn't involve having much of the football.

 

On the back foot means on the back foot, nowt to do with possession, it's about dominance.

 

You can't be in control unless you dominate, with or without the ball. All of those teams you mentioned win games by keeping possession and dominating the games. It's a useless arguement.

 

"Let's give the ball away and sit on our 18 yard box, that'll show me how good we are."

 

It will never take off at Newcastle United. Thank fuck.

[mrmojorisin75]

Anyway, back to McClaren, while I loved that win against Liverpool, it might have been better for us long term if we lost. I'm pretty convinced by now that there is no way this team is going to put in 100% effort week in week out for such a wet blanket of a manager. He smiles while he takes criticism from the pundits and he probably does the same when the players tell him to go fuck himself. There's a real chance we are going down the longer he stays in charge.

 

This is how I feel. Best case he staggers to safety and we're here again next season.

[STM]

Best case is that we pick up a bit of form and confidence and move up the league. Far from impossible but it requires us building on the Liverpool win, which we haven't done so far.

 

Tottenham away is about as bad as it gets at the moment.

[TRon]

There are teams who achieve some decent results by sitting back and hitting on the counter, but they do it by quick accurate passing when they win possession in their own half. They don't hoof it to a striker stationed on the wing like we did under Pardew.

[Dinho lad]

Well, they dew their last two games and won 2 out of 5 - decent , but not sure where this Spurs hype is coming from. (Again)

[Guest neesy111]

Well, they dew their last two games and won 2 out of 5 - decent , but not sure where this Spurs hype is coming from. (Again)

 

1 defeat all season and it's December.  That's impressive.

[mrmojorisin75]

Best case is that we pick up a bit of form and confidence and move up the league. Far from impossible but it requires us building on the Liverpool win, which we haven't done so far.

 

Tottenham away is about as bad as it gets at the moment.

 

You really think that's possible with this manager and set of players? I don't, not even close, that's why it's "best case" with him in charge.

[Dinho lad]

Drawn more games than won.

[TRon]

Drawn more games than won.

 

If we're talking about Spurs they started the season really slowly didn't they?

[The College Dropout]

I would say we controlled most games that season but on the back foot. We where rarely over run and desperate. Most of the wins where by narrow score lines but comfortable. Even in games like Swansea away where we had little of the ball we where comfortable defending and dangerous in attack. Tiote and Cabaye besides Pellegrini Man City sides are the only 442 midfielders to succeed in the last few years.  As a two - especially defensively. They where great. Didn't dominate possession but the team wasn't intended to do so most of the time.

 

I'm sorry but you can't control a game on the back foot. If you are on the back foot, you certainly can't be in control of the game.

 

I'd argue that you can't even control the game with a defensive tactic, unless you are very good at retaining possession.

 

Pardew never had a plan, other than to stop the opposition and it rarely worked.

The definition of control is the ability to define and manipulate something. That can be done with or without the ball.

 

All those times Mourinho beats Wenger. Those times SAF beat Wenger. Or when Madrid beat Bayern in the CL. Those teams controlled the game on the backfoot with much less possession. The aim of football is to score and not concede - you don't need loads of the ball to dictate that. IN games where a team has lots of possession but doesn't look like scoring and is susceptible to the counter, they're not in control. The other team is.

 

That's like saying you can't control a boxing bout on the backfoot. It's absurd.

 

As time has gone on and what he's doing at Palace, it's very clear he does have a plan. But it doesn't involve having much of the football.

 

I was agreeing with most of what you said but you had to put that in. f*** what he's doing at Palace, those players just happened to be there when he arrived and they suit his game plan - the only game plan he's got btw. The point is, he didn't have a clue what to do with the players he had here, and he was instrumental in destroying the side which finished 5th and had real potential to go on and finish top six every season with the right additions. He was a f***ing arsehole and there's every chance he degrade Palace's side as well given enough time.

 

I fully agree he only has one game plan. But he does have one and it can work when everything is going well. Someone like Carver had no gameplan.

[TRon]

I would say we controlled most games that season but on the back foot. We where rarely over run and desperate. Most of the wins where by narrow score lines but comfortable. Even in games like Swansea away where we had little of the ball we where comfortable defending and dangerous in attack. Tiote and Cabaye besides Pellegrini Man City sides are the only 442 midfielders to succeed in the last few years.  As a two - especially defensively. They where great. Didn't dominate possession but the team wasn't intended to do so most of the time.

 

I'm sorry but you can't control a game on the back foot. If you are on the back foot, you certainly can't be in control of the game.

 

I'd argue that you can't even control the game with a defensive tactic, unless you are very good at retaining possession.

 

Pardew never had a plan, other than to stop the opposition and it rarely worked.

The definition of control is the ability to define and manipulate something. That can be done with or without the ball.

 

All those times Mourinho beats Wenger. Those times SAF beat Wenger. Or when Madrid beat Bayern in the CL. Those teams controlled the game on the backfoot with much less possession. The aim of football is to score and not concede - you don't need loads of the ball to dictate that. IN games where a team has lots of possession but doesn't look like scoring and is susceptible to the counter, they're not in control. The other team is.

 

That's like saying you can't control a boxing bout on the backfoot. It's absurd.

 

As time has gone on and what he's doing at Palace, it's very clear he does have a plan. But it doesn't involve having much of the football.

 

I was agreeing with most of what you said but you had to put that in. f*** what he's doing at Palace, those players just happened to be there when he arrived and they suit his game plan - the only game plan he's got btw. The point is, he didn't have a clue what to do with the players he had here, and he was instrumental in destroying the side which finished 5th and had real potential to go on and finish top six every season with the right additions. He was a f***ing arsehole and there's every chance he degrade Palace's side as well given enough time.

 

I fully agree he only has one game plan. But he does have one and it can work when everything is going well. Someone like Carver had no gameplan.

 

He couldn't even stick to that game plan though, he used to change formations and styles after a couple of bad results. Allardyce does the horrible football game plan with conviction. Pardew's just a cunt.

[The College Dropout]

Aye certainly he would have moments where he would really try and live that "front football with fret". Eventually, we'd get battered and it was back to keep it tight, bit of magic.

[AY]

You can't be in control out of possession man.

 

Very off topic, but ofc you can. If your game plan is to eliminate the opponents "fret" and keep them passing around your defensive shape. Sunderland controlled the game against Palace with a very pragmatic game plan that involved about 10% possession. They were playing for 0-0 and got a lucky winner.

 

On the topic, I think McClaren is changing the tactic a bit. We probably will play very direct and launch it quickly towards Cisse. Spurs' defence is damn good though so can't see Cisse doing much. We are not keeping the ball as much anymore.

 

[The College Dropout]

It's a shame we've gone more direct without Mitro..

[Interpolic]

Drawn more games than won.

 

If we're talking about Spurs they started the season really slowly didn't they?

 

They've been drawing too many games all season, otherwise they'd be top of the league or thereabouts given that they haven't lost since the first day.

 

Only them and Leicester have 1 loss.

[Stifler]

If we catch Spurs on one of their off days we can get a point, a real possibility since they played in midweek. If not then the writing is on the wall.

[TRon]

Reading in the Times today that the Cabella complained about McClaren's training methods (passing emphasised) and got shown the door two weeks later. Then last week before the Liverpool game some more players wanted a more direct approach and apparently that's what got us the result against Liverpool. I don't know how much of this is true but if it is it's just confirmation that McClaren is not a leader and it's yet another shambolic appointment.

[Gallowgate Toon]

Reading in the Times today that the Cabella complained about McClaren's training methods (passing emphasised) and got shown the door two weeks later. Then last week before the Liverpool game some more players wanted a more direct approach and apparently that's what got us the result against Liverpool. I don't know how much of this is true but if it is it's just confirmation that McClaren is not a leader and it's yet another shambolic appointment.

 

I don't think listening to players' feedback and changing is a particularly bad sign of leadership, like. Not saying he's a good leader but that's hardly bad, imo. If he carried on playing in a way that players were admitting to feeling uncomfortable in that would be far worse.

[TRon]

Reading in the Times today that the Cabella complained about McClaren's training methods (passing emphasised) and got shown the door two weeks later. Then last week before the Liverpool game some more players wanted a more direct approach and apparently that's what got us the result against Liverpool. I don't know how much of this is true but if it is it's just confirmation that McClaren is not a leader and it's yet another shambolic appointment.

 

I don't think listening to players' feedback and changing is a particularly bad sign of leadership, like. Not saying he's a good leader but that's hardly bad, imo. If he carried on playing in a way that players were admitting to feeling uncomfortable in that would be far worse.

 

But it does suggest that he doesn't really know how to operate in the premier league today.