Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't say he's an expert in game management, like. He absolutely is an expert in preparation, managing a squad and setting the team up tactically but in spite of what was accomplished in Istanbul, changing the game when things aren't going for him isn't his forte.

Judging by what we've seen so far I would 100% agree with this, there's been more than a few occasions this season where we've needed to freshen things up our change approach after going down or drawing and hes kept it the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Howaythetoon

He is all about his players knowing what, where, when and how and he trusts them 9 times out of 10 and to be fair they have delivered. Better players will see the football improve and of course our performances and results. Give Rafa 11 players 7/10 ability and you are going places, throw in a few 9s like at Liverpool and its major honours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say he's an expert in game management, like. He absolutely is an expert in preparation, managing a squad and setting the team up tactically but in spite of what was accomplished in Istanbul, changing the game when things aren't going for him isn't his forte.

Judging by what we've seen so far I would 100% agree with this, there's been more than a few occasions this season where we've needed to freshen things up our change approach after going down or drawing and hes kept it the same.

I think this is because Rafa prioritises 'control' over anything else - if we are having the lion's share of possession, winning the majority of second balls, forging openings if not necessarily chances etc then the goals will eventually come and there's little point making substitutes so as to upset the process. Blackburn away's a chief example - 0-0 and in supreme control of the game (if looking toothless) but Rafa opted to keep things as they were rather than bring on Atsu and/or Mitrovic and twist the knife; it was only until after they scored when he tried to drastically change things. That's the key I think; his subs are reactive rather than proactive more often than not but there's at least some sort of tactical justification behind the approach, whereas McClaren would inexplicably twiddle his thumbs until it is too late and Pardew would bring on a left-back for no reason whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...