If you look back in the thread (around page 3?), I explain in a bit of detail how I collect them. Do ask if you have any other questions though!s.whitey92":2fv7rqr8 said:
-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
Turning the ship around // Part 7: The creative void
- Thread starter NickSS
- Start date
This is all brilliant analysis. The defensive part 5 is not so surprising given the previous conclusions.
I particularly liked the Fox vs Songo'o comparison as it shows how much of a conundrum the deep-lying midfielder is. It's incredibly rare that you find someone there who can be both a defensive destroyer and a player who knits everything together by linking and pivoting the whole defence and midfield as Fox does in his "Pirlo" / "regista" role. Obviously we can't afford such a player but Michael Carrick - who should have got far more England caps - is the only one I can think of who did both. Defensively he was very strong not with crunching tackles and blocks but by shutting down passing lanes and making interceptions. And his passing was top notch of course, that's known. For Argyle, I think you've conclusively demonstrated that we are better off with Fox's passing as long as Sarcevic and Ness are protecting from in front. Funny that Fox is the deepest-lying but also the worst at defending (just like Pirlo!), but he is so critical back there to us getting up the field. Maybe if we want Songo'o on the pitch to defend set pieces, his best role is at the back, so long as we limit his scope to commit errors by controlling possession.
It also makes sense that Charlton man-marked Fox in last season's game. Whereas other managers would say you stop Argyle by stopping Carey, Lee Bowyer said you stop Argyle by stopping David Fox. He knew that the way to stop Carey is to stop Argyle getting up the field through Fox. How do you think we would counteract a man-marking job on Fox?
Can I suggest a part 6? The attack. Earlier in the season it appeared that Carey and Lameiras were struggling to play with Ladapo because they are used to Taylor, who plays with back to goal, bringing them into the game, but Ladapo plays front to goal and wants to be fed chances to score. There was a clip from the Portsmouth game of Ladapo making a run in behind but Carey playing a pass to where he had been stood before, expecting a one-two back to a shooting position for Carey. But now Ladapo has 5 in 4. What changed?
I particularly liked the Fox vs Songo'o comparison as it shows how much of a conundrum the deep-lying midfielder is. It's incredibly rare that you find someone there who can be both a defensive destroyer and a player who knits everything together by linking and pivoting the whole defence and midfield as Fox does in his "Pirlo" / "regista" role. Obviously we can't afford such a player but Michael Carrick - who should have got far more England caps - is the only one I can think of who did both. Defensively he was very strong not with crunching tackles and blocks but by shutting down passing lanes and making interceptions. And his passing was top notch of course, that's known. For Argyle, I think you've conclusively demonstrated that we are better off with Fox's passing as long as Sarcevic and Ness are protecting from in front. Funny that Fox is the deepest-lying but also the worst at defending (just like Pirlo!), but he is so critical back there to us getting up the field. Maybe if we want Songo'o on the pitch to defend set pieces, his best role is at the back, so long as we limit his scope to commit errors by controlling possession.
It also makes sense that Charlton man-marked Fox in last season's game. Whereas other managers would say you stop Argyle by stopping Carey, Lee Bowyer said you stop Argyle by stopping David Fox. He knew that the way to stop Carey is to stop Argyle getting up the field through Fox. How do you think we would counteract a man-marking job on Fox?
Can I suggest a part 6? The attack. Earlier in the season it appeared that Carey and Lameiras were struggling to play with Ladapo because they are used to Taylor, who plays with back to goal, bringing them into the game, but Ladapo plays front to goal and wants to be fed chances to score. There was a clip from the Portsmouth game of Ladapo making a run in behind but Carey playing a pass to where he had been stood before, expecting a one-two back to a shooting position for Carey. But now Ladapo has 5 in 4. What changed?
I know, I was hoping to draw some different conclusions (which I did in some cases by looking at individuals and their weaknesses) but overall it was just one massive 8000+ word article that I just had to split in two!smithy1902":28knjvlj said:
It has to be said that Charlton under Bowyer are an exceptional side in this division. No other team that I have seen (Including Sunderland) play in such an attacking style. There are obvious gaps in their defence to be expose, but in the games I have seen under Bowyer they are often so fearless that they control possession partly because the opposition sides fear counter attacks. Each of their players is at least technically good with the ball (virtually all the midfielders are excellent with it) so it becomes very hard to dispossess them without dropping to the edge of your box and crowding them out. The reason they won't get promoted this year, like last, is that they lack depth to their squad, and once Bowyer's high-pressing style takes its toll they can't press as hard up the pitch and start to lose control of the ball, and their results tail off. You can see how this impacted Argyle's midfield: Fox attempted 21.4% fewer passes/minute than Ness & Makasi and had the lowest accuracy (72.2%). The CMs were forced to drop deep to make the passes rather than support the attack and the front three were isolated. In short, Charlton's midfield dominated with and without the ball and they could have scored 6.smithy1902":28knjvlj said:
However, Charlton weren't the only side to marginalise Fox. He struggled against Oldham (very poor quality of pitch reduced his passing influence), but Blackburn and Shrewsbury achieved it too, the former by dominating the ball, the latter by tasking Morris to mark him. In each, Argyle had an effective out ball to Taylor, who could hold it up and bring Argyle's attacker into play further up the pitch. Otherwise, stopping Fox isn't the be-all and end-all, it just usually reduces the time and quality of space that Carey/Lameiras have on the ball in games. Don't forget that Carey was at the heart of Argyle's best chance that day, which Amos brilliantly saved to deny Taylor. And, of course, he's still liable to smash the ball in from thirty yards, he's just less likely to create something when Fox's influence is reduced.
There are two more parts to come (part 6 hopefully out by lunchtime today, fingers crossed. Part 6: Taylor or Ladapo? and Part 7: The creative void.smithy1902":28knjvlj said:
But in terms of what changed from Ladapo scoring 2 in 10 to 5 in 5, including having seven "big chances" in those five, that's simple, the team changed. Adams is edging, bit by bit, towards his best line-up. He still hasn't quite got the midfield right (Fox, Ness and Sarcevic all started, but in a 4-2-3-1 rather than a 4-3-2-1, small difference, big impact, Scunthorpe are more likely to exploit those defensive gaps than Gillingham did), but we've seen Carey and Lameiras starting plus an increased control of the ball since Fox's return, so it's easier to create chances for him. The player himself hasn't changed at all, the team around him is getting better and putting him in better positions.
NickSS":3rm19g2w said:
Gut is that Taylor brings more to the team with hold up, aerial, double marking and Fred doesn't do much of that so needs to score at least a goal per game to justify his inclusion.
Eat your hearts out Linekar, Shearer, Neville etc.... this is quality analysis that doesn't just state the bleedin' obvious..... really enjoying it.
The defensive one brought to mind something Jack Charlton once said - "I've never seen a good YOUNG defender - you need experience to be a good defender". Before we slag off our defenders we should bare in mind they are young and have been thrown together. Couple that with our midfield issues so well described .... and we really should cut them all some slack.
The Taylor-Ladapo one is a fascinating. If Ladapo can work on his hold-up and awareness issues (Taylor's strengths) he could go on to be a top class striker - after a prolonged golden spell with us of course!!
After today's result and reading this I'm even more excited about how the season could unfold for us.....COYGs !!!!!
The defensive one brought to mind something Jack Charlton once said - "I've never seen a good YOUNG defender - you need experience to be a good defender". Before we slag off our defenders we should bare in mind they are young and have been thrown together. Couple that with our midfield issues so well described .... and we really should cut them all some slack.
The Taylor-Ladapo one is a fascinating. If Ladapo can work on his hold-up and awareness issues (Taylor's strengths) he could go on to be a top class striker - after a prolonged golden spell with us of course!!
After today's result and reading this I'm even more excited about how the season could unfold for us.....COYGs !!!!!
- Aug 2, 2008
- 3,469
- 22
Do you mind if I ask why? What factors endear you to him over Taylor? I presume goal-scoring is the main one!Mike Greening":2f581abq said:
If you're interested in my thoughts specifically, it's that people need to calm down just a bit. Argyle played GIllingham off the park because our midfield was entirely superior, dominated possession (particularly in the first half), and a 2-3 goal margin was justified on the night. Against Scunthorpe, that wasn't the case. Fox, Ness and Sarcevic are the best midfield three (as I have argued throughout the article series and in this thread) but 4-2-3-1 isn't quite getting the best out of them. In particular, it is liable to leave Fox more exposed defensively and force greater passing demands on Sarcevic, neither of which are their strengths. It's part of the reason why Sarcevic looked more clumsy than usual on the ball in the past two games.moles40":24ef0xvc said:
However, this was against a Scunthorpe side missing four of their best players, including both of their first choice CMs: Ojo and Lund. Ojo in particular was one of the outright best CMs in L1 last season (probably a top 15 performer overall in the League, hence why Championship sides wanted to sign him this summer). Despite this, we still didn't control the midfield, edged it in the first half but lost it in the second. Consequently, Scunthorpe had better chances than Argyle overall (that's not to say Argyle didn't create good chances, but Scunthorpe made more) and in performance terms a "fair" result would have been a draw.
The difference on Saturday was one factor: Argyle were clinical in attack and Scunthorpe weren't. But spells of good finishing in average performances come and go. Think of 2014 - Argyle beat Fleetwood 4-0 and Morecambe 5-0 in five days to move two points outside the play-offs and everyone thought we were going to be promoted, only to win 3/12 to end the season. Or 2013 - Argyle beat Barnet 4-1 and Rochdale 3-1 back-to-back and everyone thought we might challenge for the play-offs, only to win none of the next nine games and fall into a relegation scrap that we almost didn't survive from. I don't think we're in that kind of a situation now - I think this team would keep us up with a few weeks to spare (that's not being negative, generally every side in the bottom half of the table can be mathematically relegated with 3-4 games to go), but there are obvious improvements that can be made to get this team to perform even better.
Whereas after the 1-0 win against Wimbledon I sincerely predicted a relegation battle if Adams stuck with the same lineup, this one is closer to what I would describe as maximum performance level. I'm not thinking of major surgery anymore to keep the side up, but fine-tuning to continue the improvement. What bugs me is when people see improvements and use that as evidence for the finished article. A couple of very good results does not mean that Argyle are performing at their best, and over the long run it's performances that will lead to consistently better results. I'd still be looking at reverting to 4-3-2-1 with a series of selection changes, though if Adams is going with 4-2-3-1 because ASB isn't fully fit meaning he needs C. Grant at LB and J. Grant at LW to protect him, then fair play to him because he got the selection spot on.
Overall, I'm fully expecting a Sunderland win because their midfield is just superior to ours; that's why they've only lost one game all season. But they're only going to play a 4-4-2 most likely so there's a reasonable chance that Fox and Ness could stamp their authority on possession and get Argyle going forward; even if not Argyle have good movement and finishing on the break and a lot of confidence no doubt. And, of course, Sunderland could just miss every opportunity they have - that usually helps. Probability wise, I'd say 60% Sunderland win, 20% draw, 20% Argyle.
This was initially going to be a short response but - as usual - one I get going I'm difficult to stop. Last thing I'll say is that if you're interested in hearing more views about all this then we're aiming to bring back Green & White (the original Plymouth Argyle podcast). We first ran it in 2015, but that stopped when I moved to Toronto for four months (lovely city) and couldn't organise it anymore. The Herald started doing one shortly after and we never picked it up again, but we're going to try again. It'll be hosted on the Podcasts page of the Argyle Life website and I think the current plan is to have it available on Thursday's weekly, but we'll have to wait and see how that turns out.
Nick SS this analysis is fantastic. I'm not sure how you find the time but keep up the good work.
As an exile I rely on pasoti, gos, matchday moments and now I can add your analysis to the list. Please don't burn yourself out with too much, it'd be great to see your analysis every season even if content was added less often.
Fascinating reading about Freddie and Taylor, and the small clips of action really help make your points. Both players have their own strengths that benefit the team which means we will be less 'one dimensional' when Taylor is fit and will give DA a good problem in who to select.
I look forward to the next update.
As an exile I rely on pasoti, gos, matchday moments and now I can add your analysis to the list. Please don't burn yourself out with too much, it'd be great to see your analysis every season even if content was added less often.
Fascinating reading about Freddie and Taylor, and the small clips of action really help make your points. Both players have their own strengths that benefit the team which means we will be less 'one dimensional' when Taylor is fit and will give DA a good problem in who to select.
I look forward to the next update.