Football style

[Southend Elvis]

Yesterday, I decided to count how many touches Barnet had between passes. In the last 15 mins, I struggled to find any of them taking over 2, where as we probably took a minimum of 5 before each pass....that's why Barnet were great to watch. Please Kev, try it so watching the Blues could be a whole new ball game.

 

[BoyWonder2]

Yesterday, I decided to count how many touches Barnet had between passes. In the last 15 mins, I struggled to find any of them taking over 2, where as we probably took a minimum of 5 before each pass....that's why Barnet were great to watch. Please Kev, try it so watching the Blues could be a whole new ball game.

Do you honestly think that Kev turns round to the players and says “every time we get the ball, probably take a minimum of 5 touches before each pass”?

 

[southendkid]

We've had managers like Mark Molesley try and play like that and we conceded time and time against because we gave the ball away cheaply. One touch football is nice if you've got the best players in the league (which Barnet arguably do) but it's not something a lot of players at this level would be comfortable doing.

 

[Swiss Tony]

Do you honestly think that Kev turns round to the players and says “every time we get the ball, probably take a minimum of 5 touches before each pass”?

After yesterday yes.

 

[BoyWonder2]

After yesterday yes.

Okay.

 

[BEERMONSTER]

For me football in general these days is less entertaining and exciting than it once was. As someone who grew up with the marvellous entertainment of 4-4-2 & 4-3-3 formations and the shouts of 'get it forward' whenever a Center Half had the ball at his feet, midfield ball carriers running at the opposition, Wingers looking to hit the byline crossing for the obligatory big man upfront, the traditional CF, knocking them in or knocking them down for his strike partner, the fox in the box type the classic big and small combo and not forgetting the jumpers for goal posts and half time Bovril!
Joking apart I accept the modern game is played different with so many coaches invested in playing a possession based game that builds from the back.
A system that works best when you have players from 1 to 11 on the pitch who are technically and tactically fit for purpose.
Without that you don't get the results the modern tactics are set up to achieve.
How many coaches lose their jobs because of their unwillingness to adapt their perfered playing style to accommodate the abilities of their current squad, choosing to attempt to 'improve' them as players if they don't have the luxury of a transfer budget to ship them out and bring in their type of player.
Football is a simple game and in it's natural purest form is entertaining but when one element of the game is set as item one on the agenda for me the overall continuity of the game suffers.
To be entertaining possession football requires the player in possession to have a first thought process of 'can I attack here', be it a pass, a run or indeed a shot. A retention pass needs to be the secondary thought, without that ability as part of the players individual game management the safety first instinct is there and to much of that among your 1 to 11 is not going to be conducive to entertaining football.
Moncur is a player who demonstrates the attack minded process and also highlights that with the right like minded players added to the squad how easy it could be to increase the entertainment value.
But then again I am just an old dinosaur of a football fan so what do I know ?

 

[seve le six]

Yesterday, I decided to count how many touches Barnet had between passes. In the last 15 mins, I struggled to find any of them taking over 2, where as we probably took a minimum of 5 before each pass....that's why Barnet were great to watch. Please Kev, try it so watching the Blues could be a whole new ball game.

I didn't think we did that much.
I think we often pass it without looking for the better option which might be to bring the ball forward draw the opposition player and then pass.
Also too often when going forward passes are made to feet, when the receiving player has to stop, and adjust his body to take the ball, when instead it could have played for him to move on to. This is how kids used to be taught how to play football.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Do you honestly think that Kev turns round to the players and says “every time we get the ball, probably take a minimum of 5 touches before each pass”?

I am a Maher fan. Right from when he was a player for us. I really want it to come good for him but, if the players are not doing what the manager tells them, then he is not managing. If they are doing what they are told, he is managing badly. My gut says the latter. He, like the players, is learning and I hope he learns a tad quicker than he has up to now.

There are all sorts of excuses bandied about, chiefly the need for new players. As much as that may be true he still has to get the best from what he has. Man management I won't fault him for. The team are galvanised, have a great spirit and give their all. Tactically I think he is naive and when it doesn't work he is slow to, or reluctant to, change.

 

[WestyReturns]

There's so little movement when a player has the ball and looks up. They are all static. They've clearly been drilled to take the safe option rather than risk losing possession. Funny enough the safe triangles assisted Barnets first goal!

 

[BoyWonder2]

I am a Maher fan. Right from when he was a player for us. I really want it to come good for him but, if the players are not doing what the manager tells them, then he is not managing. If they are doing what they are told, he is managing badly. My gut says the latter. He, like the players, is learning and I hope he learns a tad quicker than he has up to now.

There are all sorts of excuses bandied about, chiefly the need for new players. As much as that may be true he still has to get the best from what he has. Man management I won't fault him for. The team are galvanised, have a great spirit and give their all. Tactically I think he is naive and when it doesn't work he is slow to, or reluctant to, change.

Every boxing has a plan until they get punched in the face.

From what I’ve seen, Barnet played two in behind Stead. When we had the ball with Collin, the 10’s would pick up Ralph & Taylor and Stead who press Collin & Crowther.

Sometimes you have to play quick, through the lines and beat the press. Sometimes you have to put your foot on the ball, slow the game down for 5 minutes and go again.

You can’t play blood and thunder football for 90 minutes. No one, at any level does that, so why do we expect Southend of the National League to do that?

 

[manor15]

I am shocked that a team who didn’t know if they’d have a club to play for until 3 weeks before the season is having a slow start to play incredibly attractive and clinical football.

Kev has been calling for a more offensive, creative midfielder all summer and now we have Moncur, yet it’s somehow Kev’s fault that the other 10 players on the pitch aren’t also playing through balls in the final third.

5 points from 4 games, 3 of them against sides who will be up there come the end of the season, in the circumstances is impressive. That our paper thin squad lacked intensity in the first of 2 games inside 48 hours shouldn’t be a shock to anyone.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Every boxing has a plan until they get punched in the face.

From what I’ve seen, Barnet played two in behind Stead. When we had the ball with Collin, the 10’s would pick up Ralph & Taylor and Stead who press Collin & Crowther.

Sometimes you have to play quick, through the lines and beat the press. Sometimes you have to put your foot on the ball, slow the game down for 5 minutes and go again.

You can’t play blood and thunder football for 90 minutes. No one, at any level does that, so why do we expect Southend of the National League to do that?

I didn't say blood and thunder football for 90 mins. As for the boxer punched in the face, he learns and knows when to bob and weave. We get smacked in the kisser and keep putting our face in the same place. All games start with a coaching manual and a whiteboard and when things don't go as expected you change things up. We often start with the wrong tactics and fail to adapt. I have lost count of the games this team has lost to, man for man, inferior sides that are set up with greater tactical nous. I will still be at RH tomorrow but I suspect I have a very good idea of how we will play already. If I know the opposition most certainly does.

 

[Richard Hearn]

Every boxing has a plan until they get punched in the face.

Or to paraphrase Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke the Elder (1800-1891)

"No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy".

 

[onceknownasrab]

I am shocked that a team who didn’t know if they’d have a club to play for until 3 weeks before the season is having a slow start to play incredibly attractive and clinical football.

Kev has been calling for a more offensive, creative midfielder all summer and now we have Moncur, yet it’s somehow Kev’s fault that the other 10 players on the pitch aren’t also playing through balls in the final third.

5 points from 4 games, 3 of them against sides who will be up there come the end of the season, in the circumstances is impressive. That our paper thin squad lacked intensity in the first of 2 games inside 48 hours shouldn’t be a shock to anyone.

What you settle for is what you get. No matter what new player we have brought in, the game plan stays the same. More new blood needed? Hmmmm. We will make better players look worse if we keep doing the same tried, tested and failed things.

 

[Southend Elvis]

There's so little movement when a player has the ball and looks up. They are all static. They've clearly been drilled to take the safe option rather than risk losing possession. Funny enough the safe triangles assisted Barnets first

Just outside our box is the problem, it's terrible to watch, as one tiny mistake offen leads to a shot on our goal.... how that's a positive in our game is a mystery?

 

[southendkid]

For me football in general these days is less entertaining and exciting than it once was.

I'd argue that's more to do with our team than modern football itself. We're defensively strong (meaning the opposition struggles to create chances) but not particularly creative (meaning we don't create many chances ourselves). That results in a lot of matches where not much happens in front of either goal.

The stats back this up as well, if you sort NL teams by average number of goals scored in their matches we're 4th bottom in both of the last 2 seasons.

 

[thenobster]

Use the wingers, go past players and cross. Simple

 

[Hawkwell Blue]

I have no idea when passing out from the back became a thing. The amount of goals conceded in this way, particularly in the lower leagues, is extraordinary. It isn’t mandatory! Some of our cross field passes from our defenders are perilously close to the opponent’s attackers. Unfortunately if we do break the line we don’t attack with any pace.

 

[onceknownasrab]

I'd argue that's more to do with our team than modern football itself. We're defensively strong (meaning the opposition struggles to create chances) but not particularly creative (meaning we don't create many chances ourselves). That results in a lot of matches where not much happens in front of either goal.

The stats back this up as well, if you sort NL teams by average number of goals scored in their matches we're 4th bottom in both of the last 2 seasons.

I don't think the intention is to be defensive and I don't believe we cannot be more creative with the current personnel. KM likes three at the back but deploys a DM that covers so deep he is a fourth defender. It means we win the ball deep and have further to transition to end up on the attack. Our press in the midfield needs to be higher in our half. When the opposition press we have the wingbacks defending, plus the three CBs and the DM. That leaves two mids to cover the width of the pitch between them. Invariably Cards and or Waldron are drawn back and everything, should we win the ball, starts too deep and gives the opposition more time to get back and manage the stockade. Equally we need to vary the times we send the ball wide for a cross or go through the middle. We are too predictable.

 

[BEERMONSTER]

I'd argue that's more to do with our team than modern football itself. We're defensively strong (meaning the opposition struggles to create chances) but not particularly creative (meaning we don't create many chances ourselves). That results in a lot of matches where not much happens in front of either goal.

The stats back this up as well, if you sort NL teams by average number of goals scored in their matches we're 4th bottom in both of the last 2 seasons.

Edit: The screenshots have chopped off the column headings, the 1st column is average number of goals (2nd is goals for, 3rd is goals against).

As I say, arguably I'm a bit of a dinosaur but being in my 60's I generally feel today's football is not as exciting. You may well be highlighting to me why I feel that way. Modern coaching is very stats driven which often molds how teams are set up, as they say knowledge is strength but for me most matches lack the level of spontaneity they used to have due to a more manufactured approach. Do Stats help with creativity or impeded a rewards over risk approach? Depends on your take I suppose. What I find is the predictability of the modern game for me detracts from the excitement. Don't get me wrong I still enjoy football obviously, I am just able to draw comparison from my own library of memories of what I have witnessed myself over the years, those are my stats so to speak but as was once said to me, 'If you play around with Stats enough they will end up giving the answer you wanted'