Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: redbrez on June 11, 2018, 02:53:52 pm
-
Just thinking, I prefer to watch good football,and sod and penny style teams were good but in different ways, but it did get frustrating watching us play someone of the park and getting beat.
So with a new manager and a different style of play
What would people think if we did play longer more direct but we found a way to be successful playing this system?
I think it would be a refreshing change bullying other teams for a change and trying a style that's a bit different, just reading about David Hopkins? Style of play, that's if he is successful and in the running?
If we got the results I would welcome the change ,even though I prefer to see football played on the grass ,maybe a good alternative ?
-
Long ball football doesn't have to boring. What DRFC fans want is a winning team. Passing football can be boring when you pass the ball about with no end product and come away with a defeat.
-
Rigo will love that but not for me.
-
Think a change would be refreshing nudge, maybe not so much long ball but more direct, thinking of the last time we had 2 brutes upfront and think I enjoyed us then with Jones and Muir upfront?
-
The problem would be, after playing another style throughout the last few seasons, and bringing younger players through the ranks, and with a backroom staff built into a way of playing.
Would a completely new approach suit the players we have here who are already under contract.
We are not that bad a young football side, I want someone who can build on, encourage, and improve what we already have here, which is not a bad starting place for any new manager, and add a few players who can fit in and improve the results on the field of play.
A winning side develops its own identity in my experience, and the manager guides it.
Someone coming in, changing everything, and undoing the progress made over the last few seasons is the last thing we need.
This should be something brought to the fore with the candidates at the interview stage, so that we hit the road running, everyone is clear as to what is needed, the new man knows the ethos of the club, and what we are about.
The best football is simple fast football, confidence is a big factor, we could be accused of over complicating things under Fergie, being too slow going forward, and playing one of our best attacking players (Rowe) in areas he should not be, and other players out of position.
Solve them problems, add a couple of decent young players in certain positions and I can see us having a decent season, the base of a good side is already in place.
-
Good points , but isn't fast football direct? We could have pace out wide with players like kiwomya and Blair already ,attack quick tying to play football , but if nothing's on lump into the box and cause some chaos pressure? A brute playing with marquis, and rowe or coppinger or beestin playing just behind picking up scraps, so still playing football just quicker and more direct? Still can use the players we have ?
-
I can't be doing with all this tippy tappy 500 passes and no end product possession football, BORING. I'd rather see some long ball mixed in, hit teams hard on the counter attack and don't be afraid of being physical. Much more exciting to watch.
-
I don't mind the long ball game, Liverpool used it throughout the 80's. But, there are two types of it. There's the Liverpool of the 80's who PASSED the ball long to one of their players, and there's the Wimbledon of that era who simply booted the ball down the pitch towards the opponent's goal.
I'll take the former but not the latter.
-
I agree BB. one is structured, the other left somewhat to chance.
A short or long pass played quickly can take players out of the game. It's not new, Spurs in the early sixties played it the best I have seen in this country. It was labelled pass and move in those days, added to their skill at running past players with the ball they were a joy to watch.
There are times in a game, especially in both penalty areas when football should stop, if a telling pass is not on, and a shot at goal, or getting rid of it out of the area are the requisite.
We defended pretty well last season, getting the ball forward, and in the opposition penalty area we were poor, with a slow build up in midfield.
They are the areas to improve.
Going back to Liverpool BB. the longest balls they played were back to the goalkeeper once they were in front, they were the main culprits for the law change stopping the keeper picking up a back pass.
-
Good points , but isn't fast football direct? We could have pace out wide with players like kiwomya and Blair already ,attack quick tying to play football , but if nothing's on lump into the box and cause some chaos pressure? A brute playing with marquis, and rowe or coppinger or beestin playing just behind picking up scraps, so still playing football just quicker and more direct? Still can use the players we have ?
Like a Dave Penney side then. Yeah I'd take that in a heart beat.
-
I enjoy crosses. I don't enjoy aimless hoofs up field. Keep hold of the ball and move it quick looking for an opening.
-
I enjoy crosses. I don't enjoy aimless hoofs up field. Keep hold of the ball and move it quick looking for an opening.
One of the biggest issues for me last season was the length of time it took to get the ball out wide and then into the box.
I am happy for us to play keep ball, but in a positive way rather than what we had to watch.
As the season progressed, more and more games went by without us getting in behind defenders and being able to cut the ball back into oncoming players.
On the few occasions that it happened, invariably there was only one man to try and pick out.
No wonder we struggled to score goals.
-
The first season under SOD in the championship - the away game at Bramhall Lane - SUFC under Blackwell - ball to Matt Kilgalon and hoof, ball to matt Kilgalon and hoof, ball to matt Kilgalon and hoof, ball....
That was awful!
Such a pleasure to win that one.
-
I'd like direct in terms of attacking and going for the throat as soon as we get the ball rather than reverting to a safe sideways pass which just lets the opposition close up any gaps, seen too much of that this season.
For me the way Liverpool are doing it is the best they attack and are direct but not long ball at all really. We'd soon get fed up of one dimensional long ball/set play that Pulis and Big Sam favour
-
I agree BB. one is structured, the other left somewhat to chance.
A short or long pass played quickly can take players out of the game. It's not new, Spurs in the early sixties played it the best I have seen in this country. It was labelled pass and move in those days, added to their skill at running past players with the ball they were a joy to watch.
There are times in a game, especially in both penalty areas when football should stop, if a telling pass is not on, and a shot at goal, or getting rid of it out of the area are the requisite.
We defended pretty well last season, getting the ball forward, and in the opposition penalty area we were poor, with a slow build up in midfield.
They are the areas to improve.
Going back to Liverpool BB. the longest balls they played were back to the goalkeeper once they were in front, they were the main culprits for the law change stopping the keeper picking up a back pass.
Banning back passes was probably the best rule change in the history of the game.
A couple of years ago I watched a re-run of the WC90 semi-final against West Germany. 90 seconds in, there was a long ball up towards Lineker. Augenthaler got there first and knocked the ball back to Illgner. Lineker was running in and I was on the edge of my seat thinking this was a real chance.
Then Illgner just picked the ball up.
And the same thing happened time after time when defenders were under pressure. It was shockingly sterile to watch.
The game today is unrecognisable. Defenders today are immeasurably more composed and better footballers than those from 30 years ago. They have to be to survive and the game is far better for it.
-
Agreed Billy, and Liverpool were the worst exponents of it, it drove the continentals mad.
-
Agreed Billy, and Liverpool were the worst exponents of it, it drove the continentals mad.
Probably coz Liverpool used to beat them all selby.
-
Yes hound, they killed a game if in front, they had more than one good side, changed their makeup and mixed their style of play to suit the opposition.
They could mix it as well with the rough stuff, and were not averse to taking someone out of the game, I will never forget Jimmy Case taking out Platini with his elbow at Anfield, just as the BBC commentator was saying what a great player he was.
-
Yes hound, they killed a game if in front, they had more than one good side, changed their makeup and mixed their style of play to suit the opposition.
They could mix it as well with the rough stuff, and were not averse to taking someone out of the game, I will never forget Jimmy Case taking out Platini with his elbow at Anfield, just as the BBC commentator was saying what a great player he was.
I know the history selby, Liverpool are my second team.
I remember a funny story about Duncan McKenzie of the weeds.
He said that he hated Emlyn Hughes and had been trying to catch him with his elbows all game.
Finally a long ball came in his direction, Hughes was behind him and he caught him his a belter, right on the nose.
Well, he thought he had until he looked at the player whos’ nose was bleeding.
It was Tommy Smith !!
McKenzie played the rest of the game in the right back area.
-
Good points , but isn't fast football direct? We could have pace out wide with players like kiwomya and Blair already ,attack quick tying to play football , but if nothing's on lump into the box and cause some chaos pressure? A brute playing with marquis, and rowe or coppinger or beestin playing just behind picking up scraps, so still playing football just quicker and more direct? Still can use the players we have ?
Like a Dave Penney side then. Yeah I'd take that in a heart beat.
In a Dave Penney side we had Mckindoe on the left and Younger Coppinger on the right. Neither Kiwomya as yet and is left footed or Blair are not near their standard. Now a new right and left sided midfield players who have a record of good crosses and have contributed with goals, with Rowe behind the front two of Marquis and new striker would give more goals .
Apart from Rowe we didn’t and don’t have the players good enough for that role.
-
FWIW, this is my two penneth.
Long ball football is easily my favoured style (this stems from my time at Mansfield where it brought success), but it has got limitations and, IMO, it only works with the right personnel and generally in a 4-4-2.
Too many teams nowadays line up in a defensive-minded 5-3-2 with wing-backs, not a more-attacking 3-5-2, and there's not enough opportunity to get the ball out wide to genuine wingers. A 'must not lose' mentality as opposed to 'must win' is also prevalent, IMO, in this formation. This could be down to how fickle football has become with managerial casualties.
A brutish, elbow-flicking, nasty, kicking, nipping, aggressive long ball game is exactly my cup of tea, but it's not just about the centre-back sledging it long to the big burly forward who'll flick it on. That forms part of the style, but set-pieces are just as important. Getting balls out wide and then into the box from wide areas is just as important. Long-throws are just as important. Having an intimidating bunch of six-footers in a back four is just as important. Having a 'ratty' defensive-minded CM who'll go around fouling everyone is just as important. It's equally as much about as organisation and discipline (especially at set-pieces) than it is the style. It's 'you have a job to do, so know your role and do it' and don't over-complicate it by trying this total football stuff.
SO'D's football was very pretty and pleasing on the eye, but too tippy-tappy and his teams were often guilty of over-passing the ball on a number of occasions - John Oster being a prime example. In open-play, a SO'D team would often dominate, but at set-pieces there was little threat usually.
It's a complete contrast in two styles, but I think if results were good, nobody would have too much to complain about - regardless of whatever style was used. However, if results were shit, or the football was too defensive-minded (especially in home games where fans expect you to attack because you're at home) then complaints about style of play would be louder than complaints about results.
That long middle paragraph Rigo, describes almost perfectly our title winning side of 2012/13; a back four all six foot plus, including one with a huge throw, a big hold up type centre forward, and a winger who was dynamite at both crossing and free kicks; not pretty to watch, but by God difficult to beat.
-
Direct in the Dave Penney mould can be a real thrill to watch. Direct a la Graham Westley is enough to drive a nun to drink. You do need a shithouse or two at this level though, if you want to do well.
-
That's fair comment. Aimless long balls with possession given away cheaply and it coming back to you with interest can't be anyone's Cup of tea.
On the other hand, direct with quality passes and crosses to players who have a knack of winning the ball with other players anticipating it, is more tasteful.
-
Graham Westley is an awful bloke, so it doesn't help when you combine that with the playing style.
-
Direct in the Dave Penney mould can be a real thrill to watch. Direct a la Graham Westley is enough to drive a nun to drink. You do need a shithouse or two at this level though, if you want to do well.
Westley gets a lot of unfair flack, IMO.
His Stevenage side from 2009/10 to 2011/12, which won the Conference Premier and finished in the play-offs in League One a couple of years later, as well as having two or three very good cup runs, was a superb example of a direct, aggressive, nasty long ball side knowing their jobs inside out and being successful. Not pretty, but bloody effective!
His achievements there are arguably more successful than Lincoln City have been under Danny Cowley, and they've achieved great things already.
None of this makes Graham Westley's football any more entertaining or easier on the eye and he hasn't really achieved an awful lot in recent years so you've got a Kitson who's living on past - limited - glories who could probably learn a thing or two from cavemen about football.
-
Rigo's already said he loves a bit of hoofball tbf.
-
Rigo's already said he loves a bit of hoofball tbf.
At every possible opportunity!
-
It's all down to the players you have at the club, both styles of play can be exciting, The tippy tappy Spain side had some of the best players I have ever seen, and always scored more goals than the other side most of the time.
The Wimbledon side could upset some very good teams, and the number of times the ball landed near the centre forward was not just luck, they had some decent players as well.
An exciting side often forgotten was the Aston Villa European winning team. They had good players with the ball, and speed throughout the team, and players like Morley who ran past players in midfield with the ball. They only lasted a short time, but they were exciting to watch. A mix of both styles with Wythe the only player who was not a sprinter with pace, but the focal point of the attack.
My point in my earlier post, was to consider the players we have got here now, a young team of promising players. I want a new manager who can add to, improve what is here, and play winning football whatever style that takes, not an easy task, but not impossible.
-
The question that has to be asked is are the Rovers fans patient enough to achieve the type of football SOD played?? I can remember when he first came sat in the away end at Scunthorpe getting absolutely walloped showing no apparent fight,passion or skill...Then listening to his interview after the match were he praised them for trying to do what he wanted...I was fuming and wanted him sacked on the spot but he knew what he was doing...
The reason SOD has failed everywhere else is that to play his type of football doesn't happen overnight.You have to get worse before you get better and in the football world today,you just don't get the time to do that before the sack...
We have a young group of players (copps apart) so in theory if your going to change to that type of football now is the time to do it and whilst the club would probably have the patience to stick with it,i'm not sure the fans would...tbh
-
Sod style of play is the best I have ever seen rovers play.
-
We all want to see the team win but not at the expense of neckache every Saturday. Anyone who advocates a return to kick and rush, in whatever guise, needs their head examining.
-
I like two things, pace and goals. I would say my favourite style was under Penney personally. Fast skilful wingers and good strikers.
The games changed though and that won't win as easily now.
-
Yeah that style will get quickly overran in midfield but as Leicester showed if you can become effective at counter attacking at pace that needn't be a bad thing. Monaco also had a similar style last season before Mbappe and Silva got sold
-
the only problem with us is, we like to move the ball around but, when we did go long we always lose the ball and put presure is back on our selves and that is when we gave a goal away
-
We normally make 3 or 4, unconvincing, sideways and backwards passes before going long that's a lot of the problem
-
the only problem with us is, we like to move the ball around but, when we did go long we always lose the ball and put presure is back on our selves and that is when we gave a goal away
That's because it was aimless punts in the general direction of, for some bizarre reason, Alfie May for half the season, who's about four foot tall.
-
It was mainly bad football last season. Effective to an extent as we definitely became a better defensive unit (which is not just down to defenders) but more generally we were not good to watch and specifically very bad to observe in terms of offensive play. We stayed up though so job done but poor football.
-
We all want to see the team win but not at the expense of neckache every Saturday. Anyone who advocates a return to kick and rush, in whatever guise, needs their head examining.
You could always sit higher up the stand bobby.
-
TBF, I think if we started kicking the opposition up in the air every week and launched more balls forward than Jeremy Thorpe, but kept on winning.... then most would accept it week in week out. A winning team is accepted - by whatever means, and a losing team will be shunted........ I say this as someone that stood on the dwindling stands watching the Dons back in the seventies.... a truly grim time...