...if it's good enough for wolvesalona...
Printable View
...if it's good enough for wolvesalona...
Wolveselona suffering the curse of Europa League like many others before them.
Nuno obviously picking up tips from Neil.
Don’t really get the point of the thread.
Barcelona could use them but that still wouldn’t make the way we use them any better.
They had 5 yellows today and one red card - obviously not trying to win the fair play award!
If I remember correctly, on Friday night there were no long throws in the first half. When we started and persisted with them in the second half it seemed it was as if we had run out of ideas or, at least, ideas that might work.
Get it in the mixerQuote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Mort
if you have the long thrower...use him.
It's a great tactic that ****s up a lot of teams
Yes, you're right about no long throws in the first half. I've wondered about the point of using them if Morrison has to take them, but is he the attacking force now that he was in our promotion season? I think he would have scored from that chance he had from Bennett's cross a couple of years ago, but his lack of recent goals might have affected him because it was as if he took too much care about it - i.e. He thought about it too much. Morrison's lack of success last season could be explained by the higher division we were in, but, especially with Flint's signing, I thought we'd be more of a threat from set pieces in this division than we have been so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Mort
Only difference is...they score from theirs
Long balls can be a good tactic... Man City and Liverpool have players that can pass and players who are able to make clever runs (and they build up to it by moving the opposition round and don’t just lump it 60 yards)
Long throws could be a good tactic if used effectively, and also not 58483 times a game.
Anything can be a good effective tactic, it’s just we do everything at its most basic. Would be something if we worked on things and put a little more thought into it
Are saying its not a tactic worth doingQuote:
Originally Posted by J R Hartley
Memory serves me that some folk loved it , when Woodruff, Leggy and Gunner delivered the long ball threat.
Just throwing this long one out there (get it) if we had scored winners from long throws against Blackburn and Fulham , would we be still looking at this tactic as a negative or positive.??
It's fine when it's actually a threat. But it isn't. And long throws from our own half are just ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by life on mars
I was wondering earlier today how the team go about practicing lumping the ball 60 odd yards when each occasion will be different - and random!Quote:
Originally Posted by dembethewarrior
Man City did it against spurs (last match I saw of either Man City or Liverpool)Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hooded Claw
Sterling got in time and time again because they built up to it and didn’t just hoof it up the pitch into an area hoping someone would get a head on it.
Exactement - the difference being a distinct lack of hit and hope...Quote:
Originally Posted by dembethewarrior
There was some analysis that someone did a few years ago which showed that even ignoring the occasional chance you create from a long throw it is still a tactic worth employing for defensive reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCBlue
They looked at the next shot following long and short throws in the same parts of the pitch and they found that not only did a higher percentage of moves end in a shot for the team taking the throw, but also a smaller percentage of moves result in a shot against the team taking a long throw Vs a short throw in a similar position.
This could be why we are starting to see teams who play out from the back, don't generally go route 1 also employ long throws from time to time.
If you can get essentially a free cross into the box then why wouldn't you.
Unfortunately for us Morrison's throws probably aren't as flat as needed and he would be the best person to be on the end of them.
We're not the same threat but that's confidence as well as an attacking presence. In 2017/18 the balls were coming in the box almost constantly, we were having 12/13 shots a game and going for sides. Now, we're a lot more defensive and the pressure isn't as great. If you keep banging on the door, you'll break through so Morrison was having more chances. I just think we're so much more pedestrian than we could be and that's affecting everything. Doesn't help that Vaulks has stunk out the place when he's played so his long throws are left on the bench :hehe:.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
It’s how we go about it for me, rather than the fact we use long throws.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trigger
That’s the part for me - Morrison is much more effective being on the end of the throw, than being the one actually taking it. Flint is a giant but doesn’t seem to win that many headers in an attacking context considering his size. I’d imagine Warnock thought that Vaulks would play more, so they could utilise his throw. But on Friday night, Paterson should have taken the long throws when he came on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trigger
It’s not a free cross when it’s from within your own half, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trigger
Found it quite ironic that Wolves fans thought that Goodison was a library!