This passing between our back 4

It seems to get quite a bit of criticism on here, but then most posters are older and yearn for the days of whack everything upfield.

Playing things out from the back is the way forward, pardon the pun. Most promoted sides to the Prem in recent years do that. The days of goalkeepers thumping a goal kick 80 yards upfield have almost gone.

I've seen a few Villa performances recently and it's been really enjoyable. There's a side that is direct but builds from the back. Yes, they've got the players to do it, but the principle can be copied. Once they get towards the half way line each pass goes forward, sometimes long, but on the floor. You don't see much unnecessary passing of the ball around the opposition box, they're constantly looking for through balls and asking questions of the opposition defence - one mistake and they're in. Of course, it relies on movement off the ball and pace.

As Villa are showing, you don't have to play tiki taka stuff as they don't. You can be direct, but it needs to be done well, not aimless long ball stuff.

For me the issue is less the passing among the back 4, although I'm not sure what Runnarsson has done to deserve the reputation of a ball playing keeper, he looks like a total liability in that regard at least a couple of times a game.

The issue IMO has been that when it gets forward to the midfield, it just goes back again. Lack of movement and any creativity in the central 3 since Ramsey has been out has been a glaring issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LA Bluebird

For me the issue is less the passing among the back 4, although I'm not sure what Runnarsson has done to deserve the reputation of a ball playing keeper, he looks like a total liability in that regard at least a couple of times a game.

The issue IMO has been that when it gets forward to the midfield, it just goes back again. Lack of movement and any creativity in the central 3 since Ramsey has been out has been a glaring issue.

---

Yes, without a doubt. 1 goal scored in open play in what seems like a long time.

I know it’s what we wanted and its path for the cause but at times it scared the sh!te of me today

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 19bluebirds27

I know it’s what we wanted and its path for the cause but at times it scared the sh!te of me today

---

Agree I don't see the need for it. We're missing a lot of advantage play

if building from the back means five or six passes b.etween defenders and midfield before going back to the keeper who ends up having to whack it upfield, as it does too often with us, then I'm against it. The thing is though that if you watch sides that play a passing game well, that hardly ever happens - yesterday's conditions only served to expose even more the various faults City squads have had for years when it comes to things like basic technique, creativity, flair and attacking movement

The thing is, that when this goalkeeper has the ball in his hands, instead of getting it to a outfield player quickly, he hangs around and waits for the two defenders to stand by his side so we can play from the back, and then when they get in trouble and they pass back to him, he hoofs it upfield the same with goal kicks

If we are to build from the back we need players able to do it. Wonder if McGuinness has a long term future at City, as he is certainly not a ball playing centre back.

It can work well especially with players who are comfortable. You also need to mix it up though, if you have someone upfront capable of bringing it down and holding it up then reluctance to use such a skill seems illogical.

Even Pep these days has Ederson spraying the ball around, their team in general happier to go quicker to Haaland if it's on. He even plays the huge full backs which I never thought I'd see.

It's just not hit and hope playing percentages but more about being confident and precise in what you are doing, whether that's playing longer more direct or short.

Trouble is every team wants to play like prime Swansea and every week you see they can't.

whatever the pros and cons of doing it are. We arent very good at playing it out from the back - and it starts wit Runarrson - he looks very very nervous doing it, seems hesitant and usually puts the defenders under more pressure.

Just because Man City do it - it seems to be the general understanding then every team should do it - which is utter bollox. Play to your strengths not other teams strengths.

It's frustrating for forwards to engage in 'pressing' as they are as they are invariably a man short that far up the field and it's therefore easy for teams to pass it around at the back.
It would me more effective for the 'pressing' team to commit an extra player so the opposition has no spare man, as it were.
Forwards are just wasting their energy otherwise.

modern football is about compressing the space, but the good old-fashioned diagonal over the full backs head into space still makes you have to respect it and drop 10m thus giving your midfield a millisecond of much needed time.

It is as if modern coaches are so opposed to the Warnock-type play they rather take all the unnecessary risks or tossing around the back four for no gain. What are we trying to do when we do it ? Seriously!

At yesterdays game the crowd were voicing their impatience with all the knocking it round at the back,however, the problem lies further up the park with hardly any movement at all.It's the same with throw-ins,nobody showing.Did anyone else notice the heated arguement between Siopsis and Robbo just before half-time.I think the gaffer settled this one by hooking Robbo.He proved to me that although he's a good player he's no number 10 and Ruben underlined this by allowing the wide men to play further up the park and looking a more natural no 10 that Robbo ever does.I'd like to see the side that finished the game start on wednesday.

Me to, with Tanner coming on around 60 minutes

We have slipped back into the pointless tippy tappy nonsense we suffered under Trollope. The purpose surely is to move the opposition around so the midfielders can find a bit or space further up the pitch. It only works if it is done with a sense of purpose and urgency at the back. Taking a couple of touches then passing it on to another defender to do the same is utterly pointless.
It begs two questions, firstly are our defenders capable of playing this system and secondly if it works on the training pitch what is going wrong on match day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LA Bluebird

For me the issue is less the passing among the back 4, although I'm not sure what Runnarsson has done to deserve the reputation of a ball playing keeper, he looks like a total liability in that regard at least a couple of times a game.

The issue IMO has been that when it gets forward to the midfield, it just goes back again. Lack of movement and any creativity in the central 3 since Ramsey has been out has been a glaring issue.

---

That is absolutely the issue. There is no point taking risks at the back to then play a ball forward that gives possession to the opposition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

if building from the back means five or six passes b.etween defenders and midfield before going back to the keeper who ends up having to whack it upfield, as it does too often with us, then I'm against it. The thing is though that if you watch sides that play a passing game well, that hardly ever happens - yesterday's conditions only served to expose even more the various faults City squads have had for years when it comes to things like basic technique, creativity, flair and attacking movement

---

At the same time the oppositions defenders are having a leisure break whilst their forwards stand on the edge of our penalty area pinning us back.

Posted in wrong thread.

Free kicks just inside our half going back to keeper and then we lose ball before we get it back to half way line!

It's done as a way of drawing the opposition out of their positions. If it works, and that's a big If, a team can take out a couple of opposing midfield players within a few passes. Notice that when it happens players just don't steam towards the player in possession, they're quite apprehensive about getting drawn in and turned. They usually squeeze on the third pass.

There was an instance in the first half, during which we had spent a long period making so many passes between the defenders, midfield and then defenders, and keeper ad-infinitum... where our keeper had to actually pass then ball backwards to one of the two defenders that he usually passes to.

During that period of time, Millwall had gradually moved further up the pitch, so much so, that I would have imagined that every outfield player was surely in our half.

If the whole aim is to draw the opposition that far up the pitch and pass through them in a blinding passing counter attack... this was the moment.

Unfortunately, the play was so condensed in our half and our players are not Man City or Aston Villa, we ended up with each player having less and less control of the ball/situation and each successive pass put his team-mate under further pressure.

Eventually, the inevitable heavy touch from one of our players, presented the ball to a Millwall player, and the resultant scramble to whack the ball clear, saved us from conceding a shot at our goal.

I am all for playing the ball out from the back in a controlled way, but we need the players ahead of the defenders to move around into space to create a forward pass option... at least Rubin Colwill was providing that option in the second half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingOfSiamIAm

There was an instance in the first half, during which we had spent a long period making so many passes between the defenders, midfield and then defenders, and keeper ad-infinitum... where our keeper had to actually pass then ball backwards to one of the two defenders that he usually passes to.

During that period of time, Millwall had gradually moved further up the pitch, so much so, that I would have imagined that every outfield player was surely in our half.

If the whole aim is to draw the opposition that far up the pitch and pass through them in a blinding passing counter attack... this was the moment.

Unfortunately, the play was so condensed in our half and our players are not Man City or Aston Villa, we ended up with each player having less and less control of the ball/situation and each successive pass put his team-mate under further pressure.

Eventually, the inevitable heavy touch from one of our players, presented the ball to a Millwall player, and the resultant scramble to whack the ball clear, saved us from conceding a shot at our goal.

I am all for playing the ball out from the back in a controlled way, but we need the players ahead of the defenders to move around into space to create a forward pass option... at least Rubin Colwill was providing that option in the second half.

---

Pretty much agree with all of this. It's about sucking the opposition in, creating pockets, angles etc, and breaking through a defensive line, basically turning the opposition, which is good as when that happens the game ceases to be infront of them and they are on the back foot. It's all about getting your opponents facing their own goal. We aren't very good at it at the moment, but Bulut isn't that puerile in respect of not allowing his players the 'out' ball, basically a long ball. Which is good news for us, and it allows the players to learn. I hope that we stick with it. With better players, hopefully we become better at doing it. Doesn't mean we can't mix it up though, and i think that we will. Winning the ball back quickly is as important. Good post though, can't argue with anything that you have said :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Pretty much agree with all of this. It's about sucking the opposition in, creating pockets, angles etc, and breaking through a defensive line, basically turning the opposition, which is good as when that happens the game ceases to be infront of them and they are on the back foot. It's all about getting your opponents facing their own goal. We aren't very good at it at the moment, but Bulut isn't that puerile in respect of not allowing his players the 'out' ball, basically a long ball. Which is good news for us, and it allows the players to learn. I hope that we stick with it. With better players, hopefully we become better at doing it. Doesn't mean we can't mix it up though, and i think that we will. Winning the ball back quickly is as important. Good post though, can't argue with anything that you have said :thumbup:

---

You make a good point about winning the ball back as quick as possible. It just made me reflect... that is what we had been doing since the start of Bullit's tenure, and I would say to great success.

However, in recent games I see that we have been letting the opposition have the ball more, and not press them so much. Probably understandable against teams like West Brom and Southampton, what with their better players.

However, yesterday against Millwall we stood off them and let them get all the momentum in the first half. It reminded me of the type of performance that is usually needed away from home at the end of the season, where we might need to dig in and get a point against the odds, towards promotion, against a team up for the fight. That type of away result usually also proves that the character of the players in such circumstance.

Unfortunately we weren't playing Millwall away near the end of the season, we were at home and surely we should be dictating the tempo of play.

In the end, the players did well to gradually get back into the game, through sheer will power, and once the crowd had something to cheer about, I could detect the Millwall players getting less confident when defending.

In the end it was three points, and to get three points when playing so badly shows the character of the players.

Just before we scored, I said to my grandson, if we win this, we are going up. Not (only) because I am stupid, but as we all know, we look back at certain promotion seasons and see results like this as the ones where this or that point was vital. Also, last season we would have lost that game without so much as a whimper.

I don't know why we have been pressing less of late, but we were good at it against Bristol and Swansea Town, so I can't understand why we wouldn't do it against Millwall. Especially after our manager expressed his opinion that Millwall are a more direct team, thereby hinting that they would be less comfortable in possession.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingOfSiamIAm

You make a good point about winning the ball back as quick as possible. It just made me reflect... that is what we had been doing since the start of Bullit's tenure, and I would say to great success.

However, in recent games I see that we have been letting the opposition have the ball more, and not press them so much. Probably understandable against teams like West Brom and Southampton, what with their better players.

However, yesterday against Millwall we stood off them and let them get all the momentum in the first half. It reminded me of the type of performance that is usually needed away from home at the end of the season, where we might need to dig in and get a point against the odds, towards promotion, against a team up for the fight. That type of away result usually also proves that the character of the players in such circumstance.

Unfortunately we weren't playing Millwall away near the end of the season, we were at home and surely we should be dictating the tempo of play.

In the end, the players did well to gradually get back into the game, through sheer will power, and once the crowd had something to cheer about, I could detect the Millwall players getting less confident when defending.

In the end it was three points, and to get three points when playing so badly shows the character of the players.

Just before we scored, I said to my grandson, if we win this, we are going up. Not (only) because I am stupid, but as we all know, we look back at certain promotion seasons and see results like this as the ones where this or that point was vital. Also, last season we would have lost that game without so much as a whimper.

I don't know why we have been pressing less of late, but we were good at it against Bristol and Swansea Town, so I can't understand why we wouldn't do it against Millwall. Especially after our manager expressed his opinion that Millwall are a more direct team, thereby hinting that they would be less comfortable in possession.

---

We've definitely gone of the boil. Not sure why, maybe the players have plateaued and Bulut has pretty much got out of them as much as he can. I can't really be to critical though. Hoping for an injection during january. I think that we need it :thumbup:

I think the issue is lack of confidence, obviously the idea is to bring the forward players of the opposition forward to make space which it does but the players look shot at the moment. They try, give effort but that type of game needs real belief. Oddly we played out from the back quite well under Morison with Wintle the key.

Playing a high pressing game has to be tiring, especially in a league where the fixtures come thick and fast, maybe we're just not capable of playing to the intensity we were in the first three months of the season any more?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Playing a high pressing game has to be tiring, especially in a league where the fixtures come thick and fast, maybe we're just not capable of playing to the intensity we were in the first three months of the season any more?

---

I’m not sure when this intensity you speak of actually happened because I haven’t seen much of it. We are far too passive off the ball and far too slow with it. I honestly think that hasn’t changed, it’s just now a lot worse.