The way forward.

One of the main complaints with regard to Bignot's teams was the lack of any structure with regard to formation.
I have been watching Town , and football in general , for over 60 years. I must admit I do not spend much time deciding whether I am watching 4-4-2    .  3-5-2.  . 2-3 -5. Or whatever. I leave formation to somebody ( the Manager ?) ,who hopefully is more knowledgeable than me, and selects a system using the strengths of the players he has available.
Football is,to me,a simple game. You pass, to one of your team mates,and move,pass and move until a goalscoring opportunity arises.
To me the lack of simple passing man to man has been our main problem, I am sure we have a pool of players well able to carry this out!
Let's hope our new management team can bring this to fruition.
     U.T.M

Quoted from Chips44

One of the main complaints with regard to Bignot's teams was the lack of any structure with regard to formation.
I have been watching Town , and football in general , for over 60 years. I must admit I do not spend much time deciding whether I am watching 4-4-2    .  3-5-2.  . 2-3 -5. Or whatever. I leave formation to somebody ( the Manager ?) ,who hopefully is more knowledgeable than me, and selects a system using the strengths of the players he has available.
Football is,to me,a simple game. You pass, to one of your team mates,and move,pass and move until a goalscoring opportunity arises.
To me the lack of simple passing man to man has been our main problem, I am sure we have a pool of players well able to carry this out!
Let's hope our new management team can bring this to fruition.
     U.T.M

Or you can simply boot it over the top or into the channel for a billy whizz type, which is the way we went under Slade in our second season. In his first, we tried the pass and move stuff without too much success. Will be interesting to see which one we get now, or maybe a mixture of the two. I'm sure he will have learned a lot more in the last 11 years since he was here.

Simply boot it over the top?

Fair enough you didn't appreciate the more direct style of play but to suggest it was just a case of lumping it forward is way off the mark.  It was tailored to suit what we had and what we were up against.  None of the balls forward were just hoofs.  There's a great post (apologies if someone's already dug it out) from years ago where Slade explained to someone his methods but basically the tactic was to drive the ball forward at a low trajectory, at pace and at an angle.  That way if the defence missed it Reddy could chase it down into the corner, instant possession in a dangerous area.  If Gary Jones got on the end it he was good enough in the air to bring it down or flick it onto Reddy running in behind, again possession in a dangerous area.  If the opposition defence did manage to get anything on it the trajectory of the ball meant they would do very well to do anything other than to put it back into a dangerous area for us to win, the midfield (which was packed with energetic runners) were told to press forward at this point and pressure the opposition into mistakes.

The post itself goes into great detail and explains far better than I can, but there was most definitely a method in Slade's approach.  It wasn't just hoof, hoof, hoof.  I'm not wanting to dig up old ground but it was far more methodical than the long balls up to LJL of two years ago, at least LJL was physical enough to do something with it.  Compared to the hoofs up to Dyson and Jones of recent weeks, Slade's approach looked like Total Football.

damn! i'm sure someone reposted the link the other day ,but i can't remember on which thread

Quoted from diehardmariner

Simply boot it over the top?

Fair enough you didn't appreciate the more direct style of play but to suggest it was just a case of lumping it forward is way off the mark.  It was tailored to suit what we had and what we were up against.  None of the balls forward were just hoofs.  There's a great post (apologies if someone's already dug it out) from years ago where Slade explained to someone his methods but basically the tactic was to drive the ball forward at a low trajectory, at pace and at an angle.  That way if the defence missed it Reddy could chase it down into the corner, instant possession in a dangerous area.  If Gary Jones got on the end it he was good enough in the air to bring it down or flick it onto Reddy running in behind, again possession in a dangerous area.  If the opposition defence did manage to get anything on it the trajectory of the ball meant they would do very well to do anything other than to put it back into a dangerous area for us to win, the midfield (which was packed with energetic runners) were told to press forward at this point and pressure the opposition into mistakes.

The post itself goes into great detail and explains far better than I can, but there was most definitely a method in Slade's approach.  It wasn't just hoof, hoof, hoof.  I'm not wanting to dig up old ground but it was far more methodical than the long balls up to LJL of two years ago, at least LJL was physical enough to do something with it.  Compared to the hoofs up to Dyson and Jones of recent weeks, Slade's approach looked like Total Football.

Yes, you can dress it up all you like to make it sound like you know more than me about football, but at the end of the day, that is what it is. A structured boot over the top maybe, but a boot over the top all the same. Like MB said, there three ways to play; through the middle, over the top, or down the wings. The rest is just window dressing.

It'll be on one of the 9,000 Slade threads from yesterday no doubt...

Quoted from diehardmariner

Simply boot it over the top?

Fair enough you didn't appreciate the more direct style of play but to suggest it was just a case of lumping it forward is way off the mark.  It was tailored to suit what we had and what we were up against.  None of the balls forward were just hoofs.  There's a great post (apologies if someone's already dug it out) from years ago where Slade explained to someone his methods but basically the tactic was to drive the ball forward at a low trajectory, at pace and at an angle.  That way if the defence missed it Reddy could chase it down into the corner, instant possession in a dangerous area.  If Gary Jones got on the end it he was good enough in the air to bring it down or flick it onto Reddy running in behind, again possession in a dangerous area.  If the opposition defence did manage to get anything on it the trajectory of the ball meant they would do very well to do anything other than to put it back into a dangerous area for us to win, the midfield (which was packed with energetic runners) were told to press forward at this point and pressure the opposition into mistakes.

The post itself goes into great detail and explains far better than I can, but there was most definitely a method in Slade's approach.  It wasn't just hoof, hoof, hoof.  I'm not wanting to dig up old ground but it was far more methodical than the long balls up to LJL of two years ago, at least LJL was physical enough to do something with it.  Compared to the hoofs up to Dyson and Jones of recent weeks, Slade's approach looked like Total Football.

For every hoof over the top that results in a goal, there are 7-8 balls that go out for a throw or goal kick resulting in the opposition gaining possession. That is the frustrating and boring thing about it.

17 games in that season where we scored 2 or more goals, and 18 clean sheets! God I hope we don't go back to that rubbish again!!!

It was that boring that we had he highest average attendance in the last 13 seasons!

Quoted from ginnywings

Yes, you can dress it up all you like to make it sound like you know more than me about football, but at the end of the day, that is what it is. A structured boot over the top maybe, but a boot over the top all the same. Like MB said, there three ways to play; through the middle, over the top, or down the wings. The rest is just window dressing.

Did he really say that? No wonder he got the sack! He should have watched some Clough and Buckley videos.

Here you are, couldn't find original so sorry to original poster.


Quoted Text
I saw the thread earlier regarding our ex-manager, marmite-man Russell Slade, and it took me back to a conversation I had with the guy during his time at the club. I wanted to give this its own thread because I feel that it outlines the very problem we face with today's Town side and in particular, Mike Newell.

Let me just begin by saying that I was deeply hurt by the way Slade left the club, particularly the Cardiff debacle, however throughout his time with us I found him to be the most approachable man I've ever met in football. I recall this one night, at some point towards the business end of the 2005/06 season - it was one of those fans' quiz nights at the Inn on the Park that were popular at the time. Afterwards, I approached Slade to say hello, and we got talking.

It began with the usual football smalltalk, and I offered to buy him a pint which he promptly refused, and bought me mine instead. Over the next 45 minutes or so that followed, I was given one of the most in-depth and technical explanations of footballing strategy that I'd ever heard; so much so that I can remember it almost word-for-word to this day. Allow me to paraphrase the choice bits from the conversation, because it demonstrated to me that Russell Slade was for all his faults, a very intelligent and highly committed football manager:

THE CONVERSATION

When he first joined the club, Slade had very much wanted to play attractive, free-flowing football (he had done so at Scarborough). However, some way through his first season became aware that this was not going to be possible here for one, fundamental reason. Essentially, to play attractive, passing football you need creative-minded, technically competent players. Whilst players which met such criteria are available at this level, they are only available for a reason - typically because of poor attitude or work ethic. This makes them an unmanageable liability and unaffordable luxuries. Whilst he didn't name names, I suspect he was talking about the likes of Thomas Pinault and Ashley Sestanovich who were both gifted technically, but also highly inconsistent and unpredictable.

Ultimately, Slade realised that success could not be brought to Grimsby with 'sexy football', and set-out to find another way.

At the end of his first season, he said, he spent time looking through the statistics of promoted teams for the previous few seasons. There was a common thread, in particular to the way in which successful teams tended to score there goals. Set-pieces, defensive errors and goals from counter attacks all featured heavily for successful sides, but were rare for struggling teams as a percentage of their overall goals scored. In fact, struggling teams tended to score from within the 18-yard box from 'general' open play, something which is difficult to specifically engineer.

To take this one step further, Slade mentioned he had watched literally thousands of goals from around a decade of successful League Two sides in an attempt to identify why and how promoted teams scored in the fashion they did. From this, he formed his masterplan.

He suggested that ensuring a high conversion rate from set-pieces was a fairly simple, two-part process. Firstly, you need players who can deliver a quality ball - Curtis Woodhouse, Ciaran Toner and contravertially Tom Newey were all commended. Add to that several above-average height players and you increase the chances of scoring free-kicks and corners significantly. Justin Whittle, Rob Jones, and Gary Jones were all obvious stand-outs, however Slade reckoned that Gary Cohen's athletic leap made him effectively about 6ft 3", and was a major reason for him winning a contract with the club in the first place.

This all seemed fairly straightforward stuff, but it was the next bit that really grabbed my attention.

Slade moved on to explain that the aimless hoofs from the back for which he was so heavily criticised for were in fact not aimless hoofs at all, but a fundamental part of our overall strategy. Balls would often be hit, often 10 - 15 yards away from the nearest Town player and straight into the channel the opposition full-back. However, they were played at pace, at a very specific, low trajectory which made it difficult for the opposition defender to predict and properly clear.

As part of this overall plan, Michael Reddy would chase the ball and close down the full-back receiving the ball. Meanwhile, Town's wingers would cut inside and move forward at pace to remove the option of the full-back taking his only straightforward option; heading it to his nearby centre-half. This left the full-back with only two real options; to try and control the ball (difficult because of the pace and low trajectory of the ball) or to head it forward (resulting in us regaining possession high up the pitch or the opposition midfielder having to turn under pressure from the likes of Paul Bolland).

Not only does this tactic work by providing opportunities through defensive mistakes, it also tires the opposition defence because they are constantly running with little respite (Slade mentioned that League Two centre-backs are not usually the fittest of players). Additionally, it is demoralising as the opposition enjoy little proper possession and are pinned back into their own half for long periods.

In the event that the opposition gained a settled period of possession, the following would happen. Both the midfield and defensive line would push back and sit deep, only pressing the opposing midfield when they approached Town's third of the pitch. Ultimately this meant this resulted in little opportunity for the opposition to play through the defence with a string of passes, for the final third of the pitch becomes too congested to do so. This left Town's frustrated opponents with one option - to go long into the box, playing right into the hands of Rob Jones and Justin Whittle. If you watch the Tottenham game, you'll see this happen again and again and again - quality stuff!

Slade continued. Not only is this a sound defensive route, it also provided us with one of our major outlets for goals that season. Because Town were defending so deeply, it encouraged the opposition defence to play a high-line and sit somewhere around the halfway line. Cue a quick, long ball over the top or through the middle to the lightening quick Michael Reddy, and you're through on goal. Simple as that. Again, watch some footage of our goals that season, particularly Reddy's and you'll begin to see how this was no accident.

As a final point, Slade commented that this approach required extreme levels of fitness, particularly for the midfield who would need to sprint constantly for minutes at a time often without actually receiving the ball. But, he added, fitness can be instilled in young athletes much more easily than specific technical skills. Additionally, by employing players to do very specific roles, typically their strengths, you gain a level of consistency as a team which is, and I quote "the difference between being promoted at the end of the season, or not". Famous last words, Russ, famous last words...

To summarise though, what became clear to me was that Russell Slade had realised what wasn't working, made a plan to address the issues then executed it with thought and precision.