Limer denne inn her. En lang analyse fra en fyr på Waccoe. Problemet er ikke at vi scorer for få mål. Vi slipper inn ALT for mye, sammenlignet med starten av sesongen:
Loads of reactive negative f**kers on here have been saying we're not going up and that Radz has 'blown promotion' by not signing attackers. Regardless of the actual facts surrounding the James and Saiz transfers it's actually total bollocks.
In our first 20 games we took 39 points, scored 33 goals and conceded 17. We were 2nd in the table, 1 point behind Norwich and 4 clear of West Brom and Middlesbrough united in 4th/5th, both of whom had 35. Forest, Blades and Derby all had 34 and Villa were in 8th on 31.
10 games later we've got 57 points having taken 18 from 30, we've scored 50 and conceded 34. We're 2nd, behind Norwich on goal difference, 3 clear of Sheffield United in 3rd and 4 clear of West Brom and Boro assuming both win their game in hand. So at the very least we have not (as is often stated) fallen behind. We have failed to win games which had we done so would pretty much have wrapped up the title.
However there has clearly been a change in results. In those first 20 games we regularly ground out wins against defensive sides while scoring few. Now we rarely seem to score first and often find ourselves trying to get back into games. The key difference is the difference between defensive and offensive records.
First 20 games
Scored 33 total
1.65gpg
Scoring Breakdown
Scored 0: 1 game
Scored 1: 10 games
Scored 2: 5 games
Scored 3 or more: 4 games
Last 10 games
Scored 17 total
1.7gpg
Scoring Breakdown:
Scored 0: 1 game
Scored 1: 3 games
Scored 2: 4 games
Scored 3 or more: 2 games
So we are scoring at the same rate, with a breakdown that is broadly similar. In the first 20 we scored 0 or 1 in 55% of our games, in the last 10 40%. The problem of needing multiple chances to score is still there, but that's an endemic problem to the team. It has been there since day 1 this season and is not the result of the January transfer window or recent tactics. In my view its simply down to the fact that some of the players (Roofe & Alioski for their roles) aren't good enough to be serious contributors. Pablo and Klich do well for a winger and centre mid, but we need a RW, ST and CAM that'll really contribute with 10-15, 25+ and 10-15 and we don;t have that (nor did we with Saiz, who contributed 0 goals and 4 assists in 19 appearances).
Now the defensive numbers:
First 20
Conceded 17 total
0.85cpg
Breakdown
Clean Sheet - 9 games
1 conceded - 7 games
2 conceded - 3 games
3 or more conceded - 1 game
Last 10
Conceded 17 total
1.7cpg
Breakown
Clean sheet - 2 games
1 conceded - 2 games
2 conceded - 4 games
3 or more conceded - 2 games
So the big problem is that we are conceding twice as many goals in the last 10 as in the first 20. Between Derby (h) and Sheffield United (a) we conceded 2+ goals four times. We've conceded 2+ six times in the last ten games, and this is making the problem up front much more acute because we need to score more to win a game.
The change in figures is I think largely explained by the change in personnel in the team:
First 20 - back six players (Back 5 and DM)
Peacock-Farrell: 19
Phillips (Playing DM): 18
Cooper: 18
Douglas: 16
Ayling: 14
Jansson: 12
Berardi: 8
Dallas: 8
Phillips (playing CB): 2
Forshaw (playing DM): 1*
Huffer: 1
Halme: 1
Shackleton: 1
* also played 5 games as a more attacking midfielder
Last 10 - back six players (Back 5 and DM)
Forshaw: 10
Jansson: 9
Peacock-Farrell: 8
Ayling: 8
Phillips (playing CB): 7
Douglas: 5
Cooper: 4
Alioski: 4
Shackleton: 2
Casilla: 2
Davis: 1
So given we used 12 players in the first 10 and 11 in the last 10 the issue isn't rotation, it's how the players are being deployed. Clearly, Cooper is absolutely key to the general functioning of the defence, as is Phillips in the DM role. The two first-choice fullbacks have generally served well and provide attacking outlets we lack with others in those positions. Most clearly to me it demonstrates that Forshaw cannot deliver the DM role and needs removing from it ASAP. If he's to play it needs to be alongside Klich in a midfield 4 with Hernandez and a.n.other wide behind the striker, but he cannot screen the defence in the way Phillips does. Essentially Bielsa's selection against Norwich was if anything too attacking - trying to sacrifice a defensive player in Phillips for a more attacking one in Forshaw while also playing Roberts as an out-and-out 10. It didn't work and this data set suggests it won't. I'm not opposed to Forshaw continuing to play, but that would be in exchange for Roberts not for Phillips or Klich which I don't think would be a popular (or necessarily wise) move.
Given the above I think our focus against Boro needs to be on the performance, not the result. If we'd not lost against Norwich we'd all be happy with a point at the Riverside and so we should be - we're playing a promotion rival away from home and we should be trying to maintain the current gap, not going gung-ho to try and widen it while risking an additional defeat. If we can keep a clean sheet and minimum get a 0-0 out of it that will (at the very least) be a return to the defensive stability and resilience that characterised the first half of the season.
Therefore my team for Boro would be:
Casilla, Ayling, Jansson, Cooper, Douglas, Phillips, Klich, Alioski, Roberts, Hernandez, Roofe.
Subs: BPF, Shackleton, Halme, Forshaw, Harrison, Clarke, Bamford
TL;DR: Things aren't that bad, problem is defense not attack, Forshaw can't play DM, Forshaw and Harrison to be dropped for Douglas and Phillips next weekend.
auren
