BORO v Norwich 3-1 (Forss, Latte Lath, Engel)

[wilsoncgp 10,100 19.9k]

4 minutes ago, Erimus74 said:

But Dieng could see the whole picture, Barlasar should have known who was around him but the keeper shouldnt have played the ball regardless of Carricks instructions

Can't agree overall with what you're saying mate, that's how we've played for some time and we've got ourselves out of plenty more difficult situations than that in the last 12-18 months playing that way. It's intentional too, that's how I see it. The reason earlier in the season you'd have Dieng coming out of his box with the ball or holding onto it longer than we as fans are sometimes comfortable with is part of the plan, we want to draw teams in and beat their press so there's more space to work with behind them. If Barlaser had the man on him when Dieng passes him the ball then you'd be spot on, we have done that sometimes and paid the price. But Dieng can see Barlaser has time to take a touch and pass to pick out VDB from where he is too in this situation. It only turned into a dangerous situation when Barlaser held onto the ball longer than he should have.

We know these tactics work. We see all kinds of teams doing it and importantly, we've seen our own team do it successfully. I can't watch that chance back and think Dieng or Carrick is the problem knowing that. Bad communication between players, maybe. But the right thing to do, on the edge of your own box, when you don't have information is to go with the information you do have. Barlaser knows he's been pressed all game, or he should. Stoke targeted that area of the pitch non-stop throughout the game. He'd already given the ball away somewhere near there once in the first half. And whilst he can't see the man racing up behind him, he can see VDB in space with his closest man having moved to close down Dieng.

[AnglianRed 7,882 18.1k]

1 minute ago, LinoJo3 said:

That’s the whole point of it though, you ‘beat the press’ and you’ve took 3 of their players out of the game if not more. It’s basically how we beat Leicester bc they were so easy to counter against.

I get that - but you need players who can play it effectively, in order for it to work.

Also, the Leicester game was one of those rare occasions where Carrick actually changed things up a bit, so that probably helped.

There have been too many games where I've been watching through my fingers when we've been passing around in our penalty area, basically playing chicken with opposition players and either ended up conceding soft goals, or coming perilously close.

[wilsoncgp 10,100 19.9k]

2 minutes ago, LinoJo3 said:

That’s the whole point of it though, you ‘beat the press’ and you’ve took 3 of their players out of the game if not more. It’s basically how we beat Leicester bc they were so easy to counter against.

Exactly. There are times when it's right to make the pass to Barlaser and times when it isn't, for Dieng. This time was, in my eyes, the right time to do that. Barlaser is the one who decides to turn despite not knowing what was behind him.

You definitely have to be smart but they all do for it to work. If there was anything else I'd have to say about that situation it's that VDB could maybe run into the space a bit more once it's clear Dieng can't reach him and Dieng could point directly to VDB to say that's the right pass to make. No issue with Dieng making the pass he does, though, in and of itself. Very much feel like Barlaser is the one taking the biggest risk because he doesn't know what's behind him.

[BoroSmoggie 4,104 4.3k]

Time of the week to see what lotto numbers have come out to determine our starting lineup 11.

[Erimus74 5,340 5.5k]

26 minutes ago, wilsoncgp said:

 

 

[Cosmonaut 200 343]

I think we'll win tonight, but who keeps leaking the teams?? I have never really taken notice of how often that has happened under previous managers tbh, but this has been happening for a while now it seems? Especially since we've been in the wars in poor form, anyway

if that is the team .. 

Three points vital tonight, please don't concede early ... things could get ugly 😆

 

[Redcar Rioja 9,018 8.8k]

40 minutes ago, AnglianRed said:

This goes back to what I've been moaning about re player intelligence for what seems like years.

Just basic awareness of where opponents are, the risks they pose and playing the right pass for the situation.

 

I mean most of these guys have been playing since they were schoolboys. Shouldn't be that difficult to figure out?

All the gear, no idea some of them!

[Redcar Rioja 9,018 8.8k]

27 minutes ago, wilsoncgp said:

Exactly. There are times when it's right to make the pass to Barlaser and times when it isn't, for Dieng. This time was, in my eyes, the right time to do that. Barlaser is the one who decides to turn despite not knowing what was behind him.

You definitely have to be smart but they all do for it to work. If there was anything else I'd have to say about that situation it's that VDB could maybe run into the space a bit more once it's clear Dieng can't reach him and Dieng could point directly to VDB to say that's the right pass to make. No issue with Dieng making the pass he does, though, in and of itself. Very much feel like Barlaser is the one taking the biggest risk because he doesn't know what's behind him.

Is it possible that Barlaser would have assumed that considering Dieng can see the bigger picture he wouldn't (and in this scenario shouldn't have) have passed the ball out to him if he was surrounded?

[Rioch's Braves 746 3.5k]

1 hour ago, YouAreBoateng said:

It’s certainly very telling that the last two games we’ve been beaten by teams who, like us, are going through a sticky patch and the fans are wanting the manager sacked.

I personally don’t see us winning tonight, but it would be typical boro to put in an outstanding performance and win comfortably, only to lose to QPR on Saturday. 

Fingers crossed something clicks tonight and we end the season in good fashion. 

Just read an interesting stat: in all our home league games since NYD, we’ve not scored a first half goal. How important it would be to get that early goal tonight. 

What a poor stat that is, but that's what you get when you fail to sign a striker or 2. 

[Humpty 5,127 10.5k]

As a centre midfielder, if you're coming to show for the ball, you have to be comfortable that you're in a position to take it without being compromised especially with your back to goal. That goes for anywhere on the pitch because as a midfielder, it's part of your job to retain possession. If you're not comfortable receiving a pass you turn out and reject the pass. That being said Dieng needs to take responsibility for giving Barlaser the ball when he knows Barlaser's got a man right up his ***. Dieng passed the buck and sold Barlaser up the river.

Edited March 6, 2024 by Humpty

[Rioch's Braves 746 3.5k]

4 minutes ago, Redcar Rioja said:

Is it possible that Barlaser would have assumed that considering Dieng can see the bigger picture he wouldn't (and in this scenario shouldn't have) have passed the ball out to him if he was surrounded?

Well that's the theory anyhow, you would assume Dieng would have enough football intelligence to know when not to pass the ball out, obviously not.

[wilsoncgp 10,100 19.9k]

21 minutes ago, Erimus74 said:

Agree we've played that way long enough, its not what im saying, its playing a pass to a player who is facing him with players waiting to pounce, we were so lucky not to concede then, Dieng could see & shouldnt have played the ball to him, if it had been Glover we' d have had a meltdown on here

Dieng didn't cause that though, mate, not for me.

The man who eventually tackles Barlaser only reacts to make the challenge for the ball because Barlaser turns with the ball. He's coming to cover Barlaser and he plays it into his hands entirely. Barlaser doesn't know he's there and I'm not saying he should. Barlaser actually turns with the ball as he receives it, he can probably take a touch and then play the pass to VDB if he really wants but it feels like a first-time pass is something he can do in that situation. That is the kind of passing play we've done numerous times before and the target is almost always the centre-back who has pulled out wide and that option was on there for him to take.

The whole move actually comes about with us trying to draw Stoke in. We have a free kick deep in our own half at left-back and it goes to Dieng, to VDB, back to Dieng because we want Stoke to close us down and create an opening for us to play around. When we take the free-kick, Stoke aren't anywhere near any of those players. So it was definitely something done with the intention of eventually having to make that kind of pass.

12 minutes ago, Redcar Rioja said:

Is it possible that Barlaser would have assumed that considering Dieng can see the bigger picture he wouldn't (and in this scenario shouldn't have) have passed the ball out to him if he was surrounded?

I'd accept that if it wasn't something we have done plenty of times already with the midfielder under that degree of pressure. It's been the case pretty often in the last few weeks, and for plenty of the time on Saturday, that the edge of our 18 yard box was under pressure. So either Carrick's instructions are too risky or Barlaser needs to take the less risky option based on the little information he has.

If Barlaser thinks because he's received a pass from the keeper that means he has free reign to turn then it wouldn't explain why we often make the pass from keeper, to midfielder, to centre-back to beat the press so often. He has to know it's a reasonable option when that pass is given to him from prior experience, I can't see at all why he would assume he's not under pressure purely because he's received a pass there. We do it all the time. It's a risky play but we have succeeded in that area so often when we're playing well.

[Erimus74 5,340 5.5k]

2 minutes ago, wilsoncgp said:

Dieng didn't cause that though, mate, not for me.

The man who eventually tackles Barlaser only reacts to make the challenge for the ball because Barlaser turns with the ball. He's coming to cover Barlaser and he plays it into his hands entirely. Barlaser doesn't know he's there and I'm not saying he should. Barlaser actually turns with the ball as he receives it, he can probably take a touch and then play the pass to VDB if he really wants but it feels like a first-time pass is something he can do in that situation. That is the kind of passing play we've done numerous times before and the target is almost always the centre-back who has pulled out wide and that option was on there for him to take.

The whole move actually comes about with us trying to draw Stoke in. We have a free kick deep in our own half at left-back and it goes to Dieng, to VDB, back to Dieng because we want Stoke to close us down and create an opening for us to play around. When we take the free-kick, Stoke aren't anywhere near any of those players. So it was definitely something done with the intention of eventually having to make that kind of pass.

I'd accept that if it wasn't something we have done plenty of times already with the midfielder under that degree of pressure. It's been the case pretty often in the last few weeks, and for plenty of the time on Saturday, that the edge of our 18 yard box was under pressure. So either Carrick's instructions are too risky or Barlaser needs to take the less risky option based on the little information he has.

If Barlaser thinks because he's received a pass from the keeper that means he has free reign to turn then it wouldn't explain why we often make the pass from keeper, to midfielder, to centre-back to beat the press so often. He has to know it's a reasonable option when that pass is given to him from prior experience, I can't see at all why he would assume he's not under pressure purely because he's received a pass there. We do it all the time. It's a risky play but we have succeeded in that area so often when we're playing well.

We'll have to agree to disagree Wilsoncpg 👍

[Redcar Rioja 9,018 8.8k]

1 minute ago, wilsoncgp said:

Dieng didn't cause that though, mate, not for me.

The man who eventually tackles Barlaser only reacts to make the challenge for the ball because Barlaser turns with the ball. He's coming to cover Barlaser and he plays it into his hands entirely. Barlaser doesn't know he's there and I'm not saying he should. Barlaser actually turns with the ball as he receives it, he can probably take a touch and then play the pass to VDB if he really wants but it feels like a first-time pass is something he can do in that situation. That is the kind of passing play we've done numerous times before and the target is almost always the centre-back who has pulled out wide and that option was on there for him to take.

The whole move actually comes about with us trying to draw Stoke in. We have a free kick deep in our own half at left-back and it goes to Dieng, to VDB, back to Dieng because we want Stoke to close us down and create an opening for us to play around. When we take the free-kick, Stoke aren't anywhere near any of those players. So it was definitely something done with the intention of eventually having to make that kind of pass.

I'd accept that if it wasn't something we have done plenty of times already with the midfielder under that degree of pressure. It's been the case pretty often in the last few weeks, and for plenty of the time on Saturday, that the edge of our 18 yard box was under pressure. So either Carrick's instructions are too risky or Barlaser needs to take the less risky option based on the little information he has.

If Barlaser thinks because he's received a pass from the keeper that means he has free reign to turn then it wouldn't explain why we often make the pass from keeper, to midfielder, to centre-back to beat the press so often. He has to know it's a reasonable option when that pass is given to him from prior experience, I can't see at all why he would assume he's not under pressure purely because he's received a pass there. We do it all the time. It's a risky play but we have succeeded in that area so often when we're playing well.

It would perhaps explain why we have been so crap at it all season.

Maybe we didn't appreciate that Steffen was a lot sharper with the tactic due to being indoctrinated in it at City with Pep and knew when/where/who to release to.

[Erimus74 5,340 5.5k]

Anyway, we can all have our say on the ups & downs of our team but come kickoff we have to get behind the Boro 👍