In regards to Daggers Goal. I blame the wall as they don't jump. Once that wall is set as the Keeper ideally you want the shot to go to your Near Post as you will have it covered. The wall is set to force the Free-Kick taker to Cookie's left. Any keeper will tell you how hard saving a shot when it bounces in front of you is. What doesn't help is the wall not jumping, players coming across you, so your view is partially blocked. The only nit-pick I have about Cookie’s is he's a little flat footed to react but that's most likely because he didn't see the shot until it was too late. (Let's be honest he's kept us in so many games). After the goal was scored you could see he was frustrated and it was most likely to do with the wall not jumping. To conclude the wall jumps Bromley win 1-0.
Editor’s Footnote (sorry, it’s a big foot this week)
The thing that has consistently caught my eye in the last couple of games is that, in possession of the ball, our right and left backs carry the ball deep into the centre of the park. It’s so consistent that it’s clearly coached, but this is an interesting tactical call.
It bamboozles the opposition’s wide players and leaves them chasing inland. Better still, in order to nullify the threat, an opposing central midfielder is forced to step in, drawing them away from the Bromley central midfielder they’re matched up with. This creates space for that central midfielder, who is often the recipient of the pass.
So far, so good. But carrying the ball into the centre of the pitch like this causes the opposition to tighten up. Machel alludes to the Daggers camping in a tight pack on the edge of their box and this tactic exacerbates that. In fact, it encourages it.
Bromley’s wide players should be doing more with the lateral space, but I’ll come back to that.
For now, put yourself in the size 9s of the Bromley central midfielder who’s just received the ball from an inward-travelling wide-back. As the opposition closes in, you have three choices. 1) Thread a pin-point through-ball to anyone making a central run through the tight pack (difficulty: high). 2) Thread an angled pass if a wide player is making a run in behind (difficulty: high). 3: Pass the buck and play it backwards or sideways (difficulty: low).
We've seen a lot of Option 3. It's the safe ‘possession-first’ call, but it creates a lot of negative and passive play. Machel called this out, too.
To alleviate this, Bromley’s wide players need to be more daring off the ball; darting for the byline or creating channels by pulling opposition defenders into very wide areas. But, in the last two games, they’ve been sitting in wide-central areas and waiting for the safe pass to come their way. Then, if they elected to cross the ball, it was either blocked by the first man or drifted into a very congested and static space.
In summary, it’s an interesting tactic, and I like it, but our wide players need to do more with the space or there will be a lot more stalemates to come.
Sorry, I rambled on a bit there. I’m not done, either.
In answer to Machel’s quandary about the free kick goal: As a former member of the Goalkeepers’ Union, it’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation.
From that position, a decent free kick taker will whip a ball towards the far corner with pace. As a goalkeeper, if you commit to the original flight path and it deviates, you’re stuffed. If you wait to react from said deviation and it doesn’t get a touch, you’re stuffed.
My solution was to position a defender just inside the centre of the six-yard box, slightly toward the front post. This sacrificed the offside trap, but gave a little extra protection in the flight path toward the back post, freeing me to wait for “said deviation”. It didn’t always work, and its success often hinged on how hung-over my blocking defender was, but it felt proactive.
Ultimately, defending a free kick from that area is a horrible undertaking. So, on behalf of the Goalkeepers’ Union, I blame whoever gave the free kick away in the first place.
I think a 2 man wall allowed the Daggers player to find a much easier route for goal. Having said that the free kick was very well taken and sometimes we are too quick to apportion blame. The needless fouls given in dangerous positions I find to be our weak point at present. There was another late second half in an identical position which could have punished us.
I’m finding our endless runs to the byline the most frustrating part of play at present, our lack of meaningful crosses is both ineffective and wasteful, if you don’t feed Cheek and Marriott they won’t score. Many times the route to goal via the corner of the penalty area is by far the most effective route (watch any 2022 World Cup game). It creates panic in the defence and ultimately fouls and penalties, we have the pace with the players we have but don’t punish defenders enough. This was the tactic used with so much success when Louis Dennis and Josh Rees were scoring for fun.
In regards to Daggers Goal. I blame the wall as they don't jump. Once that wall is set as the Keeper ideally you want the shot to go to your Near Post as you will have it covered. The wall is set to force the Free-Kick taker to Cookie's left. Any keeper will tell you how hard saving a shot when it bounces in front of you is. What doesn't help is the wall not jumping, players coming across you, so your view is partially blocked. The only nit-pick I have about Cookie’s is he's a little flat footed to react but that's most likely because he didn't see the shot until it was too late. (Let's be honest he's kept us in so many games). After the goal was scored you could see he was frustrated and it was most likely to do with the wall not jumping. To conclude the wall jumps Bromley win 1-0.
I hadnt considered the wall. This is precisely why I put the question out there - I wanted to see what I was possibly missing.
ICYMI:
Editor’s Footnote (sorry, it’s a big foot this week)
The thing that has consistently caught my eye in the last couple of games is that, in possession of the ball, our right and left backs carry the ball deep into the centre of the park. It’s so consistent that it’s clearly coached, but this is an interesting tactical call.
It bamboozles the opposition’s wide players and leaves them chasing inland. Better still, in order to nullify the threat, an opposing central midfielder is forced to step in, drawing them away from the Bromley central midfielder they’re matched up with. This creates space for that central midfielder, who is often the recipient of the pass.
So far, so good. But carrying the ball into the centre of the pitch like this causes the opposition to tighten up. Machel alludes to the Daggers camping in a tight pack on the edge of their box and this tactic exacerbates that. In fact, it encourages it.
Bromley’s wide players should be doing more with the lateral space, but I’ll come back to that.
For now, put yourself in the size 9s of the Bromley central midfielder who’s just received the ball from an inward-travelling wide-back. As the opposition closes in, you have three choices. 1) Thread a pin-point through-ball to anyone making a central run through the tight pack (difficulty: high). 2) Thread an angled pass if a wide player is making a run in behind (difficulty: high). 3: Pass the buck and play it backwards or sideways (difficulty: low).
We've seen a lot of Option 3. It's the safe ‘possession-first’ call, but it creates a lot of negative and passive play. Machel called this out, too.
To alleviate this, Bromley’s wide players need to be more daring off the ball; darting for the byline or creating channels by pulling opposition defenders into very wide areas. But, in the last two games, they’ve been sitting in wide-central areas and waiting for the safe pass to come their way. Then, if they elected to cross the ball, it was either blocked by the first man or drifted into a very congested and static space.
In summary, it’s an interesting tactic, and I like it, but our wide players need to do more with the space or there will be a lot more stalemates to come.
Sorry, I rambled on a bit there. I’m not done, either.
In answer to Machel’s quandary about the free kick goal: As a former member of the Goalkeepers’ Union, it’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation.
From that position, a decent free kick taker will whip a ball towards the far corner with pace. As a goalkeeper, if you commit to the original flight path and it deviates, you’re stuffed. If you wait to react from said deviation and it doesn’t get a touch, you’re stuffed.
My solution was to position a defender just inside the centre of the six-yard box, slightly toward the front post. This sacrificed the offside trap, but gave a little extra protection in the flight path toward the back post, freeing me to wait for “said deviation”. It didn’t always work, and its success often hinged on how hung-over my blocking defender was, but it felt proactive.
Ultimately, defending a free kick from that area is a horrible undertaking. So, on behalf of the Goalkeepers’ Union, I blame whoever gave the free kick away in the first place.
Case closed?
Agreed, the person who gave away the free kick has to take some blame.
I think a 2 man wall allowed the Daggers player to find a much easier route for goal. Having said that the free kick was very well taken and sometimes we are too quick to apportion blame. The needless fouls given in dangerous positions I find to be our weak point at present. There was another late second half in an identical position which could have punished us.
I’m finding our endless runs to the byline the most frustrating part of play at present, our lack of meaningful crosses is both ineffective and wasteful, if you don’t feed Cheek and Marriott they won’t score. Many times the route to goal via the corner of the penalty area is by far the most effective route (watch any 2022 World Cup game). It creates panic in the defence and ultimately fouls and penalties, we have the pace with the players we have but don’t punish defenders enough. This was the tactic used with so much success when Louis Dennis and Josh Rees were scoring for fun.