₦airaland Forum

timay:
It seems you don't get what they are trying to say, or may be you are one of those that are too stubborn to accept a superior argument.

In case the former is the case, let me educate you again.

In our match against Tottenham, mourinho tactics of packing the bus didn't work because despite playing low block against us, we were still cutting them open at the back at will, recording a high shot on target, but our strikers weren't clinical enough.

In summary, we didn't win the match not because of mourinho tactics,( because from the stats and me watching the game, that tactics didn't work) but because our strikers were not clinical on the day.

GloryIsaac:
Everyone knows that good tactics can win a match.

What is being pointed out here is that Spurs draw with United was not down to Mourinho’s gameplan, rather bluffs from Rashford and Martial.

Today’s game proves that. Rashford missed two glorious chances, assuming Martial didn’t score a hat trick and United drew, will one say it’s because of Sheffield’s tactician?

Or the coach had time to study Man United style of play, that’s why Rashford was missing clear chances?

Any coach that has to rely on bluffs from opposing attackers to squeeze out a good result is simply having faith, not tactics.

raumdeuter:
vs Cotedvoire, Nigeria was having more shots on goal same thing Ferguson vs Arsenal
The tactics no one can understand is to deliberately allow your opponent to have numerous shots on your goal and plan with their attackers to be missing it like vs Tottenham

Lana1:
elampiro is in a world of his own. No need to drag argument too much with that bros

Leyqute:
And that alone makes it a tactical masterclass abi? Why didn’t it happen when he faced Leipzig and chopped 3-0? 4-0 aggregate. Enough time to study his opponent too.

raumdeuter:
We are talking about shots on target, 1 vs 1 chances you are talking about possesion.
Does possesion equals to goals?
If you have 90% possesion and 2 shots on target but the team with 10% possesion have 9 shots on target. Its shots on target that make goals not possesion

Tactics is to increase your own chances and reduce your opponents chances

Any tactics that is making your opponent have shots on target regularly, having high percentage chances regularly is no tactic

e.g Arsenal played City last week City had 12 shots and Arsenal had 0. If Arsenal had scored from an own goal and won the game, that is not tactics but luck

raumdeuter:
When you meet a superior team you plan is to reduce the number of chances and 1vs1 they get. If your tactics does not reduce their chances then that is a failed tactic.

If your tactics is to depend on Messi missing penalties, Rashford and Martial missing 1 vs 1 , that is a useless tactic

gameboy727:
This Elampiro should just drop this tactics bullshit abeg (don't mean to be rude in any way though). Teams get lucky sometimes. Simple.

Leyqute:
How many times does this happen though? How many times does a team with 2 shots on target (from a 1v1 situation) in a match win a team with 15 shots on target (1 on 1 as well) ?

If you ask 5 random people in Ikeja how much they earn monthly and they say 750k, it doesn’t mean the average person at Ikeja earns 750k per month.

For every game where a team who created less chances wins, there are double or even triple of them where the team with more chances won.

Stop cherry-picking your sample.

raumdeuter:
People get lucky, Okomu Oil can beat Barcelona if they are lucky
Scores can be favourable due to luck
In the game above Messi lost a penalty in the game or was it part of tactics for Messi to lose a penalty?
Which coach will plan tactics for opponent to be having 1 vs 1 chances with his keeper and plan for them to be missing it even plan for them to lose penalty as part of tactics

raumdeuter:
You can also get the desired results by luck which is not your own making

If an opponent is getting more clear cut chances, facing your keeper and missing it that is not tactics, thats luck

Was it part of Mourinho tactics for Rashford to miscontrol the ball, to shoot at keeper, for Martial to shoot at keeper etc.

Anything that is making opponent to face your keeper 1vs1 multiple times is not tactics

handelex:
My guy football and boxing shouldn't be compared here, as a boxer you are a one man squad and what you said is only applicable when one is sure he's facing someone with less firepower,one who's punch carries no weight and damage, but you check am nau, United carry enough weight and power oo......also in football it's eleven people playing together where a mistake by one or two persons can jeopardize the whole team's effort and tactics/plans. Our match against Spurs, they didn't decide to take any thousand punches by allowing us those chances, we forced them open and have our selves to blame as we failed to finish them off. It was not on them, it was on us.

raumdeuter:
You tell me.

The purpose of tactics is to reduce your opponents scoring chances and increase yours

If your opponent has 10 glaring 1vs 1 chance and you have 3. Even if you win you can't claim its tactics. That is luck

If Man utd had more scoring chances than Spurs away then that tactics from Spurs failed unless part of the tactics is for Man utd to miss their clear chances

Leyqute:
What Elampuro is saying no gel at all.

In the first gif Rashford controlled the ball horibly. His instinct was to control and shoot. And he didn’t take Sanchez into account. Else he’d have controlled the ball away from him instead of into his path. What sort of foolish striker controls an aerial ball forward into the other of the opponent?

In the second video, there was more space for him to score. And get this- if he’d controlled the ball into the path of the defender he’d have lost the ball, deapite having more space.

Rashford’s immaturity cost us that goal. Simple. What happened to controlling the ball away from Sanchez and then cutting back to cause a penalty or to even score ?

Elampiro don’t bring that excuse abeg.

raumdeuter:
Who had more scoring chances between Mannutd and Spurs?
Or does tactics mean giving your opponent multiple scoring chances

What of Rashford scored his chance in the first half

Lana1:
Wear glasses. You will see it!

Lana1:
Stop watching matches on black & white tv so that you wont be looking for one reverse angle to make your point.

This is from the game on Friday.
https://images2.imgbox.com/f5/ca/ezstaz94_o.gif

This is from the same fixture last season.
https://images2.imgbox.com/36/3f/Ysp0pgFR_o.gif

Yes Sanchez was fast to cover up in the first frame. But Rashford controlled the ball poorly. He could still have recovered tho but he didn't even try. He could have made himself big and put himself in between Sanchez and ball. Sanchez would have had to go through him to get the ball and na penalty be that. Either that or Rashford goes on to score(maybe ).


Point is Mourinho didn't analyse shít. So stop backing the rubbish he said. Our problem like so many other times this season is not playing with the ball but converting chances. We played well and carved Spurs open so many times but poor finishing let us down.

Lana1:
As usual, the special nonce is speaking in the thing that dinno have a good experience...

Rashford controlled that ball poorly and didn't even attempt to fight the defender for it.

Expert17:
So Mourinho was analyzing just Man Utd for 3 months, when he has 8 other EPL games to play.

GloryIsaac:
Rashford was probably thinking about the next letter to write to the Government when Pogba gave him that pass, because he lost it due to sluggishness, not any defensive genius.

Khaytunechi:
For the first time? It isn't like we've perfected the art of forward passing. Stop overestimating Mourinho with the 'reading the opponent' talk. So, with all his readings of over 100 days, how come they didn't win and could only escape with a draw. Abeg rest, let's look at our team and stop talking like Mourinho's team was up against prime Pele and Ronaldo.

Expert17:
Na Rashford and Martial wey miss clear cut chances dey make you talk all this things

Panther7:
That's simple, it's seem ole instructed Rashford not to track back thus created a 2 v 1 situation against Shaw whenever he followed bergwijn with Aurier creating the overload.

ChristineC:
you don't need much analysis to park a bus.