₦airaland Forum

TheGoodJoe:
They can do okay but they will never or can never perform the way they are performing under Enrique. The set up of the team affects performances of players.

TheGoodJoe:
[b]First, you look at the philosophy of the set up.

If the team is set to defend, the attackers will not perform as good as the defensive department.

If you set the team to attack the defence can not perform as good as the attack department.

That does not mean a good performance can not come out from players in negative set up to their strength. It happened many times.

Let us use Mikel at Chelsea. Many criticise him that he is not the player he wants was. He was up there with Messi, Silva and Fabregas.

He is played negatively from his strength as a creative midfielder. So he can not perform up to the way he did earlier. That does not mean he can not have good games. Look at Bayern and Barca games when Chelsea won the Champions league.

If Chelsea, plays Mikel to his strength, in a creative attack role, for five games, you will see that genius we saw when he was young.

Same things go to the way Clubs set up to play. That is why Mata was frustrated under Mourinho or why Hazard criticised Mourinho's style of play. The set up affects performances.[/b]

forgiveness:
OK! Then, let me it clear that Aluko wasn't used as an attacker in the match against Manchester city. He was used as playmaker.

Attacking players (Wingers $ strikers) can either play badly or even play very well in any defensive formation depending on the team setup.

TheGoodJoe:
If you set them up to defend. I am talking of the greatest attacking trio, they will not perform prolifically. That is why Tata received the sack letter. There was a game against Atletico Madrid Messi was the worst player on the pitch.

Note Tata is an attacking coach but his set up did not bring out the best in them. Under Enrique's massive attacking set up, they are looking like the deadliest trio in the history of football.

TheGoodJoe:
Let us leave it there but note, if a team sets up defensively, the attacking players must have a bad game. So the Hull fans criticising Aluko and Akpom in a game they set up defensively is ridiculous.

If anyone deserved criticising was the defence.


This is what you quoted above. Look at what you bolded.

The attacking players. Is that the same as every attacking players.

When you set a team defensively, the attacking players must have a bad game.

Let me explain. If Pellegrini say Man City must go all out attack, the defensive players must have a bad game because most of the attacking pressure will come with limited players in defensive regions.

That is why you see Mangala and Deimeichelis making lots f errors. When I see people blasting them, I shake my head because in that position, they are meant to play poorly.

That does not mean that Deimeichelis can not have a good game, like in the Hull City match he won man of the match, or Otamendi in some recent games.

But, the set up puts them under a lot of pressure. You see Kompany defending harshly.

So criticising them is not ideal when you look at the set up.

TheGoodJoe:
This is not about giving attackers playing well or not. It is about the philosophy of the game. You can not set up a team to defend and expect the attackers to perform like Neymar, Messi and Suarez.

Is it Possible to set up a defensive formation and have the attacking players perform the way Neymar, Messi and Suarez?

Your answer will stop prolonging a simple debate. If you dance around a yes or no answer, you are evading the truth.

Is it Possible to set up a defensive formation and have the attacking players perform the way Neymar, Messi and Suarez?

TheGoodJoe:
One hundred percent. I guess you are not reading well. Read again. The attacking players. Collectively. The attacking players must have a bad game in a defensively set up team. Some might do well but collectively. They must have a bad game.

Do you agree or not?

TheGoodJoe:
[b]Oliver Torres: Unable to provide the energy in midfield Porto benefited from in the first leg. Drifted in and out of the game and was caught out of position on too many occasions. (5/10)

Yacine Brahimi: Played a key role in Porto's improvement in the second half, but he was nowhere to be found when Bayern were running riot in the opening 45 minutes. Replaced midway through the second half. (5/10)

Ricardo Quaresma: Unrecognisable from the player who caused Bayern so many problems in a two-goal display in the first leg. Lucky to avoid a red card after raising his hand to Bernat's face and he was removed at the break. (3/10)

Attack

Jackson Martinez: The biggest victim of Bayern's dominance in midfield. Left isolated despite battling impressively against Bayern's central defenders. Scored his side's goal and almost added a second with a fine effort from the edge of the box. (6/10)



This is from the From Bayern's 6-1 thrashing of Porto. You do not need to watch the game to know from the possession and score line that the attackers did not have a nice day on the field.

What I am pointing out is that in games like these, the dominating team has large possessions because they win the ball back quickly.

Most times, they win the ball from the attacking players. So the attacking players must have a bad game.

Hence Man City had a large share of the possession in the Hull games, they won the ball back a lot. So the attackers most times have bad games. I do not need to watch the game to know this.

When a coach sets his team defensively, it simplay means the opposition will have a large share of the possession. Which means the opposition will win the ball back a lot from the attacking players. So the attacking players, most times have bad games. So blasting them is not fair.[/b]

forgiveness:
Bros, You mean lucky Torres played very well in that match totally dominated by Barca?

Haha! Torrest came in for Drogba in the 80th minutes and scored in the 92 minutes extra time when all Barca players surged forward in search of the vital winning goal but where unfortunately caught up in the Chelsea counter attack trap that lead to the goal.

What did the almighty Mata played in that match before he was substituted for more effective Kaloue in the 58 Minutes? Because he was ineffective in that counter attack tactics.

Besides, Aluko is not a strike, he is an attacking midfielders.

TheGoodJoe:
Let us leave it there but note, if a team sets up defensively, the attacking players must have a bad game. So the Hull fans criticising Aluko and Akpom in a game they set up defensively is ridiculous.

If anyone deserved criticising was the defence.

TheGoodJoe:
But Torres did not have a prolific game. He lost the balls, he was dispossessed. An attacking player in a defensive formation can hardly win man of the match award.

Now that is Chelsea with top players.

Think about Hull against City.

It is standard. I am not saying a striker can not put up a good performance in a defensive formation. But most times, in a defensive formation, the attackers suffer. So there is no use criticising them when they are not set up to have a good game.

TheGoodJoe:
Let us take it you did, so you know I was following the match even on other forums.

Well your a sharp guy, you escaped my two days trap. I wish you answered yes or no. Let us leave it there but note, if a team sets up defensively, the attacking players must have a bad game. So the Hull fans criticising Aluko and Akpom in a game they set up defensively is ridiculous.

If anyone deserved criticising was the defence.

The Premier League outfit have taken down the Catalans in their own back yard after a performance borne out of grit, determination and a tiny slice of luck

Chelsea are through to the Champions League final after an incredible 2-2 draw against Barcelona at Camp Nou in their semi-final second-leg encounter was enough to hand them a 3-2 aggregate victory over the holders.

Roberto Di Matteo's team defended brilliantly throughout, and will now travel to Munich on May 19 despite playing the majority of the match with 10 men.

The Catalans appeared to be home and dry after goals by Sergio Busquets and Andres Iniesta either side of a John Terry red card appeared to put the Blues out of the competition before half-time.

However, Ramires put the tie back into Chelsea's hands with a fantastic effort just before the interval.

Lionel Messi missed a penalty early in the second-half, and the Blues combined superb defending with a bit of luck, before Fernando Torres put the icing on the cake by finishing off a counterattack at the death.
With a 1-0 deficit to overcome after the first encounter in London, Barca coach Pep Guardiola began with an attacking 3-4-3 formation.

It took them only three minutes to carve out the first chance of the match, with Lionel Messi blasting into the side netting after rapid interplay with Alexis Sanchez.

The game plan from Di Matteo was simple as Chelsea, much as they had done in the first leg, looked to defend deep in numbers and relieve pressure on the counter whenever they could.

However, they were forced into a change after only 12 minutes as Gary Cahill was hauled off through injury for Jose Bosingwa.

Barca continued to control the game, and opened Chelsea up once more with a delightful passing move, with only the legs of Petr Cech preventing Messi from opening the scoring.

Cesc Fabregas and Didier Drogba each found the side netting before Javier Mascherano sent an unlikely 25-yard piledriver just over the bar as the home side continued to search for a way through.

The hosts were forced to bring on Dani Alves after 26 minutes for Gerard Pique, who failed to recover sufficiently from an earlier clash of heads with Victor Valdes.

The Brazilian played a part in the opener 10 minutes after his arrival, releasing Isaac Cuenca down the left, whose cutback evaded multiple bodies before Busquets tapped in.

It went from bad to worse for Chelsea, as they found themselves reduced to 10 men within two minutes. Terry appeared to knee Sanchez in the back off the ball, and was shown a straight red card by the referee.

Barca took advantage of their superior numbers, and struck again two minutes before half-time. Messi caused panic with a run at the defence before slipping in Iniesta, who slotted into the corner.

But rather than implode, as so many teams have done against the Catalans, Chelsea responded, out of nowhere, in some style.

A punt from defence by Frank Lampard was latched onto by Ramires, who guided a delightful lob over Valdes to send the Londoners into the break with the advantage on away goals.

Barca were handed a chance to regain the aggregate lead three minutes after the restart, with an apparent trip on Fabregas by Drogba in the box was spotted by the officials, leading to a penalty.

However, Chelsea’s advantage was left intact as Messi smacked the spot-kick off the crossbar.

Sanchez headed an Alves cross just wide and Cuenca was blocked at the last by Cech, as Barca set up camp in the opposition half for the remainder of the match.

But it was proving to be the same story as the first leg, as Chelsea’s doggedness at the back was just enough to keep Guardiola’s men at bay.

They were almost caught out 10 minutes before the end though, but Messi could only strike the post after being put clear with only the keeper to beat.

But the Catalans were out of ideas in attack, and were finished for good by substitute Torres in the final minute of injury time. With almost every Barca player committed in the opposition half, the Spaniard latched onto a pass from defence by Ashley Cole, rounded Valdes and fired home.

Chelsea continue their incredible renaissance under Di Matteo, and will await either Real Madrid or Bayern Munich in the final at the Allianz Arena on May 19.

TheGoodJoe:
You are being funny here. How can someone read a full report of a match from almost Six websites and have no idea of how teams set up.

For once, Answer the question, did the team set up defensively or not.

Of they set up defensively, you will see there is no reason for your comment above. For about two days now, I have asked you one simple question. Did the team set up defensively? You watched the game. Answer.

TheGoodJoe:
If you go back on this thread, you will see that I was the first to report Nacho's goal. I followed it with a goal site report of the goal. After the game, I read reports of the match.

So there is no way I would not know how the teams set up to play. When I am tied down and I can not catch a game I want to watch, I follow live commentaries on goal and sportsmole. I then read reports on the game.

TheGoodJoe:
I hope you read my last comment.

TheGoodJoe:
I asked you who watched the match whether it was a defensive set up and I am still waiting for your answer. I did not watch the match. You watched it. Was it a defensive set up?

TheGoodJoe:
How do the Hull fans expect a brilliant display from Aluko when he chose to park the bus. There is no way a striker can cope and do well against a pressing Man City who are more in numbers.

TheGoodJoe:
You can not criticise an attacking player for having a poor game in a parked bus formation.

So I wonder what the number of Aluko's games you have watched has to do with this. I am not disagreeing he was poor. In that kind of formation, he must perform poorly.

TheGoodJoe:
blasting Akpom and Aluko is wrong because the coach set them up to play poorly.

TheGoodJoe:
Did I say Aluko was fantastic. I said he was bound to have a poor game because the coach decided the team was to defend.

TheGoodJoe:
They bashed attackers for having poor games in a parked bus set up.

TheGoodJoe:
Tell me what formation they used. I asked you before did they set up to attack or defend, you said it is inconsequential. You watched the game, tell me whether they set up to attack or defend.

TheGoodJoe:
Who said Aluko is an Alpha and Omega. I am saying Aluko will not perform well in such a defensive set up and the Hull fans should not bash him. Their coach chose to play negatively and the attacking players will not flourish.

I am acknowledging Nacho's dedication and brilliance. He did not give up even though the cross came to the front of the defenders. Iheanacho ran faster than the defenders, stuck his leg in between them and scored.

That is pure brilliance and the Hull fans should criticize the Hull defenders for not showing the kind of Hunger the City attacking players showed.

The defenders deserved more sticks thrown at them than at Aluko and Akpom. Aluko was on the field when they conceded only one goal. Why should he get more criticism than defenders who were on the pitch when the team conceded four goals.

TheGoodJoe:
Simply put it you won't answer. So we can let it rest. When a coach set's up his team to play negatively, you can not blame the attackers for having poor performances.

What is most ridiculous from the Hull fans is that their defence were worse than Akpom and Aluko. For instance, how Iheanacho out ran them to latch unto a cross from Sterling. Iheanacho wanted it more and was more vigilant to beat the slow thinking defenders.

One of the defenders headed the ball towards goal, instead of out for a corner and De Bruyne who wanted it more got to the ball and score.

The defenders conceded four goals, three in ten minutes but the fans hailed Bruce, the son of the coach for having a good game in a parked bus defence that conceded four goals. They bashed attackers for having poor games in a parked bus set up.

BlackAlbino6:
[color=#000000][b][size=14pt]
Amuneke to coach U-17, U-20 teams
[/size]
By Tony Ubani
UNDER-17 World Cup coach, Emmanuel Amuneke has been given more responsibilities by the Nigeria Football Federation adding the U-20 national team to his portfolio.
[img]http://www.vanguardngr.com/2015/10/amuneke-hails-eaglets/amuneke-5/[/img]
Amuneke hails Eaglets

Amuneke led the Golden Eaglets to conquer the World in Chile and the NFF confirmed yesterday that the former Super Eagles player would assist coach Manu Garba at the U-20 (Flying Eagles) while still retaining his position as the chief coach of the Golden Eaglets.

President of the NFF, Pinnick Amaju said that Manu Garba and Amuneke have a relationship that would be beneficial to Nigerian football.

‘’Amuneke will assist Garba in the U-20 and still retain his position as the gaffer of the U-17. We want to pay more attention to these teams because they are the future of our senior national team,’ he said.
www.vanguardngr.com/2015/12/amuneke-to-coach-u-17-u-20-teams/
[/b][/color]

forgiveness:
OK, I understand what you meant by controlling the game. Yours is about the possession but I was talking about Hull-city game plan, soak the pressure and go for the counter. Didn't they do that very well?
Remember, Chealse vs Barcelona UEFA semi final? Game plan that is what I mean.

How many matches did he miss before the two matches? 5 matches

How many minutes of football did he see in those two matches? 21 minutes: 6 minutes and 15 minutes respectively. As you can see, he needed time to blend and pick up.

Bros, I just saw the replay now and I can say, yes, Aluko did helped Hull-city to control the game (my concept of control) yesterday. To help control the game isn't tantamount to playing well. That question is meant for his coach to answer and not us. Ours is just to give opinions and that's all.

He gave Diame two through passes but unfortunately Diame didn't react quickly to those passes.

So, what do you want Aluko to do about Diame's inability to read tactical moves?

You said that the combination of Sterling and Kelechi broke Hull's back, that also is not true. The second goal was a through pass to Sterling before he crossed the ball into the box, notice I said into the box because it was not really an exceptional cross. Hull City defenders could have cleared the ball even before Kelechi had a touch. So, It was a defensive error. The third goal also came as a result of another defensive blunder. It was Hull City defender that assisted the goal and not Kelechi. The fourth goal was keeper's blunder.

Aluko didn't have a short at goal! That's not true. Out of the 5 shot on goal Hull had, Aluko had one shot at goal and the second was off target. Remember, he was not the point man. Go through BBC commentaries again it is there.

You are right, Aluko and Akpom were only criticized for the error that lead to the first goal. That goal disrupted their game plan. The fans knew that.

TheGoodJoe:
You are yet to answer the questions I asked.

Answer these questions:
Did Hull City park the bus?
If yes, do you expect the attacking players to have a good game?

forgiveness:
First of all, prior to the derby and Bristol city games, Aluko missed 5 full matches (Middlesbrough, Brentford, Birmingham, Milton Keyness Don and Leicester city) between 24th of October - 7th November, and only saw 21 minutes of football after coming out from injury. Tell me, what do you want me to expect from him(unfit or about to) against one of the most highly rated and fit team in the league?

You said you didn't see a single thing Aluko did on the field. Haba! Bros, you sure say you watch the match without blinking your eyes? Who initiated those brilliant moves that unlocked the Man City defense and allowed Diame the attempt at goal? If a better Striker had that chance Diame had he must surely score.

But how come Sterling couldn't do anything within the time frame Aluko was on the pitch? Remember he played for good 11 minutes before Aluko was substituted. Kelechi came in 3 minutes before Aluko came off. But during those periods, I didn't see what they played.

Bros, so you mean Hernandez and Snodgrass came into the game only for Hull city to conceded 3 more goals? Lol. Tactical blunder.
Oh! I see they managed to create a consolation goal and nothing more.

In a nutshell, Akpom and Aluko were criticized for losing possession that lead to the first goal and that's all.
Shallom.

forgiveness:
Aluko was just coming back from injury prior to Hull-city last two matches and I wasn't expecting him to play. Going into details of the match against Manchester city, he was the playmaker of his team and that was why Hull-city was able to control the game but as soon as he was removed, Man city was able to control the game and that resulted to 3 more goals.

Aluko seems to be a playmaker than a Striker and I think he played very very well against Manchester city.

TheGoodJoe:
Did I say Aluko was fantastic. I said he was bound to have a poor game because the coach decided the team was to defend.