Should use this a lot.
Match Stats - Data Perspective
- Thread starter Borys
- Start date
Should use this a lot.
Why do you think Pogba drifts? Obviously, he has Pogba and Matic against teams that sit deep and do not play with high energy (Wolves, Sheffield United, maybe Newcastle) but surely, Ole can just instruct Pogba and Matic to do what Fred and McTominay does? And the same with Bruno drifting. Or is it because Ole lets the players have too much freedom, i.e the criticism that United only lives through individual performances?
I have no idea really. For quite a while we've been playing two totally different midfield setups (McTom-Fred and Matic-Pogba) so Ole must be happy with how they perform.
The problem is we play two man midfield (Bruno is no midfielder), so if one of them drifts it leaves us with one player between defense and attack. This is a tactic I have never seen before and frankly I see no benefit of doing that. Basically every club that plays 4-2-3-1, the "2" move together and stay close (Leicester, City good examples).
But that's my opinion, I believe team needs structure because it's easier to work out patterns of play. Free-floating front 4 is good as long as you have fantastic individuals but even then, such teams struggle against well-organized opponent.
It doesn't mean we need to stay rigid, because we've seen good collaboration between fullbacks and wide players, and Bruno dropping deeper and moving side to side to create advantage. But too often when we play that horrible 4-2-2-2 we end up with 4 players in the same area.
Always interesting reading your posts. Thanks.
Klopp played Henderson & Fabinho, Dortmund in the previous 3 seasons played Witsel & Delaney, while Pochettino played Dier/Wanyama & Dembele. The double pivot with McT & Fred isn’t really the issue. Although, the pair of centre back lack of pace probably bit of issue to play high line.
You need to go back to the question why we would want to play a higher line than today. Probably to dominate weaker teams. I’m trying to remember when we lost points to a weaker team with Lindelof and Maguire as CB pair. Must be the opening game against Crystal Palace.
Lindelof and Maguire have played 15 PL games together this season. We have scored 36 goals and conceded 15 in those 15 matches.
Do we really need a higher line? And also a fast CB does not guarantee a high line.
You need to go back to the original point, if we want to ‘’play attacking football‘’ then yes. Fast CB that can deal one on one situation offers better ball recovery especially handling counter attack means taking risk to play high line becomes less issue than having both slow centre backs.
It could be like that. But there also many assumptions in this thinking. First, what is attacking football? I don’t exacrly know, but the purpose with attacking football must surely be to win matches by scoring lots of goals. Like defensive football is to win by conceding few goals, and balanced football somewhere in between. You can win a league or a cup with all these three ways of playing, so it’s not like one way is better than another.
First assumption is that a higher line would generate more goals. I’m not so sure about that. Second assumption is that one needs fast CBs to play a high line. I am not so sure about that either, but it is probably helping even though there are other CB attributes that are more important.
With the ”slow” CB pair Lindelof and Maguire we have scored 2.4 goals per PL match. With the speedy CBs Bailly and Tuanzebe we have scored 1.4 goal per match.
Maybe we play a higher line with them. But with Lindelof and Maguire we haven’t lost one single point against weaker sides since the opening game. If we define attacking football as scoring lots of goals we play a much more attacking football with Lindelof/Maguire.
Lindelof is slower than Bailly but has other qualities, and not only in defence, but also to help the team to score goals.
You are strange one. You don’t know but you are the one who mentioned the term ‘’attacking football’’ and pretended like you know what it meant.
The term is not just referring to scoring goals but everything, to be both dominant and creating chances. Mourinho won 2-0 vs City this season, you ain’t called Mourinho played attacking football in that match just because his team scored more goals ‘’2 goals‘’ while Pep’s team scored none. So it’s not just about scoring goals.
In other to do so, you are playing high line to push the opposition sit deep. None say we don’t play high line with Lindelof and Maguire. I’m saying there is less issue with quick centre back who can defend one on one situation to take a risk playing high line than with two slow centre backs (which I have explained what’s that less issue in my previous post). This logic is not assumption, that’s just how it is.
As I said elsewhere @Borys, I think one of the main differences in the Southampton games, compared with Sheffield Utd, is that the forwards played much narrow.
This had the combined effect of having them nearer to goal/spending more time in the penalty area and giving our full backs space on the flanks to attack.
If Rashford and Martial/Greenwood are posted wide like they have been recently, our build-up play is very slow as they are receiving passes and have nowhere to go but backwards or attempt a high-risk dribble. They also only really have one or two players to hit with a cross.
By seemingly having them play narrow, the two CBs and the two CMs were consistently able to find Shaw and AWB in space who then had three forwards plus Fernandes to pick out with a cross.
Also agree on the McFred midfield being the best combination both defensively and to give us a platform to attack. The idea that they are negative is only really perpetrated by daft pundits like Robbie Savage who don’t really have a clue when it comes to tactics
This had the combined effect of having them nearer to goal/spending more time in the penalty area and giving our full backs space on the flanks to attack.
If Rashford and Martial/Greenwood are posted wide like they have been recently, our build-up play is very slow as they are receiving passes and have nowhere to go but backwards or attempt a high-risk dribble. They also only really have one or two players to hit with a cross.
By seemingly having them play narrow, the two CBs and the two CMs were consistently able to find Shaw and AWB in space who then had three forwards plus Fernandes to pick out with a cross.
Also agree on the McFred midfield being the best combination both defensively and to give us a platform to attack. The idea that they are negative is only really perpetrated by daft pundits like Robbie Savage who don’t really have a clue when it comes to tactics
As you see we have different opinions about what attacking football is and there is no official definition. We have scored most goals in the league. We haven’t lost points to weaker teams. I would say we already fulfil the goals with an attacking football.
It’s not how it is, as there are so many other parameters that are important. That could be why we don’t score so many goals when we use our speedy CBs compared to playing Lindelof and Maguire. Our speedy CBs lack other qualities, not only defensively but also for the attack. Speed is good to have but it’s only a bonus compared to more important attributes.
We pretty much never concede goals on counters. Does that mean we could play higher up? Probably, but why? We seem to have found a good balance where we score more goals than any other team in the league and we concede very few goals in open play.
There must be a purpose with what a team do on the pitch.
That other parameter is irrelevant because the point is not about comparing our centre backs like Lindelof with Bailly/Tuanzebe. The point is that having two slow centre backs is an issue to play high line, that’s a common sense logic. There is a reason why there is thread of us still looking for to sign pace and good one on one situation ball playing centre back.
We scored the most but against outside the top teams because we are capable to dominate the midfield against the weaker sides. But it’s the opposite when against the top sides. Against the top 6, we have only scored 1 goal (penalty) against them this season because we are being very cautious to play high line and chose a counter attacking approach against the top sides.
When we try to push higher trying to go toe to toe against the quality sides who also want to dominate, you will expect us to be suspect on counter. A prime example is the Man City EFL Cup game. We didn’t push high enough when the match was 0-0, as soon as we conceded the first goal, we chose to push high trying to score but being stopped and defensively were suspect by man city counter many times in second half. Their second goal came from corner kick that we conceded started from the counter.
I compared Lindelof (average pace) with Bailly and Tuanzebe (speedy) to show that a fast CB doesn’t mean you play attacking football. It is naive to believe that.
It is naive to believe that we had scored plenty of goals against City, Liverpool and Chelsea if we just had played with a faster CB.
It is also strange that some people think the purpose of football is as high line as possible. It is about balance, something we have now.
Personally I don’t think players like Bruno would be well suited to play dominant possession based football with a high line.
It doesn't help that De Gea is hardly a goalkeeper who is likely to be aggressive with his positioning. You can get away with not having the quickest CBs if the pressure on the ball is generally good and you have an Allisson/Ederson in goal.
I genuinely believe that having Adrian and not Allisson in goal was a huge reason Liverpool lost 2-7 against Villa. VVD played in that game (I think), so they don't even have that excuse.
There is a reason why we are looking for new quick ball playing centre back instead of putting faith in Bailly and Tuanzebe. You just need to learn how to read.
Where did I say we would scored plenty goals if we just had played a faster CB? Didn’t I tell you attacking football is not just about goals?
It’s non-sense to say Bruno wouldn’t be well suited to play in a high line system. It’s not impossible, end of the day it’s about balance to make Bruno well suits to the system and that’s why we need a quick ball playing centre back who is good in one on one situation. Conceded 27 goals in 22 games, and keep playing deep against the top sides, we can get away with those this season but eventually we can’t stay the same way and we will need to evolve and improve and the centre back pair issue is one of the most important one we need to improve next season.
What’s the point of playing attacking football if we won’t score more goals than today?
Conceded 15 goals in 15 matches with the “slow” centrebacks. 4-5 of them in open play. The rest at setpieces, don’t se how speed help there.
I’m speculating now, but to me Bruno seems more about creativity than possession. It will be hell to play a super high line with someone losing ball so often.
The point is not attacking football, the point is high line with two pair of slow centre backs will always hurt the defense like today for example.
That’s why we need quick ball playing centre back who can defend one on one situation to create the balance.
I like how you keep changing the word from high line to super high line out nowhere to suits your narrative.
You make no sense. So the point is not to play attacking football but to keep a high line. It’s no longer a tactic, it is the goal in it self. Makes no sense.The point is not attacking football, the point is high line with two pair of slow centre backs will always hurt the defense like today for example.
That’s why we need quick ball playing centre back who can defend one on one situation to create the balance.
I like how you keep changing the word from high line to super high line out nowhere to suits your narrative.
You are the one who mentioned ‘’attacking football’’ has different term & opinion and yet still insisting to use the term, there is no point to keep using that term when you are not even on the same page as others. I’m using different term so you can understand the point and yet you refused to listen/read. What about you let go your ego, read & understand.
So the purpose of a high line is not to play attacking football?
I just told you from previous posts that the term is to control the game or not being dominant by others and creating chances like today for example.
There is no point to keep using that term of ‘’attacking football’’ when your definition of ‘’attacking football’’ is not even on the same page as others. I’m using different term so you can understand the point and yet you refused to listen/read & understand.
Manchester United 3-3 Everton
xG=1,5 xGA=1,1
And this is also the reason why Fred and McTominay have been so effective together, no other pairing can do that for us. Personally I thought there were signs during the game that we should drop one striker and seal the midfield, but we never seem to do that until last 5 minutes.
To put it into numbers so that it's easier to read (all GKs who played 10+ games in EPL)- De Gea numbers:
Summary:
Our midfield and defensive line did very well against Everton. The second goal was well worked by them and we probably should've done better, but the biggest worry is De Gea form and truth be told, I am afraid we will enter another bad patch of results simply because this defensive line is very shaky and with that goalkeeper in goal, I can see the confidence going down.
xG=1,5 xGA=1,1
- 62% possession. This number doesn't seem unusual, however that is because more often than not we had to chase the scoreline. In general we have little interest in keeping possession if we're winning so it's a nice change.
- Shots on target 5/14; Everton 3/6
- looking at xG graph, Everton had nothing from the game until De Gea presented them with a chance which was converted by Doucouré. Just after that where it seemed we were still in shock, they scored another one.
- Cavani had a great game - scored 1, and created one for Rashford and Shaw. He was involved in all our best moves.
- once again, both Shaw and Wan Bissaka were directly involved in goals. Something we'd never have imagined before the season.
- I was surprised to see that still majority of action happened on the left side, it looked to me like we attacked more on the right:
- I like how effective we've been lately on the right side. Good crossing from Rashford to assist Cavani, but Greenwood is doing well there. Mason is becoming more and more involved as well (on the same level as Marcus in terms of touches and passes, he was way below usually). 85% passing accuracy (highest from front 4), 3/5 successful dribbles. He needs to keep his head up and look for better options though. Interestingly Greenwood had highest number of interceptions + tackles in the team (6), and second best % of successful pressures.
- We did really well to dominate Everton midfield. Keep in mind they played 4 players in central areas, while we had there only Fred and McTominay. Below is the image from BBC MOTD showing what is the real issue we have with the setup rather than personnel, which I've been banging about I don't know how many times:
And this is also the reason why Fred and McTominay have been so effective together, no other pairing can do that for us. Personally I thought there were signs during the game that we should drop one striker and seal the midfield, but we never seem to do that until last 5 minutes.
- McTominay had a very good game overall, 2 interceptions and 2 tackles (2nd highest), 1 clearance, 1 goal, 91% passing accuracy and heavily involved. Probably in form of his life?
- Fred was heavily involved as well, considering he was on 52' he would top all numbers. However, his defensive contribution was very insignificant- 1 tackle, 0 interceptions, 4 blocks and 8 recoveries. He's too weak and too short to play DM and I hope Ole realized that already. Also, I thought he was really good on the ball, very calm and aware of his surroundings. We had 3% more possession in the second half with him, so another improvement we kept the ball really well. In my opinion he improved a lot in this area of his game, and it kind of supports the point I made after Southampton game that he'd suit 4-3-3 with a single pivot behind him. His passing is fine (93% yesterday) as long as he keeps it on the ground.
To put it into numbers so that it's easier to read (all GKs who played 10+ games in EPL)- De Gea numbers:
- 15th in terms of Post-Shot Expected Goals - Expected Goals. He is on the negative side (-1,3) meaning we'd do better with random keeper (shot stopping only!). It also means it'd require MASSIVE improvement from him to achieve levels from previous 4 seasons. And I mean form-of-his-life massive.
- 20th in terms of % of crosses saved (out of 21).
- 20th in terms of % of shots stopped (out of 21).
Summary:
Our midfield and defensive line did very well against Everton. The second goal was well worked by them and we probably should've done better, but the biggest worry is De Gea form and truth be told, I am afraid we will enter another bad patch of results simply because this defensive line is very shaky and with that goalkeeper in goal, I can see the confidence going down.
Just popping in to say that this is a very interesting thread. I don't expect to contribute much (if anything) myself, but thanks for for all the hard work here, @Borys and everyone engaging in the discussions.
FiveThirtyEight now have United up to fifth in their rankings driven by expected goals and modelling:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/global-club-soccer-rankings/
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/global-club-soccer-rankings/
I find the underlying stats to be interesting. The problem for me is when they try to make a “fair” system out of it. The more they try that, the more subjective it becomes. I think they manage to make it more fair, but they move away from stats in to subjective analysis.
I just want to mention that I also think that this is a very interesting thread so thanks to all participants! Personally I would be very happy if @Borys would continue sharing his insights, Your efforts are very very much appreciated, because I think you are one of the most convincing posters her, doing a great job with backing your opinions with plausible reasoning.
Just for the record, I am sorry this thread went cold but due to my job I no longer have the time to focus on football stats. I barely manage to find time for United games.
I will make a season summary to pick some interesting stats/anomalies.
I will make a season summary to pick some interesting stats/anomalies.