|
Post by alarch on Jun 20, 2015 16:42:27 GMT
First of all it’s worth documenting the factual basis for my assertion that Wales’ fortunes have been transformed. In the previous campaign we won 3, drew 1, and lost 6 – giving 10 points from 10 games. A point a game equates in the Premier League to 38 points – borderline relegation/survival. So far in this campaign we have gained 14 points from 6 games, or 2.33 points per game. This equates to a Premier League tally of 89 points – which would have been enough to win the league this season. Our attacking performance hasn’t really improved that much, with our miserable 0.9 goals scored per game in the previous campaign improving slightly to a still modest 1.33 per game. This can be accounted for pretty much entirely by Bale going from being sporadically brilliant to being brilliant in virtually every game. The biggest statistical change between campaigns has been in our defensive performance. A very poor record of 2 goals per game has been transformed totally to a superb 0.33 per game – and of course, no goals from open play. Only Romania (1 goal conceded) have a better record in qualifying for Euro 2016 to date – and that in a weak group. In fact if it wasn’t for some questionable refereeing decisions (harsh penalty against Taylor and barge on Hennessey for Cyprus’ goal) we could easily have a record of no goals conceded. So why the turnaround in fortune? For a start, whilst it’s a boring explanation, it has to be said that injuries and suspensions have been much reduced in this campaign. I’ve been tracking the minutes played by 10 key players (albeit a rather subjective metric) in each of the last three campaigns, and during the World Cup 14 campaign my 10 key players only played 47% of the available minutes. To date, in the current campaign, the availability has risen to 85%, which is even marginally better than we had under Speed. It’s no coincidence that the last time we had a run of good form, under Speed, happened when almost all of our better players were available. It’s worth also noting that 5 players have played practically every minute of the current campaign so far: Bale, Williams, Hennessey, Taylor and Gunter. The first three are key players, not least because of the absence of players of comparable stature in our squad. This continuity of players available for selection will have helped Coleman’s cause no end, as much as he was hampered last time by the frequent absences. Another marked change from the last campaign has been the messages communicated by Coleman, his staff, and the players, pre and post-match. There was no discernible consistency to the messages during the World Cup campaign, with a fair bit of excuse making (understandable when it came to player availability, less so when it came to passport-gate), and the lack of a clear focus. This time, everybody has been on-message from day 1. I’m confident that a lot of credit for this turnaround has to go to Ian Mitchell. “Ian who?” I hear you say. Have a read of this excellent article by Chris Wathan and you’ll get the picture: www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/swansea-city-wales-psychologist-ian-8833894 Although much of the article relates to his role with Swansea, the principles he espouses will have been applied to his role with the Welsh squad too. I’m not saying Coleman and co shouldn’t get a lot of credit for being responsive to the work of Mitchell, and implementing his methodologies, but Mitchell has probably been an important instigator for the total change in the way everybody associated with the national setup communicate with the media and the fans, as well as helping the players with their personal performance levels. The third and probably bigget reason for the turnaround in form and results has been the massive improvement in our defensive capability. The addition of Chester to the squad has definitely helped for sure. Of greater significance has been the change in the default formation from 4-2-3-1 under Speed, and continued by Coleman (with some minor variation) in the last campain, to a default formation involving wing backs. This has been a huge achievement, one I was very sceptical could be managed successfully, given that many of our players will have been unfamiliar with such a formation at club level – bearing in mind that managers with the pedigree of Van Gaal have struggled to implement similar systems in spite of the availablility of a higher standard of player and much more player contact time. It’s staggering just how well this change has gone. To concede no goals in two games against Belgium and a third against Bosnia - wow. Part of the explanation has to be the level of protection given to the full backs, as well as their own improved performances. In the last campaign Gunter in particular was a weak link, often failing to get tight to his opponent, allowing them the time and space to swing in crosses to individually targetted strikers. In this campaign Gunter (and Richards last time out) has been getting consistently tight. On the odd occassion when either has been beaten on the outside the crosses have been rushed and been aimed into a zone rather than picking out individuals, which has been much easier to defend. Playing with a back 5 has also given us more scope for preventing the likes of Gunter and Taylor getting isolated. Also, when we have gone with 4 at the back our wingers have tracked back well to support their full back. We have clearly identified this vulnerability from the last campaign and dealt with it – comprehensively. Another factor that has helped our defensive performance has been the protection given to our back line. Everyone has done their bit, but the Allen/Ledley combination has been a revelation. The much greater availabilty of Allen this time out has helped for sure, but Ledley has now become a defensive mainstay in a manner that it would have been hard to envisage from the last campaign. Playing a similar role for Palace has helped, but we’ve finally got round to identifying his best role, that doesn’t expose his lack of pace, and plays to his strengths: his doggedness, discipline and stamina. I would love to know where the idea of implementing a wing back formation came from? Has Coleman’s teams ever played this way in the past? Was Toshack influential behind the scences? Or has Roberts’ role grown behind the scenes? We’ll probably never know, but I’m confident that the analytical work we’ve been doing under Roberts’ supervision, on ourselves and the opposition, has played a big role in turning things around. Whether that has grown organically, or is a result of a formal re-jigging of roles in the dark days following the second Serbia hammering who knows? Where does Coleman sit in all this? I don’t think he deserved all the flak he got at times in the last campaign – especially considering our injury troubles. Equally, he’s probably getting more credit now than he deserves. But that comes with the territory of being the manager. The front man always gets the most credit and cops the most flak. The most heartening thing about our current form is that whereas in the past success seemed to be almost a random thing, dependant on the vagaries of player availability, the systems we now have in place promise much greater consistency of performance level going forward regardless of the team we put out. Even someone such as myself, towards the pessimistic end of the personality spectrum, cannot fail to be upbeat about the future.
|
|
|
Post by cadno on Jun 20, 2015 18:07:41 GMT
I always enjoy reading your posts, nice one alarch.
Could Coleman, Osian etc have taken a lot of influence from LVG Holland model after the friendly and world cup? that is, the formation and tactics they played is very similar to what Wales are doing now - getting the most out of our attacking players and being efficient in defence too. edit: I'm convinced that we're modelling our game on Netherland's world cup campaign.
Good point. In today's paper Tosh said Wales "played the same system" against Belgium as we did under him, and he was criticised for being "too defensive".
The future is looking really good, beyond euro 2016!
|
|
|
Post by cadno on Jun 21, 2015 13:02:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by alarch on Jun 21, 2015 17:43:19 GMT
Toshack wouldn't have been criticised for being too defensive if the defence had functioned as well as it has in this campaign. You only have to think of Slovakia home for starters. A humble Toshack, with a modern outlook, and with the sort of team that Coleman has around him, would have been a great success with Wales - which is a very frustrating realisation.
|
|
|
Post by alarch on Jun 21, 2015 17:52:49 GMT
That article makes for very interesting reading cadno, and the similarities in approach are remarkable, especially playing two holding players in front of the back 5 and playing a creative player further forward. It's well known that we've modelled a lot of our coaching systems on the Dutch and Spanish systems, so I guess it would be a natural extension to pay close attention to formation and tactics of these nations too. It says a lot about the poor quality of our media in Wales that no one, to my knowledge, has asked the question - what inspired the switch to 5 at the back?
|
|
|
Post by cadno on Jun 21, 2015 21:31:21 GMT
The lack of passion from most of our journalists is so frustrating. I don't understand why they can't do a little bit of research and ask interesting questions about our tactical changes, the formations, the overall improvement we've made, especially in defence. Their imagination only stretches as far as "Isn't it wonderful to have a player like Gareth Bale?" ffs! - It would be so refreshing if someone finally asked Cookie and Osian some interesting and challenging questions about our current set up, why was Dave Edwards omitted from our last squad? what does Simon Church bring to the squad? (there must be an explanation, his pace, movement, understanding with players like Ramsey and Allen...)
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Jun 22, 2015 6:14:58 GMT
Nice topic starter. Wales are able to play this style because we have the counterattacking ability of Bale and Ramsey and the enormous work rate of Robson kanu. it is a simple enough formula. Without those two we would be struggling to score. Well done to the staff for exploiting our strengths.
|
|
|
Post by alarch on Jun 22, 2015 9:36:04 GMT
Nice topic starter. Wales are able to play this style because we have the counterattacking ability of Bale and Ramsey and the enormous work rate of Robson kanu. it is a simple enough formula. Without those two we would be struggling to score. Well done to the staff for exploiting our strengths. Without that counter-attacking outlet we could easily find ourselves under the cosh for 90 minutes rather than the 70 odd minutes that we seem to be under pressure for at present, against the better opponents. Apart from providing us with the possibility of scoring, the threat provided by HRK and Bale helps to keep the opposition deeper than would otherwise be the case. Against Belgium recently, Allen played a superb long ball over the top of the Belgian defence. It was a tricky over-the-shoulder pass to control, but had Bale succeeded he would have been in on goal one-on-one. Having the opposition mindful of our threat certainly helps. I still can't get my head around the extent of our improvement defensively mind. The turnaround has been quite staggering.
|
|
|
Post by welshiron on Jun 22, 2015 9:44:51 GMT
The main reason for our turnaround is injuries
We have 5 key players and they have played just about every game,
Hennessey Bale A Williams Ramsey Allen
I would probably put Ledley in there as well as he has played his role exceptionlly
Add to that the premiership experience of Chester, Collins, Taylor Davies and the international experience of Gunter and you have a good team
Taylor and Gunter have played every game and I think we have had either Collins or Chester available as well.
If we have had the injuries of previous campaigns we would not be in the position we are.
Long may that continue
|
|
|
Post by gwernybwch on Jun 22, 2015 18:28:38 GMT
Personally I think that the main reason the transformation in our fortunes is Coleman pulling the bird off Sky Sports. Think about it; he started knocking her off around the time of Macedonia away (hence missing the flight due to his 'passport'). Ever since then he has thought that he is invincible and this had transmitted to the players and the entire coaching staff.
|
|
|
Post by cadno on Jul 6, 2015 14:40:12 GMT
We're a lot more efficient in this campaign, and continuity helps a lot
Chester is a huge improvement on Ricketts and Blake.
We have added depth with Dummett and the return of Neil Taylor (very important).
That meeting Cookie and Collins had after their fall out was important.
|
|
|
Post by cymroircarn on Jul 7, 2015 5:44:22 GMT
I just hope the defensive improvement is down to Coleman and not Symons
|
|
|
Post by LondonWelsh on Jul 7, 2015 10:18:46 GMT
I just hope the defensive improvement is down to Coleman and not Symons Fulham where second only to Blackpool last season in terms of defensive records. They let in 83 goals, (blackpool 91). I love kit, but just saying.
|
|
|
Post by toshfan on Jul 7, 2015 11:30:34 GMT
I just hope the defensive improvement is down to Coleman and not Symons After the Belgium game, there was one interclub rivalry guy on twitter refusing the give any credit to Chris Coleman on the basis that he has watched the training and that Symons did all the work. I am not making this up.
|
|
|
Post by toshfan on Jul 7, 2015 11:34:57 GMT
Toshack wouldn't have been criticised for being too defensive if the defence had functioned as well as it has in this campaign. You only have to think of Slovakia home for starters. A humble Toshack, with a modern outlook, and with the sort of team that Coleman has around him, would have been a great success with Wales - which is a very frustrating realisation. The loss to Slovakia at the Millennium aside, I wonder whether Toshack felt he was making more progress at the back than elsewhere with the players he had at the time not ready for the intensity that fans crave?
|
|
|
Post by alarch on Jul 7, 2015 12:36:49 GMT
Watched the second half for a third time last night - and it gets better with every viewing - with none of the angst.
It's striking that Hennessey hoofed the ball long down the middle all night. Normally I'd be appalled by such philistine tactics. However, on the night it made a lot of sense. Inevitably we lost possession probably 90% of the time from these long balls - but we were giving the Belgians possession in their own half - allowing us to push up to the halfway line and re-group. Not so much POMO as POMDO (Positions Of Maximum Defensive Organisation). We also hit a lot of diagonal balls out to the wings, mainly to Richards and HRK on the right. Again this didn't bring much joy - but this was also a low risk tactic. In fact, almost all the good opportunities fashioned by the Belgians on the night came as a result of misplaced or intercepted passes on the floor, in central areas, out of defence. Williams, Ledley, Allen, Ramsey and Bale were all guilty on occasion - but the conditions and the fact that Belgium excel at pressing the opposition and pouncing on any slightly misplaced balls, all contributed.
Even though we didn't get much joy by working the ball up the field it was good that we didn't rely totally on hoofball tactics. I don't think we would have survived 90 minutes of constant pressure, let alone score ourselves if we'd done so. We did at least have brief spells where we retained possession, worked the ball forward, and created moments of pressure.
Although I can see us adopting similar tactics against Bosnia, I suspect we will look to change the emphasis to more of a passing game going forwards. The opponents, the conditions, and, or course, the result, fully vindicated the tactics against Belgium. But we will need to be a bit more sophisticated if we are to succeed in the finals (should we make it - I'm not jinxing it!).
|
|
|
Post by melynwy on Jul 7, 2015 13:54:00 GMT
I've just realised that only Andorra have scored less goals than us in our group. This defence is immense!
|
|
|
Post by yanto on Jul 7, 2015 19:17:23 GMT
Personally I think that the main reason the transformation in our fortunes is Coleman pulling the bird off Sky Sports. Think about it; he started knocking her off around the time of Macedonia away (hence missing the flight due to his 'passport'). Ever since then he has thought that he is invincible and this had transmitted to the players and the entire coaching staff. Yep this is the definite scientific reason, cookie is getting his oats?
|
|
|
Post by gwernybwch on Jul 7, 2015 20:42:02 GMT
Personally I think that the main reason the transformation in our fortunes is Coleman pulling the bird off Sky Sports. Think about it; he started knocking her off around the time of Macedonia away (hence missing the flight due to his 'passport'). Ever since then he has thought that he is invincible and this had transmitted to the players and the entire coaching staff. Yep this is the definite scientific reason, cookie is getting his oats? A friend of a friends Auntie works as a Cleaner at the FAW and she said that she overheard the first time that a change of formation was discussed. Apparently it went something like this:
The Scene: The Car Park, FAW HQ, Newport Osian Roberts runs over to Chris Coleman and says "Have you got a minute gaffer, I want to have a chat about changing the tactics of the team".
"Not really Ossy, I'm already late for an important meeting" Coleman replies as he puts his golf clubs in the back of his Range Rover.
"Well you know that I have been studying football from across the world" Roberts says briefly. "I know, every time I see you you're watching football videos, you should get out more. Why don't you come with me to the Celtic Manor, there's going to be birds from Sky Sports there. Ant and Dec are supposed to be coming as well" Coleman responds.
"I think the formation that Ajax Amsterdam developed might suit us, boss" Roberts says.
"So that is why you've been going to Amsterdam. I thought it was because you were going to the red light district, you dirty bugger!" Coleman responds. "The system is based on having five at the back....." Roberts starts to say. "Five at the back? " Cookie says with surprise and continues with "If 4-4-2 was good enough for Larissa FC, it's good enough for Wales".
"I think that it will mean that we will be tight at the back, but be able to break forward quickly" Robert replies.
"What about Church?" Coleman asks as he moves to the drivers side door.
"I don't think that religion plays a part in modern football" Roberts replies.
"Sorry, I meant Simon Church" Cookie responds "Will he be playing under this new formation?".
Osian starts to say "Well, he's not the most....." and Cookie interjects "if Churchy is in the team, I'm happy for you to try this new fangled formation. God I love that boy. His goal against Macedonia has kept me in a job". "OK, I think that I might be able to have Church in the squad" Roberts replies.
"In that case, do whatever you think is best" Coleman says. He climbs inside, starts his Range Rover and tears out of the carpark.
|
|
|
Post by flynnfan on Jul 7, 2015 21:23:57 GMT
Yep this is the definite scientific reason, cookie is getting his oats? A friend of a friends Auntie works as a Cleaner at the FAW and she said that she overheard the first time that a change of formation was discussed. Apparently it went something like this:
The Scene: The Car Park, FAW HQ, Newport Osian Roberts runs over to Chris Coleman and says "Have you got a minute gaffer, I want to have a chat about changing the tactics of the team".
"Not really Ossy, I'm already late for an important meeting" Coleman replies as he puts his golf clubs in the back of his Range Rover.
"Well you know that I have been studying football from across the world" Roberts says briefly. "I know, every time I see you you're watching football videos, you should get out more. Why don't you come with me to the Celtic Manor, there's going to be birds from Sky Sports there. Ant and Dec are supposed to be coming as well" Coleman responds.
"I think the formation that Ajax Amsterdam developed might suit us, boss" Roberts says.
"So that is why you've been going to Amsterdam. I thought it was because you were going to the red light district, you dirty bugger!" Coleman responds. "The system is based on having five at the back....." Roberts starts to say. "Five at the back? " Cookie says with surprise and continues with "If 4-4-2 was good enough for Larissa FC, it's good enough for Wales".
"I think that it will mean that we will be tight at the back, but be able to break forward quickly" Robert replies.
"What about Church?" Coleman asks as he moves to the drivers side door.
"I don't think that religion plays a part in modern football" Roberts replies.
"Sorry, I meant Simon Church" Cookie responds "Will he be playing under this new formation?".
Osian starts to say "Well, he's not the most....." and Cookie interjects "if Churchy is in the team, I'm happy for you to try this new fangled formation. God I love that boy. His goal against Macedonia has kept me in a job". "OK, I think that I might be able to have Church in the squad" Roberts replies.
"In that case, do whatever you think is best" Coleman says. He climbs inside, starts his Range Rover and tears out of the carpark.
totally unfair but very funny.
|
|
|
Post by LondonWelsh on Jul 8, 2015 11:09:54 GMT
Clear Satire, but this ridiculous assumption people keep making about Osian being the driving force is very annoying. Its very hard for some people to give Chris the credit he so obviously deserves. Main Man.
|
|
|
Post by alarch on Jul 8, 2015 12:17:49 GMT
Clear Satire, but this ridiculous assumption people keep making about Osian being the driving force is very annoying. Its very hard for some people to give Chris the credit he so obviously deserves. Main Man. You're absolutely right that Coleman deserves a lot of credit for Wales' success. It is also true that his role as leader is a particularly important one - and he's clearly leading from the front. But should he get the credit for the way we set up and the new tactical approach? In part yes, but I remain sceptical that he is the instigator of the changes made in this campaign. I have no hard evidence, mainly gut feeling, and the documentary series on S4C that gave a lot of insight into Osian's role. Coleman is a great man motivator, but I can't recall him saying much, if anything, to the media, that suggests a great tactical insight. For instance, have there been any interviews where he's explained the move to wing backs? It may be that Coleman deserves even more credit than I'm currently willing to give him. I'd be only too happy to do so if someone showed me the evidence that his role is much more than a very good front man to a very good coaching team.
|
|
|
Post by texan on Jul 8, 2015 13:44:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nick75 on Jul 8, 2015 14:24:48 GMT
Great interview. Missed that at the time. I think it's time we gave Coleman the credit he deserves, while acknowledging we're lucky to have a fantastic coaching set-up to back him up. Good times!
|
|
|
Post by LondonWelsh on Jul 8, 2015 15:08:45 GMT
Clear Satire, but this ridiculous assumption people keep making about Osian being the driving force is very annoying. Its very hard for some people to give Chris the credit he so obviously deserves. Main Man. You're absolutely right that Coleman deserves a lot of credit for Wales' success. It is also true that his role as leader is a particularly important one - and he's clearly leading from the front. But should he get the credit for the way we set up and the new tactical approach? In part yes, but I remain sceptical that he is the instigator of the changes made in this campaign. I have no hard evidence, mainly gut feeling, and the documentary series on S4C that gave a lot of insight into Osian's role. Coleman is a great man motivator, but I can't recall him saying much, if anything, to the media, that suggests a great tactical insight. For instance, have there been any interviews where he's explained the move to wing backs? It may be that Coleman deserves even more credit than I'm currently willing to give him. I'd be only too happy to do so if someone showed me the evidence that his role is much more than a very good front man to a very good coaching team. Why would he say anything to the media in regards to the tactics, there is no need for him to do so. When Chris came in he said he wouldn't interfere with what Gary (Osian and Raymond) had done, and obviously it didn't work out. However after the bad results, as we wall know he said he would stamp his own mark and do it his way. This has seen him implement his own tactics and mould the team to how he wanted to play. And look what has happened. Osian is a good coach and is good with sessions, but it is coleman who is at the forefront of all tactical decisions and ideas. (Also when speaking about the wingbacks, chris did effectively the same thing while at Fulham utilising Wingbacks very much so in the counter attacking football he played. Moritz Volz and Carlos Bocanegra, 2 quick attacking full backs. Although not a traditional 5 Sylvan Legwinski often dropped back when those 2 bombed forward).
|
|
|
Post by gwernybwch on Jul 8, 2015 16:12:19 GMT
Osian is a good coach and is good with sessions, but it is coleman who is at the forefront of all tactical decisions and ideas.(Also when speaking about the wingbacks, chris did effectively the same thing while at Fulham utilising Wingbacks very much so in the counter attacking football he played. Moritz Volz and Carlos Bocanegra, 2 quick attacking full backs. Although not a traditional 5 Sylvan Legwinski often dropped back when those 2 bombed forward). Watching the S4C documentary, it is evident that it isn't the role of Coleman to come up with the tactical ideas and do the strategic analysis. He has a team that does that for him. In the S4C documentary Osian saying that it was his role to research and put forward 'different options for Coleman to consider'. It was also interesting the depth of match analysis of our competitors (particularly before the Scotland away game). Again this wasn't done by Cookie but rather 'presented' to him.
|
|
|
Post by alarch on Jul 8, 2015 16:58:52 GMT
Thanks for the that link - that's probably just about the only in-depth interview I've seen with Coleman. Very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by alarch on Jul 8, 2015 17:03:34 GMT
Good discussion - it's good to have different perspectives on issues. It's certainly clear that it is very much a team effort off the pitch as well as on it. Exactly who should get how much credit for what will probably never be clear, but it's great to see the synergies that have been developed. Long may it continue. You can watch the Osian Roberts documentaries here (subtitles available): www.s4c.cymru/clic/e_level2.shtml?programme_id=514365692 Links to the two more recent episodes in the three-parter are lower down on the page.
|
|
|
Post by alarch on Oct 5, 2015 16:09:34 GMT
I've just got round to updating the player availability stats that I've been tracking. The stats go a long way to explaining the turnaround from the last campaign. For the last three campaigns I've been tracking the availability of the 10 most important players (in my opinion). This is of course subjective, but nevertheless I think its a reasonable way of gauging the impact of injuries and suspensions. In the previous World Cup campaign our 10 best players only played 47% of the available minutes. Contrast that with the 90% to date for this campaign (probably higher still come the end of the forthcoming double-header). This goes a long, long way towards explaining the change-around in form. Consider also the five players who have played practically every minute: Bale, Hennessey, Taylor, Williams, Gunter. In other words, the player who has scored and created practically all of our goals, our goalkeeper, and three of our back five that have conceded only two goals (and dodgy ones at that) to date. Very telling.
Player availability clearly isn't the whole story. Coleman's switch to using wing backs, and improved individual performances (Gunter especially) have also played a big part in our massive improvement. But for me, the single biggest explanatory factor in our failure and success in our last two campaigns has been player availability. A boring narrative for sure, but one that's pretty much irrefutable.
|
|
|
Post by cholista on Oct 5, 2015 19:02:38 GMT
Am going to enjoy watching those vids. Diolch. Missed them at the time.
Grosso modo, the credit-giving has to be put against the backdrop of historic failure. And Cookie is the man who has finally made it click!
He deserves heaps of praise. And even more so when you consider some of the early disparaging remarks about him from fans/media. Plus his 'handling' of Bale, plus (and most especially) the fact he has ensured we have a rock-solid defence (whether by accepting advice or through instigating an idea of his own. It makes no odds in my book), plus his handling of the Collins situation, plus (as people say here) for leading from the front, plus for embedding an idea/ethos and seeing it through, plus for talking with sense in the media, plus for going about it all respectfully and without seeking self-aggrandisment... Plus... I'll stop there :-)
He is the manager, he calls the shots. He is a hero!
In addition, his technical staff deserve massive credit. As, of course, do the players themselves. Each and every one of them.
|
|