Bring back Jesse

[weasel]

Everyone commenting on that photo you do realise it was a few seconds after a corner kick had been sent in so we weren't in a position where players were in their usual places on the pitch? The ball got half cleared then played back in. Yes we should have picked the guys up but it wasn't like it was some dvious new formation

[Sean_Nile]

That picture needs to be pinned on the dressing room wall with a message stipulating "I don't want to see schoolboy defending again".

He would ask the defence "What would Ghandi do?"

[JoeDenver]

Yes....where are all the people that were bitching about the "narrow formation" under Marsh?

Have they not noticed how this team plays? Do they not care because the results have mostly come? (In a MUCH lower standard league.). Or do they just not have the tactical nous to see it?

Precisely Paul. This appears to be a slower-paced, yet more possession-oriented style. I’d love to see the heat maps vs. Jesse’s teams as I suspect there’s some overlap, especially in the attacking third.

[The Subhuman]

At least two of us have commented on the narrowness of Farkeball

[YorkshireSquare]

Perhaps that is what this team needs.

The return of Jesse.

I agree, we could do with some half time entertainment, a clown would do job!

[YorkshireSquare]

At least two of us have commented on the narrowness of Farkeball

Assume Farke is left handed, because we hardly ever use the right hand side of the pitch.

[The Subhuman]

Assume Farke is left handed, because we hardly ever use the right hand side of the pitch.

lol, We use inverted wingers, and we started with inverted full backs until Firpo started and even he comes in a lot. Inverted wingers play narrower obviously, so we're not helping ourselves by compressing the pitch.. Summerville on the right as a natural right winger would have allowed a secondary system, Gnonto is better on the left being two footed, don't think he's played there much if at al this season.

Even when Cry was switched right he was still playing narrow, even James angles in a lot. I think it's the way Farke wants to play and we've become stale in that system. It needs Geo at his best to trigger everything an he hasn't been lately. He's not been as bad as some think but he's either tiring or carrying an injury

[Cjay]

lol, We use inverted wingers, and we started with inverted full backs until Firpo started and even he comes in a lot. Inverted wingers play narrower obviously, so we're not helping ourselves by compressing the pitch.. Summerville on the right as a natural right winger would have allowed a secondary system, Gnonto is better on the left being two footed, don't think he's played there much if at al this season.

Even when Cry was switched right he was still playing narrow, even James angles in a lot. I think it's the way Farke wants to play and we've become stale in that system. It needs Geo at his best to trigger everything an he hasn't been lately. He's not been as bad as some think but he's either tiring or carrying an injury

Marsch and Farke are cut from the same cloth.

Marsch was heavily influenced by Rangnick and Farke is part of that generation of German coaches who took there inspiration from people like Klopp who was influenced by Rangnick himself.

Is a thread tying them all together hence the similarities.

Narrow for pressing and ease of transition, condense the space etc.

It's all the same just with slightly different interpretations.

Farke differs in his safety first possession style, whereas the traditional style was always look for the forward pass.

Can Even see it if you watched Glasner and Palace today, narrow attack, wide full backs, central pressing triggers and always look forward first.

[The Subhuman]

Marsch and Farke are cut from the same cloth.

Marsch was heavily influenced by Rangnick and Farke is part of that generation of German coaches who took there inspiration from people like Klopp who was influenced by Rangnick himself.

Is a thread tying them all together hence the similarities.

Narrow for pressing and ease of transition, condense the space etc.

It's all the same just with slightly different interpretations.

Farke differs in his safety first possession style, whereas the traditional style was always look for the forward pass.

Can Even see it if you watched Glasner and Palace today, narrow attack, wide full backs, central pressing triggers and always look forward first.

Sort of, Farke is a good coach, he's got us fit whereas Marsch's teams were running out of steam on the hour. Marsch was all zero substance and chaos, the playground all run toward the ball theory. But I do see there are some similarities

[Cjay]

Sort of, Farke is a good coach, he's got us fit whereas Marsch's teams were running out of steam on the hour. Marsch was all zero substance and chaos, the playground all run toward the ball theory. But I do see there are some similarities

Wasn't saying they are the same.

I think Farke is probably a better coach overall.

But they are much more similar tactical wise than different.

Marsch had basically stolen a Rangnick book and copied his ideas word for word.

Farke has taken a lot of elements of Rangnick's style and added little bits himself (the possession safety first passing is very un Rangnick)

The pressing isn't as high intensity as Rangnick likes (see Marsch or Klopp for that level of pressing).

But having your wingers come very narrow to the point they often are basically next to eachother as Gnonto and Summerville are.

Or keeping the midfield very compact, our cms don't venture far from eachother.

Or indeed Firpo pushing very high.

Central overloads.

Thats very Rangnick.

[The Subhuman]

Wasn't saying they are the same.

I think Farke is probably a better coach overall.

But they are much more similar tactical wise than different.

Marsch had basically stolen a Rangnick book and copied his ideas word for word.

Farke has taken a lot of elements of Rangnick's style and added little bits himself (the possession safety first passing is very un Rangnick)

The pressing isn't as high intensity as Rangnick likes (see Marsch or Klopp for that level of pressing).

But having your wingers come very narrow to the point they often are basically next to eachother as Gnonto and Summerville are.

Or keeping the midfield very compact, our cms don't venture far from eachother.

Or indeed Firpo pushing very high.

Central overloads.

Thats very Rangnick.

[Cjay]

The interesting thing is imo Farke is right in the sense that you need possession and can't look forward all the time.

That was a flaw in the original style that even Red Bull clubs have abandoned.

6,7 years ago when Leipzig came up to the Bundesliga playing this way and Rangnick himself was in charge quite a bit and his disciples like Marsch and Hassenhuttl they were barely having 50% possession.

It did well enough but then Nagelsmann came in, much more possession based coach and it worked even better.

They then tried to go back to the old style with Marsch, failed and they have abandoned it ever since for a more possession based style with elements of the old style with Marco Rose and Tedesco.

So the flaw with the Rangnick style was it was outdated or as with all styles eventually people worked it out a bit.

People like Klopp and Rose and Nagelsmann upgraded it and allowed more possession and width in attack.

Whilst still keeping the narrow out of possession shape ideal for pressing.

So imo in that sense Farke isn't wrong, I think he's right.

But I think where DF falls down is he's gone too far the other way, he's now over possession and over safety focused.

But he still kept the narrow attack style of the old ways which thrived off quick forward passes catching the opponent off guard and then quick interchanges.

Whereas people like Klopp use the whole pitch, much more space and still encourage riskier passes, long balls, cross field balls, sharp passing interchanges through the centre if possible.

So thats my view, in a sense I think Farke is right with what he's done.

But he's gone too far the other way regarding his possession style.

But he's kept the narrow central areas.

So he still overloads the middle of the pitch, but that is where everyone is, so if you don't move the ball quickly with risky forward passes you can only go two other places, side to side and back.

Hence why we do it so much.

And because our right side is basically ignored and we don't switch the play very much or move the ball at pace from one side of the pitch to the other the opposition know that if they shuffle us to the left and overload the middle then chances are we will struggle to create.

So yeah that's my little tactical opinion for the day

[AcrossThePondAsh]

The interesting thing is imo Farke is right in the sense that you need possession and can't look forward all the time.

That was a flaw in the original style that even Red Bull clubs have abandoned.

6,7 years ago when Leipzig came up to the Bundesliga playing this way and Rangnick himself was in charge quite a bit and his disciples like Marsch and Hassenhuttl they were barely having 50% possession.

It did well enough but then Nagelsmann came in, much more possession based coach and it worked even better.

They then tried to go back to the old style with Marsch, failed and they have abandoned it ever since for a more possession based style with elements of the old style with Marco Rose and Tedesco.

So the flaw with the Rangnick style was it was outdated or as with all styles eventually people worked it out a bit.

People like Klopp and Rose and Nagelsmann upgraded it and allowed more possession and width in attack.

Whilst still keeping the narrow out of possession shape ideal for pressing.

So imo in that sense Farke isn't wrong, I think he's right.

But I think where DF falls down is he's gone too far the other way, he's now over possession and over safety focused.

But he still kept the narrow attack style of the old ways which thrived off quick forward passes catching the opponent off guard and then quick interchanges.

Whereas people like Klopp use the whole pitch, much more space and still encourage riskier passes, long balls, cross field balls, sharp passing interchanges through the centre if possible.

So thats my view, in a sense I think Farke is right with what he's done.

But he's gone too far the other way regarding his possession style.

But he's kept the narrow central areas.

So he still overloads the middle of the pitch, but that is where everyone is, so if you don't move the ball quickly with risky forward passes you can only go two other places, side to side and back.

Hence why we do it so much.

And because our right side is basically ignored and we don't switch the play very much or move the ball at pace from one side of the pitch to the other the opposition know that if they shuffle us to the left and overload the middle then chances are we will struggle to create.

So yeah that's my little tactical opinion for the day

I wonder if this is an issue compounded by our defensive woes last season and the season before ("woes" may not be a strong enough word), as well as DF's squads defensive frailties in the past. Not making excuses for him going too far the other way, but add in a cobbled together backline and one can see why he might tend to want to err on the side of caution, at least early on in the season or until the defense has proven itself.

[malcolmw]

Precisely Paul. This appears to be a slower-paced, yet more possession-oriented style. I’d love to see the heat maps vs. Jesse’s teams as I suspect there’s some overlap, especially in the attacking third.

This has to be a joke right.... yeah?..... surely.

Marsh brought nothing but chaos and amateurism to ER. He was got a little of the 'Marcelo Glow' for a few games when he started, and then his cluelessness was quick to come to the fore.

He's a pretender. We were still paying for his f*** up when this season started.

And I really tried to give him a chance when he started. (After all he can talk up a storm). But what got me was his arrogance and a subtext that 'all would now be fine for Leeds, the saviour had arrived'.
Especially galling when you consider who he took over from.
But that's what ignorance does to you I guess.... Makes you believe in abilities you don't (yet) have.
Best thing he could do is go and ma age in League 1 or bottom of the Championship and learn his craft.

[JoeDenver]

This has to be a joke right.... yeah?..... surely.

Marsh brought nothing but chaos and amateurism to ER. He was got a little of the 'Marcelo Glow' for a few games when he started, and then his cluelessness was quick to come to the fore.

He's a pretender. We were still paying for his f*** up when this season started.

And I really tried to give him a chance when he started. (After all he can talk up a storm). But what got me was his arrogance and a subtext that 'all would now be fine for Leeds, the saviour had arrived'.
Especially galling when you consider who he took over from.
But that's what ignorance does to you I guess.... Makes you believe in abilities you don't (yet) have.
Best thing he could do is go and ma age in League 1 or bottom of the Championship and learn his craft.

Can definitely agree that Jesse needs to go to a lower Championship and experiment with adjusting his style to be more of a Nagelsman/Marco Rose style with utilizing more of the width of the pitch as well as improving player fitness. If he can improve those aspects of his management, I can see him ascending back up the coaching ranks.

But as Cjay’s detailed analysis outlines above, Farke’s style is clearly cut from the same Ragnick school, which makes sense given his German pedigree. No joking about that. It truly is Marsch’s style with more of a possession focus and slower build up play (which is partially a byproduct of the possession focus). Obviously, there are more nuances (left-side attacks, improved player fitness, and a comparatively more subdued press), but I was speaking in general terms. Again, tactically-speaking, lots of similarities between the two.

[malcolmw]

Can definitely agree that Jesse needs to go to a lower Championship and experiment with adjusting his style to be more of a Nagelsman/Marco Rose style with utilizing more of the width of the pitch as well as improving player fitness. If he can improve those aspects of his management, I can see him ascending back up the coaching ranks.

But as Cjay’s detailed analysis outlines above, Farke’s style is clearly cut from the same Ragnick school, which makes sense given his German pedigree. No joking about that. It truly is Marsch’s style with more of a possession focus and slower build up play (which is partially a byproduct of the possession focus). Obviously, there are more nuances (left-side attacks, improved player fitness, and a comparatively more subdued press), but I was speaking in general terms. Again, tactically-speaking, lots of similarities between the two.

I can see what you're saying about styles - but I'd say its largely a German style, more than that of a specific manager. Watching Bayern against Real last week in the Champions semi-final, you could see it at work. Real just absorbed pressure, didnt have much possession and then scored a wonderful goal on the break. I cant see Bayern getting through this week's second leg.

The traditional German style relies on having highly effective strikers. I recall seeing Beckenbauer's world cup winning team in 1974. Arguably they weren't as talented as Cruyff's Holland, but they had a few playmakers who could find goals out of nowhere. Gerd Muller being the main one. They could absorb pressure with typical disciplined defense and then could often score goals against the run of play.
I think this is an area Bayern have struggled with over the past few years - and likely why they paid a pretty penny for Harry Kane. Not enough this season though.
When you look at Leverkusen this year, they are playing a much wider and more pacey game. Alonso has brought a different style, which is pretty great to watch.

Marsch never played football outside the USA. Hardly a recipe for being an effective top-level coach. And it showed. Its hindsight of course, but it was an inordinately bad hire. He was not in any way equipped for the job at Leeds, especially taking over from one of the most admired and creative coaches in the world, at a time when things were going wrong and the papered-over cracks were re-appearing.

I have no doubt he's a smart guy. If - and I'm afraid its a big if, in my opinion - he's prepared to learn, he could perhaps become a good coach. But I think its more likely he'll aim for high profile jobs - probably at the international level - none of the major European teams will hire him - he has no real track record. Which makes his recruitment mby Leeds all the more baffling.
International coaching may suit him - there is less building and grinding week in and week out.

[weasel]

The interesting thing is imo Farke is right in the sense that you need possession and can't look forward all the time.

That was a flaw in the original style that even Red Bull clubs have abandoned.

6,7 years ago when Leipzig came up to the Bundesliga playing this way and Rangnick himself was in charge quite a bit and his disciples like Marsch and Hassenhuttl they were barely having 50% possession.

It did well enough but then Nagelsmann came in, much more possession based coach and it worked even better.

They then tried to go back to the old style with Marsch, failed and they have abandoned it ever since for a more possession based style with elements of the old style with Marco Rose and Tedesco.

So the flaw with the Rangnick style was it was outdated or as with all styles eventually people worked it out a bit.

People like Klopp and Rose and Nagelsmann upgraded it and allowed more possession and width in attack.

Whilst still keeping the narrow out of possession shape ideal for pressing.

So imo in that sense Farke isn't wrong, I think he's right.

But I think where DF falls down is he's gone too far the other way, he's now over possession and over safety focused.

But he still kept the narrow attack style of the old ways which thrived off quick forward passes catching the opponent off guard and then quick interchanges.

Whereas people like Klopp use the whole pitch, much more space and still encourage riskier passes, long balls, cross field balls, sharp passing interchanges through the centre if possible.

So thats my view, in a sense I think Farke is right with what he's done.

But he's gone too far the other way regarding his possession style.

But he's kept the narrow central areas.

So he still overloads the middle of the pitch, but that is where everyone is, so if you don't move the ball quickly with risky forward passes you can only go two other places, side to side and back.

Hence why we do it so much.

And because our right side is basically ignored and we don't switch the play very much or move the ball at pace from one side of the pitch to the other the opposition know that if they shuffle us to the left and overload the middle then chances are we will struggle to create.

So yeah that's my little tactical opinion for the day

I think if you took any style of playing there will be similariteis to other styles and differences, after all it is still 11 players, 1 ball, 1 pitch etc. I think you then cut your cloth according to which bits you think work and which don't and try to evolve it. Whether it works though still boils down to how good the players are and how suited they are to playing it.

I think with us long balls are not particularly effective. Bamford's control isn't the best and he also doesn't have the pace to get away from his marker so the long ball has a very small chance of being effective. Possibly more effectve if played long but out wide but then you have the winger getting the ball but not having the overlapping fll back to support them. So for us it isn't a very sensible tactic but for another team, playing our way it might be a great tactic if you have the quicker striker or a striker with great control who can bring others into the game quickly.

A large problem we had, especially earlier in the season was us dominating matches but then conceding. Going with a safer approach worked pretty well as we would keep probing for the opening goal but be less vulnerable to going behind. The noticeable thing about our long winning run was the fact that we hardly conceded a goal, and even when we did concede it wasn't from open play, As such it gave us a great platform to build success from knowing that if we scored at any point in the match we were likely to win it. We didn't need to panic but could just keep probing until at some point we got the opening.

So for me Farke's 'cautious' approach worked really well and was probably the best way to play with the players we had. The results backed it up. Even in a couple of the performances during our bad run the template for success was still good. Against Sunderland it was like many games in our winning run, solid at the back and we kept probing. Unlike in the winning run though we didn't find the goal. Against Blackburn it was the same and once again we didn't find the goal and as we pushed more for the winner we left ourselves vulnerable - if we hadn't gone all out for the win and kept our formation and not made substitutions then maybe we snatch the win instead of falling for the sucker goal.

In the matches we really came unstuck we were very much unlike ourselves conceding early goals and ruining our gameplan.

It is important to not judge the season and the tactics by the last few matches but as a whole. The tactics evolved over the season and our results improved over the season. The last few matches saw us trying to force results and coming unstuck or putting in tired performances where it is easy for one or two players to switch off for a second or two.

We aso have to remember that Farke has for the main part had to rely on players that were already here and players that were available when we had the money to spend. Norwich improved immensely in Farke second season and it is likely that he was able to sit down in the summer knowing which players couldn't play how he wanted them to and where he had to make changes. One or two wrong cogs and the machine doesn't work to full efficiency. I think Farke has shown that he can get a lot out of what he had so I see no reason why he can't make it better when he gets more of the parts that he needs even if we end up losing a few parts that seemed to work well.

[Finnatic]

lol, We use inverted wingers, and we started with inverted full backs until Firpo started and even he comes in a lot. Inverted wingers play narrower obviously, so we're not helping ourselves by compressing the pitch.. Summerville on the right as a natural right winger would have allowed a secondary system, Gnonto is better on the left being two footed, don't think he's played there much if at al this season.

Even when Cry was switched right he was still playing narrow, even James angles in a lot. I think it's the way Farke wants to play and we've become stale in that system. It needs Geo at his best to trigger everything an he hasn't been lately. He's not been as bad as some think but he's either tiring or carrying an injury

Was it Boro away when they swapped wings and we scored four?
Maybe not all four while they swapped but I’m sure it was a couple.

[Cjay]

I wonder if this is an issue compounded by our defensive woes last season and the season before ("woes" may not be a strong enough word), as well as DF's squads defensive frailties in the past. Not making excuses for him going too far the other way, but add in a cobbled together backline and one can see why he might tend to want to err on the side of caution, at least early on in the season or until the defense has proven itself.

I'd agree with you in a way

But he did the same at Mönchengladbach.

It was one of the fan criticisms, it was actually the fans who turned on him first from what German media said and his criticims were identical.

Too safe
Too much meaningless possession.
An inability to beat teams defending deep (seems a running theme for DF.
And also he was accused of being a "Schwätzer" which apparently basically means a chatterbox, someone who talks and talks and talks to try and distract from the original problems or questions.

So I don't think it's likely a new tactic for us, it's just his way now?

[Cjay]

I think if you took any style of playing there will be similariteis to other styles and differences, after all it is still 11 players, 1 ball, 1 pitch etc. I think you then cut your cloth according to which bits you think work and which don't and try to evolve it. Whether it works though still boils down to how good the players are and how suited they are to playing it.

I think with us long balls are not particularly effective. Bamford's control isn't the best and he also doesn't have the pace to get away from his marker so the long ball has a very small chance of being effective. Possibly more effectve if played long but out wide but then you have the winger getting the ball but not having the overlapping fll back to support them. So for us it isn't a very sensible tactic but for another team, playing our way it might be a great tactic if you have the quicker striker or a striker with great control who can bring others into the game quickly.

A large problem we had, especially earlier in the season was us dominating matches but then conceding. Going with a safer approach worked pretty well as we would keep probing for the opening goal but be less vulnerable to going behind. The noticeable thing about our long winning run was the fact that we hardly conceded a goal, and even when we did concede it wasn't from open play, As such it gave us a great platform to build success from knowing that if we scored at any point in the match we were likely to win it. We didn't need to panic but could just keep probing until at some point we got the opening.

So for me Farke's 'cautious' approach worked really well and was probably the best way to play with the players we had. The results backed it up. Even in a couple of the performances during our bad run the template for success was still good. Against Sunderland it was like many games in our winning run, solid at the back and we kept probing. Unlike in the winning run though we didn't find the goal. Against Blackburn it was the same and once again we didn't find the goal and as we pushed more for the winner we left ourselves vulnerable - if we hadn't gone all out for the win and kept our formation and not made substitutions then maybe we snatch the win instead of falling for the sucker goal.

In the matches we really came unstuck we were very much unlike ourselves conceding early goals and ruining our gameplan.

It is important to not judge the season and the tactics by the last few matches but as a whole. The tactics evolved over the season and our results improved over the season. The last few matches saw us trying to force results and coming unstuck or putting in tired performances where it is easy for one or two players to switch off for a second or two.

We aso have to remember that Farke has for the main part had to rely on players that were already here and players that were available when we had the money to spend. Norwich improved immensely in Farke second season and it is likely that he was able to sit down in the summer knowing which players couldn't play how he wanted them to and where he had to make changes. One or two wrong cogs and the machine doesn't work to full efficiency. I think Farke has shown that he can get a lot out of what he had so I see no reason why he can't make it better when he gets more of the parts that he needs even if we end up losing a few parts that seemed to work well.

I have a personal dislike for slow, dull meaningless possession football.

And I can't understand narrowness in attack, it baffles me why you'd want to make the pitch smaller?

I get it from a pressing point of view out of possession but in possession I'd have thought you want space?

It seems ineffective vs sit back teams and this is apparently a theme for DF for a few seasons now and was for Marsch as well.

For me I think a riskier approach would do us the world of good? You get Summerville more opportunities 1v1 rather than facing 2 or 3 defenders or Rutter and chances will increase.

You let Summerville maintain his width and suddenly the centre of the pitch is less congested for Rutter.

Possession has it's place but you don't win games because of possession.

At the same time you don't win games by being reckless like Marsch.

It's about a balance imo.

Both Marsch and DF have the balance wrong and weirdly probably need to take a bit of influence from eachother.

If Farke let us speed up our attacks and play forward more I think we'd really benefit.

I've no idea whats gone wrong recently but in general I'd prefer a more progressive style just as a general point of preference.

He's signed 10 players? How many more does he need before it can be his team? The fact he's barely played 3 or 4 of them is his choice.

Won't go down the 2nd season discussion thing as we've done it to death Norwich signed 3 players in 2nd season, Pukki, Buendia and Krul, his 3 most important players. It's upto interpretation and opinion whether the improvement was him or them.

But as a general point I think his possession preference is something Marsch could learn from. But equally Farke needs to learn from people like Klopp and Rose and Nagelsmann.

But I do think Farke has regressed as a coach, actually got worse, certainly from an entertainment perspective and not sure his possession focus has made his teams much better either.

I watched quite a bit of his 1st Norwich, 2nd season when he arrived.

The most noticeable thing I found was its very different to how we are now.

For one, they weren't afraid of a long ball into the channel or Buendia or Steipermann switching the play to Hernandez or Lewis from the right to left, or to Aarons left to right.

They also played forward much more, or they seemed to atleast, they were much clearer patterns of play and 1 touch moves which naturally includes riskier passes.

And also the midfield very different, yes they had sitters as they built from the back but as the ball progressed one of them, Vrancic or Kenny Mclean would push on, join in with Pukki and Buendia and co, they didn't just stop half way inside opponents half. They even could run beyond and pop up with a goal from inside the box.

And finally they didn't attack almost exclusively down 1 side.

So he has definitely changed.

Quite why? Possibly a few factors.

His Norwich team 1st season did concede lot.

Then when promoted they were even worse.

But then when they came back down again they became even more possession focused, they were averaging 5% more than the 1st time and they conceded less (underlying numbers will tell you they shouldn't have) but on paper they did.

And then he got promoted again and they were even worse defensively and he was sacked.

So I think much of it is down to the goals his teams conceded at Norwich, they were bad 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

When he switched to his slower more possession approach the numbers atleast looked respectable.

They weren't creating chances at a much lower rate either so to DF it seemed a balance.

So he kept it up through his spell at Mönchengladbach and now here.