Thomas Frank - Head Coach

[Bedfordspurs]

Agreed there's a need to rotate players, but it's not being done in midfield where the problem lies. Play one of Palhinha or Bentancur and then rotate between Sarr, Bergvall, Xavi, and Gray (or play Gray instead of Palhinha and Bentancur). That gives us a DM and much more going forward.

Our best footballing games have been when that has happened

 

[thfcsteff]

This is only really true of CM as we're settling atm on Bentancur partnering Palinha, this allows 4 attackers on the pitch - however that's creating issues with losing the midfield battle.

Porro Udogie (now available) + 4 attackers is not on paper picking the defensive options every time.

We have to take in to account that we have CL football and need to rotate players, so there will be times when it is true, but that is as much about available options as anything else given the players missing.

Are you seeing Bentancur (the way Frank uses him) as an 'attacking' player? I think he is another 6 at this point; his 8ness has fadedf considerably (though I suspect if the system allowed it might find itself again)...

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Are you seeing Bentancur (the way Frank uses him) as an 'attacking' player? I think he is another 6 at this point; his 8ness has fadedf considerably (though I suspect if the system allowed it might find itself again)...

He did play really well in a more attacking role recently
Think it was the Copenhagen game
But he had so much time to play

 

[billyiddo]

Agreed there's a need to rotate players, but it's not being done in midfield where the problem lies. Play one of Palhinha or Bentancur and then rotate between Sarr, Bergvall, Xavi, and Gray (or play Gray instead of Palhinha and Bentancur). That gives us a DM and much more going forward.

That's where we need to be IMV, 433 with Sarr & Bergvall getting plenty of minutes - 433 leaves Xavi without a starting position though unless we use him off the left.

 

[thfcsteff]

He did play really well in a more attacking role recently
Think it was the Copenhagen game
But he had so much time to play

Yup, it was a more adventurous midfield overall when you look at the selections. Of course it was CPH so context is needed.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Yup, it was a more adventurous midfield overall when you look at the selections. Of course it was CPH so context is needed.

Yeah they are the worst side we have played in some time

 

[billyiddo]

Are you seeing Bentancur (the way Frank uses him) as an 'attacking' player? I think he is another 6 at this point; his 8ness has fadedf considerably (though I suspect if the system allowed it might find itself again)...

No, the opposite, I'm saying that's the only real position we are selecting the more defensive option available (vs the claim we are doing so in every position)

The 4 attackers is in reference to how we have been trying to use Xavi centrally - that has seen a switch from 433 (Xavi off the left) to 4231 - that's not working because our CM options aren't able to take on full ball progression responsibilities by themselves alongside a pure destroyer like Palinha and Xavi is not really a playmaker no.10 who will link midfield with attack (ala Maddison or Eriksen) so we're left with a disconnect between midfield & attack.

 

[braineclipse]

No, the opposite, I'm saying that's the only real position we are selecting the more defensive option available (vs the claim we are doing so in every position)

The 4 attackers is in reference to how we have been trying to use Xavi centrally - that has seen a switch from 433 (Xavi off the left) to 4231 - that's not working because our CM options aren't able to take on full ball progression responsibilities by themselves alongside a pure destroyer like Palinha and Xavi is not really a playmaker no.10 who will link midfield with attack (ala Maddison or Eriksen) so we're left with a disconnect between midfield & attack.

Agreed that deep in midfield is pretty much the only consistent defensive priority selection. Though in some games we have seen others too. Sarr as a 10, back 5.

But it's not only about selection, it's also how the players are used and positioning when we have the ball. Relatively conservative use of the full backs for example.

 

[DubSpur]

That's where we need to be IMV, 433 with Sarr & Bergvall getting plenty of minutes - 433 leaves Xavi without a starting position though unless we use him off the left.

He can play as the LCM, a bit narrower. It can also be more of a 4213 (or 4231) with Xavi just behind the front 3. Change according to the opposition. And that's were I want to see Frank earn his money and show his flexibility.

 

[DubSpur]

No, the opposite, I'm saying that's the only real position we are selecting the more defensive option available (vs the claim we are doing so in every position)

The 4 attackers is in reference to how we have been trying to use Xavi centrally - that has seen a switch from 433 (Xavi off the left) to 4231 - that's not working because our CM options aren't able to take on full ball progression responsibilities by themselves alongside a pure destroyer like Palinha and Xavi is not really a playmaker no.10 who will link midfield with attack (ala Maddison or Eriksen) so we're left with a disconnect between midfield & attack.

Xavi can link the midfield and attack. The problem is that the vast majority of the time he gets the ball there's nobody ahead of him. He ends up either having to take on a couple of players or go backwards. There's a good video clip in his thread that shows exactly that problem against Utd.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Xavi can link the midfield and attack. The problem is that the vast majority of the time he gets the ball there's nobody ahead of him. He ends up either having to take on a couple of players or go backwards. There's a good video clip in his thread that shows exactly that problem against Utd.

That was brilliant and scary at the same time

 

[Bedfordspurs]

One thing that hasn’t been mentioned
Against the bottom half sides we have got results
Against the teams of similar economical level we have taken 1 point (United, plus the city win
Lost to Villa although played ok
Lost to Chelsea and Arsenal and with historically bad performances

Also lost to Bournemouth as the other top half side we have played at home and drew away with Brighton

It’s the polar opposite to what I think we went for Frank for. The punching up by having a way of getting results against richer sides

 

[Mikey10]

The same people criticising Ange and telling us it wasn't the players are now saying after we have improv d the squad with Kudus, Simons and Muani that what we are seeing is to be expected it's simply hypocritical.

Firstly (and without wishing to reopen the debate yet again, but you did mention him!) Ange had two years. Frank has had four months. Yes we've added Kudus (patchy form at best during his time at West Ham) and Simons and Muani (both unproven at the top level and let go by clubs, the latter has hardly been fit since arriving), but Frank has had to operate without the four players who created and scored almost all of our goals last season.

FWIW I have said for 2/3 years people on here over rate our squad, but it fell on deaf ears until Frank arrived. That doesn't mean a team full of internationals should be resorting to the painful football we are seeing, that's on Frank and he needs to do better....

And yet, apart from the first 10 games of his reign, we were a painful watch under Ange; and mostly under Conte; and also under Stellini; and definitely under Nuno; and mostly under Jose...makes you think it may just have something to do with the club.

 

[Bishop]

Responses below inbetween mate...




I think it very much depends on the intent. If you're playing 4-2-3-1 to press and play higher up the pitch, not so much for me. It requires the FBs to be aggressive and it also possibly requires a shift to 4-3-3 when transitioning to defence. I accept that the way Frank is going about things, this might have been the case. Of course, instead, we ended up getting battered anyway.




I swear I saw him say somewhere it was 5-4-1? I think you might well be right though, because Richy, Odobert and Kudus were at least 8 yards away from each other at all times. It was ridiculous.



We will never know the answer to this really. What I think it is safe to say is that whatever formation we'd have put out, approaching the game with that degree of callow caution would've ensured the same result. Again, I have no issue with 3 at the back if the 3-5-2 is an attacking one as opposed to becoming 'the 5'.

IF we played 3 at the back, had a midfield of Porro/Sarr/Palinha/Xavi/Udogie and Richy or Tel playing off Muani, and if that side was sent out to press and play, you'd always have players within a few yards of each other and be able to progress the ball quickly and through the middle as well as using the WBs width. When in defensive transitions, Pahlinha drops in the make a 4 if a WB gets caught out of position. For me, again, the Romero to Pahlinha to Sarr or Bergy to Xavi or Kudus through the middle links could be very productive. Muani has shown (me anyway) he can drop into half-spaces, collect and run from deep, which allows his strike partner to profit or vice-versa. Of course the caveat is that this manager (currently at any rate) won't contemplate any approach remotely like that.

I could well be a victim of idealistic thinking here, but I am continuing to find it exceptionally hard to accept the 'risks' he speaks about versus the total lack of risks we see.

I think your vision is a little idealistic and isn't how things will actually play out. If you're playing a destroyer like Palhinha there is no real reason to also play an additional CB in a 3. You've essentially go that extra defensive body in both the midfield and CB area already and are just duplicating tasks and attributes. It would make more sense if playing a 3 to pair say Sarr and Bergvall because the idea is for the 3rd CB to step into midfield and cover the gaps but with the pitch in front of them. Again I'll say I'm not a fan of the system period as it removes a midfielder and nearly always makes you lose the midfield against a halfway competent side unless you have the key specialists to play the system correctly. We clear don't so it's something that should be reserved only for the very most special of occasions.

 

[harr1984]

Firstly (and without wishing to reopen the debate yet again, but you did mention him!) Ange had two years. Frank has had four months. Yes we've added Kudus (patchy form at best during his time at West Ham) and Simons and Muani (both unproven at the top level and let go by clubs, the latter has hardly been fit since arriving), but Frank has had to operate without the four players who created and scored almost all of our goals last season.

And yet, apart from the first 10 games of his reign, we were a painful watch under Ange; and mostly under Conte; and also under Stellini; and definitely under Nuno; and mostly under Jose...makes you think it may just have something to do with the club.

No worries - The point was, with a weaker squad under Ange compared to what we have now when I said the squad wasn't all that and a lot over rate it I was told it is good enough for top 6.

Now magically we've improved the squad yet all of a sudden our expectations should be top ten and with this set of players we can't expect any semblance of decent football and this long ball football is what is to be expected? Nah.

I don't care if Frank advocates come here and say it will improve etc that's cool, I still hope it will. But the excuses for what have been served up are cringeworthy, the football has been crap for almost all of the season so far - there's no getting away from that fact regardless of what we all think/hope he will do given time....

 

[Grays_1890]

Firstly (and without wishing to reopen the debate yet again, but you did mention him!) Ange had two years. Frank has had four months. Yes we've added Kudus (patchy form at best during his time at West Ham) and Simons and Muani (both unproven at the top level and let go by clubs, the latter has hardly been fit since arriving), but Frank has had to operate without the four players who created and scored almost all of our goals last season.

And yet, apart from the first 10 games of his reign, we were a painful watch under Ange; and mostly under Conte; and also under Stellini; and definitely under Nuno; and mostly under Jose...makes you think it may just have something to do with the club.

I love how Ange pops up again, shock horror

People felt he should be navigating the league and EC better than he was (the league side) people accepted the shrug of shoulders at losing clumps of league games even before we won the comp.

Frank is currently getting more points out the same players and navigating a harder comp....

That's the point no?

 

[harr1984]

I love how Ange pops up again, shock horror

People felt he should be navigating the league and EC better than he was (the league side) people accepted the shrug of shoulders at losing clumps of league games even before we won the comp.

Frank is currently getting more points out the same players and navigating a harder comp....

That's the point no?

The point wasn't really about Ange but the quality of the squad for the past couple of seasons. Perhaps I should have said 'last seasons' squad' and let his name out of it ....

 

[harr1984]

I love how Ange pops up again, shock horror

People felt he should be navigating the league and EC better than he was (the league side) people accepted the shrug of shoulders at losing clumps of league games even before we won the comp.

Frank is currently getting more points out the same players and navigating a harder comp....

That's the point no?

And not one person has mentioned us being 9th in the league as a form of complaint, or the fact we lost to Arsenal etc. The only complaint has been the football (or lack of it)....

 

[Bishop]

Don't think anyone is expecting us to play magical football, I don't know why people keep suggesting fans are expecting the moon from him.

If I list all the players he has had available it is more than fair to expect better football than what has served up, no one is asking for miracles just evidence of an attacking plan beyond hoofing it. The same people criticising Ange and telling us it wasn't the players are now saying after we have improv d the squad with Kudus, Simons and Muani that what we are seeing is to be expected it's simply hypocritical.

FWIW I have said for 2/3 years people on here over rate our squad, but it fell on deaf ears until Frank arrived. That doesn't mean a team full of internationals should be resorting to the painful football we are seeing, that's on Frank and he needs to do better....

Player composition has always been the biggest stumbling block, that was the case under Ange, as it was Conte as it will be with Frank. I don't know why we as a fan base go round and round in circles just refusing to see what's right in front of our eyes. It's fudging boring.

Sack Frank and bring in Glasner and the same boring conversations will happen because unless we actually buy a higher standard of player who suits the game plan of whichever coach we currently have,history will just repeat and repeat and repeat.

Player quality is the single biggest decider of a teams quality, not the coach, not the stadium, not the training facilities and not the flipping team bus. The players!

 

[glorygloryeze]

If you don't want to see my point, all good.

I think i DO see your point.
However, I believe that it isn't a simple thing though, e.g. we all celebrated winning in May in Bilbao and didn't care if we played like Stoke in the second half to do so. I think there is a time and place to look at the 'style' of how we are playing. Not sure that 12 league games in is fair to do so as much as we are, given that last season around this time when there was a longer body of poor work from Ange you were saying that you felt the pressure was getting to him/the players and wondered why no-one in the top hierarchy of the club was offering Ange more public support. Should Frank not be afforded the same care/support from our hierarchy or us as fans at this time now when he has had far less time at the club and having shown far less downturn thus far?

Line-up yesterday? Probably 4-2-3-1

Vic
Porro
Romero
VdV
Udogie

Palhinha
Bergvall

Kudus
Xavi
Tel

Muani

Or a 4-3-3 with midfield of Palhinha, Bergvall and Xavi, and Kudus/Muani/Tel

I'd have looked for a carrier - which we have a couple of - to progress the ball off the CBs, for our FBs to press/pressure high and wide up the pitch, and for quick passing 10-15ft higher up the pitch.

Thanks. Very fair points.
To give Frank the benefit of SOME doubts on my part, I do suspect he was rather trying to deal with our recent injuries to make sure there were no further breakdowns given the upcoming fixtures (which are again thick and fast) and also wanting to shield some of the younger players who might not be quite ready to deal with the aftermath of such a game should things go pearshaped as they did (Odobert elsewhere is getting real stick for one).
Frank has shown he can have faith in many of our younger players: look how Tel has been tasked with leading the line, Bergvall has palyed a decent amount (in fact he started vs Chelsea). The lack of use of Grey up until now (outside of when he's been injured) is very odd though..
I suspect his gameplan for Sunday was to keep things tight before halftime and then bring on the likes of Xavi, Muani etc to have more of a threat second half. That first Eze goal i think killed his plans, the less said about what happened to such plans within 40 seconds of the restart the better!