glasgowspur
Dimitar Berbatov
Bolded would be fine if it was once, but it happened at least three times. One if not all of them should be sorting that out, not standing admiring it.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Moussa Sissoko
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
Bolded would be fine if it was once, but it happened at least three times. One if not all of them should be sorting that out, not standing admiring it.
Legohamster
Cecil Poynton
The main take away from this photo is why there is 2 Emirates Marketing Project players completely free in the box.
School boy defending/communication
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
See I look at that and think that Eriksen has gone too deep to cover to help Rose, and Winks has probably gone too far as well. N’Dombele seems to be in a reasonable position to cover his man outside the box but also and the player by the D if so required, but Sissoko seems to be in a completely ineffective position.
No doubt it’s a great piece of play, not only the cross but also City’s appreciation of space and forcing us into making tough decisions about who to track. They’ve overloaded one side and stretched us with a couple of players on the other. It isn’t easy, and their one of the best sides in the world at it, but if Sissoko has any claim to being top class defensively as a midfielder that provides us balance, he doesn’t let it happen. We fight elite movement and positioning with top class defensive positioning and awareness of our own. It’s the only way.
Maybe I’m being too harsh. City are great in that moment, and in the second half, we actually seemed to have got to a point where they had ran out of ideas, so we had locked it down. But in that moment, Gundogan picked a moment to go forward and overloaded our defence. If Sissoko was watching Zinchenko, he needed to adjust to the actual, but unusual danger. Maybe that’s why it’s harsh, because it may just be an example of elite play. It’s just that defensive awareness is something I think Sissoko is usually excellent with.
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
I wouldn’t call it schoolboy because City are one of the best teams in the world and will plan to create those kinds of overloads. It isn’t easy, but we need to be aware of it if we are to best them.
Maltese Falcon
Niko Kranjcar
I think it's a very collective responsibility. Winks and Eriksen completely lost KdB (the main blame IMHO), focusing on Silva when he was being marked by Rose, Toby and KWP get both caught in no man's land, and Sissoko doesn't track back sufficiently quickly.
Having said that, however, the cross was breathtaking and you have to give this leeway in terms of blame...
Having said that, however, the cross was breathtaking and you have to give this leeway in terms of blame...
No properly defended cross should ever result in a goal - no matter how accurate.
Had Sissoko bothered to stay within even 5 yards of his man, it wouldn't have been a goal (for the second match in a row).
Maltese Falcon
Niko Kranjcar
OMG!!! Who would have ever expected this?
Scaramanga - the paladin of impartiality and the doyen of unbiased assessments - assigns the blame to Sissoko for a goal scored by the opposing left winger (whose marking responsibility automatically therefore falls on the full back) who managed to get at the end of a crossfield ball provided by an opposition midfielder supposedly confronted by two of our midfielders who failed to get within 5 yards of him because they were ball watching....
Shock and horror!! How can that ever be??
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
TBF though the system and way we were playing he was partly sissokos man
KWP tucked in defensively at every opportunity and was being called in by Toby
IMO both are guilty but KWP will always get the blame as people don’t look at where sterling had come from
KWP has to tuck in early to allow Toby to move towards the ball if he needs to (there's a big gap between Toby and Sanchez - hard to tell who's at fault without watching the video back). That also allows him to be goalside of anyone incoming and means he's doing a decent job of being able to block the other runner in that photo - can't see who that is.
He should have had more awareness and known Sterling was moving into the box, but if everyone had done their jobs, he'd have been moving into the box with a big, Sissoko-shaped lump next to him.
Edit:
In fact, roll the video forward a couple of seconds and you'll see that KWP is doing exactly that. He leaves Aguero to Alderweireld, and covers the first runner (which is his job). Sissoko very clearly drops his man - that's not bias, it's just clear as day that if Sissoko doesn't track properly then City have a spare man.
Last edited:
That's not ball watching, that's how we've defended the flanks under successive managers and how plenty of other teams do too.
When a player (at least one who can do damage) has the ball on the wing, we always cover with two players. We leave the player who has dropped off on the assumption that they are in a less dangerous position and that we can rush one of the players out to them if they're given the ball. De Bruyne got around that by playing in a cross first time.
That cross, if properly defended, should never, ever end up as a goal. If Sissoko tracks, stays goal side and doesn't allow the ball to get to anyone's feet, then even if a City player gets a head to it it's a 5-10% xG shot. Leaving Sterling completely free to pick his header out is just suicide.
Last edited:
Lemonade Money
Steffen Freund
Lol, are you going to dissect every Sissoko play, just to suit your agenda. You're starting to sound like you've lost the plot.
I've said it many times and I'll say it again - playing 4-2-3-1 against City's 4-1-4-1 (or 2-3-5, or whatever you want to call it) is fundamentally flawed, and whilst we can point fingers at individual players, City's system is specifically designed to overload teams offensively. And the way our team was set up, it seemed like we had no plan to deal with that at all.
E.g. if you go back a few seconds from the image above, the situation looks like this, with us seemingly having a clear defensive shape:
As they almost always do, City have five forwards lined up against our four defenders, with Gundogan and Sterling doubled up on KWP. (Silva is off-screen on the right wing.) Scara you're arguing that Sissoko should have been tracking back, but in this image he looks clearly in line with our other midfielders, which suggests that was the system / approach that Poch wanted to take. I think it might be fair to give him some criticism for not recognising the danger and sprinting back once the ball was moved forward, but I think Poch also needs to take the blame for setting us up in a way that requires that kind of last minute reactionary action. (Rather than doing what still seems to me like the obvious and only solution - having a third centre back to match up against their five forwards.)
E.g. if you go back a few seconds from the image above, the situation looks like this, with us seemingly having a clear defensive shape:
As they almost always do, City have five forwards lined up against our four defenders, with Gundogan and Sterling doubled up on KWP. (Silva is off-screen on the right wing.) Scara you're arguing that Sissoko should have been tracking back, but in this image he looks clearly in line with our other midfielders, which suggests that was the system / approach that Poch wanted to take. I think it might be fair to give him some criticism for not recognising the danger and sprinting back once the ball was moved forward, but I think Poch also needs to take the blame for setting us up in a way that requires that kind of last minute reactionary action. (Rather than doing what still seems to me like the obvious and only solution - having a third centre back to match up against their five forwards.)
Last edited:
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
If we play 3 CBs we cede possession in the middle and they can swarm us a different way, as happened in the other 2-2 draw in Pep's first season when we ended up with Wanyama at centre back. We started with a 3-4-3 and moved to 4-2-3-1 during the first half as City really were battering us.
In this game, I don't think the system was that bad. 30 shots but not a huge amount of clear cut chances, last ditch blocks or saves for Lloris to make. I think Sissoko should have realised that Gundogan had gambled forward and covered back as a result. Lamela had taken Zinchenko and KWP's zone was where they overloaded. It was really well executed by City but I think the way to stop that is to have supreme concentration in the key moments. It doesn't mean Sissoko or any of the other players aren't good, and they did well for a lot of the game defensively, but in that moment we were undone. Yes by great play, but undone none the less.
In this game, I don't think the system was that bad. 30 shots but not a huge amount of clear cut chances, last ditch blocks or saves for Lloris to make. I think Sissoko should have realised that Gundogan had gambled forward and covered back as a result. Lamela had taken Zinchenko and KWP's zone was where they overloaded. It was really well executed by City but I think the way to stop that is to have supreme concentration in the key moments. It doesn't mean Sissoko or any of the other players aren't good, and they did well for a lot of the game defensively, but in that moment we were undone. Yes by great play, but undone none the less.
XG was basically 3-0, so I think we can safely class it as a dominant win for Man C in terms of chances created.
I do take the point that playing 5 at the back risks ceding possession elsewhere, but personally I'd suggest playing 5-3-2 which I don't think would be ceding possession in the middle - it would be mostly to their full-backs, which IMO is the least of all the evils - certainly moreso than consistently being outnumbered defensively instead.
You say that Gundogan had 'gambled forward' but I think that's a mis-characterisation of City's system. It's inherent in their system that they constantly have five forwards. (In fairness Gundogan does spend more time deep when he's in this role than Silva, and did against us, but he still does and did spend a lot of his time as an inside forward.)
I also don't think their first goal was a 'key moment' that required particular concentration, as such - it was a very standard passage of play, with City in their shape and us in ours, and the ball at their centre-back's feet.
Last edited:
I don't think that not tracking runs into the box would be a part of anyone's defensive plan. I have no issue with Sissoko's position as the play starts, my problem is with the very basic analysis he failed to make and see the danger. From his position he can see who's marking whom, count them one for one and see realise that he's the man spare with a runner heading into the box.
I can forgive losing Sterling for a second and failing to catch up - he's a tricky little clam and has disappeared behind far better defenders than Sissoko. What I can't forgive is steadfastly holding a pointless shape in a pointless position when there is clear danger that needs to be dealt with.
Do you also apportion blame to Poch for the way he set the team up defensively? You make it sound as if Sissoko should be constantly tracking Sterling, which just seems very weird to me given that Sissoko was playing as a wide midfielder and Sterling as a wide forward. If you're going to ask Sissoko to regularly track Sterling, why not just play a defender to do that instead? Rather than needing a midfielder to constantly be sprinting back into the defensive line to do so?
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Luka Modric
Isnt that exactly the sort of think Sissoko is there for? His greatest strength according to many an advocate on here.
Lets be honest, he isnt there for his attacking game, is he?
Poch teams are fluid and dynamic, and players have responsibility - and freedom - to move as they see fit in the game to help support our defence or attack.
NOBODY in our side should be taking a stroll back through midfield and letting runners go. Something Sissoko is actually guilty of pretty often.
I dont know that the goal could have been stopped, but I do think Sissoko could have done more to try and prevent it. As could Eriksen who was half hearted through the whole game when it came to tracking and closing down etc.
Lets be honest, he isnt there for his attacking game, is he?
Poch teams are fluid and dynamic, and players have responsibility - and freedom - to move as they see fit in the game to help support our defence or attack.
NOBODY in our side should be taking a stroll back through midfield and letting runners go. Something Sissoko is actually guilty of pretty often.
I dont know that the goal could have been stopped, but I do think Sissoko could have done more to try and prevent it. As could Eriksen who was half hearted through the whole game when it came to tracking and closing down etc.
papaspur
Kasey Keller
Again, it's fine if you're pointing fingers at specific players, but why haven't I seen you in the Eriksen thread pointing fingers at him for losing his man (KdB)? He just let him have all the space to put a cross in.
Is that a reply to my post specifically? If so I feel like we're maybe talking at cross-purposes - I'm not defending Sissoko as much as I'm criticising Poch.
Though when you do mention Poch, you suggest that he gives players defensive freedom and personal responsibility, which seems like another way of saying that he doesn't drill them much on defensive shape! Or if you're suggesting he does drill them but with a defensive system (e.g. 4-4-1-1) that's inherently flexible, I'll repeat my point that I don't think that's a good system vs Emirates Marketing Project. Because to pick up on language that you and others keep using - 'letting runners go' - I just don't think that's accurate. We're not talking about players running past our midfielders and not being tracked, we're talking about players who are permanently stationed behind our midfield. I still don't think I've seen a single person acknowledge my point that City basically play with 5 forwards for much of the match!