Match Day Thread Everton v Norwich

"They know like I do that you need a solid defence to be stable so during the international break it was a big boost to see Ben and Christoph fully fit.
"This was more or less the first time we could play the lads in their best positions, people like Alex Tettey and Tom Trybull, who are important for our midfield balance. You sensed the lift it gave the rest of the lads.
"The mood was good before we even travelled."
https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/canaries-christoph-zimmermann-daniel-farke-talisman-1-6392133

 

My only question is what is a sentance? Is it a means of sending small insects by post?

 

I prefer to separate the tactical changes from the selection of individual players. For example, you highlight McLean v Stiepermann, but Stiepermann played against Man City and our counter-attacking in that match was arguably even more fluent and effective. Likewise, against Man City, McLean played in place of Trybull, Byram in place of Aarons (with Lewis at LB), and Amadou in place of Zimmermann. Byram was good on Saturday, but if Lewis had been fit, I don't think the performance would have differed significantly. Against Bournemouth, Leitner played in AM. Rather than who plays, what's critical is how they play, and that is down to DF rather than the players.
As I see it, DF is being forced, somewhat against his will, to scale down his desire to dominate games through possession. Against better quality opposition in the EPL, our ability to control games by that means is proving limited. Against Man City, DF accepted the fact and successfully focussed on exercising greater control when out of possession. Against Bournemouth and Everton, neither of whom have anything approaching Man City's quality with the ball, we did the same, enjoying less possession than the opposition and focussing on neutering their threat with the ball -- with two clean sheets to show for it.

 

I can see your point, Robbie, but Stieperman and McLean offer different attributes. Marco is good in the air and clever at movement and positioning. McLean plays the position differently and like Paddy Davitt I think it's his best position. He gets the ball forward quickly with accurate passing and is a more natural creative player, making up for the absence of Buendia, but he also drops back quickly if the ball is lost, allowing another midfielder to cover for Aarons or Byram when they are up the pitch. This is a key difference, as Stieperman tends to stay forward when the ball is lost. For me this is a tactical change as well as a personnel change, as asking Marco to play the way Kenny does would be harder to achieve.

We were noticeably better at not giving the ball away without Buendia, so that might be considered a tactical effect achieved through personnel changes but that's more difficult to quantify. There's less difference in the case of Lewis or Byram at LB, but IMO Byram is a better defender than Aarons. We need to see how these changes work in more than one game, however, which is why I'd like to see the same line-up. I also think that Byram has earned his chance and I'd hate to see him dropped the way he was after ManCity. I totally agree with you about DF toning down his desire for possession for a better tactical balance and I very much hope that continues.

 

Think you missed my sneaky editing!

 

I think you'd be hard pressed to back up some of that statistically Rick. For example, our pass success rate on Saturday was only 71%, against an average of 81% for the season as a whole with Buendia more or less a fixture. And McLean's success rate on Saturday was only 54%, which belies the claim that he gets the ball forward quickly "with accurate passing". In reality there's virtually no difference between Buendia and McLean as far as pass accuracy is concerned, and the average length of their passing is pretty much identical too. Yes, Buendia has lost form latterly, so deserved to be dropped, but he doesn't deserve to be tarred with a generalising brush on that basis.
Regarding "tactical shift" v "change of personnel", I see that differently too. For example, Stiepermann "tending to stay forward when the ball is lost" is a reflection of our "normal tactics", as is McLean dropping back quickly when we lose possession; that's what you would expect of McLean when partnering Tettey or Trybull. On Saturday, when moved forward into AM, I noticed McLean well upfield. ahead even of Pukki at times when Everton regained the ball, exactly like Marco! So my take is that what players do largely reflects DF's tactical instructions for the game, given the position they are selected for, and if Marco drops back less than Kenny it's because he is selected at AM rather than DM.

 

Connor Southwell puts it like this:

"In deploying McLean as a number ten, goalkeeper Tim Krul was provided with an out ball that would help bypass City's pulse-racing passages of play out from the back. In the same way they broke Manchester City's press with incisive passes through the lines, they broke Everton's by attempting to play over their midfield. It was another way of asserting their philosophy that ensured they were beginning passages in their opponents' half."

This accounts for the lower pass success rate on the day, but as Connor suggests, it also meant that when the ball was lost, it was in their half, not ours. McLean scored 8.27 on WhoScored (second highest to Krul's 8.7) mainly for his through balls to attacking players, but also for the way he got back to help break up Everton attacks as an extra player in the low block defence, then providing a productive outlet when we won the ball back. As Connor says:

"McLean offers a dynamic alternative. He's someone who can burst beyond Pukki but, equally, can compete physically. Another component critical to the performance on Saturday was the double defensive screen City created through the two central defenders and midfielders, thus providing the full backs with a greater freedom down the flanks. In terms of the contribution from those out wide, this was as fluid a display as any witnessed this season."

DF found a way to keep that fluidity by the tweaks in midfield, thus shifting the attack/defence balance without blunting our attack. There was no need for either CBs or central midfielders to bomb forward this time as we got the ball to the attacking players quickly before their defence was set and it was McLean at the heart of that. The difference this time was that the defence wasn't left exposed by too many players going forward at the same time. We kept our shape and that made all the difference.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwi...ch-city-s-approach-at-goodison-park-1-6393794

 

But this just illustrates my point Rick. There was a tactical shift to playing over, rather than through, the opposition midfield. But that shift didn't at all depend on having McLean at 10. Exactly the same tactics could have been employed with Stiepermann at 10, and Marco's giving precisely that option has often been mentioned in the past. McLean's headed lay off to Pukki which led to the first goal could just as well have been a Stiepermann play!
The option for Krul to kick long has always been there, but has consistently been discouraged, with DF insisting on playing out from the back to maximise our chances of keeping possession.

 

Same applies here. The "double defensive screen" Connor refers to has always been an option, but one which DF has appeared reluctant to deploy except on occasions of special need, e.g. against a particular team like Man City, or when needing to halt a losing run, etc. We could have seen it in any of, or indeed all of, our matches this season, irrespective of starting eleven, had DF so chosen.

 

IMO, Stiepermann doesn't play as a conventional number 10, so needs the creativity of Buendia and/or Leitner. Neither of them was playing at Everton. Instead it was Trybull and Tettey to provide the 'double defensive screen' that worked so well, with Kenny providing the creativity ahead of them. Marco brings other qualities, but he needs other creative players around him. We did play over the midfield more, but we also worked the ball along the flanks and were far less predictable in our play. This is what I hope will be the case against Arsenal.

DF's view on McLean's performance:

"He was fantastic," admitted Farke. "It was the first time he played in that offensive attacking midfielder role and he produced an unbelievable workload. In terms of his tactical performance he always made the right decision, when to be like a second striker and get closer to Teemu, and when to drop in order to strengthen our centre a bit more. If you study the first goal, he linked the play with his head, which is different to playing with smaller, technical players in that part of the pitch. He can play different positions. When he is a bit deeper he can play those chipped passes or switches of play and the finishing passes. When he is closer to the goal he is a threat and wherever I need him he can do a job for me. Really flexible and it is good to have those options in the squad. If I am really honest I was tempted to bring him to this role earlier than we did but when you don't have solid defenders then he is the type of player you need in a deeper role."

https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/canaries-kenny-mclean-praise-daniel-farke-1-6394178

 

@RER
I've no quarrel with the praise being heaped on McLean; he deserves it, and earns it pretty much every time he plays, in whatever position he is asked to fill. Nor have I any quarrel with your saying that McLean and Stiepermann have different attributes. We have no clones in our squad. BUT, we've seen time and again that DF is generally happy to slot different players into midfield positions, irrespective of their individual differences, the one unalterable (except in a limited number of special situations) being adherence to his preferred style of play. What is notable about the Everton game, therefore, is actually not who played in what position, however well they performed, but that the "unalterable" was finally altered, not because of some overriding quality in the opposition (as was the case against Man City), but because the hitherto "unalterable" has proved beyond the capabilities of our current squad when it comes to delivering results consistently at this level.

 

I only watched the highlights of the Everton game, but my observation was that on a lot of the chances Byram was playing very tucked in and not pressing the wingers which allowed several dangerous crosses.

I've seen a lot of comments that he had a really good game, so did I miss a lot of his good work or am I being unfair or was it how he was instructed to play? Completely understand him not being comfortable on the left positionally if I am right, and I was surprised that it wasn't Aarons that was moved out there and Byram put in at RB.

 

The highlights were not a true reflection of his play overall, but there were times when our right flank was open to attack. Hard to know what the intention was.

 

Well, Byram was primarily up against Walcott, who is most dangerous when allowed to cut in and attack the penalty area directly; so staying tucked in makes sense. Also, Walcott is actually a relatively poor crosser of the ball (a constant source of frustration for Arsenal fans throughout the years he was a Gunner). Sidibi, the RB, made several good runs up the touchline, but his crossing was poor. Seamus Coleman proved much more dangerous than either Walcott or Sidibi when he came on with 20 or so minutes to go. Had he and Iwobi been on from the start, I think our defence would have been more thoroughly tested.

 

Thanks for your replies Robbie and RER I suspected that the highlights, by definition had just picked up the couple of occasions that he might have been out of position.

I wasn't picking on him, because I actually really rate what I have seen of him so far, he looks great defensively, I was just unsure whether he should keep the LB berth in favour of conventional LB Lewis. I think he is currently pushing to start ahead of Aarons on the right hand side.

 

To add to that, I am pretty sure Byram is a right footer. In the left back position, that means there tends to be a preference to stay tighter to the centre-back, because your weaker foot would be needed if the attacker cut back inside, whereas you are more likely to back yourself to accelerate deeper left if the attacker tries to go round you on the outside.