Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: [NT] India
good morning :o
pink.. aye ;)
the Indian keeper made some good saves.
I liked Bodgers long shot on half time. How far out was he?
pink.. aye ;)
the Indian keeper made some good saves.
I liked Bodgers long shot on half time. How far out was he?
No 0-7, so I'm not disappointed.
India's midfielders really underperformed, lots of times they weren't able to tackle your midfielders (2 with order ATT ?) and were running too long with the ball; I should have played two strikers instead.
Can't look into your squad, but I don't believe a 4-2-4 system will bring lots of success in the matches against the other 'big dogs". With a good passing game you would have torn India apart (I was really afraid for double digits...), luckily I only saw long range shots.
But said again, you may not have wing-midfielders in the team.
India's midfielders really underperformed, lots of times they weren't able to tackle your midfielders (2 with order ATT ?) and were running too long with the ball; I should have played two strikers instead.
Can't look into your squad, but I don't believe a 4-2-4 system will bring lots of success in the matches against the other 'big dogs". With a good passing game you would have torn India apart (I was really afraid for double digits...), luckily I only saw long range shots.
But said again, you may not have wing-midfielders in the team.
Disagree with a few points. :)
What makes the "system" is where the players play, not the orders they have. This was not a 4-2-4. Orders are used to influence the player's decisions.
By my count, 15 of the 29 shots were inside the 18 yard box. I don't consider these "long range". Strangely, the NZ strikers were 1 for 15 from this range (3 for 14 from outside the 18). Very odd.
The India keeper made 9 saves (nicely done!) and another 5 by the woodwork (6 if you count Bodger's double-poster twice). The team will need to finish better (which is just luck - the shooting rating is great) if it is to compete with Canada & Croatia.
@ Al Thore - would estimate Bodger's goal at 23-25 yards. A very nice strike. :)
What makes the "system" is where the players play, not the orders they have. This was not a 4-2-4. Orders are used to influence the player's decisions.
By my count, 15 of the 29 shots were inside the 18 yard box. I don't consider these "long range". Strangely, the NZ strikers were 1 for 15 from this range (3 for 14 from outside the 18). Very odd.
The India keeper made 9 saves (nicely done!) and another 5 by the woodwork (6 if you count Bodger's double-poster twice). The team will need to finish better (which is just luck - the shooting rating is great) if it is to compete with Canada & Croatia.
@ Al Thore - would estimate Bodger's goal at 23-25 yards. A very nice strike. :)
I found that both Roza and Bodger liked to hit the crossbar from close range, quite annoying.
Good to see that two of the 11 wise men had a hand in 3/4 goals ;)
Good tactic i thought Seca, too bad the shots weren't converted by the strikers :( Only problem i had was the throw in where the distance to throw was short from gilbert to edwards, i dunno if Gilbert was meant to run a lot further forward and was interrupted or not..?
Good to see that two of the 11 wise men had a hand in 3/4 goals ;)
Good tactic i thought Seca, too bad the shots weren't converted by the strikers :( Only problem i had was the throw in where the distance to throw was short from gilbert to edwards, i dunno if Gilbert was meant to run a lot further forward and was interrupted or not..?
Your number 8 Gilbert played as a right midfield-winger with order ATT.
The first 65 minutes he delivered 1 adequate cross, all the other times he tried some harmless long-range shots or ran with the ball till he was tackled or blocked. With an order MID he (or a real mid) could have delivered at least 7 crosses.
As soon as you changed the position 8 and 10, number 10 (who had an order MID) delivered a pinpoint cross for the 0-3.
The left midfielder (nr. 10), especially in the first half, was more dangerous than the attacker on the right.
Imo , 2 real wing-midfielders would have worked better for you. It's not all about the position you play them....
(edited)
The first 65 minutes he delivered 1 adequate cross, all the other times he tried some harmless long-range shots or ran with the ball till he was tackled or blocked. With an order MID he (or a real mid) could have delivered at least 7 crosses.
As soon as you changed the position 8 and 10, number 10 (who had an order MID) delivered a pinpoint cross for the 0-3.
The left midfielder (nr. 10), especially in the first half, was more dangerous than the attacker on the right.
Imo , 2 real wing-midfielders would have worked better for you. It's not all about the position you play them....
(edited)
The shooting rate seems to be a problem of the new ME, lots of complaints about that around world.
I would have set Gilbert as a midfielder and put Hird higher up.
Other than that, I loveeee this tactic.. It's very nice. You should use it more ;)
Other than that, I loveeee this tactic.. It's very nice. You should use it more ;)
Congratulations for the victory. It has been a pretty game.
I like talking tactics. Forgive the long response. :)
Your number 8 Gilbert played as a right midfield-winger with order ATT.
There were three reasons for this. The first is that he plays with an ATT order with his club, so to get the NT training bonus, he has to have the same order.
Second, I felt he could dribble through the India defense at will. IMO the ATT order made it more likely he would dribble deeper and establish the zone before making the pass.
Third, I have ample NT matches with him played in a similar position with the MID order. I was curious to see how the ATT order would affect his play.
He is a unique player. I've watched 7 of his club matches (along with copious NT matches) in the past two weeks to try and get a better sense of how to use him.
I wouldn't have a problem playing him as a MID, but thought this was a worthwhile experiment. I was actually quite happy with his play today.
The first 65 minutes he delivered 1 adequate cross,
Gilbert made passes from the right side in the following minutes:
2, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 19, 41, 47, 48, 50
Most all of which were good decisions, and his completion % was very high. The passes in 2, 47, 48 led directly to excellent scoring chances.
He didn't put alot of air under the ball, but I don't consider this a problem. Passes along the ground seem easier to complete in the modified ME. The winger (with the MID order) delivered most of his passes along the ground too.
all the other times he tried some harmless long-range shots
He took 3 shots (minutes 49, 59, 65). The first was from a great shooting position (inside the 18, unobstructed). The other two were wasted, but I've seen plenty of players with MID orders do the same thing in that part of the field.
or ran with the ball till he was tackled or blocked.
Blocked once. Tackled 4 times. 3 times the ball went out of play for a New Zealand throw-in, which usually led to a good scoring chance, as India's throw-in coverage was quite loose.
And again, lots of players with MID orders are tackled before they deliver the pass.
With an order MID he (or a real mid) could have delivered at least 7 crosses.
He only had 8 touches that didn't end in a pass. I think it is a big stretch to say 7 of those would have been crosses with a MID order.
As soon as you changed the position 8 and 10, number 10 (who had an order MID) delivered a pinpoint cross for the 0-3.
Yes, that was nice. And Gilbert, now on the left side, made a lovely head pass for the fourth goal. So I'm not sure I see your point. :)
The left midfielder (nr. 10), especially in the first half, was more dangerous than the attacker on the right.
IMO this had more to do with the tactical positioning then the order the player had. The left mid had more time and space because he was positioned higher (between the India midfield and defense).
Why not position both sides that high? It's tougher completing the pass from the defense to a winger (there were far more turn-overs trying to get the ball to #10 then there were to #8). Gilbert's dribbling is sufficiently good that he doesn't need the advantage of being positioned further upfield.
Of the 4 goals, 2 came from the right, 1 from the center and 1 from the left. Though the left side often looked dangerous, the right side was ultimately more effective.
Imo , 2 real wing-midfielders would have worked better for you. It's not all about the position you play them...
I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. Bench Gilbert? He is one of NZ's prime offensive assets. If the team is going to be successful against Canada & Croatia, he is likely to be part of it. As I said before, I thought he played pretty well.
In the end, NZ had 29 shots, 15 of which I considered quality scoring opportunities. The score could easily have been 8 or 9 to nil. I'm hopeful that the random number generator is saving up some love for the Canada & Croatia matches.
Your number 8 Gilbert played as a right midfield-winger with order ATT.
There were three reasons for this. The first is that he plays with an ATT order with his club, so to get the NT training bonus, he has to have the same order.
Second, I felt he could dribble through the India defense at will. IMO the ATT order made it more likely he would dribble deeper and establish the zone before making the pass.
Third, I have ample NT matches with him played in a similar position with the MID order. I was curious to see how the ATT order would affect his play.
He is a unique player. I've watched 7 of his club matches (along with copious NT matches) in the past two weeks to try and get a better sense of how to use him.
I wouldn't have a problem playing him as a MID, but thought this was a worthwhile experiment. I was actually quite happy with his play today.
The first 65 minutes he delivered 1 adequate cross,
Gilbert made passes from the right side in the following minutes:
2, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 19, 41, 47, 48, 50
Most all of which were good decisions, and his completion % was very high. The passes in 2, 47, 48 led directly to excellent scoring chances.
He didn't put alot of air under the ball, but I don't consider this a problem. Passes along the ground seem easier to complete in the modified ME. The winger (with the MID order) delivered most of his passes along the ground too.
all the other times he tried some harmless long-range shots
He took 3 shots (minutes 49, 59, 65). The first was from a great shooting position (inside the 18, unobstructed). The other two were wasted, but I've seen plenty of players with MID orders do the same thing in that part of the field.
or ran with the ball till he was tackled or blocked.
Blocked once. Tackled 4 times. 3 times the ball went out of play for a New Zealand throw-in, which usually led to a good scoring chance, as India's throw-in coverage was quite loose.
And again, lots of players with MID orders are tackled before they deliver the pass.
With an order MID he (or a real mid) could have delivered at least 7 crosses.
He only had 8 touches that didn't end in a pass. I think it is a big stretch to say 7 of those would have been crosses with a MID order.
As soon as you changed the position 8 and 10, number 10 (who had an order MID) delivered a pinpoint cross for the 0-3.
Yes, that was nice. And Gilbert, now on the left side, made a lovely head pass for the fourth goal. So I'm not sure I see your point. :)
The left midfielder (nr. 10), especially in the first half, was more dangerous than the attacker on the right.
IMO this had more to do with the tactical positioning then the order the player had. The left mid had more time and space because he was positioned higher (between the India midfield and defense).
Why not position both sides that high? It's tougher completing the pass from the defense to a winger (there were far more turn-overs trying to get the ball to #10 then there were to #8). Gilbert's dribbling is sufficiently good that he doesn't need the advantage of being positioned further upfield.
Of the 4 goals, 2 came from the right, 1 from the center and 1 from the left. Though the left side often looked dangerous, the right side was ultimately more effective.
Imo , 2 real wing-midfielders would have worked better for you. It's not all about the position you play them...
I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. Bench Gilbert? He is one of NZ's prime offensive assets. If the team is going to be successful against Canada & Croatia, he is likely to be part of it. As I said before, I thought he played pretty well.
In the end, NZ had 29 shots, 15 of which I considered quality scoring opportunities. The score could easily have been 8 or 9 to nil. I'm hopeful that the random number generator is saving up some love for the Canada & Croatia matches.
I agree with your assessment of Hird.
I played him deeper because of the quality of the opposition. I felt he could get the best of the India midfielders. Against a stronger team, I would play him further upfield.
@Barhilo - Gilbert was interupted on the throw-in you are referring to. He and Edwards are well spaced in the tactic.
I played him deeper because of the quality of the opposition. I felt he could get the best of the India midfielders. Against a stronger team, I would play him further upfield.
@Barhilo - Gilbert was interupted on the throw-in you are referring to. He and Edwards are well spaced in the tactic.
I felt Hird did pretty well at the start of the match. might have dropped off a little as it progressed, but having him a little more offensive would probably be better once he is in form.
The first is that he plays with an ATT order with his club, so to get the NT training bonus, he has to have the same order
I hope you know when you have 4 players with an ATT-order the whole team will lose the NT-training bonus ?
And Gilbert, now on the left side, made a lovely head pass for the fourth goal. So I'm not sure I see your point. :)
The smiley says it all, the head passes are also made by tragic passers...
I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. Bench Gilbert?
My whole argument is based on playing Gilbert as a MID on that position, I'm sure you'd figured that.
I hope you know when you have 4 players with an ATT-order the whole team will lose the NT-training bonus ?
And Gilbert, now on the left side, made a lovely head pass for the fourth goal. So I'm not sure I see your point. :)
The smiley says it all, the head passes are also made by tragic passers...
I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. Bench Gilbert?
My whole argument is based on playing Gilbert as a MID on that position, I'm sure you'd figured that.
I hope you know when you have 4 players with an ATT-order the whole team will lose the NT-training bonus ?
False. NTs don't get training, so can't play an illegal formation. I could play 10 ATTs, and they would all get the NT training bonus if played ATT with their club.
The smiley says it all, the head passes are also made by tragic passers...
Not sure how tragic passing has anything to do with this discussion. I thought you were arguing the ATT order.
My whole argument is based on playing Gilbert as a MID on that position, I'm sure you'd figured that.
I did. :) And I explained my reasoning for the positioning. I still maintain that Gilbert had a nice game. Robben and Chadwick on the other hand ...
False. NTs don't get training, so can't play an illegal formation. I could play 10 ATTs, and they would all get the NT training bonus if played ATT with their club.
The smiley says it all, the head passes are also made by tragic passers...
Not sure how tragic passing has anything to do with this discussion. I thought you were arguing the ATT order.
My whole argument is based on playing Gilbert as a MID on that position, I'm sure you'd figured that.
I did. :) And I explained my reasoning for the positioning. I still maintain that Gilbert had a nice game. Robben and Chadwick on the other hand ...
Bodger will be back earlier than expected!
This is brilliant news :D sitting at 8 days now, he will be at slight injury by next week's league and friendly (might make him play a few mins in both)
Also, any way we could convince Japan to use a 10-0-0 formation or something to the like to draw with the canucks, which would propel us into second?
This is brilliant news :D sitting at 8 days now, he will be at slight injury by next week's league and friendly (might make him play a few mins in both)
Also, any way we could convince Japan to use a 10-0-0 formation or something to the like to draw with the canucks, which would propel us into second?
Good to hear about Bodger. :)
I don't think there is much Japan can do to help. :P The Canadian manager has played a few weak line-ups, but the scare against Moldova likely put an end to that.
The goal now is to be one of the top 2 third place finishers - this would give the team 3rd place seeding in the WC. (Even if Canada were to drop points to Japan, New Zealand would be a low 2nd place finisher - quite possibly still a 3rd seed).
At the moment, New Zealand is behind Australia and Brasil on points, and Colombia on goal differential. Brasil has 2 difficult matches remaining, Colombia has 1. I'm optimistic we can claim one of those top two 3rd place spots.
I don't think there is much Japan can do to help. :P The Canadian manager has played a few weak line-ups, but the scare against Moldova likely put an end to that.
The goal now is to be one of the top 2 third place finishers - this would give the team 3rd place seeding in the WC. (Even if Canada were to drop points to Japan, New Zealand would be a low 2nd place finisher - quite possibly still a 3rd seed).
At the moment, New Zealand is behind Australia and Brasil on points, and Colombia on goal differential. Brasil has 2 difficult matches remaining, Colombia has 1. I'm optimistic we can claim one of those top two 3rd place spots.