Possession Vs Territory

[bytholwyn]

It's still early days, but I'm intrigued to know what the Sheehan philosophy is. The early signs are that he's happy to trade possession for territory.

I don't have the figures, but it's obvious that our possession figures have dropped, from 60 per cent under Williams to close to 50 per cent under Sheehan. The interesting thing to note is that in at least a couple of our wins, over Blackburn and QPR, we've had less than 50 per cent possession (46 and 45 per cent respectively), but have completed more passes in the opposition half than our opponents have had in ours. So, perhaps this is a sign of things to come, where Sheehan wants as much of the play as possible to occur in the opposition half. This tallies with how we press, mainly in the opposition half, but with more of a mid than a high press. Win the ball back high up the pitch and play your football from there seems to be the thinking.

Even though I generally prefer Swansea to dominate possession I don't mind Sheehan's approach, assuming I've understood it correctly. In fact, if we're to go down this road, then we should double down by acquiring a 9 in the Bony mould, or somehow get a tune from Kuka. At the moment there's no point banging it down the middle with Cullen as a 9, and Vipotnik hasn't fared much better. Although to be fair to Sheehan I get the impression that more of Vipotnik's long balls have been going wide of late to Ronald, who's pretty good in the air.

It will be interesting to see how things pan out. My biggest concern is that we go too far in the direction of going direct and we become as predictable in banging it long from Vigouroux as we were in always looking to play out from the back under Martin. Keeping the opposition guessing is a good thing in my book.

 

[Ringwood]

We don't have the creativity to open teams up especially when we pass it around the back at will going nowhere fast.

Much prefer Sheehan's quick outlet balls into space and bringing Eom and Ronald in the game more

The better sides are now using the longer ball to go back to front

 

[Andrew - North Hill]

To play intricate possession football, you need the players for it. Like Man City. Or, on a lesser scale but still valid, our 2011 team.

Our problem the last four years is we've been trying to recreate that style but we simply haven't had the personnel.

Martin and Williams's biggest failing was persevering with it despite clear evidence it wasn't going to work.

Sheehan seems to be a bit more realistic in how he sets us up to get more out of our limited resources.

I'd love us to play more expansively at some point, but for now I'm happy to see us walk before we try to run. It's hardly Pulisball. Let's get behind him.

 

[swansvalleyjack]

Whatever the statistics are, my eyes just tell me that it's more direct and entertaining than the Martin and Williams bore-fests. Thank god !!

 

[Dr. Winston]

There's definitely been a bit of a tactical shift away from the possession domination school as well as some coaches with limited resources try to find answers to Pepball.

It'd be nice to be early adopters of that.

 

[bytholwyn]

It's going to take a while but we need to see Sheehan's Swans for what they are, not for what they're not. Martin, Duff and Williams are gone, so let's focus on what Sheehan is bringing to the table, good and bad.

For what it's worth I think Sheehan has done a fantastic job with our defense, with much improved individual (Eom, Tymon and Darling especially), and collective performances. In attack, it's very much a case of work in progress, but there's much to like in the way we transition quickly and release Eom and Ronald at the earliest opportunity.

 

[bakajack]

To play intricate possession football, you need the players for it. Like Man City. Or, on a lesser scale but still valid, our 2011 team.

Our problem the last four years is we've been trying to recreate that style but we simply haven't had the personnel.

Martin and Williams's biggest failing was persevering with it despite clear evidence it wasn't going to work.

Sheehan seems to be a bit more realistic in how he sets us up to get more out of our limited resources.

I'd love us to play more expansively at some point, but for now I'm happy to see us walk before we try to run. It's hardly Pulisball. Let's get behind him.

The personnel to play that style properly are indeed difficult to find, but the bigger challenge is that many teams have tried to copy Pepball and as a result of that many teams have had experience playing against it. During our rise and ultimately our promotion in 2011 many teams simply did not have the experience to know how to play against that possession based style.

 

[Molbys_pie]

Pace and aggression are important factors to our play that were totally missing under Williams, I'm seeing more of that with Sheehan so far.

 

[FearOfAJackPlanet]

Vigs is certainly clearing it long more than he used to - but not all the time. Given some of the calamity moments we've had from some short-balls out, I can see why we're erring on the side of caution there. Try and eliminate those cheap goals completely, then work back from there.

I think it's fair to say we don't really care about possession anymore, just playing with more energy and purpose when we do get the ball, and we're looking to win the ball back as high up the pitch as possible. Franco is such a key player in that style as he is so good at stealing the ball from opponents and making them make mistakes by being such a nuisance.

The biggest visual difference is that under Williams the focus of our game was in our own half - that was our safe space. Under Sheehan, the opposition half is where we want to hang out, that's our safe space. We've tried to shift 30 odd yards up the pitch and play with higher energy. I think we still play it mostly on the floor when attacking. There might be stats to prove that statement wrong, but I don't get the impression we're playing hoofball at all.

 

[Jackareme]

I think Wyn nails it - the biggest shift is about the areas where Sheehan tries to play. We are much quicker back to front, and probably the most aggressive team in the league at pressing high.
When you get the ball forward quicker there are often opportunities as the opposition are not set - however, there are also risks in more ambitious passes getting picked off.
What is really needed are players with the ability to pick a pass to open up the opposition and create goal scoring opportunities. A quick audit shows the following:
Two above average fullbacks (in an attacking sense) players with creativity (Eom and occasionally Cullen), and players whose contribution is (lets be generous) variable - Ronald, Vipotnik, Bianchini, Cullen (up top).
If we add Widdell, get some consistency out of Ronald and see either a striker who fits the bill recruited, or big steps forward from others, then we have cause for optimism.
If we can cash out on any/all of Yates Kuharevych Vipotnik Bianchini Cullen Fulton Darling - then we might have the limited funds required to recruit some difference makers.
I have not abandoned hope for younger players who are acclimatizing (Kuha Vip Bianchini) - but Cullen and Yates are 26 and 28 respectively and have zero pace or physicality, and also score at a 1 in 4 rate (if you are lucky). A goal once a month is not enough to see us progress.
We also have to guard against stepping backwards through the loss of the likes of Darling and especially O'Brien. Our youngsters need to fill out 6-8 places in our 26 man squad to free up the funds to retain/recruit real difference makers.
The appointment of Sheehan is a no brainer given his extended audition - but I have a couple of concerns (that I hope don't emerge).
1. Is he an innovative coach to find attacking threats when the opposition learn how to nullify plan A?
2. Is his ultra high pressing approach sustainable over a long season with a small squad?
Time will tell - but as I said, I am feeling cautiously optimistic.

 

[Itchysphincter]

Not as straightforward as one or the other. It’s obvious that he wants to play higher up the pitch but possession percentages generally drop like a stone in the last third of the match when if we’re winning or digging in he concedes more of the ball. Our possession stats earlier in games are generally high, sometimes higher that the likes of RM and the van driver.

 

[Ringwood]

Saturdays game as a lot to celebrate..

 

[FearOfAJackPlanet]

He made a decent point in his interview - one that us fans have wearily come to accept for a long time - that it's easy to fall into the false mindset that just because you have a lot of the ball that you are in control of the game. Poor guy looked like he was suffering PTSD from being on the sideline under WIlliams and seeing it. Quite remarkable how quickly that mindset went away.

 

[bytholwyn]

Vigs is certainly clearing it long more than he used to - but not all the time. Given some of the calamity moments we've had from some short-balls out, I can see why we're erring on the side of caution there. Try and eliminate those cheap goals completely, then work back from there.

I think it's fair to say we don't really care about possession anymore, just playing with more energy and purpose when we do get the ball, and we're looking to win the ball back as high up the pitch as possible. Franco is such a key player in that style as he is so good at stealing the ball from opponents and making them make mistakes by being such a nuisance.

The biggest visual difference is that under Williams the focus of our game was in our own half - that was our safe space. Under Sheehan, the opposition half is where we want to hang out, that's our safe space. We've tried to shift 30 odd yards up the pitch and play with higher energy. I think we still play it mostly on the floor when attacking. There might be stats to prove that statement wrong, but I don't get the impression we're playing hoofball at all.

I agree entirely, and it would be over simplistic to say we're playing hoof ball. But Vigouroux launches the ball a bit too often for my liking, roughly 3 balls are hit long for every shorter pass. The vast majority of his shorter passes are completed compared to around 25-30 per cent of the long ones.

There are have definitely been occasions when Vigouroux could have rolled the ball out to a DM in space but chose to hang in to the ball before launching it, thereby allowing the opposition to get back into defensive shape. The long ball isn't always the best option for a quick counterattack. But modifying our approach is a question of fine tuning rather than drastic surgery.

 

[Dr. Winston]

He made a decent point in his interview - one that us fans have wearily come to accept for a long time - that it's easy to fall into the false mindset that just because you have a lot of the ball that you are in control of the game.

I haven't watched the interview yet but that quote is massively encouraging on two counts. Firstly because Sheehan said it, and secondly because the club appointed him knowing full well that's what he thinks.

That's a significant shift in emphasis at club management level.