Tony Mowbray Discussion

[rigger]

1 hour ago, Spartakfenni said:

if Mowbray is following Klopp’s philosophy then why haven’t we got a fucking throw in coach. Yesterday’s performance for the throwins was an absolute disgrace.

 

It is not just the first team that are poor at throw ins. The U23s and 18s suffer from the same problem. To me it seems to stem from the fact that players seem obsessed with stealing a couple of yards up the line, instead of getting the ball back in play before the opposition is set up.

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 hour ago, toogs said:

That doesn’t change the point he’s making

What point? Because we use personality related tests we should also have a throw in coach?  Bit of a leap 

[JHRover]

Lets just see how it goes. No need for talk about contracts yet unless that is for players who will have substantial value for the club to protect.

I'm amazed at how well we are doing and long may it continue. Particularly satisfying for me are the controlled 1-0 wins against tough sides in tough conditions like we have had the last 2 weeks. Of course a large part of that has to be credited to the manager. Irrespective of results he isn't leaving any time soon so lets just enjoy it whilst it lasts.

I am sure that at least 2 of the play-off teams this season are going to come from a group including ourselves and other names such as Millwall, Middlesbrough, QPR, Coventry, Luton and Forest. We simply have to be confident of finishing above those sort of sides given the way we have performed and points we have at this stage.

I'm not one for considering the play-offs as the Holy Grail and the answer to all our problems. If we were to get in there, which is a long way away, that doesn't mean that we are promoted and doesn't address the issues that we have in the summer with the squad. 

We will soon be arriving at Mowbray's annual point of collapse so the big test won't be Bournemouth next week but will be Barnsley, Huddersfield at home and Hull away. What an opportunity there.

Edited December 5, 2021 by JHRover

[Sparks Rover]

1 hour ago, rigger said:

It is not just the first team that are poor at throw ins. The U23s and 18s suffer from the same problem. To me it seems to stem from the fact that players seem obsessed with stealing a couple of yards up the line, instead of getting the ball back in play before the opposition is set up.

If you actually look at the stats across football it's shocking how many turn possession over from their own throws....its about 70+%...starts with the kids and the basics.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

11 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

If you actually look at the stats across football it's shocking how many turn possession over from their own throws....its about 70+%...starts with the kids and the basics.

If you think about it the team defending the throw in has a man over. If they mark up properly they should make it almost impossible for the team taking the throw to retain possession.

[Armchair supporter supremo]

3 hours ago, Spartakfenni said:

if Mowbray is following Klopp’s philosophy then why haven’t we got a fucking throw in coach. Yesterday’s performance for the throwins was an absolute disgrace.

 

Set pieces in general have been absolutely pathetic right throughout mowbrays time here

[Spartakfenni]

3 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

What point? Because we use personality related tests we should also have a throw in coach?  Bit of a leap 

The point is if we are adopting “modern” techniques then why haven’t we adopted Klopps throwin coach? Liverpool probably have the best conversation rate. Looks to me like inadequate research by Mowbray. He’s gone with the emperors new clothes.

[rigger]

5 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

If you think about it the team defending the throw in has a man over. If they mark up properly they should make it almost impossible for the team taking the throw to retain possession.

It's simple really, you take the throw quickly before the opposition can mark-up. Most teams have a player whose job is to mark the thrower, so that negates the extra man.

[Bigdoggsteel]

41 minutes ago, rigger said:

It's simple really, you take the throw quickly before the opposition can mark-up. Most teams have a player whose job is to mark the thrower, so that negates the extra man.

It's not always possible to take it quickly enough though? So it's not really that simple 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

59 minutes ago, rigger said:

It's simple really, you take the throw quickly before the opposition can mark-up. Most teams have a player whose job is to mark the thrower, so that negates the extra man.

That’s news to me. 

[rigger]

11 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

It's not always possible to take it quickly enough though? So it's not really that simple 

I suggest you watch The Big Match revisted on Saturday mornings, You will see every team takes throw-ins very quickly and usually they keep possession. It really is that simple.

[Bigdoggsteel]

It's funny cos I've watched QPR v Stoke and now I'm watching Villa v Leicester and I don't see any particular throw in nous 

[rigger]

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

It's funny cos I've watched QPR v Stoke and now I'm watching Villa v Leicester and I don't see any particular throw in nous 

Exactly, that is what this discussion started as. The fact that teams at the moment don't know how to keep possession from throw-ins. Years ago it was not a problem.

[JacknOry]

Weird, throw-ins seem to be the topic on the PNE forums too. How they just take throw-ins purely to get throwi-ns further up the pitch, so their top scorer can launch them into the box - of which has returned just a single goal in the campaign so far. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

12 minutes ago, rigger said:

Exactly, that is what this discussion started as. The fact that teams at the moment don't know how to keep possession from throw-ins. Years ago it was not a problem.

But you said one one post ago every team takes them quickly and retains possession? 

Players are just so fit and alert and it's not always possibly to get it thrown in that quickly. It's usually a short one and back to the thrower. The only truly effective tactic I've ever seen with throw ins was Rory Delap at Stoke! 

[rigger]

24 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

But you said one one post ago every team takes them quickly and retains possession? 

Players are just so fit and alert and it's not always possibly to get it thrown in that quickly. It's usually a short one and back to the thrower. The only truly effective tactic I've ever seen with throw ins was Rory Delap at Stoke! 

The post that you are quoting, was were I said teams on the programme "Big Match Revisited" take their throw-ins quickly and usually retain possession. That is games from the 70's and 80's, not nowadays teams.

[Ulrich]

Did I just read football players are So fit? They run 90 mins 2 times a week, that's not fit at all, as they struggle with it. Many other sports do much more than that, in fact I know recreational IE public people who are fitter than that.  Football fitness is all about recovery, which just means they are not fit enough for purpose. Players like CR7 put them all to shame as he follows a strict fitness and nutrition routine and he's still running around at almost 40.

And yes we should be looking to take every advantage we can and working on throw ins and other set pieces would create an advantage for us.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

15 hours ago, rigger said:

The post that you are quoting, was were I said teams on the programme "Big Match Revisited" take their throw-ins quickly and usually retain possession. That is games from the 70's and 80's, not nowadays teams.

Back then throw ins were normally taken from where the ball went out. It takes time to shuffle 10 yards up the touch line like they do today.

[BigUts]

2 hours ago, Ulrich said:

Did I just read football players are So fit? They run 90 mins 2 times a week, that's not fit at all, as they struggle with it. Many other sports do much more than that, in fact I know recreational IE public people who are fitter than that.  Football fitness is all about recovery, which just means they are not fit enough for purpose. Players like CR7 put them all to shame as he follows a strict fitness and nutrition routine and he's still running around at almost 40.

And yes we should be looking to take every advantage we can and working on throw ins and other set pieces would create an advantage for us.

Bit of an over simplification. I often run 30k a week, which is about twice what a professional footballer what get through over 2 games. I've also had the privilege of playing against a Southport FC 1st XI in a charity game, and although they were (and are) semi-pro I couldn't get anywhere near them. So much so their keeper played up front for giggles and he burnt past our 2 centre halves with ease.

Fitness isn't all about how far and for how long you can run, it's about what types of running you do. 90 minutes of shuttle running and short bursts would mean you have to be incredibly fit.

[rigger]

2 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Back then throw ins were normally taken from where the ball went out. It takes time to shuffle 10 yards up the touch line like they do today.

Which is exactly the point I first made. One of the main reasons for losing possession at throw ins, is allowing the opposition time to mark up, by stealing yards down the line instead of getting the ball back into play as quickly as you can. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

2 hours ago, Ulrich said:

Did I just read football players are So fit? They run 90 mins 2 times a week, that's not fit at all, as they struggle with it. Many other sports do much more than that, in fact I know recreational IE public people who are fitter than that.  Football fitness is all about recovery, which just means they are not fit enough for purpose. Players like CR7 put them all to shame as he follows a strict fitness and nutrition routine and he's still running around at almost 40.

And yes we should be looking to take every advantage we can and working on throw ins and other set pieces would create an advantage for us.

Total over simplification. They could cover 10km, or more, then you have the combatitive side of it, scrapping to try and win the ball, collisions, aerial duels, needing to be fit enough so as your concentration is there to make the right decisions. The Championship isn't Sunday league. I would be interested to see the people you you know who you claim are fitter play in a game up againt Lenihan, Travis or Rothwell , they would get their arses handed to them. 

Edited December 6, 2021 by Bigdoggsteel

[Spartakfenni]

3 hours ago, BigUts said:

Bit of an over simplification. I often run 30k a week, which is about twice what a professional footballer what get through over 2 games. I've also had the privilege of playing against a Southport FC 1st XI in a charity game, and although they were (and are) semi-pro I couldn't get anywhere near them. So much so their keeper played up front for giggles and he burnt past our 2 centre halves with ease.

Fitness isn't all about how far and for how long you can run, it's about what types of running you do. 90 minutes of shuttle running and short bursts would mean you have to be incredibly fit.

I agree and what is missing is that they cover more yards a day in training Monday to Thursday. Their fitness program is based on peaking once/twice a week. Most modern day footballers do follow similar routines to CR7. There’s not many Paul Mersons in the game today even at league 2.

[Ulrich]

3 hours ago, BigUts said:

Bit of an over simplification. I often run 30k a week, which is about twice what a professional footballer what get through over 2 games. I've also had the privilege of playing against a Southport FC 1st XI in a charity game, and although they were (and are) semi-pro I couldn't get anywhere near them. So much so their keeper played up front for giggles and he burnt past our 2 centre halves with ease.

Fitness isn't all about how far and for how long you can run, it's about what types of running you do. 90 minutes of shuttle running and short bursts would mean you have to be incredibly fit.

The specificity of fitness is something I more than understand and comparing steady state exercise such as running to variable state exercise, as you have said is not accurate.  Tennis is a nice comparable sport, it is more intense than football, contains many more high intensity actions and also strength activities such as changes of direction etc.  These guys and girls face a much more arduous schedule than football players and deal with higher loads too, in both matches, frequency of said events and spend considerably less time walking, the most common activity of any football player. Football fitness is a paradox and myth, they spend the season 'recovering' then take 2 months off and consequently fitness declines, then they spend 6-8 weeks getting back to where they were. So they never really get fitter, they just stay at the same level. I’ve played football at a goodish level and also know that people of lesser experience, like yourself in this charity match will always come off second best. This is not down to fitness, nor me belittling your efforts but experience and skill through playing means you will always be a step ahead of less experienced players. I played up front and once played against an ex wales international called Jason Reece. He was very unfit, his warm up included cigarettes, as did his half time activities, but not one of us got anywhere near him as he was always 2 steps ahead mentally.  Other sports and even some football players take their physical preparation extremely seriously, training loads in excess of matches, like tennis etc, football in general does not train in this periodised manner, hence they are always recovering and not truly uber fit as some would think. The statement I made about always being in recovery within sport is very logical and correct, it may not be what people want to hear but it is accurate.

[Ulrich]

23 minutes ago, Spartakfenni said:

I agree and what is missing is that they cover more yards a day in training Monday to Thursday. Their fitness program is based on peaking once/twice a week. Most modern day footballers do follow similar routines to CR7. There’s not many Paul Mersons in the game today even at league 2.

That's not true, if they did they'd all still be running round like school kids ala CR7. Most training sessions within football are low intensity overall and if you know and understand periodisation then that is very wrong, in fact it is the polar opposite of how it should be.
Check out his info on here:

https://manofmany.com/lifestyle/fitness/cristiano-ronaldos-football-diet-workout-plan

He trains 3-4 times a day and also does his club training. He eats religiously and basically eats the same foods everyday. How many football players look like he does, he is ripped, trains above match level and treats his body like a temple. If all our players did this, then we'd be top 2 easy and playing teams off the park, but none of them do look like him, do they.

[Ulrich]

3 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Total over simplification. They could cover 10km, or more, then you have the combatitive side of it, scrapping to try and win the ball, collisions, aerial duels, needing to be fit enough so as your concentration is there to make the right decisions. The Championship isn't Sunday league. I would be interested to see the people you you know who you claim are fitter play in a game up againt Lenihan, Travis or Rothwell , they would get their arses handed to them. 

I do not need to to name people, but you carry on baiting Bigdog 👍 I guess you didn't like my post from the other day 😂😂😂 CR7 is a true professional, most players are not, fact and if you don't like it, do some reading etc and find out for yourself 📖📖 some personal growth is good for the soul 🙏

Just look at Buckley, he has needed better physicality for years, years WTF with a serious training schedule that should be sorted in months, but it isn't and still isn't. Give it some logical thought before you reply, fitness does not take that long to improve, not does strength......