Main Discussion - Norwich City

Topic has 34 replies.
Print Search Sort Posts:

Please help with some ideas

I just keep pondering the thinking behind why Farke chose to replace Timm Klose with Ben Godfrey on Sunday. I know it’s a bit random and a bit late after the game but I just wondered what people’s thoughts were.

I can’t seem to see what his thought process for choosing Godfrey over Zimmermann would have been, especially keeping in mind we already had two youngsters in the back line. I’m not saying it was an incorrect decision, just wondering what people’s thoughts were on why he went for Godfrey and not Zimmermann.
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

Apparently Klose had suffered concussion with the 1p5wich man who was carried off - so injury 

   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

Didn't he play better than Zim in the cup games.

   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

My guess is future planning and that Godfrey is to be Klose's replacement. Possibly in January. If Hanley had been injured Zimmermann would may have been the call.
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

Farke's comments earlier in the week saying that he thought Godfrey would make a top class centre back were widely publicised. Given this is what Farke thinks it's hardly surprising that he brought him on at Ipswich.
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

The time and space in the modern game is in the centre back area (and increasingly with the goalkeepers).

It is essential to have calm ball players in this area to make an integrated passing system work or it fails before it begins.

Good passing midfielders otherwise receive receive the ball a half second too late / at the wrong pace / slightly into the wrong place / without thought as to the next pass. An average watcher might not even note that the pass is actually poor or poorer than it needed to be (straight to feet can be a poor ball for example).

Klose is a fine ball-playing centre back. Hanley isn’t. As a pair they can be seen as Championship complementary. Zimmerman plus Hanley is not as effective for ball retention or constructive ‘vertical’ balls into midfield, indeed they might not even be tried.

Godfrey can play these balls and also has a very bright, sharp, flat, early diagonal which none of the others possess to the same level.

It is not about the best eleven players, or even who is the best defender, it is about who fits the system better to allow the system to function at its optimum and allow the eleven players combined to achieve more than would otherwise be the case.

Parma
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

Exactly Parma the Modern CB one has to be like a CB / Midfielder mix like a John Stones
Able to be a CB when defending but with the ball pass like a midfielder
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

As well as the ball playing angle I retain doubts over Zims effectiveness in a pair; his star games for us are in a back 3 and usually against better quality teams who are less reliant on the big ball forward.


Given kloses better early season form and godfreys ball playing skills perhaps Klose Godfrey is the CB pairing we should be using going forward.
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

<BLOCKQUOTE><table width="85%"><tr><td class="txt4"><img src="/forums/pinkun-forums/cs/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif">&nbsp;<strong>Parma Ham's gone mouldy wrote:</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="quoteTable"><table width="100%"><tr><td width="100%" valign="top" class="txt4">The time and space in the modern game is in the centre back area (and increasingly with the goalkeepers).

It is essential to have calm ball players in this area to make an integrated passing system work or it fails before it begins.

Good passing midfielders otherwise receive receive the ball a half second too late / at the wrong pace / slightly into the wrong place / without thought as to the next pass. An average watcher might not even note that the pass is actually poor or poorer than it needed to be (straight to feet can be a poor ball for example).

Klose is a fine ball-playing centre back. Hanley isn’t. As a pair they can be seen as Championship complementary. Zimmerman plus Hanley is not as effective for ball retention or constructive ‘vertical’ balls into midfield, indeed they might not even be tried.

Godfrey can play these balls and also has a very bright, sharp, flat, early diagonal which none of the others possess to the same level.

It is not about the best eleven players, or even who is the best defender, it is about who fits the system better to allow the system to function at its optimum and allow the eleven players combined to achieve more than would otherwise be the case.

Parma

Parma, I always find your posts interesting and thought provoking. Thanks

Given the above, in your view do you think that we should really be using Godfrey as a single pivot in a deep lying defensive midfield position?

Tettey doesn’t have the passing range and leitner coming so deep doesn’t quite work, surely Godfrey is the answer and then we can have two other midfielders going forward who can compete I.e leitner and trybull or mcclean?
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

Big O,

Passing centre backs with vision, stature and a technical ability to play a pass half a second later than most - and who can defend Championship balls and who are English - are rare.

Godfrey has the attributes and potential to be a top level centre back - which is the way Farke wants ours to play anyway (quite correctly in my view) - so the issue we face is how to get him into that role when Klose is a fine example and Hanley considered something of a Championship necessity.

It is actually quite a conundrums for Farke and Webber. Holding Godfrey back goes aginst the development ethos, whilst there isn’t an obvious 1st Xi spot for him.

Klose’s contract probably provides the solution.

Parma
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

It is my view that we don’t possess a true CDM and so use Leitner as regista sometimes, Tettey as a tactically poorly-disciplined version (though a decent terrier 8), Trybull as something of all of the above and the shadow of Maddison looming large over all, as he was so good it didn’t really matter where he played, he made it work.That the others can’t do this is no shame on them. If you are simply much better, then it is sometimes the case that tactics are not as fundamental, anything can be made to work. Conversely when you are closely matched or inferior tactics become fundamental to level the playing field. Fans never like to think of their team or players as inferior which is where the schism between professional or dispassionate observer and fan occurs.

As a consequence of the above CDM at Norwich is a somewhat exposed tactical role in our current set up and a strategic weakness. To put our (very young), potentially high quality modern centre back into this scenario - regardless of the fact he had a specific breeding period here at a lower level - would be to risk corrupting some very fine ingredients.

Farke is correctly protecting Godfrey from it.

Parma


   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

Names and positions were drawn out a hat ?
   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

Big O,

Having thought about it, it may be that Godfrey’s development and potential encourage a welcome reversion to 3-5-2.

Whilst paper formations can be misleading, it is notable that our full backs look well suited to the wing back role, our defence looks more solid and our midfield - without a true single pivot CDM - benefits structurally from two (relative) holding or deeper-lying players (including at least one of Tettey or Trybull or similar).

Inferior sides - or sides playing at the top level or when playing sophisticated tactical sides - look vulnerable with two strikers or/and high and mostly non-defending wider players.

In our case playing Leitner plus Hernandez plus Pukki plus Rhodes plus a.n.other (that isn’t Tettey or Trybull) in a 4-1-4-1 simply leaves us exposed, whilst not quite having enough tactically-sharp ball retainers with sound Technical ability.

We look sound until we try to attack, whereupon our lack of real weapons leaves us looking a little toothless, whilst (connectedly) not particularly solid either. Tettey chasing the ball anywhere away from the pocket in front of the two centre backs scares me every time. He shouldn’t do it and no-ones in any case covers him. Ironically when Trybull plays the role he ‘stays’ much better, but then others around him don’t press the areas he (correctly) refuses to run into.

Simply throwing Godfrey into that does not solve the structural issue in any case, however good he may be.

Parma


   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

'Tettey chasing the ball anywhere away from the pocket in front of the two centre backs scares me every time.'

Especially when he shoots

and what about those two defenders Klose and Hanley, what were they doing in the last few minutes against the binners at CR (apart from scoring) ?

also how far 'out of his pocket' was Maddison when he hit that pass towards Hanley ?

or Klose with that cross to Lewis in the Chelsea box to score another late equaliser ?

maybe Farke could discreetly mark out the players various pockets/areas so they don't stray out of them

a sort of zonal playing, if you like

   Report  

Re: Please help with some ideas

Big O,

One small further factory that might be considered is that it is undoubtedly to the benefit of the new development philosophy to ensure that promising young players do come to the attention of the wider football world.

There is a delicate balance to be struck between protecting young players in a sporting sense ( is possible example above) and ensuring that any value in the young talent we have is realised to the full.

That these two things may be conflicting, and indeed that the second might on occasion be PR over-stated for commercial gain, are issues inherent.

Parma
   Report