The 2 goals we conceeded from free kicks on Saturday reminded me of something that really frustrates me - and that is not putting a man on the line for free kicks. Curbishley employed this tactic and over many years I can only remember conceeding directly from a free kick once- a perfect Henry blaster at home to Arsenal. There may have been one or two other occasions but it is cklear that conceeding was extremely rare and remember, Curbishley's games were against superior opposition whoi you would expect to have better free kick takers. So I wonder given just pure statistics, why Chrissy doesn't remove the keeper's preference option and impose this mathamatically proved tactic. I know statistics don't mean much in everything but this is one area where the evidence is so compelling it is foolish to ignore it.
0
Comments
Big mistake and a decision that needs reviewing.
Regarding corner kicks, this is from the secret footballer column in the Guardian:
"Anyone can navigate a giant iPad, sliding faces of famous players around with their pinkie while throwing out phrases like "Third man run" and other such rubbish. What particularly riles me is when you hear a pundit or co-commentator say something like, "I can't understand, Martin, why Drogba is not on the post here. That header would have fallen to him and if I'm Petr Cech I'm saying: 'Go on son, clear that off the line for me!'"
The fact is corners are routinely cleared by a man stationed on the six-yard line, exactly where Chelsea position Didier Drogba. If somebody scores inside that post it is for no other reason than a player having lost his man. That is the mistake. If there is a player on the post he will clear one, possibly two shots off the line a season. If that same player stands on the six-yard line he will probably clear 100 corners away over the course of the season.
The worst thing, though, is when this dross gets into popular culture and my friends start saying stupid things to me like, "We should have a man on the post, our manager doesn't know what he's doing", just because it sounds like the right thing to say. It's such an easy way of analysing that it infuriates me. It's lazy and it takes you, the viewer, for a fool. But, then again, Sky is an expert in creating a villain."
This gives the opposition fewer targets to aim for in the box, and with less of a crowd makes it far easier for the keeper to come and claim.
In this scenario the attacking team will likely only have 4 players in the box and 1 on the edge. The defending team will have 6 defenders in the box (so 2 spare, 1 for the post and 1 for the edge of the 6 yard box) and 1 defending on the edge.
It also means that when the ball is cleared there is more chance of it finding one of their own players, thus making it less likely it's going to come straight back.
Not only are opponents queued up in and around your box, within shooting distance - but you've no outlet of your own to relieve pressure and counter attack. Even a long hoofed clearance upfield is just a gift to the oppo, as they come straight back at you.
The second, I think Taylor is at fault, unless he didn't see it
Nor me. Invites pressure on any cleared ball and makes it very difficult for defenders to stay with their attacker due to the shear number of bodies in the box. Goalkeeper is stifled in coming for the ball. At least two upfield for me.
was he lying on the floor injured (smoking a cigar)