Harry and tactics

[hal9thou]

Some time ago I posted up concerns about Harry's approach - his tendency to try and protect a slim lead or play too deep against obviously superior opposition. Spurs fans know all about this. (That was how Bradford got slaughtered at the week end - they didn't pressure the ball and the line was too deep. Obviouly it was going to be difficult but they got the tactics totally wrong).

We all know and have known for some time that the only thing that can possibly keep this club up is winning and doing so consistently. Draws wont really help us which is why we are 1/10 to go down. So how do you accomodate this given the players we have? It really worries me that Harry is looking to use Zamora as a hold up player. It's far too easy to defend against a single hold up merchant, and even that assumes a consistent Zamora. A hold up forward can also mean that there is too much space between your front man (or front two) and the midfield. Your front man can end up isolated. This strategy will not be enough.

I think the only way we are going to score regulalry - and we need to do just that because single points wll not be enough - is by playing a different type of attacking game, putting through balls into space behind defenders, making them turn and using Mackie and Remy to chase up. That means 4-3-3 (becomes 4-5-1 defending). We're far more likely to get midfielders arriving in the danger zone playing that way. We absolutely have to set up to win games from here on in, and that means much more attacking flexibility. Nothing less will do.

There is an element of risk with that set up: you are more vulnerable to counter attack but I just don't think there's a choice here. It worries me that Harry's idea of survival seems to be structured around a very conservative approach while there is still a theoretical chance of hanging on.

[Geng]

I would love us to play this way, but there are several issues:

- Derry can't play like this. This system would ask him to cover too much ground, and he isn't good enough on the ball. We can get away with Mbia in this sort of system, as he's excellent at pressuring the ball, but we'd really need a Faurlin/Granero alongside him, and I'm not sure Mbia/Granero is a solid enough CM.

- Hill can't play in a system that requires a high line. If we want to press higher up the pitch the defence needs to push up so that we don't have a massive gap between the CBs and the midfield. Pushing up means leaving a huge space behind Hill, which is obviously asking for trouble.

- This sort of system takes a lot of practice to get right, and relies far more on effective, well-drilled teamwork, than our current playing style. Right now we have almost zero attacking pattern play. When did we last score a really good team goal? Watch Swansea or West Brom, or even Southampton or Norwich for good examples of practiced attacking patterns. I fear that if we haven't worked out how to attack as a team by now, we are very unlikely to suddenly learn in the last 10 games of the season.

[zeberdee]

Goals from midfield are great - that explains the attempted January signings of Sissoko (3 goals in last 5 games) and Cole (2 goals and 2 assists in last 5 games).

But if any permutation of the current midfield is going to score lots of goals you have to ask why they have not done so after 27 games.

Fact is at present getting Remy + Zamora starting up front looks the best chance to score by miles.

[stanistheman]

I would rather play a 5-2-3 system like this:

Cesar
Mbia Samba Hill
Fabio Traore
Diakite Granero
Remy Zamora Townsend

Both Fabio and Traore have pace and can cover in defence when QPR don't have the ball, but can help out the midfield duo at other times.

Remy and Townsend can play close to Zamora so that he is not isolated and easily marked.

Even if QPR get beat at Southampton playing this way I think they should preserve with it, because as stated playing tight in the hope of stealing a win or two is no longer going to suffice. I think wins will come playing this way and it will certainly give defences something to worry about seeing Remy and Townsend using their pace to pull them this way and that.

Unfortunately since winning at Chelsea on 2nd Jan with such a mindset, Redknapp seems to have chosen to set QPR out to play a negative one up front with little support and often without even a single recognised striker in the starting line-up (even playing Campbell or Bothroyd would have been better than Taarabt or Mackie as stand-in strikers.

[hal9thou]

you have to ask why they have not done so after 27 games.

we know exactly why. Our first manager this term was utterly bereft tactically. And Harry understandably feels he doesn't have the players to use the more adventurous style he employed at Spurs. But anyone depending on a semi fit Zamora to survive in 2013 is out of their mind. He was always inconsistent, and now he isn't fit.

I would love us to play this way, but there are several issues:

agree this wont be easy but look at Wigan last term. This time a year ago they were almost as certain to be relegated as we are now. Martinez brilliantly turned it around by totally re-organising their shape. Some professionals can cope - it isn't like you're having to learn brain surgery by the end of term. Its football.

I would rather play a 5-2-3 system like this.

I get that. What I'm saying is, we go down for sure unless we start scoring and I just can't see a Zamora led 4/4/2 unlocking EPL defences.

Looking back at Geng's post we have to ask ourselves how we ever imagined we were going to be good enough with Clint and Derry in key posiions, however brilliant their commitment. Throw in the chaos cause by Hughes, and realistically we have to take the hit and start all over again.

Maybe the reason Harry's given up on the idea of a higher line is because he realises we'd taken apart on the counter. Against that we have Zamora and 4-4-2. Talk about the devil and the deep blue sea.......

[Geng]

agree this wont be easy but look at Wigan last term. This time a year ago they were almost as certain to be relegated as we are now. Martinez brilliantly turned it around by totally re-organising their shape. Some professionals can cope - it isn't like you're having to learn brain surgery by the end of term. Its football.

He reorganised their shape, but not their general style of play. He'd had Wigan playing quick passing football for ages by that point, and the players might have been limited but they all knew the system and how to fit into it. We can't change from our style of play to that overnight

I just can't see a Zamora led 4/4/2 unlocking EPL defences.

Yep. This is football from the 80s. Big man with little man running off him.

Virtually no one plays with two proper strikers in the Premier League these days. For a reason.

[hal9thou]

We just don't have a football culture at Rangers any more. We did have one, way way back when we were challenging for the title.

If we're relegated - when we're relegated - I think we have to start again. Forget quick fixes. Accept that this is a long term project and find a younger, more visionary manager in tune with the way the game has developed.

This wont happen because our owers will be desperate for some return and because Harry is rooted in a bygone age. If some of that transfer money and wages had gone into constructing a top notch youth development and scouting system, we'd have been better served.