You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Why the counter attack didn't function
February 6 2023 7.28am

Why the counter attack didn't function

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 1 of 2 1 2 > Last >>

 

View mattteo's Profile mattteo Flag 25 Feb 17 7.31pm Send a Private Message to mattteo Add mattteo as a friend

in the 2nd half?

First half was good in terms of pressing and possession. But counter attack didn't work and it's strange for a team consisting of Zaha, Townsend, van Aanholt etc.

Any idea why? What do you guys think? Should the counter attack phase be exercised more in training?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Username's Profile Username Flag Horsham 25 Feb 17 7.36pm Send a Private Message to Username Add Username as a friend

Originally posted by mattteo

in the 2nd half?

First half was good in terms of pressing and possession. But counter attack didn't work and it's strange for a team consisting of Zaha, Townsend, van Aanholt etc.

Any idea why? What do you guys think? Should the counter attack phase be exercised more in training?


Depends what you mean 'didn't work'?

We didn't score, but we created chances.

Benteke had two good efforts, Townsend had two good efforts (one he should have squared for Benteke), Zaha had a decent shot from and a 1-2 with Benteke that didn't come off. He also played in McArthur just after he'd come on. Puncheon put PVA in behind nicely.

We lost a bit of shape when Punch and Jimmy/Yohan dropped too deep but I thought we still looked dangerous when Andros/Wilf/Benteke had the ball.

 


Employee of the month is a good example of how someone can be both a winner and a loser at the same time.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View FairweatherEagle's Profile FairweatherEagle Flag London 25 Feb 17 7.38pm Send a Private Message to FairweatherEagle Add FairweatherEagle as a friend

We had a few good counter attacks in the second half, but it looked to me like we kept giving the ball away cheaply as we were nervous. That resulted in a lot of potential counter attacks being snuffed out.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, we need to get more confident on the ball, though we didn't do to badly in the first half. I think that will help more than specifically practising counter attacks.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Palaceoaks's Profile Palaceoaks Flag Croydon 25 Feb 17 7.38pm Send a Private Message to Palaceoaks Add Palaceoaks as a friend

I think you should get a life and be happy with a win!!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View coulsdoneagle's Profile coulsdoneagle Flag London 25 Feb 17 7.39pm Send a Private Message to coulsdoneagle Add coulsdoneagle as a friend

Seemed to work pretty well, we did win.

I can think of instances like the the 2 on 2 with Benteke that Andros should have done better with.

I think the team as a whole dropped deeper after we scored and fought well for the 1-0 we didn't need to expose ourselves so didn't commit to the counter too much.

I think we can expect to see more of that with BFS, when we score we will drop deep and cling on for the lead.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mad4palace's Profile Mad4palace Flag 25 Feb 17 8.21pm Send a Private Message to Mad4palace Add Mad4palace as a friend

Zaha is better on the counter when played on the right, he seems to run into traffic when trying to break on the left and doesn't seem to take the ball into his feet correctly on the left. Bolasie was much better playing on his 'unnatural' side especially on the counter. It's annoying having one of Townsend or Zaha on their less favoured side. I thought we should have brought. I would have brought Zaha off for Schlupp if Van Aanholt had not gone down with cramp.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View spartakev2's Profile spartakev2 Flag Anerley 25 Feb 17 8.30pm Send a Private Message to spartakev2 Add spartakev2 as a friend

Difficult to counter attack when boro never really pushed many players forward, even when they were one down. They are really in danger of getting relegated unless they get a bit more adventurous.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
miss smith Flag london 25 Feb 17 8.38pm

we could have scored at least 3 goals in the 2nd half, i thought we had more chances in the 2nd half than in the first half

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Booted Eagle's Profile Booted Eagle Flag Bristol 25 Feb 17 8.48pm Send a Private Message to Booted Eagle Add Booted Eagle as a friend

I think we ran out of puff in the 2nd half and just could not keep up the intensity of the first half. This allowed Boro to start seeing our goal and gaining in confidence.

 


“ [T]here are known knowns; there are things we know that we know.There are known unknowns; that is to say there are things that, we now know we don't know.But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don't know. ”
—United States Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View HeathMan's Profile HeathMan Flag Purley 25 Feb 17 8.49pm Send a Private Message to HeathMan Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add HeathMan as a friend

I think the team as a whole dropped deeper after we scored and fought well for the 1-0 we didn't need to expose ourselves so didn't commit to the counter too much.

I think we can expect to see more of that with BFS, when we score we will drop deep and cling on for the lead.

Clinging on for the lead has been one of the past problems - those around me were delighted with the goal, and concerned whenever our team fell back to leave 3/4 of the pitch to allow shots at our goal. COYP

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View essetwentyone's Profile essetwentyone Flag london 27 Feb 17 12.07am Send a Private Message to essetwentyone Add essetwentyone as a friend

Originally posted by mattteo

in the 2nd half?

First half was good in terms of pressing and possession. But counter attack didn't work and it's strange for a team consisting of Zaha, Townsend, van Aanholt etc.

Any idea why? What do you guys think? Should the counter attack phase be exercised more in training?

Stupid question.
Who said we were playing counter attack ?
First half Boro just defended and we attacked until we scored. In the 2nd half Boro attacked more but their quality was poor - we defended and they couldn't break us down.We should have had 2 pens but the job was done.
Next week at West Brom we will probably play counter attack and no doubt they will practice that this week. If it doesn't work then your question will be valid but not now.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View james03's Profile james03 Flag Bangkok 27 Feb 17 1.02am Send a Private Message to james03 Add james03 as a friend

Boro showed no real intent in the first half. Sam was determined that we kept what we had so we sat deeper.

They do not have any real pace in the side to get in behind us but there was no point going all Pardew when we were 1-0 up.

I thought we were always well in control of the situation.

 


The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made. Groucho Marx

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 1 of 2 1 2 > Last >>

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Why the counter attack didn't function