Why are we making too many mistakes at the back?

[HollandGooner]

Defensivly our players are very good if you talk about invidual quality but as a unit, we always seem to lack something wich a defence need, we havent a poor defence Sagna is a starter for France so is Gallas and Clichy well he might be not a starter but sure there arent many better leftbacks then him. there is nothing wrong with our defenders but their is something wrong with the organisation at the back, and it isnt only the defence, but there is a very important factor ""The first defence are our attackers"". we need to defend as a unit and not like a one men team.

 

[Gunner_JT]

You may or may have not heard the old saying "defense wins championships". It's a massive cliche used in other sports like NBA, NFL etc, but it's the absolute truth.

No offence to you, but I hate that saying.
It's not absolute truth, it's one of the worst cliches that exists.
I do understand what you are saying though.
Winning the game is what wins the Super Bowl at the end of the day.

The club who gets the most points wins the league (other than the extremely rare occasion that it would be even at the end of the season and it goes to goal difference). At the end of the day it doesn't matter if you win each match 5-4 as long as you are getting the points and at the end of the season you have the most. Obviously that is unrealistic to say, but would be very true if it were to happen. Almost like the idea that you HAVE to beat the other Big 4 clubs to win it, makes no sense in fact, as long as you have more points at the end of the season you are the champions. Obviously in reality though getting the wins against the clubs you are competing with is helpful, and we all know about 6ptrs.

Obviously we all want a strong defence, I understand the premise of the cliche, and I also understand the unrealistic notion of winning 5-4 every game. We do need to improve our defending imo, as others have said looking at the records for this league, being strong at the back often leads to success. You cannot think that you must score 5 goals every match to win, you have to be able to win some of those 1 goal games.

Others have already made good points about our problems at the back- Almunia, the fullbacks, the midfield, defending as a team, formation problems, coaching, etc. probably some truth in all of them.

Hey i forgot, to mention i actually hate it too. But you cannot deny it is the most important trait of any championship winning team in professional sports. Team's that emphasize beautiful, free-flowing style-over-substance don't get much success in sports these days, specifically us.

You look at Manure and they had something like a 13 game streak without conceding last season. That was a turning point for them after a relatively slow start. Imagine how much confidence we could get out of that we if happen to do it.

I'm not saying we need to change our whole mentality as a club who prides itself on playing football the right way, the beautiful way, but we really need to completely overhaul the defensive facets of our game. I don't agree that our formation/style of play allows us not to be strong defensively. I don't want to compare us to Barcelona, but on surface we play a very similar style.
The key difference is that they have an organised defense, they press and apply pressure all over the field and rarely every over-commit.

If we value defense as important as attack, we can be a complete team like i said before.

 

[Mbaki Mutahaba]

If you are trying to say our academy emphasis on technique is predisposed to midfielders rather than defenders then that's a problem with criteria rather then capability. The academy should be about producing players with technical ability full stop. It is then up to the coaches to coach them in regards to positional requirements & roles in which to utilise those skills. Our attacking style is also not an excuse in regards to poor defending patterns or lack of coaching. IMO it's akin to the same laziness in application we often accuse players of.

As a counter point to your post I give you THE most successful nation in the history of the game - Brazil. They play attacking football with high levels of flair & technique across the park, with many of the same 'issues' we see in individual defenders. Yet their appreciation & application of their defensive duties is applied with more discipline than us.

I remember an article a few years ago talking about junior coaching & technique, where players such as Ronbinho & Juninho said that they didn't play with a full sized ball or pitch until the age of 14. They also said that this was the age they started looking at tactics, player positions and roles based upon their skills & attributes = skills & technique first, then decide who plays what role & position.

First dont use us a basis of comparison for good defensive teams. Brazil has never been good defensively and still are not and they have missed out on several "more" world cup title because of exactly that. And the few times a coach has come and tried to make drastic changes there hs been a backlash because the flair went with it. Because the team selected was completely different. Just imagine a team with a striker, Kaka and Robinho in the lineup. That is 3 players already out with regards to defensive duties. The only reprieve is they are so deadly going forward few teams even risk having a go at them. But its still the offensive threat that is carrying the team.

And that is where the whole 'notion' of you only win with strong defense goes up in smoke. The most successful teams/clubs in this world relied heavily on their attacking power then defensive system. They never had the best defense. Just look around and it will be very obvious.


Football hasnt changed much. You can count the very few players who are technically gifted (going forward) with the right defensive attributes. Its crucial having a "balance" but its even more crucial being extremely good on one aspect (offense/defense). So far if we are to go with history(facts) those leaning more on offense were more successful.

 

[Anzac]

First dont use us a basis of comparison for good defensive teams. Brazil has never been good defensively and still are not and they have missed out on several "more" world cup title because of exactly that. And the few times a coach has come and tried to make drastic changes there hs been a backlash because the flair went with it. Because the team selected was completely different. Just imagine a team with a striker, Kaka and Robinho in the lineup. That is 3 players already out with regards to defensive duties. The only reprieve is they are so deadly going forward few teams even risk having a go at them. But its still the offensive threat that is carrying the team.

And that is where the whole 'notion' of you only win with strong defense goes up in smoke. The most successful teams/clubs in this world relied heavily on their attacking power then defensive system. They never had the best defense. Just look around and it will be very obvious.


Football hasnt changed much. You can count the very few players who are technically gifted (going forward) with the right defensive attributes. Its crucial having a "balance" but its even more crucial being extremely good on one aspect (offense/defense). So far if we are to go with history(facts) those leaning more on offense were more successful.

Sorry I don't follow your 1st line - I must have had too much to drink.
I was trying to follow your earlier post re our academy & thought you were saying that we produce technical players who are attacking by definition. My point re Brazil is that they produce technical players & then worry about positions & roles, but that they apply themselves better to defending than we do, despite having some of the same sort of individual player weaknesses in various roles.

I agree that Brazil rely moreso upon their attacking prowess as the basis for their success, but also that Italy as the 2nd most successful nation are renowned for their defence, as are the Italian clubs that dominated European competition to form the backbone of the Euro Elite. Even AW's early success was built upon a strong defence. Either way you need to get the fundamentals in place regarding your 'weakness', and the best possible exponents to play to your 'strengths' - we are doing neither at this point.

All I'm saying is bottom line the academy should not be determining what position or roles the players are built towards, unless these are the only players we are providing them. The academy should be producing players of a certain technical quality.