|
and he still has issues deploying a starting 11, as well as implementing a sound formation. It doesn’t matter who is on the pitch, be it new signings, veterans, or
an understaffed team, Frank lacks definitive actions. These issues carry over from last season, where he constantly changed lineups and formations.
We had no business losing yesterday’s match, because Mourinho wasn’t even focused
on the match because of fixture congestion. He pieced a starting 11 together, and implemented a ultra conservative tactic. He had his team sit back to conserve energy,
and not let the score get out of hand , and if the game was in reach in the final minutes, they were instructed to go for it. And his team did just that.
Frank , due to inexperience and stubbornness, did not realize what mourinho was doing, which is why he was unable to match the adjustments that Mourinho made in the second half. He got out-coached and out-mastered.
Frank had no business starting Timo as a winger, when Alonso can easily be deployed at that position, considering he has played fullback, wingback and winger throughout his career. And since his ability is more offensive than defensive, his creativity, crossing and dribbling could have been used to help break down spurs’ defense. That would have allowed Timo to play as the striker, instead of Giroud, who was too static. But he wants to continue to implement Alonso as a FB when he does select him ( Conte played Alonso as a wingback only). This is the shit that Frank does not see. Learn how to use the personnel that you have for situational moments, instead of trying to fit a square peg into a round circle.
Frank Lampard simply lacks tactical football science, and mostly importantly, he doesn’t have a main system or philosophy to generate his strategies. Every great coach has this, regardless of what formation they use or the kind of players they have.
Mourinho usually plays a 4-5-1 ( or 4-2-3-1) as a coach. That’s his main CAREER formation. However, his football philosophy is to always control the tempo of the match, no matter if the team is ahead or behind. By controlling the tempo, if the team is ahead, it can easily secure the victory. If it is behind, it is not behind by too much, and can go after the win. It’s not sexy. It’s usually low scoring football, but it works.
He implemented a 3-5-2 against Frank, but still using his main philosophy. And his formation was played out of that....Frank even got into a squabble with Jose, where Jose had to tell him : " The only thing that I was telling him was an opinion of an old coach to a young, talented coach which was when the players need us, is when we are losing. When they are winning, we don't need to be the protagonists of the touchline.
"Last match, when they were losing 3-0, I felt sorry for him because he was really, really sad and quiet in his chair. In terms of football, I have nothing to teach him, he knows football up and down. He is a fantastic coach. It was just an opinion: Stay on the touchline when your team is losing and stay calm when your team is winning."
I have seen many formations from Frank, and I have seen many different players and lineups that he has implemented. But I have yet to see a main principle or philosophy
behind any of those implementations. All I see is just a lot of players running around kicking a ball with few victories to show for it.
|
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Okay Sports
