Super Frank Thread

[bigbluewillie 1,805]

6 minutes ago, 11Drogba said:

For a second I was like, are we in 1st of April or March?

OH yeah you're right mate of course i forgot that, nice one Henrique

Thought at first it was a wind up, now i'm sure it is.

[Tomo 21,681]

3 hours ago, bigbluewillie said:

Am i really reading this from Henrique?

And oh what about having a Chelsea player as your fav

I imagine it was a copy and paste from Reddit.

[Tomo 21,681]

3 hours ago, Jason said:

I get that every manager wants to be their own man but given that Lampard played under some of the most successful, experienced, pragmatic managers in history, it seems bizarre that he doesn't have that bit of pragmatism in him. 

Could be that's why he decided to become a different type of manager.

Maybe he didn't particularly like playing in that style despite winning a lot doing it and decided early on he's going down a different path as a manager. 

[Jase 43,479]

53 minutes ago, Tomo said:

Could be that's why he decided to become a different type of manager.

Maybe he didn't particularly like playing in that style despite winning a lot doing it and decided early on he's going down a different path as a manager. 

Did you actually read the whole post or just decided to quote certain part and take it out of context? 🙄

4 hours ago, Jason said:

I get that every manager wants to be their own man but given that Lampard played under some of the most successful, experienced, pragmatic managers in history, it seems bizarre that he doesn't have that bit of pragmatism in him. There is no need to be playing all out attacking football, 200 miles per hour football for 90 minutes, not when the team is already vulnerable defensively. You need to know when to slow the game down and control things, even just for a few minutes and when to go for it.

 

[Tomo 21,681]

16 minutes ago, Jason said:

Did you actually read the whole post or just decided to quote certain part and take it out of context? 🙄

 

I wasn't actually saying it was right or wrong, just saying it maybe was why he's turned more into a Pep breed of manager (in terms of preferred style of play) than a Jose.

[Jase 43,479]

Just now, Tomo said:

I wasn't actually saying it was right or wrong, just saying it maybe was why he's turned more into a Pep breed of manager (in terms of preferred style of play) than a Jose.

But that's not even the point I was making! 

[OneMoSalah 8,611]

17 hours ago, Jason said:

Yes, I remember but Sarri did take it to the extreme with the sterile possession. Things only got interesting at times in the second half of the season when Loftus-Cheek and CHO provided some directness into the team. Otherwise, it was just endless passing without any attacking intent whatsoever. 

Again though, if you see how Napoli were with him, they didnt click properly until his 2nd season there but I suppose that doesnt matter either.

Having Ruben and Callum made a difference (I think you said something along the lines of him using them saved his job at the time) but its not as if they were the only reason the team played better (or why he kept his job) Jorginho and Kante finally looked much better in the team after the winter. We were more used to his style and I think bar in the final third where the movement and speed of play struggled due to various reasons (lack of willingness to run in behind, runs from MF etc) it would of gotten better, its not as if Pep, Klopp, even Jose in his 2nd spell here got the team to play exactly as they wanted. Throw Pulisic, Tomori and James in and around the squad as well who has been a huge plus this season at times, I dont think we would of done any worse this year round. 

Its not as if sterile possesion isnt what we have seen a lot of times this season either.... I mean since the first half of the season (similarly to under Sarri) have we really created that many chances in many games weve dropped points? I wouldnt neccessarily agree. 

The quality in the squad hasnt helped Conte, Sarri or even Frank but he has made bigger mistakes particularly excluding players he could have utilized more (even more baffling with the transfer ban I doubt anyone has ever been so naive in a similar situation) and his set ups tactically. I still get the feeling he has no idea of his best CB pairing, CMs or his best shape be in 4231 or 3 at the back. At least with the others they throughly knew what their preferred system and teams would be most weeks.

 

[Jase 43,479]

19 minutes ago, OneMoSalah said:

Having Ruben and Callum made a difference (I think you said something along the lines of him using them saved his job at the time) but its not as if they were the only reason the team played better (or why he kept his job) Jorginho and Kante finally looked much better in the team after the winter. We were more used to his style and I think bar in the final third where the movement and speed of play struggled due to various reasons (lack of willingness to run in behind, runs from MF etc) it would of gotten better, its not as if Pep, Klopp, even Jose in his 2nd spell here got the team to play exactly as they wanted. Throw Pulisic, Tomori and James in and around the squad as well who has been a huge plus this season at times, I dont think we would of done any worse this year round. 

Not sure if using 2 players to justify Sarri's style was working is a good justification. Lampard hasn't deviated much from Sarri's style and yet Jorginho has only a handful of good performances while Kante has blown hot and cold in this B2B role. 

As for the young players, there was no telling who Sarri would have preferred. He might have taken to James, Tomori, Mount, Abraham or he might not have at all.

30 minutes ago, OneMoSalah said:

Its not as if sterile possesion isnt what we have seen a lot of times this season either.... I mean since the first half of the season (similarly to under Sarri) have we really created that many chances in many games weve dropped points? I wouldnt neccessarily agree. 

We have less sterile possession than last season but the main problem is, our attacking play has become predictable of late. Think we're still in the Top 2 or 3 in terms of shots/shots on target but attacking approach is basically just give the ball to James to cross into the box and hope someone puts the chance away. Hardly seen any of the intricate passing play that we saw earlier this season.

34 minutes ago, OneMoSalah said:

The quality in the squad hasnt helped Conte, Sarri or even Frank but he has made bigger mistakes particularly excluding players he could have utilized more (even more baffling with the transfer ban I doubt anyone has ever been so naive in a similar situation) and his set ups tactically. I still get the feeling he has no idea of his best CB pairing, CMs or his best shape be in 4231 or 3 at the back. At least with the others they throughly knew what their preferred system and teams would be most weeks.

That and the team just don't look well coached either. Remember how certain players came out and complained about Conte's or Sarri's boring, repetitive training drills and compared them to Lampard's supposedly more fun training? The fun training sessions are sure working wonders right now...

[ZaynChelsea 423]

Yeah Frank surely needs more time to make us win against a shower of shit like Bournemouth. Sack him.

[Laylabelle 9,292]

There doesnt seem to be a game plan except hope for the best and concede from corners. We dont look solid at the back or going forward. Everything is so mish mash

[DDA 9,570]

Big improvements needed but I honestly think that will come with better players coming in. I got your back Frank. 

[Atomiswave 6,072]

1 hour ago, DDA said:

Big improvements needed but I honestly think that will come with better players coming in. I got your back Frank. 

I hear you but better players will only give you so much. Tactics, gameplan, shape and attitude comes from the manager and he has failed so far on that imo. You cant expect miracles really, he is indeed a rookie.

A rookie that has played under awesome managers yet has taken none of their acumen on board it looks.

[bigbluewillie 1,805]

Whooooa hold on let's see how he performs when he gets the chance to bring in his own players.

And not judge him on solely on the players he has at his disposal, i think any manager would struggle with most of them.

I think Tactics, gameplan,shape, and attitude, comes from having round pegs in round holes, and not the mish mash he has at present.

In Lamps I trust, and I think if we are fortunate enough to finish 4th then I think he will have done well.

KTBFFH

[Tomo 21,681]

1 hour ago, Atomiswave said:

I hear you but better players will only give you so much. Tactics, gameplan, shape and attitude comes from the manager and he has failed so far on that imo. You cant expect miracles really, he is indeed a rookie.

A rookie that has played under awesome managers yet has taken none of their acumen on board it looks.

Just over a week ago we saw positives signs of a decent end product. I rewatched the Spurs game on Saturday morning and some of the one touch combination play (especially between Kova, Jorginho, Mason and Oli) was excellent.

While I do agree they're aspects he needs to vastly improve on to ultimately make it here there is a plan and when it comes off it looks excellent.

He's shown enough over the course of the season to get an opportunity with better players (plus the young boys a year older and more hardened). But I won't disagree there has to be a vast improvement on the good:bad ratio and strong evolvement in his management else he will be facing the sack and deservedly so.

[Atomiswave 6,072]

20 minutes ago, bigbluewillie said:

Whooooa hold on let's see how he performs when he gets the chance to bring in his own players.

And not judge him on solely on the players he has at his disposal, i think any manager would struggle with most of them.

I think Tactics, gameplan,shape, and attitude, comes from having round pegs in round holes, and not the mish mash he has at present.

In Lamps I trust, and I think if we are fortunate enough to finish 4th then I think he will have done well.

KTBFFH

Sorry but I take an average side with a WC manager than the other way round. Attitude etc I mentioned comes from the manager. THis squad can be more solid, more resolute but we aint. We can rectify many mistakes but we dont, what the hell do they do in practice? Still if we get top4 ( fat chance ) then im all in for him having another go IF his ass is backed.

[Tomo 21,681]

55 minutes ago, Atomiswave said:

Sorry but I take an average side with a WC manager than the other way round. 

I wouldn't, even the very best managers can only take limited teams so far as we know all to well, however the other way round - Avram Grant got dragged to a title race and two finals, Scolari won a world cup, Pellegrini won the league and Valverde won back to back titles.

[Jase 43,479]

Chelsea have problems at both ends of pitch and three at the back is not helping

https://theathletic.com/1644608/2020/03/01/chelsea-frank-lampard-bournemouth-formation/?source=shared-article

Chelsea have reached the end of February without Frank Lampard knowing his best tactical system, never mind his best team.

He has oscillated between 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 and 3-4-2-1 throughout a rollercoaster season and sometimes switched formations during games. All of it has been motivated by the search for the thing that all successful coaches and teams strive for: balance.

Of the three systems, 3-4-2-1 has been his safety net whenever real adversity has struck. Shifting to three at the back secured a 5-2 away win over Wolves in September, as well as a Premier League double over Tottenham that dramatically altered the landscape of the race for fourth place.

“When they have a run of bad results, they go to five (three centre-backs with wing-backs). When they have a run of bad results, they go to (Marcos) Alonso and that’s what they did when they played against Lille and against us in the first match (Chelsea’s 2-1 win at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium in December),” Jose Mourinho said pointedly after Tottenham lost at Stamford Bridge last weekend.

“That’s what, of course, I knew they were going to do again. It’s obvious. When they’re in a run of good results, they go to different players.”

But this week has underlined that 3-4-2-1 is not the all-encompassing solution for Lampard that it was for Antonio Conte in the autumn of 2016. Bayern Munich overran Chelsea’s midfield and destroyed their defence at Stamford Bridge on Tuesday, while only the preternatural goalscoring ability of Marcos Alonso spared Lampard another embarrassing defeat away at Bournemouth on Saturday.

Both teams hurt Chelsea in different ways. Bayern limited them to 36.7 per cent possession — a season low — and targeted the right side of their defence, with the rampant combination of Alphonso Davies and Serge Gnabry overwhelming Reece James and Cesar Azpilicueta. Bournemouth blitzed them with high pressing at the start of each half, capitalised on a long-standing Chelsea weakness defending set pieces, and exploited the space behind Alonso with Jack Stacey.

At the other end, Bayern defended with a high line, pinning Chelsea into their own half whenever possible. On the few occasions that Mason Mount managed to break their offside trap, the recovery speed of Davies and David Alaba quickly erased the opportunity. Bournemouth instead set up in a low block, encouraging Lampard’s team to pass sideways and funnelling them wide; Chelsea attempted a season-high 807 passes at the Vitality Stadium and delivered 30 crosses from open play.

No two football matches play out the same way but a broader analysis of Chelsea’s performances this season generates two firm conclusions: 3-4-2-1 has not afforded them the defensive solidity that Lampard hoped it would and it has further impeded their stuttering attack.

“It is a system which has worked well for us quite a few times this season,” Lampard said of 3-4-2-1 after the Bournemouth game. “We have Olivier Giroud up front and it allows people to get inside, nearer him. Second balls and link-ups. It gives us stability — you hope — with the three centre-backs and when you move the ball well you can control games. We did manage to control things once we settled into the game and livened up. It does help in that way with us. It is a system I like for that.”

Chelsea have played 35 matches across the Premier League and Champions League this season. Lampard has arranged his starting XI in a 4-2-3-1 for 18 of those, in a 4-3-3 for eight of them and in a 3-4-2-1 on nine occasions. The win percentages are as follows: 44.4 per cent in 4-2-3-1, 37.5 per cent in 4-3-3 and 55.6 per cent in 3-4-2-1.

The basic numbers suggest 3-4-2-1 is Lampard’s best tactical option for this Chelsea squad but a deeper dive into the analytics reveals a more complex reality. For starters, playing a three-man central defence with wing-backs hasn’t made the team markedly better defensively. They have still conceded an average of 1.44 goals per game, with an expected goals against (xGA) of 1.14 per game.

By way of comparison, Chelsea average 1.5 goals conceded per game in a 4-2-3-1 and their xGA is exactly the same — 1.14 per game. In a 4-3-3 they have let in 1.38 goals per game, though their xGA of 0.89 suggests they have been marginally unlucky.

How their defence performs in different formations (per game)
4-2-3-1: 1.5 goals conceded, 1.14 xGA, 9.7 shots faced, 3.6 shots on target faced
4-3-3: 1.38 goals conceded, 0.89 xGA, 8.8 shots faced, 2.6 shots on target faced
3-4-2-1: 1.44 goals conceded, 1.14 xGA, 8.1 shots faced, 3.2 shots on target faced

Chelsea do give up fewer shot attempts in matches where Lampard plays a 3-4-2-1 — 8.1 per game, down from 9.7 per game in a 4-2-3-1 and 8.8 per game in a 4-3-3 — but their overall xGA figure indicates they still give up a similar number of high quality chances. They concede 3.2 shots on target per game in a 3-4-2-1, only marginally down from 3.6 in a 4-2-3-1.

There is plenty of reason to believe, however, that Chelsea are a worse attacking team in a 3-4-2-1. Their xG in the nine games Lampard has started with it is 1.68 goals per game, compared to 1.95 goals per game in a 4-2-3-1 and 2.1 goals per game in a 4-3-3. They register fewer shot attempts per game (14.7), fewer shots on target per game (4.6) and create fewer chances per game (11.1) in a 3-4-2-1 than in a 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3.

How their attack performs in different formations (per game)
4-2-3-1: 1.79 goals, 1.95 xG, 17.3 shots, 6.2 shots on target
4-3-3: 1.38 goals, 2.1 xG, 17 shots, 5.8 shots on target
3-4-2-1: 1.67 goals, 1.68 xG, 14.7 shots, 4.6 shots on target

Playing with three central defenders also alters where Chelsea tend to have the ball. Lampard’s team attempt more passes per game (595.1) in a 3-4-2-1 system than in the other two formations but a greater proportion of these happen in their own half (285.1) and fewer in the opposition half (292). Their 55.2 per cent average overall share of possession is lower than in a 4-2-3-1 (59.7 per cent) or 4-3-3 (58.3 per cent), suggesting that we are seeing more sterile passing rather than genuine control.

Chelsea’s domination of the ball was even more extreme against Bournemouth. They had a season-high 73.2 per cent share of possession, with 454 of their 807 attempted passes occurring in the opposition half. Despite this, however, just six of their 23 shot attempts tested the impressive Aaron Ramsdale and their xG of 1.85 wasn’t much better than the home side’s 1.31.

The most beneficial aspect of a 3-4-2-1 for Chelsea’s attack is that it puts their wing-backs, two players with unique gifts, in the best position to impact the final third. James delivered 16 crosses in the match, many of which caused panic and one which was flicked onto the crossbar by Giroud before rebounding to Alonso for the opening goal.

Alonso might be the most natural goalscorer in Lampard’s squad, and the timing of his runs into the penalty area — particularly when James was primed to deliver the ball from the other flank — caused Bournemouth constant problems. He had more touches in the opposition box (11) and more shots (seven) than any other Chelsea player at the Vitality Stadium.

Chelsea created a couple of good chances aside from Alonso’s opening goal while in a 3-4-2-1, largely from James crosses. But the extra centre-back did not prevent them from conceding two goals in the space of three shambolic minutes early in the second half, and it was only when Lampard substituted Fikayo Tomori for Willian and switched to 4-3-3 that the equaliser arrived.

Part of Chelsea’s collapse sprang from a set-piece frailty that exists regardless of what system Lampard plays. As a team, they lack height and physicality, even with Alonso and Giroud in the starting XI, so it was no surprise when Jefferson Lerma easily out-jumped Mateo Kovacic and Andreas Christensen in the 54th minute to head past Willy Caballero.

It was the eighth goal Chelsea have conceded from a corner kick this season — only Aston Villa and Norwich, the bottom two teams in the Premier League table, have given away more (nine). At the other end, Lampard’s team never looked likely to make much of the 14 corner kicks they won themselves. Christensen is yet to score a goal for the club in 92 senior appearances.

“Everyone wants to point to the defence but we work all week on our defence,” Lampard said after the game. “But at the same time, if you’re going to create something like 23 chances and (send) balls slashing across the face (of the box), those are the chances that you need to stick away. That’s what creates the nervousness.

“I’m very happy for Marcos Alonso but when I think that my left-back is the one scoring the two goals and he scored our last goal in the league as well, and you’re creating that many chances in between, you have to question why we’re not finishing them.”

Chelsea have taken just 19 points from their last 16 Premier League matches. Even in a Champions League qualification race as low in quality as this one, a continuation of that form is highly unlikely to be enough to finish fourth. Lampard has big issues to solve at both ends of the pitch, and there is little cause for confidence that three at the back can provide the balance he is looking for.

[Supermonkey92 1,428]

I've got to say it seems Frank's hasnt got a clue how to coach a back 3 - and you definitely need to coach it.

We've already lost the patterns we had under Conte (understandable) and hes not getting it back. Api and tomori were so fucking close on saturday it was difficult to pass out when it should have been the easiest phase.

Honestly Frank play the same 11 when we were playing good football. 433/4231 hybrid especially with kante out.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk