The key question regarding points lost...

[NewYorkSaint]

Much has been made of the shocking stat that since Ralph joined, Saints have lost 71 points from winning positions... far more than any other premier league team.   But there's a key piece of context missing from those stats. Namely, how good have we been at achieving those winning positions in the first place?  And the answer is: incredibly good.    In terms of first half performances, we punch way way above our weight, challenging pretty much every team in the league and often notching up a lead.     

This, of course, has been Ralph's strategy from the start. When you have a team that costs way less than those dominating the league, how do you give yourself a chance? Answer: Blitz them. Build a team that's incredibly fit, and unleash a coordinated high press that forces mistakes and creates goal opportunities. It's thrilling to watch, and exhilarating when it works.

The question has always been - how do you do that without burning yourself out?  And how do you do it when teams KNOW that this is going to be our strategy? Overall, it seems to me our strategy has become more nuanced this year.  It's not flat out for the first 45 minutes. Efforts are made to recoup energy, and then pick the moment to dial it up again. We've had several impressively professional 1-0 wins where the blitz has been followed by prolonged, determined defense.   It's agonizing when that fails... Norwich and Brighton being the latest exhibits.  But overall, I think you could argue that this strategy is still a smart way for us to go. It gives a real chance of scoring early against any team. To thrive, though, we need to either turn our efforts to 2 or 3 goals not one - we've often seemed to come so close to doing this - OR figure out how better to solidify in the second half games.  Or both.

And there's a third strategy that I'd love to see Ralph try sometime, namely: hold the blitz for the second half. Play it calmly, carefully, efficiently for 45 mins. And then, with energy in store, hit them hard second half.

I don't mind losing some points from winning positions, provided we're left with more than enough to thrive.  But I'd definitely enjoy a few games where we turn first-half solidity into second half glory.    What do you guys think? 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

I suppose the issue with your third strategy is the blitz wouldn't be as effective in the second half, because the players would already have 45 minutes in their legs

[alehouseboys]

We should have been well out of sight by halftime in some of these games, where sitting back more in the second half may have been doable but we're too fragile at 1-0 up.

[Saint Garrett]

1 hour ago, alehouseboys said:

We should have been well out of sight by halftime in some of these games, where sitting back more in the second half may have been doable but we're too fragile at 1-0 up.

Agree, and this is 100% down the the players to take the chances, not the manager. The manager has got things spot on, if we should be 3 or 4 up at HT.  Broja, despite his brilliant goal, missed at least 3 very decent chances on Saturday, 2 of which were in the first half. Adams also missed a very decent chance.  At the end of the day, it's been very similar for about 10 years. Even under Poch / Koeman, it was the same just with better players, and therefore better results. 

We dominate, aren't clinical enough, and end up either with a 1-1 draw or a 0-1 defeat.  Same with Puel. we just never got a result at home because we couldn't score goals.  We have to learn to be more clinical with our chances, and then the game is over and done with.  I don't think this is a problem of the manager personally.

[Miltonaggro]

1 hour ago, NewYorkSaint said:

Much has been made of the shocking stat that since Ralph joined, Saints have lost 71 points from winning positions... far more than any other premier league team.   But there's a key piece of context missing from those stats. Namely, how good have we been at achieving those winning positions in the first place?  And the answer is: incredibly good.    In terms of first half performances, we punch way way above our weight, challenging pretty much every team in the league and often notching up a lead.     

This, of course, has been Ralph's strategy from the start. When you have a team that costs way less than those dominating the league, how do you give yourself a chance? Answer: Blitz them. Build a team that's incredibly fit, and unleash a coordinated high press that forces mistakes and creates goal opportunities. It's thrilling to watch, and exhilarating when it works.

The question has always been - how do you do that without burning yourself out?  And how do you do it when teams KNOW that this is going to be our strategy? Overall, it seems to me our strategy has become more nuanced this year.  It's not flat out for the first 45 minutes. Efforts are made to recoup energy, and then pick the moment to dial it up again. We've had several impressively professional 1-0 wins where the blitz has been followed by prolonged, determined defense.   It's agonizing when that fails... Norwich and Brighton being the latest exhibits.  But overall, I think you could argue that this strategy is still a smart way for us to go. It gives a real chance of scoring early against any team. To thrive, though, we need to either turn our efforts to 2 or 3 goals not one - we've often seemed to come so close to doing this - OR figure out how better to solidify in the second half games.  Or both.

And there's a third strategy that I'd love to see Ralph try sometime, namely: hold the blitz for the second half. Play it calmly, carefully, efficiently for 45 mins. And then, with energy in store, hit them hard second half.

I don't mind losing some points from winning positions, provided we're left with more than enough to thrive.  But I'd definitely enjoy a few games where we turn first-half solidity into second half glory.    What do you guys think? 

Good post, with some interesting perspective.  On that basis, if we had an on song Ings or Beattie per se in this side this season things would likely appear much brighter.  Overall its the lack of clinical finishing that's killing us along with the regular chance of a goalkeeping blunder at the other end.  I know that's patiently obvious to us as fans, but you would hope that any new owner on the horizon would see that too.

[badgerx16]

We may have failed to win games having held a lead at some point during them, and indeed be the worst for this trait, but no team has ever lost points in a game of football. The worst case scenario is that you lose the game, so end up with the same number of points you started with. If, for instance, Liverpool take a 1-0 lead against Spurs, Spurs then go on to take a 2-1 lead, before Liverpool score a last minute equaliser to end the game 2-2. How many points have each team gained or lost ?

 

Edited 6 December, 2021 by badgerx16

[Adkins' Bus]

Good post which is probably pretty close to the mark. Given our equally inept ability to overturn a deficit and the general importance of the first goal at this level, I think it is a fair strategy theoretically. And I think we are close to making it effective if one or two things can get ironed out - more clinical finishing and less blunders in goal as one said above. 

Not sure the third strategy would work so well for the reasons already mentioned. It would be less irritating if we were to draw after coming from behind, but it doesn't matter how the points come at the end of the day. 

[Christophenburg]

There may be something in this but the change in performance at the second half is almost immediate, meaning it's more then just fitness alone. If it is simply because Ralph knows that the squad can maintain the level in the second half so he tells them to ease off, then he needs to respond tactically when other teams ramp up to counter that, which I don't think he does, or at least does well.

Based on 1st half performances we'd have 25 points, that's 5th currently. It's just not sustainable to drop so many points every game

[Ex Lion Tamer]

9 minutes ago, Christophenburg said:

There may be something in this but the change in performance at the second half is almost immediate, meaning it's more then just fitness alone. If it is simply because Ralph knows that the squad can maintain the level in the second half so he tells them to ease off, then he needs to respond tactically when other teams ramp up to counter that, which I don't think he does, or at least does well.

Based on 1st half performances we'd have 25 points, that's 5th currently. It's just not sustainable to drop so many points every game

I might be wrong but I thought we slowed up before the end of the first half against Brighton

[Mattster]

5 hours ago, NewYorkSaint said:

Much has been made of the shocking stat that since Ralph joined, Saints have lost 71 points from winning positions... far more than any other premier league team.   But there's a key piece of context missing from those stats. Namely, how good have we been at achieving those winning positions in the first place?  And the answer is: incredibly good.    In terms of first half performances, we punch way way above our weight, challenging pretty much every team in the league and often notching up a lead.     

Agreed. In some ways it is very encouraging - seeing how we can play when everything is clicking and everyone is fresh shows that the talent is there, IMO. On the other hand, of course, it is intensely frustrating to watch the same team fail to consolidate a great half of football with more than one goal (or even any goals), and throw away so many winning positions. I get the sense sometimes that Ralf thinks you can sit on a 1-0 in the prem, regardless of when the goal is scored. Sometimes you might get away with it (just - see e.g. Villa), but more often than not you won't, and we are a far less effective team IMO when we are not being aggressive. Perhaps Ralf tries to tell them to play within themselves and defend the lead at half time, when a more effective strategy for us might be to continue to go for it and just hope we score more goals than the opposition. I don't know, that's probably pretty naive but something has to change.

On a more personal note, as someone in the family area, almost every game we have seen this season has had most of the action up the other end, as we almost always point that way first half when we are going for it, and then the opposition generally does the same (also at that end) for the second half. For that reason alone things need to change!

[verlaine1979]

I don't see us playing an unusually energetic press compared to many other teams in the league. What I see is us trying to play a press without particularly energetic players. In central midfield in particular, both Romeu and JWP aren't quick to begin with, so the drop off as they tire is more noticeable. Neither are the likes of Elyounoussi, Stuart Armstrong or Redmond among the quickest/most physical in the league. We've got good pressing strikers, but the rest of the team isn't really built for it, and it shows.

[sfc4prem]

5 hours ago, Saint Garrett said:

Agree, and this is 100% down the the players to take the chances, not the manager. The manager has got things spot on, if we should be 3 or 4 up at HT.  Broja, despite his brilliant goal, missed at least 3 very decent chances on Saturday, 2 of which were in the first half. Adams also missed a very decent chance.  At the end of the day, it's been very similar for about 10 years. Even under Poch / Koeman, it was the same just with better players, and therefore better results. 

We dominate, aren't clinical enough, and end up either with a 1-1 draw or a 0-1 defeat.  Same with Puel. we just never got a result at home because we couldn't score goals.  We have to learn to be more clinical with our chances, and then the game is over and done with.  I don't think this is a problem of the manager personally.

Agreed.

[Turkish]

Wouldn’t it be better to do it the other way round? Defend, contain in the first half then blitz them in the second half? 

[SFC Forever]

It is possible that our team is over trained which will show at the end of the games. Or even under trained but if that they would be too lethargic from the start. 

I am concerned now as THIS IS HAPPENING GAME AFTER GAME AND APPARENTLY THEY CAN'T FIND A SOLUTIOPN.

[thesaint sfc]

For me, Romeu is a fantastic footballer and a real favourite player of mine as he's been around for a while now and comes with lots of experience. However, I don't think he fits very well into our team. He plays the ball back far too much which is good for keeping possession and very helpful when we're running out of steam, but not good if we're trying to really attack and get early chances. I'd like to see him perhaps be brought on as a substitute to replace someone more attacking focused when we're ahead and looking to slow things down. I think a big part of the reason that we can now see how important Stuart Armstrong is that we're seeing more of Romeu as a result of his injury. 

He's an absolutely solid defensive midfielder, but I think he's a bit old fashioned for the modern game and should be bought on when his approach is more useful.

[S-Clarke]

10 minutes ago, thesaint sfc said:

For me, Romeu is a fantastic footballer and a real favourite player of mine as he's been around for a while now and comes with lots of experience. However, I don't think he fits very well into our team. He plays the ball back far too much which is good for keeping possession and very helpful when we're running out of steam, but not good if we're trying to really attack and get early chances. I'd like to see him perhaps be brought on as a substitute to replace someone more attacking focused when we're ahead and looking to slow things down. I think a big part of the reason that we can now see how important Stuart Armstrong is that we're seeing more of Romeu as a result of his injury. 

He's an absolutely solid defensive midfielder, but I think he's a bit old fashioned for the modern game and should be bought on when his approach is more useful.

Not sure he's the wrong player for us as such, he'd get into most midfields in the bottom half of this league. The problem we have is the mix around him in my opinion.

His job should 100% be focused on breaking up play, positioning himself to be the deep pivot in essence - which will result in a lot of recycling of the ball. What he needs is someone to be able to pass the ball to who will then drive forward, sadly his conventional midfield partner JWP doesn't do that either. JWP is not a DM as such, he's just a bog standard CM who again is good at recycling the ball and playing a higher pivot role (he also gets around the pitch much better as well as cover)

So I wouldn't give up on Romeu and say he's the problem, far from it - he'd doing his role, the issue is the mix and lack of quality around him. If he had players to pass the ball to who did look forward then it would be a different picture. A lot of the fault lies with our number 10's as well who just don't contribute near enough in that area.

You always need a Romeu in your side to do the ugly side of it, but you also need quality in the attack to do the pretty bits.

Edited 7 December, 2021 by S-Clarke

[WALK DMC]

On 06/12/2021 at 12:43, NewYorkSaint said:

Much has been made of the shocking stat that since Ralph joined, Saints have lost 71 points from winning positions... far more than any other premier league team.   But there's a key piece of context missing from those stats. Namely, how good have we been at achieving those winning positions in the first place?  And the answer is: incredibly good.    In terms of first half performances, we punch way way above our weight, challenging pretty much every team in the league and often notching up a lead.     

This, of course, has been Ralph's strategy from the start. When you have a team that costs way less than those dominating the league, how do you give yourself a chance? Answer: Blitz them. Build a team that's incredibly fit, and unleash a coordinated high press that forces mistakes and creates goal opportunities. It's thrilling to watch, and exhilarating when it works.

The question has always been - how do you do that without burning yourself out?  And how do you do it when teams KNOW that this is going to be our strategy? Overall, it seems to me our strategy has become more nuanced this year.  It's not flat out for the first 45 minutes. Efforts are made to recoup energy, and then pick the moment to dial it up again. We've had several impressively professional 1-0 wins where the blitz has been followed by prolonged, determined defense.   It's agonizing when that fails... Norwich and Brighton being the latest exhibits.  But overall, I think you could argue that this strategy is still a smart way for us to go. It gives a real chance of scoring early against any team. To thrive, though, we need to either turn our efforts to 2 or 3 goals not one - we've often seemed to come so close to doing this - OR figure out how better to solidify in the second half games.  Or both.

And there's a third strategy that I'd love to see Ralph try sometime, namely: hold the blitz for the second half. Play it calmly, carefully, efficiently for 45 mins. And then, with energy in store, hit them hard second half.

I don't mind losing some points from winning positions, provided we're left with more than enough to thrive.  But I'd definitely enjoy a few games where we turn first-half solidity into second half glory.    What do you guys think? 

A really good well balanced post. 

The only thing that I'd add, is that virtually every match we go to where we are hanging on to a slender lead or point, my son turns to me and says "Do we really have to continue to play 2 up front ?".   I understand the concept of defending from the front, but sometimes it would be better to shore up the midfield; I cannot understand the obsession with 2 up front when other parts of the team need support - JWP, Diallo and Romeu in unison for the loss of a forward makes sooooooooo much sense to me, I just cannot believe we don't try it.  Not every game but where we are clearly losing control, why not try such a simple change ?  

[Matthew Le God]

The issue predates Hasenhüttl...

 

Edited 7 December, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[CB Fry]

15 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

The issue predates Hasenhüttl...

 

He's been in charge for three full years. Utterly irrelevant.

[Noodles34]

I feel that ever since I started watching Saints, we have always thrown games away. It’s just what we do.  

[benjii]

The really damning statistic is the lack of goals we have scored in the final 30 minutes of matches. It is because our attacking play is generally shite and reliant on the other team making mistakes. 

[Ted Bates Statue]

2 hours ago, benjii said:

The really damning statistic is the lack of goals we have scored in the final 30 minutes of matches. It is because our attacking play is generally shite and reliant on the other team making mistakes. 

Just had a look on https://www.soccerstats.com/halftime.asp?league=england to compare the first half v second half performance table. 9 goals in first halves, 5 goals scored after HT.

Mildly interesting - it's a mirror image for Brighton - 5 before half time, 9 after.

[Charlie Wayman]

We simply aren't good enough or smart enough which is down to the players and the coaching staff. It will end in relegation one day.

[JustinR]

55 minutes ago, Charlie Wayman said:

We simply aren't good enough or smart enough which is down to the players and the coaching staff. It will end in relegation one day.

Unless fixed. Which you'd expect

[wild-saint]

2 hours ago, Charlie Wayman said:

We simply aren't good enough or smart enough which is down to the players and the coaching staff. It will end in relegation one day.

Personally, I think relegation is inevitable unless we get significant investment within the next couple of years.