Wail all you like, they just ain't going to 'get rid' or 'hoof it'!

Today at 02:04 AM

This isn't going to make me popular. Was ever thus.

But I need to get something off my chest. I've posted online about it a few times and received a mixed response but it's time to commit it to 800+ words.

The topic in question has many names. The one you use largely depends on your viewpoint of said subject.

Some will refer to it as that 'tippy-tappy cr@p' while others, like me, see the same thing as football's modern way – building up from the back and passing through and around your opponents’ high press.

I'm not going to lie – I struggle to see how those who regularly watch football cannot see or comprehend the aim of said method and the consequences of abandoning it in favour of 'going long' or 'getting rid'.

It's not as if it's a new thing.

Since the arrival of Daniel Farke, it's been City's way of doing things. Since 2017! Nearly eight years! Yet, it seems, for many the penny has yet to drop.

Even under Dean Smith and David Wagner, it was a thing – even if both had their own distinctive ways of trying to implement it – and now under Johannes Hoff Thorup, we are in the process of developing variation 4.0.   

But the gist is the same, as is its rationale.

If you don't believe me, I recommend a read of this excellent article on totalfootballanalysis.com, where a gent by the name of Domagoj Kostanjsak explains in detail the concept and how/why more teams attempt to play this way today than ever.

For another good read on the same subject, this piece in NY Times/The Athletic credits our very own Mike Walker and his Class of 1992-93 as being pioneers of this style of play.

But if you have neither the inclination, desire or time to wade through Domagoj's piece, allow me to precis:

The basic premise is to keep the ball, and so to do it, the idea is to not launch it long – which gives your team at best a 50/50 shot of gaining possession – but instead relying, initially, on your team's centre-backs and goalkeeper to quite literally start the ball rolling.

This is why, invariably accompanied by River End wailing and cries of 'BOOT IT', Angus does neither and instead trusts his centre-backs to take the ball and try – if there is an option available – to progress it accurately and precisely from the defensive third into the middle third of the pitch.

Unfortunately, there are the baddies – known as opponents – whose aim is to stop Angus, Shane Duffy and Callum Doyle from doing this. They adopt a high press with the express aim of stopping the ball being played out, with the prospect of winning the ball high up the pitch in a dangerous attacking area.

If they do win the ball back – as we know to our cost – the chances are they are just one, two or three passes away from getting a shot on goal.

That’s why we hear the risk/reward phrase trotted out regularly when it’s being discussed.

Because here's the thing. Those who deploy a high press have to do so in more than ones and twos. Realistically, a minimum of four players are needed to press successfully, often more, and so if (big if) you have players who can successfully break and beat that press, you have eliminated those four or so players from the game.

You therefore have lots of grass to play football in and time/space to progress the ball quickly up the pitch. This is where Hoff-ball differs from Farke-ball. Hoff-ball demands that once the press is broken, everything happens with tempo – the idea being that two, three or four passes later a chance on goal is created.

Under Farke, patience remained very much the key – even beyond the press – although his style has evolved a little at Leeds.  

But it's a difficult thing to do. Most sides, particularly against teams who are known to want to progress the ball from keeper and centre-backs, will deploy a well-drilled and organised high press, and so the space for progressing the ball forwards is kept to a minimum. Which is precisely why Angus, Shane and Callum have to be patient and "tippy-tappy".

They don't shift the ball patiently to each other in ever-decreasing triangles to deliberately annoy Fred in the River End, George in the South Stand, Margaret in the City Stand, or Stan in the Barclay. They do it because they are waiting for one of their midfielders or full-backs to make a move that will create an angle which offers them the chance to make a progressive pass.

If that pass isn't on, they will recycle it and return to those ever-decreasing triangles. Sometimes, usually with the River End apoplectic with rage, one of them will attempt a pass that isn't quite on and will give it away. Then the River End goes apoplectic with rage … again … because they have given it away.

But… and get this… they, as much as supporters howl and holler and tell them to 'GET RID', are not going to. Keeping possession is the very tenet of Hoff-ball. Its underlying principle.

So why would any of them just 'HOOF IT' and effectively just cough up possession?

Because also get this, the players we have, and who we will have soon, are wholly unsuited to having the ball just banged long to play the percentage game. We simply don’t have the players in our squad whose raison d’etre is to wrestle gigantic centre-backs for it.

Maybe Ashley Barnes could have been that man but he was an outlier in more ways than one. And he’s not here anymore.

In the here and now, the squad is evolving but even two or three transfer windows down the line, it still won't be filled with 6'6' bruisers who will be more than happy for Angus to just lump it in their general direction.

Instead, those arriving at Carrow Road are far more likely to be good technicians who are adept at the "tippy-tappy cr@p".

For as long as Ben Knapper is here, even post-JHT, this will be the Norwich City way. Suck it up, folks.

That's not to say the way Hoff-ball is being delivered at the moment won't evolve. It will. And as the squad is filled with more technicians and is shorn of those less adept at the short, quick passing, accurate passing game, then the beating-of-the-press will evolve too.

One of the current and valid criticisms is that the ball is being played too slowly, thus reducing the number of possible passing lanes. The quicker and more confidently the ball is shifted, the greater the number of potential options.

The flip side is they get closed off and the ball has to be recycled, which, quite often, is where we are now. But still, I'd prefer the patient approach to the very obvious and unsophisticated alternative.

Tempo and rhythm are, of course, key – as they are to the whole underlying principle of JHT's football – but that will come with time and, probably, some new players. At the moment it's all a little deliberate and staccato but – unlike most, it seems – I'm pretty cool with that.   

Another valid response to all the above is that, very occasionally, it is okay to ‘go long’, and by that I mean slide the ball early down the channel (as opposed to just lumping it forward in the vague direction of Josh Sargent for Ante Crnac). In doing so, it offers an outlet if there are no passing options and plants a seed of doubt in the opponents’ minds.

It also makes it more difficult for your opponent’s back four to condense play by using a very high defensive line, particularly if you have pace in forward areas, which we now have in the form of Lewis Dobbin.

But, please don’t get too excited River End. For me, this has to remain a Plan B-type option to be used sparingly and not become part of the ‘system’.  

Some cite the success rate in the Premier League of promoted teams who are possession-based and who bui;d up from the back – like Southampton – and I get it. But, let’s be honest … as a football club, the bright lights of the top tier are a way off right now. That’s very much a discussion for another day.    

So … sorry to those around me in the River End and beyond. The "tippy-tappy cr@p” is here to stay whether we like it or not.

All of the wailing in the world is not going to lead to Angus, Shane, Callum or AN Other just launching it.

But it seems that, for some, eight years still isn't long enough. Maybe, for some, that penny will never drop.  

*dons tin hat*

OTBC