曼聯大敗利記的原因

fderek

我個人認為曼聯今次部防明顯不足
只想單憑早段入球來控制比賽
事實上曼聯終於在利記手上
第一次顯出其中場防守能力的薄弱
很明顯費爺既部署係只以維迪一人凍結托利斯
但事實上很明顯托利斯的能力,尢其是速度完全
在維迪之上, 曼聯跟本一開始就應該以雙中堅看管托利斯
(曾經在歐聯以此方法成功凍結伊度奧)
此外艾夫拿的身位及身高基本上亦很難挑戰
狀態大勇的謝拉特
於是成就第一二球其實是可以預計的
費爺今場明顯錯了在幾點:
1.關鍵大戰上放棄了傑斯與史高斯
令中場上面完全無能力搶回控制權
最後關頭才換入傑斯基本上亦無能為力
完全顯出整條中場線沒有做到好好分球的工作
2.沒有好好利用朴智星
明明清楚對方剛於歐聯展現出強大攻力
應該要有嚴防的預算, 出朴智星時
應該是以防為主, 就好像對國米一樣, 凍結對方一個主力
個人認為Aurelio今場是應該要被凍結的
因為除了謝拉特以外, 他和Lucas就是進攻的起點
能夠凍結掉他相對地會令利記整個後防反擊能力遜掉
3.出了泰維斯而不是貝碧托夫
泰維斯其實狀態實有普通
再加上他跟朗尼都是控球型射手
很少會直人禁區而是在外面就起腳了
而遠射對利記一向都很難起作用
結果這一場C朗拿度就反而得不到很多的盤球空間
因為朗尼和泰維斯都把後衛拉了出來
這也浪費了卡域克長傳的能力
因為泰維斯和朗尼都不是頂得之人
實在有點不明白何以技術型的貝碧托夫
會在這場大戰上被放棄先發~

Kev

4 conceded..
1. vidic -> mistake
2. evra -> penalty
3. vidic -> freekick
4. van der sar ->lop

i personally dont think it's the tactics problem..
they attack well and brillant, i agree with what sir alex said at the post con..

尺分屹八4

費sir換人有問題+vidic冇態
費sir本身出正選竟用安達臣,唔用費查
同埋70min到一次換哂3個人
搞到vidic紅左 都冇得換後衛
搞到要奧沙打中堅

Kev

原帖由 尺分屹八4 於 2009-3-16 05:36 PM 發表
費sir換人有問題+vidic冇態
費sir本身出正選竟用安達臣,唔用費查
同埋70min到一次換哂3個人
搞到vidic紅左 都冇得換後衛
搞到要奧沙打中堅

no offense but i think you have to make it clear of the facts..
70 min make 3 substitutions isnt a problem.. you cant say this decision "搞到vidic紅左 都冇得換後衛"..
1. god knows vidic would get sent off right after the sub? according to what you said, does it mean the last sub must have to be made at the end of the match?
2. the sent off of vidic led to the freekick and its the 3rd goal of liverpool (3-1) at that moment, so even if theres still a slot for a substitution, i dont think ferguson would sub a defender in.
also, it's hard to say fletcher would be a better choice than anderson, as im sure that the reason for having anderson to play was because of his physical advantages over fletcher.. which is quite important when the opponents are players like gerrard and mascherano.
but of course what we have seen was, man utd losing 1-4, yet i didnt see anderson playing really bad in that match..
as from what i have said in the previous post, 1 goal was from vidic's mistake, 1 (penalty kick) was from evra's late tackle, 1 from a freekick and the last one was a nice lop..
i cant say man utd should be winning this, but i just dont think they played tat bad to have a score line of (1-4).

fderek

原帖由 Kev 於 2009-3-16 08:03 PM 發表


no offense but i think you have to make it clear of the facts..
70 min make 3 substitutions isnt a problem.. you cant say this decision "搞到vidic紅左 都冇得換後衛"..
1. god knows vidic would get se ...

I couldn't agree with your viewpoints about making substitution in 70mins
we could see manchester wasn't playing well in the first half,
their goal come only from the penalty, and it's in the early first half
after the goal they simply couldn't get back the control of ball,
they keep on losing the possession and thus losing two goals
it's unfair to say anderson should bear the responsibility,
but if giggs or scholes were substituted in the second half but not in the late 70s
everything should be different as in the late 70s, they really don't get much time
to score and meanwhile they still can't get back the control of the middle
therefore through out the whole match I could hardly see any structured attack
but only shots come from places that could hardly score.
it's really the problem of the tactic, who used to have sub only when 20mins left
if it is Morhino, i bet he would already have 2 subs in the second to gain the control

tomstar100

曼聯的球員未訓醒,好多時曼聯踢早埸(當地時間中午12:00-2:00),都失分的.和波或輸波.球員踢來沒精打采

Kev

原帖由 fderek 於 2009-3-17 08:58 AM 發表


I couldn't agree with your viewpoints about making substitution in 70mins
we could see manchester wasn't playing well in the first half,
their goal come only from the penalty, and it's in the early  ...

i understand your view point, yet if you compared sir alex squard with mourinho's, especially at his chelsea time, it's different..
remember that giggs and scholes are experienced players, it wouldnt take them long to fit into the tempo of the game..
and also because of their age, it should be better to have them on the pitch for a later time rather than earlier in order to have a larger impact.
you got to know that the subs that mourinho made at early times in the game are usually young players, and i remember he subs old players like viera at the later stage of the game..

so come back to this match tat we're talking abt,
you pointed out that the impact of the 3 substitutions wasnt large.. yes i agree with it..
but it would be fair to see it in the another way,
as i remember, vidic was being sent off right after man utd had made the 3 substitutions, and of course it's also the time when liverpool scored their 3rd goal..
so it would be so difficult to have any large impact be made by them..
also, man utd at that time was having 3 strikers, which is not a usual formation that they play.. plus only 3 defenders and no defendsive midfielders left as opposed to a strong midfield that liverpool had at that time, it's hard to judge the substitutions performance under that situation.

xxtheonexx

amigofans

sorry, 恕我無心機睇大家既論點, ever manutd fans kev兄既point...

因為我全盤否認曼聯大敗原因係佢地本身有問題(所謂排陣, 狀態及戰術等等)

可能曼聯輸左, 所謂形勢有變, 好多利物浦fans重燃希望, 傳媒亦炒作一番,
仲用98年阿仙奴既例子, 去引証曼聯失掉冠軍有理由....

利物浦成日被稱為海鮮波, 但鮮有人包括香港d講波佬會去分析成因,
big 4大戰中15分取足13分, 會輸比米保但又可以炒曼聯4球,
似乎已經唔可以用一句"水準唔穩定"去解釋一切...

奇就奇在人人認為利物浦而家係叫"回勇", 無咩人留意佢地贏既波, 包括好多場反超前同大戰,
都係靠對手既低級犯錯同紅牌所致, 佢地呢種靠謝拉特同扥理斯, 等對手出錯既憑個人質素取分既打法,
根本無可以贏到一季要打38場既聯賽...

再者, 所有人好似當車路士係透明一樣, 第2位其實係佢地, not liverpool...

曼聯莫講輸一場, 輸多兩場佢地都仍然會係榜首到尾,
就算曼聯大意失荊州, 捧杯既只會係車路士,
個人係完全否定利物浦既機會...

amigofans

原帖由 fderek 於 2009-3-16 11:43 AM 發表
我個人認為曼聯今次部防明顯不足
只想單憑早段入球來控制比賽
事實上曼聯終於在利記手上
第一次顯出其中場防守能力的薄弱
很明顯費爺既部署係只以維迪一人凍結托利斯
但事實上很明顯托利斯的能力,尢其是速度完全
在 ...

大致上同意你既說法, 但不要忘記唔可以當呢場波, 係一場獨立既波黎睇,
正如妳第一個point, 無出giggs同史高斯可能係敗因, 但唔出佢兩個,
正因為佢地歐聯搏完一場....第3點既貝碧扥夫, 原理係一樣...

呢一點正就係利物浦同曼聯既分別, 費格遜其實已經有點"過時",
佢可以贏既野, 就係經驗, 佢絕對清楚每場用咩人既得與失,
同每場波要用咩打法, 簡單講, 留與放...

呢方面, 係英超大概只有雲加同佢同一級數....
反觀賓帥, big4小聯賽佢一支獨秀, 但聯賽榜佢只係第3位...

我絕對唔係話曼聯呢場輸波係留力, 只不過係老費呢類老油條鐘意計數,
佢認為giggs, 貝碧扥夫同史高斯用黎打國米最好,
佢係唔會為左利記而去攞一場過既歐聯黎玩...

我敢講唔係有7分加一場在手, 佢未必會出果日既陣容同打法,
其實由佢老人家2月頭講, 今年歐聯比聯賽重要,
就知道佢根本無放利物浦同車路士於眼內, 好有信心已經穩奪聯賽...

當然, 如此肉酸地輸1比4, 絕對會係佢意料之外