Beez – really enjoyed this piece, and my head went when Nketiah did his Rio Rio Dancing in the Sand routine. A 4-2-2-2 against such a well-drilled Palace defence was always going to be awkward, but even in our usual shape we’d have struggled. It felt like December 2023 all over again: not as many chances conceded, but Palace kept skipping past our midfield with ease.
Nothing’s a problem until you lose, but once you funnel Mo wide it becomes a simple plan to blunt us. Bradley had a tough afternoon, though so did Frimpong once Szobo switched over. Did we miss Trent? I don’t think so. Watching Saka at Newcastle, you see how he ghosts past two men and straight into the box. That kind of low-block disruption is what we lack right now — despite all of Mo’s strengths.
And as you said a long while back, the chances are we’ll drop points in games we might not deserve to, or win matches we probably shouldn’t. Either way, this loss shouldn’t carry long-term weight in the context of the season so far — it’s about fixing the patterns, not panicking about the outcome. It will take time and need patience (as some bloke on another substack said 😉).
Thanks, mate. Yeah Palace are just a really good side. I can understand why Slot wanted to try to outthink their established 3-4-2-1 formation and set up, I just think it was too tough a game for experimentation given the team is already playing like strangers in many ways.
Your comment about Saka has reminded me of something I meant to check for this article but forget. Liverpool completed just six of their 22 attempted take-ons in this match, per FBRef. Their database includes 1,098 matches from Europe's big five leagues in which a team attempted exactly 22. Only 16 of them completed fewer than six, with 20 others on six exactly. It was a real bottom of the barrel performance on that front.
Palace are exceptional snuffing out those half spaces. Its a reason why Isak has scored just one goal in 7 games against Palace.
Whether 6/22 is really bad against Palace I'm shocked we attempted 22! Palace barely let any away team have more than 4-6 successful.take ons last season.
Looking at the match stats it must have been a tactical instruction as nearly every player tried a take on.
The tackling stats against dribblers were woeful. We attempted 7 and made one single tackle stick. Palace dribblers weren't invisible were they?
The xG finished 2.1-2.1 and reminded me of the Bournemouth match at Anfield that finished 2.2-2.2. Maybe Glasner and Iraola have more in common than I thought.
Slot's recently talked about rotating more during the season, which is fine. But I agree changing the system backfired both attacking and containment.
We needed to disrupt Palace. If Jones and Szoboszlai played you have two willing overlappers allowing Wirtz and Isak to drop out of the range of Guehi and co and play a few through balls.
I also think we need to play the ball outside to Kerkez a little more. Gakpo is frustrating in cutting in and either dinking, side passing or shooting.
But it takes time and Ekitiké’s idiotic red did hurt us as he was a player with swagger who could have made a difference. Fed nearly saved us.
As you say why Frimpong left Nketia the way he did showed a lack of awareness reflecting how we approached the game.
We could've still lost but we'd have been far more competitive from the first whistle. Its just one loss but you can see the headlines if results go against us on Saturday.
Feels like all those long throws will make for a long season.
Beez - having watched and read a few reports after the Galatasaray game "duels" is a recurring theme. I might be wrong but we won 45 duels to Galatasaray's 58, which is a big difference. Against Palace it was closer in the home team’s favour (48-45) but we were way behind on ground duels (36-23). How does this compare to last season's start (duel "success") and is it just about bedding new players into our pressing system, opposition tactics, or other factors? For example referees.
Duels is a tricky stat to analyse. I usually go by Sofascore, which has it as 61-46 for the Galatasaray match, 45-29 for ground duels specifically.
The final word of your comment is key, though. Duels is essentially tackles, dribbles and fouls combined, so a decent chunk of the stat is determined by the referee. With dribbles and tackles aligning in most cases - a successful dribble is a failed tackle and vice versa - the metric doesn't really mean 'duels' in the sense that we think of them watching a match.
As such, it doesn't really relate to pressing or tactics. It's essentially which team dribbled better and who was the ref?!
Great (albeit frustrating) work. For the life of me, I can't figure out what the "Wirtz on the left" approach was supposed to do, especially since he didn't end up on the left half the time! I kept seeing him way over on the right side behind Mo with an acre of space on the left begging to be filled. I saw someone suggesting it might've been a 4-2-2-2? I guess with Mo and Alex forming the front two, and switching between center and the right and left, respectively? But that still doesn't explain Flo's positioning. Asking Alex to cover half the pitch on the left also isn't something I'd suggest to a guy still basically going through pre-season and without a backup because someone quite literally can't keep his shirt on... Yeah, I'm just totally confused at whatever that game plan was supposed to be. A very "Pep overthinking it" moment. What heightens the contrast, of course, is Cody coming in at the half and us reverting to our more typical 4-2-3-1 and taking control of the match...
Beez – really enjoyed this piece, and my head went when Nketiah did his Rio Rio Dancing in the Sand routine. A 4-2-2-2 against such a well-drilled Palace defence was always going to be awkward, but even in our usual shape we’d have struggled. It felt like December 2023 all over again: not as many chances conceded, but Palace kept skipping past our midfield with ease.
Nothing’s a problem until you lose, but once you funnel Mo wide it becomes a simple plan to blunt us. Bradley had a tough afternoon, though so did Frimpong once Szobo switched over. Did we miss Trent? I don’t think so. Watching Saka at Newcastle, you see how he ghosts past two men and straight into the box. That kind of low-block disruption is what we lack right now — despite all of Mo’s strengths.
And as you said a long while back, the chances are we’ll drop points in games we might not deserve to, or win matches we probably shouldn’t. Either way, this loss shouldn’t carry long-term weight in the context of the season so far — it’s about fixing the patterns, not panicking about the outcome. It will take time and need patience (as some bloke on another substack said 😉).
Thanks, mate. Yeah Palace are just a really good side. I can understand why Slot wanted to try to outthink their established 3-4-2-1 formation and set up, I just think it was too tough a game for experimentation given the team is already playing like strangers in many ways.
Your comment about Saka has reminded me of something I meant to check for this article but forget. Liverpool completed just six of their 22 attempted take-ons in this match, per FBRef. Their database includes 1,098 matches from Europe's big five leagues in which a team attempted exactly 22. Only 16 of them completed fewer than six, with 20 others on six exactly. It was a real bottom of the barrel performance on that front.
Palace are exceptional snuffing out those half spaces. Its a reason why Isak has scored just one goal in 7 games against Palace.
Whether 6/22 is really bad against Palace I'm shocked we attempted 22! Palace barely let any away team have more than 4-6 successful.take ons last season.
Looking at the match stats it must have been a tactical instruction as nearly every player tried a take on.
The tackling stats against dribblers were woeful. We attempted 7 and made one single tackle stick. Palace dribblers weren't invisible were they?
The xG finished 2.1-2.1 and reminded me of the Bournemouth match at Anfield that finished 2.2-2.2. Maybe Glasner and Iraola have more in common than I thought.
Slot's recently talked about rotating more during the season, which is fine. But I agree changing the system backfired both attacking and containment.
We needed to disrupt Palace. If Jones and Szoboszlai played you have two willing overlappers allowing Wirtz and Isak to drop out of the range of Guehi and co and play a few through balls.
I also think we need to play the ball outside to Kerkez a little more. Gakpo is frustrating in cutting in and either dinking, side passing or shooting.
But it takes time and Ekitiké’s idiotic red did hurt us as he was a player with swagger who could have made a difference. Fed nearly saved us.
As you say why Frimpong left Nketia the way he did showed a lack of awareness reflecting how we approached the game.
We could've still lost but we'd have been far more competitive from the first whistle. Its just one loss but you can see the headlines if results go against us on Saturday.
Feels like all those long throws will make for a long season.
Beez - having watched and read a few reports after the Galatasaray game "duels" is a recurring theme. I might be wrong but we won 45 duels to Galatasaray's 58, which is a big difference. Against Palace it was closer in the home team’s favour (48-45) but we were way behind on ground duels (36-23). How does this compare to last season's start (duel "success") and is it just about bedding new players into our pressing system, opposition tactics, or other factors? For example referees.
Duels is a tricky stat to analyse. I usually go by Sofascore, which has it as 61-46 for the Galatasaray match, 45-29 for ground duels specifically.
The final word of your comment is key, though. Duels is essentially tackles, dribbles and fouls combined, so a decent chunk of the stat is determined by the referee. With dribbles and tackles aligning in most cases - a successful dribble is a failed tackle and vice versa - the metric doesn't really mean 'duels' in the sense that we think of them watching a match.
As such, it doesn't really relate to pressing or tactics. It's essentially which team dribbled better and who was the ref?!
Great (albeit frustrating) work. For the life of me, I can't figure out what the "Wirtz on the left" approach was supposed to do, especially since he didn't end up on the left half the time! I kept seeing him way over on the right side behind Mo with an acre of space on the left begging to be filled. I saw someone suggesting it might've been a 4-2-2-2? I guess with Mo and Alex forming the front two, and switching between center and the right and left, respectively? But that still doesn't explain Flo's positioning. Asking Alex to cover half the pitch on the left also isn't something I'd suggest to a guy still basically going through pre-season and without a backup because someone quite literally can't keep his shirt on... Yeah, I'm just totally confused at whatever that game plan was supposed to be. A very "Pep overthinking it" moment. What heightens the contrast, of course, is Cody coming in at the half and us reverting to our more typical 4-2-3-1 and taking control of the match...