If we actually worked on specifics on our counter-attacks then I'm sure at least one but probably more of them would have resulted in a goal yesterday.
It's very easy to say "their" decision making was poor but had the team worked on simple specifics like:
a) When we have an overload then have the runners (players not on the ball) help the player on the ball by taking targeted positions, a space to run into. So, if Lucas is on the ball he knows that Son will be running to e.g. the near post channel.
b) When on the counter lets have it supported by a player running behind it to provide a cut back if the oppo has tracked the runners.
c) Have our runners cross-over, or split to create space
Both Son and Lucas are heads down runners when on the ball, knowing where their teammates are running to (back post, front post, wherever) means it's one less decision to make, it's now about do I continue to carry the ball or do I pass it now, they don't have to worry about knowing where their teammate is running to as this is already determined.
In the same vein, when we are hoofing it out from the back, why are we putting the ball up in the air for either Son or Lucas to win? They lost every header (Lucas has a good leap on him when attacking the ball in the box) both him and Son simply lose this aerial duel every single time. So why not just hoof it out for a throw-in that advances us up the pitch and might pin them in a bit. Or hoof it to a specific defender that we think is their weakest in the air/or even their weakest on the ball and let him take possession but then target him with a press once he's on the ball?
TDLR - Help them by reducing the decisions that need to be made. Have our attacks involve using our strengths, whilst targeting their perceived weakness.
www.premierleague.com
