The only way an attack minded coach and game plan suits our squad is if all our chances go in.
What you're basically saying is we can't defend so the best bet is to attack.
That doesn't work if you can't keep hold of the ball at will. When we lose possession we're always in danger of conceding goals.
If we sell Kane we're far less likely to score.
At which point we're just gonna end up twatted most weeks.
No, not saying that at all really. It doesnt have to be so binary, does it?
Being on the front foot, attacking and playing positive football - suits our squad (and ethos) more - I think thats fair to say.
Thats not the same as saying we should go full Ossie and not defend, or that we cant defend.
Jose and us just werent compatible. We showed under Poch (mostly) we could defend, but we were better when we defended high up the pitch, condensed the playing space and pressed hard.
We can defend.
Just not how Jose wanted us to, in a relentless low block where our whole mentality was about stiffling play.
Similarly in attack, we actually outperformed our xg (dreaded xg!) considerably, which IMO speaks to the quality of our attakers - and the lack of attacking structure/intent in our team under Jose.
I know Mason didnt do brilliantly, but just with him trying to shake ofJoses stranglehold we looked much better IMO (on the way to recovery, rather than particularly good)
Fonseca, by all accounts, likes to hold posession, lots of short passes, and his teams create a good amount of high quality chances. Which, to me, sounds like just what our squad needs.
We were, essentially, shite last season - in so much as we had square tactics for round players and it just didnt work - and yet we still finished within a few results of top 4.
I dont see why, with round tactics to go with round players, we cant perform better.
Or, to put it another way, why everyone just expects us to be worse.
