This is a chronological look at Wolves’ season, exploring the tactical issues and themes that came up along the way.
Summer Plans
Mick McCarthy’s summer spending appeared to be designed to re-establish a 4-4-2 formation. The decision to spend £7m on Steven Fletcher would not have been made if he was intended to be Kevin Doyle’s deputy – this was a clear statement that a return to two up front was planned.
McCarthy also signed Stephen Hunt, a player he had long admired having named him as one of the best players in the Championship back in 2008-09. Given that Wolves had used Kevin Foley, Adlene Guedioura and David Edwards all out of position on the wing during their first season in the Premier League this could also be regarded as a positive step.
Curiously, Wolves’ defence had been regarded by the national media as a strength in 2009-10, with many citing a lack of ability to score goals as the club’s chief concern. This overlooked the fact that McCarthy had regularly used a 4-5-1 with Karl Henry, Michael Mancienne and Foley in midfield. Put bluntly, Wolves were often attacking with just Doyle and Matt Jarvis and the defensive solidity was due to the protection afforded the back-line rather than the ability of it.
As such, the signings of Steven Mouyokolo and Jelle Van Damme – even without the benefit of hindsight – felt a slightly half-hearted attempt to address the club’s defensive weaknesses.
Ambitions Scaled Back
A positive start against Stoke City at home seemed to vindicate McCarthy’s decision to revert back to 4-4-2. But the fragility of this more expansive approach was soon exposed. Wolves scored in the first eight games of the season – but conceded in all of them. By the middle of October, the Stoke win remained a one-off and failure to beat West Ham at Molineux left Wolves in 19th place and in need of a change of approach.
The result was a switch to 4-5-1 as McCarthy identified the need to keep the ball. It saw the return of Nenad Milijas to the midfield and the Serbian achieved the desired effect as Wolves outpassed Chelsea at Stamford Bridge. Incredibly, there followed a run of games in which McCarthy’s men outpassed a number of the biggest clubs in the country.
McCarthy is perceived to be a coach who favours a direct approach and so this increased emphasis on short passing appeared to be something of an epiphany for the manager. It didn’t last. The results were not really improving and late goals were starting to undermine Wolves’ season.
Late Goals
By this point, late goals were becoming a theme of the season – and not in a good way. Fulham, Spurs, Villa and Man Utd (twice) had grabbed late winners against Wolves and it was happening too often to be a coincidence. At the end of the season, Wolves finished 11th in the half-time league table – six places above where they ended up after 90 minutes.
There are various reasons for this. The players themselves have admitted they have struggled to keep up the intense play of the first half. Karl Henry said: “We usually run so hard in the first half that you can’t do that for 90 minutes, especially against the top-quality sides. Sometimes you might be drawing 1-1 away from home and you say, ‘OK we’re not getting as close to them anymore, we’ve run out of steam, let’s sit back and soak it up a bit and approach it in a different way.”
McCarthy himself has also contributed with negative substitutions at key points. For example, against Newcastle at Molineux, he elected to withdraw Van Damme from the right-wing and bring on Ronald Zubar, pushing Foley forward into midfield. Zubar promptly conceded the free-kick from which Andy Carroll equalised. Against Fulham at the opposite end of the season, McCarthy removed Milijas and brought on Mancienne to shore things up – instead he barely got a kick and the visitors soon got a deserved equaliser. They are minor examples but indicative of a negative approach and a desire to merely ‘hang on’ to a lead.
Return to 4-4-2
As the poor results continued, it was Sylvan Ebanks-Blake’s dramatic late winner off the bench against Sunderland in late November that seemed to once again convince McCarthy that 4-4-2 was the way to go. Gone were the ambitions to outpass sides and it instead became a typical Mick McCarthy approach.
The plan was to win the ball high up the pitch and play from there. With Doyle and now Stephen Ward as attacking options, they certainly had the players willing to battle for the ball and run after lost causes down in the channels.
There were 1-0 wins against Birmingham and Liverpool with Ward and Ebanks-Blake up front and in January this became three 1-0 wins from five games when champions Chelsea were beaten at Molineux. This time it was Fletcher and Doyle as the front two and McCarthy was now revelling in 4-4-2 a la Mike Bassett.
Such was his commitment to the system he even asked Milijas to play up front for the last seven minutes against Chelsea when fellow substitute Ebanks-Blake was injured. As McCarthy said: “To go 4-4-2 I asked a lot of the players because it was against the favoured 4-3-3 everybody plays, but they just bought into it.”
Indicative of defensive weakness
The statistics above probably give a good indication of how weak Wolves were defensively this season. They were high on the passing table and had the ball in the opposition half more than every team other than Everton. They also had overall possession stats of 50% – placing them 10th in the table. And yet, they still conceded more than every team except Blackpool, West Ham and West Brom. This is surely a damning indictment of the side’s defensive capabilities. In truth, one only has to look back at the plethora of howlers that marred the season – Zubar at Bolton; Mancienne at Birmingham; Richard Stearman and Ward at Tottenham; Berra at Wigan; Foley against West Ham; Elokobi versus Everton. The list is long and less than distinguished and none of the defenders are exempt from criticism.
Back to 4-5-1
Despite some successes, a 3-0 home defeat to Liverpool proved the final straw for McCarthy. He’d taken enough blows and decided it was time to ‘cover up’ and switch to the 4-5-1 with Doyle ploughing a lone furrow up top once again. This was the tactic that served him so well the previous season.
It encouraged Jarvis to get up in support of Doyle as Wolves relied on their width to get behind the opposition – usually utilising the left-flank for their attacks. The return to this tactic brought victory over Manchester United and earned Jarvis his England debut.
Fletcher and Ebanks-Blake
Of course, this 4-5-1 meant that both Fletcher and Ebanks-Blake could not be accommodated in the side. Fletcher’s late run of goals meant that he finished the season with 10 Premier League goals and just 15 starts. Ebanks-Blake’s record was nearly as good with 7 goals and 11 starts. It says much for the imbalance in the squad that these two strikers could finish the season with such impressive goal returns and still remain out the side – while some of the defenders could retain their place despite numerous errors.
Over-reliant on Doyle & Jarvis
Meanwhile, the problem with Wolves’ 4-5-1 was perhaps that they became something of a one-trick pony. After his England debut, teams identified Jarvis as the key threat and he struggled to deal with the increased attention. You could almost sense the mantra of opposition coaches – stop Jarvis and you stop Wolves.
When this was coupled with the loss of Doyle, the two most important cogs in the 4-5-1 were loose and McCarthy lost faith in the system – abandoning it when 1-0 down at St James Park just 30 minutes into the game.
He perhaps felt pressured by the fact that Fletcher and Ebanks-Blake had both been scoring goals but not getting a chance and eventually felt compelled to play them both. A disastrous run of results followed as Wolves picked up just two points from five winnable games.
Last throw of the dice – Hunt and Fletcher
It was ironic that after chopping and changing his line-up and formation so many times in the campaign, McCarthy eventually found salvation in turning to the two men he had identified to improve his side the previous summer. In an incredibly gutsy move, the manager bit the bullet against West Bromwich Albion and dropped Jarvis for Hunt. In recalling the shaggy haired winger, McCarthy was pairing him and Fletcher in the starting XI for only the fourth time all season. They were both pivotal at the death – producing goals and assists galore in the final three matches to see Wolves over the line. It was vindication of sorts for the club’s summer transfer policy.
Conclusions
This was a season in which Wolves never really settled upon a favoured system and were constantly fighting to cope with the defensive problems that were not addressed in the summer. Many of the statistics suggest that Wolves’ playing style befits that of a midtable side and McCarthy will feel he has the attacking threats at the club to achieve this goal. To use a footballing cliché – at the end of the day – it was these attacking strengths that proved to be just about enough for survival.
Excellent summation, and agrees with what most of us have said all along, our defense is crap!!
Yeah but it also says that Mick has done a reasonable job! Which of course is true!
I musta missed that!!!
Good analysis.
What I think is the No.1 priority for Mick and the Management is to decide on what formation Wolves should play next season, and then recruit (and maybe develop) players to fit into this formation.
I am not saying that we should be a one trick pony, but I do not believe that we can play 4-4-2 successfully for a whole season – other teams just pick off the midfield and get behind the defence when we are not on the front foot.
The best system that fits our players is 4-5-2 – but we aren’t allowed to have 12 player on the pitch1 🙁
Having a second striker playing ‘in the hole’ behind the main striker (be it Doyle, Fletcher or SEB) who can provide extra cover in midfield and then bomb forward, seems to be what is needed. This is where Ward and O’Hara performed pretty well. So do we need to get Doyle, Fletcher and SEB to learn/ train to play in this more withdrawn role and learn to defend/ mix it better – and get the best of both worlds? I welcome thoughts.
Certainly, I think that the key position/ player is the main midfield defender/ Karl Henry. I love him to bits, but he has been found wanting on too many occasions – early mad tackles and trying to swap shirts with the opponent before half-time lead to bookings and pressure for later in the game. On too many occasions when he has partnered O’Hara in midfield, they have left the ball to each other and the opponent has nipped in and taken it – one of the Everton goals being a classic example. Also, I think other teams know his game and that he is not going to burst forward and have a shot.
In many ways, I think the best candidate for the central, deep midfield role might be Kevin Foley, who I think has a lot more ball skill and doesn’t make the same mistakes.
Any way, I’m still recovering from the heart attack I had at the match on Sunday. I gather that next year’s season tickets will include a free pass to New Cross Cardiac Ward! 🙂
Onwards and upwards!
I like the idea of having a player maker in the hole between midfield and defence, how about Kightly if he can find his mojo again, he has the speed, close control and attacking nous to be a great player in this position.
As most people agree the defence needs a complete revamp, we need 2 central defenders and a full back, the best we can find and afford. Everywhere else we can make do probably, but we need fast, strong single minded no nonsense defenders of the ilk of Bruce and Palister.
….and as for the initial article itself, brilliant, it shows in stats what we all saw on the pitch.
Lovely post Adam. Here are my thoughts on a few points.
* Defensive recruitment – I felt super confident about the signings of van Damme and Mouyokolo last summer. I thought Mick had identified two big weaknesses in the side – lack of pace in the middle and lack of anything down the left – and sorted them. I knew nothing of van Damme but thought nothing could be worse than what we had already and I’d been impressed whenever I’d seen Mouyokolo play.
* 442 can still work, even with a shaky defence. For instance, the starting eleven on the opening day was strong. Even though van Damme was played left midfield against Stoke, he teamed up well with Ward going forward and offered greater cover defensively. We then had Jarvis bombing down the opposite flank and feeding two strikers, with Jones pushing forward and Henry sitting in. This gave us enough attacking menace to hurt the opposition, but still offered protection to a shaky back four. We subsequently never saw that starting lineup again. It was the change in personnel, not the 442, that saw us struggle after the first three games, in my opinion at least.
* In terms of late goals, I agree fully with everything you say about ‘negative tactics’ (by the way, where did you find that Karl Henry quote about being knackered?). We sit far too deep, far too early in games and invite pressure. This is understandable against the top top sides, but can’t be tolerated against the rest. Sitting back as we did at home to Fulham for example, was unforgivable in my opinion and we were lucky to hold on for a point in the end. We can make ourselves compact and difficult to beat without retreating to our 18 yard box.
* The individual errors this season were disgusting. We can’t afford to giveaway presents like that, particularly when survival can so often come down to a single point or even a single goal. Sloppy errors in concentration cost us dear. I’ve still not forgiven Fletcher for a misplaced pass in the 94th minute at Old Trafford that led to United’s winner. People blamed Ward, rightly, for allowing Park to cut inside but he should never have had the ball.
* The return to 451 in Feb, with Hammill and O’Hara on board, was a great shout with victory at Villa Park a particular highlight for me. The team that started that game had so much quality. It’s a shame it was swiftly dismantled afterwards.
* The conclusion that everyone must arrive at is that the defence just plainly isn’t good enough. We’ve got the players to win games 442 or 451, but it’s errors at the back that are the difference between midtable and bottom of the table. I’d like to see us spend £10 million+ on a left back and center back. As for who, Roger Johnson and Liam Ridgewell would do fine for me.
Excellent article summerising that MM has never settled on his strongest team. Also demonstrates importance of milijas in the games he has played in. If you look at late goals conceded (fulham home and away,wba away) milijas had been taken off and after that we couldn’t retain possession.
Agree that the effect of taking Milijas out of the side hasn’t been fully understood. Along with Fletcher, he was the most comfortable and competent Wolves player in possession this season to my mind.
I still feel that a midfield of Milijas, O’Hara and Henry (?) + 2 wingers is our best option in a 4-3-3, with Fletcher up front.
Milijas was vital in mid season. I feel he has contributed a huge amount to keeping us up this year. If he stays, I hope MM finds a way to use his skill more consistently. I think he is a much better player than Henry.
Thank you, Adam!
A very good article concerned with system and tactics instead of individual players, something rare, unfortunately. I believe that one thing you are saying is that we are getting caught – or the back four are – if we push up too far with the team, and I agree that is what has happened at many occassions.
You – with Karl Henry – stresses that the team cannot keep up the pressure for 90 minutes because they get exhausted. At least that is seen as one reason. I would rather believe that we don’t have speedy enough players among the back four – and the defensive inner midfielder – to pull that tactics off.
The full-backs are not fast enough, nor are our central defenders and Karl Henry is sometimes missing in games covering for them. MM tried to avoid these problems in the last games by not playing two out and out wingers and probably by giving instructions to Foley and Elokobi not to go so high up on their flanks when attacking and that worked fairly well.
But to the next season Wolves need to adress the problem more proper by finding a high quality defensive coverage in the middle and a couple of fast running defenders. I’m actually confident that McCarthy has this knowledge and that management will sort it out before next season starts.
Love This Blog!
Paddy
Brilliant blog mate. I wanted to add Mick’s decisions at home to west ham. Had we have gone down, it was in my mind for a ‘5 moments where it went wrong.’
We absolutey dicked west ham 1st half in a 442, were 1up, and as soon as it went 1-1 he hauled off Fletcher, bought on van damme as a right midfielder and just settled for a draw. Meanwhile, SEB twiddled his thumbs on the bench. It smacked of subservience to a Premiership pecking order,when we all knew west ham were gash.
Mick at his best is decisive. Your great blog shows how indecisive and confused he’s been.
I still don’t think he knows what his best team is now.
And finally, to quote Alan hansen, ‘keep a clean sheet and you’ve got a chance’. We kept 5all season. Nuff said!
Great blog Adam thought you got it spot on,but mick has to take a lot of
the blame for his indecision.Enough said on mm,I think one of the biggest
problems we had was we did’nt play our better players in the right
positions.Fletcher has proved to be a good signing and if mm had’nt
been short sighted i think he would have got the goals we needed to win
the games.Defencively i think we all know what is required for next
season,must spend the right money to attract the better player plus wages
Get the defence sorted plus another quality midfielder then that will suffice…Keep a settled side and stick to one formation who ever we play.
MM won’t start players unless they demonstrate that they are prepared ‘to put a shift in’. This can be seen in Milijas’s limited use last season and Fletcher’s this season.
While I can see the importance of making players work for their place, we have to exploit the talent in our team. For me we failed to do this fully this season with Fletcher (and possibly Milijas again to a lesser extent).
This has been my biggest single frustration and concern re: MM.
Flipping brilliant – love this stuff
Brilliant analysis Adam, and all those who’ve made follow up posts.
I’m not sure how much our defensive weakness affects our ability to control and push on in games. Our defending has been very poor now for 2 seasons. This puts additional pressure on the midfield as they know if they push forward they will be exposing the back line. For most of the season Henry had been operating virtually as a 5th defender – it would be interesting to see the stats on what percentage of the season he has spent in the opposition half!
It is this in turn that leaves us short in central midfield when playing with two out and out wingers & perhaps leads to our reliance on a 4-5-1 formation.
I’m sure that if we could make a couple of key defensive signings then this would relieve the midfield of some of their defensive duties and enable us to play a more attacking style of football in a more 4-4-2 shaped formation.
For me, the key things that shaped this last season has been the signings that didn’t work rather than the ones that did i.e. the Van Damme fiasco and Moly being totally ineffective. Micks key signings this year has to be to get those positions right. Hopefully this would allow us to play O’Hara & Mili in central midfield without them having to be so concentrated on protecting the back four.
the way i see tactics, playing a slow (and thereby flat to minimise space) back four means you have to sit deeper to prevent the forwards capitalising on the space in behind. Means the midfield has a bigger area to cover, especially in 4-4-2 as the forwards normally play as high as possible, thereby completely screwing henry (or anyone who plays in CM) over when we lose the ball. playing five in the midfield means you have four bands of players ie 4-2-3-1 instead of three 4-4-2 and the transition in loss of possession is easier to cope with. We would therefore profit the most by playing quicker centre backs! I don’t get the praise for Craddock, he drops off very deep and it undoes all the hard work we try and do in pressing high and hard up the pitch. I’d like to see a stat on average position for KH or how much running he has to do for different CBs??
one thing we should note though is that we did get more points than last season. Its also pretty pleasing to see the teams that did go down didn’t get 40 points, its still that sacred number.
Funny that an identical piece seems to have just appeared here: http://ghostgoal.co.uk/2011/05/27/wolves-statistical-review/
I hope no-one is passing off your work (which was very good too) as their own.
Hi Bill
That’s my site!
I just wanted to send this piece over to Thomas and Ben here too. As my blog is not really Wolves-specific, I send them some of the ones I think might interest fellow Wolves fans.
All the best
Adam
Great analysis Adam, this para says it all for me…
“It says much for the imbalance in the squad that these two strikers [Fletch & SEB] could finish the season with such impressive goal returns and still remain out the side – while some of the defenders could retain their place despite numerous errors.”
Morgan and MM have to invest significantly on the back 4 unless they want a repeat of this season. The extra £40M for being in the prem should help. Don’t spend it on the stadium, consolidate our position in the prem first!
Excellent article!