free kicks and walls

[Blackpuddin]

Noting how even your common or garden free kick specialists now seem to have learnt the Ronaldo/Bale technique of getting the ball up and down over a wall, I'm wondering why managers haven't told their walls to move back a bit, 15 yards say, rather than just robotically standing 10 yards away 'because they can'. The thinking being that they can jump as the ball is coming down rather than after it's already looped over their heads @ 10 yards. Plus they'll have more time to see and potentially intercept the ball.
At the very least maybe have some flexibility in the placement of walls fore and aft to confound the kicker somewhat, because all their practicing will be based on 10 yard walls.
Probably a good reason for this, feel free to put me out of my misery,

[RDM]

I'm sure there's a reason that I've missed but on a similar note, why have walls at all?.
Penalties get saved sometimes and they are obviously taken much closer than a free kick. Why doesn't the wall stand behind the kicker, giving the keeper a clear view?

[deadmau5]

If it's close to the goal it will give the attackers a lot more space in which to play as the 'offside line' will be 5 yards further back.

[Blackpuddin]

deadmau5 said:

If it's close to the goal it will give the attackers a lot more space in which to play as the 'offside line' will be 5 yards further back.

Understood, but I'm more on about direct strikes at goal where others don't play much of a part, mainly because the free-kickers seem to be scoring more often than they're missing these days. Free kicks in certain areas are becoming almost as dangerous as penalties.

[London424]

I would suggest it's because even though you see the goals on the highlights that many many more hit the wall/go blasting over than they would if there was no wall/wall further back.

[Blackpuddin]

London424 said:

I would suggest it's because even though you see the goals on the highlights that many many more hit the wall/go blasting over than they would if there was no wall/wall further back.

Understood again but I'd still say that at Prem level anyway the free kick goal threat is escalating to a level where you'd think the backroom boys would be looking at better ways of defending it. It's going to become more of a problem rather than less of one.

[andyjo1982]

Fair point Blackpuddin. I watched the Norwich game Saturday night and was pretty amazed that the West Ham wall didn't jump. If they had, Collins would have stopped Snodgrass' freekick from going in (IMO). In that instance though I'm not too sure being another 5 yards back would have stopped the FK. But I think perhaps it would throw a few FK specialists if the wall did go back a bit every now and then. The only issue, is that the further back the defenders go, the more crowded the box gets which makes it awkward for the keeper.

[Blackpuddin]

How about a double wall, one at 10m and another one a little behind that. That back wall wouldn't have to be a full one, just a couple in it maybe to give that element of defensive depth that seems to be missing at the moment. I expect some would say that leaves the defence too concentrated in one area but my argument would be that when you goal is under direct threat from a FK specialist with a strong track record of scoring then it's a reasonable redeployment of players, risk management and all that.

[Steely4WD]

1 of the main reasons I can think of is at the minute, they have to be 10 yards, thats not really that far if say I wanted to pass to my team mate for him to drill it home. By the time its got to him, many players would be able to close down that 10 yards to stop him shooting, hence people going straight for the shot straight away. If it was another 5 yards back it gives you lots more options. You could go straight for the shot still as the wall being 5 yards further back wouldn't really make that much difference or you could pass it across the box to a team mate who now doesn't have the wall in front of him and an extra 5 yards of space to place/smash the ball at the goal.

Just my 2p's worth
Steely

[MrAdaam]

Having the wall closer will also provide the man taking the shot less to aim at in the way of direct vision. Essentially, it's going to look like a bigger wall (only marginally in this case), which will inhibit a potential target. Negligible point, considering the likes of Ronaldo appear to be able to play with their eyes closed when it comes to set pieces.

[Blackpuddin]

Fair point Steely, I suppose in that case it would depend on the defensive unit being well disciplined and able to compensate for a different angle of attack.
I just wonder if it's one of those things that happens the way it does because it always has happened that way, but the game is changing and especially the skill level of the guys standing over the ball. They obviously put in plenty of practice time, just seems natural for the defence to do likewise with some management input thrown in. With the amount of money at stake you'd think they'd be looking for every angle. Unless they think that stopping goals isn't as important as scoring them.

[Cheib]

Blackpuddin said:

Noting how even your common or garden free kick specialists now seem to have learnt the Ronaldo/Bale technique of getting the ball up and down over a wall,

That technique is all about hitting the valve.....the players place the valve exactly where they strike the ball which which compresses the air inside the valve and cause the ball to deviate/dip/swerve in that unpredictable manner. That's why you see that straight on technique where they hit the ball with the top of their foot rather than the classic Beckhamseque free kick where they strike with the instep.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

RDM said:

I'm sure there's a reason that I've missed but on a similar note, why have walls at all?.

I recall a team doing that in a game against Brasil, and it worked a treat. Without anything to bend the ball around, the Brazilian free kick maestros couldn't cope.

[JuniorD]

Often wondered if the pros making up the wall who wince out of the block, or fail to jump, or duck, or turn aside, or jump over a low shot don't feel utterly embarassed at being total fruits. If you are getting paid for being on the field you really should be prepared to take a direct kick in the bks, let alone get hit by a ball. Also, maybe if the wore protective boxes they'd be a little less wussy standing in the wall?

[London424]

JuniorD said:

Often wondered if the pros making up the wall who wince out of the block, or fail to jump, or duck, or turn aside, or jump over a low shot don't feel utterly embarassed at being total fruits. If you are getting paid for being on the field you really should be prepared to take a direct kick in the bks, let alone get hit by a ball. Also, maybe if the wore protective boxes they'd be a little less wussy standing in the wall?

Well the thing is it's normally the forwards and midfielders who make up the wall (defenders are marking the others) so you're not normally dealing with "hardmen".

And getting hit from 10 yards isn't exactly fun, but I agree, if you're earning however many thousands a week you should be expected to take whatever comes your way.

[mikeyr]

Just to add to this debate - whilst I do believe they could have a think about reviewing the traditional wall there are some obvious difficulties of moving a wall back or having none at all.

Maybe a study is required trying different types of walls and marking to see if anything reduces the risk of a goal. A wall is probably needed less as you go down the football pyramid.

Anyway, point was going to be that have seen a couple of walls set up like this (D= defenders, 0 = ball):

......¦-------¦
.........GK


.....DDD...DDD....


.........0

Benefits are giving the goalkeeper a clear sight of the ball and probably works best if the opposition have both a left and right footed striker as then could go either way.

If you wanted to really baffle a team why not go with this set up?

......¦-------¦
......D.D.D.D.D

..........GK

..........0

Do think teams should be a bit less regimented at times rather than everyone settling into the same routine, would certainly unsettle the opposition!

[BlackST]

If the wall is moved further back it gives the free kick taker more goal to aim at.
With the likes of Ronaldo it would probably be a guaranteed goal.

Less goal for him to aim at to place the ball the less chance he will get to score.

If the wall is smack bang infront of you, the likes of Ronaldo have to get it over the wall and then back down whilst in the meantime still getting alot of power on the kick.

If the wall didn't work Ronaldo would score from a free kick every time. Because he doesn't it shows that the wall works in my eyes.

[mikeyr]

True but would like to see a comparative as to how often he scores from a freekick with a wall to "blind" the keeper versus shooting without any players between himself and the goalie.

Of course, his teammates could stand in a "wall" and do the same job ...but get out of the way of his shot...

Wonder if clubs research this sort of thing?