Quote Originally Posted by Penarth Blues View Post
I'd rather watch the imperfect football of the Championship than be subjected to this mind-numbing boredom each week. I hope to God this isn't the way that football evolves...

They might need to bring in a time limit to possession. For example, you've got 30 seconds to get a shot away once you regain possession...
Fair enough, and I suppose it would not be marked down as the most entertaining ever. I agree with you though that there is a an obsession with dominating possession and high pressing at the moment. But from a coaching perspective, I actually found it a fascinating encounter. A clash of styles; possession-dominating Barcelona versus defensive-oriented and counter-attacking Chelsea.

Styles move in cycles, and at the moment the trend is high-press/possession footy at the top end generally. I must admit I prefer a pragmatic and strategic approach as a coach such as Eddie Jones in rugby or Ferguson, Ancelloti, or Mourinho in football, as opposed to a philosopher such as Guardiola, Wenger or Klopp - who always insist on the same style. The philosopher's approach is generally only useful for rich clubs with a deep pool of all the players who can play their style. For most clubs, the system breaks down if they do not have this and so it is a very fragile method. It relies on systemic perfection across the board. The philosopher also rarely has a Plan B, and can come unstuck when an opponent takes a lead and his players are mentally more fragile. The only philosophers that can perform at a lower level are your Warnocks' and Pulis' who build a cheap philosophical system around high physicality, fitness, aggression and build their teams for stability, with a chance of doing well, but will never win a Premier League on it.

But most clubs do not operate at either level. Only a few clubs have the riches for the high technique philosophy. And there are only so many Warnocks and Pulis' around. Most are better served going for a pragmatic approach, identifying the strengths and opposition of their opponents, as well as their own, and then selecting the players from their pool of of various players to exploit it. Ferguson was good at this. With a crap team he would go out and attack. Playing against Barcelona he would sit deep and counter-attack. Ferguson and Mourinho's pragmatism shows there is more than one way to skin a cat in this game.

If anything that is what this Chelsea v Barca game proved. Conte's sit deep / counter attack was equally effective on the night as Valverde's philosophy. There is more than one way to skin a cat. That is the beauty of football.