Reply With QuoteVery good analysis.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soc...74358?mode=amp
I though this was an interesting article
Very good analysis.
It's better than the usual standard of football reportingOriginally Posted by severncity
yes enjoyed reading that too . the game as it is today was the brainchild of Johan Cruyff at the top level who saw the future of the game it has now become . pep has taken it to another level .can the game ever go to yet another level in say 10 years time ?
There are plenty of football fans who despise this style of play, enough on here, although i sort of get where they're coming from. Plenty of fans (especially the ones who sit by me) are barking at the players to 'get rid' (not a problem under the current regime) absolutely adore a tough tackle and applaud like performing seals when Arter goes on one of his Forest Gump five minutes, i reckon that as a fan base we love a trier as opposed to a technician. Peter Whittingham is responsible for some of the finest bits of footballing skill and intelligence that i'm ever likely see from a City player, yet even after six or seven years there were fans slagging him off for not doing the things that he had never done and wasn't on the pitch to do in the first place. Players with natural ability(not that we've had many) have always polarised opinion at our club, players with limited ability but who work their bollocks off are lauded. Maybe fans can associate easier with a grafter.
I used to say that "never 442" was as reductionist and wrong as "always 442" when BBC pundits were falling in love with 433 a good couple of years ago now. Isn't your analysis of our fans as simplistic as the fans you're describing? Plenty of good things about Whitts but plenty to frustrate as well beyond his not celebrating his goals vigorously enough.
I'm not a fan of modern tactics but this might be to do with the inequity in the player skillsets in different teams. I can appreciate they are really effective and, at the highest level, the players and teams are poetic in their abilities to do amazing things with the ball. However, they rely on keeping aimless possession for so long that I am bored in many matches. When this is compounded by all the best players being at one or two clubs then it's even worse as there is little or no competition in most matches they play.
I think if you made Man City play the 'Warnock' way they'd still thrash most other sides due to the quality of their players and we'd then be lauding their pace, skill and dynamism and saying what a wonderful style it is. To make my point a little clearer, I'd say that Huddersfield and Fulham try to play the Man City way but their players are not good enough to impose themselves on other teams doing the same thing and so they never stood a chance.
Things always turn full circle, and we need to try and be ahead of the curve if we want to have any chance of competing with our limited resources in a way that Swansea managed. The question then obviously is 'how do you stop the Man City's of this world'?
I think Burnley are pretty close to an answer to that personally...
Good post, I like a mixture between both sets of tactics, i reckon Atletico Madrid have always had a good mix of possession, Physical, pace and explosiveness in the final third, and that's why i like waching them. The way Liverpool, Man City and Barcelona play is a different level and sometimes it's breathtaking, an absolute joy, but i still prefer a mix as opposed to one style and that includes how we play.
I was just about to post that Atletico were like a “better Burnley” and I was struggling to think of many other teams who are like it.
Mourinho’s Inter Milan team were the masters of it though I believe.
Argentina play like it as well, maybe it's down to the influence of Simeone?
The thing I thought Liverpool did better than any other side to have come down here this season was press us to distraction. They didn't give us a moment's peace all over the pitch and I came out of the game thinking that I'd just seen an example of how watching football in the flesh can show you so much more than the television can because I can't say that I've noticed that part of Liverpool's game as much as I did the Sunday before last. Thinking about it in the context of that article though, I wonder if Liverpool pressed us harder than they normally would because they knew they were playing a side that would present the ball back to them quite easily because they lacked the ball skills and passing ability to beat that press by playing around it?
In some ways, I don't think the article tells us anything new, but it does a good job of crystalising things. For example, I've struggled to understand why some sides seem so hell bent on copying a style of play that can only work against all opposition for the very best - unless, you have the quality of player that could give Man City and Liverpool a really good game while copying their approach, say, seven times out of ten, what is the point in emulating them, surely it would make more sense to try to come up with a way of effectively countering them?
I've mentioned on my blog before that I watch Manchester City play with a sense of respect, but not a great deal of enjoyment - what enjoyment I do get from them comes when there is a moment of individual magic from a Aguerro, Silva(s), DeBruyne, Sterling etc. but the message conveyed by the article almost suggests that such individualism is discouraged.
Turning to City, it was proved last season that, albeit at a lower level, success can be achieved over the course of a long season with a possession rate of, say, 38 to 50 per cent (anyone saying that Leicester did the same in the Premier League would be right up to a point, but I think it's significant that no side has come remotely close to emulating Leicester by using an approach which was happy to see your opponents have 60 per cent of the ball or more). This season, our possession stat has too often dropped to something like 25 to 35 per cent and the fact we are up against better players means that the consequences of not having the ball can be more damaging.
Barring a truly miraculous escape act in our last two games, the "Warnock way" will have, once again, been proven not to work in the top flight and I have must say that the way we go about playing the game has to be seen as a true polar opposite of the way Manchester City, in particular, go about their business.
I've always said that the football Cardiff City played under, to a degree, Malky Mackay and definitely under Russell Slade and Neil Warnock has absolutely nothing to recommend it by or remember it by if it is played poorly - it looks clumsy, agricultural and old fashioned, but that is not to say that I would want us to try to play like Manchester City. Rather than that, I would prefer to see us play in a way that was occasionally capable of giving them a bloody nose in the way that a lot of sides in this league can do if they are really on their game and Peps' team let their standards drop a bit.
Let's face it, we've not laid a glove on Man City and Liverpool in four games this season, nor Manchester United in one game, we competed, but little more than that at Spurs and rolled over against them at home. We gave an erratic Arsenal team a couple of good games and should have beaten a very off colour Chelsea side at home, but, in only game in eleven so far can it be said that the Warnock way seriously inconvenienced one of the top six.
People are talking about Burnley as being the sort of team we should look to emulate, but, having watched them at closer quarters now, they seem a bit too much like us for my tastes and I believe owe a lot to the fact that they have a much more effective talent spotting set up than us - just as was the case in our last season at this level, so many of the sides we should be able to compete with have got mush better value for money than we did with our signings.
Based on this season at least, the team I would look at as someone we should seek to emulate is Watford. They are a big, powerful team that often play in a direct manner, yet they are able to move the ball around crisply and effectively when they want to and have gifted individuals who, while being a little flaky in some cases, give them the game changers and match winners of a type that we have not seen anywhere near enough of at Cardiff this season.
Historically and in terms of potential support, I would argue that Cardiff City are a bigger club than Watford and I honestly can't see any reason why, with the right approach and effective planning we couldn't emulate them - I can remember a time when Watford were very much a Neil Warnock type team and they still retain elements of the old ways to this days, but they've combined the old and the new in a way which we haven't been able to do up to now.
Cruyff started it off at Barcelona too....they love him there
Watford were quite ruthless with managers at one point weren’t they? Was it three in one season? At the time it seemed like th3 owners were a bit crazy but seems it’s worked out
Fair point, they were - I seem to remember them having three managers before Christmas one year and, in their early seasons in the Premier League, they made a habit of getting rid of managers who, from the outside at least, had done a decent job.
Absolute wrong. Their possession based football is as much of a defensive tactics as their attack, drawing opposition out to exploit. The theory is that you limit the oppositions time at the ball, and thereby limit their chances of scoring a goal. If you simply started to double the pass range, you would lose the ball much more and therefore have a different balance to the team. We could go on and on about the difference, but as one stated above. You can never underestimate a Cardiff City fan enough.
Possession as defence used to be a thing when tiki taka was in its hey day, but that isn't what the likes of Liverpool and man city are trying to achieve at all.
They are all about winning the ball back high up the pitch and then being able to immediately attack against an unorganized defence. It is not the same as tiki taka at all
Lol. Guardiola said as much even before the Manchester derby... Winning the ball is another fase of that ”tactic” and yes, it has to be done quickly - because the team stands high and often unbalanced to defend. More important than retention is pressing, slowing down counter attacks and find balance again.. Why do you think every academy is teaching kids football in triangles? If you showed Warnick a triangle, he would pull out a stick and start playing it.
I prefer to watch teams like Real, Juve and Ajax. Their games in the Champions League have been very entertaining. Bournmouth are my favourite team in the Premier League, but I think they are still a work in progress. Liverpool, Man City, Arsenal and Chelsea don't excite me at all. Spurs are the only Top 6 side who I find remotely interesting, as I like the way Son and Eriksen play.
Yes, it's surprising that method has worked out, but like Swansea, it's sure to fail one year !!!
I was going to post that article!
Earley's criticism of commentators reminds me of the saying that generals always prepare to fight the last war, not the next one - or maybe we could modify the aphorism 'Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach' to 'Those ex-footballers who understand modern tactics, become successful coaches. Those who don't, become commentators.'
If you shuffle your shoulders a bit you should be able to get your head up your own arse just a little further...
I fully understand the theory behind why possession is being kept - it's not rocket science. However a lot of this possession is sideways and backwards whilst looking for that opening and I find that boring. To me it's the equivalent of taking a ball into the corner of the pitch but just done over the whole pitch. I appreciate YOU think it's marvellous - generally I don't. Let me know if that's too difficult for you to understand.
There is no room, i can guarantee..
Possession isn't a direction. It is a building block. And when you look at these new types of possession teams, they also look outnumber the defence. You see? The move in blocks trying to be two against one. If you find it boring or not is not very important. Football isn't man against man, or making subs like for like anymore. It about creating that unbalance. And it is very difficult to understand, because it is the most intelligent and beautiful football you can watch. Maybe you should move to boxing? Or dig up those VHS tapes from back then and start over? Spend some time watching Italian football in the 80s and 90s! Brilliant education watching ”Sacchi ball” 😅 Regarding blocks and pressing anyway..
Interesting, but I'd like to see the stats across the board. This just shows how the best and worst teams play. It would be nice to see something along the lines of "What teams have to do to survive in the modern game".
Really? You can’t just imagine the stats from that?
No. Can you?
If so, please conjure up West Ham, Palace and Newcastle for me. Thanks.
Posting Permissions
