|
|
Post by shirleymush on Feb 17, 2012 13:12:59 GMT
Because opposition coaches and players are constantly trying different things in order to stop them. OK, example: The Classico in Madrid, the league one that Barca won 3-1. Real were all over Busquets, which pretty much meant that Real were all over Barca. So Guardiola pushed Alves into midfield, Pique to right back and slotted Busquets in alongside Puyol at the back where he operated as an old-style libero. Suddenly Barca started playing, because Busquets had been withdrawn to an area where even Real weren't prepared to press him. Football is a simple game- it's about controlling space; creating and exploiting it when you have the ball, negating it when you don't. Doing the same thing week in, week out is only going to work if the opposition do likewise. Yes, it is also about having good players, but it is also about being able to facilitate a synergy between those good players. Now here's Tom with the weather... Interesting, I don't get to watch much Spanish football so now I feel like I was there… Cheers ;D but apart from moving people did he use different players or the same ones in different places, I'm a little unclear on that from your reporting? Same ones in different places. I'm not talking about doing things differently through squad rotation, I'm talking subtle changes to the shape and structure of a team. Although if you want to talk about personnel, there's an interesting debate to be had about the arrival at Barca of Fabregas and how it may or may not have contributed to them being miles behind Real despite clearly being better than them... |
|
|
|
Post by Furry Frank The Combat Wombat on Feb 17, 2012 13:18:08 GMT
It's indeed an interesting discussion. I won't pretend to know fook all, so it's all grist to the mill.
Does anyone else titter when they hear the name Busquets, btw. I don't even know why, but it just makes me laugh.
|
|
|
|
Post by THE BEAST on Feb 17, 2012 13:19:33 GMT
Same ones in different places. I'm not talking about doing things differently through squad rotation, I'm talking subtle changes to the shape and structure of a team. Although if you want to talk about personnel, there's an interesting debate to be had about the arrival at Barca of Fabregas and how it may or may not have contributed to them being miles behind Real despite clearly being better than them... I think I'm confused, I agree with the shape and structure thing, I thought you meant playing the best players don't always get you the best result? Anyway, Fabregas, always thought that was a bit of a strange one, does he even get to play much? I just can't see where he fits with them, Arsenal miss him but they are set up differently and need someone with charisma in midfield! |
|
|
|
Post by shirleymush on Feb 17, 2012 13:45:21 GMT
Same ones in different places. I'm not talking about doing things differently through squad rotation, I'm talking subtle changes to the shape and structure of a team. Although if you want to talk about personnel, there's an interesting debate to be had about the arrival at Barca of Fabregas and how it may or may not have contributed to them being miles behind Real despite clearly being better than them... I think I'm confused, I agree with the shape and structure thing, I thought you meant playing the best players don't always get you the best result? Anyway, Fabregas, always thought that was a bit of a strange one, does he even get to play much? I just can't see where he fits with them, Arsenal miss him but they are set up differently and need someone with charisma in midfield! The point is that there's more to it than just sticking the eleven best players on the pitch. Fabregas has played plenty of games and has been banging them in- certainly more than Pedro, who he has usually played at the expense of. Unfortunately, Cesc's presence necessitates a change in shape that doesn't seem to be working for them. So while Fabregas has been playing well, Barca have been below their best. I don't think there's much doubt that Cesc is a more complete footballer than Pedro, but it underlines the point about the players versus tactics debate. Have you ever read The Blizzard? There's a fascinating interview in the first issue of it with a bloke called Juan Manuel Lillo, who is one of Guardiola's mentors. He rejects great swathes of notions that many coaches would take as read and basically says that football is a nebulous, swirling mess most of the time! |
|
|
|
Post by Mandochris on Feb 17, 2012 13:54:44 GMT
See, Happy Jack? You came to the right place  |
|
|
|
Post by THE BEAST on Feb 17, 2012 14:39:36 GMT
Have you ever read The Blizzard? There's a fascinating interview in the first issue of it with a bloke called Juan Manuel Lillo, who is one of Guardiola's mentors. He rejects great swathes of notions that many coaches would take as read and basically says that football is a nebulous, swirling mess most of the time! Football as chaos theory, in true burley style that is a concept that stiffens me right up…am I the only person that this has great appeal to? Most excellent, and no I have never read the aforementioned article (or even seen the magazine), is it available online? |
|
|
|
Post by shirleymush on Feb 17, 2012 18:48:52 GMT
Have you ever read The Blizzard? There's a fascinating interview in the first issue of it with a bloke called Juan Manuel Lillo, who is one of Guardiola's mentors. He rejects great swathes of notions that many coaches would take as read and basically says that football is a nebulous, swirling mess most of the time! Football as chaos theory, in true burley style that is a concept that stiffens me right up…am I the only person that this has great appeal to? Most excellent, and no I have never read the aforementioned article (or even seen the magazine), is it available online? Yeah mate. www.theblizzard.co.uk/That's actually not what Lillo is really saying, but he does appear to have an almost Post-Structuralist attitude to it, i.e. that every movement and decision a player makes is relative and that all coaching and tactics are therefore subjective, meaning there is no such thing as universality, no right or wrong answer, no "right" way of playing. His philosophy when it comes to the didactic nature of the coach is something that I strongly agree with though, and similar to what I endeavour to implement in my teaching. Getting back to the original topic of the thread, another thing that is worth mentioning is that now more than ever there are footballers who are multi-dimensional. The levels of fitness are so high now that players are able to perform many different functions during a game. For my money, the "false nine" has been the tactical trend of this season- from Messi at Barca to Rooney at United right through to Walters at Stoke, the notion that one of your central strikers can be dropped into midfield when defending to provide an extra man, or when attacking so as to provide an extra option for the pass. Saints have at times deployed two false nines, with both Lambert and Guly dropping back when opposition have the ball (e.g. in the second half against Hull, when De Ridder and Lallana had been pushed right up onto their full backs. A good team's defensive shape will now usually be quite different to their attacking shape, and super-fit players will often perform several different roles at different times (again, think back to Saints at the beginning of the season). There is no shortage of praise on here for Lambert, but I don't think fans of other clubs are remotely aware of his talents beyond those usually associated with the old-fashioned centre forward. He is so complete now that he comprises centre forward, outside left/right, trequartista and inside right/left in one supremely effective player. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2012 19:06:23 GMT
Football as chaos theory, in true burley style that is a concept that stiffens me right up…am I the only person that this has great appeal to? Most excellent, and no I have never read the aforementioned article (or even seen the magazine), is it available online? Yeah mate. www.theblizzard.co.uk/That's actually not what Lillo is really saying, but he does appear to have an almost Post-Structuralist attitude to it, i.e. that every movement and decision a player makes is relative and that all coaching and tactics are therefore subjective, meaning there is no such thing as universality, no right or wrong answer, no "right" way of playing. His philosophy when it comes to the didactic nature of the coach is something that I strongly agree with though, and similar to what I endeavour to implement in my teaching. Getting back to the original topic of the thread, another thing that is worth mentioning is that now more than ever there are footballers who are multi-dimensional. The levels of fitness are so high now that players are able to perform many different functions during a game. For my money, the "false nine" has been the tactical trend of this season- from Messi at Barca to Rooney at United right through to Walters at Stoke, the notion that one of your central strikers can be dropped into midfield when defending to provide an extra man, or when attacking so as to provide an extra option for the pass. Saints have at times deployed two false nines, with both Lambert and Guly dropping back when opposition have the ball (e.g. in the second half against Hull, when De Ridder and Lallana had been pushed right up onto their full backs. A good team's defensive shape will now usually be quite different to their attacking shape, and super-fit players will often perform several different roles at different times (again, think back to Saints at the beginning of the season). There is no shortage of praise on here for Lambert, but I don't think fans of other clubs are remotely aware of his talents beyond those usually associated with the old-fashioned centre forward. He is so complete now that he comprises centre forward, outside left/right, trequartista and inside right/left in one supremely effective player. Hurrah! Now you're getting somewhere. Bin the rigid formations!  |
|
|
|
Post by lostboy on Feb 17, 2012 19:18:18 GMT
Erm, that's what the pair of us have been saying, and praising the players for, for months. BUT you've got to have leaders I. The pitch and an understanding of what's going on to begin with. You still can't concede vast areas of the pitch.
This is where Saints have moved on in leaps and bounds with their front six, almost all of whom are completely interchangeable. Set them up properly and watch them go!
|
|
|
|
Post by THE BEAST on Feb 17, 2012 19:59:38 GMT
Shirley, nice one, I read that … Admittedly a little inebriated… And like what you're saying
LB, I know that's what you've been saying, it's also what I've been saying, Hammond whilst technically not the best player we have is without doubt the best leader we have on the pitch.
Some of the others could get there but at the moment we do need a leader, that's where we are deficient.
Well, that and somebody who can cover for the defence when things get pulled apart (Hammond is very good at this), and enough, blah blah blah, interesting thread ultimately… I'm going back to my wine
See you at the game tomorrow (possibly)
|
|
|
|
Post by Mandochris on Feb 18, 2012 8:55:02 GMT
Yes, to all of the above.
|
|
