Is football really so complicated these days?

[Cardie]

Grant isn't suggesting simplicity in that just a break from the tradition of a new manager sweeping in and changing everything straight away to the detriment of the team.

He's changed very little and certainly doesn't play the expansive attacking football he promised prefering to keep playing the Mourinho way. Difference is he's not fighting with Kenyon, Abramovich and the players Abramovich bought without Mourinho's say so.

[GJM]

A lot of the press have started to get on the 'Grant's not getting the credit he deserves' wagon, but, in my view, his 'simplistic' approach lost them the league and would have had them out of the CL if it weren't for....well, let's not bring that up again.

Almost all of what I think you need for a challenge was there already, i.e. a squad of very good players who play as a team. If they had a better manager, they would have capitalised on the fact that United played well below their level for much of the last 2 months of the season.

[GJM]

Originally Posted by Cardie

Grant isn't suggesting simplicity in that just a break from the tradition of a new manager sweeping in and changing everything straight away to the detriment of the team.

He's changed very little and certainly doesn't play the expansive attacking football he promised prefering to keep playing the Mourinho way. Difference is he's not fighting with Kenyon, Abramovich and the players Abramovich bought without Mourinho's say so.

He has played the Mourinho way with one difference - he has failed to win anything. The margin is a very small one, but could hardly be more significant. In my view, Mourinho would have beaten Spurs in the final, and would have beaten United to league title. And, conversely, Riise would have been 1% more focussed and not....ah fuck it.

[Chuck Fadanoid]

You'd expect no less than for Rafa, or any other manager, to analyse the game in as great an extent as possible. So if he then finds weakness or somewhere to improve, I'd imagine it's hard not to want to change the system in order to accomdate it.

[Stu Monty]

Interesting point. Well worth debating.

I'm wildly surprised to see that it's been used, once again, to state how shite our manager is.

[Section_31]

I think body conditioning and nutrition is the only really 'scientific' aspect of football.

Players of yesteryear who were merely fed up on steak to 'build them up' simply couldn't live with the pace of footy today.

Tactics wise though no way, it's a simple fucking game - which is what's so frustrating about it.

The mancs play the simplest footy out there and yet it's the most effective - ball out wide, crossed in, loads of men in the box, goal.

They've been doing it for fifteen years and it works, simple as.

[Stu Monty]

Originally Posted by Section_31

I think body conditioning and nutrition is the only really 'scientific' aspect of football.

Players of yesteryear who were merely fed up on steak to 'build them up' simply couldn't live with the pace of footy today.

Tactics wise though no way, it's a simple fucking game - which is what's so frustrating about it.

The mancs play the simplest footy out there and yet it's the most effective - ball out wide, crossed in, loads of men in the box, goal.

They've been doing it for fifteen years and it works, simple as.

It works over 38 games, when you also factor in that they have the best players. It certainly hasn't worked in Europe because if that's the way you play it's easy to get knocked out on one dodgy game where you don't fire.

I also don't agree that they've played the same way for years. The treble side had Beckham whipping crosses in and Giggs on the other wing taking people on and running at them, that's changed now and a lot of their play is little one-touch and move stuff around the area or even longer direct balls for Rooney, Ronaldo or Saha to latch onto behind the back four. The don't just whip it in, in fact they rarely do to be honest.

Arsenal played a completely different system and won things, having the best players (and in particular players who can go past people) makes you hard to stop, that's the crux of it. Defensive systems have become more astute over the last decade or two and that is why teams like United are focussing heavily with their kids on individual skill to go past a man. After a man has been skinned the whole thing has to move and gaps appear.

[Hermes]

Originally Posted by Paul

Reading the other thread about Rafa's progress (or otherwise) over the last four years, it struck me how taken in we've become about the notion that football is a science. Now, I'm not dimissing tactics or fitness or even rotation out of hand, but am I alone in thinking that the simple game has been over-complicated to the point of confusion? I mean, isn't winning trophies fundamentally about getting the very best players you possibly can and then letting them go out and do their stuff?

No, it's about Prozone, analysing how far people have run, where they have run to and analysing how to negate their strengths by telling your players where to run to combat the oppositions movement.

But, first of all you must do a multitude of physical tests on your own players to decide who is going to play in the next game.

Finally, it's about convincing gullible fans that you can't compete with the best teams because of a multitude of excuses.

[Section_31]

Originally Posted by Stu Monty

It works over 38 games, when you also factor in that they have the best players. It certainly hasn't worked in Europe because if that's the way you play it's easy to get knocked out on one dodgy game where you don't fire.

I also don't agree that they've played the same way for years. The treble side had Beckham whipping crosses in and Giggs on the other wing taking people on and running at them, that's changed now and a lot of their play is little one-touch and move stuff around the area or even longer direct balls for Rooney, Ronaldo or Saha to latch onto behind the back four. The don't just whip it in, in fact they rarely do to be honest.

Arsenal played a completely different system and won things, having the best players (and in particular players who can go past people) makes you hard to stop, that's the crux of it. Defensive systems have become more astute over the last decade or two and that is why teams like United are focussing heavily with their kids on individual skill to go past a man. After a man has been skinned the whole thing has to move and gaps appear.

I remember a 'fly on the wall' show about the mancs about ten years ago and Schmeical was saying Fergusson rarely if ever talked deep about tactics.

Like you say it's obviously about having good players, but other sides (especially this Arsenal side) have had top players and won fuck all because they make too much of a meal of their football.

Also while I agree that they don't whip the ball in the way they used to, the Mancs' play is and always has been about the flanks, it's about stretching teams and you'll often see Brown and especially Evra overlaping down the flanks, with midfielders following into the box. They just swamp the box and more often than not there's someone there to get on the end of it.

I think the Italian league has proven over the last few years that you can't play footy as if it's chess and expect to refine it to a science, nobody deploys a drilled defence like the italians, and nobody obsesses over coaching badges and tactical play as much as they do, and yet they've all been royally buttfucked this year by sides that just depend on pure athleticism and individual skill to take them down.

[Paul]

Originally Posted by Stu Monty

It works over 38 games, when you also factor in that they have the best players. It certainly hasn't worked in Europe because if that's the way you play it's easy to get knocked out on one dodgy game where you don't fire.

I also don't agree that they've played the same way for years. The treble side had Beckham whipping crosses in and Giggs on the other wing taking people on and running at them, that's changed now and a lot of their play is little one-touch and move stuff around the area or even longer direct balls for Rooney, Ronaldo or Saha to latch onto behind the back four. The don't just whip it in, in fact they rarely do to be honest.

Arsenal played a completely different system and won things, having the best players (and in particular players who can go past people) makes you hard to stop, that's the crux of it. Defensive systems have become more astute over the last decade or two and that is why teams like United are focussing heavily with their kids on individual skill to go past a man. After a man has been skinned the whole thing has to move and gaps appear.

He's identified and bought the players to make it work in Europe though, Stu. Central midfielders with pace and the ability to retain possession allow their full backs to bomb on as they do in the league, but without leaving them exposed to the counter. Pace, in my opinion, in the most significant area of superiority over the rest of us that The Mancs have.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Stu Monty

Interesting point. Well worth debating.

I'm wildly surprised to see that it's been used, once again, to state how shite our manager is.

To question if Rafa sometimes makes thing too complicated is not the same as saying that he is "shit".

As Neil G. said:

Obsessive attention to the opponents is fine in the CL when you're up against a superior side and have to work out how to neutralise their strengths. Rafa clearly excels at this. But when you're up against weaker sides, it gets in the way. Just go out and play a strong side and a system that your players are comfortable with, and let the opponents try and figure out how to stop you.

Can you really disagree with this?

Are you happy when we have 4 men in the box on corners and generally lack players in the box when we attack?

For the record I wanted Rafa gone last autumn, but I really admire him for the strenght he has shown under times with enormous pressure and not least for his succesful change of tactics/formation. He is a stubborn man, a stayer who does what he believes is right no matter what happens around him and you have to admire him for that.

On the basis of this, and because of the stability he represents in these times of turbulence, I want to give him another year to see if he can mount a real title challenge.

If we are out of the title race by christmas because of over-complicating things and over-cautious approach against shit teams, there is no way he should be given another chance.

It`s a fine thing to support the manager through hard times, but the support should not be blind and in denial of the faults that he obviously must get rid of.

[Rashid]

100% agree Judge and that's how I feel too.

[MLB]

Prozone and the like have made football more like a chess match than a boxing match. The "scientific" side of it is diluting the entertainment side in some cases, but what's really making it boring is the complete imbalance between the haves and have nots.

[Stu Monty]

Originally Posted by Section_31

I remember a 'fly on the wall' show about the mancs about ten years ago and Schmeical was saying Fergusson rarely if ever talked deep about tactics.

Like you say it's obviously about having good players, but other sides (especially this Arsenal side) have had top players and won fuck all because they make too much of a meal of their football.

Also while I agree that they don't whip the ball in the way they used to, the Mancs' play is and always has been about the flanks, it's about stretching teams and you'll often see Brown and especially Evra overlaping down the flanks, with midfielders following into the box. They just swamp the box and more often than not there's someone there to get on the end of it.

I think the Italian league has proven over the last few years that you can't play footy as if it's chess and expect to refine it to a science, nobody deploys a drilled defence like the italians, and nobody obsesses over coaching badges and tactical play as much as they do, and yet they've all been royally buttfucked this year by sides that just depend on pure athleticism and individual skill to take them down.

The best players don't play in Italy anymore though, they play here, so that's why we have three out of four in the semi-finals. The Italians won the World Cup mate, there's still a lot to be said for their tactical way of playing if you have the quality to compete.

Inter got put out by Rafa, AC got put out by the pass the ball to death merchants and Roma went out to United. That's three vastly different styles that they got buttfucked by Section.

[jsjazz]

If you have the best players, you can tell them to get on with it and most of the time they will win.
If it was just down to that, we wouldn't have coaches or managers, all chairmen would just get a copy of FM2008 and buy the wonderkids etc.
When teams are evenly matched or one team is slighty weaker, they can tip the odds in their favour by employing the right tactics. Of course luck, bribed refs etc come into it, but you can alter the odds slightly.
How many people pontificating here about the simple game have actually been on coaching/management courses or have qualifications? I ask because I recently read an article, can't remember where, about how modern coaches realize they don't always have the best players, so they compensate. They try to pull the opposition out of place so even a crap player if left unmarked has a chance of creating or scoring.
I don't want to turn this into a pro or anti Rafa thing. I just thought it was interesting to hear that this is how Capello, Scolari, Lippi and the Dutch guy (who's name I've forgotten) approach the game.