0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Good points , but isn't fast football direct? We could have pace out wide with players like kiwomya and Blair already ,attack quick tying to play football , but if nothing's on lump into the box and cause some chaos pressure? A brute playing with marquis, and rowe or coppinger or beestin playing just behind picking up scraps, so still playing football just quicker and more direct? Still can use the players we have ?
I enjoy crosses. I don't enjoy aimless hoofs up field. Keep hold of the ball and move it quick looking for an opening.
I agree BB. one is structured, the other left somewhat to chance. A short or long pass played quickly can take players out of the game. It's not new, Spurs in the early sixties played it the best I have seen in this country. It was labelled pass and move in those days, added to their skill at running past players with the ball they were a joy to watch. There are times in a game, especially in both penalty areas when football should stop, if a telling pass is not on, and a shot at goal, or getting rid of it out of the area are the requisite. We defended pretty well last season, getting the ball forward, and in the opposition penalty area we were poor, with a slow build up in midfield. They are the areas to improve. Going back to Liverpool BB. the longest balls they played were back to the goalkeeper once they were in front, they were the main culprits for the law change stopping the keeper picking up a back pass.
Agreed Billy, and Liverpool were the worst exponents of it, it drove the continentals mad.
Yes hound, they killed a game if in front, they had more than one good side, changed their makeup and mixed their style of play to suit the opposition. They could mix it as well with the rough stuff, and were not averse to taking someone out of the game, I will never forget Jimmy Case taking out Platini with his elbow at Anfield, just as the BBC commentator was saying what a great player he was.
Quote from: redbrez on June 11, 2018, 03:49:06 pmGood points , but isn't fast football direct? We could have pace out wide with players like kiwomya and Blair already ,attack quick tying to play football , but if nothing's on lump into the box and cause some chaos pressure? A brute playing with marquis, and rowe or coppinger or beestin playing just behind picking up scraps, so still playing football just quicker and more direct? Still can use the players we have ?Like a Dave Penney side then. Yeah I'd take that in a heart beat.
FWIW, this is my two penneth.Long ball football is easily my favoured style (this stems from my time at Mansfield where it brought success), but it has got limitations and, IMO, it only works with the right personnel and generally in a 4-4-2. Too many teams nowadays line up in a defensive-minded 5-3-2 with wing-backs, not a more-attacking 3-5-2, and there's not enough opportunity to get the ball out wide to genuine wingers. A 'must not lose' mentality as opposed to 'must win' is also prevalent, IMO, in this formation. This could be down to how fickle football has become with managerial casualties. A brutish, elbow-flicking, nasty, kicking, nipping, aggressive long ball game is exactly my cup of tea, but it's not just about the centre-back sledging it long to the big burly forward who'll flick it on. That forms part of the style, but set-pieces are just as important. Getting balls out wide and then into the box from wide areas is just as important. Long-throws are just as important. Having an intimidating bunch of six-footers in a back four is just as important. Having a 'ratty' defensive-minded CM who'll go around fouling everyone is just as important. It's equally as much about as organisation and discipline (especially at set-pieces) than it is the style. It's 'you have a job to do, so know your role and do it' and don't over-complicate it by trying this total football stuff.SO'D's football was very pretty and pleasing on the eye, but too tippy-tappy and his teams were often guilty of over-passing the ball on a number of occasions - John Oster being a prime example. In open-play, a SO'D team would often dominate, but at set-pieces there was little threat usually.It's a complete contrast in two styles, but I think if results were good, nobody would have too much to complain about - regardless of whatever style was used. However, if results were shit, or the football was too defensive-minded (especially in home games where fans expect you to attack because you're at home) then complaints about style of play would be louder than complaints about results.
Quote from: RedJ on June 12, 2018, 10:32:56 amDirect in the Dave Penney mould can be a real thrill to watch. Direct a la Graham Westley is enough to drive a nun to drink. You do need a shithouse or two at this level though, if you want to do well.Westley gets a lot of unfair flack, IMO.His Stevenage side from 2009/10 to 2011/12, which won the Conference Premier and finished in the play-offs in League One a couple of years later, as well as having two or three very good cup runs, was a superb example of a direct, aggressive, nasty long ball side knowing their jobs inside out and being successful. Not pretty, but bloody effective!His achievements there are arguably more successful than Lincoln City have been under Danny Cowley, and they've achieved great things already.
Direct in the Dave Penney mould can be a real thrill to watch. Direct a la Graham Westley is enough to drive a nun to drink. You do need a shithouse or two at this level though, if you want to do well.
Rigo's already said he loves a bit of hoofball tbf.