I was taught coaching by Geoff Pike, FA Cup winner 1980 with West Ham. When we asked him about the ‘West Ham way’ of playing football, he replied that the manager told them to “get the ball to the furthest forward player as quickly as possible”...isn’t that the Gareth Ainsworth way as well? Nothing wrong with the long pass, it got Watford from the 4th division to the 1st under Graham Taylor.
I’d rather win by playing direct football. No question at all.
In any case, I think the direct game can be great to watch. For the most part we’ve been very entertaining the last 4-5 years, partly because we get the ball forward quickly and create chances relatively frequently.
The Spain teams of 2008-2012 were very dull in my view. Passing football is great when it’s combined with risk taking and attacking, but the way they just kept the ball as a way of grinding down the opposition was very tedious.
The idea of neat passing football being somehow more attractive or sexier than a more direct style is a fallacy anyway. The two Oxford-Pompey semi finals were as dull and unattractive as I can remember football being, while our first leg at Fleetwood was spectacularly entertaining. Even a couple of Oxford suporting fans admitted as much.
I have to confess that, while watching most games on TV, I'm often longing to see the centre back play a long ball to a big centre forward to knock down and create chances inside the box.
All this aimless passing about with no end product, i.e. a ball into the box, drives me crazy. At times last night Man City had 10/15 passes and then when the opportunity to play a ball into the box arose they only had 1 player there.
That said, I stand by my previous comment that win ugly or lose sexy aren't the only 2 options available in a football match.
@MindlessDrugHoover said:
The idea of neat passing football being somehow more attractive or sexier than a more direct style is a fallacy anyway. The two Oxford-Pompey semi finals were as dull and unattractive as I can remember football being, while our first leg at Fleetwood was spectacularly entertaining. Even a couple of Oxford suporting fans admitted as much.
Awful game's!!! Like it's been mentioned the direct game we play always seems to create more chances
The sexiest football we've played in the Ainsworth era came during the previous play-off run, when we used zippy wingers to cross the ball into the box in a 442 formation. If we had been able to combine that with a player like Bayo it would have caused absolute carnage. Sadly by the time he arrived, the system had moved to bypassing the midfield as much as possible. There are many elements to the more recent Ainsworth style that I'd retain - the high press, the big man up front, the forwards tracking back - but I do yearn for a formation that utilises the width of the pitch and the full qualities of the Wheelers and Onyedinmas we possess.
I wouldn’t be surprised if we moved to a 4-5-1 formation for some games next season. We have to accept that our opponents in the Championship are likely to have more possession than us, so clogging up midfield and making us difficult to break down seems a sensible tactic. Every point gained will be precious.
Having good passers will help wether you are direct or not. The better the ball forward the less likely you are to be defending again soon after as it's cleared. There were times towards the ends of the play off games when we were hanging on for dear life and as impressive as that was defensively you could relax a bit more when Freeman for example could keep the ball for a second or two, make a pass forward or even just hold it, run the clock down a bit and let the defenders reset. Whoever plays central mid will obviously need to defend well and cover a lot of ground too. Curtis came from nowhere to be a great player for us, hopefully he can regain the form from before his injury.
@peterparrotface said:
Sort of full circle there, Spain played to their strengths and found a way to win 2 Euros and a World Cup.
2012 was a more grinding tactic than 2008-10, for me
I should add that I’d be more than happy if England played tedious passing football of that nature and won back to back tournaments.
That kind of possession football can really work in Euros/WC where hot weather and lots of games in short succession means fatigue is a major issue. But it isn’t very enjoyable to watch.
Subjective obviously but I couldn't disagree more. Watching players like Xavi and Iniesta dictate play and control games was for me seeing artists perform
@peterparrotface said:
Sort of full circle there, Spain played to their strengths and found a way to win 2 Euros and a World Cup.
2012 was a more grinding tactic than 2008-10, for me
I should add that I’d be more than happy if England played tedious passing football of that nature and won back to back tournaments.
That kind of possession football can really work in Euros/WC where hot weather and lots of games in short succession means fatigue is a major issue. But it isn’t very enjoyable to watch.
That Spain side 2008-2010 was as far from tedious as it gets for me, number of electric counter attacking moves that created goals and chances, might go and look it up again on YouTube to check my awful memory isn’t playing tricks
@Erroll_Sims Oh Tifo are brilliant, they do a podcast as well. Not all tactics either, found myself watching their explainer of the ITV Digital collapse yesterday.
@glasshalffull said:
I wouldn’t be surprised if we moved to a 4-5-1 formation for some games next season. We have to accept that our opponents in the Championship are likely to have more possession than us, so clogging up midfield and making us difficult to break down seems a sensible tactic. Every point gained will be precious.
Was only suggesting that this morning to a mate of mine. 4-5-1 is the only way we can compete against most teams in the championship with lightening quick counter attacking football. This could be a good opportunity for the likes of Scotty Kashket to stake his place.
@glasshalffull said:
I wouldn’t be surprised if we moved to a 4-5-1 formation for some games next season. We have to accept that our opponents in the Championship are likely to have more possession than us, so clogging up midfield and making us difficult to break down seems a sensible tactic. Every point gained will be precious.
Was only suggesting that this morning to a mate of mine. 4-5-1 is the only way we can compete against most teams in the championship with lightening quick counter attacking football. This could be a good opportunity for the likes of Scotty Kashket to stake his place.
4-3-3 and 4-5-1 are often supposed to be interchangeable, it should always go back to 4-5-1 as you work to get the ball back when you don't have it. Does need the right type and quality of player though. We've had some good players who can switch between Winger and Wide Striker and some more regular strikers shoved out wide who can't or won't get back when needed. I guess if you expect to be attacking less you need people who are more suited to tracking back.
For me Kashket is better in a 442 given time to sniff out opportunities and if we were to go 4-5-1 then the one is more likely to be a Bayo style hold up player or a Samuel type running and chasing and winning free kicks.
4-3-3 can also morph into a 4-2-3-1, which strikes more of a balance than the 4-5-1 - we did it for a bit against Bristol Rovers and stifled them. Ordinarily you'd want a true 10 in a 4-2-3-1, but we wouldn't play it the way most teams do. The wingers play slightly deeper in a 4-2-3-1, so there's the risk of isolating the striker slightly, but ours are so used to getting up and down the flanks that I think we could overcome that issue.
@chairboyscentral said:
4-3-3 can also morph into a 4-2-3-1, which strikes more of a balance than the 4-5-1 - we did it for a bit against Bristol Rovers and stifled them. Ordinarily you'd want a true 10 in a 4-2-3-1, but we wouldn't play it the way most teams do. The wingers play slightly deeper in a 4-2-3-1, so there's the risk of isolating the striker slightly, but ours are so used to getting up and down the flanks that I think we could overcome that issue.
Wow. Never been able to see the game I love in such binary terms but can't help admire those who can.
Basically your wide players run around a bit more? Or have I missed something.
@Right_in_the_Middle Kind of. The thing is, ordinarily in a 4-2-3-1 you've all of the '3' feeding the striker/getting in on the attack themselves - Spurs have Moura, Lo Celso and Son behind Kane.
Because we don't really make use of a 10 in the traditional, creative sense (Blooms performs a destroyer role instead) unless Freeman plays, our wingers would have to get up and down a lot to a) defend as they already do and b) support and create for the striker. You want that striker to be reasonably mobile - this formation wouldn't work with Bayo - but you also can't leave them completely isolated to do it all by themselves.
I think 4-2-3-1 would work for us because our wingers are exceptionally hard-working, but you'd need a ball player alongside Gape - he'd be the midfield anchor.
Couple of follow ups. I guess when you talk about a traditional 10 you are using modern day terminology rather than comparing a number 10 when I grew up. 'Traditional' is, I guess, based on age. I remember when midfielders defended and attacked and weren't labelled as either one or the other.
You talk about Gape specifically and our other midfielders more generally as if they have no ball playing skills at all. Apart from being disrespectful it is also plain wrong. Gape plays in the Wycombe system but given more licence to find a short pass he can and has proved it. I don't know what you have against him.
Finally no point trying to explain it to me by using Tottenham as an example. Last time I saw them play was when we lost there in the cup.
@chairboyscentral said: @Right_in_the_Middle Kind of. The thing is, ordinarily in a 4-2-3-1 you've all of the '3' feeding the striker/getting in on the attack themselves - Spurs have Moura, Lo Celso and Son behind Kane.
Because we don't really make use of a 10 in the traditional, creative sense (Blooms performs a destroyer role instead) unless Freeman plays, our wingers would have to get up and down a lot to a) defend as they already do and b) support and create for the striker. You want that striker to be reasonably mobile - this formation wouldn't work with Bayo - but you also can't leave them completely isolated to do it all by themselves.
I think 4-2-3-1 would work for us because our wingers are exceptionally hard-working, but you'd need a ball player alongside Gape - he'd be the midfield anchor.
Comments
I was taught coaching by Geoff Pike, FA Cup winner 1980 with West Ham. When we asked him about the ‘West Ham way’ of playing football, he replied that the manager told them to “get the ball to the furthest forward player as quickly as possible”...isn’t that the Gareth Ainsworth way as well? Nothing wrong with the long pass, it got Watford from the 4th division to the 1st under Graham Taylor.
I’d rather win by playing direct football. No question at all.
In any case, I think the direct game can be great to watch. For the most part we’ve been very entertaining the last 4-5 years, partly because we get the ball forward quickly and create chances relatively frequently.
The Spain teams of 2008-2012 were very dull in my view. Passing football is great when it’s combined with risk taking and attacking, but the way they just kept the ball as a way of grinding down the opposition was very tedious.
Sort of full circle there, Spain played to their strengths and found a way to win 2 Euros and a World Cup.
2012 was a more grinding tactic than 2008-10, for me
The idea of neat passing football being somehow more attractive or sexier than a more direct style is a fallacy anyway. The two Oxford-Pompey semi finals were as dull and unattractive as I can remember football being, while our first leg at Fleetwood was spectacularly entertaining. Even a couple of Oxford suporting fans admitted as much.
I have to confess that, while watching most games on TV, I'm often longing to see the centre back play a long ball to a big centre forward to knock down and create chances inside the box.
All this aimless passing about with no end product, i.e. a ball into the box, drives me crazy. At times last night Man City had 10/15 passes and then when the opportunity to play a ball into the box arose they only had 1 player there.
That said, I stand by my previous comment that win ugly or lose sexy aren't the only 2 options available in a football match.
Awful game's!!! Like it's been mentioned the direct game we play always seems to create more chances
If Ainsworth is paying a fee for the baby beast, what sort of fee are we thinking? £50k?
Don’t even go there @bigred87 ! Good to see you making regular contributions. Trust you’re in reasonable spirits?
The sexiest football we've played in the Ainsworth era came during the previous play-off run, when we used zippy wingers to cross the ball into the box in a 442 formation. If we had been able to combine that with a player like Bayo it would have caused absolute carnage. Sadly by the time he arrived, the system had moved to bypassing the midfield as much as possible. There are many elements to the more recent Ainsworth style that I'd retain - the high press, the big man up front, the forwards tracking back - but I do yearn for a formation that utilises the width of the pitch and the full qualities of the Wheelers and Onyedinmas we possess.
I wouldn’t be surprised if we moved to a 4-5-1 formation for some games next season. We have to accept that our opponents in the Championship are likely to have more possession than us, so clogging up midfield and making us difficult to break down seems a sensible tactic. Every point gained will be precious.
Having good passers will help wether you are direct or not. The better the ball forward the less likely you are to be defending again soon after as it's cleared. There were times towards the ends of the play off games when we were hanging on for dear life and as impressive as that was defensively you could relax a bit more when Freeman for example could keep the ball for a second or two, make a pass forward or even just hold it, run the clock down a bit and let the defenders reset. Whoever plays central mid will obviously need to defend well and cover a lot of ground too. Curtis came from nowhere to be a great player for us, hopefully he can regain the form from before his injury.
We would know the full details by now if @drcongo hadn't recklessly banned the club shop mole!
@micra Very good thank you?
I should add that I’d be more than happy if England played tedious passing football of that nature and won back to back tournaments.
That kind of possession football can really work in Euros/WC where hot weather and lots of games in short succession means fatigue is a major issue. But it isn’t very enjoyable to watch.
Subjective obviously but I couldn't disagree more. Watching players like Xavi and Iniesta dictate play and control games was for me seeing artists perform
Iniesta instrumental in so many one touch moves played at pace, was as good as you ever see on a football pitch.
He was a modern day genius.
That Spain side 2008-2010 was as far from tedious as it gets for me, number of electric counter attacking moves that created goals and chances, might go and look it up again on YouTube to check my awful memory isn’t playing tricks
There was a sense of freshness about Spain in 2008, but the style became a mind-numbing caricature of itself, where possession is an end in itself.
Either way, I have always found the direct approach much more exciting.
Its not possession that wins games its what you do with the possession you have that matters as we saw in the play off games
The actual theory of tiki-taka is pretty fascinating - Guardiola was terrifyingly meticulous at Barcelona.
@chairboyscentral - thanks for that - highly informative and easy to digest
@Erroll_Sims Oh Tifo are brilliant, they do a podcast as well. Not all tactics either, found myself watching their explainer of the ITV Digital collapse yesterday.
I will check them out
Was only suggesting that this morning to a mate of mine. 4-5-1 is the only way we can compete against most teams in the championship with lightening quick counter attacking football. This could be a good opportunity for the likes of Scotty Kashket to stake his place.
4-3-3 and 4-5-1 are often supposed to be interchangeable, it should always go back to 4-5-1 as you work to get the ball back when you don't have it. Does need the right type and quality of player though. We've had some good players who can switch between Winger and Wide Striker and some more regular strikers shoved out wide who can't or won't get back when needed. I guess if you expect to be attacking less you need people who are more suited to tracking back.
For me Kashket is better in a 442 given time to sniff out opportunities and if we were to go 4-5-1 then the one is more likely to be a Bayo style hold up player or a Samuel type running and chasing and winning free kicks.
4-3-3 can also morph into a 4-2-3-1, which strikes more of a balance than the 4-5-1 - we did it for a bit against Bristol Rovers and stifled them. Ordinarily you'd want a true 10 in a 4-2-3-1, but we wouldn't play it the way most teams do. The wingers play slightly deeper in a 4-2-3-1, so there's the risk of isolating the striker slightly, but ours are so used to getting up and down the flanks that I think we could overcome that issue.
Wow. Never been able to see the game I love in such binary terms but can't help admire those who can.
Basically your wide players run around a bit more? Or have I missed something.
@Right_in_the_Middle Kind of. The thing is, ordinarily in a 4-2-3-1 you've all of the '3' feeding the striker/getting in on the attack themselves - Spurs have Moura, Lo Celso and Son behind Kane.
Because we don't really make use of a 10 in the traditional, creative sense (Blooms performs a destroyer role instead) unless Freeman plays, our wingers would have to get up and down a lot to a) defend as they already do and b) support and create for the striker. You want that striker to be reasonably mobile - this formation wouldn't work with Bayo - but you also can't leave them completely isolated to do it all by themselves.
I think 4-2-3-1 would work for us because our wingers are exceptionally hard-working, but you'd need a ball player alongside Gape - he'd be the midfield anchor.
@chairboyscentral
Couple of follow ups. I guess when you talk about a traditional 10 you are using modern day terminology rather than comparing a number 10 when I grew up. 'Traditional' is, I guess, based on age. I remember when midfielders defended and attacked and weren't labelled as either one or the other.
You talk about Gape specifically and our other midfielders more generally as if they have no ball playing skills at all. Apart from being disrespectful it is also plain wrong. Gape plays in the Wycombe system but given more licence to find a short pass he can and has proved it. I don't know what you have against him.
Finally no point trying to explain it to me by using Tottenham as an example. Last time I saw them play was when we lost there in the cup.
Could Wheeler be the CAM?