On February 24 2012 23:46 uberMatt wrote: i'll never understand this european obsession of constantly talking about shit that has absolutely no relevance on current form
That's actually an interesting observation. Looking at american sports conversations, people are usually focused with trends only a few weeks old. European football conversations are focused on history.
3-4 pages either side talking about some of the history in an American Sport. I think the discussion was PF's. Say what ? This is actually in between discussing live games. History matters its not just a cliche.
Not saying history isn't discussed in american sports. I follow european football and the NBA quite actively and I find that discussions around the NBA are really focused on current trends - not necessarily in TL.
On February 24 2012 23:46 uberMatt wrote: i'll never understand this european obsession of constantly talking about shit that has absolutely no relevance on current form
agreed. or, "Manchester City can't win because they've always choked." Which completely ignores the fact that half their players have come in the past year or two.
If anyone's checked out The Blizzard, then it becomes pretty clear how a lot of football writers/enthusiasts think about teams. Which is a sort of ethereal level of being that lands somewhere between the players, fans, coach, and history. Match announcers don't seem to delve into this, thank god. It's just frustrating when people look into football as more than the sum of its parts.
Don't know what you are picking on, discussion is exactly what football is about and why it has grown so big :-). There is even an own word for "discussing football" in Italian (don't know it though, just read it in the book "Calcio"). History is what keeps fans driving and passionate in game breaks.
Yea I dont get what point your trying to make either. I dont think Ive ever heard anyone reasonable make that Man City comment, theyve never been in the picture enough recently for that to matter.
On February 24 2012 23:46 uberMatt wrote: i'll never understand this european obsession of constantly talking about shit that has absolutely no relevance on current form
agreed. or, "Manchester City can't win because they've always choked." Which completely ignores the fact that half their players have come in the past year or two.
If anyone's checked out The Blizzard, then it becomes pretty clear how a lot of football writers/enthusiasts think about teams. Which is a sort of ethereal level of being that lands somewhere between the players, fans, coach, and history. Match announcers don't seem to delve into this, thank god. It's just frustrating when people look into football as more than the sum of its parts.
and theres a reason for it. except for really extreme circumstances(like billions in city) turning a team around,changing the spirit,just does not happen. the same way you can change all the players and the coach of a certain team,theyll play a certain way anyway. thats why discussing history is important. english teams play hard/kick and run german teams play offensive italian teams score early and defend all game spanish teams okay with short passes and technical football.
sure its not true 100% of the time,but thats the way it is.this is mostly due to formation centerrs in clubs,where the philosophy of play doesnt really evolve.
so yeah,theres an etheral being in football.(french example,nantes has been playing short passes barcelona style for over 40 years,and psg has always turned excellent players to mid-tier players,auxerre has been playin physical for 20 years)
Well take the Joe Mourinho effect. He augments a core group with a few players he really likes and creates an identity that is definitely not based on the nation in which he's coaching. Watching his teams, you can tell that he understands that his job is to win and convinces the players of that. He sort of bucks that standard European "logic" about certain teams identities. Granted, he's had extremely skilled players to enact his ideas.
I'd say discussing history and philosophy of a club is interesting, but that whole question of identity seems pretty moot when you talk about the first-division of England, Spain, Germany, etc. Those clubs exist to make money and win games. It's nostalgic to think that teams exist in their old identities. The philosophy of play changes slightly indeed, but the mentalities of the players at big clubs is to win. True, many teams have adopted extra-national approaches to mixed success (see: every year when one EPL team tries to play Spanish-style), and the players are often slow to adapt. I just think it's foolish to think that clubs cannot change identity quickly.
Uhh well Jose teams have never had a style. Unless by style you mean whatever it takes to win. Hes employed everything in the book. If he feels hes playing a better team he will go to his well drilled Catenaccioesque, (not often cept maybe a few barca games) if not hell put out whatever he needs to win play the flanks, control the midfield. His teams are always well coached and strong on the counter. And yeah hes always had the players hes needed to do it.
I dont agree that you just any team can change identity quickly, you cant. The italian trend towards the kind of football we see today has been slowish. (Inter/Milan Semi anyone ? And the Juve Milan final after for that matter were just absolute snoozefests for a purist, albiet chances were had and the games were reasonably intertaining.)
But honestly I dont know where this got brought up or why. The conversation was just about the fact that English teams havent been dominant in europe over the entire decade just the last few years. What does that have anything to do with club identities, ethereal realms, or what people think (PSG is a promising player graveyard :s apparantly) about clubs.
On February 25 2012 07:07 Rebs wrote: Uhh well Jose teams have never had a style. Unless by style you mean whatever it takes to win. Hes employed everything in the book. If he feels hes playing a better team he will go to his well drilled Catenaccioesque, (not often cept maybe a few barca games) if not hell put out whatever he needs to win play the flanks, control the midfield. His teams are always well coached and strong on the counter. And yeah hes always had the players hes needed to do it.
I dont agree that you just any team can change identity quickly, you cant. The italian trend towards the kind of football we see today has been slowish. (Inter/Milan Semi anyone ? And the Juve Milan final after for that matter were just absolute snoozefests for a purist, albiet chances were had and the games were reasonably intertaining.)
But honestly I dont know where this got brought up or why. The conversation was just about the fact that English teams havent been dominant in europe over the entire decade just the last few years. What does that have anything to do with club identities, ethereal realms, or what people think (PSG is a promising player graveyard :s apparantly) about clubs.
i actually think its pretty interesting. i lived abroad for a few years and stopped following football altogether.when i finally got back to watching it,sure there were new players/managers everywhere,and top teams had changed,but the identity of most of the teams didnt.im just not talking about the playstyle,the results but the way players adopted the same attitude as their predecessors,the managements attitude towards the players/public and so on. i really think football clubs have a soul,and if they dont we(the football fans) sure act like they do.
another example:liverpool has always been the good guy. today theyve got players as aggressive/abusing as gerrard and suarez,still,liverpools the good guy.
On February 25 2012 07:07 Rebs wrote: Uhh well Jose teams have never had a style. Unless by style you mean whatever it takes to win. Hes employed everything in the book. If he feels hes playing a better team he will go to his well drilled Catenaccioesque, (not often cept maybe a few barca games) if not hell put out whatever he needs to win play the flanks, control the midfield. His teams are always well coached and strong on the counter. And yeah hes always had the players hes needed to do it.
I dont agree that you just any team can change identity quickly, you cant. The italian trend towards the kind of football we see today has been slowish. (Inter/Milan Semi anyone ? And the Juve Milan final after for that matter were just absolute snoozefests for a purist, albiet chances were had and the games were reasonably intertaining.)
But honestly I dont know where this got brought up or why. The conversation was just about the fact that English teams havent been dominant in europe over the entire decade just the last few years. What does that have anything to do with club identities, ethereal realms, or what people think (PSG is a promising player graveyard :s apparantly) about clubs.
i actually think its pretty interesting. i lived abroad for a few years and stopped following football altogether.when i finally got back to watching it,sure there were new players/managers everywhere,and top teams had changed,but the identity of most of the teams didnt.im just not talking about the playstyle,the results but the way players adopted the same attitude as their predecessors,the managements attitude towards the players/public and so on. i really think football clubs have a soul,and if they dont we(the football fans) sure act like they do.
another example:liverpool has always been the good guy. today theyve got players as aggressive/abusing as gerrard and suarez,still,liverpools the good guy.
Do we even watch the same sport? THE steven gerrard agressive or even abusive? i don't even....
O-M-G Milan-Juventus: Muntari scores a 2-0 goal that was not counted despite the ball clearly passing the goal line, Juve counters and Pirlo almost scores the 1-1. I can't imagine the shitstorm if Pirlo had scored the goal :O That was a mistake style Lampard vs Germany in 2010 WC
On February 26 2012 05:19 ApocAlypsE007 wrote: O-M-G Milan-Juventus: Muntari scores a 2-0 goal that was not counted despite the ball clearly passing the goal line, Juve counters and Pirlo almost scores the 1-1. I can't imagine the shitstorm if Pirlo had scored the goal :O That was a mistake style Lampard vs Germany in 2010 WC
It wasn't quite as obvious, as the ball never hit the ground where it should be obvious that it was past the line, but yeah, even then it shouldn't have been missed.
crazy game between lyon and psg,4-4 with 4 goals in 10 mn,psg tying the game at the last second. 5 really nice goals. paris looses first place after a game they should have won 8-5 >.<
EPT
