EPT2018 - 2019 Football Thread - Page 45
| Forum Index > Sports |
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
| ||
|
DucK-
Singapore11447 Posts
Personally this early version of sarri ball is not attractive to me yet, because there's still too much sideways passing going on. Outside of the hazard magic, we're actually not doing great in creating chances. My maim enjoyment is the fact that finally our style is positive and we strive to take control of game. Good news is that its most likely due to the lack of a proper striker, and its still the early stages. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18481 Posts
On October 01 2018 20:19 sneirac wrote: All true, but that still doesn't make Barca 2009 boring. Their opponents were boring, the team that is parking the bus is boring. You may have loved Chelsea 1.0, but for anyone that wasn't a fan to watch their matches were horribly depressing shit shows. There is a reason no one gets hyped for a "top" game anymore if Mourinho is involved and that is because it will just be bus parking and it always was that way for Chelsea too. No one is getting hyped for "top" games anymore period. | ||
|
clusen
Germany8702 Posts
On October 01 2018 20:14 Pandemona wrote: Which every team did, like every team does vs city or bayern etc. But the new Pep doesn't pass it around outside the box, they shoot, they make runs into box and play out of this world passes. Pep Barca did not do that, you can show huge differences between Bayern, Man City pep vs Barca pep. That isn't due to anything other than pep evolving as a manager and improving on his style. Pep just adapted to the players he had, he didn't get to choose the players he used at Bayern during his stint except maybe Thiago. They bought players like Kimmich without even asking him. Rightfully so. | ||
|
WillyWanker
France1915 Posts
Spain had less impact because they didn't have the same players up front. Try matching Messi Henry Etoo... In my opinion, Pep's teams play the smartest football. Smart means finding the best situation to score, and if the current attacking move isn't going to be a goal, go back and find a better opportunity. This means less shots, less risks, etc. That's why they pass the ball short on corners, because there's only a small chance you're going to score on a corner kick (even more so when you only have midgets). On top of that, they have more YouTube-worthy plays per game than most teams have in an entire year. People tend to forget that and just focus on the game's average pace. And the ball moving fast will always look slower than players moving fast xD For me watching players take the smart decisions most of the time is really satisfying. But I can understand why for some it's boring. Mayweather is amazing at defense, people call him boring. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Anyway back to the point i was making is that Pep plays same way at Bayern and at City but he played even more offensively due to the passing was way quicker at Barcelona the ball was moved so slowly. Like Chelsea vs West Ham, when you play the ball slowly, it becomes extremely easy to defend vs that style as you just need to stay rigid in your formation. That is the difference for me and is what i prefer to see. What would you say the difference between Pep City/Bayern and Sarri/Klopp style is to that of the Barca side in 2009? For me it is the speed of the ball being moved. | ||
|
WillyWanker
France1915 Posts
Pep's City seems to take more risks going forward, I think he just adapted to refereeing that's a lot more permissive in England, and teams defending more physically rather than tactically. Also when you have Messi, you can't play the same obviously. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8715 Posts
On October 01 2018 22:40 Pandemona wrote: Difference with Mayweather analogy is the people calling him boring do not understand the sport. Now football there is no understanding of what is right or wrong, the object is to put the ball in the net is all that football is. In boxing the object is to hit and not get hit, which Mayweather never got hit (rarely), where as others aim to knock you out and in return get hit. Anyway back to the point i was making is that Pep plays same way at Bayern and at City but he played even more offensively due to the passing was way quicker at Barcelona the ball was moved so slowly. Like Chelsea vs West Ham, when you play the ball slowly, it becomes extremely easy to defend vs that style as you just need to stay rigid in your formation. That is the difference for me and is what i prefer to see. What would you say the difference between Pep City/Bayern and Sarri/Klopp style is to that of the Barca side in 2009? For me it is the speed of the ball being moved. wait, i have only just started to take notice of what youre saying. correct me if im wrong, but youre saying pep's tiki taka moved the ball too slowly? wat. peps tiki taka was a masterclass showing of touch and move. if youre saying you prefer open play and passing and running into space more, then people probably wouldnt disagree. but to say that peps tiki taka was slow because the ball didnt move around enough is just flat out wrong. and i dont think any team facing peps peak barca team would have thought defending against that team was easy. they put 10-11 people behind the ball and closed all spaces and simply hoped for the best. most teams still got demolished. theres a difference between letting the opponent have the ball but being confident in your defense and being relatively in control of the situation, and being against that barca team and just hoping that having enough bodies in the box will be enough to last 90 minutes. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On October 01 2018 22:40 Pandemona wrote: Difference with Mayweather analogy is the people calling him boring do not understand the sport. There is no difference, I would say that people who consider teams that smash scoring records or win trophies styles "boring" to not understand the sport either. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On October 01 2018 20:43 DucK- wrote: Hmm I don't remember mourinho parking the bus as much as he did after Chelsea 1.0. I mean I get why people dislike his style in man u or Chelsea 2.0, but in my head Chelsea 1.0 wasn't fully a bus parking side. I only remember drogba bullying defenders, lamps scoring goals and essien running everywhere. My favourite was always when Chelsea conceded, because that's when they up the tempo. Their mental will was so strong then, unlike now. It didnt park the bus. Mou's first Chelsea team was far and away the best style of football to play in the PL at the time (till Peps team last year anyway. They were organized in defense but they played with power with guys that were pound for pound more Athletic and still as talented if not more talented than opponents going forward. But even that Chelsea was very much second ball cross stuff in look for rebounds. It played to its players strengths and they played at a high tempo but there wasnt much in the way of artistry (which is fine, thats not a requirement Actually that was how Ancellotti's Chelsea played aswell now that I remember, so Id say those were the best two Chelsea teams to watch. His Inter Chelsea 2.0 and United Teams are hot garbage. Even the one that won the league benefited from individuals peaking at good moments and the other contenders being bad. That was after all the prelude to Leicesters win which was when all of the regular contenders had categorically hit rock bottom. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Sarri/Klopp versions of this and Pep Bayern/Man City side played the ball way faster, not at the beginning of Bayern era but defo towards the end of that stint. The speed was crazy. Stuff like this is what i mean, they just played so slow. This is what i remember from "peak 2009" Barca. Then now when i look at a Pep team i see fast paced, lots and lots and lots of off the ball movement added in with crazy formations and beautiful passing at pace. On October 01 2018 23:15 Rebs wrote: There is no difference, I would say that people who consider teams that smash scoring records or win trophies styles "boring" to not understand the sport either. Again this is irrelevant and wrong. The results determines the success, Mayweather winning without getting hit and jabbing his way to victory compared to Pacqiao is chalk and cheese. Mayweather was more successful, Chelsea had these point records and goal records before the Pep man city record by parking the bus..... | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On October 01 2018 23:23 Pandemona wrote: They got to the edge of the box, did not shoot and went backwards, this was caused by them playing to slowly yes, that was at its peak in 2009. It felt like they kept the ball because they needed to keep it away from the opponent which is Pep 101 but did not shoot or move it as quick as teams move it now. In peak 2009 Barca they played it across the opponents box side to side and everyone was bored. Or at least so the people i spoke to in England xD Sarri/Klopp versions of this and Pep Bayern/Man City side played the ball way faster, not at the beginning of Bayern era but defo towards the end of that stint. The speed was crazy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wcvo3F-SeFk Stuff like this is what i mean, they just played so slow. This is what i remember from "peak 2009" Barca. Then now when i look at a Pep team i see fast paced, lots and lots and lots of off the ball movement added in with crazy formations and beautiful passing at pace. Again this is irrelevant and wrong. The results determines the success, Mayweather winning without getting hit and jabbing his way to victory compared to Pacqiao is chalk and cheese. Mayweather was more successful, Chelsea had these point records and goal records before the Pep man city record by parking the bus..... Regarding the video, is it completely lost on you that the centreback is camping the edge of the opponents half ? Making a risky play at that point is a gauranteed counter attack and no one is trying to press or take the ball on the other side. What is it that you propose they do ? Make a dumb through ball thats get intercepted and releases a counter? And the ball is moving quickly, I am not sure what you mean by slow here. And I dont understand by Klopp Sarri or Pep City moving the ball faster means. English teams in general offer more space and Liverpool doesnt even really build plays. Theyre speed comes from pressing and releasing players on counters generally through the wide players and with fullbacks supporting. When was the list time Hendo and Milner actually passed their way through a team lol ? And Sarri's style is practically the same thing as Pep, its not particularly faster although its a bit more defensive minded with a focus on transitions from defense to attack being made through ball and player movement, rather than kick and rush which makes it easy on the eye. The game feels faster because teams expose themselves more, no other reason. The City vs Brighton game over the weekend was literally 90 minutes of exactly that video except Brighton got antsy a couple of times tried to get forward and win the game, got burned and then went back to sitting in their box. Yes, there are differences and adjustments to the way City plays compared to Barca or Bayern or wherever, but the core philosophy is still the same and you can see it plain as day. And regarding your comment about being irrelevant and wrong I dont understand the point you are trying to make, the syntax is confusing. edit; Oh I see now. Wow you think Mous first Chelsea team parked the bus ? Are you kidding ? | ||
|
WillyWanker
France1915 Posts
Barça counter attacking is just as scary (if not more) than other top teams. Give Messi space and see what happens. Constantly creating chances from 'static' situations is super hard and Pep teams can do that better than any other team. Barça broke more defensive locks than any other team. Any time I've seen Madrid (which nobody would dare say they're boring to watch) face a bus, they struggled far more than Barça. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On October 01 2018 23:34 Rebs wrote: Regarding the video, is it completely lost on you that the centreback is camping the edge of the opponents half ? Making a risky play at that point is a gauranteed counter attack and no one is trying to press or take the ball on the other side. What is it that you propose they do ? Make a dumb through ball thats get intercepted and releases a counter? And the ball is moving quickly, I am not sure what you mean by slow here. And regarding your comment about it being irrelevant and wrong I dont understand the point you are trying to make, the syntax is confusing. You said you don't understand football if you think that smashing scoring records and winning trophies is boring....yet the records are there from bus parking times as well in terms of goals and teams still win major trophies by bus parking... You cannot compare boxing to anything like football in terms of end goal. The goal isn't to knock your opponent out, that is just a win condition. The idea of boxing is to score a blow on your opponent to help earn the points to win you the round. Watch Amateur/Olympic boxing to understand what boxing is, it isn't Deontay Wilder windmilling his way to a victory because he has a god given gift of granite hands. It's the ability to hit and not get hit. That is the skill and art of boxing. The aim of football is to out score your opponents, how you do that is up for debate. Bus parking into counters and set pieces or keeping the ball and starving your opponent of said ball so you have more chances to score yourself. Yet the peak 2009 Barca was more keeping the ball whilst not creating as many chances as they could have, for me at least. That was due to the ball moving to slowly, like in the above clip i linked. Its moving side to side slowly without much off the ball movement. Now if you see City version of this, it is way quicker and always going forward not as much side to side. That is what i am saying the evolution from Pep was, ok you might risk losing the ball more, but if you move it faster and quicker with even more off the ball movement (yes barca pep did lots of off the ball movement as well) then their is more chances to score. That is what right now Chelsea struggling with and Liverpool took time learning under Klopp too. The ability to move the ball quickly and fast, if you do not, it is easy for teams to sit in and park the bus against you. See Chelsea 0-0 vs West Ham. | ||
|
DucK-
Singapore11447 Posts
On October 01 2018 23:21 Rebs wrote: It didnt park the bus. Mou's first Chelsea team was far and away the best style of football to play in the PL at the time (till Peps team last year anyway. They were organized in defense but they played with power with guys that were pound for pound more Athletic and still as talented if not more talented than opponents going forward. But even that Chelsea was very much second ball cross stuff in look for rebounds. It played to its players strengths and they played at a high tempo but there wasnt much in the way of artistry (which is fine, thats not a requirement Actually that was how Ancellotti's Chelsea played aswell now that I remember, so Id say those were the best two Chelsea teams to watch. His Inter Chelsea 2.0 and United Teams are hot garbage. Even the one that won the league benefited from individuals peaking at good moments and the other contenders being bad. That was after all the prelude to Leicesters win which was when all of the regular contenders had categorically hit rock bottom. Glad that what I remembered was correct. | ||
|
WillyWanker
France1915 Posts
Liverpool is entertaining to watch because of their big flaws. They don't control much, they just out score opponents. They concede a lot of chances but score more. Their heavy press is super risky and rewarding at the same time. They leave so much space that games look fast, they concede a chance, counter attack, steal the ball and do it again. Pep teams press and keep the ball to minimize how often they're exposed and find the perfect way to strike. People used to say Barça defenders were shit, but in reality it's just because any time they actually had to defend, they were in a bad spot like 1v1 or 2v1. Keeping the ball helps you reduce the risk of getting into that position. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8715 Posts
On October 01 2018 23:47 Pandemona wrote: You said you don't understand football if you think that smashing scoring records and winning trophies is boring....yet the records are there from bus parking times as well in terms of goals and teams still win major trophies by bus parking... You cannot compare boxing to anything like football in terms of end goal. The goal isn't to knock your opponent out, that is just a win condition. The idea of boxing is to score a blow on your opponent to help earn the points to win you the round. Watch Amateur/Olympic boxing to understand what boxing is, it isn't Deontay Wilder windmilling his way to a victory because he has a god given gift of granite hands. It's the ability to hit and not get hit. That is the skill and art of boxing. The aim of football is to out score your opponents, how you do that is up for debate. Bus parking into counters and set pieces or keeping the ball and starving your opponent of said ball so you have more chances to score yourself. Yet the peak 2009 Barca was more keeping the ball whilst not creating as many chances as they could have, for me at least. That was due to the ball moving to slowly, like in the above clip i linked. Its moving side to side slowly without much off the ball movement. Now if you see City version of this, it is way quicker and always going forward not as much side to side. That is what i am saying the evolution from Pep was, ok you might risk losing the ball more, but if you move it faster and quicker with even more off the ball movement (yes barca pep did lots of off the ball movement as well) then their is more chances to score. That is what right now Chelsea struggling with and Liverpool took time learning under Klopp too. The ability to move the ball quickly and fast, if you do not, it is easy for teams to sit in and park the bus against you. See Chelsea 0-0 vs West Ham. that video alone probably has more passes than what the opposing team had the whole game. you cant call that "slow ball movement". also, have you seen the off the ball movement there? look at the players, not the ball, theyre running around constantly trying to create triangles. just because someone doesnt make a through pass or lob into space with another guy sprinting doesnt mean theyre not playing fast. as for the rest of the video, im gonna need more context. current scoreline, game time etc. you can see the entire opposing team running back and forth in formation trying to follow the direction of the ball. meanwhile barca is clearly content on letting the other team waste energy because no one is actually trying to occupy a space in the box and commit to an attack. id hazard a guess that barca are either already winning or were simply confident enough that them scoring was only a matter of time after their opponents' legs gave in. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Man City have it even more than Liverpool though i agree though and they move it so fast and slick and so much movement. Barca are probably winning in that game above might not be i don't know was just highlighting their slow movement of the ball compared to other teams, i mean Pique relaxing passing slowly out, going side to side, yes is movement but there is way more movement happening in the Pep teams of now and the ball is moved quicker forward rather than side to side. You hear managers on about this all the time and even pundits. Carragher and Souness are big voices on that side of the argument of the ball should be moved quicker forward and not side to side. | ||
|
sneirac
Germany3464 Posts
| ||
|
KelsierSC
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On October 02 2018 00:59 sneirac wrote: How in the world is moving the ball forward faster gonna help if the opponent parks 10 men in the box? In general it isn't 10 men literally in the box they still move to close people down, if you can move the ball quickly then the defence doesn't have as much time to reorganise and pockets of space can appear. | ||
| ||
