Bate Borisov - Juventus 30th Sep 2008

bono said:

:stuckup: :stuckup: :stuckup:

Click to expand...

One of my difficulties debating my team with you, is that you use such a Ranieri quote as evidence. For my own part I would readily agree with you, if you said that it was a mistake fielding Camo as a central midfielder in a team where the wingers are virtually incapable defensively. Or if you just say that playing Camo as a central midfielder when you have other options is just stupid.

Now - this is what Ranieri is quoted as saying:

"1: My decision to put Giovinco in central midfield in a 4-3-3 formation was not the best choice for this match 2: as BATE focused on fast breaks."


Giovinco was in central midfield? How does he figure? Did Nedved not play the same left midfield drifting inside he always does? Did Giovinco not play the right midfield drifting inside Camo always does?
Is that supposed to mean that Nedved was a forward?

And apart from it being impossible to see that a: we played 433 and b: that Giovinco was a central midfielder (so much so, that UEFA - who base their pre-match formations on the informations from the teams - had us pegged in the 442 we always play), I just have to ask if 433 is supposed to be incapable of facing counterattacking teams? Huh?

Then it is somewhat weird that most the major teams in world football play variations of this tactic isn't it? Considering that the biggest sides are habitually faced by teams are .....wait for it.... deploying a counterattacking strategy!!!
And if this bit of wisdom - 433 being bad against counterattacking teams - is one he held on to before the match, then how could he be surprised that it backfired? He presumed that Bate would be camping in our half, or what?
And just one more thing.... isn't it at fact, that Bate actually did their damage in the first half our when they were in fact trying to force the issue and had us under rather sustained pressure? To the extend that they had a marked advantage in possession in the first 30 minutes? Is that counterattacking football per se?

For those who watched the match, I think it would be quite hard for anyone to think that passage (too) in Ranieri's post match comments wasn't completely idiotic.

actually i feel like that this time Ranieri selected an interesting 11, he almost got it all right pre-match selection wise to put it like that. i was delighted to see De Ceglie start, just because i think Molinaro is god awfull.

Giovinco starting - good stuff.

i'd go with Marchiosio in center mid instead of Camo though.

Bate was really explosive and threatening the first 30 minutes. they went out with no fear and all guns blazing, logically enough since it was their first CL game ever at home. Juve looked shocked and paralyzed by this. Juve to me things started to look better with Legro and Camo out for Knezevic and Marchiosio.

i'm alright with the result, like Ranieri says considering we were assualted down by 2 goals very early and managed to fight back and get close to win it i'm content atleast. remember there was 3 relatively new players out there for Juve. DC, Marchiosio and GIO. they are doing alright already in my eyes but they will only get better with time and more match experienced. they will learn how to synch and connect with the more experienced players shall we say.

take Gio, it looks like he is so accurate he could hit a needle on the field from anywhere. so when he learns how the other players in the team particulary the strikers likes to have the ball, how they make their runs etc we should be in for some eye candy. this goes for any new player in the team really.

but the problem with Ranieri for me is that he never seems to learn. no matter how big plate of symptoms and indications he get served from a game he just never seems to recognize and learn from them. so he will just go and do the same mistakes next match. like using Molinaro, putting Gio on the bench, do weird and too late subs in general etc etc.

looking at next game with great anticipation, what has he learned from the last games?

glen

I quoted Ranieri not for the Govinco part, but for the "formation" part. Teh Govinco there was (I think) used for an ullustration that a 433 with one DM only is not the smart. So it was not against Govinco, but that he shoudl have played 2 DMs. In inter 433 works (well didnt against Milan but has and will) with ... wait, 3 DMs!

I did say after 1st half that this super offensive formation (almost all attacking options on, only Momo as a DM) might force Ranieri to re-consider and never play all of them together again. So my 1st own quote was about what Ranieri will make out of this (if doesn’t work even against a team like Bate etc). So I quoted Ranieri after the game to show I might have had a point (since I made a prediction about his own way of thinking, analysing the game). No shock I used the Milan Depor game as an example. By far on a far greater magnitude (UCL 1/4 final, Milan was tipped for a UCL win that season), Carlo played it cool, very attacking without going for a strong 0-0 game options and was ROCKED like never before. Till this very day we have to watch 2 or 3 DMs every freaking game you know (at that Depor 0-4 game we played only Rino and then Pirlo-Seedorf-Kaka-Sheva-Tomasson, plus Cafu, I think)

The Osman quote was a friendly reminder since he obviously will never stop his all dismissive attitude towards my posts, whatever I post.

Glen said:

You quoted it because you felt like it backed your argument.

It hope to have demonstrated to you, that whereas I could agree with you that Camo in the middle - given the other players and in general - was a bad idea.... but also, importantly, that the quote itself was entirely meaningless. Hence it is rather difficult to use for anything other than saying: "WOW! ZOMG!!! He said 'FORMATION' - just like me! ZOMG!", which is the sms-generation equivalent of what you did.

Click to expand...

I did back my argument. I think you fail to understand that my argument was what Ranieri himself will make out of this formation. Not what it is (or you think) in reality happened or what you think was the real formation and what was the real problem there. Ranieri, like Carlo, is a defensive (or rather solid ) minded coach. He was probably forced to play an all attacking formation sooner or later (or simply always wanted to try) and he felt Bate is the perfect example. He got the bites, big time. So, knowing him, even before the game was finished I felt he will use that to make an argument such an attacking formation cant work. And he did. (even if you are right his argument is wrong on the face of it). This is what i am saying. I claimed this 1st half will haunt you because of what Ranieri will make out of it. His quote proves my point, at least partially.

tu put it bluntly - the quote was not meaningless since it reaveals Ranieri's state of mind about the formation and that is what I was talking about during the game.