Xtratime Community banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,168 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Here's the situation: you get a random team appointed to you with the job to coach them. With a limited budget of course (so no dream team possible), but with the tactic to turn into a whole. A bit like Championship Manager, but a little more abstract since it is about tactics rather than about players (of course it's not totally abstract: if you can use a player as an example of what you want for that position, go right ahead and spit it out :) ). And no, I don't claim to be a tactical genius ;) :tongue: , so I go on (what I hope to be) common sense.

My team would then play in a flexible 4-4-2 with focus on the centra midfield, which would look like this:

-------------11--------9-----------

--8------10-------6----------7-----

--5-------4---------3----------2

-----------------1--------------------

remarks by number:
3: always the final man. should be a firm defender with a clear view and a no-nonsense tackle.
11: action maker, a bit smaller but with a good dribble
9: what I call the fysical striker. A good header who can shake his man off in a duel and then shoot.
6: defensive midfielder. strong points: ball recuperation and a good overview
8 and 7: flank players who rely more on speed and speed of execution which they especially can use when 10 is operating as a playmaker/"pivoteur"
10: attacking midfielder. In a more offensive match, he can post behind the strikers and act as a playmaker/"pivot". 6 can then either move to the center or get back-up from 4 who positions himself next to him for ball recuperation. The other defenders keep their position and stay behind the ball at all times.

That would have this result:
10 moving up:

---------11--------------9---------

----------------10-------------------

-----8--------6---------------7-----

or with 4 moving ahead as well:


-----------11-------------9-----------

-----------------10--------------------

--8-------4------------6---------7----

------5----------3-----------2----------

When moving into a defensive strategy, 6 can easily blend in in the defense, thus moving into a 5-3-2 like this (or 1-4-3-2 if you will)

------------11---------------9-----------

--------8----------10---------------7----

------5--------4----------6--------2----

--------------------3--------------------

-------------------1---------------------

Strong point: during a game you can gradually change your strategy without moving more than two players at once, unless of course my nr.10 moves ahead and 4 joins 6 as a backup.

Weak point: a lot will depend on organisation and especially on my nr. 10. But then again, a lot of teams do and if all goes well, he'll abviously be my star player. :)

So that pretty much sums it up. What are your thoughts on this one? How would you let your team play? Would you go for the fearless attack or rather choose for a defensive style and maybe even a bit of catenaccio? Or do you have any remarks or questions about my team? Just give a holler and let me know. See you!

greetz,
binswhacker
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
Very interesting topic :star: on which I'm not going to answer right away. Maybe tomorrow otherwise, next Thuesday, but I'm going to reply :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,606 Posts
Looks a very good tactic and you should be able to try it out once :)

Well, i would opt for a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 but haven't much time to go in detail now. I will post it in the w-e and then choose one out of the two and see if can take on your team ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,606 Posts
Hmm, after some thoughts i decided to play with a 4-4-2 since it's a modest team we are talking about :) Still i would make some adjustments though depending on the opponent ..
It looks more or less like the extremely well explained tactic of binswhacker though :eek:

______11______9_____

__________10

8___________________7

__________6

5______4_____3______2

__________1


The right- and leftback are very important to neutralize the wing players of the opposite team. Beside speed they also need a good tackle. Offensive skills are a surplus ;)

Central defenders need a good view on the game and at least one of them i want to be strong in the air.

Number 6 is one of the key figures in my team. He needs a lot of defensive qualities and running ability. He brings balance to the team and relieve my playmaker from his work.

The 2 wingers would be most concentrated on the offensive and therefor need speed, good crosses, ...



For example : When opposite team counters from the right ...

__O
_____<- 6_______

5____4_____3_____2

The defensive midfielder will go the right to stop his run. 8 will take place in the central part to fill the empty place left by 6, and also the 10 will go backwards to 'defend' and get the ball to set up the attack. (If 6 comes too late there are still 5 and 4 ofcourse so he can take care of his central job)


Main idea behind the whole tactic is that you always can make a 'triangle' easy between the players which gives the man with the ball always 2 solutions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,168 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Well, I like to agree with you on that one. I think on of the key elements, if not THE key element is finding the player in a free position, so the trick idd is to have as many options as possible in order to surprise the opposing team.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
Ok someof my ideas.

First of all I believe a good coach first looks at his squad and builds taktics from the qualities he has. Never the less there should be a clear idea behind every line up. Something very few coaches have in Belgium.

Anyway my favourite system is the 3-4-3 Ajax played. You get attractive football and results (which to me are of secondary order). Another good system is the 3-5-2 (or 3-4-1-2
:rolleyes: as it was reffered to) that As Roma played last year. Unfortunately those are systems that only work when you have outstanding players (e.g. Litmanen at Ajax and the fantastic Cafu at Roma).

For a normal team I would go for a 4-4-2. Unless you have 1 real good defender (Beloufa) and 2 wingers who can take a whole side (type Van Kerckhoven) than I would opt for a 3-5-2. But let's stick to the 4-4-2.

We'll start at the back. In the centre the ideal combination is an intelligent defender, who can also help in the build up, (but in the first place is a defender). The proto-type of this kind of player on a Belgian level to me is Suad Katana (who Anderlecht soo nicely let go to Turkey :rolleyes: ). Alongside him is the defender who can neutralise any forward. One name: Olivier Doll. The backs once again are one the first place defenders, it's nice if they have good attacking qualities, but if they can't defend, they are out (looking at you Peter VDH). A good example for this type of player is Dheedene (in his last year at Anderlecht).

Then midfield: this is important in my views on modern football. Although I regret it, we more and more see that the classical playmaker doesn't work anymore (that is if you play a 4-4-2). The creativity comes from the sides. Even the best playmaker in the world Zidane, couldn't do it for Juve in a 4-4-2. La vecchia signora too changed to the system that was soo succesfull for ManU and Valencia.

Still this way of organising the midfield has one important condition that some ignore. It's not because your flanks bring the creativity, that the centre should be filled with 2 workers. Sure they should do the recuperation, but if they don't have a decent passing you're lost. Those central midfielders need to be able to clinch to a ball, to bring some rest. If they don't, the whole balance of the team is lost. For an example look at Hasi-VDH at Anderlecht at the beginning of this season.

Does this mean I believe players like Stoica or Anic are lost? No not really. They shouldn't be midfielders though. These kind of players aren't number 10's any long. Their best place is a 9,5. A bit like the number 11 in Binswhacker's system. The difference is I would have such player positionned in a more backwords way.

The example is of course Degryse (although Stoica to me can be even better). a player that brings rest to the team, can make an action and a decisive pass and scores on a regular bases.

Risk is that the deep striker, indeed physical, but with enough technique to play with his back to the goal, is let alone too much. Therefore the wingers (from midfield) should play high enough so they can support him. In Belgium Grégoire and Aruna are the types I'm looking for.

A last note that I always would play out of the base of possession, on the half of the opponent (creative football based on technique you know ;)) although some of the best coaches (from Cuper over Emilio ferrera and Sollied) claim the other way around.

Your comments people :)

If you're interested in this kind of topic (I know Iam a lot) look also at Adriaan's ideas here:

http://www.xtratime.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63139
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,168 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Thx for the referation. I was considering posting the thread in other forums as well, like the Italian and the Spanish. I'll get around later today since that won't take much time ( I just love the copy - paste system :D ) But back to the thread: the reason that I posted my 11 up front, is idd because I had a different type of player in mind for that position. Guys like Kolotilko, Moreira, Sillah and Simic and come to think of it, yes, Stoica could also do some good work there. My 11 is the type of the player that can dribble himself through a hole in the wall, if you know what I mean. ;) Now I'm going to take a bit of time to consider my other players and I'll get back to you then.

greetz,
binswhacker
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
597 Posts
I think it is an interesting descussion, but I think the players are much more important than the strategy.

A good manager/coach should be able to make the best possible out of every player... If you have an extremely good vinger, like Giggs/Overmars, you need to play with a vinger. Than you can't play 3-5-2 f.ex. It would be terrible if a manager put Giggs or Overmars on the field as a wingback...

I normally would prefer a 4-4-2 formation, always two strikers I think is the best... If you play 3-5-2 you need two very good wingbacks, defending and attacking wingers... A 3-5-2 formation would be very good if you have a creative midfielder that are not able to make the long runs back and forward... In this system you can also have a player running a lot, but it is more difficult in a 4-4-2 system where you normally would need one defensive minded and one attacking minded midfielder, if you don't have two very good vingers that can do the formation like a 4-2-4...

I don't think the numbers are very important, though, the important part is to put together a team than can win games. As I'm from Norway I do know our style. We always play 4-5-1 with a very defensiveminded and long ball style. This suited the team very well in the mid 90's but know we don't have the players to play in this system but they still use it as the coach think it will work again because it worked previuosly. And thank whoever that Norway now seems to dip in form as it is the worst team in the world to watch, even for me as a Norwegian.

The players are the most important. A coach may have to change his system if he loses one player that he can't be replaced. It is most important to play a system that suites the players available. In most countries, though, they play in one certain way because the players are teached to play this way from a very young age.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
Yes the Norwegian system doesn't work anymore (who was that trainer, who also called hiimself a Marxist again)?

Is it really because the players aren't suited for it anymore or is it because it isn't adapted to modern day football/ other cioaches have found a solution to it.

Anyway I think that system was more influential than many think. If you look at the double-defensive wall Italy drew during the Euro2000, it came right of the Norvegian style 5 years ealier. Still the Italians improved it to an art-form while Norway always looked bopring to me. But hey as a Belgian I'm probably not allowed to critise other NT :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
Talking about taktics and the Norvegian system... one of the most frightening things is the trend to give possession to the opponent. It's an evolution that can clearly be seen. With the exeption of Real almost all succesfull teams of the last years aply this (Liverpool, Valencia,...). Althought it can be spectacular, to me it is an inferior strategy.

Still it prooves itself to be very effective, also in Belgian. From Patrick Rémy to Trond Sollied (and if we may believe him also Emilio Ferrera, although I don't see that) all the succesfull coaches aply it. Whereas there was Cruyff's rule who said "as long as you have the ball, your opponents won't score" now we have rules that say "the ball must be on the other side in 10 (is it 10 that Rémy-rule?)seconds or the space will be gone to create a chance.

Any views on this sad (?) evolution? I'm going to go think about it in a pub with a beer :D :drunk: c-y tomorrow:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
597 Posts
gOD said:
Yes the Norwegian system doesn't work anymore (who was that trainer, who also called hiimself a Marxist again)?

Is it really because the players aren't suited for it anymore or is it because it isn't adapted to modern day football/ other cioaches have found a solution to it.

Anyway I think that system was more influential than many think. If you look at the double-defensive wall Italy drew during the Euro2000, it came right of the Norvegian style 5 years ealier. Still the Italians improved it to an art-form while Norway always looked bopring to me. But hey as a Belgian I'm probably not allowed to critise other NT :D

First, everyone is allowed to criticise Norway because we deserve it! Belgium is a great footballing nation and has given me some of the greatest memories of football, even though I support the Oranje...

The Norwegian coach was Egil Olsen, and yes, he's a Marxist. The new coach, Nils Semb, do copy Olsen's style as he and the Norwegian FA thinks it's the only way to succeed. Even though we don't have any world class players, we do have some decent players like Flo, Solskjaer, Iversen, Leonhardsen, Bakke, Carew, Riise and a few more. The best four players we have, probalby, Flo, Solskjaer, Iversen and Carew are all strikers. Solskjaer need to play a striker as he is not good enough anywhere else, but he normally play on the wing for Norway... Norway play 4-5-1 whatever. With this system it is only one striker, and the three others have to play in midfield... So it is not difficult to see the problem, especially as our two best midfielders, Mykland (1860 Munchen) and a more unknown Orjan Berg, have quit the national team (among others in protest to the style). The only decent winger in Norway is Sorensen (Dortmund I think!), but I can't remember seeing him on the national team (though I have to say I can't remember the last Norway-match I saw...).

All coaches in Norway think that Olsen's way of thinking is the right one. Olsen is an expert commantator on Norwegian TV and he doesn't think any other nations or teams play decent football, not even the teams that have won many championships. He always criticise them for not playing long balls (It is nice to see some very good goals where a team holds the ball for a long time because Olsen do not think it's possible to score if more that three players are involved in the attack, and the attack normaly starts with a fullback or the goal-keeper!!!).

With everyone thinking his style, where extreme qualities are much better than overall good qualities, I don't think Norway will be anywhere near to qualify again for a major tournament. Decent players will never get the chance in the team before we get a foreign coach with new ideas. If you are a very good header of the ball, a very good passer or a very good tackler, you don't need any more qualities to play for Norway. Our best finisher, Solskjaer, is hardly ever in the box... It is a vaste of talent-de-luxe!

This is a fact: During Euro2000 the Norwegian players where not allowed to pass the ball backwards or sideways during training. Whatever obtion, the ball had to go forward. So in most of the cases you gave the ball away to the opposition when you easily could have found a teammate with a simple pass on the ground. It's hardly allowed to pass the ball on the ground!

I have to say, I'm very happy that there are more Norwegians than me who do not like the national team. There are a lot of Norwegians supporting Argentina, Spain, Brazil, Italy, Nederland, England, France etc. and would only go to a Norway game if they played their favourite team.

The team is so unattractive that before the Euro2004-draw they hoped to draw f.ex. France and England, the only way to fill the stadium (and it takes only 25.000).

Norway is the most boring national team in the world, I think everyone agrees with that! We should stick to the winter games!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,502 Posts
Talking about taktics and the Norvegian system... one of the most frightening things is the trend to give possession to the opponent. It's an evolution that can clearly be seen. With the exeption of Real almost all succesfull teams of the last years aply this (Liverpool, Valencia,...). Althought it can be spectacular, to me it is an inferior strategy. Still it prooves itself to be very effective, also in Belgian. From Patrick Rémy to Trond Sollied (and if we may believe him also Emilio Ferrera, although I don't see that) all the succesfull coaches aply it. Whereas there was Cruyff's rule who said "as long as you have the ball, your opponents won't score" now we have rules that say "the ball must be on the other side in 10 (is it 10 that Rémy-rule?)seconds or the space will be gone to create a chance.

Any views on this sad (?) evolution?
Well I don't like this trend aswel. I always prefered possesion football over counterfootball. Barca under Cruyff and Van Gaal ( remember the 99-2000 Cl!), Real Madrid since Figo and by moments the Depor of nowadays are simply marvelous. Teams that patiently keep making triangles, and squares, moving forward little by little.

Year by year football is getting harder and harder. It's difficult to both look for somewhat consistant results and nice football.

So what's your solution to this gOD? ( if you see one)

Also, does anyone have nice football lecure that you would like to recommand?

ADRIAAN
_______
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,168 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Well, maybe you already read this one, but "Pitch Fever" by Nick Hornby looks like a must-read for every football-fan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,168 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Not being able to sleep :D and a finally finished selection bring me to pick up this old thread one more time :eek: . After careful deliberation ;) I've come up with a selection of 24 players with 3 keepers:

As you remember, the numbers are the same as the positions in my original strategy:

legend: 1st choice - 2nd choice - 3rd choice (although that of course can easily change with each opponent :) )

1) Devlieger - Verlinden - Deelkens
2) Deflandre - Vreven
3) Lembi - Vidovic
4) Maertens - Clement
5) Vanderheyden - Vrancken
6) Simons - Chatelle
7) Tanghe - Dufer
8) Goor - Daerden
9) Verheyen - Goots
10) Smolders - Blondel
11) Moreira - Kpaka

remarks:

1) 24th player: Englebert: perfect player to replace or back up the flanks when they play an infiltrating role.
2) Vandewalle as a full-time keeper coach :)

So, the end result would look like this:

--------------------------Devlieger---------------------

--Deflandre------Lembi------Maertens----VDH----

--Tanghe---------Simons-----Smolders---Goor---

--------------Verheyen--------Moreira---------------

Your thoughts on this, or your selection? Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
I'll use the same numbers as Binswhacker did since I also would play 4-4-2. I'll pick 24 players with 2 keepers (Binswhacker you only have 23 if I counted well)

1) De Wilde -- De Vlieger
2) Blay -- De Cock *
3) Zokora -- Lembi*
4) Beloufa -- Doll -- Bodor*
5) Dragutinovic -- Mi Zewlakov
6) Baseggio -- Simons *
7) Aruna -- Dufer *
8) Grégoire -- Boffin *
9) Dagano -- Jestrovic -- Cavens*
10) Thys -- Englebert *
11) Stoica -- Degryse

Notes:

* As said the backs should first be defenders. There are almost no decent right-backs in Belgium so I opted for Blay who comes close and since he plays at that position for Standard. Better would be to position him at place 10.

* Nr 3 is a good defender who has also skills for the build up.

* Nr 4 is more a defender who's first qualtities lay in neutralising an attacker. of course Beloufa has the qualities of nr 3 and nr 4 bt still I think his main asset is defensively.

* Nr 6 and 10 are the same type of player. Defensive midfielders who have good passing skills. It's a detail but I think they should be a left and a right-footed player

* Nr 7 and 8 are creative wingers, people that can pass a man and/or have a good cross (I know Aruna hasn't but he makes up for it thanks to his dribbling skills)

*Nr 9: The striker, who can play with his back at the goal. Physically strong and easily scoring. ideal is Koller, but I only wanted to take players of our league

* Nr 11: The playmaker in modern football. best discription is a 9,5. He creates but also scores.


That would make:

--------------------------- De Wilde -----------------------------

Blay---------------Zokora-------Beloufa------------Dragutinovic

Aruna -------------Thys---------Baseggio------------Grégoire

----------------------Dagano----Stoica----------------------------
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,502 Posts
What a diverence in football culture between those two teams ;)


Well I want to try something diverent:

a 4-5-1 with 1 defensive midfielder.


---------------------------De Wilde-------------------------------

Junior---------------Zokora--Beloufa-----------Dragutinovic


Mornar---------------------Bassegio---------------------Boffin

-------------Stoica------------------------Degryse---------------

------------------------------Dagano-------------------------------


Ultra offensive, but I just would love to see this one day. I mean, they did try it with Zetterberg and Scifo. Ofcourse Degryse falls back when Stioca attacks and the other way around.

ADRIAAN
_______
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,168 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
gOD: Englebert is my 24th player. I posted him in aremark afterwards because after his impressive on the left against Genk, I do not want to pin him down to one flank. Now he'd be a supersub who'd come in the back of a winger to support actions on the winger's part. So in e.g. a situation where a lot of pressure can be brought over the right wing, I'd bring him in for a defender or a striker to back up the infiltrating Tanghe.

adriaan: you mentioned a difference in football culture between me and god. Now I can see some tactical differences as well (although we have 5 or 6 players in common in our selection) but I'd like to know which are the differences that struck you. :)

Here are a few of the differences I noticed:

1) we have different postions for our final man
2) gods wingers are more prone to sending crosses whereads my wingers are more infiltrators.
3) gods playmaker has a 50/50 midfield/striker type of position if I get it correctly whereas mine is a more traditional type even though he gets a chance to move ahead during the game and operate behind the strikers.

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,672 Posts
binswhacker said:
1) we have different postions for our final man
2) gods wingers are more prone to sending crosses whereads my wingers are more infiltrators.
3) gods playmaker has a 50/50 midfield/striker type of position if I get it correctly whereas mine is a more traditional type even though he gets a chance to move ahead during the game and operate behind the strikers.
1) What do you mean :confused:

2) Yes the creativity mainly comes from the wings. In my opinion that is the trend in modern football. Still the flanks are also imùportant to keep the pitch wide. That's the only way to play on the opponents half. Maybe that idea isn't modern, but in the tradition of Anderlecht and Cruyff essential to my view on football. Therefore all players should have a decent technique (maybe except for the defender concerned with the neutralisation of the opponent's attacker).

Certainly the central midfielders should be able to hold on to a ball. Something I've been missing at Anderlecht and de Rode Duivels the last years (hopefully the duo Baseggioo-Simons works soo that can be resolved). It is essential though, not only for the attack but also to keep pressure away from the defence. At Euro2000 we could see Wilmots-Vanderhaeghen fail at that aspect. Another result was that they had to run after each ball and we're physically destroyed after 75 minutes.

3) Yes that for a part was the result of the players I could choose. Although he isn't convinced himself, I truely believe Stoica could be (and by could be I'm not talking about working harder or that kind of bs. Anybody who saw him the last 1.5 years should know he works hard enough :rolleyes: ) absolute worldclass (what does Aimar has that Stoica doesn't have :wth: :confused: on that position.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top