Why I prefer attractive football over winning at all costs

[gerdm07]

I've been thinking about this here and there based on many comments on this site from members that say they don't care how we play, they just want to win. Here are my thoughts:

1. Attractive football gives you joy just watching. If we play attractive football most of the time, say 60% of our matches, then you will be entertained around 30 matches a season. That's 30 days you will experience joy with the entertaining play and want to watch more. Yes, losing or drawing the match would dampen some of the joy but at least your saw some nice skill and good play. And even after a bad result you were given hope that next weekend will be different.

2. On the other hand, let's say we play conservative football and maybe win just a little more than with attractive football. We might squeak to a title here and there and that's great. When we win a title or cup, though, you get joy for a few days and then you just go back to living your life. It's a brief joy. Sure, even playing conservatively you will see some good play, just not 30 days. Instead, you might see some sparkling play maybe around 10 matches and most of it will center around individual play, not team play.

3. Attractive football wins consistently over the long run. This is especially true with modern football. A team can't compete year after year by playing conservative, defensive football. You might get lucky once in a while, but it can't be sustained.

4. Attractive football attracts great players.

5. Attractive football intimidates your opponents. Two good examples are City at the moment and United during their great runs under SAF.

I became a United fan in 2000 (first time I got satellite tv and could watch european football) because United played with a swagger. I got the feeling that how United play was just as important as getting results.

I know some of you will laugh and mock me and that's okay. This is how I feel and I'm sure there are others like me. My enthusiasm about football has waned because of the pedestrian football I've watched for 4 years now.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

I definitely prefer attacking football and I'm sure most people here do too.

With regards to 'winning at any cost' I suppose it depends on what you're winning. I'd take winning the league right now playing defensive football. But I'd prefer united playing consistently entertaining football over trophies like the league cup and Europa league to be honest. Football is passion and entertainment at the end of the day.

 

[ManUSarge]

I get the impression that we don't play attractive football because we just aren't good enough. I am no football expert but I remember Mourinho teams at Chelsea playing quite attractive football at times. At the start of the season I thought that was what we would be getting this year. It seems as though we have worsened quite a bit since Pogba's absence. We just aren't good enough at building up the play and for some reason the team has been instructed to blast the ball up front. In my opinion, teams that do that aren't good enough to break down defenses. That is apparently what we are...a team that cannot break down defenses and are hoping the defense is caught napping on a long ball up front.

 

[donkeyfish]

I don't find that much joy watching attractive football unless there's real competition, for example in a friendly game. That itself tells me there needs to be an element of competitiveness and importance of winning for football to be joyful.

Similarly, I never enjoy that much watching games in replay.

 

[Keeps It tidy]

Attractive Football usually wins trophies.

 

[NoPace]

I get the impression that we don't play attractive football because we just aren't good enough.

I don't think we could play attractive football and challenge for the title or dominate a (terrible) CL group like we have, but if you gave a manager like Sarri or Guardiola a season he'd have this team playing good possession football:

---------Lukaku----------- (Rashford)
Martial---------------Mata (Mkhitaryan, Lingard)
----Pogba--Herrera------- (Pereira)
--------Matic-------------- (Blind)
Young------------Valencia (Blind, Darmian)
----Lindelof---Bailly-------(Rojo, Jones)
--------De Gea------------ (Romero)

Lindelof/Rojo would be a battle assuming Lindelof is just struggling with the move and isn't a lemon.

No real place for Fellaini or Smalling who would be sold off fairly quickly by a manager playing what is basically a Ajax/Barca style. And in the summer we'd badly need pace and skill at LB and RW though we probably do to play Mourinho ball better anyways.

Also not sure this would suit Lukaku, but I think Martial, Pogba, Matic, Bailly and De Gea would do well in it and that's 5 of our 6 likeliest first choice players over the next 3-4 seasons and Lukaku is likely clever enough with his movement to find a way to still score a healthy number of goals even in this kind of formation.

So, all in all, I'd say the only big issues we face squad-wise if Mourinho is replaced with a manager who plays attractive football is that we might actually need to buy a partner for Bailly (and replace Smalling in the squad), buy another CM who can pass and move which can be tough to find in real quality and it might not suit Lukaku, and only the latter one really concerns me. So, probably an extra 50-100M in the market, which isn't so crazy for a club like ours.

And I'd be furious we didn't sign Bernardo Silva, since I think a midfield of Pogba-Silva-Matic would be fantastic on a team trying to win games 3-2 rather than 1-0.

 

[Sassy Colin]

Attractive Football usually wins trophies.

Exactly, I'd be interested to know who all these teams are who play attractive football and never win anything.

After all, when United used to play attractive football all the time, we were rubbish.

 

[Lord_Emz]

We could play attractive football, but José doesn't likey. Forget about the trophies of last year, we could turn to crap easily. I saw a post somewhere else where someone was like "diff between Jose and pep is if you give them both money to buy a private car, pep would buy a Benz while Jose will buy a truck". That's true to an extent.

This isn't knee jerk, Morata looked superb yesterday cos of his team. Playing off Hazard's dribbling, which could take 3 or 4 men out, leaving space for Morata to exploit. Behind him, an intelligent Fabregas, who could split a defence with a no look pass, whereas we had Mkhitaryan looking amateurish. Not to forget, the drive, enthusiasm Bakayoko added, and the protection of Kante, another intelligent guy. At rb, they had azpilicueta who could actually cross decent balls. Comparing them to us, Matic can match Kante, Herrera is no where as driving as Bakayoko, possibly Pogba could do this. Mkhitaryan is pure rubbish.

We need a new rb, or young at rb and a left back who doesn't have to cut inside everytime. They had Willian on the bench, who was a regular previously. Having a dribbler, hazard, and a runner, Willian flanking you, added with full backs who can cross, as a striker there are lots of chances for you to find space and score goals. It's not about Lukaku's limitations. Having an awful number ten and an endless runner winging, if I were him, would have gotten fecking frustrated by now! I think our defence and gkeeper are good enough if we are to attempt attacking football, but José's old habits die hard.

 

[walkinhop]

People get this all wrong. Most of the time. Because i said they do.

First, what is attractive football?

-Fast passing
-Combinations
-Lots of chances
-Lots of goals
-Missed something?

Winning should be the number 1 priority. Always. If you disagree, go to find yourself a soccer mum, get adopted and play non-scoring 3rd grade soccer in the states.
The trick is, winning needs to remain the number one priority while style is not sacrificed.
"But mister, how is creating chances not a part of winning/" To create chances you need certain personnel to execute certain actions. Apparently, humans tend to be unable to do everything and you get Liverpool.

Mourinho sees the Tottenham game and thinks Result! We see the Chelsea game and think Backfire. The truth is somewhere in the middle. I doubt anyone would mind being stable at the back while actually having a plan for going forward. We are becoming a one trick pony. However, seeing people valuing attractiveness more than winning is just baffling.

It's like saying losing at chess is ok as long as your knight dances the place up.
It's like saying smelling a good meal is better than eating a mediocre one.
It's like saying it's better to have a broken Ferrari than a working Rover.
It's like saying it's better to have a beautiful spouse who's sleeping only with the neighbor than a decent loyal one.
It's like saying it's better to have a fancy stuffed marsupial than an ugly living one.

 

[Micky Targaryen]

Attractive Football usually wins trophies.

Wenger loves this post.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

There is nothing fun nor exciting about losing. I'm a fan of effective football. On both ends of the pitch. Being aesthetically pleasing is a pure bonus. Right now we are only effective defensively. Everyone is fawning over Pep's City because they are playing the best effective football in the league currently. It also helps they have the players to make it aesthetically pleasing.

 

[Cnaiür urs Skiötha]

I guess most of us are not happy about our Football for the last years and would prefer more exciting stuff to watch.

However, we needed to become more stable again and Mourinho absolutely delivered on that front. We won the EL, have 12 Points after 4 games in the CL and chances are good that we will at least finish within top 4 this season.

I hope we will bring in 3 more top Players that we are clearly still missing and with improved Quality I hope our style of playing will get more exciting again.

 

[Gopher Brown]

Go and support Arsenal.

 

[Aniefiok]

Exactly, I'd be interested to know who all these teams are who play attractive football and never win anything.

After all, when United used to play attractive football all the time, we were rubbish.

Tottenham

 

[Mike09]

Arsenal played attractive football back then with a lot of their young creative players but they never win. I prefer winning rather than play attractive football.

 

[Keeps It tidy]

Wenger loves this post.

Arsenal have not played attractive Football in a very long time.

 

[RedRonaldo]

The preferences are clear:

1. Winning with attractive football (what City is doing at the moment)
2. Winning with ugly football (what we trying to do)
3. Drawing with attractive football
4. Drawing with ugly football (what we trying to do away against big team)
5. Losing with attractive football (Arsenal)
6. Losing with ugly football (team in relegation zone, and how we've ended up at times)

And how we define attractive vs ugly:

Attractive - high quality passing, fast, lots of movements, more emphasis on attacking, more chances created, more goals scored, exciting to watch etc) (i.e. City)

Ugly - Parking the bus, slow zombie passing, moving like dinosaurs, heavy reliance on long ball, more emphasis on defending, boring to watch) (i.e. Us)

 

[Lentwood]

It's just not that easy though. Whenever Utd play a non-top 6 side, it's the opposition who park the bus and get ten men behind the ball. This makes it incredibly difficult to be free-flowing and easy on the eye, unless you have players like De Bruyne, Silva, B.Silva, Aguero, Jesus, Sane etc....

When we play top sides, I am afraid we just don't have the quality to open up and take them on head-to-head. I just don't think people realise how much weaker our starting XI is than our title rivals from an attacking perspective.

 

[Keeps It tidy]

It's just not that easy though. Whenever Utd play a non-top 6 side, it's the opposition who park the bus and get ten men behind the ball. This makes it incredibly difficult to be free-flowing and easy on the eye, unless you have players like De Bruyne, Silva, B.Silva, Aguero, Jesus, Sane etc....

When we play top sides, I am afraid we just don't have the quality to open up and take them on head-to-head. I just don't think people realise how much weaker our starting XI is than our title rivals from an attacking perspective.

In terms of attacking talent only City are clearly superior in that regard.

 

[ivaldo]

It’s almost like the start of the season never existed.

We’ve played some great football this season, right up until the Pogba injury, and the great football will return when he does. Yes we are too reliant on Pogba to be that creative spark in the middle at the moment, and I’m sure Jose recognises that and will look to rectify in the next one or two windows.

 

[Lentwood]

In terms of attacking talent only City are clearly superior in that regard.

Definitely not. You wouldn't take Salah, Mane, Coutinho and Lallana over any of our three right at this moment in time? Not talking about potential - I'm talking about how good they are and how often they impact games now.

How about Pedro, Willian, Hazard and Fabregas? Or Ozil, Sanchez, Ramsey?

We keep going on about the "potential" of Martial & Rashford and they might go on to be world beaters - but they aren't right now, not on a regular basis. Mhiki and Mata I am afraid are top half players but not title-challenging quality and so in reality we've got two kids and two not quite good enough attackers supporting a CF who doesn't have the finesse to really get hold of the ball and make things happen.

 

[DWelbz19]

Wenger loves this post.

Arsene Wenger hasn’t played ‘attractive football’ in a while, Buddy.

 

[Champagne Football]

Apart from Pep and Pochettino - I can't think of a single manager out there who is having a lot of success while playing nice football. I wouldn't call Arsenals football successful or attractive to be honest. Zidane will probably be in the managerial scrapheap soon. So if Pochettino were to go to Madrid then who would you replace Jose with?

 

[Keeps It tidy]

Definitely not. You wouldn't take Salah, Mane, Coutinho and Lallana over any of our three right at this moment in time? Not talking about potential - I'm talking about how good they are and how often they impact games now.

How about Pedro, Willian, Hazard and Fabregas? Or Ozil, Sanchez, Ramsey?

We keep going on about the "potential" of Martial & Rashford and they might go on to be world beaters - but they aren't right now, not on a regular basis. Mhiki and Mata I am afraid are top half players but not title-challenging quality and so in reality we've got two kids and two not quite good enough attackers supporting a CF who doesn't have the finesse to really get hold of the ball and make things happen.

Salah, Mane and Coutinho are great but, Liverpool lack a #9 like we have and having that Can, Henderson, Wijnaldum midfield is terrible considering the type of Football they are trying to play.

Hazard is elite but, Pedro and Willian are pretty meh. And Cesc is a flat out liability in certain types of matches

Sanchez is great but, Ozil is a liability in certain matches. Ramsey is good but, their midfield options outside of him are pretty terrible. They have to rely on one of Iwobi, Welbeck and Walcott giving them something. And they do not know how to get the best out of Lacazette.

 

[2 man midfield]

Do you not think all managers would love to play good football? No manager wants to have to set out to play dour stuff, but it's about the team available and the necessary approach. If we'd tried to play expansive, attractive football yesterday evening we'd have been 3 down in 20 minutes. I thought that was obvious just from watching the game.

We haven't got the players to play that way, and won't have until the job is finished. It's an often repeated cliche, but seeing as Jose has been here a little over 12 months I'll repeat it. We are a work in progress.

 

[Maradona10]

I remember a time when tici taca of barcelona seemed very unattractive to some on here and called it boring . For some attractive football is swashbuckiling football with both wingers attacking and your side conceding. Basically what Liverpool do and city do with better players.
For some its tactical victories, having joy in watching ruthless defending, winning etc. Attractiveness is subjective. What is attractive to you may be poop for me.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

I persobly prefer attractive football over just wanting trophies for the simple reason, you watch your team lift a trophy maybe a couple of times a year, you watch them play football about 180 mins a week.

Take last season we won a couple of trophies does that make up for the 100’s of hour of terrible unimaginative pragmatic football we all watched last season.

For me it doesn’t for other it does and that’s fine, but for me I would rather ya play good football to watch every week and not won somthing then play terrible football and and win a trophy.

That’s my personal opnion

 

[2 man midfield]

Trophies > style

Liverpool play good football, which I hope is some comfort to them as they sit in 5th place.

 

[FCBarca]

To the OP, this is effectively the major difference between say a coach like Pep & Mou. Both want to win and while they see it differently in terms of how best to get there - it is more important for one of those two to entertain & bring joy to fans and the players through their play.

Mou would be happy grinding out a 1-0 win complete with parked bus while Pep would never do this. They are fundamentally different in this respect and if you get either of the coaches, you are certain of what sort of product you will ultimately see on the pitch

One style inspires, the other does not

 

[evil_geko]

I agree, I am not watching that much football aside from United these days so when I watch that one game of footie a week to relax, I don't wanna watch this dross.

 

[Crashoutcassius]

Yeah let's change style again after spending 300m lol

 

[Lord_Emz]

http://m.goal.com/x/en-gb/news/683/...rdiola-shows-cowardly-mourinho-attack-now-the

Saw this article. Basically the difference.

 

[King.of.Red]

nah, for Man United, the club that I love and support, I prefer winning at all costs because I love win and it gives me more happiness especially if later we can win trophies. attractive or not, as long as we win a match, that's pure joy for me.
If I want to see attractive football, then I can watch other football matches beside Man United. Of course, if we also can win each match with attractive football, that will be great.

 

[frank lee madeer..]

Tottenham

Pochettino has spent 2 quid tho. Let's have a bit of perspective.

 

[GhastlyHun]

It's like saying smelling a good meal is better than eating a mediocre one.
It's like saying it's better to have a broken Ferrari than a working Rover.

Those are pretty good metaphors

 

[Baby Groot]

restore the back pass rule and Liverpool wins the league, in very ugly style.
on second thought scrap that, I rather Liverpool win nothing trying to play pretty.

 

[Massive Spanner]

Are people forgetting Fergie's last few years or what? We haven't played attractive football since 06/07. I wonder would Op sacrifice the 5 PL's and CL he won since then for us to have played more attractive football?

 

[Moby]

When one chases excellence, success follows automatically.

 

[Moby]

Are people forgetting Fergie's last few years or what? We haven't played attractive football since 06/07. I wonder would Op sacrifice the 5 PL's and CL he won since then for us to have played more attractive football?

I don't what you were watching if you didn't find the Ronaldo-Rooney-Tevez triumvirate entertaining.

 

[Raees]

When one chases excellence, success follows automatically.

Exactly