Agreed. And it's not like players who are generally aggressive and good at hounding the opposition when not in possession all of a sudden lose this aspect of their game in a system which isn't a dedicated, comprehensive "pressing system" of one kind or another. The latter usually requires a high line, as you say - and that would clearly be hazardous here, with Romario lurking on the line, just waiting to outpace one of the "oil tankers" in the middle.
The Reality Draft - QF: Jayvin vs The Red Viper
- Thread starter Edgar Allan Pillow
- Start date
Don't have to play a high line to press hard. I think he could win a lot of balls if Deschamps and Overmars were put under pressure consistently, they also don't have the passing range of the other side of his team so forcing play that way would be good too.
But it helps a lot. Nothing worse than pressing high without a midfield and defence to back it up. You get easily stranded against competent players.
Shame on you.
A pressing system is not just "a player" hounding another, it is an entire system of "Which options am I cancelling out for my opponent" and having a team who is fully aware of which decisions you will take before you make them - so when Overmars is the only option left for Deschamps - there would already be players there before he made that pass to intercept or put further pressure on Overmars when he receives it.
You don't need a high line to make it work either(he shouldn't use a high line for sure), United did a lot of pressing during 06-09 to win the ball back high and start counter attacks as it is one of the most efficient ways to start counters. Compare Mourinho, who needs every single player to be a tactically astute work horse for his system to really shine - he also needs extreme pace in his side as well from the wings.
TRV doesn't have three naturally aggressive players up front, he has three players who were at their best in a pressing system.
I'm not sure if it's the first thing that comes to mind when thinking of Henry and Robben. Neither did much of it for much of their careers, Henry was clearly unhappy grafting away on the wing for Juve and Barca, while Robben only started properly bothering his arse in recent seasons. Yes they can do it, but they're not exactly Boniek and Nedved working the flanks there.
That was my very point!
I take it you think TRV should have opted for precisely a pressing system - because those players you mention are ideally suited for it, and less suited for the system he does in fact use? Well, I disagree - I think their characteristics are very much suited for a counter attacking set-up.
1. Why are these players ideally suited for a pressing system?
2. Are the qualities which make them thus suited only present, as it were, IN a pressing system? Or can they capitalize on these qualities in a different system as well?
If the change is timely and you don't think the damage would have been done already... I always take the 24 hours as two halves, if a change is made, say, after 12 hours it's a half time change. If you thought th egame was deadlocked and after the change he would win the second half then yes, you would. If the defence is all over the shop for an entire half, it may be a different scenario. E.g. I hadn't voted in your game yet because I really couldn't lean either way, I may have voted Raees, but after that Zanetti switch I would have changed it, instantly.
There's no way that Henry was at his best in a pressing system and I'd happily take World Cup 2014 Robben in TRV's set-up here, so he clearly doesn't need a pressing system either. I don't think it matters for Eto'o either, at least I don't see his form at Barca from 04-06 as worse than the first season under Guardiola, where he was part of such a system for one season. It could be used, if it fits the rest of the team, don't think it makes much sense here though.
Last edited:
That's not related to the Romario conundrum but the lack of a ball-playing CB. The point was that while Blanc linked up well with Xabi/Deschamps, TRV needed Scholes/Schweini to come deeper to start the build up. Probably pointless comment in this setup anyway since, by his own admission, he is sitting deep and playing on the counter, the territorial advantage is conceded by definition. I wasn't that clear on it then, thought it was meant to be a free-flowing exchange of blows, and then it would certainly have been a problem.
Last edited:
You are alone in that, tbh.
His defensive participation rose significantly when he was playing under Guardiola, without losing his offensive threat.
Seconded, Sagnol seems no better than Sagna in this things. Bloody hell.
23-19 to TRV right now
Will Viva complete a 4-pointer of a switch or chicken away from it?
Will Viva complete a 4-pointer of a switch or chicken away from it?
Ah, right - well, that's fair enough. The Stam/Vidic combo lacks something in that regard - I think we can all agree on that. Question is how much of a deficiency it is. He's got Dunga sitting deep, who's a better passer than he's usually given credit for.
On a general note, it seems to me that the ball playing CB is usually hyped up a little too much in these drafts - most teams do get by without having a positively great passer back there. You don't need a creative sort of player to start the build-up from the back. Of course it helps - and it's a good thing to have, but it's not a sink-or-float thing unless your tactics depend entirely on having a Koeman style passer in your back four (or three).
Thierry Henry said:
I had just finished adding a few comments to the post you quote. Namely, that in a counter-attacking setup they would have been deep anyway and the territorial advantage was conceded by design anyway.
Re: ball-playing CB, I don't mean it in a creative way. It helps if your CBs have a good pass on them, particularly in a counterattacking setup but it isn't a necessity. It does however affect how quick your transitions are, and how much those in midfield need to "come short" to build things up. It's not like other CBs can't pass a ball, the point is it is primarily simple balls and if they go beyond that comfort zone you start risking losing posession and getting caught on the backfoot by it. For them not to go beyond their comfort zone they need someone to drop deep, link up with them and eventually find those more difficult passes.
It has style implications, basically, and that is pretty evident when watching teams with and without ball-playing CBs. In this case here, sitting deep and breaking, it would be a nice to have from his CBs but won't affect TRV all that much. It's a bonus for Jayvin though, clearly.
I take it he loved it there
counterattacks are used excessive in these drafts. Almost every one writes, that he is playing on the counter regardless of the team. There are very few top teams nowadays that sole rely on counterattacks. Most teams are not going full-possession or full counterattck, nut something in between. Furthermore there is a difference between a quick transition/direct play and counterattacks. Its not the same.
I love both teams, but I am pretty disappointed by both managers and the tactical discussion. TRV has Schweinsteiger, Scholes and Eto in his lineup and he really wants to focus on counterattacks? These are great player to control a match, ignoring that to focus on only one aspect seems unreasonable. Its the same with Jayvin. Alonso, Figo and Boban (who I dont know very well) add more than counterattacking threat.
I guess I understand why the managers are doing that. Its very easy and the caf overrates it, but its not realistic or good.
I love both teams, but I am pretty disappointed by both managers and the tactical discussion. TRV has Schweinsteiger, Scholes and Eto in his lineup and he really wants to focus on counterattacks? These are great player to control a match, ignoring that to focus on only one aspect seems unreasonable. Its the same with Jayvin. Alonso, Figo and Boban (who I dont know very well) add more than counterattacking threat.
I guess I understand why the managers are doing that. Its very easy and the caf overrates it, but its not realistic or good.
Chicken out sound more like me..23-19 to TRV right now
Will Viva complete a 4-pointer of a switch or chicken away from it?
I might unvote, but I won't go to Jayvin as TRV might have the slightest edge. Still pondering about it.
I think both managers are wary because both lack a player who will dominate the midfield, a la Xavi/Iniesta for Alonso and Keane for Scholes. I presume due to both midfields have a high probability of being a tad lightweight, they have oped for a conservative strategy. What makes it even is that Scholes is proven in a counter acttacking set up and Fio/Overmars/Alonso have the pace to shine in that set up too!
Jayvin - 18
.
Gio,
sajeev,
Thisistheone,
Balu,
Edgar Allan Pillow,
Hojoon,
.
antohan,
crappycraperson, ,
BorisDeLeFora,
Raees,
Annahnomoss,
Skizzo,
The Red Viper - 22
.
Wittmann45,
Decotron,
Pat_Mustard,
Cutch,
ha_rooney,
manikandan nair,
bucky,
Isotope,
Kallech33,
|Neo|x, ,
Kazi,
DesiBD,
PedroMendez,
Invictus,
.
VivaJanuzaj,
Chesterlestreet,
harms,
Joga Bonito,
Congrats @The Red Viper
Fantastic game @Jayvin
.
Gio,
sajeev,
Thisistheone,
Balu,
Edgar Allan Pillow,
Hojoon,
.
antohan,
crappycraperson, ,
BorisDeLeFora,
Raees,
Annahnomoss,
Skizzo,
The Red Viper - 22
.
Wittmann45,
Decotron,
Pat_Mustard,
Cutch,
ha_rooney,
manikandan nair,
bucky,
Isotope,
Kallech33,
|Neo|x, ,
Kazi,
DesiBD,
PedroMendez,
Invictus,
.
VivaJanuzaj,
Chesterlestreet,
harms,
Joga Bonito,
Congrats @The Red Viper
Fantastic game @Jayvin
Figo wasnt that fast but that doesnt really matter. of course both teams can counterattack. Thats not my point.
I liked @Annahnomoss lineup in the first round because at least his whole team was perfectly setup to counterattack with a defense that would love the sitback for 90 minutes. I can appriciate this kind of lineups and they show that the manager actually knows their player and capitalizes on their strength.
Those two teams are not specialised only on counters. They could do far more and far better. Its sad that both manager completely ignore that and limit their sides in such a radical way.
A lot due to Atletico and Real who did so well under a counter-attacking system. After the trashing of "possession Bayern" in the CL, you were basically doomed if you weren't playing counter attacking football. Prior to that "controlling the midfield" was the bread and butter for every team, regardless of who you played against and which players you had.
The "popular/vote winning" manner to play changes nonstop depending on how the results in the real world pans out.
totally agree. Its the flavor of the year, but we should be able to do better than that.
In fairness, I think we usually do. I don't think it is about flavours but "safety first". A lot of the emphasis isn't in how teams will play and string moves together but how their defences will be beaten, so there's a tendency to choose sitting back and countering. I did it to good effect in the 50s draft against @Gio, but in that case it was a very clear case of his side being stronger across the board, I had some great players but absolutely had to approach it as a Conference side getting a PL side in the FA Cup.
I agree 100% with one point you make there though re: counter vs. quick transitions. That's the point I was making earlier about TRV having a slower transition which required the midfielders dropping deeper, which was a bit redundant once his chosen setup already had them deep and defending most of the time. If both sides had played a normal/balanced game the differences would be very clear on the pitch, Jayvin had something much smoother and less long-ball reliant going on there.
BTW, congrats @The Red Viper , sorry to keep on Romario's case but there really wasn't much to focus on elsewhere on the pitch. Nothing as clear cut at least.
Hard to ignore trends in the real world, to be fair - just as it's hard not to pander, at least to an extent, to the voters.
That said, a counter attacking approach is nowhere near as "set" as a system (to use that term again) of whatever kind. There are multiple ways to counter attack. In a very general sense you could say that any team that allows the opponent to hog the ball to a fair extent and isn't too worried about actually defending when not in possession, relies on a counter attacking approach - but it doesn't necessarily imply a uniform way of executing these attacks. In that sense this "fad" is at least more open to interpretation than certain others.
United were often enough a counter attacking team during Fergie's golden years - but we didn't necessarily look anything like other teams known as being counter attacking.
That said, a counter attacking approach is nowhere near as "set" as a system (to use that term again) of whatever kind. There are multiple ways to counter attack. In a very general sense you could say that any team that allows the opponent to hog the ball to a fair extent and isn't too worried about actually defending when not in possession, relies on a counter attacking approach - but it doesn't necessarily imply a uniform way of executing these attacks. In that sense this "fad" is at least more open to interpretation than certain others.
United were often enough a counter attacking team during Fergie's golden years - but we didn't necessarily look anything like other teams known as being counter attacking.
Been busy the whole day. So couldn't really contribute a lot. Will go through the discussions and reply back later.
Hard Luck, Jayvin. Good Game. And, Thanks to all those who voted for me.
Hard Luck, Jayvin. Good Game. And, Thanks to all those who voted for me.
Unlucky Jay.. voted for you on the basis I thought your attack was well suited to exploiting TRV's defence but it was tight as hell in all honesty. Congrats TRV - with that front 6 you'll be a match for anyone and it'll be interesting to see who you upgrade the squad with.
Good game Viper, well argued.
Going back to Pedro's point earlier, I would say we were primarily about quick transitions and directness albeit in a different way to Cruyff's Dream Team (which also did counter, but I wouldn't call a counter-attacking team by any stretch). Uruguay is actually a good example of a team that traditionally sets up to play on the counter, sit deep, defend with a 4-5 man backline, two hardworking DMs ahead, and a mixture of pace merchants and trickery further up the pitch.
Our problem always, invariably, is finding players who can connect the two phases effectively. More often than not the defensive players are so shit on the ball that it comes straight back at us. That's what Enzo provided for a couple of decades, to good effect (three Copa América's, all of them beating either the flavour of the times in 83, or the World Champion in 1987 and 1995). Recoba did it for a while, but he lacked industry the lazy fecker. And obviously it was what made Forlán quite clearly the best player at WC2010, what a tourno he had! Back at the Olympics people banged on about how we were taking Cavani and Suárez, and I kept saying we wouldn't do well there, guess why... No point having shiny names upfront if you can't get the ball to them.
We were really good at counters with brilliant flanks, but I don't think we ever played to soak pressure and just wait for the counter. We were much more balanced and were not lacking when it comes to mastering the middle.
I agree with anto's point on quick transtions as against pure counters. Fergie'e United vs Jose's Inter.
Yes, absolutely.
But this is nominal again, as far as I'm concerned - it's about terms and labels. To me we were a counter attacking team of sorts - if you want to call it quick transitions, fine. It's distinct from both other teams that favoured swift transitions and teams that played "counter attacking" football in the sense you imply, though.
The basic difference in this context isn't between shades of X - it's between possession orientated football and a brand of football which is less preoccupied with possession. The latter style necessarily means you rely more on hitting your opponent on the break - in that sense it's a counter approach.
I doubt many, if any, of the draft managers who state that they intend to sit deep and counter actually mean to imply that they intend to play according to traditional counter attacking systems of the sort you refer to - it's a pretty general term in this context, and it is mainly about not having to be in the driver's seat, not needing to dominate possession.
So, yes - it may be a cop-out or at least a safety-first-approach of sorts these days*, given the apparent fall of tiki-taka and the extreme ball hogging ways of certain teams and managers. But it's not a "system" people operate with as much as it is a label slapped on tins which contain different kinds of meat - but meat, not veggies.
* In drafts, I mean, obviously.
See above.
Counterattacks are quick transition in a very specific context. Bayern in the treble winning season scored more goals after counters than any other top team while also playing a fairly extreme possession style with a slow/save buildup elements (=slow transition). Dortmund played/plays in a very risky/direct way (=quick transition), but with less counterattacks.
Spanish tiki-taka rarely used counters and was fairly slow in transition, but thats a very extreme and specific way to play football. One of the most extreme tactics in football.
The gist is, that possession based approaches and counter-attacks are not necessarily a conflict and quick transition doesnt necessarily mean that you get into counter-attacking situations.
Anto do you have any links to the Copa games of this era.. I want to brush up on my knowledge on all things Enzo.
I think a big cause is that the more in depth you go about things - the more enemies you will make who disagree with you. The more generic you are, and the less you actually say - the more you let the voter just assume you will play exactly like he thinks "your players would play".
So by just throwing in a generic statement, like "I will play counter-attacking football" and writing a story about your players attributes you avoid being called out for just leaving it blank - which you basically could have done instead.
You can find most games on Youtube, although quality isn't the best. Frankly, not being in the heat of the moment they can be quite dull as it typically consists of a bunch of water-carriers behind the ball, give it to Enzo, Enzo gets fouled, rinse repeat until he manages to not get fouled and does something brilliant.
The most watchable team was actually when we came runners-up in Brazil in 1989, look up the Argentina-Uruguay semi-final (we won, 2-0), that's a bloody good game to watch although Sosa was the MotM in that one. Maradona in his pomp as well
Another entertaining one could be the 1995 final against Brazil since you will see loads of familiar faces and Enzo being hunted down in packs. Or you could go for feeling for him watching another entertaining game: Denmark destroying us in 1986. It's actually a good indicator of him as a player, constantly surrounded by spackers and being on a solo mission. Sometimes it failed, spectacularly, but the remarkable thing is how many times he actually managed to be successful almost single-handedly.
You can also have a look at the clip I put together in a previous draft when Annah had him. I think it accurately portrays his evolution, value and versatility as a player.
Also, Sagnol can still affect the games from deep. His crossing from deep was sensational.