Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber
Thus says Kemo
Zidane didn't play a starring role in France's 98 world cup tournament.
And? Inspired them to the final in 06, swaggered all over the place in Euro 2000 too.Zidane didn't play a starring role in France's 98 world cup tournament.
Your average football fan doesn't even know a 442 from a 4231 or 4411.I think your average football fan places far too much importance on formations
Oh my.Nani is as talented as Ronaldo.
Which all obviously have nothing to do with World cup France 98.And? Inspired them to the final in 06, swaggered all over the place in Euro 2000 too.
Well it's not outrageous is it? He's as good at shooting from distance, as good a crosser, a better dribbler, more creative, better defensively, less likely to lose possession, as fast and has similar levels of acceleration.Oh my.
Whoooooosh.Well it's not outrageous is it? He's as good at shooting from distance, as good a crosser, a better dribbler, more creative, better defensively, less likely to lose possession, as fast and has similar levels of acceleration.
Ronaldo is more consistent, a better goal scorer (better in the air, better movement, better finisher) and is taller.
Consistency is the important factor, so it's really Ronaldo's mentality that sets him apart. Nani's got several gears to step up based on his attributes - it's completely dependant on whether he has the mental capabilities to do.
Well it's not outrageous is it? He's as good at shooting from distance, as good a crosser, a better dribbler, more creative, better defensively, less likely to lose possession, as fast and has similar levels of acceleration.
Ronaldo is more consistent, a better goal scorer (better in the air, better movement, better finisher) and is taller.
Consistency is the important factor, so it's really Ronaldo's mentality that sets him apart. Nani's got several gears to step up based on his attributes - it's completely dependant on whether he has the mental capabilities to do. It's an unpopular opinion, but it's certainly not a stupid one when you assess the players' attributes.
Being talented doesn't mean better. Talent doesn't mean much if there isn't much consistency in the end product. It's all relative. Many might be as talented as Messi and show glimpses of similar qualities, but without the opportunity to play alongside Xavi and Iniesta & Co or might not have have the consistency or end product. Potential & talent alone isn't enough.Oh my.
That one is unpopular because it's silly.Nani is as talented as Ronaldo.
But it has everything to do with the suggestion he's overrated and his achievements aren't what they're built up to be. However I think you were just stating a general opinion, so ignore me .Which all obviously have nothing to do with World cup France 98.
Not that unpopular. I share it.I think your average football fan places far too much importance on formations and they don't understand that it's the playing model that is the important factor and that formation is a function of the playing model. I think too many fans today base their belief on how football is played on their playing of games such as championship manager or FIFA football on the play station.
Mine is I bet the most unpopular opinion here.
I willBut it has everything to do with the suggestion he's overrated and his achievements aren't what they're built up to be. However I think you were just stating a general opinion, so ignore me .
What do you mean by playing model?I think your average football fan places far too much importance on formations and they don't understand that it's the playing model that is the important factor and that formation is a function of the playing model. I think too many fans today base their belief on how football is played on their playing of games such as championship manager or FIFA football on the play station.
Mine is I bet the most unpopular opinion here.
which confirms its unpopularityNot that unpopular. I share it.
I actually agree with a few of those, especially the one with Smalling. I do think that Jones will be a lot better than you think he'll be, however I definitely think that when both have hit their prime, Smalling will definitely be the better of the two players, despite the fact that he was signed for a lot less and had a much smaller profile when coming to us.United ones - Rafael won't cut it. Jones will not be a top defender, forever a squad player, whilst Smalling(who gets very little press) will become one of the finest defenders in world football given a couple of years. His rise from the non-league is sensational.
Arsenal ones - Koscielny is a much superior player to Vermaelen at centre-half. Gibbs really shouldn't be playing left back for a side with aspirations of finishing in the upper echelons of the league right now, and Chamakh would be a good player for most teams in the division, used correctly.
Some crap he read in a coaching manual which I don't think he properly understood.What do you mean by playing model?
What do you mean by playing model?
Some crap he read in a coaching manual which I don't think he properly understood.
What would your opinion on the matter be though if he went on to comfortably be the clubs top ever goalscorer?Wayne Rooney's all round game is too inconsistent for him to ever be deemed 'world class'.
The idea of him being brandished a Utd legend sickens me, after the manner in which he held the club to ransom.
Ha, ha, ha.John Barnes in a very recent interview said that for him formations are not the most important thing, when he played at Liverpool both Liverpool and Watford played 4-4-2 but both teams played completely differently.
Why would any coach explaining the details of tactics ever talk about formations?Playing model refers to what style a coach wants his team to play. This can also change during a game depending on the situation. The playing model covers a number of different scenarios and the most simple explanation will be to use the phrase "4 moments of the game". The 4 moments being when a team first gains possession, once a team has possession what do its players do, when a team loses possession and once possession is lost what does the team do. If you are a coach and you work through the 4 moments and the players available and your preferred style of play you can then work out individual player roles for those situations and also team roles for those situations.
So for example a coach may love to use width on attack and to also force the opposition to play wide if they are in possession, so the coach will get his players to be set out to provide width when attacking and then to slide inside so the opposition has space available out wide but not centrally. You might use this if a team you are playing doesnt make use of wingers or have strikers who usually score from headers or crosses etc.
The playing model is also how teams deal with defending a counter attack, how they deal with defending long balls, how they use width etc. Do they like overlapping fullbacks, do they like a target man, is the target man someone who is good in the air or likes the ball played to his feet etc.
So before the formation is worked out its best to work out how you want to play and more importantly how you want to play with respect to each of the 4 moments of the game.
The 4 moments thing was something I first became aware of while on a coaching course where Mourinho was featured on a FIFA UEFA coaching licence video explaining his approach to tactics etc. In the interview i watched it was interesting to note that the most important thing for him was the immediate time around when possession was either won or lost. In a 30 minute interview he never once mentioned formations. I dont know if it was he who came up with the term but using it as a backbone for what i do has helped me a lot.
When you work through the 4 moments and your own playing model you start to become aware that any formation can be used to play any style of football as long as the player roles are clearly defined during the 4 moments.
John Barnes in a very recent interview said that for him formations are not the most important thing, when he played at Liverpool both Liverpool and Watford played 4-4-2 but both teams played completely differently.
Ha, ha, ha.
You were chattin a good bit of sense there but using John Barnes to backup an opinion is a bad idea. The man couldn't buy a clue.