You might have only 3/4 counters a game so if we are depending on them to score we are fecked
What's wrong with counter attacking football?
- Thread starter UpWithRivers
- Start date
The issue is it’s not sustainable. I don’t think any team can withstand that much pressure from top teams, in every game. On top of that, it’s difficult to play counter attacking football vs the low block.
I agree. But he was talking about ETH getting the sack within a few months' time if we don't show the ''progressive, modern-day'' football.
But more likely because there is a new shiny object out there in the market, Tuchel.
There’s nothing wrong with counterattacking football. Every tactical scheme has its pros and cons. It’s thrilling to watch when it works, but from a fan’s point of view you generally want to see your team dominate the opponent in terms of possession and chances created.
I brought them into it. It's the same sport and those examples aren't irrelevant just because they're different leagues considering many of the players and managers in the PL have played there too.
This league is dominated by those teams because they're the best teams with the best managers and the best players. Not because their tactics makes them automatically better.
He can coach them to be better at it but better than shite is still pretty bad. Klopp replaced most of his starting team before winning anything. Pep couldn't get this lot to play possession football.
Seriously? He was hired to make the team better. That's it.
Because the team was so rubbish it had forgotten how to counter attack and do anything other than indulge in self-pity.
The same problem it was under Ole, you don't accomplish a long term vision of "progress" with pragmatic football you just don't any attacking system with the ball at your feet also needs regular match practice, you didn't see Pep or Klopp do it when they came in did you it was their way or the highway and there was massive growing pains (as their team was also unsuited) but in the end it paid off.
Seriously isn't anyone else getting tired of the flip flopping in this fanbase? This was literally all people talked about before he came, that this season was a free pass because of the possibility of entertaining football and now suddenly counter attacking is fine again i can't keep up.
Seriously isn't anyone else getting tired of the flip flopping in this fanbase? This was literally all people talked about before he came, that this season was a free pass because of the possibility of entertaining football and now suddenly counter attacking is fine again i can't keep up.
Last edited:
There were few growing pains with Pep and Klopp had to change almost the whole starting eleven.
Ah but they didn't change the system did they, they gradually changed players until the system started to work, isn't that the whole point that the system is more important than individuals?
Imagine Pep had said nah, Joe hart doesn't work lets just wait until we get a new GK to start trying to build the football we actually want to play. Of course he wouldn't do that so why has ETH, why has he ditched the philosophy he was brought in for why is he waiting, drop De Gea and make do.
Last edited:
Not really these leagues aren't relevant to us because that's not the competition we are facing. We aren't facing Milan and Juve.. We are facing Man City and Liverpool. Not to mention these were just one offs, not a complete dominance on the competition like in England.
They have the best managers alright.. You do realise these managers are the ones who put the tactics for the team, right ? And both managers play either possession based or high pressing football. If they had any other 2 managers with different styles they wouldn't be dominating that much.
Isn’t this just a general football question? Unsure why it’s in here
Switching things around is important. We won our second CL final because SAF was able to switch from a (then) very modern based attack made up of two forwards comfortable with the ball at their feet to a more traditional 'target man' behind a goal poacher type of system which was the staple of football back in the day. That confused Bayern's defence which lacked leadership once the ageing but still spectacular Lothar Matthäus left the pitch
These days teams are expected to have 2-3 tactics in their arsenal. Counter attack football is usually useless against teams who defend deep and are perfectly happy with a draw. However as Greece had shown during Euro 2004 it can be absolutely lethal if the opponent is ready to commit all he's got to win the game. I don't mind us switching to such system once we're 2-0 up. We have the players to play such system (Rashy, Sancho, Antony etc) so why not use it? However it can't be our only tactic. It failed Mou and it also failed the 'manager' that succeeded Mou.
These days teams are expected to have 2-3 tactics in their arsenal. Counter attack football is usually useless against teams who defend deep and are perfectly happy with a draw. However as Greece had shown during Euro 2004 it can be absolutely lethal if the opponent is ready to commit all he's got to win the game. I don't mind us switching to such system once we're 2-0 up. We have the players to play such system (Rashy, Sancho, Antony etc) so why not use it? However it can't be our only tactic. It failed Mou and it also failed the 'manager' that succeeded Mou.
Think people are confusing between transitions and counters (or fast transitions)
Since Ole, we've relied more on transitions for goals and that in itself is a pretty sustainable way of playing, as long as the team is somewhat good at winning the ball back and has pace up front - teams will lose possession no matter how good they are and you will catch the opposition defence out of shape. Counters are just sexier transitions. More pace, more directness and players happening to be in all the right areas.
Ofcourse, a great team should have more to their game than transitions, but I find nothing wrong in being the one of the most dangerous sides on transitions
Since Ole, we've relied more on transitions for goals and that in itself is a pretty sustainable way of playing, as long as the team is somewhat good at winning the ball back and has pace up front - teams will lose possession no matter how good they are and you will catch the opposition defence out of shape. Counters are just sexier transitions. More pace, more directness and players happening to be in all the right areas.
Ofcourse, a great team should have more to their game than transitions, but I find nothing wrong in being the one of the most dangerous sides on transitions
That's not it. He was brought in because of his style of play and was the reason the majority of the caf were so excited because we finally signed a manager capable of showing the fans what we've been missing the last decade.
Neither Pep or Klopp changed their philosophy on how they want to play the game. What they did is stick with it no matter the results until they gradually got the players to fit the system. There's no point hiring a manager with a set philosophy only for him to change it to a system he isn't familiar with no matter how pragmatic it may seem at the time.
What world are you in? A Champions League winning manager has just been shown the door. We are not so much better than them. If the same results continue for EtH people will start to wonder what was the purpose of getting him. We could have stuck with Ole or Rangnick.
Yeah and my point is he is not doing that. Ole, Mourinho, LvG all delivered few good results. They were all fired because ultimately they did not make the team better.
If you were around for Fergie's early years, I bet that you would be first in line to call for his firing. Probably printing the banners with 'Fergie Out' to give out to your mates.
You could make the argument for literally any of the managers we have sacked since Fergie.
Neither Klopp nor Pep were loaded with the likes of Rashford, Martial, Sancho, Bruno and Ronaldo - all of them on wages that render them unmovable - and were told to make do with them because their respective clubs perceive them as assets probably more valuable than the manager. Also, neither of them took over a club that had previously wasted 6 years and close to a billion pounds to support the vision of two managers who didn't want to have anything to do with possession football. We are literally an Eriksen injury away from having absolutely no one to either pass or carry the ball from the defence to the midfield, but ETH should supposedly have already turned us into a possession-based side. He is setting his team to play at his midfield/attack's only strengths and, at the same time, he's implementing press traps that will allow us to regain possession and maintain a higher line. Which is already a huge difference compared to Mou's philosophy and to what Solskjaer's football ended up becoming. If United fans really want to see a possession-based side, they should show a bit of patience, stop being fans of this or that player instead of the team and not laugh at the notion that we have an overpaid, overindulged and one-dimensional squad that apparently needs an intervention straight out of a Holywood sports-film script in order to "agree" with the manager that we must run as much as our opponents on a football pitch.
I believe that, after being coached under Moyes-Mourinho and Solskjaer, there are many United fans who associate counter-attacking or transition football with defensive and unimaginative football: Too much defending in our third for everyone's liking, players who can only run in straight lines, otherwise too ponderous on the ball with very few supporting runs/off the ball movement and a collective short-circuit whenever we have to exchange more than two one-touch passes in tight spaces. Which often results to dropped heads/raised arms and meaningless sideways passes because, you know, everybody wants the first-time ball in-behind, but no one's willing to work hard enough to create the best possible version of that ball.
This isn't, of course, what transition football is all about. But fans are quick to react to what they've witnessed recently in a way that can make self-explained nuances slowly fade away from view. For example, it's not ground-breaking news to argue that, although SAF, Mourinho, Moyes and Klopp can all be placed under the umbrella of transition football, they don't implement the same tactics and they don't share the same philosophies. I doubt that United fans would think badly of counter-attacks, had Klopp been managing us over the last 7 years instead of Mourinho and Solskjaer.
Even when you take the poster who's recently been targeted on here because of his (often harsh) criticisms, if you read through the lines, he simply says no to desperate defending in our box, and no to surrendering any notion of establishing control through possession and relying solely on our deep block in order to see matches through. Which, in my book, is a more than fair concern, because that particular type of transition football gets you nowhere nowadays. And when it does, it's usually too streaky and its success is short-lived. We've seen lots of that at OT and it has nothing to do with how United played under Ferguson. I don't know whether ETH will be a success or not, but his signings thus far are an indication that he wants more proactive players who will sweat the shirt not only for themselves but also for their teammates.
You need to be able to keep the ball and know what to do with it. Know how to keep it and how to create quality chances. Only then your football is sustainable and you can even win the league. If you rely too much on counterattacks then you will just win some big or cup games.
If the above is perfected that‘s all what matters. I personally couldn’t care less if it is done with 38% or 70% possession.
Remind me again how much possession Liverpool had in the CL final against the mighty Spurs.
There is nothing more boring than a team having 60+ % possession but hardly creating anything.
If the above is perfected that‘s all what matters. I personally couldn’t care less if it is done with 38% or 70% possession.
Remind me again how much possession Liverpool had in the CL final against the mighty Spurs.
There is nothing more boring than a team having 60+ % possession but hardly creating anything.
Funny how after one poor game all the positives from 4 wins are out the window. We are back to ‚these players can‘t play any better‘.
We are good at transitions but need to be better at possession. Creating lots of chances against sides that defend well, will be the biggest hurdle to clear. But we will.
We are good at transitions but need to be better at possession. Creating lots of chances against sides that defend well, will be the biggest hurdle to clear. But we will.
I'm not sure if it's a global thing, but in the Netherlands often people act like high(er) possession percentages are synonymous to domination.
Domination is deciding the direction of - in football's case - the game, placing your will on the other.
I know a lot of people hate Atletico, and it's not like they're consistent at it (especially now that they're trying to be more possessive, their play is wildly inconsistent compared to the mid-late 2010s), but they've played some games, I remember one against Liverpool in particular, where they had 30% possession (if not less). But the gameplay and direction was so clearly decided by Atleti. Pool tried and tried, but you just knew nothing was going to get through.
Of course in most games it's mere survival of making it through when such a game happens, but when those examples of dominating defense exists where you're simply unsurpassable and your (few) counters are always at least dangerous, that can be exhilaratingly dominant as well.
I'm fine with people disagreeing, and of course you also have to see Atleti as a team that does everything to win, perhaps only done more horrifically by Bordalás' teams, and I do hope things like delay get banned soon, which will surely improve the game a lot (imo). But just wanted to share my view on the topic of possession =/= (or =) domination.
I still hope they grow in their possession ability, and think that's why they got Witsel, and why players Felix and Lemar are (by now) trusted a lot by Simeone in the spine of the team. However, sometimes their "Atleti" side of things is a great sight to behold, even if many games showing that side are horrendous to even me.
Domination is deciding the direction of - in football's case - the game, placing your will on the other.
I know a lot of people hate Atletico, and it's not like they're consistent at it (especially now that they're trying to be more possessive, their play is wildly inconsistent compared to the mid-late 2010s), but they've played some games, I remember one against Liverpool in particular, where they had 30% possession (if not less). But the gameplay and direction was so clearly decided by Atleti. Pool tried and tried, but you just knew nothing was going to get through.
Of course in most games it's mere survival of making it through when such a game happens, but when those examples of dominating defense exists where you're simply unsurpassable and your (few) counters are always at least dangerous, that can be exhilaratingly dominant as well.
I'm fine with people disagreeing, and of course you also have to see Atleti as a team that does everything to win, perhaps only done more horrifically by Bordalás' teams, and I do hope things like delay get banned soon, which will surely improve the game a lot (imo). But just wanted to share my view on the topic of possession =/= (or =) domination.
I still hope they grow in their possession ability, and think that's why they got Witsel, and why players Felix and Lemar are (by now) trusted a lot by Simeone in the spine of the team. However, sometimes their "Atleti" side of things is a great sight to behold, even if many games showing that side are horrendous to even me.
I feel like there is in the EPL a statistical correlation between consistent high press tactics and winning stuff.
Because Klopp and Pep didn't take over teams as rubbish as ETH has. If he wanted to play possession football, who could he actually play? Our goalie is appallingly bad at it and he's been our best player since Ferguson left. Our defence can't do it, our midfield can't pass forward and our forwards are fast but that's it. Klopp took over a decent team from Rodgers. Pep took over league champions. ETH took over a team of one trick ponies that have either counter attacked, lobbed it to Felliani or lost for at least 5 years and had given up. Anyone expecting him to make them into proto-Barca was kidding themselves.
They are relevant. It's not a different sport. Pep and Conte did the same things in La Liga and Serie A that they do in England. You can dismiss what happens in those leagues because it undermines your argument if you like but I don't have to. Tactics don't magically disintegrate when you cross a border, if they did, every champions league game would be won by the home team.
You're guessing they wouldn't be as dominant if they played differently. But you have a point in so far as the way they play suits their players. The way we've played in the last few games suits ours. Blindly copying them gets us hammered by Brentford. Burnley couldn't copy Liverpool and suddenly start challenging for the title.
That was it. The Caf didn't appoint him, the club did and those prats probably don't even know what possession football is. You can judge him by what random posters on here want but that won't be what gets him sacked or rewarded.
There's no point in persisting with trying to teach donkeys how to be greyhounds until you get sacked at Christmas when we're 12th.
He's done that. Ole didn't deliver good results in his last year, did he? He couldn't progress the team from the tiny base he had. ETH can. But for now, he's stuck with what he's got.
Jesus, if losing one game in the Europa League is enough to make everyone here start moaning again, maybe we deserve finishing 12th.
Only for as long as there's been a statistical correlation between having managers who managed in Germany in 2015 and winning stuff so let's hire Lucian Favre.
As we said, that's his job to coach these players to play possession football. These players have been consistently playing under managers whose only style was parking the bus and counter attacking. You can't dismiss the idea they can't play this style just after 2 games under a new manager after years of playing defensive style. Rather than switching to a counterattacking system again, he should exhaust the possibility of these players playing his style so that by the end of the season he knows which players that fit him to keep and which are hopeless and should be sold.
Even if these leagues are relevant (which to our argument aren't), these are one offs. Simeone won the league once in the last 8 years. Hardly a comparison to Pep and Klopp dominating the competition in the league and I don't think the target for United is to win the league as a one off in 8 years?
And by the way, the City team Pep inherited wasn't competing for the title for the previous 2 years.
Counter attacking football can be some of the most exciting stuff, and is a brilliant tactic at times.
You probably won't win a league with it though, as in a high amount of games you need to massively take the initiative against a lot of teams who'll sit back.
We've seen it with the likes of Rashy that without acres to gallop into he's not nearly as effective.
You probably won't win a league with it though, as in a high amount of games you need to massively take the initiative against a lot of teams who'll sit back.
We've seen it with the likes of Rashy that without acres to gallop into he's not nearly as effective.
It was the classic "blessing in disguise" that the cafe loves to mention.
It can stop the silly talk about winning the league or top 4 being a given, and make us remember we're only just starting this journey.
That's true. The idea that we could finish beyond 4th was unrealistic.
I don't understand what you actually think should be happening. Are you expecting that ETH stubbornly stick to a tactic that his squad clearly isn't ready to execute yet? Should ETH be replaced with someone who can have the squad looking like Bayern Munich in less than a month? Who, in your estimation, would have been capable of that with the group of players under contract at United on July 1st, 2022?
There's absolutely no indication whatsoever that ETH has permanently abandoned the idea of implementing the tactical philosophy he used at Ajax. He has said in every interview that the long term goal is to do this, but he has clearly decided to implement it slowly over the course of the season because most of the squad is having difficulty adapting and some of the players are likely completely incapable of doing so. Do you think he's lying about this? Has he pulled an elaborate long con, implementing an exciting possession based tactical philosophy at Ajax in order to get a job at a big club so that he can play his true favored style of parking the bus and playing on the counter?
We could finish anywhere between 2nd and 6th I reckon, we need a lot more evidence first.
It's not unrealistic. When you are (at worst) the 6th best team in the league, a top 4 finish is never "unrealistic".
“Good in possession” does not equal “possession team”. Did you even watch the Real matches during Zidane’s tenure? Sure, against mid table La Liga teams and CL minnows, they had more possession — like United in the SAF days, but in matches vs top teams like PSG, Bayern, Liverpool, City, they typically sat back and hit on the counter. Hell, they beat Pep’s Bayern team 5-0 in the semis and had 30% possession…
They beat Liverpool last year with 46% possession and 4 shots on goal vs Liverpool’s 24… they sat back vs PSG and City with low 40% possession in both matchups, both home and away…
‘what we are discussing is “what is a superior strategy, possession based football or counter-attacking football”. Real Madrid won more CL titles playing a more conservative style that the possession purists like Pep have won. And Pep has only won the CL with Messi, failed at Bayern and so far has failed at City.
‘Tuchel’s run with Chelsea to the CL title was textbook counter attacking play! They had mid 30s possession in the semis and 40% in the final.
You seem to think that possession tiki/taka style is superior to a more balance attacking mindset. Also, you are confusing possession and high press. A high press has nothing to do with a possession centric team. You can have a high press, but also have a counter-attacking philosophy. Do possession oriented sides employ a high press? Sure. 6 seconds to get the ball back or a tactical foul, that’s what Pep does. He has to because he puts so many numbers near the ball, if the other team gets a switch to open space, it puts his CBs under tremendous pressure.
The fact is that when you throw in other CL finalists (Juventus x 2, Atletico x 2) there is even more evidence that a conservative approach in the latter stages vs equally talented squads actually wins more trophies, not ride or die Pep-style philosophy.
‘By the way, what the feck is a mid-press? If you mean defending in the mid-block, I would agree that Real does that, but it’s not really a pressing system, it’s just compact defending reducing space between the lines.
You seem to equate “quality on the ball” with “possession-centric.” It’s not really the same thing. Read a book on modern tactics. Tiki taka is about generating overloads around the ball when in possession. You are constantly looking for 3v2s, 4v3s and 2v1s. In doing so, you commit more players to certain areas. That’s why Pep has his FBs pinch in as an extra midfielder.What are these 5 teams? Because Real Madrid wasn't a counter attacking team.
Any team can counter attack when they get the ball on fast transition. That doesn't make them counter attacking one.
Zidane's Madrid were playing on front foot and their style was dependent on using flanks and crossing.
As said multiple times. Counters are fine. The problem is when that's the only thing you can do.
Real haven’t really done that much historically. Zidane was content to dictate play with three world class midfield distributors and watch his wings attack via 1v1s and or cut in and shoot. His FBs typically operated on the wing in support of that (Marcelo / Carvajal). Ancelotti was masterfully pragmatic in both stints as Real manager. Read my post above regarding Real’s possession numbers in the final CL matches of that 2016-2018 run. Zidane was happy to soak up pressure and hit them on the break when playing tiki taka sides. And winning!
Having the bulk of possession doesn’t make you a tiki taka side. It just means you’ve had more possession.
You guys really ought to read some books on tactics. The media typically gets this stuff wrong… Although Liverpool has a lot of possession, they don’t exhibit the characteristics of a typical Pep style possession centric side. They keep their FBs wide and they bomb in crosses, they don’t care much about losing possession because they have 3 ball winning midfielders who press immediately, win the ball back and recycle possession out wide. They do play a high line, like a Pep side.
In regards to Ten Hag and how we move this team forward, I love the pragmatism. He doesn’t have the players right now to execute a Pep-like system. He does have world class forward-pass distributors (Bruno and Eriksen) and very speedy forwards. He won’t be able to utilize that against lower table sides, and you can already see him given Eriksen freedom to roam into wide areas to build patterns of play.
Most people confuse park the bus, Stoke / Burnley with counter attacking football. No. That’s park the bus, lump it forward and chase it, win 2nd ball type football. I agree that is Neanderthal type stuff.
Counter attacking football is good when
(1)A team is leading with one or more goals ,and the other team is committing players forward, the leading team can finish the other team on the counter.
(2) You are the smaller side, you can play a low and wait for the bigger team to attack, you finish them on the counter.
Counter attacking football is not good if
(1) You are the bigger team,and the smaller team plays a low block,ready to settle for a draw,thereby leaving no space for you to counter attack.
(2) Not sustainable for a big team ,you may win matches against the big teams (about 5 of them) and struggle against the smaller sides which are about 14/13 in number.
On the average a big team that is able to break the smaller teams down and struggle(with counter attack) against the big teams will finish higher than a big team team that is successful against big teams (counter attack) and struggle to break smaller teams.
(1)A team is leading with one or more goals ,and the other team is committing players forward, the leading team can finish the other team on the counter.
(2) You are the smaller side, you can play a low and wait for the bigger team to attack, you finish them on the counter.
Counter attacking football is not good if
(1) You are the bigger team,and the smaller team plays a low block,ready to settle for a draw,thereby leaving no space for you to counter attack.
(2) Not sustainable for a big team ,you may win matches against the big teams (about 5 of them) and struggle against the smaller sides which are about 14/13 in number.
On the average a big team that is able to break the smaller teams down and struggle(with counter attack) against the big teams will finish higher than a big team team that is successful against big teams (counter attack) and struggle to break smaller teams.
This is a good post and I agree with a lot of it. The best teams are pragmatic and can alter approach based on the opponent. I think you’re a bit harsh on Ole though. He was unable to win a trophy and diversify our attacking philosophy, but he really didn’t have the midfielders to do it. I suppose if you want to blame him for not buying the midfielders he needed, that’s fair.
Definitely. In 2016-17 Guardiola's midfielders were De Bruyne, David Silva, Fernando, Fernandinho and Yaya Toure before the transfer window even opened. That summer he even strengthened it with Gundogan and ended up with a front 3 of Sane, Sterling and Aguero. With all of these players in the squad he managed 3rd place. I'm not sure how anyone can look at United's midfield and think 4th place is a realistic expectation. We've gotten a bit lucky with Liverpool and Chelsea struggling to start, but we're a Bruno/Eriksen injury away from being a solidly mid-table club.
Wow, you really are a purist, aren’t you? It bothers you that Ten Hag is taking a pragmatic approach. Look at the players in the City side. They don’t really have pure wingers, they put highly technical players in the wing positions, not particularly competent in 1v1 situations but fantastic passers and high IQ players — Foden, Grealish, Mahrez, Bernardo Silva, etc. We have Rashford and Antony and Sancho, very different types. We don’t have the players for that system.
I'll say it again "counter attacking football" isn't actually a thing
I think you are the one who should read these books. No one said Zidane and Carlo's Madrid or Klopp's Liverpool were playing ticki taka, but they were dictating the play, playing on front foot and were comfortable in possession. Their intention wasn't to set back and wait for a lucky break on the counter against any big team they face. They can do counters while in fast transition, but that's not their main and only plan.
We aren't asking Ten Hag to play Ticki Taka, we are asking to coach the side to play on front foot, press opposition and retain the ball well. That's not Ticki Taka.