*Official* English Football Season 2014-15

[Raffski]

It's actually quite interesting when you consider what is said here:

Aston Villa's new manager Paul Lambert vows to throw out the negative tactics used by Alex McLeish - Telegraph

I guess spending two seasons getting smashed everywhere has changed his mind somewhat.
As for the whole negative football debate, it's ridiculous to suggest that a team should play in any other way than the one most likely to produce a result- Villa, for example, would've had absolutely no chance if they just went for it, and I doubt it would have been a classic match if they'd lost 4-0.

That said, I'm pretty sure I'll be whining the next time someone blocks their way to a result against my team as it's bloody frustrating to be on the receiving end of lol

 

[Pothas]

Tbf to Ikki have heard you all moan about Stoke etc over the years

Oh yeah guilty of this for sure, it is just funny because it is Liverpool.

The whole you do anything to win argument is one that I hate even if I can see that it is valid, certainly don't want to see a team I support ever do it.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Oh yeah guilty of this for sure, it is just funny because it is Liverpool.

The whole you do anything to win argument is one that I hate even if I can see that it is valid, certainly don't want to see a team I support ever do it.

There is a difference between doing it for one game and doing it every week though. Basically everyone who has been successful against Barcelona in the last five years has done it, for instance.

I agree with Ikki that it isn't good in the long run and I am not trying to defend Villa in a general sense; I still think they will struggle this season. But playing defensively away to a side who came 2nd the previous season seems to me to be obviously legitimate. What are they supposed to do, attack them and get beaten 5-0?

Stoke played very cynically in every game which is why they were so hated (IMO, anyway). I don't have a problem with them playing in that way against sides clearly better than them, though. In fact I had less of a problem with Stoke than most in this thread did, although it's fair to say I wouldn't go out of my way to go and watch them.

 

[sledger]

RE: Stoke, I think there's a difference between playing negatively and playing really thuggishly. Obvs there's also a difference between a defensive team that can attack really clinically and effectively (albeit not especially excitingly) like Chelsea from Mourinho's first term, and a team that relies on hoof-ball and the long throw, like Stoke.

 

[NUFAN]

Spurs shoddy defense made Liverpool fans think their attacking options are better than they really are (currently).

 

[sledger]

I thought Eric Dier was meant to be amazing? :

 

[NUFAN]

Yeah, nah. He's lived up to his name the past couple of weeks unfortunately. Chiriches is ordinary too.

Still seething about our draw at Sunderland, on another day we would have won 4-1

 

[sledger]

Also, since Debuchy is out for months, I wonder if there is any chance of Jenkinson being recalled from West Ham. Otherwise Bellerin is going to be getting a run out fairly soon...

Edit: Haha, only just seen that Alex Song is also now at Wham.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

I'm with Ikki on this one, he's spot on and you're only arguing with him because (a) it's Ikki and he's an annoying **** 95% of the time and (b) because none of you like Liverpool.

 

[duffer]

I'm with Ikki on this one, he's spot on and you're only arguing with him because (a) it's Ikki and he's an annoying **** 95% of the time and (b) because none of you like Liverpool.

I feel for him slightly, having watched everyone play the same way against Arsenal for a decade it takes a while to accept it as a way of life.

 

[sledger]

I feel for him slightly, having watched everyone play the same way against Arsenal for a decade it takes a while to accept it as a way of life.

Yeah, funnily enough I remember Villa doing this in a game against Arsenal back in 2003, and Wenger having a moan about it then.

Graham Taylor's response was basically "The alternative was for us to go out and get beat 4-0" iirc.

 

[duffer]

Yeah and then you had the Pulis' and Allardyce's with their 'Arsenal don't like it up em' brigade. Teams need to evolve.

 

[Jarquis]

Ikki's both right and wrong. Long term it's not a good strategy for Villa and their approach against some weaker opposition was interesting TSTL but to complain about the way they played against Liverpool is basically moaning that the opposition weren't negligent in their approach to the game.

I've had the argument numerous times with Uppercut before - style and attacking mentality counts for **** and as both Sledger and duffer allude to above - you learn that as an Arsenal fan. Against Liverpool the way Villa played gave them the best chance of winning the game, in their other fixtures they won despite their tactics and not because of them.

 

[Pothas]

If style and attacking mentality counted for nothing there would be no point in enjoying football.

 

[Uppercut]

I do think they count for something. I just think it's subjective. I wouldn't say Villa's system is inherently boring, but on Saturday they did the defensive part of it much better than the lightning-fast counter-attacks. When they won 3-1 at Liverpool a couple of years back they scored some really nice goals but their gameplan was basically the same.

Likewise I definitely don't think Arsenal have got worse to watch since they started defending a little deeper and attacking a bit more directly. There was a time when Arsenal/Spain/Barca fans seemed to think their slow possession game was inherently the best to watch, and it just wasn't.

 

[Jarquis]

If style and attacking mentality counted for nothing there would be no point in enjoying football.

Well of course they matter from an enjoyment POV and I'm far more inclined to watch a game involving two attacking sides than two boring cynical ones but they don't matter at all in terms of determining who wins the game. Football isn't a stylistic sport in the same way something like diving is.

I used to be the biggest complainant of "ZOMG we had 72% posssession and hit the post 3 times and bossed the game but didn't win" to which people (mainly Uppercut) would point out that one statistic matters and that's the one labelled 'goals scored'. Football basically boils down to scoring more than the opposition/stopping them scoring more than you and Villa's approach ultimately enabled them to do that on the weekend.

As an Arsenal fan I've seen it all. Obviously the dream is to both win and play attractive football but given the choice between the two I'd take the former. Last season saw a lot of 'Arsenal winning ugly' and holding on for 1-0s and 2-1s is a lot more enjoyable than creating 25 chances and losing to the same scoreline.

 

[sledger]

Arsenal's brand of winning ugly isn't really comparable to the Stoke/Bolton variety of winning ugly tbf (or winning attractively, if there is such a thing).

I largely agree, in the sense that in more or less all circumstances I would rather see Arsenal win than not win, but like someone suggested earlier, I don't think I could ever really support or care about a team that played like Stoke did every week. It's not so much that it's not entertaining enough, but more to do with the fact that there's nothing to like about a team like that whatsoever.

 

[Pothas]

My opinion on this is really not coherent, I can't really disagree with any of that but there is just something in it that I don't like.

One thing I would say is that sometimes people seem to think there is no relation between playing well and winning a game. It is the whole 'result not performance thing,' obviously it is not always the case but good performances generally lead to good results.

 

[Jarquis]

You yourself made the distinction though - Stoke suck because they barely play within the rules and the whole 'they don't like it up them so go and kick 12 shades of **** out of them' is barely football. On the other hand sitting deep, 'parking the bus' and other such things are genuine tactical approaches and still require a level of tactical nous and ability that just trying to intimidate and hurt the opposition doesn't.

 

[Eds]

Curious as to whether the people in this thread like Atletico Madrid.