TalkBass OFFICIAL English Football thread 2012-13: second half

[Darkstrike]

You could count Stoke's tactic of beating the opposition to near death.

I've often heard of Uniteds tactical system being called "zombie corruption football"(I'm sure you can guess the sites I hear this from, lfcred/RAWK/BlueMoon), apparently we play really slowly and wait for the bought refs to give us frees and penos.

I suppose the only true tactical deviation was total football, defenders, midfielders and forwards swapping place at will to confuse the opposition, but in the end, as you say, have the ball more/kick it in their net more is still the ideal result.

[dangnewt]

So all this talk about getting players to work in a system might be mostly.....talk. I could buy that - I'm more in the change the system to fit your players camp than the other way around. Also, be willing to modify (not abandon) your approach depending on your opponent and on how the match itself is unfolding. Doesn't appear that LFC is doing enough of that this year.

Tactics is a small part of the actual game of baseball but a larger part of baseball talk. Football-basketball-hockey are much more tactical. At the college level, better tactics and execution can prevail over talent but at the pro level, talent wins way more often than not.

In American football, there is this notion of "coaching them up" That is, except for maybe the top 5-10 players entering the league from college, they need a lot of coaching at the pro level to bring them up to pro speed. The teams that can consistently take their average players and make them good and take their good players and make them stars are the teams that win consistently. In baseball, there is less development once you make the big league - it is mostly do you have the talent and are you ready to play.
Which way does soccer work.

[Darkstrike]

The major difference here, I'd assume is that American Football is a much more coach reliant sport. Both teams pick plays, and hope their choice out tactics the other. Obviously having great players who can pull off special things helps immensely. Or a player like Brady who's allowed to run his own offence, and counter what he sees on the defensive line. The Saints are a prime example, despite having some incredible players, they've sucked big style without their coach.

Managers in football don't have the easy access to change up their form so often, besides roaring from the touchline and waving their arms like ejits. So superior players who can read the game, or work from many positions becomes vital.

[dangnewt]

Originally Posted by Darkstrike

The major difference here, I'd assume is that American Football is a much more coach reliant sport. Both teams pick plays, and hope their choice out tactics the other. Obviously having great players who can pull off special things helps immensely. Or a player like Brady who's allowed to run his own offence, and counter what he sees on the defensive line. The Saints are a prime example, despite having some incredible players, they've sucked big style without their coach.

Managers in football don't have the easy access to change up their form so often, besides roaring from the touchline and waving their arms like ejits. So superior players who can read the game, or work from many positions becomes vital.

With the lack of set plays except on free kicks and corners - it does resemble hockey more than anything else - even basketball can run a set play.

Do players get better once they hit the big club or is 95-99% of the development done prior to arriving in the EPL? Are there any managers with a reputation for making his players better or is it more who can motivate his players to play.

[Keano]

Originally Posted by dangnewt

Do players get better once they hit the big club or is 95-99% of the development done prior to arriving in the EPL? Are there any managers with a reputation for making his players better or is it more who can motivate his players to play.

It's really an individual thing, and for the manger's involvement it's bit of both. There are players who had instant impact, such as Aguero, and players who took time to develop at a single team, such as Bale as a winger. There are also cases where move to a big club doesn't help a player, such as Diego Forlan.

As for managers, there are several cliches out there, such as Wenger being great at bringing up young talent, 'Arry being good man manager, etc., but while they may be true to some degree, I feel most of them are a bit exaggerated.

[Darkstrike]

Originally Posted by dangnewt

With the lack of set plays except on free kicks and corners - it does resemble hockey more than anything else - even basketball can run a set play.

Do players get better once they hit the big club or is 95-99% of the development done prior to arriving in the EPL? Are there any managers with a reputation for making his players better or is it more who can motivate his players to play.

It differs with every player, tbh.

Rooney was playing in the Prem when he was 16, and certainly improved since. Guys like Sterling and Wilshere are young, playing first team in the Prem, and have all the potential in the world to improve. Cleverly and Welbeck are playing with United for years, and still have a lot of improvement in them. As for managers making their players better, it's often a case of finding what they do best, ie, moving Scholes from striking to the midfield, or moving RvP from the wing to striking. Evra was a striker until one of his prior manager decided he would be a better fullback.

The motivation is a big thing too though, supposedly one of Ferguson's specialities. Often driving United on to be greater than the sum of their parts.

Of course there is a tactical approach too, like in the United/Arsenal game, rather than have Rooney as a playmaker or striker, Fergie had him shadow one of Arsenals midfielders(can't remember which now, Arteta maybe?), meaning they couldn't get a grip on the game.

[Tituscrow]

I'm pretty sure that the rhythm section of Helloween are in here...

http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/horro...rs-vol-15.html

[cheezewiz]

Originally Posted by Darkstrike

It differs with every player, tbh.

Rooney was playing in the Prem when he was 16, and certainly improved since. Guys like Sterling and Wilshere are young, playing first team in the Prem, and have all the potential in the world to improve. Cleverly and Welbeck are playing with United for years, and still have a lot of improvement in them. As for managers making their players better, it's often a case of finding what they do best, ie, moving Scholes from striking to the midfield, or moving RvP from the wing to striking. Evra was a striker until one of his prior manager decided he would be a better fullback.

The motivation is a big thing too though, supposedly one of Ferguson's specialities. Often driving United on to be greater than the sum of their parts.

Of course there is a tactical approach too, like in the United/Arsenal game, rather than have Rooney as a playmaker or striker, Fergie had him shadow one of Arsenals midfielders(can't remember which now, Arteta maybe?), meaning they couldn't get a grip on the game.

It was Arteta, and I hate to admit, it was a brilliant tactical move. Flubbed up Arsenal's whole game.

[Tituscrow]

Hey Bill...what reception did Big Mick get on his return to his old stomping ground?

[Darkstrike]

3 points, clean sheet too, almost forgot what those were...

[Tituscrow]

Villa looking doomed. 15 shipped and none scored in the last 3 games. The Pie-Eaters have the knack of winning when they really need to.

I was hoping Delia's mob would steal a point of Sitteh, and I suspected Spurs would beat the Mackems.

Just hoping the Toon can hold the Gooners...

[Keano]

Bale booked for simulation, but this time there was legitimate, albeit small, contact. It's not a penalty but it's definitely not a yellow. This is getting beyond point of stupidity at this point.

So now my concern is that opposing defenders will be allowed to go harder at Bale because they'll be able to get away with more against him. He only has himself to blame for this reputation.

Also, two triffic fixtures in a row of an exciting game, thanks to the Manchester clubs. lol

[Darkstrike]

Aye, Villa seem on a heavy downward spiral.

[Darkstrike]

That game was crazy, Newcastle are having a brutal time of it.

[tplyons]

Yesterday we switched cable companies. This morning when I tried flipping over to the Arsenal match, I discovered we don't have Fox Soccer in our package.

This will be fixed by next week. I can't miss another match like this one!

[Keano]

I always try to give credit due to the winning side, but that was some terrible **** from Newcastle. They made Villa look like a defensive juggernaut.

[MarkMgibson]

Originally Posted by MartinG1957

Couldn't disagree more!
I have no time for either Arshavin or Gervino - Walcott us worth two of both of them IMHO of course :-)
Happy Christmas to all from a wet but not flooded Scotland!

They should give Walcott a blank check after that performance! I wasn't convinced about him as a striker before, but I'm a believer after that game. Thierry Henry would've been proud of that last goal.

[Darkstrike]

Tell ya what, besides the immense 3 goal 2 assist performance, all props should go to Walcott for when he was tripped in the box, rather than stay down whining and playing for a peno, got right back up and knocked in a goal.

[Tituscrow]

Originally Posted by Darkstrike

Tell ya what, besides the immense 3 goal 2 assist performance, all props should go to Walcott for when he was tripped in the box, rather than stay down whining and playing for a peno, got right back up and knocked in a goal.

No, that's Bales trick. He even said today, he will continue to 'go down' when there's contact.

Walcotts nuts finally dropped today.

[Darkstrike]

Aye, I saw his interview, he was'nae happy about that yellow.