Maybe for the first time, I had no clear favorites. Yet, if I had a vote, I would have voted for Russia and Australia taking in consideration their geographic location on the planet’s map and the fact that they never hosted the competition before. No doubt, Middle East is a fitting region for a worldcup –again if you browse the map of previous worldcup tournaments. But Qatar? I don’t know about that. UAE (with Qatar maybe), Egypt, Morocco, or some other co-hosting creative arrangements like Syria-Lebanon, Syria-Jordan, etc… In that deserted corner of my mind, I could sense the cross paths leading Qatar to pull out a surprise, but I refused to believe it will happen that fast. Till the last moment, I thought Qatar’s campaign was more a PR project promoting the country, and creating a portfolio for the following attempts. I was aware they WILL get a decent number of votes, though not that many.
The moment the result was announced, the world got crazy screaming statements range from FIFA’s corruption to Middle Eastern cannibals. The question is, did anyone give this a second thought, trying to understand what really happened?
First: Logistics
Before getting into FIFA’s Evil spirit, technicalities, and human virginity crap that we read, lets state a given that no one seems to get: This was a voting battle. The one who earns most of the votes, get the cheek. I do believe it is there where some serious contenders failed miserably. They thought it is about promoting the message “we are the best”. Seriously? Now how naïve is that? Since when any election has anything to do with “who is better”? Yes…yes…In fairy tales and pink notebooks. Agreed. In real world, this is laughable. Silly. Elections- and voting battles- are about campaigns, connections, presentations, interests’ concurrence and promises. Unless if you really believe the prime minister, president, or governor you just voted for is the genius of your nation. Here is some news for you: The winner is the candidate who happened to stand on the cross paths of the position keepers’ interests. The big bulls. You don’t like that? Neither do I. But we both know the world will keep going.
When you decide to play a game, you need to be aware of the rules before you step in. If the rules are that obvious since day one, don’t get involved then if you failed you complain: This is not fair! I hate this game! I don’t want to play with you anymore! CHANGE THE RULES! Childish.
While the main contenders were busy bulling Platini every Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday and bashing Platter for the rest of the days, other contenders were sewing their voting canvas one stitch at a time. Take Qatar as an example, being an Arabic country means an initial boost for its campaign both in Asia and Africa. Translate that. Votes. Most importantly, they had a good understanding about who really wear the pants in this process. Some people like to believe it is all about Blatter. He is the one who decide and the rest follow. This belief goes deep in time since the Havelange-Johansson war that led the big European nations to consider FIFA as the father of all evil-though there is some truth in that. Now here the thing: Lots of the voting members who actually decided who hosts the world cup are more fragile to their national or continental pressure than they are Blatter’s puppies. Through the mentioned channels, Qatar and most probably Russia sneaked in tempting or bargaining interests to seal the deal. That’s while England campaigners were celebrating Beckham’s inclusion in their team. He will make the speech that turns the world around and bring glory to the Island. That’s when USA thought Morgan Freeman can through a charismatic spell on everyone then snatch the big prize. That’s mixing act with fact. Australia played the “we are the ones with no enemies, we play it smoothly” card. So as Netherlands-Belgium. It is not if you have enemies, but how many friend you have who can translate their support to votes. Let’s not start talking about the laziness of Spain-Portugal and how far the economic complexities effected it. Their campaign sounded like “we want it…but it’s ok if we don’t get it. Really.”
Was it possible for Blatter to put pressure against Qatar and Russia? That’s the second fold of the deal. Qatari Bin Hammam, and South Korea's Chung Mong-Joon are two presidential candidates who can threaten Blatter’s position in the FIFA. Bin Hammam had a good bargain to offer and Chung Mong-Joon knows that he can’t dream to become FIFA’s president if he makes Qatar’s Lobby in the FIFA angry A.K.A a deciding number of countries in Africa and Asia. Issa Hayatou in the other hand is the long serving member of Africa, he need to do favors for North African countries supporting Qatar. Maybe, if England, Australia or USA were able to stand behind Brazil's member Ricardo Teixeira (another FIFA presidential candidate), and succeeded to convince enough FIFA members to get involved in the bargain they could have created a countering leverage. Why didn’t they do it? Good question. Because they wanted to play it fairly? Wrong answer. They just weren’t as bright as a country they like to call “700,000 inhabitants”.
Does that prove the need to change the voting regulations? I can see a solid argument supporting this suggestion and I tend to agree on it to some extend. But let’s not get too patriotically driven while demanding a change. It was so wrong for some to take the approach of good people (countries) bad people (countries), those who are the knights of democracy and ethical conduct and the others who exist only to damage all that. At least the current –FIFA- system still respects the voting of the majority regardless of how the voting decision was made. It is far better than a system where one vote can cancel the will of all other 191 members, ironically supported by the loudest voices demanding a change in the FIFA. We didn't hear any voices demanding fairness. All our international (and national) palaces are made of glass. So let’s combine efforts in the right direction, if we really want to make a move. A change based on principles, not on interests.
It is extremely unfair to claim it is all about corruption and buying votes, denying the effort made by the winning countries and ignore the mistakes made by the rest. Mind you one of the big contributor in the Qatari achievement is an English man whom the English campaign decided not to hire thinking he will damage their attempt. Qatar knew exactly what they were doing. They left nothing for chance and did much more than just preparing speeches and spreading smiles. From the quality presentations to the stunning stadiums’ designs and ideas, to the storyboard supporting the need to host the tournament as a message of peace in the Middle East, taking the World Cup to a Muslim nation for the first time and to break down barriers between Islam and the West.
A small country succeeded to play the cards right on the international level, getting gains from a system that is made to serve only the big boys-as usual. For once, the great nations need to accept being on the receiver end.
But wait! Technically the winners were the worst candidates! Those abusingterroristdiscriminatingkillers!!! We must not let them host a world cup!
Preface
This is not the first time I write about football styles and methodologies- that’s why a decent part will be a compilation of what I wrote in some articles before. Yet, the world cup and the Pundits’ inputs about it force to take the big tournament as a demonstration and case study. Especially that, as usual, there were more attempts to look at the empty part of the Spanish glass rather than analyzing it for what it is for real, With its flaws and benefits.
When Italy won the world cup in Germany, football romantic analysts claimed that they didn’t deserve it because they played a so-called “Passive football style”, the pragmatic football analysis responded by pointing out that the most important thing in professional football is winning titles. Football exhibitions place is freestyle tournaments, not world cup. They also recalled that defense is also football, and a team that produce quality defense the way Italians did, deserves the title as much as a team that win it depending on offense brilliance .
The anti-Italy pundits were basically attacking football admirers, added to the Majority of journalists in UK who slate and underestimate any success if it’s not English.
The analysts who defended Italy were basically the pragmatic ones who place result over anything else, beside the Italian journalists who rightfully defended their national team achievement.
Four years later, Spain won the world cup. And as usual, there were journalists who hailed the achievement as a victory of offense football and beautiful game. They are basically the romantic analysts mentioned above who believe there is a right way and a wrong way to play football. The argument that “the right way” wins no title is proven wrong again. Spain won the title. Take that pragmatics!
On the other side, there were the journalists who complained that for Spain to win this world cup is enough to call it the worst tournament ever! They scored the least number of goals. They played boring football of passing and passing then….passing and passing again. Those are basically the previously called pragmatic who were lecturing about “results over style”. And of course, the Majority of journalists in UK who attack any success if it’s not English joined this chorus. Read their articles and you will be surprised of the level of inconsistency while stating their opinion in both cases.
A case for Spain: Dancing between the contradictions
It is extremely astonishing that those who used to argue Barcelona’s “right way to play football” claiming it is arrogant. The same journalists who believe the important thing is winning, and not the way you win. They are now writing eloquent articles that Spain didn’t deserve the world cup because they played boring football and only scored a handful number of goals. Didn’t they win this way?
It was even stranger that most of the Italians i had discussions with, believe that Spain didn’t deserve the title for the same reason. They scored the fewest number of goals for a world cup champion. That’s valid as a critic for the offense efficiency. Yet, isn’t that a huge credit for defense quality as well? Scoring the least number of goals was more than enough to win. Isn’t defense another way of quality football anymore? How can Italy deserve it and not Spain then?
It’s a personal choice for someone not to like possession style of football. No one can argue with that. But it’s a long senseless shot to label it as “boring football” especially for someone who hail settling deep and counter attacking.
If the ball is the reference and the focal parameter in this game, then how can a team that is not interested in having the ball be more fascinating for a football fan than a team that entertain the ball for most of the game time? That’s like saying there is more joyful in watching parked formula 1 cars than watching it in a race.
The same people who complain that attacking football admirers are not aware of the virtues of defense approach for being more systematic and tactically disciplined style usually underestimate the systematic approach of possession oriented teams (or attacking teams as commonly known).
Between Barcelona and Spain: Perfecting the system
While most of the credit was given to Barcelona after Spain’s world cup victory, Spain in this world cup perfected Barcelona’s football approach. Basically the quality defense of Barcelona was always overshadowed by the excellence of offense. The collective systemized dynamics of their defense is more or less an advanced catenaccio. In my preview for the second leg game between Barcelona and Inter, I tackled the defense subject:
“Defense is to prevent your opponent from scoring. As obvious as the definition is, its interpretation tends to be too one-dimensional to understand the variety of options. Some build towers and walls around the city. Sometimes it works; sometime the walls collapse and the city get wiped off the map. Both cases happened. If you forgot, I can remind you. Barcelona players in return, ramble through the opponent troops taking their arrows and swords (the ball?). Without it, they can’t even initiate an attack. Not only that, but the Catalans will also have more arrows (possession share) to shoot on the opponents. Though, it’s not all easy. If you get busted while crawling between the opponents’ tents, you are dead! They will easily stab you once, twice, and even more. Building towers sound more secured as long as it works. Yet it invites the enemy to approach the city gates. Moving towards the opponents’ tents sound like a crazy idea. But as long as it works, the return is extremely high as you don’t only defend your city but you also dominate and terminate the enemy permanently, using their own arrows. High risk=high return. I am sure you’ve heard that before. In the past five years, the return for Barcelona was unmatched. That’s good enough to stick to the principle.”
While before the first leg against the same team I wrote:
“Barcelona through possession oriented build up succeeded to keep the ball for the longest period possible, and that’s how they prevented Inter from scoring goals. An approach that’s still underrated by many football fans around the globe while claiming that Barcelona defense is weak. When Barcelona increases their ball possession, that’s defense, and it’s not bad at all.”
Still, Barcelona’s defense faced some tricky challenges. First, the lateral cover to block counter attacks. The team lost lot of points and games because they lacked the answers to fix this defect. Busquets is a good player in that matter, but he needed more support in the midfield especially when he was accompanied by Xavi and Iniesta (Keita provide relatively better cover when he plays). I’ve been mentioning what I call the Vacuum tunnel since two years already. It’s the space between the offense setup and the defense line. The moment the team loses possession this tunnel sucks the opponents’ counters from one side and blow it in the face of the defenders on the other side as fast as the cameras can catch.
The exposed space Barca players leave behind
when they go for miscalculated offense/pressure work
My suggestion to solve this problem was to introduce a different defense approach when losing passion by departmentalizing the fight to gain back possession using less players to put pressure on the opponents than we usually do and more players to close the spaces in the midfield.
The above demonstration explains a method I call “the anvil and the hummers” or sometimes I refer to as “catching the rabbit”. Putting pressure using the maximum number of players will create spaces in the midfield (Vacuum tunnel) for the opponent to play the ball through, breaking the initial pressure and generating counter attacks. Having a line to create cover (Anvil) closes all the spaces and squeezes the opponent in possession under the hummers of players putting pressure. You will need fewer players this way to retain the ball and they will put less effort because it is easier to catch a rabbit squeezed in the corner than running after it in an open field.
Then there is the physically demanding side of this approach, something that is not recognized sometimes. Continuous pressure while hunting for the ball is more demanding than positional defense. The sequence of the games leave an impact on the overall performance.
How long can you do this Alves dance while maintaining pressure and transition?
“At Barcelona the defense is mainly the job of the players who attack the opponent territory. This season, it’s the work of three forwards, two midfielders and an Alves (you can make up a position name for him. May be: the wing back forward?). The role of the defensive midfielder (Call him Yaya) is to create cover, and the role of the three defenders left behind is to create depth.
It’s a kind of win-win deal between defense and offense. Defenders agree to take the risk of guarding a wide sector of the field without sufficient number of players, which save more players for the offense section of the pitch. Offense in return pay for that by applying high pressure in the opponent's half, winning the ball as fast as possible, increasing possession time, and creating a Y2K problem on the scoring sheet that lacks a third digit to count the goals scored by the Catalan slaughters. All that contributes to keep the defense enjoying a sun bath, and keep Valdes in an extended vacation.
The Dangerous Compromise between Defense and Offense
When the Pressure on the ball drops by 15 %, it doesn’t demand 15% more effort from the defenders to cover that declination. It actually leads the whole system to collapse. Because the defenders role then switch from creating depth and Freezing the opponent’s last man standing upfront, to become a mission impossible of standing and facing a counter attacking tsunami, to mark, tackle, cover, with continuous re-positioning and pressure. And still falling under the obligation of building up the game from behind with accurate passes, Nonsense clearance is a crime in Barcelona. That’s too much for a defensive trio, right? This is not something we train our defenders to do. This is not something we like. And it's not something Defenders of any team can handle.
If we agree on that, then we know that the periods when the team face a drop in form, we need to evaluate the whole team defensive contribution (and specially those who are upfront), before looking for the scapegoat who made the last mistake before the goal. More pressure upfront means fewer counters, leading to less catastrophic mistakes. That’s the magic of probabilities.”
Spain during the world cup applied the basic tricks of Barcelona but did what was required to avoid the mentioned defensive defects. Vicente del Bosqe –now a national hero- was criticized for employing two holding midfielders. We already analyzed the roles of the two holding midfielders of Spain, but one can imagine what would have happened if he failed to win the world cup. Yet, one of the reasons he won the world cup was the impressive positional synchronization between Busquest, Xabi, and Xavi and the way they closed all the spaces in the midfield and assisted the center backs when the two fullbacks moved forward. As a result, even with both fullbacks moving forward and with at least one of the fullbacks being less qualified defensively than Abidal for Barcelona –Capdevilla. Spain was still more stable defensively against the best teams in the world cup than Barcelona was last season against big clubs.
Germany, a team that scored for fun during the world cup failed to create any sufficient threat when they played Spain. Netherland after beating one of the most solid teams defensively-Brazil- did nothing better than the Germans. Some may argue that Holland’s goals and victory over Brazil were basically the result of defensive errors. That’s an additional prove that when possession football succeed it creates better defensive output than traditional defense. Spain’s quality to keep the ball in the opponents’ half prevent even the possibilities of defensive errors or at least limit it. Defense is the ability to avoid conceding and there is no way better than not allowing any scoring opportunities at all. Again, an advanced catenaccio!
With such a level of quality systematic defense and dominant possession, even with a main striker suffering a coma, the team still succeeded to keep defense tight and keep the ball in the opponents half long enough to score and win. A perfect mix of playmaking football approach and upgraded daring catenaccio that camp its troops in the opponent’s half rather than the teams’ own box.
N.B. "Total football" and "Catenaccio" terms used in this article express a symbolic meaning regarding defense awareness and offense approach. By no mean we define any team's style nowadays within any of the mentioned traditional styles.
English premier league was the subject of the first part about the best league in the world. I apologies first for some spellings in the first part –I updated the post fixing where I thought there was a need for editing. This part will be brief as there are lots of factors the EPL have in common with the rest of the world leagues.
If it’s not convincing to consider the EPL as the league to crown, its more unlikely to find a sold case for the liga to consider it the best league in the world.
Evaluating the EPL in the first part was based on what the league generally stands for:
“Is it an exhibition to enjoy the game? Is it the level of competition? Is it the mechanism that helps the domestic level to improve and feed national teams that represents the respective country? Is it an environment that helps the game’s evolution throughout the tactical clashes that take place between the clubs involved? Is it the mean that transform football from a game to an economic module helping the country and the people financially? Or maybe, it’s a mix of this and that.”
For being an exhibition, the liga and the Serie A are the same. They are more like a Shakespearian theater than a music concert. In a Shakespearian theatre, you can expect the artists to have more quality, the music is more correct and the lyrics are of the best ever written. Yet, lady gaga will always generate more headlines than Andrea Bucelli. More audience. More dancing and chanting and fun.
The liga is the place where you find the Picasso type of footballers. The techniques and skills. The offense and the flair. But it’s also where the stadiums are only attended in occasions. The fields are not always up to the standards and the media coverage ranges from “not that good” to embarrassing. Matches schedule is also a bug that hurts the liga’s market value.
As mentioned in the first part, it’s not accurate that the EPL is generally more competitive than the liga. Yet, while competitiveness means different objectives from avoiding relegation to qualifying to the Europa league, champions’ league or winning the title, the competition for the title is still the most attractive face of all.
The gap between Barcelona and real Madrid as title contenders and the rest of the liga teams is getting wider every season. The solution must not count on blocking the improvement of the big two so the rest can catch, but to help the rest to grow in a stable manner. Some of the teams were so close to break through, and the failure was mainly the result of sloppy management than anything else. The most recent example is Valencia. They were up there. They needed two more seasons of stability with some smart signings and a new monster will start competing for the title. Instead, they decided to take risky shortcuts. The most irresponsible decision was to start building a new stadium while not sure how to sell the existing one. From there on, it was a free fall. Deportivo was another example. And the list is long. That shows the need to put some guidelines to channel the clubs’ management on the proper path. That’s even more important than injecting more money. With bad management that will not really make a difference. Ask the English premier league teams.
Taking about the EPL, the main demand in Spain is that the TV revenues should be distributed as it happened in England because that will help to create a more competitive league. While I agree on the first part (the distribution) I don’t believe in the second part (enhance competitiveness). It didn’t happen in the EPL anyway. The teams competing on the title are the ones financed by sugar daddies, not TV returns. The rest are less competitive than the liga clubs as I pointed out in the first part.
Still, there is a need to reconsider the distribution of TV revenues. The change will not damage the big two as much as it will help the other 18 teams to finance their operations (even though at the moment, the change will be bad for Valencia because they will earn less money than they do through the existing system- proving that the change will not solve problems alone).
On the bright side, the liga is no doubt the best big league when it comes to feeding the national teams. Not only the first team but all the way through the youth squads. Barely can you find a Spanish club without a proper youth setup. Its hard to predict how long that will last, but at the moment the liga is perfectly fitting to develop domestic talents into world class players.
Unlike the liga, the Serie A suffered a decline in football quality in the last few years. It’s a heartbreaking to compare this Serie A to that’s of the nineties for example. Other than sharing all the mentioned defects of the liga, the continuous scandals Italian football faces make things only worse for the Calcio to heal.
Even though, the tactical level of the Italian football is still superior in many ways, that’s not enough to rescue one of the most popular leagues in the world. Unless the clubs start to trust the youth more, invest in the infrastructure and the stadiums (some are disastrous even for amateurish leagues), and until the FIGC gain the trust of all its members and maintain enough stability, the Calcio will never be the league we knew.
Then where can we find the best league in the world?
It’s possible to build a case for any league. In fact, leagues of France, Holland, and Portugal for all the players they generate for the national team and the number of players they export (economical factor) added to the level of competitiveness (regardless of the quality of competitiveness) can build a case. South American leagues are also unfairly overlooked.
But in my opinion, the best league in the world at the moment is the Bundesliga. It’s not the best league for any specific reason but it generally ticks more boxes than any other league. Financially it is stable and the clubs are governed by strict regulations to control the books. The competitiveness is improving. The youth setup is impressive feeding the national teams. The stadiums are also wonderful. I can’t claim that a football fan will straight forward find it more exciting to follow the Bundesliga than the liga, the EPL, or the Calcio as the German teams will need some time to build their fan base abroad. But if there is a module to follow, that’s the one I can recommend.
One of the main debates during the world cup was the annoying trend of using double pivots. It sounded like a sin or a disgraceful behavior. While Holland fans considered it as an ugly compromise aiming to bring the world cup home, it was an unacceptable idea for teams like Brazil and Spain.
While analyzing a system, one of the common flaws is to focus on tactical notations more than system functionality. That leads to some football stereotypes that sounds like a given: Three players in defense are less reliable than four. Two holding midfielders is less offense oriented than one. And so on…
The team that impressed the majority of world cup followers was Germany. If we use absolute tactical terminologies, they were playing two holding midfielders. But the flair was there so as the scoring potentials. Because none of the two players, Khedira and Schweinsteiger was as static as the notations might reflect. Khedira was more a Pivot assistant/box2box midfielder, as long as the match scheme permits.
Brazil’s usage of two holding midfielders was heavily criticized. Dunga is a flop in the eyes of football analysts. But if it wasn’t of Melo’s stunning performance for Holland against Brazil, who knows? Maybe Dunga would have been labeled as the new Zagallo.
As I always repeat: The coach is the hostage of his own results. Dunga made lot of mess (especially with some substitutions). Yet, the two holding midfielders Dunga used served the offense fire as much as it created a stability for the defense (The coach can’t control things enough to prevent his player to score an own goal then earn himself a suspension). It’s always important to keep the midfield area under control, especially for this Brazil where you can’t count on a Ronaldo or a Ronaldinho to create chaos and decide the game. When the team lost possession they had two holding midfielders but while set offense they had only one: Melo. Gilberto was a third center back who released the two fullbacks to attack with no concerns. As an aftermath analysis one player was sacrificed for more defense duties released two players to contribute in the offense without hesitation. It was almost impossible for Brazil to use one holding midfielder with the kind of fullbacks they have –especially on the left. Keep in mind that the structure was not Dunga’s innovation. Brazil 1994 had Mouro Silva and Dunga in the final. Brazil 1998 had Sampaio and Dunga in the final. Brazil 2002 had Gilberto Silva and Edmilson in the final. In 2006 with Ze Roberto being less-disciplined beside Silva, they failed in the quarterfinal regardless of having all the superstars you may wish.
Moving to Spain, I will try to keep focused on the holding midfielder detail because there is a plan to write a post about Spain in the world cup. Before evaluating the success of two holding midfielders for Spain it’s important to question the certain: Were Xabi and Busquets playing as two holding midfielders?
Technically, yes. But if we dive more in depth, those two were the best demonstration about how far the functionality can upgrade the standard position and role of a player. While Xabi was a mix of Khadira’s (Germany) Box2box/pivot assistant, Busquets was by far the performer of the world cup. He was a Gilberto and a Melo (as a position not as a performance) at the same time, two in one. And he added the normal deep lying play-maker touch you can expect from Barcelona’s graduates. No wonder that with Busquets and Xabi behind and Iniesta in front, Xavi was able to go and do some shopping while the match is taking place and return without notice. Was this the best system for Spain? That’s another discussion. But the Busquets-Xabi partnership not only helped releasing the fullbacks to attack but also closed the midfield and buried any opportunity for counter attacks.
Holland system was the most primitive one of them all. No doubt van Marwijk will get his share of the praise because he reached the final, but the positioning and functionality of his players was too static to earn any credit. It was simple: close-down the defense and throw the ball forward for the skillful ones to make the difference. There is a difference between change and innovation. He changed the team tactics no doubt, but it’s safe to say there was no innovation at all. I dare to believe that reaching the final was absolute luck.
No doubt there were other teams applying this structure, but it is safe to say that the mentioned nations were the ones who received most of the sticks as a price for believing in it.
The word on the street complains about how boring the Spanish Tike-taka football is. And I have to agree with that. I remember when I was a child playing football with my older uncle in the backyard.
He used to dribble the ball around me in circles showing up his dominance. I used to chase the ball desperately trying to win it back.
It took me ages to succeed. Then in one moment or two he used to win it back again. That was so.damn.Boring.
Lot of Kamaras' in nowadays football, though not as entertaining...
He used to dribble the ball around me in circles showing up his dominance. I used to chase the ball desperately trying to win it back.
It took me ages to succeed. Then in one moment or two he used to win it back again. That was so.damn.Boring.
It’s that same man who lived in poverty for years, a good man. He always had the dream of fame and wealth, but it never crossed his way. Then one day he desperately decided to seek money anyway possible, whether practicing illegal business, rubbing a bank, or anything he can find. It doesn’t matter which path he took, the last chapter was the same, he lost his pride, sold his soul and is serving his period in that narrow prison where life is worse than what he was complaining from.
It’s the same duck that was charmed by the way the swan walk and tried to imitate. The duck failed to walk as a swan, and forgot how she instinctively walks.
Ladies and gentlemen, That’s Holland V.2010
Ladies and gentlemen, That’s Holland V.2010
It was painful to watch this team. They wanted this cup so badly that they undressed their football from its respected identity. They wanted this cup so badly that they didn’t hesitate to tackle the opponent on the chest, knee, elbow… shoot from the hip.
They gambled everything lost everything and won nothing.
It would have been disastrous if Holland would have won this one. The team of attractive football wins the cup when they gave up their style to play as everyone else. They win against a team that refused to play like everyone else and stayed loyal to their attractive style. That was too much for football god to allow.
Congratulations Spain. Hard luck for Holland. May be next time they can bring back their passionate football that represents them better and makes us appreciate them more.
Who will you pray for? I am all for Spain, though I always dreamed of the day Holland-not Spain- will win the tournament. Why? Because I was raised to worship the oranges football style. I consider Rinus Michels as my coaching icon. I mourn the 1974 team before and after every world cup for being the team that deserved the title more than any other team that lost it -beside Brazil 1982 may be. Their fans have that cheerful flavor in the stadium. All that being a relatively small country with -also relatively- limited resources. But those who were capable of beating the wild oceans still suffer to beat their bad luck and bring that dear title home.
But not this team. I can go as far as saying this is the worst team to win this title for Holland. Not that they are bad or anything, but there is a concern that this team may cause Holland football the same ruining infection the 1966 world cup winners caused for England. That team became the uncompromisable standard for English football and players were reshaped and evaluated per se. Coaches were struggling to imitate Alf Ramsey to an extreme that any innovative idea faced automatic rejection. And here we are 44 years later, Holland bring a different football approach to the world cup than they used to do, the common one or the so called "realistic". For the first time this team neither tastes orange nor carrot. There is no refreshing juice within. Healthy? May be. But its as good to health as a tablet. You need it, but you never seek it with joy. Its scary to think that if this team wins, Holland from bottom to top, from amateurs to first division, from youth to superstars will seek more of the same. Current coach already pointed out that "you cant count anymore on luck...Attractive football is a destructive ideology in Holland's football.". Its not that attractive football is the right way while the rest is wrong. Its just the only different style facing the rest. We need that. Holland 1974 were as close to the title as this team- or even closer. I hope it keep being the same next sunrise.
Spain deserve this one, regardless of laughable stuff you read in the past few days. Its the only team that all the opponents (Aside of Chile may be) were more concerned to stop than to beat. The unique style of play. Being a team with all what the word can express. Not group of individuals with a level of understanding. A team. And with the huge impact total football had on Spanish football -and Barcelona methodology in specific- its just fitting for this Spanish team to defeat this Holland.
I will not get into tactics and systems, nothing to say more than what previously said about the two teams. I will invite you to enjoy this final as it will be a great pleasure for the eye.
Holland reaches the final depending on their least inspiring performances in a competition since I can remember. Today, we will know who will follow them to the final. If Germany does so, it will be one of the most interesting games as it will serve as a rematch to that 1974 final where Germany broke the orange hearts and shadowed the quality of that total football team, led by their Johan. If Spain survived another day, that means we will experience one of the most heartbreaking finals. Imagine, the best two football nations that never won the title meet to play for the cup. One of them will end up: Failing again after being that close. Can’t they just have the cup two years each? But let’s calm down, Spain still have a mountain to climb till they start getting concerned about that.
Germany proved so far being the most consistent and balanced team. An extremely organized lineup mixing youth and experience all dedicated to the case. You barely find such level of commitment in world football these days, especially when it comes to national teams. But we are talking about the Germans here.
The selection clicked perfectly so far. There is no need to think about modifying it. Yet, there is no choice now with Müller being suspended. It’s not easy to figure out who will take his place. Trochowski –another polish serving Die Mannschaft- is a sound option. He is the most experienced compared to Kroos and Marin. But since when lack of experience was a problem for this national team? Both are extremely talented and even if it’s still early to be certain, you can expect them to become starters in euro2012. Kroos is a good choice for midfield battle while Marin is a player who can expose Spanish defensive fragility on the flanks. My vote goes for Trochowski though. It’s the semifinals and reliability should be ahead of promising.
Germany will give a special attention to Spain’s left flank where Capdevilla, Villa, and Iniesta (regardless of where his natural position is) operate. Spain is a left sided team offense wise. Leaving Lahm without sufficient support is like shooting yourself in the foot. That’s another factor Joachim Löw will take in consideration while picking Müller’s replacement.
I can’t expect that Löw will try to disturb Spain’s buildup by putting pressure on the backline, mainly Pique, Busquets and Xabi Alonso using Özil, Trochowski, Podolski, and Klose. Xavi will be forced to move deep shadowed by Khedira. That will limit Spain’s threat on a defense line led by Schweinsteiger as a holding midfielder. Then the lines retreat to create a block in front of the area, not only to protect defense but also to invite the Spaniards to move forward leaving spaces in their backlines. That’s where Germans’ counterattacks will be lethal.
Spain looked a bit disappointing if you judge based on expectations. They are more or less doing a Holland in this tournament: Winning without inspiring. But make no mistake, the team is gradually improving game after another. After the game against Switzerland, Vicente del Bosque modified the selection slightly to solve problem number one: Lack of offense presence inside the box. He counted on Torres as a striker with Villa exposing the spaces. Ramos is becoming more and more daring to open the right flank while setting offense (even though his decision making was a bit poor sometimes). Then with time the Duet Xabi-Busquets started to synchronize their functionality better. Against Paraguay, Xabi was less tempted to do a holding midfielder role than before, he was more a center midfielder. But there is still some Xabi-related tailoring needed as there is still some conflicts between his role and that’s of Xavi. Squeezed between Xabi directness and Iniesta’s impact, Xavi is still struggling to dictate his command in the midfield as he usually does.
The most notable concern for Spain is Torres form. He is yet to prove his worth as a starter in this tournament. And the question is: Will he start against Germany?
My guess is that he will. I commented about this on Barcelona football blog, so I think I will just paste it here:
“I will pick him in a heartbeat. I am against any suggestion to bring him instead of Ibra, but that doesn’t mean I have to deny he is a great striker. Yet, the reasoning behind starting him goes beyond his individual qualities as a striker.
Spain needs to do everything possible to make Villa’s life easier for being their winning horse in this competition.
1) As I’ve been saying it since two seasons and thankfully its confirmed now, Villa plays better with a striker in front of him to create spaces than he does as a lone/main striker. Add the fact that Spain barely has any scoring midfielders who is proven with the national team, that add more responsibilities on the offense to score. Spain needs to use Villa the way he scores most and help him to be less containable. That’s not as a lone striker which will put lot of limitations on his qualities as a versatile forward who-for the record- contributed defensively on the left flank almost as much as Capdevila. When he moves to channels you will barely pick an alternative that can run into the box and cause damage. Keep Torres in, even if he doesn’t score. He creates the spaces for Villa to do so.
2) The other alternative (instead of starting a midfielder instead of Torres) is having Llorente as a starter. This is a striker I like, but how far can we consider him as a tested reliable option as a starter to worth the gamble of changing your main striker so far in a semifinal game? Starting from semifinals, changes in the selection are not recommended in general. You use the selection that picked the world cup momentum already as a group regardless of individual evaluations. You can expect the games to be close and tight which means that the last 30 minutes will decide the game. Install your additional options then. Add the fact that Torres knows Villa. He can predict what’s going to happen next and what to do to serve that. Referring to the first point, this factor gives Torres the edge as a starter.
3) If you start Torres and sub him for another player who is not a key starter, the sub will be very motivated to serve as a game changer. If you bench Torres then your plan failed he will be too desperate as a sub to prove his worth so he may not be as helpful.
4) Even when Torres disappoint as a forward, he still put an extremely appreciated pressure on opponents’ defense while retaining possession. That’s a huge plus for a team that plays possession based style.
5) If Torres scored in the semifinals he will turn to a beast in the final. That’s tempting enough to give it a try.”
Another reason is that I don’t think it is smart for Spain to mirror Germans system. Germany employ five midfielders when they lose possession. If Spain gave up on Torres for a midfielder they may have better quality in that department than Germany but the Germans will have the edge offense wise with more players capable to score than the Spaniards. Spain needs to move the game to the Germans third and need a target man like Torres in the box to pull the two center backs together toward him for Villa to slice through the space. It has to be either Torres or Llorente, and between the two I pick the more experienced.
Spain needs to count on the versatility of the players. To break through pressure it’s not enough to demand support but also to focus on continuous movement demanding the ball in the space as forward as possible. A mix of Xabi directness and Xavi command can do the trick if performed accurately. If the game turned to be another Holland-Uruguay, then Xabi long shots will help the team to create threat.
It’s extremely important that Villa attack from Lahms flank to keep him at the back, or else Capdevilla will be in trouble. Iniesta will be a key player to shuffle the team’s lines forward for being the most skillful in the midfield. His responsibilities will range from contributing in the buildup, stretching Germans defense from the flank, and keep on trying to add that piece of offense threat to his magic box while through demanding the ball in the box or launching long shots.
This game promises to enhance the level of football of this world cup, which was disappointing so far. Spain was one of the favorites for this world cup before it started. Germany deserved the favorite stamp for this match after their performance in the competition. It’s a very close battle, and hopefully it will bring the best out of the two teams.