Ribery: Pep lacks experience

http://pepfraud.esy.es/

Lord Awesome wrote:
Sophisticated? 3 systems? Hmm. The way you wrote this makes it seem like you know him personally.

If you compare him to others, his football is highly developed. His football at Bayern was more 'sophisticated' than his football at Barca. The injury crisis made him much better as he had to squeeze different types of solutions without his starters. All at the same time while staying true to his philosophy. Marti Perarnau who attended multiple Bayern training sessions, wrote Pep’s book and is a good friend of Pep, said Pep studies 2-3 systems per game. I’ll take his word for it.

If Guardiola is as “multi systematic” then why does it appear like he’s trying to do the same thing over and over again. Pep only attempted to play Bayern the way Barca did. I say he attempted cause in the end we all saw that he could not mirror them neither on the field nor in the trophy cabinet. When I say “the same poop” I mean that Pep’s mind doesn’t stray from attempting the tactic of prioritizing possession of the ball until the defense breaks.

Every great coach has a philosophy. That is Pep's philosophy. What's wrong with his view on football? There is one ball on the pitch. If you control the ball without losing it, you'll create more and concede fewer.

I said earlier that Pep’s football is sophisticated. Maybe that was the wrong word. The correct word is that it’s logical. He’s successful because his football is common sense.

I also hope you realize that teams hire him to play like that, right? Bayern hired him to bring a fluid, controlling style of football, and he did exactly that. However, bar the basic concept of controlling the ball and controlling the space, his Bayern and Barca side were different.

This is how you view his football:
Bayern = possession
Barca = possession

This is how I and others view his football:
Barca: Positional play, possession, inside wingers, halfback, overlapping fullbacks, diamond midfield, link-up, low crosses, slow build up, and the employment of the false 9. The attacking strategy was to create space in between the lines for Messi or Iniesta to exploit.

Bayern: Positional play, possession, outside wingers, inside fullbacks, CM's playing as CAM's, long diagonals, high crosses, long shots, and the employment of the half-forward. The attacking strategy was to create 1v1s for the wingers so they could cross the ball to Lewa or Mueller.

Can you tell me with a straight face that Juventus-Bayern 2-2 (2016) in the first leg was the same as Barca-Arsenal 3-1 (2011) in the second leg? Barca and Bayern had different positional shapes, and they had different strengths. Pep tried to incorporate those strengths all with the basic concept in mind. And I'm going to say it again, you do realize he was hired to make his teams play his way, right?

That’s what makes Pep one of the world’s best. He finds a way to make use of his players’ best strengths without sacrificing the shape and strategy.

Let's look at Manchester City. De Bruyne and Silva, positionally would be considered as central midfielders. However, offensively they aren’t playing as central midfielders, they’re playing as attacking midfielders. Pep hasn't shoehorned one on the wing, nor has the other been playing very deep. He's found a way to allow the both of them to express their strengths in their best roles, without sacrificing the structure of the team. Now, let's also look at City's wingers. Sane/Nolito and Sterling aren't going to win City games on their own, but they have a skillset which is beneficial for any team. They're dribbling wingers who have an abundance of pace. So you don't want to give them too much individual responsibility, rather you want to put them in situations which they'll impact the game. Pep does that by making sure the team creates 1v1 situations for them. They'll win their individual duels against the fullbacks most times.

Essentially, you have four great players who are all playing in their best positions. At the same time, the team is emphasizing all of their strengths. Most importantly, the positional shape of the team hasn't been adversely affected due to those movements. The fullbacks were criticized last season for lacking quality, but so far they’ve looked alright. Since the fullbacks come inside to add more control, they aren’t being forced to run extra yards nor are they being used as attacking outlets. They mostly facilitate possession so they aren’t exposed as often. Their inside movements allow the CM’s to move higher up and the wingers to stay wider and higher.

As I said, it’s logical, and it’s common sense. If we look past the fancy terminology and the tactical nuances, Pep is one of the best because he manages to maximize his players' strengths, while minimizing their weaknesses at the same time.

Compare that to Mourinho who's obsessed with playing Pogba as a defensive midfielder in a 4-2-3-1.

You see sophisticated I see a borefest. Effective? Yes. Despite Guardiola’s stained CL successes, the effectiveness of his strategy is shown in the numbers overall and that’s why I consider him a good manager, at least.

I don’t enter ’which football is better to watch’ arguments because it’s subjective. What you see as boring is what I and others see as beautiful.

However, when compared to Mou I only consider Mou better only because he can vary his strategy more than Pep. Some people here in GL think that arming a defense is easy and that it’s only the quality of defenders that makes a defense good. If it were really that simple than any manager would how to defend against any opposing team. Mou has shown to be more tactically sound compared to Pep. While Pep sticks to his own strategy Mou changes depending on the situation presented.

Objectively speaking, the football Pep teaches is harder to learn the football Mourinho teaches. LMFAO, pls stop. No, he hasn’t. In individual duels against Pep, Mou gets outschooled more often than not.

Pep is one of the most tactically sound coaches in the world. Has Pep *bleep* up? Yes, yes he has. As all coaches do. However, he hasn't lost the plot as many times as Mourinho has.

Pep doesn't just want possession. Possession is a tool. It's a means to an end. That's something you fail or choose not to understand. Pep wants superiorities across the pitch. I've listed a few of them in previous posts. The best way to generate those superiorities is by holding onto the ball. He targets the opposition's weaknesses and uses possession as a tool to exploit those said weaknesses. And I don't see what's the problem with that. The rewards you get from holding onto the ball and not losing it is greater than the rewards you get by sitting back.

Everybody anti Mou follower here seems to think Mou only defends and nothing else. While Mou is defo more confident in using the shield he’s not estranged to playing attacking football when he sees the opportunity. Normally, Mou pushes his team outward when he sees that the opposition won’t be able to breach his defense enough or when he sees that the opposing team is open at the back and opts for counters. He’s a bit more open when the scores are even or when he’s down a goal or when he wants to take the first strike and flush the other team out. Normally, he grinds or surprises to obtain the leading goal and once Mou achieves that advantage he changes to a counter attacking team since the opposing team will normally be given the ultimatum to score. That’s already 2 different dimensions (however you look at it) that Mou utilizes in his games. First the measurement of the opposing teams prowess to set the initial strategy (Mou’s best aspect IMO) and then the 2nd dimension for when he has the lead. He can give a 3rd dimension for when he’s down. Basically find a way to attack the opposing defense while attempt to not let the margin go higher. IMO it’s his weakest dimension but he’s made the occasional come back here and there. No one’s perfect.

You listed the in-game reactions that 99% of coaches make.

• If you are the better team, take the game to the opposition. Once you have managed to score, sit back and counterattack.
  

• If you are the weaker team, sit back and counterattack.
  

• If you are losing, take the game to the opposition and try to score.
  

It boggles my mind when someone calls Mou multi-dimensional while at the same time call Pep one-dimensional. I don’t have a problem with Mou's view of football. He believes that “he who has the ball, will make mistakes." My problem is that he hasn’t been doing anything different to improve on that idea. He’s been doing the same thing for the past six years ffs.

He uses the 4-2-3-1. He uses central wingers and overlapping fullbacks. He wants a complete CAM who while defending is an 8 and a 9.5 while attacking. He rarely if ever adapts and makes use of a tactical tweak to fit in a player. Also, at this point, unlike Pep, Mou no longer has the excuse that his gameplan is working so he doesn’t need to adapt. He was embarrassing last year, and this year United aren’t looking good either.

Pep used a 3-4-3 so he could include Fabregas and he played a 4-2-4-esque formation so he could include Mueller. At Bayern, he would regularly play Costa, Coman, Robben, Muller, and Lewa all at the SAME TIME. They’d start games like that ffs.

Mou can’t even play one of Martial/Mkhitaryan/Pogba in their preferred positions LMFAO.

There are variations to Pep’s possession, and position game. He’s the most flexible coach in the world in that regard. Mou is someone who has been doing the same thing, for the past six years. There has been no variation to his basic ideas, no tweaks, nothing new whatsoever.

For someone who is multi-dimensional, why do Mourinho's teams struggle so much when they have the ball and are facing a parked bus? He's managed rich clubs with talented attacking players as well. It's not like he has a bunch of dopes leading the attack.

You’d think multi-dimensional Mou would have no problem against those teams. Pep faces a parked bus almost every game, and his teams win 9/10 times. If Pep faced teams that gave his teams space, he'd dominate more than he already does. I can't say the same about Mourinho's teams, who always struggle against parked buses.

Needless to say Mou, is swayed by the scoreline and changes the dimension of his game according to the scoreline and has shown to work with all his strategies just fine, in my book. Manager’s who are results based are usually like that.

Every manager cares about results. Their job security depends on it. As much as you'd like to think he doesn't, Pep does care about the results. Maybe, for him, the performance is more important, but he'll do what it takes to get a win. I mean, since he's come to City, City has been dropping deep and counterattacking at the end of games. That was something Pep was accused of not being able to do, what are your thoughts on that?

Also, what are your thoughts on this?

Lord Awesome wrote:
A lot of Pep fans in GL seem more irritating than Pep himself, tbh. These  really believe his style of coaching is multidimensional and revolutionary. Pep only needed 1 CL, not 3, 1, to prove his mettle. I’m sure the hype will end once Pep is found out in PL and he’ll end up like Rijkaard or something.

8 wins in 8 games.

Fantastic post Cas, i do fear you have wasted your time though.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Considering his history he probably believes it.

Pep is a fraud.

Mou>Pep.

CR>Messi.

Messi was carried by Xaviesta.

The PL is the best league and exposes frauds.

His first 8 games at all the clubs he's been at

Team. Pld Won draw lost GF GA GD
City 8. 8. 0. 0. 25 4 +21
Bayern 8. 6. 1. 1. 16 8 +8
Barca 8. 5. 1. 2. 19 8 +11

Kolarov: "We won’t burn out. The reason is that the training sessions are so well planned."

Kolarov: "This is the best team I have worked with and it doesn’t get mentioned a lot. It starts in the office and reaches to the pitch.": "Guardiola’s staff are amazing. At every training session they look after you individually, one by one."

Kolarov: "It is why the team looks so mentally sharp. That creates a positive atmosphere around the club."

Kolarov: "You guys in the press don’t see it but we know and that’s why we are so sharp on the pitch."

Clichy: "What we like most is that every training session, every game is different."

Clichy: "He (Pep) has his own philosophy but he also looks at the opposition we play against and from that moment he will change things."

Clichy: "Sometimes, that means playing out of position. We have seen so many players playing in areas they are not used to. "

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Fantastic post Cas, i do fear you have wasted your time though.

Yea, I know I did. This entire thread was a waste of time TBH. It's just that I was trying to understand some of the 'criticism' he gets and most of the reasons were really stupid.

Casciavit wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Fantastic post Cas, i do fear you have wasted your time though.

Yea, I know I did. This entire thread was a waste of time TBH. It's just that I was trying to understand some of the 'criticism' he gets and most of the reasons were really stupid.

It was a solid read and very insightful.

Casciavit wrote:
If you compare him to others, his football is highly developed. His football at Bayern was more 'sophisticated' than his football at Barca. The injury crisis made him much better as he had to squeeze different types of solutions without his starters. All at the same time while staying true to his philosophy. Marti Perarnau who attended multiple Bayern training sessions, wrote Pep’s book and is a good friend of Pep, said Pep studies 2-3 systems per game. I’ll take his word for it.

I'll admit I didn't watch Pep's Bayern when he played against most of the non major BL clubs but during the bigger matches I have never seen anything that looked liked "3 systems per game." That's OK though, you're are free to believe whatever you want.

Casciavit wrote:

Every great coach has a philosophy. That is Pep's philosophy. What's wrong with his view on football? There is one ball on the pitch. If you control the ball without losing it, you'll create more and concede fewer.

I just don't prefer to prioritize the ball as much to the point where I'd rather watch paper dry. I'd rather not relinquish the goal and make it harder for my opponent to breach the defense. As soon as the team picks the ball up I rather choose whether to go for the quick counter or delay the ball and keep it away from the opposition. Depending on the situation, of course. Nothing "wrong" with one or the other.

Casciavit wrote:
I said earlier tharet Pep’s football is sophisticated. Maybe that was the wrong word. The correct word is that it’s logical. He’s successful because his football is common sense.

I also hope you realize that teams hire him to play like that, right? Bayern hired him to bring a fluid, controlling style of football, and he did exactly that. However, bar the basic concept of controlling the ball and controlling the space, his Bayern and Barca side were different.

This is how you view his football:
Bayern = possession
Barca = possession

All right here we go. This is the big one I have problem with.

The main thesis that kinda irks me everytime I see it. That you and yours believe that Pep's footy is superior than all other styles. Probably a logic as one-dimensional as Pep's tactics. This is where the flaw comes from the most. This logic you guys believe is nothing short of naive, IMHO. If Pep's tactics are logical, than Simione's or Mourinho's must be essential to life itself, by your guys own logic. Go figure.

Casciavit wrote:
This is how I and others view his football:
Barca: Positional play, possession, inside wingers, halfback, overlapping fullbacks, diamond midfield, link-up, low crosses, slow build up, and the employment of the false 9. The attacking strategy was to create space in between the lines for Messi or Iniesta to exploit.

Bayern: Positional play, possession, outside wingers, inside fullbacks, CM's playing as CAM's, long diagonals, high crosses, long shots, and the employment of the half-forward. The attacking strategy was to create 1v1s for the wingers so they could cross the ball to Lewa or Mueller.

Can you tell me with a straight face that Juventus-Bayern 2-2 (2016) in the first leg was the same as Barca-Arsenal 3-1 (2011) in the second leg? Barca and Bayern had different positional shapes, and they had different strengths. Pep tried to incorporate those strengths all with the basic concept in mind. And I'm going to say it again, you do realize he was hired to make his teams play his way, right?

That’s what makes Pep one of the world’s best. He finds a way to make use of his players’ best strengths without sacrificing the shape and strategy.

So you're saying that Pep did something other than prioritize possession in one of those 2 games that you mentioned? It's not the shape of Pep's teams that I draw my criticism towards Pep. It's what he tries to do with them which is basically the same thing as what he did at Barca. Also, if he really did want to take the best out of Bayern then I wonder why he didn't incorporate one such as Ribery to his max. He had the same problem with Ibra at Barca. This idea is dubunked that Pep maximizes a teams potential has already been debunked by Pep's own past methods of alienation of certain top players for the sake of implementing his own strategy. If Bayern indeed obtained Pep for his style that's fine but I'm glad I was right about Pep only win domestic titles and not CL. Pretty sure Bayern fans will laud Heynckes (as well as myself, even tho I'd rather watch Bayern lose more than win) more than they will Pep. Feel like arguing how Pep was "surperior" or more "sophisticated" than Heynckes too? I wouldn't put it beyond you guys to do so. In the end, Pep didn't do anything beyond I expected him to do at Bayern.  

Casciavit wrote:
Let's look at Manchester City. De Bruyne and Silva, positionally would be considered as central midfielders. However, offensively they aren’t playing as central midfielders, they’re playing as attacking midfielders. Pep hasn't shoehorned one on the wing, nor has the other been playing very deep. He's found a way to allow the both of them to express their strengths in their best roles, without sacrificing the structure of the team. Now, let's also look at City's wingers. Sane/Nolito and Sterling aren't going to win City games on their own, but they have a skillset which is beneficial for any team. They're dribbling wingers who have an abundance of pace. So you don't want to give them too much individual responsibility, rather you want to put them in situations which they'll impact the game. Pep does that by making sure the team creates 1v1 situations for them. They'll win their individual duels against the fullbacks most times.

Essentially, you have four great players who are all playing in their best positions. At the same time, the team is emphasizing all of their strengths. Most importantly, the positional shape of the team hasn't been adversely affected due to those movements. The fullbacks were criticized last season for lacking quality, but so far they’ve looked alright. Since the fullbacks come inside to add more control, they aren’t being forced to run extra yards nor are they being used as attacking outlets. They mostly facilitate possession so they aren’t exposed as often. Their inside movements allow the CM’s to move higher up and the wingers to stay wider and higher.

As I said, it’s logical, and it’s common sense. If we look past the fancy terminology and the tactical nuances, Pep is one of the best because he manages to maximize his players' strengths, while minimizing their weaknesses at the same time.

Compare that to Mourinho who's obsessed with playing Pogba as a defensive midfielder in a 4-2-3-1.

Here. This is probably what I like about you the most. You can identify the players on the team and the roles they can play. I don't know who's idea it was to play Silva as a CM and not an AM (I'm assuming Pellegrini?) but yes Pep is playing him soundly at the moment and so far looks like Man City is benifitting from it. De Bryune too has found the right manager again for his style. Mou only plays Pogba there cause from what I've seen he has no real option at DM, at the momnent. Also, out of all the defenses Mou's had, Man U's defenders are of lowest calibur he has had at his disposal. No Carvalho, Terry, Chivu, Lucio, Samuel, Pepe, Ramos here. Stones is still pretty young and still not at peak (At least I hope not).

Casciavit wrote:
I don’t enter ’which football is better to watch’ arguments because it’s subjective. What you see as boring is what I and others see as beautiful.

Yep agreed here. Tho, I only argue to remind that there's more that one way of playing footy. That's all.

Casciavit wrote:
Objectively speaking, the football Pep teaches is harder to learn the football Mourinho teaches. LMFAO, pls stop. No, he hasn’t. In individual duels against Pep, Mou gets outschooled more often than not.

Pep is one of the most tactically sound coaches in the world. Has Pep *bleep* up? Yes, yes he has. As all coaches do. However, he hasn't lost the plot as many times as Mourinho has.

Pep doesn't just want possession. Possession is a tool. It's a means to an end. That's something you fail or choose not to understand. Pep wants superiorities across the pitch. I've listed a few of them in previous posts. The best way to generate those superiorities is by holding onto the ball. He targets the opposition's weaknesses and uses possession as a tool to exploit those said weaknesses. And I don't see what's the problem with that. The rewards you get from holding onto the ball and not losing it is greater than the rewards you get by sitting back.

Yeah, the superiority complex again. Look sir, I'm gonna make it as obvious as possible as to why Pep has schooled Mou more often than not post Inter.

Pep hasn't dealt with a Julio Cesar at GK, Chivu, Samuel, Lucio, Maicon, at CB with Zanetti, Cambiasso at DM ever since that glorious Inter crusade and he probably never will again. Yes there was Carvalho Pepe at RM and Mou eventually got around Pep at the end but it pales in comparisson to Inter 2010. Yes, Pep beat Allegri's Buffon, Bonucci, Barzagli but excluded Chiellini and we'll never really know what could've happen if he were. And even then, I still believe Inter's defense to has more responses to opposing attacks than Juve's defense. Point is, at least for the forseeable future atm, Pep will probably not have to encounter a defense quite like that one ever again. Simione did it with an even lesser Defense but even so it's not the same. If defending was as easy as you make it out to be than all defensive managers would win all the time cause they have it "easy." Destroying something organized is not easy, my friend. Anyone in La Liga, especially, can vouch for that.

Casciavit wrote:

You listed the in-game reactions that 99% of coaches make.

• If you are the better team, take the game to the opposition. Once you have managed to score, sit back and counterattack.
  

• If you are the weaker team, sit back and counterattack.
  

• If you are losing, take the game to the opposition and try to score.
  

It boggles my mind when someone calls Mou multi-dimensional while at the same time call Pep one-dimensional. I don’t have a problem with Mou's view of football. He believes that “he who has the ball, will make mistakes." My problem is that he hasn’t been doing anything different to improve on that idea. He’s been doing the same thing for the past six years ffs.

He uses the 4-2-3-1. He uses central wingers and overlapping fullbacks. He wants a complete CAM who while defending is an 8 and a 9.5 while attacking. He rarely if ever adapts and makes use of a tactical tweak to fit in a player. Also, at this point, unlike Pep, Mou no longer has the excuse that his gameplan is working so he doesn’t need to adapt. He was embarrassing last year, and this year United aren’t looking good either.

Pep used a 3-4-3 so he could include Fabregas and he played a 4-2-4-esque formation so he could include Mueller. At Bayern, he would regularly play Costa, Coman, Robben, Muller, and Lewa all at the SAME TIME. They’d start games like that ffs.

Mou can’t even play one of Martial/Mkhitaryan/Pogba in their preferred positions LMFAO.

There are variations to Pep’s possession, and position game. He’s the most flexible coach in the world in that regard. Mou is someone who has been doing the same thing, for the past six years. There has been no variation to his basic ideas, no tweaks, nothing new whatsoever.

For someone who is multi-dimensional, why do Mourinho's teams struggle so much when they have the ball and are facing a parked bus? He's managed rich clubs with talented attacking players as well. It's not like he has a bunch of dopes leading the attack.

You’d think multi-dimensional Mou would have no problem against those teams. Pep faces a parked bus almost every game, and his teams win 9/10 times. If Pep faced teams that gave his teams space, he'd dominate more than he already does. I can't say the same about Mourinho's teams, who always struggle against parked buses.

Then Pep must be the only one thinking he's losing all the time. Cruyff, Zeman, Luis Enrique, Wenger all do the same thing to varying degrees. 99? A Pep fan accusing Mou of doing the same thing for six years? Nah. Not buying this one.

I've already explained what I see Mou doing in regards to his managing. If you expect any Porto, Chelsea, Inter, RM, and CL fans to believe Mou simply parked the bus against every team he faced then you may as well block the sun with your thumb and tell us that that the sun isn't shining.

Currently, I think it's still kinda early to judge. You're right about Mou losing it, tho. Has been for sure ever since Mou's last PL title. That's safe to say right now surely. Maybe Pep does have a chance at the title. There's still more league to play to tell for sure, tho.

Casciavit wrote:
Every manager cares about results. Their job security depends on it. As much as you'd like to think he doesn't, Pep does care about the results. Maybe, for him, the performance is more important, but he'll do what it takes to get a win. I mean, since he's come to City, City has been dropping deep and counterattacking at the end of games. That was something Pep was accused of not being able to do, what are your thoughts on that?

Also, what are your thoughts on this?

8 wins in 8 games.

Pep is being forced deep for once since the competition is tighter. Glad to see he's doing something different for a change. Hope he can keep it up.  

If that's you're reaction in 8 games thus far then I wanna see your reaction when Pep becomes compared with Wenger. That's my prediction for Pep in PL, anyway.

Bookmarked.

Casciavit wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Considering his history he probably believes it.

Pep is a fraud.

Mou>Pep.

CR>Messi.

Messi was carried by Xaviesta.

The PL is the best league and exposes frauds.

Pep is not a fraud. He just got hyped by you guys to the point where it seemed like Pep was this invincible Super Saiyan God manager. When he lost to Simione's Atletico (the last straw) you guys receive backlash from the naysayers and couldn't take the burn. The real fraud's are you guys not Pep. Pep's a good manager. Great? Not yet.

CR>Messi?

Yep. Don't see how Messi is getting that Ballon D'Or this time. You guys wanna keep blaming everyone else but Messi for his failiures cause he can dribble or playmake in Barca. Whereas Ronaldo was kept out due to injury in Euro final all of a sudden his goals aren't vital to Portugal's success.

Of course you guys think Messi>CR.

Messi carried by XaviIniesta?

Both XaviIniesta have Euro's and a WC at NT.
Messi was a U-20 and Olympic medal.
Pretty sure the balance tilts heavier for XaviIniesta.
Even Ronaldo's Euro weigh more than Messi's leveler.
Messi also performs much better at Barca than at NT level.
Why is this still being discussed?

The PL is the best league and exposes frauds.

Yes, it is currently.

No, leagues don't expose frauds. Pep is just predictable. This has yet to be confirmed but I'm betting it will in due time. Unless he really changes his tactics and becomes more versatile like other managers.

There you have it. Conclude whatever you will.

Today logic died a painful death.

How could people take Ribery seriously? Pep helped him & nursed him in way despite so many injures. As did LVG.

Ribery sh*t on both when Robben outplayed him or he got injured. Ribery is one of the biggest scumbags in football who punched his team-mate giving a black eye in the middle of the match because his team-mate told him to follow the coach's instruction regarding PK.

He is often very eager to take FK & Corner but is a pathetic FK & corner taker because he lacks the height, curve etc needed & it is like a straight lowish ball to the near post but the fu**er wants to go n take everytime.

This is the same guy who did undertake prostitutes for months with rave parties while his wife was pregnant. Who would do that to his wife while she is pregnant?

The guy bailed out of the French NT early after failing & always stirred sh** for the NT. No1 should take this guy seriously!

What an idiot, got absolutely outplayed in two halves without two of Spurs key players, thank Brendan for showing character last week and not bowing down to him like 90% of the PL