Is There A "Correct" Way To Play Football?

sciacca wrote:Platini said it best, Brazil defend with 4, Italy defend with 8

and the winner was....

Great points he brings out, 'History shows defence always beat Attack'.

sciacca wrote:Great points he brings out, 'History shows defence always beat Attack'.

my fave quote.

heres my personal quote..

TMO- "football is not defined by how its played but how its thought of."

"there is no correct way to play football, but there is a correct way to adapt and win against anything"

the italian way being my personal choice for best.

TMO, you know what they say.

'Italians do it best'

When it comes to Football, when it comes to history, when it comes to food, Women, everthing hehehe, I'm being sarcastic here.

sciacca wrote:TMO, you know what they say.

'Italians do it best'

When it comes to Football, when it comes to history, when it comes to food, Women, everthing hehehe, I'm being sarcastic here.

lol

i hope more people look at this thread, hope people understand wat we r saying and come closer to understanding the game better imo.

Beh, what do you expect? Mostly everyone here is EPL fans... They will disagree, tho when was it the last time did England win anything? Take Chelsea for example as a club... No CL's... Why? because they use the wrong tactics, and now their league is depending on Italians and other foreign coaches to do it for them

sciacca wrote:Beh, what do you expect? Mostly everyone here is EPL fans... They will disagree, tho when was it the last time did England win anything? Take Chelsea for example as a club... No CL's... Why? because they use the wrong tactics, and now their league is depending on Italians and other foreign coaches to do it for them

every team and every club believe in a way of playing football on the field, look at what the epl is known for.. but it sometimes prevents them from moving forward and modernizing their game to be able to compete "today", england is a prime example of philosophy "retardation" clubs like arsenal backing that up, they believe in a way to "play" but it has absolutley no substance, and their recent sucesss shows.

also

i really do understand also the feeling many italian fans might feel for their recent troubles in the league and also when it comes to the national team, you guys have a tremendous philospohy its only that there are many factors holding you down. many and that also shows.

its not also about the philospohy but about how well you implement it.

politics,players,managements have to do with it.

Scandals ruined it a bit, but since then two clubs won.
Euro's we were fine.
Two years of devastation because of Lippi leaving youth and our stars away. No Cassano, No Party.

many factors indeed. well im off, goodnight

final message- there are many ways of playing football, many strategies, cultures, tactics, none is wrong, the only wrong you can do though is to limit your self to thinking a certain way of playing is right and wrong. limitless possibilites are assured for those who venture.

and yes the italian way is imo the most complete. GOODNIGHT.

Which idiot gave this post a negative reputation?

The OP is right, there is no "correct" way to play football. Barca's football is only "beautiful" in Barca fans' minds, some people even find it annoying. Different clubs are suited to different kinds of football but some people can't accept that. For example making Chelsea play tiki taka football would be stupid because they are more suited to physical football. Does that mean that since they can't play tiki taka football they play anti-football? No way. Football is a tactical game and you play different types of football accordingly. People need to grow up.

Which idiots? Trolls...

english_jewel wrote:Which idiot gave this post a negative reputation?

The OP is right, there is no "correct" way to play football. Barca's football is only "beautiful" in Barca fans' minds, some people even find it annoying. Different clubs are suited to different kinds of football but some people can't accept that. For example making Chelsea play tiki taka football would be stupid because they are more suited to physical football. Does that mean that since they can't play tiki taka football they play anti-football? No way. Football is a tactical game and you play different types of football accordingly. People need to grow up.

+1

What I want to know is, what Barca fans said there is a "correct" way of playing football?

Or even, anything but Barca is anti football?

The Franchise wrote:What I want to know is, what Barca fans said there is a "correct" way of playing football?

Or even, anything but Barca is anti football?

i dont understand your question, where does it say that barca is anti football?

anyways you barca fans are self righteous about how you play, youve made it clear far enough and i can quote you the whole day on how you think successful teams are only those who play with "Style", and thats what this thread is all about to erase that mentality.

everyteam has a style of play, and just because a team plays a certain way that you dont like, and you end up calling it anti football, doesnt make it so.

The Madrid One wrote:

The Franchise wrote:What I want to know is, what Barca fans said there is a "correct" way of playing football?

Or even, anything but Barca is anti football?

i dont understand your question, where does it say that barca is anti football?

anyways you barca fans are self righteous about how you play, youve made it clear far enough and i can quote you the whole day on how you think successful teams are only those who play with "Style", and thats what this thread is all about to erase that mentality.

everyteam has a style of play, and just because a team plays a certain way that you dont like, and you end up calling it anti football, doesnt make it so.

I didnt say thats what it said. Read.

I said, when did Barca fans say anything but their fotball ( tiki taka )is anti-football?

And no you cant quote me saying successful teams are only that when they play with style. Dont make up crap.

I said the best teams in history, the ones that people remember, play great football, and thats true.

Again, I will say it.

Name the best teams in history, name the ones that are best remembered....they ALL play attacking football with a sense of style and entertainment.

Brazil 70, Total football of Holland, Hungarians of the 50s, Milan of Sacchi, Madrid of Stefano and co , they are all known for great attacking football and everybody even to this day still knows them.

you are still fighting for that point, and i am not, it is useless for you to keep budging.

my point is to understand football for what it is, it doesn't have to be with style and "dominance" to be winning football, regardless of how it looks, the strategy and philosophy is what matters, and thats what many people dont understand, specially barcelona fans and many others that label any kind of football that they think is "incorrect" or "unpleasing to the eye" as anti football.

you still think im defending the methods of parking the bus or something, im not sure you even know what this is all about... do you understand or not? if you dont i dont care, ive made up 5 pages of thought over the catenaccio thread and this one. if you dont understand its because you cant or dont want to.

The Madrid One wrote:you are still fighting for that point, and i am not, it is useless for you to keep budging.

my point is to understand football for what it is, it doesn't have to be with style and "dominance" to be winning football, regardless of how it looks, the strategy and philosophy is what matters, and thats what many people dont understand, specially barcelona fans and many others that label any kind of football that they think is "incorrect" or "unpleasing to the eye" as anti football.

you still think im defending the methods of parking the bus or something, im not sure you even know what this is all about... do you understand or not? if you dont i dont care, ive made up 5 pages of thought over the catenaccio thread and this one. if you dont understand its because you cant or dont want to.

No they dont and if u dont understand what Dani is saying i really dont know what to say.

The Franchise wrote:
I said the best teams in history, the ones that people remember, play great football, and thats true.

Again, I will say it.

Name the best teams in history, name the ones that are best remembered....they ALL play attacking football with a sense of style and entertainment.

Brazil 70, Total football of Holland, Hungarians of the 50s, Milan of Sacchi, Madrid of Stefano and co , they are all known for great attacking football and everybody even to this day still knows them.

Thats simply not true.These teams are remembered because they won trophies.And frankly we even dont knows whether most of these teams always played beautiful football for certain.Its always a glorified assumption more often than not.

@mole

hes not saying anything to contribute imo.

if real madrid would defend and then attack once or twice AND WIN, people like you and dani will call it a disgrace, but why?

mole you voted for the first option didnt you?

you guys dont want to understand


over history defense has always prevailed over attack.

thats why oh so many guys like that messixaviesta guy think that it is a disgrace for a tea like real madrid, that is "supposed" to play a way, is made to play in such a way as it has under mourinho, because you dont get it.

why does it matter? you think its part of the clubs philosophy? even if it is, the philosophy is most important than the looks of it.. look at arsenal, at madrid of 2005-2010 they play a way but they win jack shit.

mou is trying to bring a MODERN philosophy from which a team can thrive on, regardless of how it plays, because it can only limit your possibities.

I am mixed on this debate

1) I hate teams who play very defensively all the time, who can't create anything but who can only destroy the game. I hate watching boring game, I hate watching guys like Domenech and Puel making talented players look so bad. When we were winning 1-0 against a small team like Brest getting dominated all the match and playing awful football I was furious. I think that we should play offensive football and use creativity.

2) However I don't like Barcelona at all. Their football does not please me as without Messi it is quite boring. Their arrogance and the fact that they think that they are superior to everything are not acceptable. I prefer Mourinho by far to them now and I don't think Real Madrid of Mourinho is boring or anti football at all.

OLpower wrote:I am mixed on this debate

1) I hate teams who play very defensively all the time, who can't create anything but who can only destroy the game. I hate watching boring game, I hate watching guys like Domenech and Puel making talented players look so bad. When we were winning 1-0 against a small team like Brest getting dominated all the match and playing awful football I was furious. I think that we should play offensive football and use creativity.

2) However I don't like Barcelona at all. Their football does not please me as without Messi it is quite boring. Their arrogance and the fact that they think that they are superior to everything are not acceptable. I prefer Mourinho by far to them now and I don't think Real Madrid of Mourinho is boring or anti football at all.

i think you go towards vote 1 then.

the opponent cant win if they dont score, what difference does it make regarding how the play looks, it can be beautiful or it can be "ugly" but as long as it works its alright.

but for many people like BARCELONA fans, and otherssuch as ur self, that is unnaceptable.. there HAS to be "CREATIVITY"

btw the way you respond, you think im attacking barcelona's playing style.. i am not, i am attacking the way most of them think and make others think is right.

Look there is no " correct way to play football" there are many different styles but iam against defensive football in all its forms having said this i accept it if theres an attacking plan involved in the defensive tactics.

Same with attacking football no is no one absolute in dominating attacking football and Catenaccio was not all out defense like Park the Bus is there was atleast an attacking plan involved in the tactics.

So to end this i am fine with all styles of football except the park the bus tactics where the team using it is only really aiming to get a 0-0 draw.

Note: I am talking the variation of parking the bus where the team is only focused on getting a 0-0 draw.

I do not mind defensive tactics at all if they are employed reasonably.

People also underestimate the sexyness of a well executed counter attack. 3 passes and then a goal (Inter in CL win, Germany in the WC) can be just as good as 100 short passes to the goal line (Barcelona, Arsenal).

As usual, the extremes are not good at all. Very negative football with long balls to nowhere or praying for a set piece goal can become a borefest. A 1000 sideways and backward passes with no real end to them can be as annoying as a fat cockblock.

I guess I'm just a football whore.

Immaculate_Mole wrote:Look there is no " correct way to play football" there are many different styles but iam against defensive football in all its forms.

Same with attacking football no is no one absolute in dominating attacking football and Catenaccio was not all out defense like Park the Bus is there was atleast an attacking plan involved in the tactics.

So to end this i am fine with all styles of football except the park the bus tactics where the team using it is only really aiming to get a 0-0 draw.

Note: I am talking the variation of parking the bus where the team is only focused on getting a 0-0 draw.

point proven, you chose option 1. if you dont go for defensive football, then that means you dont think its winning football and you cant possibly role with option 2 more.