re: Let's settle this once and for all...

You can have a philosophy and be a great strategist, but if the players don't buy in, and it doesn't utilize your strengths, you're wasting your time.

quote:

---

I think the right way to play is whatever it takes for a team to win.

---

Last weekend, my son's U17 club team played the number 2 team in the state. We were the visitor and had two subs on the bench. The home team had eight. Our coach knew their team and playing style. They were clearly the more skilled team and would likely have dominated. He decided to park the bus. We led 2-1 with eight minurtes left, but ultimately lost 3-2.

I actually enjoyed watching our boys execute flawlessly for the better part of the match. I think it was a valiant effort. Certainly not boring.

What ever it takes to win

Many here have done a good job of laying out the distinction between a fan wanting their team to win and neutral observers wanting to watch entertaining football.


I'd add that I personally don't hate watching catenaccio tactics as much as most people. Certainly not as much as Ray Hudson who's currently "boycotting" Chelsea for football "that could put a glass eye to sleep".



However, I'd be among the masses in outright revolt if a manager at Roma were prone to that tactic--regardless of wins -- instead of a fluent, technical passing attacking style.




Another extremely important distinction to make is between "counter attacking" football and "parking the bus". Parking the bus is counter attacking football minus the actual counter attacking.

Nm. I can't read.

I don't know I thought 6-0 was pretty "beautiful".

Yeah, I just don't see one tactic as "correct" and another as "not correct". I always like to see the "anti-soccer" teams win just to see soccer fans whine ... because that's how I get my kicks.

I think parking the bus is fine as a tactical choice, so long as you actually are trying to counter in some way and not boot the ball like a soccer mom just told you to "kick it".

I think excessive time wasting and blatant diving have no place in football (and yes Randy, insert your Suarez/Pool fan comment here ), but really, one of those is an individual choice and the other is a team tactic.

Essentially, Chelsea should have been given a yellow card about 20 minutes into the 'Pool match for time wasting and each successive incident given another yellow.

And just to cover it before this thread gets hijacked (though commenting on it at all will likely hijack the thread) - Suarez, and about 300 others, should be given more yellows for blatant diving, and retroactive warnings (escalating to half game and then full game suspensions) from the FA for those instances determined afterwards were blatant dives that the ref didn't catch and give yellows for. I don't think the current rules allow for that type of thing, but would like to see it. It has become too big a part of the game and you now get penalized for trying to play it straight because your scoring opportunity has been compromised and no foul is called.

I would also like to see excessive rolling around when its clear you weren't hit where you're holding, punished severely. For instance if a dude rolling around and gets a guy a red card for something not really done, I think the Red suspension should be lifted and given to the guy who rolled around.

You play to get the points you need from that match, based on the rules of that competition. If a tie is ok for you, you play that way. IMO boring or parked bus doesn't matter - get the points.

Funny that American football teams that score a lot and don't play D are considered gimmicky while teams that play strong D and keep the ball by running is commendable.