Doc wrote:

jibers wrote:

Doc wrote:That positional football under Pep sure went well for City today.

Yes because Dinho slipping, stones staring into space and bravo making a poor decision renders Peps whole game useless. I mean at least try and use some damn common sense. City were the better team before Bravo had that brain fart. I suppose SAF losing 6-2 at home to city makes him clueless as well.

Too many clowns on this forum.

Let's not forget what Pep is trying to implement is much harder to coach than what pretry much most managers are doing.

Ancelotti getting walloped 4-0 by Atleti also makes him a scrub

Never called Pep a fraud, was never even the intent. Never called Ancelloti a fraud and he too was made fun of losing 4-0 to a rival. Sure I can find excuses as to why we got walloped by Atleti as well.

Take your sensitivity elsewhere old man. City got beat 4-0 and I'm taking the God damn piss in a thread where it literally says Zidane's Real Madrid is the worst footballing side I've seen. The same Pep that was given some lavish praised right in this thread, lost 4-0 and I'm gonna let that slide? Shit, I thought Sports would have updated it at 3-0.

Forgot to quote valk he's the one that said he was a fraud.

Lol I've defended Zidane. I think people want too many things. Madrids strength lay in countering. As long as the results are there...

Unless the player develops a legit cult following due to whatever reason (Guti, Raul, Iker, etc.), hype would always come from performance. Yes, the Spaniards on the team would always get preferential treatment from the press. That's pretty much a given and nothing too wrong with that either.

But when any player (who doesn't have a legit cult following) stops performing, press and fans would kill the hype. Doesn't matter if he is a Spaniard or not, the Madrid faithful know what they are seeing on the pitch.

sportsczy wrote:

jibers wrote:

sportsczy wrote:Every time they attacked...  how do you define that?  Having the ball in your half or middle of the pitch?  You attack when you're in an attacking zone.  And yes, whenever Barca was in the attacking zone, they looked a threat to score.

Just so happened that the midfield was very dense with players so that neither team spent as much time on the attacking end as they wanted to.

Ah so you denied what I said now you are changing the narrative. Never change sportsczy

You've  changed the definition of attacking in a single page. Unbelievable.

No.  You're projecting your definition of attacking to me.  Because my definition doesn't match yours, you're saying that I'm changing it.  Please quote one place where I contradicted myself.  

jibers wrote:Your exact words

sportsczy wrote:No they weren't Jibers.  Every time Barca attacked, the looked like they were going to score.  City?  Not so much.  

Mascherano was playing fullback and Mathieu was at CB...  so really, City should have raped that defense.  Busquets has been crap to start the season too.

City were tactical and toothless.  Not starting Aguero against that defense was beyond ridiculous by Pep.  Him and his stupid false 9.  Hasn't worked for him since Messi.

Me calling you out for your exact words

jibers wrote:

Lucifer wrote:The only team that came with tactics and purpose yesterday was City albeit some weird ones like benching Aguero. Barca has only one  tactics, only one strategy that is to pass the ball  to MSN asap and yet we failed to do that single thing for the most of first half leaving MSN stranded in final third. That's how bad we are nowadays.

But according to sportsczy barcelona looked like scoring in every attack. Watch him back track from that drivel like he usually does when called out.

@Lucifer he dropped Aguero because he wanted muddied sueriority which is why they were able to construct moves very swiftly. Messi drops into barcas mf and with Kun there they would have been over run.

Bar the building from the back Barcelona don't use position play in the final 3rd. It's a free for all.

You denying ever using that and lying straight out

sportsczy wrote:No.  I said that every time the ball got to the attacking zone, Barca looked a threat to score.  Man City did not look like a great threat when they got it into Barca's attacking zone.

And you see how much better Barca uses fullbacks compared to City.  Barca's fullbacks fly forward to create width so that Messi and Neymar can use them as a decoy to cut in or pass them the ball.  City doesn't do that.  Also, the rotation of Iniesta and Rakitic to cover when the fullbacks are very high is top notch.  The issue Barca has is that Busquets has been subpar and the defense is also very shaky (injuries mostly).  So they're positionaly more conservative than usual... forcing them to rely on MSN to do more on the attack.

With Pep, I saw a manager who was trying too hard to prove he's a genius in a big game once again.  You MUST... and I mean MUST... put Aguero in there to terrorize that back line.  As it was, all of City's play was in front of them.  They didn't need to worry about a CF making runs behind them.  That's far easier to defend.  The few times City got behind Barca in the wide areas... there was nobody for them to pass the ball to in the box.  No runs were being made at all.

In any case, let's agree to disagree lol.

After being caugh out you proceed to become a philosopher

sportsczy wrote:Every time they attacked...  how do you define that?  Having the ball in your half or middle of the pitch?  You attack when you're in an attacking zone.  And yes, whenever Barca was in the attacking zone, they looked a threat to score.  City didn't because they didn't have a scorer on the pitch.

Just so happened that the midfield was very dense with players so that neither team spent as much time on the attacking end as they wanted to.

Lets see you houdini your way out of this

Im waiting for a response Sports

sportsczy wrote:hala...  their definition of positional play is wrong.  They mean positional play as it relates to specific tactic they have in mind.  Positional play is applicable to every tactic.  

Zidane's tactic is very reliant on positional play in fact.  The tactic itself is something they don't approve of.

this is such a lie, why do you do those things? Im sorry but this is disrespectful to those who understands the concepts laid forth by pep, gasset, bielsa, cruyff, and i can continue. I know how badly you wanted Zidane to coach like those people, as he went to visit them and you were getting excited here telling us how he is learning from them etc....
Now you have transitioned from the denial he cant be like those people to he actually plays some juego de posicion, lmoa, hell to the fckin no.

It's like saying that Carlo's team play tiki taka because you just watch bayern. Like i could ever teach a team to play that way lol, the fat italian just inherited a golden situation, like Heynckes when Van Gaal left lol

Seriously, i would strongly advise some here to go and read about it. It's not about "barca" it's just a way of playing football. Pep use possession as a tool, yet many other coaches prioritize other aspects like pressing, or quick transitions forward like LE or Tuchel.

The only thing Zidane tactics rely on is BBC

Mr Nick09 wrote:

sportsczy wrote:hala...  their definition of positional play is wrong.  They mean positional play as it relates to specific tactic they have in mind.  Positional play is applicable to every tactic.  

Zidane's tactic is very reliant on positional play in fact.  The tactic itself is something they don't approve of.

 this is such a lie, why do you do those things? Im sorry but this is disrespectful to those who understands the concepts laid forth by pep, gasset, bielsa, cruyff, and i can continue. I know how badly you wanted Zidane to coach like those people, as he went to visit them and you were getting excited here telling us how he is learning from them etc....
Now you have transitioned from the denial he cant be like those people to he actually plays some juego de posicion, lmoa, hell to the fckin no.

It's like saying that Carlo's team play tiki taka because you just watch bayern. Like i could ever teach a team to play that way lol, the fat italian just inherited a golden situation, like Heynckes when Van Gaal left lol

Seriously, i would strongly advise some here to go and read about it. It's not about "barca" it's just a way of playing football. Pep use possession as a tool, yet many other coaches prioritize other aspects like pressing, or quick transitions forward like LE or Tuchel.

The only thing Zidane tactics rely on is BBC

I was going to comment as well. Zidane's Madrid using positional play

You couldn't make this stuff up. This thread has exposed Sports.

Here's a good site that endeavors to explain a lot of things into becoming a football coach...  it's intent is to be a resource for young prospective coaches.  

Here's positional play in football explained in detail as it looks to explain how you would implement it at every age level:

http://www.football-coach.net/positional-play.html

I just generally believe that terms referring to overall concepts suddenly get hijacked to talk about a specific concept.  Positional play, according to Barca/Pep, is an evolution of total football.  Why don't they just call it something else?  Like zonal football since that's what it is.  Positional play referred to something entirely different, and far more broad, when i was learning the game.

I also think that zonal play is absolutely not exclusive to positional play as they would have you believe.  It's just a total football implementation of zonal play.

But OK... if you guys are accepting and referring to the definition of Juego de Posición as Barca/Guardiola defined it, that's fine.  Now at least I know what you're specifically referring to.  Of course, there's LVG's concept of it too, that is far more defensive, but whatever.  I'll understand what you're talking about.

BTw, here's a very good read on what Pep Guardiola does and positional play within the context of his philosophy on it:

http://spielverlagerung.com/2014/12/25/juego-de-posicion-under-pep-guardiola/

http://spielverlagerung.com/ is a very very good site in regards to football tactics btw.

To get back on topic... so what are you guys advocating when you say that you want to see "positional play"?  Are you talking about the LVG application, Pep's or just the idea that you want?

Because, as I understand Pep, football isn't defined by the players but zones.  Every player needs to be able to fill every zone conceptually.  Of course, some players will naturally be in certain zones most often so they practice and are chosen based on their ability to do the tasks required there...  but it doesn't mean that other players who are not as acquainted with those zones shouldn't be able to play it.

It's a variation of total football.

You want Zidane to implement total football?

I am not going to use the term total football here because beyond occupation on the pitch to me it's characterized by the constant switch players would make moving up and down the pitch.

I remember when were having a similar conversation when Mourinho was in his third, he was getting rekt on this forum. One very good argument you used to have back then was that Mourinho couldn't coach talent because he did not put them in the best situation to succeed. he needed mindless robot with high stamina to complete the tasks and schemes he had in mind.

We commented about what Zidane brought to this madrid football wise, and i say nothing. Regardless of how preposterous the thread title is.

When the conversation moved to "then what do you want to see" i answered that i want to see this team evolves how they play into something more methodical, less reliant on instinct but team play, and which will leverage individual talent upfront at their best possible level. Something that will also give us more consistency as a team, because we are faced with an adversary that is doing exactly that and has developped a league consistency that is near frightening. La liga titles in the past few years show it. And yes, we are probably facing an historically great player, yet, i believe in the last 5 years we have one (if not equal at times) historically great player too, yet that has not translated in equal success.

@Hala, It's not nonsense, it's an oversimplified truth.

you are talking about a situation where both Cristiano and Benzema were injured for at least the first few weeks of play, and so Morata, Asensio and Lucas play more. it's not that he is less reliant on BBC, it's just that this season he has had limited chance to field them.

The moment they came back, even half fit like benzema was, Morata was back on the bench lol. I repeat, BENZEMA WAS HALF FIT

First of all stop predicting failure for the team you guys suck at it, and don't know sod all about tactics, how pep doing? At least zidane hasn't lost game .

secondly why would the coach of the team regardless of who it is, not rely on the 2 time winning cl trio? Because your butthurt that one of them happen to be benzema?

Morata is meh af had a whole preseason, had couple starts just had 1 goal, so yes a half fit benzema>morata who is clearly a back up at best nothing more, you lot trying to build up morata as being world beater just proves how deep the benz hate is.

Zidane using positional play . I don't think it is true even by a long stretch. I also like how argument before was we are winning , that's all matter to after they were exposed with 4 draws it became we haven't lost yet lol. If Zidane with preseason is only able to build this brand of football then I have no faith in him long term. This is basically another Enrique except he atleast coached them to build up properly from the back..

halamadrid2 wrote:Super Pep about to lead City to a 5 game winless streak. But imagine if our team only played alittle bit like his team

this is such a poor argument lmao, do you think you sound clever? lol

smh our defence under zidane is just incapable of keeping a clean sheet

To be fair Casemiro is injured but who's fault is it we didn't get a backup???

Real Madrid as a whole is at fault. Doesn't matter who you wanna blame individually, they are all represent Real Madrid at the end of the day.

Doc wrote:Real Madrid as a whole is at fault. Doesn't matter who you wanna blame individually, they are all represent Real Madrid at the end of the day.

But then who would be the scape goat when things don't go perfectly?

It's not about scapegoating, i think logically speaking no one should be more aware of this team strength and weaknesses than Zidane.

And if he identifies a weskness in the squad selection, he is most directly concerned to make or request that adjustment.

At the end of the day, if we were in the hole because of a missing DM, he would be blamed. So yes we are all real madrid but he is responsible for building rhe squad, inthe absence of a sporting director, and the influence that he has at the end, it's a pretty glaring miss.

We're in first place too  And the only team in the major championships that's undefeated in all competitions no less...

sportsczy wrote:We're in first place too  And the only team in the major championships that's undefeated in all competitions no less...

Please respond to my response where you said i should give evidence of your lies.

The problem Nick, is that it is a different culprit every few months or so. None of us know really what goes on in the highest level decisions at the club, so we post and we blame based on biased view points.

Right now it's Zidane, but in the past it's usually Perez, or Ronaldo being selfish, or Marcelo's poor defending, or Casillas being past it.

I think Doc said it well, we win together, we lose together.

Did Zidane tell Perez we don't need a backup DM? Did Zidane propose a DM that Perez didn't want to buy? Were offers made and rejected? Did we even have any viable options to pursue?

I don't know those answers and I don't think anyone here does so I am not going to necessarily blame any one entity. At the end of the day it is likely a combination of more people involved than we can even fathom- not just one person.