Football Versus Results (1 Viewer)

Tom

The DJ
Oct 30, 2001
11,726
#1
Well three Italian teams are through to the Champions League semis! Who would have thought it given Barcelona and Valencia were both favourites to make it through after the first legs of their respective ties? Unofortunately it has come at a cost, as I think Martin pointed out, football is not the winner. Two teams that played their football with style and grace were put out by a combination of luck and defensive power by the two best sides in Serie A, according to the standings at least. The image of the Italian league has taken another blow, with media around the world and fans critical of the way the two teams played.

The question I put to you is do you actually care? Surely there is more to football than scraping results and something should be done.

One option is to go on like we have been, fielding defensive minded teams in home champions league ties maybe, packing the midfield with 'grinta' as we like to call it. Whether the results will come or not is debatable. To a degree the tactics were successful, particularly in the case of Juventus, where the defence put on an admirable display, however luck and poor finishing played a major part too. Buffon's positioning for the Kluivert volley, Luis Enrique's amazing miss and the clear penalty decision turned down. There were similar instances in the Inter Milan game. It can be argued that playing flair football is no good if results are not achieved, and I would go along with this for the most part, however without the luck factor, we would be looking at three Spanish teams in the semi finals and not Italians.

The second option is change. Earlier in the season it was felt Milan were helping revolutionise the Italian game, but it appears to have been a false dawn, as Ancelotti retreats to his usual 'safe' defensive attitude. This would bring so many benefits to so many areas.

The teams themselves could surely only benefit. Instead of journeying to the Mestalla seemingly without a clue how to attack, techincally gifted players would fill the slots vacated by surplus Di Biagio's and things would begin to happen. The games would be more exciting, the players would enjoy it, the fans would enjoy it. Serie A would surely gain more fans, as the old stereotype of a defensive mentality is blasted apart. More players would come to Italy, encouraged by the opportunities for attacking football in Serie A. The question still remains though..would results in Europe improve?

Going on this year I'd venture to say no, they wouldn't, but for how long can the Italian teams play without flair and creatibvity and progress. The days of this type of football are surely numbered, and it would be better for us, as champions of Italy to learn from the Spanish teams instead of foolishly believeing we are better than them.

Now on to Juventus solely. If we were to change how would we do it? It is hard to imagine Moggi spending his money on flair players. Despite years of bolstering the defence, unbelievably we now require two or more young defenders to be purchased. Lippi himself has his favourite player base, the type like Nedved, hard working and effective, but not particularly creative. HAve recent performances in Europe convinced him of the need for a different attitude, because they certainly have of me!

I put to you various questions here.

- To what extent was the success of Juve and Inter down to luck?
- Are you happy with our way of playing?
- Do you think it is time for change in mentality and approach to games?
and finally

- What do you think should be done and how?
 

paulo

Senior Member
Aug 14, 2002
640
#2
Nice post!:)

I think that attacking play would certainly help the italian teams. Just look at how Milan played at the start of the season and how they are playing now. They were considered one of the strongest teams in Europe, doing great in both Serie A and CL. Now, they are practically out of the scudetto race and are struggling against teams like Ajax-a team they would previously destroy. This change of tacticks is certainly not the only factor to blame, but it's still an important one.

But that isn't necessarily the case for Inter. They can achieve getting good results without playing attacking football, like they proved against Valencia. Players like Vieri and Crespo can score a goal out of nothing, allowing the team to play defensive football.

1 Why did we win and who deserved qualification?
2 To what extent was it down to luck?
3 Happy with the way we played?
4 Do you think it is time for change in mentality and approach to games?
5 What do you think should be done and how?

1 It's all psychological. Juve were more relaxed, more concentrated, they had a psychological advantage. Barcelona, on the other hand, were stressed and not enough focused, and no matter what they did they somehow couldn't find the back of the net. They were playing a lot better indeed, but didn't necessarily deserve qualification more than Juve.

2 It was in great extent down to luck, as Barca should have had two penalies, more free kicks, and more goals. Without luck Juve would never win this game.

3 No, not at all. Barca had full dominance throughout the match, playing great and attractive football. Juve should have been better in attack, they should threaten Barca with dangerous runs and fast counter-attacks, and defence and midfield should have done better. It was a weak performance, maybe except Thuram and and a couple of other players. Fortunately we had a great deal of luck and, of course Lippi, who made Juve have this psychological advantage which proved so crucial.

4 Concerning Juve: no, they are doing fine. Maybe other clubs should consider these things rather than Juve. But the most important reason of why they have their mentality and approuch to games is the coach, not the whole team. Change the coach and you can change the whole club's mentality.

5 Milan should play attacking football like they did in the start of the season. They should be less concernrd about conceding goals and more about scoring them. Inter should improve their defence and midfield, so that the many great players they have play as a strong, solid team rather than a shaky group of great individual players. They need to concede less goals. Juve should continue as they have done, as the results have been great.:thumb::cool: They should perhaps be less afraid of attacking and taking chances, and be less reliant on the best players.
 

Jules

Junior Member
Apr 14, 2003
103
#4
There are so many things to say. But what I think is most important is the factor of luck, which I dispute. Not because luck wasn't involved, but because at the level we're talking about, of course there is luck, but there also has to be enough skill so that luck can work. If Juve had not enough skill to beat Barca, then why couldn't Barca beat Juve in either of its two matches? It's a ridiculous notion at this level of the competition to say that these teams are inferior, and there only because of luck. First round luck, maybe. Not into the semis. What competition have you ever seen in football that works based solely on luck?

Juve won because Juve played with more determination and spirit. Since when are these virutes not included in sport? Are we all so blinded by what the FIFA gods tell us has to be good that we won't see what is right in front of us?

Real Madrid sucked big time at the beginning of this tournament. Is it luck that got them through this far, or skill? Didn't they do only enough to survive? Where is the criticism of them?

I think Italian football has changed this season. Slowly, it is adopting an attitude of winning. Winning means scoring. This next summer's transfer should tell us how much and how serious these changes are going to be.

The bottom line is: Italian football can't change over night, nor, most importantly, should it. It's working right now, and the clubs main priority is bringing its fans victories. If winning was not a priority of clubs, we could all play as pretty as Arsenal. But I bet your bottom dollar that any Arsenal fan would love to be in our position right now. And I wouldn't trade places with them.

But, everyone associated with Italian football knows that changes are inevitable, and slowly, they are beginning to happen. And when they do, we will dominate even more. Other teams can take a page from us and work on their defences, instead of whining about how we aren't playing fair. Since when is winning not fair?
 

Jules

Junior Member
Apr 14, 2003
103
#5
Oh, and by the way, is luck retroactive? I mean, was it lucky for Barca that Trez was injured for this game? Was it lucky for Barca that Del Piero got injured 2 days after we could have called back Miccoli from on loan? How much luck do we want to assign to any sporting event, and how far back can it go?
 

Respaul

Senior Member
Jul 14, 2002
4,734
#6
nice posts lisa...


I have one question....
those of you (in this thread and others) saying we should play wonderful attacking football.... those of you that are so attracted to that game..... why in the world are you juve fans.... we have never been that team you crave (even in the wonderful periods such as mid 90's), what makles you think we ever will be!!

if thats what your after you need to look elsewhere cause that jus aint juve.
 
OP
OP
Tom

Tom

The DJ
Oct 30, 2001
11,726
#7
++ [ originally posted by Shadowfax ] ++
I have one question....
those of you (in this thread and others) saying we should play wonderful attacking football.... those of you that are so attracted to that game..... why in the world are you juve fans.... we have never been that team you crave (even in the wonderful periods such as mid 90's), what makles you think we ever will be!!

if thats what your after you need to look elsewhere cause that jus aint juve.
I can't speak for anyone elsebut personally, I like to think I am a realist somewhat. I know full well that we aren't going to transform into Real overnight, we lack both the funds and the mentality of the Real board when sanctioning these deals. Personally I would like us to be better in possession, give the ball away less, look more comfortable on the ball, and an important aspect that we could learn from United, getting men forward in numbers.

This would be enough for me anyway, and I wouldn't change teams for the world, I couldn't follow another team with the same interest that I do Juventus.
 
OP
OP
Tom

Tom

The DJ
Oct 30, 2001
11,726
#8
Lisa I am in agreement with the majority of your post, but back to the issue of luck. There are those who believe you make your own luck, well I don't buy into that personally. Obviously there is more than just luck, but lets be fair here, Juventus and Inter have had huge slices of luck in the quarter finals, namely in the form of clear cut penalties being denied to their opponents.

We played with passion, determination and heart but it doesn't change the fact that both ourselves and Inter were outplayed over the two legs. Obviously it is better to be outplayed and go through (a chance to redeem yourself) but these perfoemances really are giving Juventus a bad name. People are wondering 'how did this team win Serie A?' Its fine to rely on individual strikes or penalties in the league, but when it comes to the big stage, if we are to win, and deservedly win, we are going to have to focus our transfers on a different type of player.

We are Juventus, we shouldn't settle for second best!
 

ex-rasp9

Junior Member
Apr 8, 2003
76
#9
it seems to be quite constructive discussion...there have been spoken much i can sign my name under...

well, i think too defensive tactics is a problem not only for italian teams, i can see a lot of examples even in our russian (it exists!) football. it seems like a very tempting thing... the matter is it's its majesty result that rules, and not only in serie a, most european championships have been infected with that bacillus...

as for luck, there's a principle: the stronger, the luckier... or sort of, it seems to work in about 90% cases, if you're weak it'd be stupid to hope for luck to win. of course, sometimes some twists happen.

nevertheless, 3 italian teams in semis look like god's gift...and real luck!
 
OP
OP
Tom

Tom

The DJ
Oct 30, 2001
11,726
#10
++ [ originally posted by paulo ] ++
Fortunately we had a great deal of luck and, of course Lippi, who made Juve have this psychological advantage which proved so crucial.
personally I'm beginning to wonder just how good Lippi is. On one hand he has won us the scudetto straight away, and seemingly again, but how much of this is down to the fact we sold Zizou and Pippo and bought Thuram Nedved and Buffon?

Then of course you have some baffling tactical decisions. He tinkers with formations in vital games, drops players and switches their position. A lot of us, I feel give him too much crdit as some of his substitutions don't actually make sense and it is perhaps just a lucky gamble when they pay off.

With Lippi comanding the transfers I'm not sure our football will improve either, we all know the type of palyer he likes. Hopefully his CL experoiences have at least taught him that we could do with something creative in the middle ofthe park, though now we've made it to the semis he may begin to believe that we actually are one of the best 4 teams in Europe!

Anyway I do like Lippi so I don't want to be too critical of him, he just worries me at times.
 
OP
OP
Tom

Tom

The DJ
Oct 30, 2001
11,726
#12
++ [ originally posted by tarmpropp ] ++
I'm all for result. To me there's something beatuful in defending and playing "boring".
Its great to see good defending but to see such mediocre attacking play that we usually offer is hardly beautiful
 

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
#13
++ [ originally posted by Shadowfax ] ++
nice posts lisa...


I have one question....
those of you (in this thread and others) saying we should play wonderful attacking football.... those of you that are so attracted to that game..... why in the world are you juve fans.... we have never been that team you crave (even in the wonderful periods such as mid 90's), what makles you think we ever will be!!

if thats what your after you need to look elsewhere cause that jus aint juve.
I beg to differ as the teams of the 90s which went to 3 cl finals were not boring and the fact that a team plays attacking football is not necessarily attractive while playing counter attacking football is not necessarily boring but for goodness sakes there has to be a pattern of play

The midfield of Sousa, Jugovic, Deschamps, Zz et al are definitely an upgrade of Tacchi , Tudor, Zambrotta

Against Barcelona at home there were several occasions in which from our corner kick within seconds the ball is passed back to Buffon becos we do not have anyone who can pass the ball and how a team cannot string more than 3 passes which are constructive is beyond me

Valencia are not an attacking team but they play attractive passing football whilst Iruetta who at heart is a negative manager has a team that plays attractive football

There is hardly interchange of pass and movement from our midfield

Tacchi just stays in the middle winning balls and making 3 yards passes, Davids goes on pointless runs while Zambrotta is always running into a cul de sac then he dives while Tudor cannot pass the ball to save his life and these are our midfielders

Even the Vialli era when it was more power based there was still better coordinated football than we have now, its nothing to do with attractive football but more to do with constructive football from my point of view
 

Respaul

Senior Member
Jul 14, 2002
4,734
#14
++ [ originally posted by denco ] ++
I beg to differ as the teams of the 90s which went to 3 cl finals were not boring and the fact that a team plays attacking football is not necessarily attractive while playing counter attacking football is not necessarily boring but for goodness sakes there has to be a pattern of play

The midfield of Sousa, Jugovic, Deschamps, Zz et al are definitely an upgrade of Tacchi , Tudor, Zambrotta

Against Barcelona at home there were several occasions in which from our corner kick within seconds the ball is passed back to Buffon becos we do not have anyone who can pass the ball and how a team cannot string more than 3 passes which are constructive is beyond me

Valencia are not an attacking team but they play attractive passing football whilst Iruetta who at heart is a negative manager has a team that plays attractive football

There is hardly interchange of pass and movement from our midfield

Tacchi just stays in the middle winning balls and making 3 yards passes, Davids goes on pointless runs while Zambrotta is always running into a cul de sac then he dives while Tudor cannot pass the ball to save his life and these are our midfielders

Even the Vialli era when it was more power based there was still better coordinated football than we have now, its nothing to do with attractive football but more to do with constructive football from my point of view
did you actually read my post!!

at no point did i say the 90's teams were boring nor did i say todays team was better or anywhere near equal.All i said was that even that team was not what you would call an attacking side.... Personally our play doesnt bore me... if it did i would have stopped supporting juve 15 years ago not keep coming back for more and spend every spare penny trapseing around the world after them.

the simple fact is that splattered all over this forum are posts saying "we must play attacking" , "i want attacking" , "attack", "attack" etc etc

This is not juve, never has been and probably never will be.
If people want attacking football on a regular basis juve is not the team for them.
People should look to what we are not what you dream of.... and if theres such a difference between the 2 why do people waste their time supporting something they know they dont like.
 

JKane

Junior Member
May 31, 2001
302
#15
... however luck and poor finishing played a major part too. Buffon's positioning for the Kluivert volley, Luis Enrique's amazing miss and the clear penalty decision turned down.
It's not that we had no goalscoring chances at all. Ciro with the header, Di Vaio left alone in front of Bonano (still can't figure out how the f*** he could fall down! :D), Nedved's brilliant shot in the second half etc.

We weren't that bad after all.

And then, how lucky was Barca in the first leg? Saviola's goal was a very bad joke IMO. In the end I agree with Paul and Lisa. In football, its not all about playing attractive football.
 

Dragon

Senior Member
Apr 24, 2003
27,407
#16
if an italian team wins the CL the media will be shutted up
i dont think barcelona played gracely, i dont like spanish football... but well that is just me
 

Jun-hide

Senior Member
Dec 16, 2002
2,068
#17
Great post by all, Paolo and Jules in particular.

I tend to agree with Jules. At the level we are talking, it is ridiculous to just put everything down to luck. Beside, luck, which is element of surprise that benefits oneself, is always present in any situtaion and in anytime.
Also the meaning of luck is somewhat diffuesed, as Jules pointed out correctly. Milan was lucky to score that goal in the last minute of game. Although, I did not see the full game, they seemed to have more chances than Ajax did, with Sheva's delicate chip, a possible Brocchi's goal. So in the context of whole match, were they lucky to get that goal?
I do and agree with Denco's attacking apporach, in general. I don't think there is a tradeoff between style and result. Maybe there may not be strong correlation between style and result, since like Celta proved for many years style doesn't necessarily mean vicotry, and lMilan showed in the early 90s, you don't have to score 4-5goals every game to win the game. However this doesn't mean you have to sacrifice the style for result.
What determines the result and style for me is the balance in the team, and the players which formed the team. In order to get the result, my belief is that one has to play to ones strenght. If Inter feel that there strenght lies in defending then so be it. If Real fancies scoring 4 or 5 goals in the process of conceding 3or 4 goals then so be it. Perfectly honest, I think Juve-Barca game, in the second leg was far more exciting than Real-Man U. Although the game lacked attacking flow and goals, the tension in finely balanced game was much more interesting to watch then allout attacking display which was going to favour one team. Beside, one always has to think realistically in short term and take the players in disposal into consideration. There is no point playing all out attacking game when your best players and strenght is defenders and defending. However, like Denco, Paolo mentioned, one can take their philosophy into account in long term, for instance buying a technical player and developing techincal and exciting players through the youth academy. There is no denying Juve, Inter can do with one or two very talented attacking midfielder. and it would probably help the team in terms of getting result as well. On the other hand, there is no point in Real spending another 30m on Beckham when they have Figo, Zizou, Raul. I would advise them to buy a CB of Samuel's class.
 

Jules

Junior Member
Apr 14, 2003
103
#19
Thank you, Jun-hide. It is the philosopher in me that needs clarification on just what luck is. We philosophers are not so useless in the outside world after all, it seems. ;)

Paul, thanks to you as well. And you make some great points. I often wondered why people who criticize Juve for Juve's style follow Juve.

What I want to say further is simple: isn't all this criticism that has been cropping up in England and Spain in particular just down to the point that they spend more money on 'stars', and are upset that apparently, it's not the money, but the tactics, that can make a champion contender?
 

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
#20
++ [ originally posted by fabiana-juve ] ++
i agree real madrid should not buy beckham they dont need him
They are not buying him solely for football reasons if at all, but then again how do we know they are really interested in him.

Jun the only way that the Barceloan game was anything anywhere near the real vs man u game was in terms of drama , not in the quality of play
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)