Giampaolo Pazzini - ST - Milan (30 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP
Ahmed

Ahmed

Principino
Sep 3, 2006
47,928
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #242
    That wasn't Catenaccio. It was just defensive, counter attacking football.

    Catenaccio is based on man-marking.

    Inter just held their shape, and doubled up on Robben, and it was enough to stop Bayern.
    same difference :p
     

    Hust

    Senior Member
    Hustini
    May 29, 2005
    93,703
    Like what Red said, I think this "modern football" thing is a fabrication. If modern you mean the ability for a team to transform its tactics mid-game that's one thing but an attacking formation can still be a 442 with the right players.
     

    Alessandro

    Senior Member
    Sep 13, 2002
    1,210
    What? Yes he is.
    Long time ago he wasn't...now he is. There's not a thing where he's good at.
    So why do we live in past? Del Neri's system is 4-4-2 with 2 destroyers and 2 fast wingers. One poacher and one "creative" striker.
    Are we still in 90s?
    Modern football is Mourinho's formation, Barcelona's formation. Manchester, or some other club.
    What about Bayern's formation? Is it modern?
     

    juve103423

    Senior Member
    Mar 22, 2010
    949
    It is really ridiculous this talk about "modern football". It is all about scoring more goals than the opponent. The way you do it doesnt matter. 4-4-2 with direct and wide play is one of the most used systems, why should this suddenly not work anymore ?
     

    Adrian

    Senior Member
    Jan 31, 2003
    6,880
    Any formation is fine by me provided we have the right players and coach to play it. Every big team plays differently, inter, barca, arsenal, united, chelsea....all differ...but they have the players to pull off whatever their coach is trying to dish out.

    The 4-4-2 interests me as i think it will bring some stability back to the team, we looked poor structurally all season. cassani, criscito, bonucci, vargas and a few other important signings and we may be back in business.
     

    deepblue

    IBM Chess Programmer(DB)
    Feb 19, 2003
    104
    That wasn't Catenaccio. It was just defensive, counter attacking football.

    Catenaccio is based on man-marking.

    Inter just held their shape, and doubled up on Robben, and it was enough to stop Bayern.
    Catennaccio was dead even since the concept of playing a libero was wiped off from football...Also catenaccio in the crude sense also stresses more on zonal marking as much as man marking.

    Modern day catennaccios, played by Capello, Cuper, Hitzfeld and Sir Alex(against Barcelona and Arsenal) is what Inter demonstrated against Barcelona and Bayern...Inter had an organized backline and an attack that does not need more than two chances to score. Modern day catennaccios are all about confidence, organziation and controlling the tempo through out 90 minutes

    With flair players like Eto, Sneijder and Cambiasso are sitting back and defending it can be only a matter of minutes they increased their tempo whenever they went a goal down. In the case of Bayern, Robben was the only threat, once they tired him out, it was an easy meat for Inter but what they did at San Siro and later at Nou camp was amazing with too many cracks playing for Barca.
     

    JuveJay

    Senior Signor
    Moderator
    Mar 6, 2007
    75,000
    Have you ever asked yourself, why clubs aboard avoid Pazzini? Why only clubs in Italy make fuss about him?
    How do you know clubs avoid Pazzini? Just because we get linked doesn't mean we are even following him, and vice-versa. I'm sure enough teams have been following him, he has been scoring goals after all. I bet English teams have looked at him, especially as he scored a hat trick in the first game at the new Wembley.

    Look at Rolando Bianchi, a limited player who had one good season, Man City picked him up for €13m which is a fortune for a club like Reggina. English teams have scouts everywhere, even at U15 level in Italy.
     

    Red

    -------
    Moderator
    Nov 26, 2006
    47,024
    Catennaccio was dead even since the concept of playing a libero was wiped off from football...Also catenaccio in the crude sense also stresses more on zonal marking as much as man marking.

    Modern day catennaccios, played by Capello, Cuper, Hitzfeld and Sir Alex(against Barcelona and Arsenal) is what Inter demonstrated against Barcelona and Bayern...Inter had an organized backline and an attack that does not need more than two chances to score. Modern day catennaccios are all about confidence, organziation and controlling the tempo through out 90 minutes

    With flair players like Eto, Sneijder and Cambiasso are sitting back and defending it can be only a matter of minutes they increased their tempo whenever they went a goal down. In the case of Bayern, Robben was the only threat, once they tired him out, it was an easy meat for Inter but what they did at San Siro and later at Nou camp was amazing with too many cracks playing for Barca.
    I don't consider what these teams are doing to have anything to do with catenaccio.

    Any system that doesn't involve a libero and man-markers ain't catenaccio.

    What Inter and Man Utd did successfully was ust sit deep, hold shape and play with lots of pace on the break. A pretty bog standard defensive target, they just did it better than most teams do it.
     

    MikeM

    Footballing Hipster celebrating 4th place with Tuz
    Sep 21, 2008
    12,850
    Pazzini is a poacher. When you evaluate a poacher all you look at is his finishing ability. It's good, sure. But we also have Trezeguet who has good finishing ability. So what is the point of paying $20M for Pazzini when if you look at him and Trezeguet there isn't much difference and if there is, it's not worth $20M.
     

    X Æ A-12

    Senior Member
    Contributor
    Sep 4, 2006
    87,984
    Pazzini is a poacher. When you evaluate a poacher all you look at is his finishing ability. It's good, sure. But we also have Trezeguet who has good finishing ability. So what is the point of paying $20M for Pazzini when if you look at him and Trezeguet there isn't much difference and if there is, it's not worth $20M.
    Trezeguet is surely leaving this summer and if he doesn't he probably shouldn't be relied on as a starter at his age.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 26)