The game seems to have become very cautious in England nowadays with the majority of team's playing 1 up front in order to have a man extra in the middle and also the day of the by-line winger has disappeared, fewer headers from crosses are scored today than ever before and we have your right footers playing on the left and your left footers on the right meaning less crosses, but enabling them instead to cut in to help the lone striker when a counter attack happens and for me it make's the game a lot less exciting overall. The new era's approach seems to be whatever happens, 'let's at least not lose' instead of the attitude saying ''let's go win this game' from the off. Foreign coaching has played an obvious influential role in these changes, almost all premier league teams adopt similar tactics and a fair few in the Championship, it decreases less and less throughout the leagues but eventually will find it's way I feel. What do you guy's think of the new tactics deployed by some teams as mentioned and what kind of approach would you take if given the choice at Leeds? Is it now more important than ever to get 1 point and play safe rather than risking it slightly and having a go for all 3. How many times have you seen a dull game where late on a team go 1-0 down and all of a sudden the opponents spring to action and the game explodes to life with attack after attack...why not start like that from the get go, fans deserve to see their team trying to play the right way and win no matter where or who against, or do they deserve to watch stale football and hope things fall their way on the day? I know ability and knowledge come into play on what way a team does set-up, but surely it is the better philosophy to let your player's express themselves and encourage them to do things in a positive way rather than hope things fall into place on the day.
Some good points raised, Scared to lose instead of daring to win being one. Also the physical side of the game has diminshed,no tackles from behind,shoulder barging etc, This has led to a more technical game,pass,pass,pass,which as you say leaves just one man upfront,so teams can control the midfield. I suppose the masters of this were barca and the spanish national team. But they can play one touch football,many prem and even less championship players cant. Pace is an al more important part of the game,look how liverpool,rip sides to bits with it, But with players who can pass,move and invent. I think the days of the kickers,ala wimbledon,stoke are over. Whether its better for us fans remains to be seen.
I think you are looking at it with rose tinted glasses. The game has changed immeasurably due to increased professional is from every player and club. No more smokers or drinkers, all on good diets etc. This means fitter faster players so the pitch is due facto smaller. The likes of Eddie Gray or Steve Heighway having the space to do what they could do is gone. And 442 is still the standard but much more creativity in the way teams play, yet they can cancel each other out. The 70s 80s and 90s were also full of boring games. Essentially I disagree
With elmo on this. Players are closed down all over the pitch these days. Modern defenders are quicker now than ever, very rare for winger to knock a ball down the line and be able to coast past a full back and make a cross.
Football today is far more exciting than in the 70's and 80's. Can remember being bored senseless by the Liverpool and Arsenal teams - nowadays those two clubs are two of the best to watch for the neutral. Admittedly some games can be boring with the lesser team parking the bus, maybe 4 points for a win would encourage them to attack more.
Obviously the game is better than in the 70's with fitness etc, i never mentioned that, even within the last 10 years it just seems to have become way more negative in term of approach to games and as you said if players are faster and fitter then shouldn't they be creating more space due to this and not less!? A lot of the comments are sensible that you make and I don't think there is a right/wrong in this as teams will inevitably set up to give themselves the best chance of getting a win, my main concern is that the game is a bit too negative regarding the attitude of some teams approach. Roberto Martinez for example has been a shining light with his approach compared to say Mourinho who uses similar systems and has a lot more resources at his disposal.
Football from the 90s onwards increased in skill across the board. You can get L1 and L2 teams these days playing passing football that you would never have seen up until the 90s. In the Prem, the CL and billionaires money has completely distorted the game. The rich clubs fight it out for the title, there's a handful of decent teams and then everyone else is fighting against relegation. A lot of these play defensively and are poor to watch, but they don't have much choice. Back at the top, Liverpool are all-out attack, Chelsea are very defensive, Arsenal pass it around, and Man City are very attack minded. Man Utd are just ****. So again, it's a mixed bag, but taken as a whole, there are more negative teams in the Prem than positive ones, and the fear of relegation is one of the factors of that.
Football is a strategy game like any other. My experience of strategy games is that sometimes no matter what you throw at the opponent they aren't budging.
