Diego: Bundesliga >> Serie A

[JaanevarAjeeb]

Wrong.

Purists of the game like Barcelona, Arsenal, current Chelsea- teams who take risks, but play their philosophy of football, which is free-flowing from end to end. Teams who play against the likes of these teams, have to play rough, tough, and compact so that the opponents' passing lanes are shut down. Their only goal scoring opp. comes in sporadic breaks, where players like Sneijder and Stankovic come into play to break rhythm, intercept a pass, and initiate a counter-attack: send a pin point pass forward to players like Eto'o or Milito.

Mourinho is not AT ALL about taking risks, which is why he plays a defensive game- starting at the midfield, half back, and full backs, and breaking forward on counter. Look at Porto, Chelsea, and Inter. Mostly 1-0 or 2-0 wins as mentioned by Ekbatan, and a lot of draws and losses to mediocre teams. Same with Real this season. Same with when he was at Cheslea- he won two doubles, but got sacked with hefty severence. Ancelotti is not playing Chelsea the way he played AC Milan, because it has such a solid defense and half-back, he is able to instate an attacking diamond, or even play with 3 forwards. Mourinho cannot make 3 FWs work, if his life depended on it. Look at what he tried to do for 2-3 games with Real, and failed each time, reverting back to 2 up top (more like just Higuain at the very top)..

[Haf3z]

Purists of the game like Barcelona, Arsenal, current Chelsea- teams who take risks, but play their philosophy of football, which is free-flowing from end to end. Teams who play against the likes of these teams, have to play rough, tough, and compact so that the opponents' passing lanes are shut down. Their only goal scoring opp. comes in sporadic breaks, where players like Sneijder and Stankovic come into play to break rhythm, intercept a pass, and initiate a counter-attack: send a pin point pass forward to players like Eto'o or Milito.

Can you please clarify what you mean with "purists"?

Just a little sidenote:

My friend, you are critisizing one of the world's most successful managers, and of course it is your right to do so. I respect your opinion and view on things. But the man has been managing Madrid for a few months and you're talking about him as if he was Carlos Quieroz. Also, regarding his time in Chelsea, he wasn't sacked because Roman wasn't satisfied with the game itself. Roman couldn't stand to have a manager that was larger than life and expected to have the final say on things, hence the appointments of Scolari and also Ancelotti who both are famous for being loyal to their presidents (Scolari in Uzbekistan of all places, and Ancelotti with Milan and Berlusconi). If you don't like Mourinho, that's fine. I'm just trying to steer the debate into a more objective direction where the results and titles matter, not whether someone encourages gung ho football or catenaccio. That is irrelevant. Football is a tactical game.

[JaanevarAjeeb]

Can you please clarify what you mean with "purists"?

You don't have to agree with me, man. It's cool. There are plenty on this board who know what I'm talking about. You can even phone in the guys at FSC or GolTv and ask them what I mean. I'm sure there are plenty of people who love the way Inter or Chelsea played under Mourinho, simply because it was effective and got results. But, it's usually never because of "how" they played. This is the distinction which I'm repeatedly trying to make to you.

You like the Italian game, because it is tactical. You must also love chess/baseball. It is a difference in taste, I guess. Also, I think my posts re Mourinho don't dictate that I dislike or even disagree with him. He is after-all, a product of Bobby Robson and Van Gaal. I just don't enjoy his brand of football. And yes, I think Chelsea is much, much, much more entertaining this season and last, than when Mourinho was coach- like I said before, he did lay the foundation, but he wouldn't have changed his style to the current one (that's for sure). As far as Ancellotti or Scolari, being dictated by their owner, you work for a company. Those clubs are companies. You can't always be the rebel and disrespect the investors. I think Abrahamovic was interfering precisely because he didn't enjoy the 1-0 or 2-0 wins. This is what he said repeatedly in his search for a new coach.

[EKBATAN]

You like the Italian game, because it is tactical. You must also love chess/baseball.

that is a very wrong analogy, serie A has some of the best score lines every week compared to epl and la liga and bundesliga (maybe not so much this year)

You cant deny that the most memorable, entertaining, talked about games in history of football have been involved with Italian teams, whether international or club level. They lose some and they win some but the point is thats whats exciting whether theres drama in it or goals. Without italian football it'll be boring cuz you have teams like barca, real, chelsea, man u dominating their leagues with high paid players and managers and they soak up all the good talent around the world just to sit on their bench.


i can guarantee most fans of la liga and epl, watch highlights, they dont really watch the games and the reason people dont like serie A is cuz its going thru tough financial and legal times with the scandal so there arent many super stars in their leagues...which again are soaked up by top 2 teams of epl, la liga and bayern. so to put serie A down when compared to other leauges who are in better shape now financially and management wise is not very fair. if they were on same level and they were failing or boring then u have a case.

[Haf3z]

You don't have to agree with me, man. It's cool. There are plenty on this board who know what I'm talking about. You can even phone in the guys at FSC or GolTv and ask them what I mean. I'm sure there are plenty of people who love the way Inter or Chelsea played under Mourinho, simply because it was effective and got results. But, it's usually never because of "how" they played. This is the distinction which I'm repeatedly trying to make to you.

You like the Italian game, because it is tactical. You must also love chess/baseball. It is a difference in taste, I guess. Also, I think my posts re Mourinho don't dictate that I dislike or even disagree with him. He is after-all, a product of Bobby Robson and Van Gaal. I just don't enjoy his brand of football. And yes, I think Chelsea is much, much, much more entertaining this season and last, than when Mourinho was coach- like I said before, he did lay the foundation, but he wouldn't have changed his style to the current one (that's for sure). As far as Ancellotti or Scolari, being dictated by their owner, you work for a company. Those clubs are companies. You can't always be the rebel and disrespect the investors. I think Abrahamovic was interfering precisely because he didn't enjoy the 1-0 or 2-0 wins. This is what he said repeatedly in his search for a new coach.

I actually like both offensive and tactical ways of playing football . I love watching Spain or Barcelona playing, just as much as I can enjoy watching Napoli or Palermo. I guess what I wanted to say earlier was that it is not like black and white, that tactical football or catenaccio for that matter also can be beautiful, at least for me .

[EKBATAN]

I actually like both offensive and tactical ways of playing football . I love watching Spain or Barcelona playing, just as much as I can enjoy watching Napoli or Palermo. I guess what I wanted to say earlier was that it is not like black and white, that tactical football or catenaccio for that matter also can be beautiful, at least for me .

[shayan20]

Attacking football does not equal success my friend. Barcelona wins, and therefore their style of play is beautiful. They are magnificent in that aspect. However, I don't consider Arsenals style to be beautiful, because they fail to win (titles). You can completely dominate a game without possessing the ball in football. Possession is a irrelevant factor actually. Inter won the Treble with this formula, beating opponents that played a more possession based football (which is of course also is entertaining to watch). Mourinho's whole plan was to avoid keeping the ball within the team, and as an Inter supporter, I am ecstatic about how well they pulled it off. Was it defensive? Yes! Was it destructive? Yes! Was it beautiful? Yes! Was it successful? Yes!

Laying focus on defense has never been the issue. Inter played offensively in the Serie A too. The main purpose of football is to score more goals than the opponent. Based on what you're saying, we can remove the goals and penalty boxes from Emirates Stadium and just look at Arsenal passing the ball back and forth and showing how well they can retain their possession .

Jokes aside, beautiful football does not necessarily have to be offensive football. Defense can be just as entertaining and beautiful. Imagine your Barcelona playing against Real Madrid, and Real is totally dominating the game, but they still cannot beat you. That is a great satisfaction and in fact great entertainment (just as Barcelona's offensive and creative "El Toque" style of play is entertaining)!

I agree with Inter being defensive, destructive and successful under Mourinho but it was definitely not beautiful for a neutral like me,
you're obviously biased as an Inter fan and would consider that beautiful/entertaining because your team won at the end but many neutrals would agree
that kind of football even if its successful result-wise, it fails to entertain.

eg. Look at Barca-Arsenal game in CL, those 2 was probably the most exciting games on CL that year.

[Haf3z]

I agree with Inter being defensive, destructive and successful under Mourinho but it was definitely not beautiful for a neutral like me,
you're obviously biased as an Inter fan and would consider that beautiful/entertaining because your team won at the end but many neutrals would agree
that kind of football even if its successful result-wise, it fails to entertain.

eg. Look at Barca-Arsenal game in CL, those 2 was probably the most exciting games on CL that year.

Yes, you're right. And you actually just said what I've been saying all along. As a fan of a team, you enjoy the victory more than how the victory actually was achieved. As a neutral, it is like you said difficult to enjoy Inter's game. However, I think that Arsenal fans were disappointed when Barcelona beautifully won over them in quarter finals last season. I don't think they comforted themselves by saying "Hey, at least we were entertaining". Perhaps some of them even wished for a more tactical game in order to advance to the semi finals, but maybe I'm wrong.

However, when I watch two teams that I don't root for as a neutral, I can still enjoy a defensive and tactically superior team when it is successful. So even neutral supporters can enjoy tactical football .

And as I said before, if a team like Barcelona wins and runs over a team that plays tactically, I enjoy Barcelona's style of play. The winning football is the best football, because football is all about winning. Regardless of how it is achieved (as long as it isn't against the rules of course).

[raminio05]

who say's that good defense isn't beautiful? as an arsenal fan i'm frustrated year after year because it's in defense that we lack beauty, and that's what costs us every year.

[EKBATAN]

^ yup!

and there is a big difference with playing GOOD defense rather than playing DEFENSIVELY like new zealand and north korea.

[DubFreeek]

I believe Bundesliga is better than Seria A in terms of excitement, attendance, facilities and organization

[Haf3z]

I believe Bundesliga is better than Seria A in terms of excitement, attendance, facilities and organization

I agree with you on everything but excitement. You can't measure excitement. Would you consider the Turkish league better than the English just because the Turkish fans get more excited? Each culture or country has its own unique way of showing excitement. Are Finns less excited about their national team just because they tend to be less verbal than German fans? Not necessarily .

[DubFreeek]

I agree with you on everything but excitement. You can't measure excitement. Would you consider the Turkish league better than the English just because the Turkish fans get more excited? Each culture or country has its own unique way of showing excitement. Are Finns less excited about their national team just because they tend to be less verbal than German fans? Not necessarily .

Well by excitement I meant you dont fall sleep in middle of games as other members pointed out in this thread as well

[shayan20]

at the end, it comes down to personal taste I guess
I know many people love tactical style of Italian football and it gets them excited.

[P.Nima]

Watching Milan Vs Chievo right now. I gotta say, it was a long time ago I watched a Serie A game, I always assumed they would be boring, but this game looks pretty interesting so far. I like the tempo.