Euro 2012 Match Discussion Thread

[Mike.]

That's the Spain I like to watch. Nowhere near as much possession, but it was quality attacking possession. 4-0 seemed unfair to Italy in the end, especially as Motta got injured and they were down to 10 men (terrible luck), but it happens. Clinical finishing is what matters, and Spain took their chances.

They traded some passing and possession for some direct threat, and were utterly lethal.

 

[zzeezzy]

Considering what Italy did to the Germans, you give side the little credit. Actually Mario didnt miss chance after chance. Bayern had 3 really good chances, the rest were much more difficult, and every single one of Robbens attackes were stopped in the exact same place. Chelsea were not all that lucky.

Hodgson doesnt need to focus on more possession, he needs to focus of effective use of the ball, we struggle at constructing attacks. Doesnt matter if we have 38 or 68 posession, if you can construct and score off your attacks, you will win.

Maybe so, but you could argue that 9/10 of the times Robben was pure selfish and only looked to cut inside and do one thing. Also apart from the very good chances Bayern did have, did you count the penalties Chelsea conceded and the opposition (Messi/Robben) in both the semi and the final missed.

Hodgson needs to be more inventive rather than just a 4-4-1-1 or a 4-4-2 rigid system. Lets try and be more adventurous and stop being outnumbered in the middle of the park, 4-3-3, Jack Wilshere, Tom Cleverley and Steven Gerrard as the midfield 3 for example? What's to stop us from having better possession anyway, I am sick of people keep saying we are not good enough, even the teams weaker on paper in this tournament had more possession bar Greece. We need to work on passing and moving and having more options in the middle of the park, our wingers/wide midfielders are not exactly anything to shout about.

 

[LFCMarshall]

Right except they have been practising that method week in week out for months on end. Roy had two weeks. The comparisons are completely, utterly, totally null and void.

I dont necessarily mean for the tournament just gone, more the future.. only time will tell, but for this type of football, i very much doubt hodgson will employ it, as he is used to the old fashioned approach

If more teams played like this in the english league, the national team would improve.. but that is all clubs individual choice on how to play and you cant change that!

 

[Mike.]

They were actually in 3 games. They could have been easily gone in their game against Napoli. Do not tell me that you were not shocked when they got over Napoli. The win over Barca was a pure luck. Heck Milan played twice better than Chelsea, but did not have the luck. Bayern did not miss much although they controlled the game, however they missed a penalty and then Chelsea won on penalties - now tell me that is not based on luck...again.

Yup constructing attacks. Will be hard tough with this quick tempo, long balls style with which Chelsea won the CL. I would say that the current English pool was not good and soon with the new guys that are comming England could have some better success.

No I wasnt shocked against Napoli, because they exploited the holes in Napolis defence repeatedly.

Bayerns attacks wre completely predictable, go and watch the game again, and focus on Robben vs Cole. Stops him over and over in exactly the same place.

Chelsea and England dont play the same way...

 

[Mike.]

I dont necessarily mean for the tournament just gone, more the future.. only time will tell, but for this type of football, i very much doubt hodgson will employ it, as he is used to the old fashioned approach

If more teams played like this in the english league, the national team would improve.. but that is all clubs individual choice on how to play and you cant change that!

Eh, all the clubs play entire different ways. Uniteds game for example is far more complete than Swanseas. Long or short, control or counter, expose or stifle. Ditto City. Possession for its sake is no use. Its what you do with it, that is actually Englands real problem.

 

[LFCMarshall]

Eh, all the clubs play entire different ways. Uniteds game for example is far more complete than Swanseas. Long or short, control or counter, expose or stifle. Ditto City. Possession for its sake is no use. Its what you do with it, that is actually Englands real problem.

Agreed, although the way i look at it, if you having more possession you have more chance of creating better goalscoring chances and you will have alot more efforts

IMO nothing worse than seeing a side have 30-40% Possession, why i am so glad Liverpool appointed a coach with this philosophy and why i was disappointed with England appointing one with a completely different approach..

 

[Mike.]

Agreed, although the way i look at it, if you having more possession you have more chance of creating better goalscoring chances and you will have alot more efforts

IMO nothing worse than seeing a side have 30-40% Possession, why i am so glad Liverpool appointed a coach with this philosophy and why i was disappointed with England appointing one with a completely different approach..

The only thing wrong with having 40% possession is not doing anything with it. Then you just invite pressure. Frequently scoring with that is another thing entirely.

 

[zzeezzy]

Eh, all the clubs play entire different ways. Uniteds game for example is far more complete than Swanseas. Long or short, control or counter, expose or stifle. Ditto City. Possession for its sake is no use. Its what you do with it, that is actually Englands real problem.

Although I agree with this, Hodgson's rigid 4-4-2 prevents us from having options when we finally do get the ball to actually play our way out, we need a formation which gives us more options in the middle of the park when we get the ball.

 

[Shockhorror.]

They traded some passing and possession for some direct threat, and were utterly lethal.

And much more entertaining.

 

[Mike.]

Although I agree with this, Hodgson's rigid 4-4-2 prevents us from having options when we finally do get the ball to actually play our way out, we need a formation which gives us more options in the middle of the park when we get the ball.

That was his quick game plan for the tournament, im not sure why you are so obsessed with taking this as read for the next 4 years. It was a reactive approach based on no prep time. Two banks of four, make us hard to break down. A simple approach that required little time to work on. No time for implementing anything else. Not my cup of tea either, but there was very little time to implement much more. Now comes the time for constructing more progressive football. The football in the Euros counted for little, and shouldn't be judged as the standard, positively or negatively. It was a matter of getting through it, and getting ready for the real work.

 

[Rhys Walters]

**** Spain owned up the tournament!!

 

[zzeezzy]

That was his quick game plan for the tournament, im not sure why you are so obsessed with taking this as read for the next 4 years. It was a reactive approach based on no prep time. Two banks of four, make us hard to break down. A simple approach that required little time to work on. No time for implementing anything else. Not my cup of tea either, but there was very little time to implement much more. Now comes the time for constructing more progressive football. The football in the Euros counted for little, and shouldn't be judged as the standard, positively or negatively. It was a matter of getting through it, and getting ready for the real work.

Let's hope so, Welbeck was a positive anyway, as well as some other things.

 

[Mike.]

Let's hope so, Welbeck was a positive anyway, as well as some other things.

Dont get me wrong, I'll be right being you if we play we did in the Euros for the next 4 years. But we need to see it for what it was, simple short term stuff.

 

[Vanjagl]

Not always true. First of all, you need to have players who can do it. Secondly, you need to be playing opponent who cant do it better then you. Italy actually had more possesion today for most of a game - have another good look at the final score.

"Posession football" is a complete buzzword. Just take a look at Spain in this tournament. They played slow tempo when they needed it. They played high tempo when they needed it. They also played very simple and direct when they needed it.

Yeah mantaining possession and distributing the ball around is one of key elements of football nowadays. But another key element is using your strength , exploiting opponent weaknessess, all adjusted to the situation at hand.

Not some one-size-fits-all "possesion football"

I wont comment the rest of the post, cuz that's not the point i'm trying to make. Mike said that possession is useless. Possession can be useless but in most cases it's not. Having massive possession is always a plus. If you have ball in your feet a lot more than your opp, you have better chance of creating something and keeping your opp quiet. Ofc that doesn't work if you don't have tactic to support massive possession, but still, to have that kind of possession is always a plus.

 

[CJACKO11]

It does. If you hold the ball, opposition team can't score.

But the counter argument is if you don't turn your possession into something note worthy then you won't score either.

Inter Milan yes, Chelsea no. How lucky did they get, the opposition created tons of chances against Chelsea in the semi and in the final. It was a lot down to luck, Mario Gomez missing chance after chance, you can't rely on that kind of luck (opposition not taking their chances) to win consistently at top level of football.

England need to work on keeping the ball, not chasing the ball around and being content with an average of 38% possession over a tournament, just above Greece, absolutely awful.

Oh and England also playing this way got lucky even to go to penalties against Italy, could of been 3 or 4 nil to Italy easily.

Hodgson either needs to focus on having more possession or he will do absolutely nothing again next tournament, you may do well against teams like Sweden/Ukraine playing this way, but against any opponent with real quality you simply can't let them have so much control over a game and expect to win. Or do what England done the other night, absolutely exhaust themselves because they were chasing the ball for so long and practically playing for penalties.

Again it was not luck, Gomez had about 2 decent chances and after that he did absolutely nothing. It was all mainly Robben making the wrong decisions which does not come under luck.

Exibit A on luck - The opposition side makes all 3 subs and then one their players has to come off through injury.

That comes under luck, not a side constantly missing chances!!!!!

They were actually in 3 games. They could have been easily gone in their game against Napoli. Do not tell me that you were not shocked when they got over Napoli. The win over Barca was a pure luck. Heck Milan played twice better than Chelsea, but did not have the luck. Bayern did not miss much although they controlled the game, however they missed a penalty and then Chelsea won on penalties - now tell me that is not based on luck...again.

Yup constructing attacks. Will be hard tough with this quick tempo, long balls style with which Chelsea won the CL. I would say that the current English pool was not good and soon with the new guys that are comming England could have some better success.

Penalties is about skill and nerve, once we scored once against Napoli i was fully convinced we would go on to win the game so no i was not surprised. Barca missing chances does not come under luck!!! Nothing stopped Barca from missing their chances apart from them. They had a 2-0 lead with Chelsea down to 10 men in their own back yard but their defensive frailties cost them dearly, not luck.

Maybe so, but you could argue that 9/10 of the times Robben was pure selfish and only looked to cut inside and do one thing. Also apart from the very good chances Bayern did have, did you count the penalties Chelsea conceded and the opposition (Messi/Robben) in both the semi and the final missed.

Hodgson needs to be more inventive rather than just a 4-4-1-1 or a 4-4-2 rigid system. Lets try and be more adventurous and stop being outnumbered in the middle of the park, 4-3-3, Jack Wilshere, Tom Cleverley and Steven Gerrard as the midfield 3 for example? What's to stop us from having better possession anyway, I am sick of people keep saying we are not good enough, even the teams weaker on paper in this tournament had more possession bar Greece. We need to work on passing and moving and having more options in the middle of the park, our wingers/wide midfielders are not exactly anything to shout about.

That is not luck, both players have a chance to score but didn't, Messi didn't even hit the target. Is that luck or just a poor kick?

No I wasnt shocked against Napoli, because they exploited the holes in Napolis defence repeatedly.

Bayerns attacks wre completely predictable, go and watch the game again, and focus on Robben vs Cole. Stops him over and over in exactly the same place.

Chelsea and England dont play the same way...

Exactly what i was saying and i believe if they did set up more like Chelsea did then they may have got more out of the Italy game.



Sensational performance from Spain tonight even before the injury to Motta. It seemed that they had another few gears in them tonight and done the basics correct i.e stick tight to Pirlo!!!! Great to see Torres and Mata scoring and them combinding (get used to seeing that) and Torres winning the golden boot even though he only started 2 games!!!! Best national side ever, i am not sure as i was not around to see the Brazil's of the 70's etc but they are the best of my time without a doubt.

 

[Tyton]

Chelsea vs. Barca was certainly a lot of luck. But vs. Bayern? Not really, just quality defensive football.

If you watch the game again and count actuall good chances for both teams you'd find it was pretty close, even though Chelsea barely touched the ball.

 

[Mike.]

I wont comment the rest of the post, cuz that's not the point i'm trying to make. Mike said that possession is useless. Possession can be useless but in most cases it's not. Having massive possession is always a plus. If you have ball in your feet a lot more than your opp, you have better chance of creating something and keeping your opp quiet. Ofc that doesn't work if you don't have tactic to support massive possession, but still, to have that kind of possession is always a plus.

But then that is what you do with possession. Which was my point, its not purely about possession but what you do with it. Possesion on its own is meaningless.

 

[CJACKO11]

Chelsea vs. Barca was certainly a lot of luck. But vs. Bayern? Not really, just quality defensive football.

If you watch the game again and count actuall good chances for both teams you'd find it was pretty close, even though Chelsea barely touched the ball.

I fail to see where the luck lies, please tell me because i am curious whether it was luck or poor finishing. Two totally different things.

 

[CJACKO11]

Also i want to say how disgusted i am with the Spanish players who didn't play the game celebrating in their kit after

 

[jgehunter]

Also i want to say how disgusted i am with the Spanish players who didn't play the game celebrating in their kit after

You get disgusted by that? Your priorities must be akin to those FIFA have when applying fines