serie A hands down. teams have to readjust their approach prior to every match (this holds especially true for midtable/relegation teams). in the other leagues, teams can more or less play the same way week in week out. they have a tactical identity (see swansea or stoke the past few seasons). in serie A, most clubs' "tactical identity" is to adapt to their next opponent's strengths and exploit their weaknesses thats why there are so many successful italian football managers
just think of all the player roles there are in Serie A/Italy that aren't used in the rest of the world libero - De Rossi 2011/12 trequartista - Totti false 9 - Totti (Barca is well known for using Messi as a false 9, but it was Spaletti who pioneered it in 2006/07) carillero - Marchisio/Nocerino in a 4-4-2 diamond regista - Tachtsidis/De Rossi 2012/13 false 10 - Thiago Motta/Montolivo in Euro 2012, Bradley 2011/12 Chievo i'm sure i'm missing a couple players also have to be well trained in a variety of formations and tactical setups. only in italy do you still see 3-man 5-man 2-man (zemanlandia) backlines nowadays there are so many Italian players who are terrible with their ball technique but are so good at the game because they are so skilled tactically (inzaghi, perrotta, gattuso, etc)
I think Serie A it's just a myth... it's the perception which became reality. The tactics in football are such a common place now, everyone has access to all of the same information and it becomes diluted over and over. People talk about this team or that team has a great defensive system, or are tactically more efficient etc etc, but most of this talk comes from watching the game, seeing the result of the game and THEN making a judgement on it. You will never see an expert say this... So this team was tactically better, played a better game and showed good control, but lost 3 x 1... is it possible? of course it is possible, you can have a team which does everything perfect tactically but doesn't have the talent to overcome a more talented team. You just will never hear an expert say that, it's always about breakdown of defenses and mental toughness.. and NEVER about.. well this guys is just faster and better so he was able to speed past the defender AND THEN get around the second defender which was making a perfect cover only to cross to another player coming into the box that's open because your team didn't have the talent to hold up your defensive system. I think the difference between tactics is negligible. And by the way, false this and false that have been used forever and a half... 10 years ago you would have been laughed at if you mentioned a false something. Because it seems that now there's a need to name every single player type as before we would define players as defenders, midfield and forwards. They didn't play the same roles, Roberto Dinamite and Zico were both forwards and played a completely different styles, nowadays people would definitely try and label them in order to differentiate the player. LB, LWB, LW RB, RWB, RW this group used to be only 1 position bout 20 years ago hahaha the best is the example of tequartista.. it's just a fancy name of saying the responsible for creating offensive plays which really doesn't participate defensively and moves around the pitch as he pleases.. How many players from the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s can you describe like that? cause there are tons! naming a continent America doesn't mean that it wasn't there before you named it.. just saying
rightly so .. in general and thru out history. Typical example for the proofs that they won games by tactics but not by "pure talents" nor by better squad : 1- WC level: Italy82 came against the odds and won over Brazil 82 3-2 - Brazil82 were in TOP20 teams in history and only lost that 1 game in whole year - Brazil82 had a great record before that game: won 100% with GF 13 GA 3 meaning they beat opponent with an average of at least 3goals, and allowed much less than 1 per game. 2- UEFA champions league: AC Milan 94, came out to beat Cruijff "Barca dream team" 4-0 in UCL94 final (even without their best DF in Baresi) Barca of Cruijff (composed with Romario, Stoitchkov, M Laudrup, Koeman, Pep Guardiola, Bakero, Nadal ..) a great team with great record before the final: W5 D2 (unbeatable) with 16goals scored/7 and allowed only 3/7 - meaning they beat opponents with more than 2 goals per game and allowed less than 1 goal every two games
Another example! Honduras 2 x 0 Brasil on the Copa America 2001. Shows that Honduras even against the odds were able to beat a formidable opponent because of the tactics they used during play. Which shows also the great tradition of Honduran football and tactics. or just kind of proves that upsets can happen.. But I'll take the tactics!! or... i got a better one.. THEY WANTED IT MORE THAN BRAZIL!!! YEAHHHH
Yes true ... also a famous Greece at Euro 2004 against ALL ODDS to BEAT France (title holder with Zidane Henry Vieira Makelele Thuram ...) and a Portugal (with Scolari WC coach with Figo Deco Pauleta Cavarlho and young CR7 ...)
Zeman never played 3-5-2. He always played 4-3-3. Never heard of a thing called "carillero" in Italy. Don't remember De Rossi playing as a real "libero", better to say he has played as a central defender, as he substantially played in line with the other two defenders. The false 9 which seems to have gained flair in these years was a use of the centerforward which was already common in the 10s and 20s of the last century. The listing of the so called trequartista here is not a tactical issue, but a "nominalistic" one. The name comes from the italian word "trequarti" (3 on 4, three quarters of the field ) which identifies, more or less, the area aproximately 10 meters out of the opponents box (divide the field in 4). That is the area where certain players, usually with great technical skills but who are not real strikers, were thought to be determinants, usually with assists. In older times (since the 60's) the trequartista was usually deployed centrally, but it was not unusual to give him great freedom on the field. Today, when "lines" are commonly used, the terms refer to a player who is deployed in beetwen the lines of midfielders and forwards. So you can have a trequartista who really plays on the wing. You can have also 3 together... If you play 4-2-3-1 in Italy all the men in the line of 3 could be called trequartista, because trequartista is not (and probably never was) a term used to identify a "role" (even if for a long time it was used for a player who was initially deployed centrally), it is more a term used to identify qualities of the players. Iniesta is a great trequartista. Maybe he doesn't know that, but if you are great in the last 25 meters of thew pitch, great in playing in beetween the lines, great in assisting forwards, and don't play in the line of forwards or midfielder, you can be labelled as a trequartista, even if you start wide, on the wing. Maradona was the greatest trequartista: not playing in line with the forwards, but deployed quite far from the midfielders, with great freedom to move orizontally. The same goes for "regista" it identifies a player who build the play regardless of the position, so, it's not a proper "role", it's an attitude. Pirlo is a regista, Zidane was a regista, Rivera was a regista, Albertini was a regista, Paulo Roberto Falcao was a regista, Xavi is a regista. Their position in the field was/is different, because, again, you can be a playmaker in different parts of the pitch. I think to the Inter of Trapattoni (1989) and they had 2 regista Matteoli and Matthaeus. The france had Platini and Giresse together. Regista, trequartista ecc. ecc. do exist in all of the world, they are not tactical roles proper to italian football, they are words proper of italian football terminology. I hope what I've written can be read without difficuties and misunderstandings.
you read it wrong. i said in Italia, some managers insist to play with a 3-man backline (Mazzarri). Some play with a 4-man backline. Some play with a 2-man backline. never said zeman played 352. i said zeman plays a 2-man backline. he basically played a 2-3-5 with wingbacks pushing higher up than the midfielders. just look at his kickoff You’re arguing with someone who watches and anaylzes every single Roma match. under luis enrique, DDR played DEEPER than kjaer/juan. he does not play in line with them. He plays deeper so kjaer/juan can push wide in possession allowing rosi/angel to push higher as well. DDR is a great libero, but he’s a terrible central defender. Look at games where kjaer/juan were injured and gago became libero with ddr playing “out of position” as a centerback. He is terrible and gets drawn out of position too much. As a libero, he has the freedom to roam out of the backline and into midfield, as he’s done dozens of times under LE. Visit the roma subforum for bigsoccer or his stats discussion on pesstatsdatabase, DDR does not play centerback. He either plays as a midfielder, or as a libero carrilero is a spanish word, but you don't find those players in La Liga. it's used to describe players who play wide in a midfield diamond (marchisio/pogba). the english word for this role is called "shuttlers" but you hardly find these players in England either Maybe my use of the word “player role” may be misleading, but I agree mostly with what you say about trequartistas. Totti played as a trequartista effectively under zeman recently on the left wing I know false 9’s were used in the early ages of football, but the first team in modern football to use it weekly consistently was 2006/07 spaletti http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/03/05/teams-of-the-decade-5-roma-2007/ I disagree with what you say about registas. I define registas as a deep lying playmaker such as Pirlo or David Pizarro or Albertini. If trequartistas are the playmakers of the ¾ pitch, then registas are the playmakers of the ¼ pitch. For me, zidane/rivera/kaka/delpiero are all trequartistas because they play in the area between midfield and offense, similar to the role and mentality of totti Falcao for us Romanistas was in a class of his own. The best way to describe him is a complete midfielder. I cant think of many more like falcao. He’s not deep enough to be a regista, he’s not advanced enough for a trequartista, yet he has the qualities and playing styles of both I’m not saying there aren’t registas and trequartistas outside of italia, but until recently, these kinds of roles and attitudes exist ‘mostly’ in italia. Carrick is probably the only regista in the EPL and he’s nowhere near the class of pirlo or david pizarro in his prime. Only until recently has the EPL started having players who resemble trequartistas (hazard, coutinho, barkley, mata, etc.), but in modern football, ¼-playmakers and ¾-playmakers were mostly prevalent in italia i wouldn't exactly describe either of lampard/gerrard as a trequartista/regista (although one can argue that this season under the new liverpool coach that gerrard plays more of a regista role) regardless of how either of us interpret the regista and trequartista. the point of this thread to discuss leagues and tactics. the fact that most of the footballing world divides their pitch into thirds whereas italians divides theirs into fourth is testament in itself to how tactical football in italia is
Man... there is no new news on football tactics since the 80s or maybe even before. It's all been done, so I have a hard time believing there is a difference between these leagues, especially during the information age. All over the world we have everyone studying everyone else
true, but there's still the fact whether or not they actually use these tactics i truly believe theres more tactical variety in italia in modern football
All coaches adapt to their roster, that's tactical variety. The difference is negligible, this is more of a historic content conversation. That's the same thing as saying total football is only Dutch now and joga bonito is only brazilian... or tiki-taka was a spaniard invention.
how many leagues have teams that consistently play a diamond midfield or a 3-man backline? that's tactical variety
Ok now i understand what you meaned on 3 man, 5 man, 2 man... can't be with you on the fact that Zeman played a 2 man line... it's a four man line. He choosed very offensive wingbacks but it's still a 4 men line. As for the regista matter. IMO you are changing the way italian football use the term regista. You may do it at will, but that's not correct in respect to the nature of the term. In Italy regista has never been only used to describe players a la Pirlo but also player a la Platini, Beccalossi, Rivera, ecc. ecc. This is an excerpt from La Repubblica 1995 on the question, and a list. While I don't totally agree with it, it is enlighting. DA RIVERA A ZOLA QUEL RUOLO FA DISCUTERE La definizione di regista: il giocatore più importante del centrocampo, con attitudine all' assist per le punte. Figura tipica del gioco a uomo, che ha avuto il suo momento ' classico' negli anni ' 60, con l' apparizione di Gianni Rivera. Un uso esasperato addirittura ne faceva l' Inter contropiedistica di Herrera, con Suarez capace di lanci di decine e decine di metri. Altri popolari registi dagli anni ' 60 in poi furono De Sisti, Juliano, Cordova, Antognoni, Di Bartolomei, Falcao, Platini, Bulgarelli, Capello, Beccalossi, Frustalupi, Pecci. Il regista solitamente indossa la maglia numero 10. Ma Pelè e Maradona erano registi? Non proprio, sono classificati come ' atipici' Nel gioco a zona il suo ruolo è meno spiccato, il Milan di Sacchi ne era privo, così la sua nazionale (4-4-2). Nel 4-3-3 diventa preminente il centrale di centrocampo (come Di Matteo nella Lazio): ma la sua distribuzione di gioco non richiede le qualità di palleggio e di estro che tradizionalmente sono considerate caratteristiche del regista. La ' categoria' professionale, anche per il diffondersi del gioco a zona, si è però con il tempo divisa in due ruoli: la mezzapunta-fantasista e il coordinatore davanti alla difesa. Esemplare l' assetto della Fiorentina che li schiera entrambi, Di Mauro dietro e più avanti Rui Costa. Tra i primi ci sono Roberto Baggio, Zola e Mancini, tutti in squadre di alta classifica. Sono però considerati ormai a tutti gli effetti degli attaccanti e come tali li ha convocati Sacchi. Di giocatori analoghi si servono però anche squadre di mezza classifica come il Napoli e il Torino: anzi, è proprio grazie a Carbone e Pelè (il ghanese) che sono a metà classifica. Più tradizionale l' interpretazione di Seno (Inter). Nella prima categoria rientra Bortolazzi, del Genoa, o Di Biagio, del Foggia. Longhi, del Padova, è reduce da tre gol alla Cremonese: il Brescia, ultimo in classifica, ce l' aveva e di nome, Hagi, ma se n' è liberato. De Sisti, Juliano, Cordova, Antognoni, Di Bartolomei, Falcao, Platini, Bulgarelli, Capello, Beccalossi, Frustalupi, Pecci. (How many Roma players... it shows that Repubblica is a roman newspaper) That's a list. De Sisti, Pecci were almost Pirloesque for long parte of their career (deep lying in english), Beccalossi probably the more offensive, Bulgarelli a classic mezzala with little instinct for goal but great vision and pass range, Antognoni, probably the more classica here, as, I concur with you, Falcao... but thi list is quite correct, all of these very different player were labelled as regista. Note that coming to the contemporary (at the time of writing) football, the journalist listed as regista players as different in their positions as Seno (and Di Biagio, who wuld fit your interpretation of the word regista), and Hagi, or even Longhi (who really was a classic mezzala).
Tactical variety would be for a team to seemingly transition between a diamond to a line, from a 3 man back line into a 2 man back line... To have somebody set on a position and stay there shows tactical discipline.. which would be the same as 4-4-2 ... they are just being disciplined enough to stay on their position. Switching from 4-4-2 to a 2-5-3 on the fly... that's tactical variety. Going from a 5-4-1 and coming back on the second half with the same players but playing a 3-6-1 ... that's tactical variety.
I would agree, Serie A has the best teams tactically. In my opinion, the Italian clubs play the game the way it was meant to be played. I'm not sure how to explain that exactly, but when I used to watch the Serie A (I can't anymore because fox soccer/fox sports no longer provides it as well as the NBC Sports Network) I used to think the way the Italian clubs played was the smoothest and easiest to the eye out of any other league.