Bad compared to who? How does 6 out of the 8 semi finalists in the CL and Europa league coming from La Liga support the "bad defensive league" idea?
You guys need to look at some facts. There were less teams in la Liga with a positive goal differential than there were in the PL. There were more lopsided scores in the PL than in la Liga. There were double the number of teams in the PL with at least a +10 goal differential than there were in la Liga. And as I said, in European competition 6/8 semi finalists came from la Liga. I don't know how your stereotypes can survive those facts.
Europa league? Seriously? The Champion's League finals were between Bayern Munich and Chelsea. Neither in the Spanish league. If you are seriously trying to argue that the Spanish league has great defense then I think we might be done. They have fantastic offense. No argument there. If you are trying to say they have great defense...sorry.
Well have fun touting that banner and I wish you the best of luck convincing people of your argument. We are way off topic anyway. Time to move on.
They looked like a textbook attacking 4-2-3-1 with dual #6s. Both Arbeola and Alba in full attack mode much more forward than the DM. Busquets sat at a point just in front of his CBs and Alonso slightly forward. Silva, Xavi ,and Iniesta were pinched in centrally. Xavi was a very central CAM. I hope we get to see Spain's slow buildup 4-2-3-1 v Germany's lightning strike 4-2-3-1! I agree that Jones as an AMR in a 4-2-3-1 v Guatemala is the same compromise as Williams at AMR. However it seems that the best formation for Dempsey may be as a CAM in the 4-2-3-1. His Honduras, Italy, and now Guatemala goals have all come from almost the same spot when the MNT has played that formation.
You said look at the goal differential in the table, and it's not Real Madrid and Barcelona scoring all those goals. What did you mean? Go ahead and take a look at it. And I don't get the Europa league really comment. That's head to head between the leagues. And nobody realistically thinks Bayern and Chelsea are better than Real and Barcelona. For one thing, Real and Barcelona had to play each other in the same week they played Bayern and Chelsea twice. Bayern and Chelsea had already lost their leagues, Chelsea by miles.
I was laughing because you are correct dood. I think it is funny people bash La Liga. No doubt it is a good league. now...the bottom tier of La liga is a lot WORSE than the bottom tier of PL. BUT the top half of La Liga is better (not by a ton but better) than the top half of PL. No shame in that. it is what it is.
We've seen Barcelona lose in key games very few times over the last 3 years, but there were CM's defending were tremendous at cutting out the passing lanes and instantly hitting a running striker / midfielder for the counter. As much as I dislike both of them, DeRossi and Lampard were very good defensively and adept at quickly spurring the counter. Ramirez was the MVP for Chelsea against Barca, and I see quite a bit of Schweinsteiger in him, Ramirez of course faster on the counter, but Schweinsteiger the better passer. Agree on Dempsey, but that is also a compromise. Normally the CAM is a small, quick passer, finding players to assist. I hear people complaining about Dempsey roaming to touch the ball, but tactically it makes sense for him as the defense needs to pay attention to him, if he can get them thinking he is playing deep or he is playing wide, it might give him an extra second in the box. By the way, Ukraine what amounts to a 5-4-1 right now, at least in defense.
And Spain plays better with a forward than without. As would nearly every team in the world. A forward is not a luxury.
I don't either. The Europa League cost Serie A a Champions League spot. If you don't take that competition seriously, it will bite you in the ass. Chealsea no. Bayern? I don't really see a huge difference between Bayern/Real/Barcelona. Bayern was also worlds ahead of Chelsea this season. Bayern, Real, and Barcelona were the best teams in Europe this year, and there really wasn't much to separate them. Everyone else was playing catch-up.
There's a lot of misconception on this thread. I am sure del Bosque would love to play with a forward ... it's just that his prime choice for the position is hurt and his second best choice has sucked for the last two seasons. His third choice was 4-6-0 or 3-7-0 that Barcelona plays. Also nominally without a striker, when David Villa is out. It works reasonably well for Barcelona. It worked reasonably well for Spain. The same 4-6-0 also worked very well for Luciano Spalletti when he was in charge of Roma. But one can always quibble with formations and the roster selection. One could also argue whether one should play his 4th best attacking midfielder vs. his 2nd best striker but that is not not as much of a clear-cut choice as many here believe. As to the rest - it seems like the 4-4-2 "Empty Bucket" can also be played under the right circumstances. Who knew!
Press 1: "So, Jorge, the press guys are a bit concerned about the lack of team chemistry. We've seen the players playing out of position for the two qualifiers. What's going on?" JK: "Diles, Martin." Vasquez: "We're creating the new soccer revolution. It's called the 'sidero,' like a libero, but instead of moving across lines up and down the field, the sidero moves side to side, all the way to the left, all the way to the right." Press 2: "That explains the rather erratical patterns followed by Clint Dempsey and Landon Donovan?" Vasquez: "Yes, indeed. They are our first two sideros. The rival will never know where to find them." Press 1: "It seems they don't know where to find each other, either." JK: "Es trabajo en progreso." Vasquez: "We're just starting with these two. Our version of 'total football' will have al 10 players playing like sideros, it's going to confuse any rival!"
Because a traditional definition of formations stipulates a certain spacing between the lines far more than the particular talent in these lines. Barcelona has no spacing to define it as 4-3-3. Spain, with Cesc in, basically played it just like Barcelona.
A "formation" is never fixed. It's just a reference point. Imagine them as electron orbitals: if the movements of the player were charted in a field, his/her position within the formation is just the place where he is most likely to be found. But, in reality, the player will be roaming over about 20% to 40% of the field. A formation in the modern game is fluid. Which means the team facing you must also be fluid. Up to a point. The Spain-Italy game saw Italy in actual competition mode: a very cerebral team. Little wonder so many of the best managers are Italian, or of Italian descent --it's a culture that emphasizes football-as-chess. Spain normally advances their lines. To the point that most of their midfielders are also attackers, and can score because they are close enough to the area. Italy for long stretches of the game didn't allow them to do that. They called their bluff, and instead of retreating and narrowing themselves, they also moved forwards and let Maggio and Motta ready for opening runs, coming from inside toward the outside. That was brilliant, IMO. Spain is fundamentally narrow. Only Arbeloa can provide some width. Iniesta, Silva, Fabregas, Xavi, Alonso, they all run to the middle. And Alba cannot just leave Ramos alone.
Which would make years of the Big Soccer debates about formations useless. As it would a bunch of coaching books and the Wikipedia pages. This is not exclusive to either Spain or Italy. That's right but Barcelona and Spain, when playing without a true striker, do so uniquely differently than other teams. That's the secret sauce of Guardila's genius. That and a little Messi on the side. I would have switched Ramos and Arbeloa. But I am not the Walrus .. goo-goo-goo-chu.
What you're describing is a tactical difference, not a formations difference. Formations are best described by how a team lines up defensively. How a team attacks falls into the category of tactics, not formations. If you look at the average position of the players when they don't have the ball, that is the formation.
Uncle Woy bucks this cycle's trend with two results with his 4-4-1-1. The Dutch should have played a simple 4-4-2 in the last two matches. Too much emphasis on shooting and not scoring, makes you Dan Marino or Reggie Miller.
I think Holland's choices, and the failure of those choices, for the match against Portugal are more illuminating. Holland dropped a dmid for an attacking mid and the result was, a lot less defense and very little improvement, if any, in offense. Is the Edu, Bradley, Jones trio necessary to protect the defense and perhaps ensure more possession? Of course, Holland went from two dmids to 1, while JK persists with three holding mids. Is there a happy compromise at 2?
We tried that against Slovenia...worst defensive performance of the JK era. Another important lesson from Holland, if your backline plays like estonia, but your frontline plays like the dutch, you're only as good as something in between, like Ireland. They lost to absorb and counter Denmark, they lost to a comprehensive German team and they lost to a freely attacking portugese side.
Spain-Croatia - del Bosque does use a forward (Torres) but the width is provided by the fullbacks Arbeloa and Alba. Spain has some chances early but is struggling to create many in the second half. Then Vicente takes out Torres and puts in Navas to stretch the field wide with his dribbling on the right. (Navas is listed at 60 kg. It had to have been after a trip to a buffet) In 4-6-0, the game suddenly opens up. Italy-Ireland Italy flawlessly moves from 3-5-2 to 4-4-2, which makes sense because their opponent Ireland likes to play the long, rather than a possession oriented, ball. The word of the day is - FLEXIBILITY.
IMO it definitely wasn't a false 9 that opened things up so much as Navas's width. (And even more than that, Croatia's need for a goal.)
Del Bosque actually moved Silva into a "top striker" role for a while. Then Cesc replaced Silva there. The point being - fullbacks weren't stretching the defense. A dribbling winger did.