Are negative tactics stifling the World Cup?

[mfw13]

It seems to me that quite a few teams are switching from a 4-4-2 to a 4-5-1, operating with a lone striker, and putting ten men behind the ball. This is leading to boring matches where one team has most of the possession but struggles to break down the other team's defense which has nine or ten men behind the ball.

France played a 4-5-1 against Switzerland with Henry as a lone striker, the Czechs played a 4-5-1 against the US, put nine men behind the ball after Koller scored, and had all ten men behind the ball for most of the second half. Today, T&T regularly had all eleven players in their own box defending corners, although England finally broke them down after 60+ minutes.

Tactically, teams which use speed and need space to effectively attack (such as England and the US, among others) are being confronted with massed five-man midfields designed to deny them space, and they have for the most part failed to find a tactical answer.

[King-James]

Tactically, teams which use speed and need space to effectively attack (such as England and the US, among others) are being confronted with massed five-man midfields designed to deny them space, and they have for the most part failed to find a tactical answer.

Not many teams have went out that way. Mostly just when they know they either are really disadvantaged or are doing a major tactical gain in playing that way.
For a tournament, IMO the general tactics have been very positive. Only in league matches have I regularily seen tactics this attack oriented. They aren't playing negative like clubs tend to do in the UEFA CL for example.

[leonidas]

Not many teams have went out that way. Mostly just when they know they either are really disadvantaged or are doing a major tactical gain in playing that way.
For a tournament, IMO the general tactics have been very positive. Only in league matches have I regularily seen tactics this attack oriented. They aren't playing negative like clubs tend to do in the UEFA CL for example.

although i agree with you for the most part, i dont think this really holds true with say, the france-switzerland game, where france was clearly the tactically superior team on paper, but on the field, they were rather lacklustre. then again, france has been rather off for the past 2 years so i dont know.

we are seeing this maybe more this year because there are some really really weak teams in trinidad, togo, and angola. i mean in 2002, you could say that really, only china was the weakest. maybe saudi arabia as well, but at least they have some "tradition" compared to the other teams we are seeing this time around.

[Black]

the Czechs played a 4-5-1 against the US, put nine men behind the ball after Koller scored, and had all ten men behind the ball for most of the second half.

Are you sure your not just a thinly disguised excuse for the USA loss? The Czech simply out-played you. When the US had the ball (with the exception of Reyna's hit off the post) they did very little with it.

[mfw13]

That's precisely my point....Bruckner came up with a brilliant tactical plan to deny the USA the space in which to use its speed and Bruce Arena had no tactical answer.

The reason we played like crap is because we were seeing a defense we had not seen before and which exposed our poor passing and ball control in tight spaces. Our wingers were not able to get behind the Czech defense and get in crosses because the Czechs strung five men across the midfield, and since our whole attack is based on using our wingers speed to get behind the defense and open up space we looked absolutely clueless.

[EZ-Aussie]

Stifling the World Cup? I've seen plenty of goals so far to keep me interested. Stifling your team maybe!

[Paul Sousa]

Perhaps seeing what Greece did in the Euro has affected how teams are approaching this tournament?

[Val1]

Except it is not 10 men behind the ball. Looking at the Czech - USA game, behind Nedved, the Czechs attacked in depth, they were releasing 5-6 men evry time he had the ball. Same with Croatia. You have to defend against Brazil, but they brought 5 men into attack and were very promising going to goal, attacking Brazil where they were weakest, at the corners of the penalty box. Ecuador has been a breath of fresh air, the Germans are attacking (even with a less than fit Ballack), Mexico attacked, Ghana attacked, Spain came out smoking, Holland (read that ball hog Robben) attacked, Australia never gave up.

This is nothing like Greece winning Euro 2004 or Bolton playing vs Arsenal. This has been quite the entertaining WC thus far.

Edit: Are you watching Argentina v Serbia Montenegro play?

[leg_breaker]

The reason we played like crap is because we were seeing a defense we had not seen before and which exposed our poor passing and ball control in tight spaces.

The thread title talks about negative tactics. What exactly was negative about the way the Czechs played? They only technically had ten men behind the ball because America were passing it along their back line all match!

Our wingers were not able to get behind the Czech defense

Because they're not good enough, for because of a Greece-style strategy.

I don't think anyone Begrudges T&T's defensive play against Sweden, they were anything but negative.