He was widely criticized for treating the defeat as a casual one. Some sections of the media were pointing from a long time ago that he is an obsolete coach, since he hasn't got results at his last clubs and was appointed to the National Team just because he won it in 2002. At least this should expose more the corrupt guys who command CBF and the many problems involving them, but I'm not confident much is going to change.
If I'am not wrong he relegated Palmeiras, but in the same time won the cup and a participation in Copa Libertadores.
Thanks, sir. Hopefully one day you too can sit on that NT bench. I'd rather think it was a problem with David Luiz (and not just him anyway) than the team's tactics, anyway.
David Luiz played like usual really. He didn't have an off day, the opponent exploited his shortcomings. It's the coach's job to put players together in a way that don't make them repeatedly expose each other or exploitable by the opponent. This was a short analysis of the players movements before the first three goals on German TV. It shows that Brazil was heavily man marking but couldn't cope with Germany's movements at all (which is exactly why most modern teams prefer zonal marking with only selective man marking nowadays).
I don't think there is that much to talk about regarding the game, I mean the result speaks by itself, so let's talk about something more interesting: Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler
but losing a man has nothing to do with the tactic per se. Besides, it's very easy to watch the goals and see that the defense has just melted, just take the one on the 5-0. Errors everywhere. The coach can't miracles (he can definitely not start Fred maybe), otherwise you'd just put 11 players from Arminia Bielefeld and win the champions league. I can guarantee you that no zonal marking will change that But it's just football, not a math table, one goal could change the match and as Gordon said if Brazil happened to score first maybe we would be talking about a completely different match.
Every match starts with 0-0. It's always worth analyzing the first couple goals. The final result doesn't matter for that, no players starts a match knowing it will turn out 1-7. And your defiant attitude is honestly annoying. Of course football is not math and there are a lot of influences. But repeatedly discounting the influence of the coaching staff like you do leaves nothing to discuss except useless emotions that can't be repeated.
French coach after 1998, Brazilian coach after 2002, Italian coach after 2010, it didn't change anything. It's more about the team than the coach
I'm willingly over-riductive, because it's probably as annoying as the constant keyboard coaching that I see around, sorry. I do think that tactics play a part, not so much when you have such high-profile coaches and players who are used to play top football every day. You want to look at the first goals? Well, for Japan, Konno makes an unfortunate challenge and Colombia takes the lead. 2nd goal, Uchida and Yoshida are too focused on the ball and not the man they have behind, Uchida moves towards Rodriguez leaving Martinez free who scores. There, here's your tactical analysis of Japan - Colombia. Later, Yamaguchi is a box to box midfielder, gets in for Aoyama, and after that we get eaten on counters. That was the reward for a tactical move. Else we can discuss that Del Bosque didn't understand tiki taka doesn't work anymore, Scolari doesn't know how to set up proper marking, yeah, sure. And I bet the day after the result could've been completely different with the same set ups. The World Cup is not a league, where consistency is rewarded and you can at least feel the hand of the manager every week. And that's not to say the coach has no influence. It has, but there are tons of facts pointing to the fact that it's limited. As for the "nothingness to discuss", it would be nice if the player's selections, forms and match events were given the priority instead of the incompetent coaches for a change.
Brazilian newspaper that is known for always making jokes in the front page: "THERE WILL BE NO FRONT COVER Today we can't joke, we're ashamed* *While you were reading this, Germany scored again"
It's nice to see that Germany and german football seems (till today) on the top of the World while a lot of japanese footballers are playing in the german league. Maybe this can improve in some way japanese football itself in a near future?
lol, this guy got so angry that he broke his TV after the match... https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=691627520874882
What do you think they do every day and what makes "top football" top? So how do you select players and discuss such, if not with a specific goal at which point you also talk about tactics (whether explicitly or implied)? ---- High level football is dominated by approaches of limiting randomness and making the game more predictable for one's own advantage. The goal is to not be dependent on one player's mood or (un)fortunate circumstances. Instead the collective of a team should be capable of adapting to any deviation. This is why in general there are two dominating trends in top football: - Tiqui taca for controlling the ball and thus robbing the opponent the ability to dictate the game. - Gegenpressing for quickly making use of changed circumstances, robbing the the opponent the ability to adapt to the new challenges, thus gaining the ability to dictate the game even off the ball. Both of these approaches require a collective cohesiveness as for every advantage in football there is usually also a disadvantaged area that the opponent can try to exploit. The easiest example of such is building a majority, outnumbering the opponent in a given area: As both teams have the same number of players, the pressured team "only" needs to be able to quickly move the ball from the area the opponent outnumbers to one where the own team is at advantage. For the pressed player this requires a specific set of abilities usually referred as "pressing resistance": close control of the ball and good overview for free teammates, while the rest of the team need to be capable of positioning such that the pressing no longer cuts of potential passing angles. Thus in prepared teams there is no longer a static formation but a constant adaptation to changing challenges. In the ideal case all players always know how to react to any changes without the whole of the team suffering for it. Maybe people feel this all is too "highbrow" in which case I'll refrain posting anymore in BSJ. ---- In any case I expect a clear victory for Netherlands against Argentina tonight. Argentina has been one of the tactically worst teams this WC so far, essentially profiting of the inability of their opponents to exploit their collective weaknesses while benefiting from the good individual form of Messi and Di Maria. Netherlands' van Gaal on the other hand is known to be downright obsessed with controlling everything and leaving nothing to luck, as could be seen e.g. with his choice PK GK Krul who was prepared to do the PK and obviously got (to learn) the data which players tend to shoot into which corner. The result was that he jumped into the right corner in every single one of Costa Rica's shots.
He was going to get raked over the coals no matter what he said. It would've been easy to blame the players for quitting so easily and their unprofessionalism. But he took the blame on himself, and i can respect that. I dont think of it as 'manly' either - to counter the words dax stuck in my mouth. It's what real leaders do - take responsibility instead of play the blame game.
One of the most boring match of this WC, reminds me some Milan derby like that one in UCL semifinals.
Not very surprising after yesterday though. Neither team wants to give up the first goal. Both sides also know their opponents offense is driven by one man (robben and messi) and both have very good enforcers that have been effective at limiting their impact.
lol, it's what every coach normally does, especially after a big defeats (like Del Bosque too), but ok, I guess we have to see it as somewhat special What do they do? They train with the best clubs in the world and play in the hardest leagues in the world ? As for "what makes top football top", we can have two points of view I guess: one is the player ("a top player") and that has zero to do with the tactics, and the other one could be a team, which would mean a team that delivers results in the toughest competitions. So was Fred ineffective because of Scolari's poor tactics? Do you think Maeda did badly for Japan in the Confederations because the teams countered him effectively or because he was in poor physical and mental form himself anyway? Why do you think many people were not happy with Scolari sticking to Fred? That's the problem, you can try to make things easier for him\whoever by creating a type of football that suits your team, and even exploits the way you think the opponent will play, but truth is ultimately that's stuff that's only going to remain on a paper, as there are too many factors involved. Messi resolving the game against Iran is not tactics and I can hardly think that Sabella didn't know what to expect from them. Sure, nobody is perfect and it's possible his strategy wasn't perfect, but making the right dribble, shooting in the goal and not over the crossbar, has nothing to do with tactics. Take a game like Denmark vs Japan in the last World Cup: it was unlocked and resolved with two free kicks in the end. Note that nobody is saying that Denmark couldn't have done potentially better with the perfect tactics, but matches do not depend that much on it. Then allow me to doubt that that's the goal. I'd say high level football is simply dominated by trying to create a system where all your players strenght can sum well together. It's not like you can play tiqui taca in Atalanta just because it seems the best method to deliver results, which is also way it's limited to certain teams. (see also: Japan U17 at the last world cup) Huh? Name me a few top clubs outside of Spain or National teams that play this kind of football, I'd like to understand who you have in mind. Judging by the name I'd guess you're referring to Dortmund's type of football. While we can say that there are many teams that, more generally, feature high pressing, that's a concept so generic and used that it's hardly a difference unless you're using it exactly for countering tiqui-taca type of football for example. Heck, even Zac Japan tried to do it against Colombia and used it against Italy last year. I don't feel it's highbrow at all man. It's not like I think you're shouting nonsense or anything like that. Not at all, at least you try to see things a bit on the insight. My problem is just... especially the last things you said, the players aren't robots, come on there. No tactic is gonna refrain Cristiano Ronaldo for going for the shoot near the goal instead of the pass to the free teammate, if you follow me . Yoshida not making the foul against the Jordan player letting it go scoring against Japan has nothing to do with tactics. Even if Zac told him to do it, he's not a robot, it's ultimately up to his instinct\quality. Decisions on the pitch are made in one tiny second, very often, and many circumstances. I'd tend to give credit to that GK's instinct more than Van Gaal but whatever. At least he made the risky sub and it worked in the end so he was right. But realistically, I could have easily seen Navas saving some PKs and making it worthless, but it didn't happen. Japan's GK Kawashima has saved tons of PKs, at the last Asian Cup, and the previous World Cup he kinda did against Denmark, but unfortunately, even if Japan (probably) prepared PKs against Paraguay too it didn't change the result. And, in my opinion, too often a coach gets credit\ solely based on the ending result. Which is why I tend to separate leagues from the elimination tournaments (where, often, you see League one level teams overperforming for example except they're doing zero in the league - curious, huh?)
I didnt say it was special either, but thanks for putting more words in my mouth. All i said is that i can respect him, unlike zac shirking responsibility.
No problem man. I too like to go with my own interpretations like you do with Zac. So in my twisted understanding, being impressed by something denotes that it has something different than the usual. Somewhat special, as I wrote. That's just me though, no worries, it could have a different meaning for everyone. Oh and, "He actually mans up" is not the same as "It may be manly" sorry, he was very strong, King Leonidas level. That's surely why Gunner wrote that he was widely criticized for treating the defeat as a casual one.
He said tactics were right but final touch wasnt there. Tactics are his responsibility Final touch is players responsibility Have a nice day.