Anti football? Do me a favour!
In an article I wrote earlier this season, I discussed some comments put forward by Chelsea midfielder Florent Malouda (at a time when Chelsea were absolutely destroying every team that came before them). In short, Malouda expressed dismay at the fact that his side weren’t receiving sufficient praise for their style of football at the time, with commentators and pundits instead choosing to shower Arsenal (and to a lesser extent, Manchester United) with adulation.
Before I go any further, I would like to stress and underline a few important points:
1) I enjoy watching Barcelona, Arsenal and Spain as much as the next person.
2) I am not a close-minded xenophobe who refuses to accept other football cultures or styles.
The proliferation of internet live streaming sites, in conjunction with the growth of the blogosphere, means that access to football and football opinion is greater than ever.
However, this increased access means that theories propounded gain greater currency and become more widespread.
One prominent opinion that is commonly espoused amongst commentators and fans is that a combination of short passing and attacking football is synonymous with purism, and that other styles or brands of football are lesser or not the ‘right way’ to play the game.
In some cases, styles of football preferred and employed by figures such Jose Mourinho and Tony Pulis are mockingly derided as ‘anti-football’.
After losing to Ipswich Town in January, Arsenal captain Cesc Fabregas expressed dismay at the way his opponents had played.
“I don’t know if it is long ball or it is a rugby kick but it worked for them,” he said.
“In England, a lot of teams play like that and it works for them, they create chances like that and it is their football. We just have to put the ball on the floor and try to play football.
“Credit to them because they played well but Arsenal played the football, the other team refused to play football, they were lucky to score with a long ball.”
This snobbery is not limited to figures within the domestic game. Speaking to The Guardian earlier this year, Barcelona and Spain midfielder Xavi discussed his thoughts on the English game.
He said: “You watch Liverpool and Carragher wins the ball and boots it into the stands and the fans applaud. There’s a roar! They’d never applaud that here.”
Xavi is a clearly an exemplary footballer, and comes across as a thoughtful and articulate man. However, comments such as these serve to reinforce foreign stereotypes of ‘the English game’ and add further credibility to the notion that short-passing-based, ‘tiki-taka’-style football is the ‘right way’ to play the game.
This denigration is also extended to managers who eschew a tactics-heavy approach too. Tottenham Hotspur manager Harry Redknapp is frequently belittled for his approach to management and coaching.
Prior to the start of their inaugural Champions League campaign, many had predicted that Redknapp’s side would face several humiliations at the hands of ‘tactically-superior’ teams. However, Tottenham defied the naysayers and produced a string of superb performances, including a 3-1 victory over Inter Milan, a side then managed by celebrated tactician Rafael Benitez.
Describing his approach, Redknapp stressed the importance of the players, not the system or tactics used.
“Whether it is 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3, the numbers game is not the beautiful game in my opinion,” he said in his column.
“It’s 10 per cent about the formation and 90 per cent about the players. If you have the best ones and they do their jobs, then they can pretty much play any way you want them to.”
At the end of the day the object of professional football is to win; trophies are not handed out for aesthetics or for the use of meticulous tactics. Managers and players are not obliged to entertain spectators.
Winning is the ultimate aim, and it doesn’t really matter how this is achieved. There are of course, many ways to skin a cat, and each one is as valid and acceptable as the other. After all, how many Chelsea fans were complaining about aesthetics after 2004/05 and 2005/06, and how many Inter Milan fans were miffed with Mourinho after their treble-winning season of 2009/10?
Follow me on twitter at www.twitter.com/zarifrasul
Football News 24/7
You are missing the point. Football is a spectacle as well. It is about winning in all ways including winning the crowd. Sometimes an underdog can win heroically without playing amazing football, but it is amazing because they did all they could on and off the ball. However, teams like Mourinho’s employ underhand tactics because he doesn’t know how to create great football teams. He resorts to simplistic football allied with what else he needs to do with cheating, whinging, ref bashing, and all round scummy behaviour and hope he gets away with it, which he does because fifa are an utter joke on so many levels.
With regard to Stoke and Pulis, it is fine as they are within the rules, and Pulis isn’t awfully behaved although he could behave better. However, there is only so far he can go with that style and don’t expect to be applauded as who wants to watch it.
Watching Barca is a joy watching Mourinho’s chelsea and even Madrid team isn’t. Simples.
Plus Barca win more trophies. Simples.
Play football and organise, work hard play with confidence and you have the best team, not just one that is organised, works hard and plays with confidence likes Mourinho’s. Again simples. The reason he gets so far is that most people don’t do the basics well, but he’s not advanced. If he was he would be praised by everyone and he wouldn’t have to resort to cheating and being an enemy of what is good for the sport.
Reply
jezz09 Reply:
April 28th, 2011 at 4:02 pm
“Watching Barca is a joy”: Maybe for you it is but you cannot speak for everybody. This is the problem with arsenal and Barca fans, they are so Ignorant that they feel they have the right to force everybody to believe that tippy-tappy is the right way to play football. Who do they think they are? And please don’t talk about mourinho cheating after what we saw from Barcelona last night.
I am one of an ever-growing group of fans who despise both Barca and Arsenal, and their fans and anything associated with those two clue, due to the absolute cheek they possess, when spouting crap about how their football is the only nice football. This group I speak of, made up of supporters from a huge range of clubs happen to find this style of football quite boring, barca are never involed in a rapid paced end to end game, with great tackles, one on one battles etc. Plus, taking messi out of the team leaves them ab average team, because w/out him, they dont have the required penetration, somebody who actually plays the assist ball, or scores himself.
So please, dont try and speak for everybody, saying barca play the best football, that goes for you and all other Barca/Arsenal fans out there.
P.S The hypocrisy of Barca supporters to talk about cheating, not only after last night but they’re display against arsenal also
Reply
You have taken the Xavi comment completely out of context to enforce your point. He was commenting on the passion the English have for football and how we applaud anything done well, whether it be a Messi-esque dribble past 82 players or a bonerattler from Carragher.
Reply
As a Blackburn fan the last paragraph struck a massive chord with me. Since Big Sam was sacked we have won just 3 games playing an allegedly more attractive style. Give me Sam anyday as when supporting or playing for a team Im pretty sure results are more enjoyable than pretty football. Don’t get me wrong I watch a lot of football and really appreciate the easy on the eye stuff but when it comes to Rovers I couldn’t care less how them points went on the board.
Reply
Zarif Rasul Reply:
April 28th, 2011 at 3:18 pm
Yeah, I feel the same way about my own team; I couldn’t care less if we won every game 1-0 by suffocating the opposition and nicking one on the counter.
Very shocked by the decision to remove Big Sam, seems even more baffling now. He would’ve guaranteed a mid-table finish and Premier League survival.
Reply
Seggie Reply:
April 28th, 2011 at 9:19 pm
The way this season has gone and the nature of the league I wouldn’t have been suprised if we would have been looking at a 6-8th place finish under Sam. We were winning games at home, once he left we started drawing and losing winnable home games, granted our away form was poor and obviously still is but so’s Bolton’s and look were they are in the league.
Reply
I appreciate both your perspectives. Providing you aren’t deliberately endangering the health of opposition players, I do not believe that there is a wrong way to go about playing football.
Mourinho is a master at winning; his success with Porto, Chelsea and Inter illustrates this. The sending-off of Pepe last night completely changed the game; we cannot say with certainty that Messi would’ve grabbed his brace had there been 11 RM players on the pitch at the time.
I do agree that Barcelona are easy on the eye, but there is also an art to the way that teams put out by Mourinho win. His triumph over Barcelona over two legs last year was enthralling.
Reply
Someone writes:
taking messi out of the team leaves them ab average team, because w/out him, they dont have the required penetration, somebody who actually plays the assist ball, or scores himself.
That’s the dumbest comment I’ve ever heard. Look at the Spain national team (Xavi, Iniesta, Pique, Puyol, Busq, D Villa, Pedro). It’s basically Barca w/ fTorres replacing Messi, and they’ve dominated intl soccer the last 3 yrs. They won Euro2008 and the World Cup. Argentina got beat 4-0 by Germany.
Messi’s the best player in the world, but Barca’s still an amazing team without him.
Reply