Football crisis

[Thracian]

Football is voluntarily manufacturing a crisis for itself which will decimate it just as surely as that storm which ripped up New Orleans.

It is voluntarily scoring own goals week in and week out which will quickly alienate the viewing public which is its very lifeblood.

A refer of course to 4-5-1 - the footballing equivalent of a brick wall. Four-five-one is being "erected" by any number of football teams from England downwards every Saturday afternoon and it is doing the fans heads in as if they themselves were banging against it.

With the obscene amounts of money floating about in football (and shameless individuals begging for any Tom, Dick or Harry to throw some our way so we can contribute to the rape of our beloved game), the fear factor which so afflicts our managers and managing directors is not going to go away.

Consequently I'll say it loud and clear. The football authorities will have to do something about it.

Three or four things spring to mind but the point of this thread is to see what you would do to encourage attacking, entertaining football once more.

Among my ideas are these:

a) No points for a draw. Or, make draws impossible by having a "decider spell" at the end of each game whereby each team has to shed two players every 10 minutes of the "extra period" and so on until a goal is scored.

b) Reduce the number of substitutes to one. This would inevitably mean that good players would start moving away from the Chelsea's and Manchester United's to have any chance of getting a game.

c) Reduce the number of players in a team to 10 so there is more space.

d) Award a penalty to the opposing team if one side fails to have a shot at goal for a period of 5 minutes.

e) Limited the amount of money a club can spend on its team.

f) Limit the number of players a club can have in its squad.

g) Rule that every team must field 7 players who are UK nationals - and three who were born within, say, 40 miles of the ground.

Some of these ideas represent radical changes but would make for a far better competition, would protect the development of our national players, would make Academy development even more vital and would ensure a greater emphasis on attacking football.

I know there will be lots of vested interest objections but this is at least part of the way forward for football around the world and I would like to hear any other ideas which would make what I fear is a badly ailing game healthier.

Tear everything I say apart, by all means, but please come up with more viable alternatives while you're doing it because what I'm seeing at the moment is hurting my eyes.

[Sparky]

a and g sound decent ideas to me , would idea g be illegal due to european freedom of movement?

[The People's Hero]

I dunno about doing away with the draw, but doing away with nil nils would be a start.

[marko]

With all due respect points C and D are ludacris.

What if you get a couple of injuries??? if a player takes a knock and can't come off because the subsitute has been made his injury will get worse and keep him out for a longer period. Imagine the effects of this on the likes of Burnley and Sheffield Wednesday.

Point D is just silly, in the end players would just hoof it from anywhere i fear of conceding a penatly. Also could you imagine the scores

Leicester City 23-19 Reading

[Anish]

A nice effort Thrac but some of those suggestions are wild - the FA would never implement those changes and if they did FIFA would probably make them overturn it.

I think 4-5-1 is fashionable at the moment, but now that most teams are trying/using it they will end up cancelling one another out, and the system will naturally go out the window because teams need to win. Also, fans will take a stance to the bore draws and the management of clubs will realise that they need to attack and score goals to attract the crowds.

[The People's Hero]

D is definitely ludicrous.

[The People's Hero]

But at least its provoking debate rather than the monotony of the usual we're cr ap or head in the clouds, everything is fine posts.

[Fez of Mahrez]

I've never been an advocate of measures to change the game too much because I love the fact that football has essentially been the same game for over a hundred years: each team of eleven players trying to score more goals than the other team for ninety minutes and if they score the same number, it's a draw. I'm even basically against video replays for goalline decisions just because I love the fact that the game you see at the Nou Camp is essentially the same game that you see over Viccy Park on a Sunday morning (give or take Ronaldinho).

However, I agree that now something has to be done. Chelsea play 4-3-3 to be honest, there's no way you can see Robben, Duff or Wright-Phillips in wide roles as conventional wide midfielders, they play much further forward almost in line with Drogba or Crespo. You can see why teams like Bolton, Everton and Charlton play 4-5-1; it got Everton into the Champions League (albeit briefly!), Bolton into Europe and look at the start that Charlton have enjoyed to this season. The real hellishness of this formation lies with teams like Liverpool and Blackburn, for very different reasons. Liverpool have the resources to mould an exciting attacking team and instead they stick a lamppost up front and five in midfield. Don't get me started on Blackburn. Fulham are another example of a bad 4-5-1, stifling exciting attacking players like Boa Morte and Malbranque by bogging down the midfield and giving their creative midfielders only one striker to play off. I don't know what the answer is but surely the fans won't lap up this ten-man midfield nonsense for much longer? The games today have been woeful.

[davieG]

We're fast heading back to the 2 points for a win and 1point for a draw situation where teams have become so scared of losing, as much as I'm against messing about with rules, leagues and points systems perhaps now's the time to consider the introduction bonus points for numbers of goals scored or preferable the size of the goal difference.

As in 1 point for a draw; 3 points for a win ; plus 1 point for winning by two clear goals and 2 points for wininng by three or more clear goals for example - so you could get a maximum of 5 points for a win. The emphasis would still be on quality of performance both in defence and attack and just going for a 3-4 defeat / 4-3 win would not give you extra points.

It's not just Abramovich & Chelsea it's the overall distribution of funds, I think the Champions League has done the most damage and has ensured that not only does practically every league in Europe have a 1,2 or 3 horse race but it has reduced the value of National Knock out cups like our FA Cup. Furthermore it is now impacting on international football with clubs/players giving the Champions league priority in terms of appearances and money generation.

So until there is a massive change in the way money is distributed/used it will only get worse, we should take a leaf out of the NFL in the USA where the emphasis is on making sure the leagues are competitve. The only way I can see that happening is if the fans stop attending in ever greater numbers and let the powers that be know that we want a level playing field. Pandering to so called super stars needs to be toned down considerably. however in a society where Big Brother and mediocraty prevails it wont be in my life time.

I posted these earlier I believe the fundamental problem is the money if there was a more equitable split of funds coming into football and that the rewards for winning were the trophy, the kudos, the history making then I thnik that would go a long way to resolving the current issues. If you know your going to get pretty much the same level of cash whether you win or lose and that you're not going to go bust then the fear would disappear.

I'd be happy to adopt some form of e, f, g.

[Thracian]

a and g sound decent ideas to me , would idea g be illegal due to european freedom of movement?

Big debate on its own, this one, but I'm not going into it cos I want this thread to provoke debate and ideas.

[Thracian]

With all due respect points C and D are ludacris.

What if you get a couple of injuries??? if a player takes a knock and can't come off because the subsitute has been made his injury will get worse and keep him out for a longer period. Imagine the effects of this on the likes of Burnley and Sheffield Wednesday.

Point D is just silly, in the end players would just hoof it from anywhere i fear of conceding a penatly. Also could you imagine the scores

Leicester City 23-19 Reading

Not sure about all that. It's only in recent seasons we've had all these substitutes and they haven't been for the better. Clubs like the big three have multi-million pound players on the bench when they could be spread around the clubs and the substitutions being made in every second half are a constant interruption to the flow of the match and a blatant time-wasting on occasions. There must be a middle ground that is better than what we have cos we managed without five subs for decades and it made for some interesting scenarios.

[Thracian]

D is definitely ludicrous.

Why? Just dwell on it a bit.

Would it encourage more attacking play or would it prevent the endless ball possession tactic of passing backwards and forwards across the park?. It's only a bit like the rugby league's five tackles and you're out idea.

It would surely mean a team having to try to get forward.

[henry's best mate]

You might aswell invent a new sport. Because it would be practically the opposite of football, and would be getting rid of what football is all bout

[The People's Hero]

It would also encourage teams not to have the ball and to play extremely defensively, restricting chances for shots and so winning a penalty themselves. It's not rewarding attacking play, it's rewarding restrictive play.

[filbertway]

I like idea E ,

D made me laugh though

[Thracian]

You might aswell invent a new sport. Because it would be practically the opposite of football, and would be getting rid of what football is all bout

Football has always evolved, there have been lots of changes. All I want to do is redress the balance that has tilted the wrong way because of money and fear.

You might argue that 4-5-1 is the new invention, that it is not real football at all in the attacking sense and it HAS already started to get rid of what football was all about.

It's certainly a long way from the 2-3-5 of my day - and that WAS entertaining. Leicester City 8 Manchester City 4, Leicester City 6 Burnley 2, Leicester City 6 Manchester United 0 etc etc. Grounds full to capacity with the overflow outside.

People who took folk on like George Best, Tom Finney, Stanley Matthews instead of playing the endless triangles and the keep-ball of modern times. Characters like Derek Dougan and Frank Worthington who so often brought a smile to the most serious of proceedings.i

Leicester has grown as a City over those years but it's lost about 20,000 fans somewhere and 0-0 from 4-5-1 won't be getting em back. Does that not bother you?.

Don't you, don't clubs and don't managers understand their responsibility to the game itself and the future of the game. You and they are the custodians now, cos fans have power, believe me. Football needs to be looked after properly and in the proper spirit. Fans can help ensure this happens.

[Thracian]

It would also encourage teams not to have the ball and to play extremely defensively, restricting chances for shots and so winning a penalty themselves. It's not rewarding attacking play, it's rewarding restrictive play.

Maybe, I don't know. Perhaps it would be worth conducting some sort of trial.

[filbertway]

The only reason footbal is so defensive these days is the money i think, take out some of the money and i think we would see more attacking football.

West ham are playing attacing in the prem and look what its doing for them.

[Thracian]

Mind you it's ironic they were calling for their manager's head at one stage last season.

[CasinoGee]

Can someone move this to general footy?

Anyway, I think this 4-5-1 thing is just a fad and soon it will be exploited by some tactical genius. No need to change the rules for it, we're not Americans. although I do think it is a product of a lot of other things that are wrong with football that do need changing. We need to look at the Cause, not the Symptoms.

[breadandcheese]

As I said on the general thread, 4-5-1 is just a fad because it has proved successful for Charlton, Bolton, Everton, etc. However, it is just that, a fad. Do you remember when the latest great tactic was 3-5-2? England played it, we played it and so did a half a dozen teams in the top league. I cannot now name one side in any professional English division who plays it.

Eventually, the 4-5-1 will become stale/tired and be found out such that the fad passes. In a way, we are already seeing this happening with Fergie changing Utd from 4-5-1 (which he said left the attack too isolated) into a 4-3-3.

At the moment, managers seem reluctant to play an open formation for fear of being labelled "tactically naive" or "gung-ho". However, as teams start to become accustomed to this negative defensive formation, you will get the top teams adapting, such that these 4-5-1 teams will seem foolish sitting back for 90 mins and inviting pressure.

[henry's best mate]

Teams that use 4-5-1 are just trying to be like mourinho, but there is only one mourinho

[rossporterlc]

watching the 4-5-1 formation is almost as boring as talking about it

[Guest]

a) No points for a draw. Or, make draws impossible by having a "decider spell" at the end of each game whereby each team has to shed two players every 10 minutes of the "extra period" and so on until a goal is scored.

Draws to me are good. There are times when neither teams deserve to win. I've seen more exciting draws than some victories we've had for a start. Nothing wring with parity.

b) Reduce the number of substitutes to one. This would inevitably mean that good players would start moving away from the Chelsea's and Manchester United's to have any chance of getting a game.

I disagree. It doesn't stop squad rotation on a match by match basis. I would perhaps stop an outfield player being subbed for a keeper if sent off, as this is more exciting, and fairer; if the keeper is sent off justifiably, where's the advantage if another keeper comes on in his place. Fair enough to me.

c) Reduce the number of players in a team to 10 so there is more space.

Would it? Space is created by the style of football played, not the number of players on the pitch.

d) Award a penalty to the opposing team if one side fails to have a shot at goal for a period of 5 minutes.

How many times has a team had possession and not created a shot through good closing down by their opposition? Surely the fact they've cancelled each other out is enough? We would be in a position where players would be taking shots for the sake of it, thus not improving the game at all.

e) Limited the amount of money a club can spend on its team.

I do agree with this. In order to make football more even, and to take the money aspect out of the game, cap club's wages bills, transfer fees etc. Once money is out of the equation, more clubs could be vying for the championship, not the richest thre.

f) Limit the number of players a club can have in its squad.

Again, I agree with this. This would again mean money has little to do with the sport. It would bring a bit of equality to the game, and stop the world's top 10 or so from 'hogging' the better players.

g) Rule that every team must field 7 players who are UK nationals - and three who were born within, say, 40 miles of the ground.

I don't know how easy it would be to 'police', but making teams play a large percentage of their players from the club's own country should surely be better for international football. More English players, say, would be playing in the top European competitions, against the top European players, instead of the handful we have now. I do think this would however go against the EU's freedom of movement laws, and can't see this happening.

[cisono]

watching the 4-5-1 formation is almost as boring as talking about it

yes, unless you are Oriental, in which case you may interpret it as having 4 attackers, which would certainly give you a much more dynamic team keen on attack and scoring goals