Guest Col city fan Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 There has been a lot of criticism in other threads, of Jose Mourinho and his 'style of play' at Chelsea. I believe this is due, at least in some part, to some posters simply not liking Mourinho (but that's subject to another discussion and is merely an assumption on my part). What cannot be questioned is the success, in terms of trophies won, that Mourinho has had at a number of clubs. He has surely been the most succesful football manager of recent times, along with Guardiola? Opinion such as this begs the question of what type of City side fans want to see Pearson put out next season? As far as I can see, Mourinho is playing to his strengths.. his tried and trusted mechanism of playing with a sole striker, controlling the midfield and hitting sides with pace and strength often on the counter attack. This may not look pretty... but it works for him. If Pearson next season goes for a similar type of game... controlling, harassing, winning midfield battles, not conceding many, will City supporters be satisfied with this, or would you rather see an attacking style of play which entertains and where the emphasis is primarily on goals scored, rather than not conceded? It's all hypothetical of course. This season, with the 4-4-2 we've scored enough AND not conceded too many either. But next season might be different? Will we be happy if we go to a Mourinho type style of play (if it works) or do we want to see a more 'entertaining' brand of football at the KP? Opinions please...
chapero82 Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 I watched the Chelsea game yesterday and turned over, it was the most boring match I have watched
Stadt Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 We'll play on the counter, I hope. We have quick players who are suited to breaking fast and we'll be underdogs in most games so it'd be the right idea in my opinion
Wrighty22 Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 Style of play could be decided on new players brought in? Hoping we do go out and get a reputation as an attacking but hard to breakdown team.
Fox92 Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 I don't like watching Chelsea anyway and haven't really seen much of them this season so I cannot comment on their style of play. But I do like ball retention. Barcelona and Bayern are great to watch, as they don't really give the ball away and the opposition have to work so hard to win it back. That's great football to me. I admire players like Schweinsteiger who just sit in midfield, don't look to beat any player but just spread the ball without giving it away. They make the game look easy.
Istilllovefilbert Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 We'll play on the counter, I hope. We have quick players who are suited to breaking fast and we'll be underdogs in most games so it'd be the right idea in my opinion Totally agree.The only problem is keeping other teams out.
Banks Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 I reckon we'll be like Southampton. Play attractive football and a pressing style, concede goals but can also score in abundance.
Corky Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 I hope we don't change too much, away from home we might be more pragmatic or boring if you like but at home we should go for it and play attacking football.
theessexfox Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 If we did play the 'Mourinho way' then we can be criticised a lot less than Chelsea, as we don't have the infinite resources they possess to combine success and style.
Stadt Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 Totally agree. The only problem is keeping other teams out. If we play with 8/9 players behind the ball and look to counter which should be ok but it's pretty boring watching us have 40% possession.
TheLeftSide Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 Don't care as long as we stay up, I'm sure it will not be a boring season though!
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 This sort of thread worries me, let's play our game and see how things work out. FFS most if the players can only play 442, remember the start of the season and going top playing 442. Unless major signings occur I can not see much changing and tbf I don't want to. What we need is for players to continue to develope and mature.
DangerFox Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 I like our type of play, it works. I feel we just need to tighten up in certain tactics and strengthen in key places. We struggle with set pieces as documented, and rather than capitalise with possession and attacking prowess we sometimes sit back and try and utilise a counter attack method but then we don't break quick enough. If we make some decent signings in the summer, this could all be eradicated.
LAprice_ Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 This season, our style of play can be compared to Man City/Liverpool (obviously not quality!). Our main strength seems to be the pace in which we attack. We have 2 (very) attacking-full-backs that spend most their time on the wing, like Zabaleta and Clichy, for example. This allows our 'wingers' to cut inside and roam, like Silva and Nasri. I realise that it's quite a big comparison to make but that's how I see it anyway. The similarities also go further though: Liverpool and Man City both play attacking football because that's the only way they know how. It seems like every week MOTD pundits are scrutinising Demichelis, Kolo Toure, Skrtel, etc... Just like us Leicester fans moan about how we concede 'sloppy' goals Next season we need to strengthen the system we currently play whilst also cutting out the mistakes. This means that we need to become far more clinical. We score a lot of goals but it is still no where near the amount we should be getting, considering the dozens of chances we create. In the Premier League we will get far fewer chances. Pearson also needs to sort out the calamity defending. Our game is an attacking one, we can accept that goals get scored on the counter-attack but we don't do ourselves any favours by conceding from set-pieces and crosses. I think we need to strengthen the backbone of the team. The teams I mentioned, Liverpool and Man City, do play attacking football but they also have physically strong, technically sound CMs that read the game excellently (Gerrard and Fernandinho). In our team, that would probably be the Matty James role. If we honestly believe that he's capable of that role then yes, I would play that attacking football. A realistic model for our team would be Hull City.
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 There has been a lot of criticism in other threads, of Jose Mourinho and his 'style of play' at Chelsea. I believe this is due, at least in some part, to some posters simply not liking Mourinho (but that's subject to another discussion and is merely an assumption on my part). What cannot be questioned is the success, in terms of trophies won, that Mourinho has had at a number of clubs. He has surely been the most succesful football manager of recent times, along with Guardiola? Opinion such as this begs the question of what type of City side fans want to see Pearson put out next season? As far as I can see, Mourinho is playing to his strengths.. his tried and trusted mechanism of playing with a sole striker, controlling the midfield and hitting sides with pace and strength often on the counter attack. This may not look pretty... but it works for him. If Pearson next season goes for a similar type of game... controlling, harassing, winning midfield battles, not conceding many, will City supporters be satisfied with this, or would you rather see an attacking style of play which entertains and where the emphasis is primarily on goals scored, rather than not conceded? It's all hypothetical of course. This season, with the 4-4-2 we've scored enough AND not conceded too many either. But next season might be different? Will we be happy if we go to a Mourinho type style of play (if it works) or do we want to see a more 'entertaining' brand of football at the KP? Opinions please... Oh Col! Trust you to come up with something to to test our values. Pretty football may not be as successful as those boring but successful styles of play, so for me it would have to be boring football and more successful results. BORING! BORING! BORING! I DO BORING! Anyway, I like boring. I am boring, I eat boring food, drink boring drinks, do boring things, make boring posts, dream boring dreams, and most boring of all is the sex.(Ten times a night is not exciting)
lgfualol Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 ****ing hell I can never watch Chelsea, bloody boring. All their strikers are dreadful. They win 1-0 too much.
One Legged Beaver Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 First and foremost I don't think we should play a negative game as it doesn't really suit our players. I would accept it however if for the first few seasons if it got us the results to make us an established Premiership side. I would expect us after two or three sides to expand on that though a start to play a more attractive style of football.
Pegosteve Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 I'm afraid we need to sort our defence out then work from there. I don't think our defence is up to PL standard, think we need a couple of experienced PL players possibly a Centre Back and Left Back. If we can be tough to break down and then we can play on the counter we might do OK. Certainly Drinky won't get as much time on the ball as he has this season and our strikers will need to put chances away as we may not get too many! Don't want us to be boring and I don't think we have enough experience to be boring! Add 4 or 5 experienced PL players and give it a go!
Buzzell Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 I wouldn't be bothered if we played boring football as long as we won. Who cares about playing pretty, entertaining football? Surely the result and end product matter more? Same with Chelsea. Call them boring all you want but as long as there winning games, getting the 3 points is all that counts. Would you rather us play pretty, entertaining football next year but finish in the lower half of the league? Or play boring football, 1-0 wins here and there and finishing in the top half? I just hope we don't play boring football and end up back in the Championship!
Istilllovefilbert Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 Oh Col! Trust you to come up with something to to test our values. Pretty football may not be as successful as those boring but successful styles of play, so for me it would have to be boring football and more successful results. BORING! BORING! BORING! I DO BORING! Anyway, I like boring. I am boring, I eat boring food, drink boring drinks, do boring things, make boring posts, dream boring dreams, and most boring of all is the sex.(Ten times a night is not exciting) Ten times a night? I wish I was gay, I'd ask you to marry me.
Captain... Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 First and foremost is results, and I would be happy to watch us play like West Ham, if we got the results they have. But seeing as results are the most important, we won't get many if we play like West Ham as we are shit in the air, and at puting crosses in. The best chance we have of getting results is to play in the style that got us up. With a few tweaks, and additions to the playing side. Having said that we will need to be tighter at the back, whether that will be personnel formation changes or just working on RDL and Schlupp's discipline and positioning, we'll just have to wait and see.
lcfcsnow Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 First and foremost is results, and I would be happy to watch us play like West Ham, if we got the results they have. But seeing as results are the most important, we won't get many if we play like West Ham as we are shit in the air, and at puting crosses in. The best chance we have of getting results is to play in the style that got us up. With a few tweaks, and additions to the playing side. Having said that we will need to be tighter at the back, whether that will be personnel formation changes or just working on RDL and Schlupp's discipline and positioning, we'll just have to wait and see. Well I certainly wouldn't, and I have said numerous times Sam Allardyce is possibly the only manager who would force me away from the club. I'd rather play Championship football than sit through the dross his teams serve up in the top flight.
Kitchandro Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 Playing to his strengths? Are you serious Col? A club with that much money can play anyway they like. Mourinho simply chooses to be boring.
Kitchandro Posted 14 April 2014 Posted 14 April 2014 By the way, if Chelsea lose the title because they haven't scored enough goals, will people change their tune about this thing where negative football is supposedly effective?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.