CWW, BLB, don't you know that the code of conduct of this forum requires you to dig in pedantically, emphasising points of disagreement and caricaturing the other person's view in bad faith? You've let yourselves down with that civilised discussion. You've let us all down.

Saw an interview with Fabegas the other day talking about how over coached football has become, it’s stifled creativity because players lack the intelligence to make decisions themselves once they find themselves in unfamiliar scenarios to what has been coached. I don’t think it helps how important athleticism has become either.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 27 minutes ago
CWW, BLB, don't you know that the code of conduct of this forum requires you to dig in pedantically, emphasising points of disagreement and caricaturing the other person's view in bad faith? You've let yourselves down with that civilised discussion. You've let us all down.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I'm often just as guilty as the next poster (I do enjoy a lame wum article), but I and I'm sure most of us appreciate a good article and reasonable chat! I need to go back to your comment about your kids playing Rocket League.. if theyve played it enough, I'm sure theyve mentioned to you the phrase ''what a save!'

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 38 minutes ago
CWW, BLB, don't you know that the code of conduct of this forum requires you to dig in pedantically, emphasising points of disagreement and caricaturing the other person's view in bad faith? You've let yourselves down with that civilised discussion. You've let us all down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In reality, everything exists on a spectrum, and there are very few purely positionist or relationist sides.

-------------------------------------------

Which is what I was going to say about Ten Hag.

I think he identifies more clearly with both schools of thought than some other coaches and allows for more positional freedom, free-thinking, fluidity and variation in structure.

He also allows for numerical superiority, overloading the ball side and collaborative movement which isn't at all common in a strict symmetrical positional system.

With Ten Hag we've sort of got the best of both worlds.

Comment deleted by Article Creator

Dazza, TRS

<OK>

Ole ball was the most recent example of Relationism in the PL… “let the lads play”

Well I think that's being very generous to Ole.

There’s also a big differential in positionism too which is around manipulation of the ball vs the players to make the space, and also between in and out of possession whether the same is applied or not.

I’m not sure any of it is particularly new though, it’s more the discussion of it is. It’s always been a balancing act between the two and a trade off. Depending on the coach, they don’t tend to be as rigid in their thought processes as some think either, a lot will adapt dependent on the players they’ve got and also the opposition as it tends to be different areas on the pitch that they allow the balance to change.

Interesting topic. I find the deliberate manipulation of space by using overloads etc really entertaining to watch. I think this is, and stopping the opposition from doing the same, a really big factor as to why we did well against Barcelona.

I’m really liking Ten Hag because he watches, learns and adapts accordingly (so far).

PS. Love the linkage to socioeconomic and cultural features RR. 🎶 Only you 🎶

In the Netherlands, young players learn to value the ethos early on that space is important in football, but Dutch space is different. Rinus Michels viewed football as the ability and willingness to shape, mould, and control an entire physical environment and all that occurs within that environment. Such a belief is rooted deep in determinism and unleashed through intelligent application. In football, full-backs overlapping wingers, strikers dropping to collect the ball. I have seen this at Barca under pep. Where the forwards would drop back, pulling the defenders with them, opening up space on the wings, for the fullback to bomb forward and receive the ball.

In Total Football each player is instructed and able to take over the position of another player when that player leaves their position. I believe this to be a perfect mix of Positionism and Relationism. A player also has be intelligent and extremely fit as they need to be aware of the players around them, their position and when to fill the gap another player has left. And intelligent to find solutions on their own to eventually score that goal.

Someone on here said that "parking the bus" ruined football, if you think of it, it is probably the only tactic that works against Peps football or against Total Football. When Inter won the CL under Mourinho, they beat Barca by parking the bus but it is 100% Positionism. 2 rows of 4 defenders not leaving their position at the back, means that the oppo forwards cannot create the space for the fullbacks to bomb forward. Effectively nullifying Total Football. In the spirit of the game, this is a fair tactic, but yes, I facking hate it

Anyway, interesting topic, long story short, I think a combination of Positionism and Relationism is probably the perfect mix.

Here's a thoughtful piece that pushes back on the value of discussing relationism vs positionism as opposing poles:

https://medium.com/@jonmackenzie/taking-a-position-on-relation-in-football-bd6e0bee989a