Gegenpress is so last year
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
We need sustainable football.
Really good article.
I do slightly miss the days when you'd have to really earn your chances on goal. Especially in the big PL games. It'd take a really good performance to win a game by more than the odd goal, and really good attacking play to carve a team open.
You watch the big games in the PL now, and you get chaos, and circus goals. There'll be bags of chances and nearly all of them will come from clumsy play or daft errors. It's entertaining but it just doesn't make you feel like you're watching anything particularly high quality or significant.
You watch the big games in the PL now, and you get chaos, and circus goals. There'll be bags of chances and nearly all of them will come from clumsy play or daft errors. It's entertaining but it just doesn't make you feel like you're watching anything particularly high quality or significant.
I think today's PL is closer to the norm than the 2006-2010 period. Before that, the PL was just as if not more chaotic than it is now with us and Arsenal being much better than the rest.
I've been arguing with some eejit in another thread who is convinced that all we've been doing all season is pumping crosses into the box. I'm encouraging him to see the error of his ways (well, memory) by looking back at highlights from all our crappy home draws, starting with the Burnley game. It was kind of cool to watch those highlights again, without being in agony about all the chances missed. We were opening Burnley up with controlled, sexy football rather than forcing them to make mistakes. Definitely easier on the eye than all this frantic pressing malarkey.
I really dont like Gegenpressing. If you watch two neutral teams do it, it makes for a shit game. Pass-pass-lose the ball-pass-pass-lose the ball, repeat. Niggling foul after niggling foul.
Mercifully, these trends come and go. We see with Liverpool that they can really suffer against deep sitting teams, and given that its a tactic easily employed by teams lower in the table, I doubt any team with its eyes on the title will be able to keep it as their plan A.
Mercifully, these trends come and go. We see with Liverpool that they can really suffer against deep sitting teams, and given that its a tactic easily employed by teams lower in the table, I doubt any team with its eyes on the title will be able to keep it as their plan A.
It is, but I also don't think it's a coincidence that 2006-2010 was the golden period in terms of English teams performances in the Champions League. Our teams now have gone back to being routinely outclassed by any half decent, or organised European opponent.
I think the high pressing game works as a way to compensate somewhat for a lack of quality. It's based on forcing errors rather than creativity or imposing quality on a game. Problem is if you try it against a team who aren't flustered by it, or have the discipline and quality to cope, you just get picked off.
Dortmund did it, but with quality players, so it got them results. They could press, or they could pick teams off and create openings.
The thing we have indeed played some nice stuff throughout the season. The problem is people are using it as an overall narrative which is just wrong. We played sexy football against Burnley, Stoke, West Ham in the League Cup, maybe even Arsenal at some point. Maybe I am missing one or two examples but the point it has by no way been the norm. There were good footballing performances and other lump it to Zlatan/Fellaini and see what happens performances.
Its funny; I was on a flight back from NYC a few weeks back and the American Airlines flight, along with a cabin crew of pensioners, had live TV. I selected the "sport" channel which had a MOTD style highlights show of the Bundasliga. I thought to myself "Awesome, lets see what all the football hipsters keep raving on about and check out this dynamic league".
With the exception of approximately two matches it seemed if every game ended 1-0, 1-1 or 0-0 and I was thoroughly bored and disappointed.
This article seems fitting of my opinion.
With the exception of approximately two matches it seemed if every game ended 1-0, 1-1 or 0-0 and I was thoroughly bored and disappointed.
This article seems fitting of my opinion.
That's a discussion for another thread (there's fecking millions of them for you to choose from) I was really only saying that when we have played well (and I'll have to assume that playing well is when we come closest to playing the way the manager wants us to play) our style is more aesthetically pleasing than frantic pressing high up the pitch.
“But this season, goal scoring has declined to its lowest level for decades."
Has it really though? I checked the numbers and the amount of goals scored after 27 matchdays is almost the exact same as it was the last two years. It was lower than in the current season in 07-08 which is hardly decades ago and in 06-07 there were even less goals scored.
Has it really though? I checked the numbers and the amount of goals scored after 27 matchdays is almost the exact same as it was the last two years. It was lower than in the current season in 07-08 which is hardly decades ago and in 06-07 there were even less goals scored.
Not every game in the Bundesliga is like that, and only in England people say that 0:0 or 1:0 is boring because they are used to chaotic games where the defensive organization is chaotic, that is why they are behind the Spanish and German teams in Europe.
Last edited:
The detail is in the article. It's a tiny decrease but the author seems to think it's significant.
I did not had time to read the article, but was it to highlight some sort of Bundesliga bashing, maybe they should watch Hoffenheim or Dortmund instead of stereotypes of gegenpressing, the fact is today in Germany there are much more progressive coaches than in the Premier League.
I understand that but I'm talking about this tiny decrease because even this tiny decrease seems to be down to the article comparing a full season to a season that's not finished yet.
Last season the amount of goals scored after 27 match days was basically the same as this season but it increased over the last few matchdays and it was the same the year before. As I said you even find years when the teams scored less goals after 27 match days but if you look at the stats for the whole season they scored more because teams scored a lot more goals at the end of the season. Why shouldn't the same happen this year?
Hopefully the article was not written by the same guy who asked Schweinsteigger if he would make Chicago Fire World Champion
Last edited:
Well you should really read articles if you're going to comment on them. It's definitely not Bundesliga bashing and at least one of those "progressive coaches" is quoted in it.
As I said I did not had the time to read the article, but today it is so normal to read articles bashing other leagues, players or coaches, I felt it could be 1 more, and I was not saying anything negative, it is only my opinion about the quality of coaching in Germany in relation to the Premier League.
Oh, and I was talking about "progressives" like Nagelsmann or Tuchel, even Wagner of Huddersfield is more atractive to me than the guy from Schalke.
This is false. Effective pressing is much more than rushing the ballplayer with bodies, that is easily beaten by any technically proficient team.
LVG endorses this article
bring back 4-4-2. 2 orthodox wingers. jumpers as goalposts.
Happened for ages now. 3 at the back, sometimes revolutionary, sometimes defunct. All out attacking football vs defensive football. Different winners at different times. 4-4-2, old hat or the way forward again? I've witnessed the ebbs and flows for decades now, as have quite a few Redcafe posters, and one thing is certain: its not about fads its still about the football, stupid.
The only manager who had this sussed over the ages (no not Mourinho, not Wenger) was Ferguson. He wasn't exceptionally tactically gifted but he was exceptionally 'footbally' gifted. The game is still played with 11 players and the ball is still round. The rest is just noise. There's nothing wrong with gegenpress per se. Its actually a good tactic to employ as you don't overcommit players to attack. But if your defenders couldn't defend a bouncy castle from one 3 year old then its not the gegenpressen that's the God damn problem. You need to do what Ferguson did, put 4 proper leaders at the back (5 even including the keeper) and you can play whatever the f*ck you want.
And you don't buy leaders for big money (often). Those are usually called mercenaries. You find them in the rough, you cultivate them, you nurture them, then you ask them to die for you every week. Its really that easy and Ferguson had it sussed.
The only manager who had this sussed over the ages (no not Mourinho, not Wenger) was Ferguson. He wasn't exceptionally tactically gifted but he was exceptionally 'footbally' gifted. The game is still played with 11 players and the ball is still round. The rest is just noise. There's nothing wrong with gegenpress per se. Its actually a good tactic to employ as you don't overcommit players to attack. But if your defenders couldn't defend a bouncy castle from one 3 year old then its not the gegenpressen that's the God damn problem. You need to do what Ferguson did, put 4 proper leaders at the back (5 even including the keeper) and you can play whatever the f*ck you want.
And you don't buy leaders for big money (often). Those are usually called mercenaries. You find them in the rough, you cultivate them, you nurture them, then you ask them to die for you every week. Its really that easy and Ferguson had it sussed.
Happened for ages now. 3 at the back, sometimes revolutionary, sometimes defunct. All out attacking football vs defensive football. Different winners at different times. 4-4-2, old hat or the way forward again? I've witnessed the ebbs and flows for decades now, as have quite a few Redcafe posters, and one thing is certain: its not about fads its still about the football, stupid.
The only manager who had this sussed over the ages (no not Mourinho, not Wenger) was Ferguson. He wasn't exceptionally tactically gifted but he was exceptionally 'footbally' gifted. The game is still played with 11 players and the ball is still round. The rest is just noise. There's nothing wrong with gegenpress per se. Its actually a good tactic to employ as you don't overcommit players to attack. But if your defenders couldn't defend a bouncy castle from one 3 year old then its not the gegenpressen that's the God damn problem. You need to do what Ferguson did, put 4 proper leaders at the back (5 even including the keeper) and you can play whatever the f*ck you want.
And you don't buy leaders for big money (often). Those are usually called mercenaries. You find them in the rough, you cultivate them, you nurture them, then you ask them to die for you every week. Its really that easy and Ferguson had it sussed.
What this bloke said.
Fergie was a chameleon, that's not something you can say for any current manager today. He really was special.Happened for ages now. 3 at the back, sometimes revolutionary, sometimes defunct. All out attacking football vs defensive football. Different winners at different times. 4-4-2, old hat or the way forward again? I've witnessed the ebbs and flows for decades now, as have quite a few Redcafe posters, and one thing is certain: its not about fads its still about the football, stupid.
The only manager who had this sussed over the ages (no not Mourinho, not Wenger) was Ferguson. He wasn't exceptionally tactically gifted but he was exceptionally 'footbally' gifted. The game is still played with 11 players and the ball is still round. The rest is just noise. There's nothing wrong with gegenpress per se. Its actually a good tactic to employ as you don't overcommit players to attack. But if your defenders couldn't defend a bouncy castle from one 3 year old then its not the gegenpressen that's the God damn problem. You need to do what Ferguson did, put 4 proper leaders at the back (5 even including the keeper) and you can play whatever the f*ck you want.
And you don't buy leaders for big money (often). Those are usually called mercenaries. You find them in the rough, you cultivate them, you nurture them, then you ask them to die for you every week. Its really that easy and Ferguson had it sussed.
Oh I agree but every game was as boring as watching paint dry.
But having survived the LVG years I was in my element.
Every style has its flaws.... The flaw with the gegenpress is that when teams conceded possession and sit back, you can't win the ball back high up the pitch... because you already have the ball. It's then about you being creative enough to cut open a team, which has nothing to do with pressing.
Having said that. I think it's something that can be worked on, and I wouldn't have any other style.
I watch Manchester City under Pep and United under Mourinho and I'm bored senseless. It's strange, I remember reading about your run of good form a while back, and thought to myself I should watch a game, maybe Mourinho has finally cracked it (You were on a winning run I think). But It was boring football, you still won that game mind you, but it just wasn't enjoyable to watch. Now some people argue that that isn't important, I fully understand that. In fact, sometimes I wish we had that mentality.
As for City, their style works best when a team sits back I reckon, that slow, probing, possession-based football, waiting for the perfect pass. That works when a team sits back, probably explains why we do so well against them.
It's all opinions, and they all work to some extent or another.. the truth is, if Mourinho, Pep and Klopp both had their systems working to perfection they'd all be at the top.
Having said that. I think it's something that can be worked on, and I wouldn't have any other style.
I watch Manchester City under Pep and United under Mourinho and I'm bored senseless. It's strange, I remember reading about your run of good form a while back, and thought to myself I should watch a game, maybe Mourinho has finally cracked it (You were on a winning run I think). But It was boring football, you still won that game mind you, but it just wasn't enjoyable to watch. Now some people argue that that isn't important, I fully understand that. In fact, sometimes I wish we had that mentality.
As for City, their style works best when a team sits back I reckon, that slow, probing, possession-based football, waiting for the perfect pass. That works when a team sits back, probably explains why we do so well against them.
It's all opinions, and they all work to some extent or another.. the truth is, if Mourinho, Pep and Klopp both had their systems working to perfection they'd all be at the top.
Pffft. Who watches football with their eyes when they can just look at the beautiful stats and get the whole story?
Happened for ages now. 3 at the back, sometimes revolutionary, sometimes defunct. All out attacking football vs defensive football. Different winners at different times. 4-4-2, old hat or the way forward again? I've witnessed the ebbs and flows for decades now, as have quite a few Redcafe posters, and one thing is certain: its not about fads its still about the football, stupid.
The only manager who had this sussed over the ages (no not Mourinho, not Wenger) was Ferguson. He wasn't exceptionally tactically gifted but he was exceptionally 'footbally' gifted. The game is still played with 11 players and the ball is still round. The rest is just noise. There's nothing wrong with gegenpress per se. Its actually a good tactic to employ as you don't overcommit players to attack. But if your defenders couldn't defend a bouncy castle from one 3 year old then its not the gegenpressen that's the God damn problem. You need to do what Ferguson did, put 4 proper leaders at the back (5 even including the keeper) and you can play whatever the f*ck you want.
And you don't buy leaders for big money (often). Those are usually called mercenaries. You find them in the rough, you cultivate them, you nurture them, then you ask them to die for you every week. Its really that easy and Ferguson had it sussed.
Yeah, pretty much.
Football isn't that complicated. Get the basics right, get the players to give 100%, make sure you have enough individual quality.
Easy. Or not. But it's not about specific tactical choices nearly as much as it's about getting the best out of whoever you're working with. You tweak a bit, you use a slight variation on a familiar theme - you don't invent something shockingly novel which leaves your opponents helpless.
I hate these "trendy" names in football. Liverpool fans buzzing over their "gengenpress", thinking they won the league in November.
Absolute cringe.
Absolute cringe.
Sorry if not clear, i meant that sitting deep is a tactic easily employed by teams lower down the table.
Could someone please fix the title. My poor German eyes are bleeding.
Could someone please fix the title. My poor German eyes are bleeding.
To what? Gagnampress?
That would slightly improve the situation, but Gegenpressing would put joy into my pedantic German heart.
Ah that makes sense. Fair enough
Gegenpressing is a tool, just like the offside trap. Teams use it to varying degrees, but I'd say it's an integral part of pretty much all top team's approach, especially the possession heavy, because they really need it get away with having 10 players in their opponents half.
Bundesliga's real problem this season is that the supposed top teams who are supposed to be able to play effective attacking football are pretty much all having a bad season, so naturally the goals per game average of the league suffers.
Also supposed trend setters Cologne (despite Modeste scoring like a world class striker), Hertha and Frankfurt are 9th, 15th and 16th in the form table since the winter break.
Last edited:
Brian Clough, one of the most revered and successful managers in the history of the game, came forward with a simple strategy and message: 1. The ball is your friend, 2. If you are not great at football give it to those that are. 3. I am the boss and I know best, all you need to do is your job. Ferguson knew all this too. Even Wenger did, back on the day.
Our current manager has point 3 in spades but frequently forgets points 1 and 2.
Football is a simple game, but a team game. You need good players, and a couple of great players, but the motivation and make-up of the team is more important than anything. I think that is the main reason we are 6th right now.
Our current manager has point 3 in spades but frequently forgets points 1 and 2.
Football is a simple game, but a team game. You need good players, and a couple of great players, but the motivation and make-up of the team is more important than anything. I think that is the main reason we are 6th right now.
Great post! Especially the bolded part. Gegenpressing by itself like any other tool used is not boring or exciting. It often contributes to exciting outcomes when the ball is moved fast in dangerous areas creating space in the same way penetrative possession is and fast counter attacks can be. When you fail to move the ball fast enough and create space in the final third, you are boring regardless of whether your rely on the counter, Gegenpressing, possession or whatever. Ultimately, what people often calls exciting is the amount of potent action in the final third with people often attributing the tools that enabled it as the reason. As you rightly point out, Bundesliga teams this year have not been good offensively, or at least as good which is the main reason behind the relative lack of excitement.
So teams that are 5th, 6th and 7th in the table respectively, are top of the table when it comes to how often their players are not beaten, but in terms of how often they outplay others their stats are not good. I really struggle to see the relevance of this information to the validity of their metric.Rory Smith said:
Both teams that prioritize possession and the ones emphasizing pressing, are also taking players out of the game. Not sure where 'third way' comes into it.
So now that the season is over we've actually ended up with more goals being scored than last season or the one before.
I thought of this thread too. This is what the article said.
The season average goals per game for 2016/17 is 2.8660, higher than both previous seasons.
Why would you even bother to write such an article with incomplete data? Now the whole argument is out of the window. Ridiculous stuff, really.
I actually thought the article discussed some interesting points, but we can now firmly say that its conclusions were premature and ill-founded.