As long as the teeny weeny string bikini era hasn't come to an end then I'm happy.
Has the tiki-taka ‘tiny turbo player’ era come to an end?
- Thread starter Fortitude
- Start date
What do you mean specific examples. Players are on individual diets in a lot of cases. They don't drink as much, they have all their macros sorted out. They eat healthier diets than they did 20 years ago. Do you want specific meals that players are eating...
And no, I'm not assuming these things can get better forever but every sport has phases where something changes that makes the level increase. In cycling at the moment they are pushing refuelling on the bike towards 200g of carbs per hour. 20 years ago they weren't doing anything even close to that and its only in the past 5 years they have been pushing over 100g/hour. They won't get that sort of boost again unless something else changes to allow them to increase that further but all these little changes (or big) make a huge difference.
They now analyse training. They have HR data, GPS data, video analysis that allows them to help players in any way they need help. They can tell when players aren't putting in the effort, when they are slowing down, when they aren't sprinting enough, when they aren't in the right places on the pitch etc.
I don't think it is nostalgia. I think it's homogeneity of current footballing style that makes it inspid and dull. Building from the back is nice if you have the players and if it is efficient. Most teams are terrible at this and leads to huge turn overs. Defenders are goalkeepers spend more time on the ball than they should and central midfielders spend time chasing and pressing than getting on the ball and creating. There's a dearth of top strikers or creative players these days and most players seem to lack a decent first touch.
Longball is also part of the game. Wing play, aerial duel, physicality are parts of the game.
I think managers and players are over complicating a very simple game. It was always about the fundamentals first and then you sprinkle some gold dust on it. Now we have left footed wing backs on the right
Last edited:
Logically, this makes no sense. Football is analysed to within an inch of its life these days so when something isn't happening, its for a reason. Its not that players are incapable of it, its that its not good value to the team.
Dribbling is because teams are set up in such a way that you will lose the ball 9/10 if you try and dribble through the middle of the park. Defenders don't statically stick out a leg any more and say "well I tried". They are as quick as the attackers in a lot of cases so you are trying to beat a man who is fighting with you while 2 of his mates then gang up on you to nick the ball. Then your team suddenly loses the ball in the middle of the pitch and the opposition is running at you. Players still dribble, they just do it less and in the right areas and usually to beat a single man rather than 2 or 3.
Our corners are crap but corners in general have always been crap in general. I fear that a lot of your argument is conflating 10 years of highlights from old games in your memory vs watching games week in week out, usually involving a crap United team.
A 2019 study from the University of Portsmouth found that then current day footballers were taller, faster and leaner than footballers from previous decades, noting that much of the change had occurred relatively recently. They cited the impact of modern pitches and improved training regimes as the cause.
As for the intensity of games, as per this study that only looked at the change between 06/07 and 12/13 (let alone differences between decades) the total distance run increased by 2%, the amount of high-speed running (the distance that players run at a speed over 19.8 km/h during a game) had increased by 30%, “sprints” (distance covered at a speed over 25.2 km/h) had increased by 35% and the number of sprints players performed had increased by 85%.
It would also be odd if football players weren't better athletes than those of previous decades, as that's the consistent trend across other sports. So you'd have to imagine some reason for football specifically to be immune to the impact of decades of sports science.
Last edited:
Theres far too many misty eyes gazing back into the past when it comes to sports. You can 100% make the argument that great players from previous generations would have been been great players in this generation with all the advances and changes made but if you magically transported most of those players into the modern game they wouldn't stand a chance. Everything is too different. Pitch quality, opposition quality, fitness, what was allowed to be considered a tackle, the type of ball, the style of football etc.
I would go so far as to suggest that if you took one of the well performing "small teams" from the current PL and stuck them into the league from 20 years ago they would make most of the league look utterly hopeless from a tactical, technical and physical perspective. They would have to toughen up quickly though
True, this thread’s trend tilts towards those tika taka tactics
The 2019 study was comparing today's footballers to those from the 70's and 80's. Obviously yeah today's will fair better. There's been a massive culture shift from the 70's and 80's. But that's not the period being discussed here. We're talking now compared to 2005. Totally different.
Similarly the 07 to 2013 period. I get you'd assume the curve has continued going upwards since 2013 but the argument here is in fact the game has slowed up since 2013. Everybody went full Pep in the last decade.
It would be really interesting to get stats for today's game as a comparison. Sprints, distance covered, time spent walking etc.
Yep, this.
Supreme midfielders are more rare nowadays than 10-15 years ago, so that you are not able to control the ball (the pace of the game) anymore and the 3 or 4 upfront are allowed to be as direct as they can be? Liverpool’s Mane-Firmino-Salah were the trendsetter and now we have Madrid’s fantastic four as the best example imho.
We had peak Bruno and Rashford 5 years too early.
I dont like taking the sides of the folk who really push the narrative of everything being better now but for the italic bit I do think players at the highest level are fitter and more athletic. But its not a general consensus through the entire league as our own clubs players show, it also doesnt automatically equate to being able to run more during a game. If you asked 100 people on here who ran more for Man United, Marcus Rashford or David Beckham, the answer in 100/100 would be DB. DB lfet United 22 years ago.
People mistake having a great diet and access to better fitness regimes to working harder and running more. Thats utter bullshit because your mentality plays a huge part in that.
As for the bold you are 100% correct. Its an absolute and flat out lie that football is quicker than its ever been. I plead with anyone who thinks this to go and watch the United/Arsenal games where the two clubs were the best in the league between 97 and 05, in particular the game at OT in 2002 when Wiltord scored.
I watched that game a few years back and honestly I could not believe what i was seeing. It was absolutely relentless. There was no dicking about with the ball in defence and possession chasing, it was pure attacking, precise filth. We lost the game but our first half performance was astonishing compared to what were used to now.
That's not true at all. I think very few teams are good at limiting space. Arsenal have been the best at it the last few years. City used to be good but now they're laughable.
Some of the other top clubs in the league, Spurs, Chelsea, United, Villa, these teams give up quite a lot chances and space due to having structurally flawed systems. The best team in Europe Real Madrid are so attack minded that they also give up gigantic amounts of space especially at wide.
It's a good thing though, makes for better games. Precise and faultless pressing CAN restrict space but the minute there's a glitch in the system it falls apart (see city with Rodri)
IF you go back twenty years ago and look at the highest level, football was so much more structured at the highest level because of managers like Benitez, Mourinho, etc. These guys dragged everyone else into their haram style football where space in the final third was non existent most of the time.
Chelsea, Liverpool and even ourselves were known as great defensive sides during that era and not because attackers were weaker (See Chris Wood current scoring rate) but because how few chances we gave up due to how difficult it was to find space against our defensive structure. it's night and day to the top level of the PL now. Recent games between city/Chelsea, Arsenal/City, simply would never have happened between United, Liverpool/Chelsea and Arsenal in that 2004-2010 period.
I dont think anybody wants a return to those days but it would ne nice to find a middle ground as the level of errors and stupidity seen in some of the big games nowadays is actually quite offensive.
Last edited:
There has been a shift since many teams are now playing in a 3-4-3 variant with a box midfield consisting of two CMs and two AMs. The CMs are playing a bit deeper again and don't need to be as agile as before. But we kind of see a reemergence of the classic 10 now since the two midfielders before the CMs are playing a bit higher up the pitch than the Iniestas and Modrics from before.
But I can't think of any team that is playing two box to box midfielders again. Rodri as your typical regista has just won the Ballon D'Or, Bayern are playing Kimmich and Pavlovic as starters who both are rather horizontal players, Madrid is desperately missing Kroos because their current athletic CMs are too one-dimensional, Barcelona are playing almost solely playing leightweights in midfield, the German champion (
) plays Xhaka and Palacios who aren't really fast or physical either, Inter played Calhanoglu who is also more of a regista type of player these days, PSG plays Vitinha.Tbh tiki taka would destroy any team even now when you have prime Iniesta, Xavi, Busquets and Messi in the team. It’s not the style that’s disappearing, it’s the talent that is not there. Messi in any system would do well.
There's nothing entertaining about passing the ball between yourselves without going anywhere either, just watch a United game at OT!
Agreed. I don't get why so many like this kind of football but I suppose that's the reason that possession oriented football is declared dead every other year.
Don't blame the team playing the passes, blame the team that sets up so negatively that it forces the other team to be so patient. No team wants to play those kind of passes, they all like to attack. Some simply refuse to play like headless chickens just because the opponent constantly defends with 11 men in their own half.
Football has become risk averse and formulaic, it maybe more skillful and technically better but it's less entertaining
Just watch older games, the pressing is way off, most teams in the pl played defensively and were not as mobile from defense to attack.
Defenders constantly went in for the tackle and left so much space, allowing attackers to just run.
Teams were not half as organised as today, everything is so structured and everything is about finding space.
Totally
Pressing can be way off in modern football (see ETH United from last season, Leeds under Bielsa in the Prem, see city from this season).
Defenders constantly going in for a tackle and leaving space is literally a common theme of modern day football with a selection of sides playing higher defensive lines, leaving defenders in one on one situations where mistakes and space are likely (Spurs, Cit, United the biggest culprits in the last year). I mean did you watch real city last night? did you see the winning goal? the winning goal LITERALLY happens because of that.
It is an absolute ludicrous suggestion that any modern side are more organised than Chelsea under Mourinho, Liverpool under Rafa or United under Fergie(in particular 2008-2009). In fact its a really really dumb thing to suggest if that's what you're suggesting. You can use the eye test, you can use the statistical test. Those sides were the peak of restricting space in behind and defensive organisation. It's not even a debate to be had.
Dunno why people are so weird with stuff like this. Football goes in cycles, there's been no one formula for any real sustained period.
Mourinho and Benitez stringent tactical style which aimed to limit space and opposition chances took hold of the highest level between 04 and 10. This came after Wenger and Fergie's free flowing 100mph battles before than. Guardiola and Klopp brought back a more attacking/dominant style in the early 2010's to more recent. And now were moving away from possession obsessed systems and more counter , physical styles of play. Conte was the man who brought back the 352/343 which is now the most used system in the english football league.
Football goes back and forth with tactical styles and set ups.
Last edited:
Athleticism and physicality has increased exponentially, despite the claims to the contrary here.
If you look at all the stats and data for sprint numbers, total distance covered, average distance covered per player per 90 mins, number of high intensity actions, covering distances etc etc everything has increased.
If you look at all the stats and data for sprint numbers, total distance covered, average distance covered per player per 90 mins, number of high intensity actions, covering distances etc etc everything has increased.
Not a fan of this "runners and pressing" type of football we're seeing this generation, just my opinion. I'd rather watch technically gifted players, like Zidane, Scholes, Ronaldinho (and the list just goes on), athleticism does not equal entertainment, at least not to me. Most of the best teams don't play to open teams up, they press them to mistakes and pounce on them, which is just boring to watch imo, because then you see way too many teams just trying to play carefully and boring with short passes.
It's the same in NBA, the athleticism is the highest it's ever been, but it's so boring to watch, because there's no finesse to the plays or playees anymore. Love watching Jokic, Doncic, Curry and Irving however.
It's the same in NBA, the athleticism is the highest it's ever been, but it's so boring to watch, because there's no finesse to the plays or playees anymore. Love watching Jokic, Doncic, Curry and Irving however.
I think Klopp raised the organisational levels significantly compared to Rafa. And I acknowledge Rafa as one of the raisers of the modern game in the 00s on that account.
The main progress has been attacking organisation. Attacking patterns of play are far more developed than back then, particularly in terms of overloading areas of the pitch. Looking at the games between peak city and Liverpool, it's like a different sport.
And a result of that is defenders tackle a whole lot less because they'd be completely exposed by modern attacking plays if they went in they way they did 15-20 years ago.
I won't say defence is more or less organised today than back then, but it is very differently organised. Simply because such defending wouldn't work against the modern developments in attacking play. And attack is simply prioritised higher at the highest level. Give Benitez Klopp's back five and he would never have played so high up, even though Van Dijk was basically tailor made for defending loads of space in one on ones.
Football today is less individual and requires far more teamwork than before, especially in defence. But this is basically just completing the development started by Sacchi - turning football into less of a game about winning your duels against your direct opponent.
The main progress has been attacking organisation. Attacking patterns of play are far more developed than back then, particularly in terms of overloading areas of the pitch. Looking at the games between peak city and Liverpool, it's like a different sport.
And a result of that is defenders tackle a whole lot less because they'd be completely exposed by modern attacking plays if they went in they way they did 15-20 years ago.
I won't say defence is more or less organised today than back then, but it is very differently organised. Simply because such defending wouldn't work against the modern developments in attacking play. And attack is simply prioritised higher at the highest level. Give Benitez Klopp's back five and he would never have played so high up, even though Van Dijk was basically tailor made for defending loads of space in one on ones.
Football today is less individual and requires far more teamwork than before, especially in defence. But this is basically just completing the development started by Sacchi - turning football into less of a game about winning your duels against your direct opponent.
Obviously you can have both attributes but there's always been a battle of athleticism vs the more technical approach, and one doesn't always beat the other. I seem to remember Kroos and Modric passing it around Liverpool's very aggressive midfield press in one CL final. I also remember the energy and power of Bayern Munich's midfield smashing prime Barca to pieces. I do agree though we seem to be favoring athleticism more now, which is a shame in a way because our club has bought some of the slowest players in recent times (Casemiro, Eriksen, Zirkzee, Martinez, Antony etc.) and we're suffering for those mistakes.
I think it's because the tactical gap has now shrunk so much that athleticism has been a differentiator again.
It depends on what you see as tiki-taka. The only tiki-taka was the 2010-era Barcelona and Spain national teams. Everything after that has been more possession and ball-pressure-orientated gameplay. Whether from Barcelona or Spain and the managers/teams they have influenced.
The fact that the current City has struggled this season has nothing to do with the tiki-taka dying. They just going through a period of chance - whether it's a decline of Kyle Walker, De Bruyne, Silva & Gündogan all together.
The thing is a lot of teams have had 70% possession and over 700 passes completed and they weren't automatically given the tiki-taka role. Whether you like to play more with the ball or pressurize the ball, it's been like that for ages.
The fact that the current City has struggled this season has nothing to do with the tiki-taka dying. They just going through a period of chance - whether it's a decline of Kyle Walker, De Bruyne, Silva & Gündogan all together.
The thing is a lot of teams have had 70% possession and over 700 passes completed and they weren't automatically given the tiki-taka role. Whether you like to play more with the ball or pressurize the ball, it's been like that for ages.
This could well be me defending my age and what I'd consider my era but I feel like 2005 is being described as if it were 1970.
By 2005 the drinking culture was well gone. Nutrition was already there. As was analysis etc.
The idea footballers are now eating and training so differently to 2005 that tiki taka is physically impossible sounds crazy to me.
I feel like Spain run an updated version of that. But now they have pace on the wings (Williams and Lamal), players that have a different ancestry, which provide different muscle fibers for pace.
Unless people is very young, passing game would never die and it wasn't created by Pep or Barca at all.
What Pep did it's been more cynical, pragmatic, pressure a lot more, ball playing from the back and recycling the attack too much in some situations that when the team is the late City, with less trully bonafide players, it can become a bit boring or even predictable and lacking verticality and finishing.
Also Pep went full berseck in not making many counters, which was silly having players like Messi and Iniesta and later Luis Enrique combined everything with a great dinamic team that still played a passing and possesion game. When it's done by extraordinary players, it can be a joy to watch.
Also there are different styles to do a passing and posesion game, Old Guard full blown attack a la River la Maquina in the 40's, Madrid with Alfredo and cia, la Quinta del Buitre in Madrid was great when holding the ball and atttacking with many options.
Netherlands in the 70's with already some weird pressing tactics when loosing the ball, Brazil 82, France from that period and their Champagne Football, Pekerman's Argie 06 squad similar to the profile and tactics of Tiki Taka, but with way less pressure and even more pragmatic and less offensive approach in certain games (that cost them the elimination, bar unlucky injuries), and lots of other teams in between and before.
Being a Boca fan, Bianchi in the 90's and 00' could be excesivly pragmatic holding the ball, when we already had the advantage, before that it was fecking great to have it and go wave after wave.
River always even till today was tiki taka with lots of dribbling involve and passing in motion, this type is great to watch (Tele Sanatan Sao Paulo too) the current U20 NT has 4 attacking kids from River that love to pass in motion while dribbling.
So there were always variations, it's not that much of a question of merely players (of course genius and phenom alike help to make any style better), it's more of what strategies you maximize under a certain tactic; so when having possesion: being less or more direct, pressuring more or less, holding your guns even when a counter is presented or not, play the ball constantly from the back or not, recycle the play cosntantly or risking it a bit more, etc.
It's not Tiki Taka (whatever the fvck means) or Huffing it.
What Pep did it's been more cynical, pragmatic, pressure a lot more, ball playing from the back and recycling the attack too much in some situations that when the team is the late City, with less trully bonafide players, it can become a bit boring or even predictable and lacking verticality and finishing.
Also Pep went full berseck in not making many counters, which was silly having players like Messi and Iniesta and later Luis Enrique combined everything with a great dinamic team that still played a passing and possesion game. When it's done by extraordinary players, it can be a joy to watch.
Also there are different styles to do a passing and posesion game, Old Guard full blown attack a la River la Maquina in the 40's, Madrid with Alfredo and cia, la Quinta del Buitre in Madrid was great when holding the ball and atttacking with many options.
Netherlands in the 70's with already some weird pressing tactics when loosing the ball, Brazil 82, France from that period and their Champagne Football, Pekerman's Argie 06 squad similar to the profile and tactics of Tiki Taka, but with way less pressure and even more pragmatic and less offensive approach in certain games (that cost them the elimination, bar unlucky injuries), and lots of other teams in between and before.
Being a Boca fan, Bianchi in the 90's and 00' could be excesivly pragmatic holding the ball, when we already had the advantage, before that it was fecking great to have it and go wave after wave.
River always even till today was tiki taka with lots of dribbling involve and passing in motion, this type is great to watch (Tele Sanatan Sao Paulo too) the current U20 NT has 4 attacking kids from River that love to pass in motion while dribbling.
So there were always variations, it's not that much of a question of merely players (of course genius and phenom alike help to make any style better), it's more of what strategies you maximize under a certain tactic; so when having possesion: being less or more direct, pressuring more or less, holding your guns even when a counter is presented or not, play the ball constantly from the back or not, recycle the play cosntantly or risking it a bit more, etc.
It's not Tiki Taka (whatever the fvck means) or Huffing it.
Last edited:
Thank you. you said it perfectly in the first paragraph and backed up my statement. The players are systematic and not capable of thinking for themselves. The no value for the team. Hence why take on a man and practice said skills? Becasue it's of no value to the team.
Imagine if we didn't let ronaldo develop his first few years here. He was tough to watch sometimes. Alot of no value to the team. But guess what? He developed those skills and turned into a fantastic dribbler. Scoring goals for fun.
Your logic about defending is faulty at best. You are not allowed to tackle now. Ronaldo7, R9, came from a time when you were allowed to tackle. Perhaps you are you young to remeber that time in football. Maybe watch some YouTube of ronaldo or hazard getting bashed. That might help you understand the lack of logic in your statement about defending.
I fear that alot of your argument is because your too young to make time references when you have to watch video to reference players I'm taking about.
Yes pressing can be way off in modern football, but what eth had would have been good in previous decades and we were seen as one of the worst.
No defenders go in for the tackle far less than previously, they stack on their feet more and focus on pressing and controlling space. I did not watch last night, but that doesn't prove anything, just because it still happens doesnt mean it doesnt happen far less.
Mourinho was very organised but that started off a lot of other teams doing it, what he did it not that uncommon now, they didn't press so well though. Liverpool now are more organised than with Rafa, United were only notably organised when we had Carlos Queiroz as assistant manager, otherwise United were not at all a standout organised team.
"Football goes in cycles" is just a slogan people use, just a mindless thing with as much depth as "make America great again". Just because there are common themes does not mean things are repeating.
Guardiola and Klopp had amazingly well organised teams, this is why people say Peps teams were robotic, Klopps team had one of the most organised presses in football.
I am not sure how we are moving away from possession and to counter attacking when our top 2 teams are Arsenal and Liverpool, and last season it was City.
Yeah that's a great point.
I guess I'm rallying against the idea that just because time has passed things must automatically be better. To the extent that folk go with that even though what they're watching isn't better.
All the football content out there but we never really see what a day in the life is like. How long is training? What do they eat/drink? It'd get interesting. Maybe ask a guy like Rooney as to how training has changed from 2010 to today.
I'm of the opinion it'd shock people who think footballers exist in laboratory controlled conditions munching goji berries all day. I reckon their nutrition is no different to the hipster population of South Manchester.
That's before considering how much impact different foods/training can actually make.
Each to their own I guess but I suspect more fans in the UK would agree with me that the football dished up now is generally less exciting and entertaining than it used to beFor you
Leaving the bigger picture and tastes aside, Zehner is a Leverkusen fan, if he doesn't enjoy this period and with a Wirtz among other in his team, he would hardly enjoy anything
David Silva
Don’t Forget about Paul Scholes.
Don't think it's more risk averse at all. If anything teams across the board are far more willing to play attacking football than before.
I think the entertainment value lost something from personal duels being less significant in the game, but there's been a lot of positive advances in the modern game as well, particularly the speed of transition from defence to attack. Much less meandering in games.
That and the loss of shots from a distance.