Is the way teams play the most boring it’s been for a while?

Not too long ago, the defenses were much deeper, meaning there were much more 1v1 situations scattered across the pitch.

This means there was always a moment of creativity and individuality. The attackers didn't have to run that many kilometers, meaning they have more oxigen in their brain to perform genius moves. The problem is those teams would lose to any average team today that plays as 11 men running together as a unit.
 
Bale Bale Bale said:
Problem is if you're a young coach interviewing for a role and your answer to what style of football you play is "direct, 442, crosses, width" or "defensive, compact, counter-attacking" etc then you aren't getting the job. Whenever I hear a new manager talking about the way they want to play, I already know what's coming before they've even said a word.
Click to expand...
It's so funny, go back twenty years in time and everybody and his dog would tell you those were the reasons why football had become boring
 
abundance said:
It's so funny, go back twenty years in time and everybody and his dog would tell you those were the reasons why football had become boring
Click to expand...

I have very old articles complaining about the state of football in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, nonetheless there are trends on every period that we will be more fond or not.
 
Last edited:
The Euros is an interesting example. Spain aside, the big nations have been pretty boring to watch.

The smaller nation games have been much more interesting. Georgia v Turkey being the game of the tournament so far imho.

Georgia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey, Romania, Austria, Hungary and Albania games have been a good watch.

It might be because alot of their players aren't household names or that they are giving 110% in their games. I'm not sure what it is but I've enjoyed their games.

I do think there is too much football being played. It's diluting the product. NFL for example is the richest sport in the world. Teams play a maximum of 17 games all season and every game is sold out. That should tell us something.

A decade ago, I used to watch all of the CL knockout games from last 16 onwards. Or made sure I saw highlights of them all.

Now unless Utd are involved or it's the final itself I don't bother. Same with MOTD, used to watch it every week, now I just skip to the Utd highlights or catch goals of others games that interest me on YouTube.

It's just oversaturated of the game, plus tiki taka and guardiola possession football to death, and has spread like a cancer across football. It's all about fitting into systems and not about the individual or the off the cuff maverick magician who dazzles feats of outrageous minds ending physics with the ball.

It could also coincidentally be because Utd have been so crap for best part of a decade and I'm disallusioned with football.
 
abundance said:
It's so funny, go back twenty years in time and everybody and his dog would tell you those were the reasons why football had become boring
Click to expand...
I was here 20 years ago.. just around the time football started becoming boring when teams started playing variations of 4-5-1.. Our 4-4-1-1 was pretty disjointed and don't get me started on our CL away matches after Carlos Queiroz joined..

Also - the likes of Bielsa, Rangnick, Klopp, Rodgers (at Swansea) all played very attractive football in the late noughties and early 2010s.

Edit: 2004 was the year Porto and Greece won the CL and Euros respectively..
 
I think the academy systems have to take some of the blame. In their eyes, and for their clubs, they are doing the right thing in terms of creating professional players but it's all plug and play type players - who know the systems, basics, automatisms etc and all the flair/individuality is coached out of them.

A lot of the top nations introduced performance plan into their academies so everyone has been focusing on the same philosophy for the last 10-20 years and the players are being taught to play a certain way. The also focused on bringing in players younger (ages 6-9) and sticking by them so they can mould them into the type of player they require and want in the first team. It's very risk adverse and essentially your left with players who are all similar in technical ability and share many of the same traits.

The CB's of the modern generation are better on the ball that most of the CM's from 10-15 years ago. Remember when Rio's ball playing ability was lauded - it would be run of the mill now or below average. Same with Rooney in his prime, and it was talked about how hard he worked - that's seen as the norm now too.

A typical academy is the likes of Saka now - absolutely brilliant player who scores and assists but never someone to get you off your seat, a lot of the same movements, predictable passing, risk adverse choices. I did read an article on the Athletic about the academy at United and how the coaches still allow that individual freedom which is why you probably see the likes of Garnacho, Greenwood & Mainoo have that individuality and unpredictability about them. It's more enjoyable to watch someone like Garnacho over Saka, but Saka is much the better player in the modern game.
 
Yup. It’s very boring. It’s effective and successful, but boring. There aren’t any flair players or number 10s anymore.
 
All Europeon teams play pretty much the same style, except Spain and Portugal..

African teams, South American teams play a different way , with more flair ..
So obviously the Euros will be boring
 
I feel like this was always destined to happen.

With the advent of detailed statistics and technology, we were always going to find the optimal way in which football is supposed to be played, Pep or no Pep, and I guess this current way of playing football is simply how the game is meant to be played for the highest possible efficiency, within the current rule system at least.

We might see some slight changes and tweaks in the future, but people who think we're ever going back to more chaotic and exciting style of football are just coping hard.

Even if someone finds a better tactic to play football, it's going to be instantly copied by everyone else and there's not going to be a variation of different styles either.

It's similar to how military history unfolded. You had chaotic warfare and totally different types of armies clashing until at some point military tacticians just figured our the optimal tactics, passed this knowledge to one another, and you get all the armies fighting in the same way for long periods of history until new technology comes up.

With football however, there's not going to be any disruptive element so we're just doomed to what we have now. You might as well enjoy it or pick another sport.

Unless there is some crazy rule change like for example giving teams a limit on how long they can keep the ball or limiting the number of passes before shooting at goal, we're just doomed to see the current "Pep influence style" in slight different variations being on display forever.

For example one way to make football more exciting would be to introduce a rule that you're only allowed to have 8 passes on opponent's half and then you have to shoot, which would force teams to play more long balls, dribble more or attempt crazy long shots. But I doubt people will be ready to accept such radical rule changes.
 
Last edited:
Technology, stats and data analysts killed the game. The managers and coaches are just like the players, being directed by the data to exploit the opposition weakness, however fine that margin may be. To be as efficient as possible, to try and maximise a way to get a result. That's why there are no maverick footballers anymore, you'll never see a Giggs or Cantona player ever again as the way they played, with freedom and expression, it'll be coached out of them, they will be ostracised for not being a team player.
 
You should see this forum in the days when catenaccio did the rounds.

Grown up people watching most games have almost always had the same complaints comparing with the ‘golden era’ previous championships when a childs lack of understanding, only a few games watched in full, history retold and gold tinted memories make Paolo Rossi’s dreadful Italy of 1982 seem like an old classic, Netherlands 1988 an example of total football, Zidane in 1998 a flourish of brilliant one man shows.

This Championship, I’ve had great fun watching Germany, Turkey, Portugal, Austria, Spain, Hungary. But I’ve been impressed by the intelligence and sophistication of Slovenia and Denmark in their collective ability to control the opponent. This was what italy of 1982, France of 2000, Spain of 2012 first of all were so great at - controlling the opponent.

This eternal chess game between controlling and freeing up players, space, opportunities is what fascinates me most with the game, and it’s been around since the 19th century. You just have to bee much better as a team now than in 1956 or 1986 to do either.
 
LA BOMBA said:
I feel like this was always destined to happen.

With the advent of detailed statistics and technology, we were always going to find the optimal way in which football is supposed to be played, Pep or no Pep, and I guess this current way of playing football is simply how the game is meant to be played for the highest possible efficiency, within the current rule system at least.

We might see some slight changes and tweaks in the future, but people who think we're ever going back to more chaotic and exciting style of football are just coping hard.

Even if someone finds a better tactic to play football, it's going to be instantly copied by everyone else and there's not going to be a variation of different styles either.

It's similar to how military history unfolded. You had chaotic warfare and totally different types of armies clashing until at some point military tacticians just figured our the optimal tactics, passed this knowledge to one another, and you get all the armies fighting in the same way for long periods of history until new technology comes up.

With football however, there's not going to be any disruptive element so we're just doomed to what we have now. You might as well enjoy it or pick another sport.

Unless there is some crazy rule change like for example giving teams a limit on how long they can keep the ball or limiting the number of passes before shooting at goal, we're just doomed to see the current "Pep influence style" in slight different variations being on display forever.

For example one way to make football more exciting would be to introduce a rule that you're only allowed to have 8 passes on opponent's half and then you have to shoot, which would force teams to play more long balls, dribble more or attempt crazy long shots. But I doubt people will be ready to accept such radical rule changes.
Click to expand...

I keep ironically saying shot clock but now I kinda wanna see it.

Within 2 minutes upon gaining possession of the ball you must shoot.
 
TenonTen said:
Brazilian Ronaldo agrees.

Click to expand...


I think it's a new societal thing too. There's more action in some other sports compared to football. It could take 25 minutes to see a shot on goal in football when in that time you can see many fantastic plays in other sports.

Highlights in sports is big and I wouldn't be surprised if people especially kids these days would rather watch the highlights after the game than a full game
 
thisisnottaken1 said:
Yup. It’s very boring. It’s effective and successful, but boring. There aren’t any flair players or number 10s anymore.
Click to expand...
Meanwhile Nagelsmann is throwing three 10s on the pitch at once (Wirtz, Gündogan, Musiala). I understand if you don't rate Gündogan as a "flair player", but still...
 
Football is absolutely better now than it was in 90s and 00s. Introduction of playing styles based on high line and pressing (be it Guardiola possession style or German gegenpressing) have been a breath of fresh air in the stale low block-counter attack default mode of modern football.

A team that plays a high line is never at fault for a dull football game. Every high line and aggressive pressing is fragile by default. Team with the ball is not at fault for the other team's decision to camp in their own half. Boredom and caginess are the result of the fact that most teams still default to opportunistic low block football, especially against better opposition.

Nevertheless, high scoring teams that insist on playing football are routinely blamed ("they won't give the ball away"), while multi-million squads fluking their way to cup trophies through generic reactive football are lauded for "tactical diversity and individual expression". In the end, people get what they deserve.
 
Last edited:
stefan92 said:
Meanwhile Nagelsmann is throwing three 10s on the pitch at once (Wirtz, Gündogan, Musiala). I understand if you don't rate Gündogan as a "flair player", but still...
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was over exaggerating a bit. I should have put “many” instead of “any”.
 
It's become a lot more robotic which isn't always that interesting to watch. I think we generally see less shithouse football though, so it's not all bad.
 
Besides the trends in how modern football is actually played, I feel that VAR has killed off what little in-the-moment excitement was actually left in the game.
 
Stocar said:
Football is absolutely better now than it was in 90s and 00s. Introduction of playing styles based on high line and pressing (be it Guardiola possession style or German gegenpressing) have been a breath of fresh air in the stale low block-counter attack default mode of modern football.

A team that plays a high line is never at fault for a dull football game. Every high line and aggressive pressing is fragile by default. Team with the ball is not at fault for the other team's decision to camp in their own half. Boredom and caginess are the result of the fact that most teams still default to opportunistic low block football, especially against better opposition.

Nevertheless, high scoring teams that insist on playing football are routinely blamed ("they won't give the ball away"), while multi-million squads fluking their way to cup trophies through generic reactive football are lauded for "tactical diversity and individual expression". In the end, people get what they deserve.
Click to expand...

Don't think anyone here has argued against the game being better than 90s or 00s(if there is I haven't seen it, haven't read all the posts). It's the entertainment value that's being discussed if I'm not mistaken and with that I agree with most here(including the OP). Matches are mostly boring because the way teams setup. Risk adverse and very chesslike. Making it very boring to most people who match. Imo.
 
There is also too much football and too much talk about football in general. Oversaturation and overanalysis. It was more fun when there was less of it.
 
JBG said:
Don't think anyone here has argued against the game being better than 90s or 00s(if there is I haven't seen it, haven't read all the posts). It's the entertainment value that's being discussed if I'm not mistaken and with that I agree with most here(including the OP). Matches are mostly boring because the way teams setup. Risk adverse and very chesslike. Making it very boring to most people who match. Imo.
Click to expand...
I feel like that's a huge problem for the PL (and fans focused on the PL notice that pattern now at the Euros at many, but not all, teams), but not for football as a whole.

Being German and following the Bundesliga more than the PL I feel like tactical diversity is increasing recently and things get more interesting again after several years of everybody playing some Klopp/Rangnick inspired pressing system (including Bayern who moved slowly away from LvG/Pep possession football to Flick's gung-ho pressing). Some teams relying on really sitting deep (Union Berlin) which has become unusual, some teams starting to really focus a lot more on possession again (Leverkusen, Stuttgart), even those "boring standard pressing teams" at least not sitting back but having a go at it (I remember fondly Bremen winning in München and committing most of their outfield players to press in Bayern's half - in the 94th minute while leading by one goal).

Not saying that similar things don't happen in the PL (I think Brighton for example got a lot of praise exactly because they play a possession style that usually isn't associated with clubs on their level), but I feel like it's less common there and that's what makes games more boring.
 
stefan92 said:
I feel like that's a huge problem for the PL (and fans focused on the PL notice that pattern now at the Euros at many, but not all, teams), but not for football as a whole.

Being German and following the Bundesliga more than the PL I feel like tactical diversity is increasing recently and things get more interesting again after several years of everybody playing some Klopp/Rangnick inspired pressing system (including Bayern who moved slowly away from LvG/Pep possession football to Flick's gung-ho pressing). Some teams relying on really sitting deep (Union Berlin) which has become unusual, some teams starting to really focus a lot more on possession again (Leverkusen, Stuttgart), even those "boring standard pressing teams" at least not sitting back but having a go at it (I remember fondly Bremen winning in München and committing most of their outfield players to press in Bayern's half - in the 94th minute while leading by one goal).

Not saying that similar things don't happen in the PL (I think Brighton for example got a lot of praise exactly because they play a possession style that usually isn't associated with clubs on their level), but I feel like it's less common there and that's what makes games more boring.
Click to expand...

Haven't watched much Bundesliga these past years (mostly due to Bayerns dominance making it less interesting, City says hi...). But I do watch Turkish Superlig and there's actually some entertainment to have there, because teams don't play the "LVG or Pep" way. So might be right about it mostly being a PL thing. But also, as you mentioned, most of the bigger teams in the EUROs, sadly, play this way as well. Making it a chore to watch some matches.
 
The good old days of football was kind of like PES games where players had their own individual personality, skillsets and style. Today's football is more like Fifa where every single player is basically the same.
 
JBG said:
Haven't watched much Bundesliga these past years (mostly due to Bayerns dominance making it less interesting, City says hi...). But I do watch Turkish Superlig and there's actually some entertainment to have there, because teams don't play the "LVG or Pep" way. So might be right about it mostly being a PL thing. But also, as you mentioned, most of the bigger teams in the EUROs, sadly, play this way as well. Making it a chore to watch some matches.
Click to expand...
I think these things go in cycles in all leagues... someone is dominating a league with a certain style, most try to emulate that until you get kind of a deadlock, and then it's time for tactical innovation again. I think the PL is now at this deadlock stage, while the Bundesliga already moved into the next part of it's cycle. To put names on it, Klopp and Pep dominated the BL some years ago and then moved on to do the same in the PL, so them leaving/being close to the end of their time might indicate a similar change towards fresh ideas.
 
Do kids still go outside and emulate Haalands tap ins and Mbappes kick and runs with their mates? I would say it's harder for a kid to fall in love with the game like I did without all the flair players I had the privilege to grow up watching
 
MiceOnMeth said:
Do kids still go outside and emulate Haalands tap ins and Mbappes kick and runs with their mates? I would say it's harder for a kid to fall in love with the game like I did without all the flair players I had the privilege to grow up watching
Click to expand...

Kids are still doing Ronaldo's "si" thing and he's not really been a flair player for over a decade.

If he scores on Sunday, half of the kids in England will be doing the Cold Palmer (the other half will be doing it via their FIFA computer games).
 
Tactical diversity is at an all-time low, in my opinion. It seems every team is either attempting death by 1000 passes or ultra-quick transition, and even then they're just two sides of the same coin, based on pressing high.

I think it's making results far more predictable (at least where the best sides are concerned) as far fewer teams are setting up to cause an upset, they're simply trying to play them at their own game. The problem in doing that is, they're not as good at it, so they just lose.

I can't tell whether it's symptom or cause, but I think the "new" generation of managers are contributing to this. As an example, managing a lower Premier League team used to come with expectations of setting the team up to at least fight hard and try to make it as difficult as possible for the opposition, with the hope that it's enough to come out of the game with something. Now they're just using it as an audition platform for a bigger job because results don't matter as long as they can prove they prefer a "modern" style of play. Kompany has just got the Bayern job off the back of this, despite basically sacrificing Burnley's Premier League status by refusing to adjust tactics in an attempt to grind out some results.
 
MiceOnMeth said:
Do kids still go outside and emulate Haalands tap ins and Mbappes kick and runs with their mates? I would say it's harder for a kid to fall in love with the game like I did without all the flair players I had the privilege to grow up watching
Click to expand...

I think the advance of tech and gaming and other distractions means kids don't bother with going outside to kick a ball much. Plus there are fewer areas to play, though when I was a kid and many of my generation like the CO92, we played in tight spaces in the street. It makes you develop a good touch and ability to shield the ball, take on a man to create a small space to pick a pass. You can tell the footballers who were street players to those who only ever played in a park or AstroTurf pitch.
 
duffer said:
Kids are still doing Ronaldo's "si" thing and he's not really been a flair player for over a decade.

If he scores on Sunday, half of the kids in England will be doing the Cold Palmer (the other half will be doing it via their FIFA computer games).
Click to expand...

If kids are more interested in emulating celebrations over what players actually did with the ball could that be a sign that the football being played isn't very captivating?
 
Chipper said:
If kids are more interested in emulating celebrations over what players actually did with the ball could that be a sign that the actual football isn't very captivating?
Click to expand...

Not really. Kids have been emulating celebrations since players started to celebrate.

I remember kids at school doing the Klinnsman dive and the Roger Milla dance, because they were cool and fun, not because of the "captivating football" Cameroon or Spurs played.

Honestly, back in the day kids barely even saw any football on TV. You were lucky to get 1 match a week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.