Today analysis : Do Pep and City always playing from the back?From goalkeeper to theirs defend & midfield? Ederson :"No" post on page 2

LuckyScout78

Full Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2018
Messages
1,065
A wise monk told me the qoute/statement : " Free style will outbeat any style. A, B, C, D, E and Pep style. Every style with a name and certain way of playing.

At that time. After reflecting and analyzing it. I agree with him. The monk explained why too. So today i will write an article about why Free style will outbeat any style.

First to get my readers on the same page with me. We have to agree with the word "style " mean. What is the definition of a "football style"?

First i google it. "What is the definition of a football style". And i get this answer :

"A style of play is defined as the general behaviour of the whole team to achieve the attacking and defensive objectives in the game. The strategy is normally achieved via the application of specific tactics."

Now i will add it more to the definition of a football style :
+ A certain way of playing. Which the players are 100 % loyal to it. Example City and Pep style : Playing out from the back no matter what. No hoof and long ball no matter what
+ Pep and City ball possesion and control football. It's style and way of playing

But before we come to the comparison : Free style vs Pep style (the superior elite football style . We have to agree that. It is against 100 % Pep style. Not 70-80 % Pep style + mixing with 20-30 free style. Then you are not stick or loyal to your style 100 %. And the comparison will not work.
You can't call it a style. When you mix it up with many styles? Then it is a free style. Or mix martial arts.


Now let us find out why Free style will out beat any style, with a name and 100 % certain way of playing.

Here are the reason and arguments why Free style will outbeat :

+ Free style is not predictable. We don't know what come next. Free style is unexpected. Opposite like one of Pep way is playing out from the back.
So opponents go studying how to stop Pep style. Because he has a certain way of playing. From the back. In other words you know how to stop "A certain way of playing" Many teams puts high press against that.
A certain way of playing is predictable. Just like you get to have a code to break a code. If you don't have any code. It is nothing to break.
+ Free style has nothing to break. Not certain way of playing.

In other sport like boxing. Boxers study the opponent boxing style. If they have a certain way of boxing.

And in old days where wars strategy were predictable. If was a lot more easier to stop your enemies. If your soldiers and trops have a certain way to attack. Why and reasons peoples send spy, insider or taking photos of all the movements of the enemies.

So that are reasons why. A predictable style or way of attack, can't outbeat a free style. Your opponents and enemies don't know what will come next.

BUT even Pep and City has a style. We all knows football players are human. And we have panick mood. Then City players will hoof the ball and play long too. They are not 100 % stick and loyal to "Always playing out from the back"
And we human will do mistake. Like City mistake against United in the last year FA cup final. Lead to first goal by Garnacho.
Of course City players are loyal to what and how Pep want his team to play. But there are always exception and they are 100 % loyal to it. 100 % perfect loyal to the manager style is impossible.


In football area. Free style is like. If it is right to play long you play long. Like trough ball from the defend to the attacking players. Against team with high defend line. They totally open up.
Or play short when you have no one upfront to the receive the ball.
Just play right to how the moment on the football pitch appear.
But in football. When you come down to the line. Then you have to deliver the ball out 45 % angle , if it is a teammate at that place. Because you are not scoring from that angle.



Sum up. Free style is unpredictable. Your opponents team don't know what will come next. Playing with a Freedom. But always look for the most effience way to scoring goals, more than your opponents teams. To win the match.

And for me. Free style is more entertain to watch and play. A 100 % certain style might feel like a robot. Keep doing the same thing over and over again. But credit to Pep. If they master it. Exercise and repeating make master.
But again. From a watcher and supporter point of view. I prefer the unexpectable.
Like movies. We want something unexpected.
Street dancer with free style
Rapper with free style

But football is all about scoring more goals than your opponent teams. There are many way and path to it. And if you follow or copy Pep style. With lower qualities players. You will always end up second best.

And in the end. A certain style doesn't belong to specific anyone. Reason why managers copy each others style. Why styles are able to copy. It belong to everyone.

Thank you for reading and have a great weekend to mine readers;)

P.S article inspired from the buddhist monk's quoute, statement or whatever you call. I put it in the football world. He explained it from martial arts world.
 
horsechoker said:
Can someone summarise this please
Click to expand...

Free style :

+ Unpredictable = don't know what will come next = your opponent next move
+ Unexpected
+ No certain way of playing

VS


A style with a name and certain way of playinng where players are 100 loyal to it:
+ Predictable
+ You know what will come nect
+ Have a certain way of playing

Like you have to a code. To break a code right?
So if you want to break a style. It get to be or exist/certain of style.

If your style is freedom = then it's nothing to break


+ A style relate to our human ego. So most of our human always get ownership of a style. So we name it a style. Pep style or whatever.

But the article and analysing is not. Or i wouldn't go deep to our human ego. My path and my style.
It is just about which style will outbeat the others.

Special in Martial arts. If you have a certain way and 100 % loyal to it. Then you will rise your chance to lose. Your opponents will study you.
 
LuckyScout78 said:
Free style :

+ Unpredictable = don't know what will come next = your opponent next move
+ Unexpected
+ No certain way of playing

VS


A style with a name and certain way of playinng where players are 100 loyal to it:
+ Predictable
+ You know what will come nect
+ Have a certain way of playing

Like you have to a code. To break a code right?
So if you want to break a style. It get to be or exist/certain of style.

If your style is freedom = then it's nothing to break
Click to expand...
What's all this 'being into discussion and replying' shit?
 
Surprised and disappointed in not mentioning Wharton in the op. Must be a first.
 
LuckyScout in thread responses… utter woke nonsense
 
Reading the title I got visions of early 90s British news presenters doing a segment on the popular “Hip Hop dancing” that’s come over from the states and is taking the UK by storm
 
Not one mention of getting Adam Wharton off Crystal Palace for £20m? What's going on?
 
Good thought, I thought the same but came to the conclusion that freestyle can only be successful if you have freestyle elements in addition to excellence in one or more systematic styles. So, in a sense, having a player or two who are capable of magic moments.

I share your feeling of entertainment when a game is less predictable. So, I hope your monk's message is spread far and wide and Pep is unmasked as the footballing equivalent of Mother Theresa with his questionable political contacts, the enormous sums of unaccounted money he receives, and his overly dogmatic views.

I appreciate your threads. Keep them coming.
 
I may add that the « supremacy » of patterns of play has created a whole generation of footballers devoid of any football IQ and a lowering of the average technical ability of players.
The biggest proof of that is the disparition of number 10s in football

For instance, people highly criticized Real Madrid because they had no clear style.
What I saw was a team of players with high football IQ and the technical ability to be able to adapt to any games. Players able to do everything while moving forward. All in all players that needed guidance but not to be told what to do play by play and which positions to hold in which half space and so on.
 
horsechoker said:
Can someone summarise this please
Click to expand...
Chat GPT, please summarise this post for me

The post discusses the concept of "Free style" in football and argues that it can outbeat any other style due to its unpredictability and flexibility. The writer compares "Free style" to the more rigid and predictable styles like Pep Guardiola's. They emphasize the importance of being adaptable and not sticking too rigidly to a specific style. Additionally, they suggest that a certain style may feel robotic and repetitive, whereas a more free and unpredictable style can be more entertaining and effective in scoring goals. The post concludes by highlighting the idea that while certain styles may be copied and mastered by different teams, ultimately football is about finding the most efficient way to win matches.
Click to expand...
 
Think I’ve figured it out.
Instead of wax on, wax off (repeat repeat)
The opponent should wax off before waxing on, sometimes waxing off a few times before waxing on an undetermined amount of times, thus confusing an opponent with a traditional wax on, wax off style.
 
This is GCSE level "Positional Play Vs. Relationsim" writing. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if you replaced "Free style" with "Relationsim" and it came up as a plagerised script from a 15 year old YouTube tactico.
 
I actually think lucky scout genuinely believes he's posting actual articles.
 
The Virgin predictable pep vs chad freestyle luckyscout
 
in theory that makes sense

in practical terms I'd say it's close to meaningless

there is way too much randomness and complexity involved to apply game theory like this to football, I think
 
Tarrou said:
in theory that makes sense

in practical terms I'd say it's close to meaningless

there is way too much randomness and complexity involved to apply game theory like this to football, I think
Click to expand...
Agree, if everyone is just making it up how will your teammates know what you're currently making up? Works in a team of 11 Xavi, Iniesta, Messi or Scholes. Not in a team of 11 normal "great" footballers.
 
Chipper said:
Was going to post the same but ended up reading an article about the Finnish kid with the dreads from that. He's now an award winning chef in Paris and has a hipster moustache.

Proof that you don't need to stick to one style.
Click to expand...

wok wok wok the microphone
 
feck the haters @LuckyScout78. If you enjoy writing these reports and posting them then you keep on doing it. I'll continue to enjoy reading them.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
feck the haters @LuckyScout78. If you enjoy writing these reports and posting them then you keep on doing it. I'll continue to enjoy reading them.
Click to expand...
Second that. The pile-on is a little much, and not that funny anymore after a dozen or so threads going the same way. And there are some interesting points here:
LuckyScout78 said:
A wise monk told me the qoute/statement : " Free style will outbeat any style. A, B, C, D, E and Pep style. Every style with a name and certain way of playing.

At that time. After reflecting and analyzing it. I agree with him. The monk explained why too. So today i will write an article about why Free style will outbeat any style.

First to get my readers on the same page with me. We have to agree with the word "style " mean. What is the definition of a "football style"?

First i google it. "What is the definition of a football style". And i get this answer :

"A style of play is defined as the general behaviour of the whole team to achieve the attacking and defensive objectives in the game. The strategy is normally achieved via the application of specific tactics."

Now i will add it more to the definition of a football style :
+ A certain way of playing. Which the players are 100 % loyal to it. Example City and Pep style : Playing out from the back no matter what. No hoof and long ball no matter what
+ Pep and City ball possesion and control football. It's style and way of playing

But before we come to the comparison : Free style vs Pep style (the superior elite football style . We have to agree that. It is against 100 % Pep style. Not 70-80 % Pep style + mixing with 20-30 free style. Then you are not stick or loyal to your style 100 %. And the comparison will not work.
You can't call it a style. When you mix it up with many styles? Then it is a free style. Or mix martial arts.


Now let us find out why Free style will out beat any style, with a name and 100 % certain way of playing.

Here are the reason and arguments why Free style will outbeat :

+ Free style is not predictable. We don't know what come next. Free style is unexpected. Opposite like one of Pep way is playing out from the back.
So opponents go studying how to stop Pep style. Because he has a certain way of playing. From the back. In other words you know how to stop "A certain way of playing" Many teams puts high press against that.
A certain way of playing is predictable. Just like you get to have a code to break a code. If you don't have any code. It is nothing to break.
+ Free style has nothing to break. Not certain way of playing.

In other sport like boxing. Boxers study the opponent boxing style. If they have a certain way of boxing.

And in old days where wars strategy were predictable. If was a lot more easier to stop your enemies. If your soldiers and trops have a certain way to attack. Why and reasons peoples send spy, insider or taking photos of all the movements of the enemies.

So that are reasons why. A predictable style or way of attack, can't outbeat a free style. Your opponents and enemies don't know what will come next.

BUT even Pep and City has a style. We all knows football players are human. And we have panick mood. Then City players will hoof the ball and play long too. They are not 100 % stick and loyal to "Always playing out from the back"
And we human will do mistake. Like City mistake against United in the last year FA cup final. Lead to first goal by Garnacho.
Of course City players are loyal to what and how Pep want his team to play. But there are always exception and they are 100 % loyal to it. 100 % perfect loyal to the manager style is impossible.


In football area. Free style is like. If it is right to play long you play long. Like trough ball from the defend to the attacking players. Against team with high defend line. They totally open up.
Or play short when you have no one upfront to the receive the ball.
Just play right to how the moment on the football pitch appear.
But in football. When you come down to the line. Then you have to deliver the ball out 45 % angle , if it is a teammate at that place. Because you are not scoring from that angle.



Sum up. Free style is unpredictable. Your opponents team don't know what will come next. Playing with a Freedom. But always look for the most effience way to scoring goals, more than your opponents teams. To win the match.

And for me. Free style is more entertain to watch and play. A 100 % certain style might feel like a robot. Keep doing the same thing over and over again. But credit to Pep. If they master it. Exercise and repeating make master.
But again. From a watcher and supporter point of view. I prefer the unexpectable.
Like movies. We want something unexpected.
Street dancer with free style
Rapper with free style

But football is all about scoring more goals than your opponent teams. There are many way and path to it. And if you follow or copy Pep style. With lower qualities players. You will always end up second best.

And in the end. A certain style doesn't belong to specific anyone. Reason why managers copy each others style. Why styles are able to copy. It belong to everyone.

Thank you for reading and have a great weekend to mine readers;)

P.S article inspired from the buddhist monk's quoute, statement or whatever you call. I put it in the football world. He explained it from martial arts world.
Click to expand...
With 'free style', I think you might be talking about relational play? That's the term for the football style discuss in this thread from last year:

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/fluminese-and-the-relationism-tactical-revolution.478095/

To quote its OP:
Hoof the ball said:
There's an ever increasing movement of teams shifting towards the opposite end of the tactical spectrum away from strict positional play (ala Guardiola, Sarri, etc) and more towards chaotic approaches that favour more individual expression and classical Brazilian ideas of the game.

Fluminese are leading the pack with some interesting stuff right now :-



However, Football Meta did a good job with explaining positional play vs relational play and a really good section on Fluminese too.

Click to expand...
 
Cheimoon said:
Second that. The pile-on is a little much, and not that funny anymore after a dozen or so threads going the same way. And there are some interesting points here:

With 'free style', I think you might be talking about relational play? That's the term for the football style discuss in this thread from last year:

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/fluminese-and-the-relationism-tactical-revolution.478095/

To quote its OP:
Click to expand...
Ha, to quote myself: I just now noticed it was mentioned a few days ago as well:
Zehner said:
Spain had the biggest tactical influence on the game after the Netherlands, followed by Germany and Italy I'd say. Brazil also deserves a mention because of Diniz' relationism. It has already been implemented by European coaches with great success, for instance Xabi Alonso and Thiago Motta.

England probably has the biggest influence in terms of football culture, media and economy but not so mach from a tactical perspective.
Click to expand...
That's kinda in line with @LuckyScout78 thinking this will become big.
 
Cheimoon said:
Ha, to quote myself: I just now noticed it was mentioned a few days ago as well:

That's kinda in line with @LuckyScout78 thinking this will become big.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is pretty cool and it could be the beacon of hope for those who say football has become boring because of Pep.

Anyway, I don't think it's one vs the other. Alonso for instance clearly coaches positional play but he combines it with relationism. Chaos by design. Systematically get your instinct footballers in situations in which they can improvise and express their genius. You sacrifice a little bit of control for it but not that much.
 
Let's try keep it constructive folks. It was maybe funny the first once or twice but now it's old news to keep taking the piss. This is the FF and not the General. Productive criticism rather than just straight up taking the piss everytime if you could.
 
Last edited:
SilentWitness said:
Let's try keep it constructive folks. It was maybe the first once or twice but now it's old news to keep taking the piss. This is the FF and not the General. Productive criticism rather than just straight up taking the piss everytime if you could.
Click to expand...
I know you're Staff so you've got to be professional and all that, but I feel the words of @Cheimoon in our secret thread would be a better statement here;

So you bundled into LuckyScout's thread to make fun of the work he's clearly passionate about? Well done. You've won the internet. Also, you're a small cocked cnut asshole bitch ass bitch. Woop dee fecking doo dah, good job. Your sarky response in the thread took 0.000001% of the effort that the OP took when writing his, and somehow you think you're brilliant. You think you're brilliant for two reasons. One, because you're an idiot with low standards. And two, because go feck yourself.

I'll let you in on a little secret; you're a bully. I don't mean that in the mild "aw, stop bullying pwease pwetty pwease" way that you used to beg the big lad in Second Year. I mean it in the way that basically translates into "Bully = sad bastard with zero happiness in their own life so they try and make up for it by shitting on anyone who tries to do something that you haven't got the balls to do yourself."

In summary; this is my impression of you. "Hurr Durr I'm a massive twat and nobody likes me because I'm thick as pig shit."

Translate that into LuckyScout's native tongue and see what response he has for you. You UKIP voting, cardboard eating, wanking into a sock each night due to loneliness, dumb as feck cnut."
Click to expand...

Wise words indeed from the always placid and analytical Dutch Canadian, right there...
 
Mr Pigeon said:
I know you're Staff so you've got to be professional and all that, but I feel the words of @Cheimoon in our secret thread would be a better statement here;



Wise words indeed from the always placid and analytical Dutch Canadian, right there...
Click to expand...
I see you censored our some of it, but that captures it pretty well still!

So how about that relational play then...
 
I don't think freestyle is a very accurate term for the "style" of play you're describing. If you're alluding to the strategy that ETH is trying to implement then it's better described as "situational flexibility".

ETH talks a lot about transition and slowing the game down when appropriate but then making very fast/abrupt transitions when the opportunity presents. The "free" aspect is that he doesn't mandate a specific technique when making the individual transition i.e. if the transition pathway is via a short pass(es), long pass, lofted pass, driven pass, crossfield diagonal or dribble/carry then any of those options are permitted - as long as it is the correct technique for the specific opportunity. There are team strategies/moves/pressing triggers that are coached on the training pitch in order to create those "opportunities".

I think it has the potential to be hugely entertaining and also very effective, but the major, major issue with it is that the players have to have exceptional decision making abilities, confidence and also very high concentration levels. This is why it has failed more often than not so far, as players like Rashford, AWB, Sancho, McTominay, Maguire etc.... either have extremely poor situational awareness, poor concentration (Sancho) or in the case of AWB, Maguire, Rashford and McTominay specifically lack the confidence to make a very quick, decisive action when opportunities present. On the flip side players like Martinez have absolutely shone because he is extremely decisive in his play.

Rashford is an interesting case because his problems are almost entirely confidence related. He's absolutely capable of being brilliant in ETH's system, but once his confidence drops he has a tendency to stop making decisions altogether, and instead of making the killer pass/dribble/shot he dithers, takes far too many touches and runs himself into a blind alley or off the pitch.

Players like De Ligt, Zirkzee and Ugarte should make a big difference once they get up and running, as all three are extremely confident and assertive whether it's in creating opportunities via pressing/interception (Ugarte) or transitional/key passes (De ligt and Zirkzee). I think our summer transfer window has been close to perfect, the main reason being that all of the new signings share the same traits in terms of being very decisive/assertive with their approach.
 
Last edited:
LuckyScout78 said:
Free style :

+ Unpredictable = don't know what will come next = your opponent next move
+ Unexpected
+ No certain way of playing

VS


A style with a name and certain way of playinng where players are 100 loyal to it:
+ Predictable
+ You know what will come nect
+ Have a certain way of playing

Like you have to a code. To break a code right?
So if you want to break a style. It get to be or exist/certain of style.

If your style is freedom = then it's nothing to break


+ A style relate to our human ego. So most of our human always get ownership of a style. So we name it a style. Pep style or whatever.

But the article and analysing is not. Or i wouldn't go deep to our human ego. My path and my style.
It is just about which style will outbeat the others.

Special in Martial arts. If you have a certain way and 100 % loyal to it. Then you will rise your chance to lose. Your opponents will study you.
Click to expand...
3 ways of saying the same thing. I bet you're popular in work meetings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.