Forum
{{ post.commentCount }}

Didn't find anything.

{{ searchResult.errors[0] }}



Liverpool’s Steven Gerrard Problem: He’s Not Andrea Pirlo.
tiki_taka 10 years ago Edited
Barcelona, France 367 9768

Hey, Liverpool, can we talk? We can have it in the car if you like — that way we can both stare straight ahead and not make eye contact, and then when it’s over we can all go on with our lives. The fact is, we can’t put it off any longer. We need to talk about Steven Gerrard. There comes a time in every star’s career when athleticism begins to fade. For some, that decline simply marks the beginning of a second (or third or fourth) act in their career; for others, it signals the beginning of a suddenly not-very-distant end. So the question for Liverpool and Gerrard is twofold: What kind of player can the midfielder become? And how likely is it that he’ll be able to make that transition?

The major issue for Gerrard is that he just isn’t as mobile as he used to be. At various points over the course of the season, Gerrard has served as the more attacking-minded half of a double pivot with Lucas Leiva (whose recent injury heightens the Gerrard conundrum all the more), the runner between a defensive midfielder and a creator in a three-man midfield, and, finally, most problematically, as the deepest-lying midfielder in a trio, and the more defensive half of a double pivot. That’s nothing new for Gerrard; his versatility, his inability to fit squarely in a position, has always been part of what defines him. In his younger days it was a strength. Now it’s quickly turning into a weakness.

The reasoning behind shifting Gerrard into a deeper midfield position is fairly clear. First and foremost, Gerrard is an icon, and he’s almost singularly responsible for the most iconic moment in Liverpool’s recent history. He’s a big enough star and important enough figure at the club that he probably gets to bring the ship down with him before he gets benched. So, if he’s going to be on the field, what’s the best place to put him? Well, given that he has mobility issues but remains a fantastic ball striker and can still regularly play defense-splitting passes like this …

… well, it seems natural that Gerrard could slide easily into the role of deep-lying playmaker. He could be Liverpool’s Andrea Pirlo.

In fact, when you look at the stats, as Ted Knutson did here, Gerrard bears a unique and striking (although not perfect) resemblance to the signature deep-lying playmaker of the last 20 years, the great Football Jesus of Juventus. Or, if you’d prefer that from Ted in visual form, here are Pirlo and Gerrard, profiling very similarly since the 2009-10 season.

Here’s the issue: Pirlo has always been an athletically limited player. He had shifted into a deep-lying playmaker role about a decade before AC Milan sold him to Juventus in 2011. So, while it’s true that Pirlo has undergone a tremendous renaissance over the last few seasons, that’s more attributable to Juventus catering an entire system to his lack of mobility and surrounding him with two of the best two-way midfielders in the world (Arturo Vidal and Paul Pogba). In effect, Juventus constructed a team specifically to allow Pirlo to continue to do what he’s always done best.

Gerrard has never been a one-dimensional player like Pirlo. His whole game has been built around his ability to do many things at once. Deploy him as a defensive midfielder and you’d get a better passer, dribbler, and shooter than any other defensive midfielder; play him in the hole behind a striker and you’d get an unparalleled level of defensive commitment from that position.

As the deep-lying playmaker, Gerrard will have to learn a new skill. The role combines two facets that have never been the focus of Gerrard’s game. First, when in possession he has to make himself available to receive the ball. Starting from the 2010-11 season, Gerrard received just under 55 passes per 90 minutes during league games, according to ESPN Stats & Info. That’s 10 fewer than Andrea Pirlo did over the same time frame. Defensively, Gerrard will have to commit to the nebulously defined task of “shielding the back four.” While basically every football fan on the planet knows the phrase, it’s pretty difficult to define precisely what it means. In general, though, if something goes wrong in a pocket of space in front of the defenders but behind the midfielders, it’s probably the deepest-lying midfielder’s fault.

It’s a big challenge for Gerrard, compounded by the fact that he simply won’t have the same quality of midfield shield in front of him. While Jordan Henderson is developing from a talented prospect into a versatile midfielder (and has almost certainly become more potent as a runner than Gerrard himself at this stage), he’s not Arturo Vidal, because really nobody is. And with Gerrard playing as the deepest midfielder, Liverpool have nobody to comfortably pair with Henderson ahead of him. Rodgers tried Lucas in that role, to somewhat hilarious effect, at Stoke. Joe Allen is a more natural fit, but he can’t stay on the field and is untested, to say the least, as a dependable week-in, week-out starter on a team contending for a Champions League spot.

Now, despite all that, manager Brendan Rodgers has some reason to hope. Gerrard clearly has both the passing quality and vision to excel in the creator role. He’s relentlessly good at carving open defenses with accurate long balls to create chances. He’s set up 0.9 chances per 90 minutes from long passes in open play since the 2010-11 season. That’s better than anybody in the Premier League except Juan Mata. The prospect of Gerrard spending games with time on the ball to thread passes to Luis Suarez is enough to make any manager giddy. All Gerrard needs to learn is to be in the right place at the right time. And Rodgers needs him to learn it quickly. He can’t bench the Liverpool legend, and with Lucas Leiva out for two months with a knee injury, it sure seems like Gerrard is about to get a lot of on-the-job training.

There’s a lot riding on the rest of this season for Liverpool’s iconic midfielder. He has to develop a skill he’s never shown before, with the future of his career riding on the outcome, in the middle of a Champions League race. That’s a tremendous amount of pressure. Then again, it’s not like Steven Gerrard is unfamiliar with rising to the occasion.

2
  • History
Showing previous versions of this text.

Hey, Liverpool, can we talk? We can have it in the car if you like — that way we can both stare straight ahead and not make eye contact, and then when it’s over we can all go on with our lives. The fact is, we can’t put it off any longer. We need to talk about Steven Gerrard. There comes a time in every star’s career when athleticism begins to fade. For some, that decline simply marks the beginning of a second (or third or fourth) act in their career; for others, it signals the beginning of a suddenly not-very-distant end. So the question for Liverpool and Gerrard is twofold: What kind of player can the midfielder become? And how likely is it that he’ll be able to make that transition?

The major issue for Gerrard is that he just isn’t as mobile as he used to be. At various points over the course of the season, Gerrard has served as the more attacking-minded half of a double pivot with Lucas Leiva (whose recent injury heightens the Gerrard conundrum all the more), the runner between a defensive midfielder and a creator in a three-man midfield, and, finally, most problematically, as the deepest-lying midfielder in a trio, and the more defensive half of a double pivot. That’s nothing new for Gerrard; his versatility, his inability to fit squarely in a position, has always been part of what defines him. In his younger days it was a strength. Now it’s quickly turning into a weakness.

The reasoning behind shifting Gerrard into a deeper midfield position is fairly clear. First and foremost, Gerrard is an icon, and he’s almost singularly responsible for the most iconic moment in Liverpool’s recent history. He’s a big enough star and important enough figure at the club that he probably gets to bring the ship down with him before he gets benched. So, if he’s going to be on the field, what’s the best place to put him? Well, given that he has mobility issues but remains a fantastic ball striker and can still regularly play defense-splitting passes like this …

… well, it seems natural that Gerrard could slide easily into the role of deep-lying playmaker. He could be Liverpool’s Andrea Pirlo.

In fact, when you look at the stats, as Ted Knutson did here, Gerrard bears a unique and striking (although not perfect) resemblance to the signature deep-lying playmaker of the last 20 years, the great Football Jesus of Juventus. Or, if you’d prefer that from Ted in visual form, here are Pirlo and Gerrard, profiling very similarly since the 2009-10 season.

Here’s the issue: Pirlo has always been an athletically limited player. He had shifted into a deep-lying playmaker role about a decade before AC Milan sold him to Juventus in 2011. So, while it’s true that Pirlo has undergone a tremendous renaissance over the last few seasons, that’s more attributable to Juventus catering an entire system to his lack of mobility and surrounding him with two of the best two-way midfielders in the world (Arturo Vidal and Paul Pogba). In effect, Juventus constructed a team specifically to allow Pirlo to continue to do what he’s always done best.

Gerrard has never been a one-dimensional player like Pirlo. His whole game has been built around his ability to do many things at once. Deploy him as a defensive midfielder and you’d get a better passer, dribbler, and shooter than any other defensive midfielder; play him in the hole behind a striker and you’d get an unparalleled level of defensive commitment from that position.

Hey, Liverpool, can we talk? We can have it in the car if you like — that way we can both stare straight ahead and not make eye contact, and then when it’s over we can all go on with our lives. The fact is, we can’t put it off any longer. We need to talk about Steven Gerrard. There comes a time in every star’s career when athleticism begins to fade. For some, that decline simply marks the beginning of a second (or third or fourth) act in their career; for others, it signals the beginning of a suddenly not-very-distant end. So the question for Liverpool and Gerrard is twofold: What kind of player can the midfielder become? And how likely is it that he’ll be able to make that transition?

The major issue for Gerrard is that he just isn’t as mobile as he used to be. At various points over the course of the season, Gerrard has served as the more attacking-minded half of a double pivot with Lucas Leiva (whose recent injury heightens the Gerrard conundrum all the more), the runner between a defensive midfielder and a creator in a three-man midfield, and, finally, most problematically, as the deepest-lying midfielder in a trio, and the more defensive half of a double pivot. That’s nothing new for Gerrard; his versatility, his inability to fit squarely in a position, has always been part of what defines him. In his younger days it was a strength. Now it’s quickly turning into a weakness.

The reasoning behind shifting Gerrard into a deeper midfield position is fairly clear. First and foremost, Gerrard is an icon, and he’s almost singularly responsible for the most iconic moment in Liverpool’s recent history. He’s a big enough star and important enough figure at the club that he probably gets to bring the ship down with him before he gets benched. So, if he’s going to be on the field, what’s the best place to put him? Well, given that he has mobility issues but remains a fantastic ball striker and can still regularly play defense-splitting passes like this …

… well, it seems natural that Gerrard could slide easily into the role of deep-lying playmaker. He could be Liverpool’s Andrea Pirlo.

In fact, when you look at the stats, as Ted Knutson did here, Gerrard bears a unique and striking (although not perfect) resemblance to the signature deep-lying playmaker of the last 20 years, the great Football Jesus of Juventus. Or, if you’d prefer that from Ted in visual form, here are Pirlo and Gerrard, profiling very similarly since the 2009-10 season.

Here’s the issue: Pirlo has always been an athletically limited player. He had shifted into a deep-lying playmaker role about a decade before AC Milan sold him to Juventus in 2011. So, while it’s true that Pirlo has undergone a tremendous renaissance over the last few seasons, that’s more attributable to Juventus catering an entire system to his lack of mobility and surrounding him with two of the best two-way midfielders in the world (Arturo Vidal and Paul Pogba). In effect, Juventus constructed a team specifically to allow Pirlo to continue to do what he’s always done best.

Gerrard has never been a one-dimensional player like Pirlo. His whole game has been built around his ability to do many things at once. Deploy him as a defensive midfielder and you’d get a better passer, dribbler, and shooter than any other defensive midfielder; play him in the hole behind a striker and you’d get an unparalleled level of defensive commitment from that position.

As the deep-lying playmaker, Gerrard will have to learn a new skill. The role combines two facets that have never been the focus of Gerrard’s game. First, when in possession he has to make himself available to receive the ball. Starting from the 2010-11 season, Gerrard received just under 55 passes per 90 minutes during league games, according to ESPN Stats & Info. That’s 10 fewer than Andrea Pirlo did over the same time frame. Defensively, Gerrard will have to commit to the nebulously defined task of “shielding the back four.” While basically every football fan on the planet knows the phrase, it’s pretty difficult to define precisely what it means. In general, though, if something goes wrong in a pocket of space in front of the defenders but behind the midfielders, it’s probably the deepest-lying midfielder’s fault.

It’s a big challenge for Gerrard, compounded by the fact that he simply won’t have the same quality of midfield shield in front of him. While Jordan Henderson is developing from a talented prospect into a versatile midfielder (and has almost certainly become more potent as a runner than Gerrard himself at this stage), he’s not Arturo Vidal, because really nobody is. And with Gerrard playing as the deepest midfielder, Liverpool have nobody to comfortably pair with Henderson ahead of him. Rodgers tried Lucas in that role, to somewhat hilarious effect, at Stoke. Joe Allen is a more natural fit, but he can’t stay on the field and is untested, to say the least, as a dependable week-in, week-out starter on a team contending for a Champions League spot.

Now, despite all that, manager Brendan Rodgers has some reason to hope. Gerrard clearly has both the passing quality and vision to excel in the creator role. He’s relentlessly good at carving open defenses with accurate long balls to create chances. He’s set up 0.9 chances per 90 minutes from long passes in open play since the 2010-11 season. That’s better than anybody in the Premier League except Juan Mata. The prospect of Gerrard spending games with time on the ball to thread passes to Luis Suarez is enough to make any manager giddy. All Gerrard needs to learn is to be in the right place at the right time. And Rodgers needs him to learn it quickly. He can’t bench the Liverpool legend, and with Lucas Leiva out for two months with a knee injury, it sure seems like Gerrard is about to get a lot of on-the-job training.

There’s a lot riding on the rest of this season for Liverpool’s iconic midfielder. He has to develop a skill he’s never shown before, with the future of his career riding on the outcome, in the middle of a Champions League race. That’s a tremendous amount of pressure. Then again, it’s not like Steven Gerrard is unfamiliar with rising to the occasion.

Comments
tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

Steven Gerrard vs Andrea Pirlo – Which World Cup veteran will dictate the tempo in England vs Italy?

( Posted the 9 june 2014, before the game !! )

Steven Gerrard and Andrea Pirlo face off against each other on Saturday as England and Italy open their World Cup campaigns, in a game that gives Roy Hodgson’s side the chance to exact some revenge upon the side that knocked them out of Euro 2012 two years ago.

Gerrard has adapted to a new role, similar to Pirlo’s, in the last few months but will the Italian maestro reign supreme again or will England’s captain dominate proceedings on Saturday and exact revenge on the Italians?

A Pirlo-inspired Italian side made it to the final of Euro 2012 after he tore England apart in the quarter-finals. His masterful passing, effortless movement around the pitch and panenka penalty dominated the match and England could not cope.

This time around, they have their own deep-lying midfielder capable of controlling the game in Steven Gerrard. The captain was handed his new role by Liverpool boss Brendan Rodgers last season and it worked a treat as the Reds romped their way to the top of the Premier League and came within a whisker of winning the title, just finishing second below Manchester City on the final day.

After Gerrard was moved to his deeper role, Liverpool lost just one more league game out of 18. That also included 14 wins that were a part of an 11-match winning run, and three draws. His passionate but controlling presence at the base of the midfield worked well in a diamond with Jordan Henderson, Philippe Coutinho and Raheem Sterling with Joe Allen often stepping in if needed.

Gerrard now seems comfortable in that position and will need to remain at his composed best in Manaus at the weekend. Pirlo will probably be afforded space and time on the ball due to the heat so Gerrard needs to be even more impressive in order to take control from the Italian.

In their final 18 league matches last season, Pirlo completed a slightly higher percentage of his passes, with 88% hitting their target, while Gerrard completed 85% of his.

Gerrard completed 973 passes in that time while Pirlo completed slightly more with 994, including 134 against Verona in February. This suggests that the Italian might edge proceedings on Saturday night but a difference of 19 successful passes over 18 games is barely anything at all so the pair are quite even in that department.

The Englishman scored 10 goals in the run-in for Liverpool, but eight were from the penalty spot – he may need that at some point this summer.

While both Gerrard and Pirlo play in the same position, their roles are slightly different. Gerrard is more confrontational and wins more tackles than the Italian, who tends not to tackle as much. Gerrard won 54% of his 81 tackle attempts in his new role while Pirlo only won 33% of his (21/63) over the last 18 games.

Another big difference between the pair is the number of created chances in the time Gerrard moved deep. The Englishman created 27, assisting seven, with Pirlo creating 43 chances and assisting six goals in the same time period – higher than any of his Juventus teammates over the second half of the season.

Now, Gerrard’s role at Liverpool isn’t as creative as Pirlo’s at Juventus due to the talent in front of him, but if Pirlo gets into a rhythm against England and starts to dictate the tempo of the match, gaps may open and he could expose England, setting them off to an early defeat.

This will certainly be a tight battle. Both players completed a similar number of passes while Gerrard was busier in the tackle, but Pirlo can create chances at will. Both players’ set-piece delivery is world class so it could be anyone’s guess as to who will dominate when England meet Italy on Saturday.

0
Lodatz 10 years ago Edited
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992

"What kind of player can the midfielder become? And how likely is it that he’ll be able to make that transition?"

Well, he's already successfully become a deep-lying play-maker, operating from defensive midfield. So, that answers THAT question. Seems like the person who wrote this doesn't really understand what he's talking about, or else is a couple of years out of date.

NOT SURPRISING, since the first half of this thread is entirely stolen from THIS article:

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/liverpools-steven-gerrard-problem-hes-not-andrea-pirlo/

Oh look. There's that internet again.

The comments section is interesting, though. ;)

"but if Pirlo gets into a rhythm against England and starts to dictate the tempo of the match, gaps may open and he could expose England, setting them off to an early defeat."

Which is interesting, because that didn't actually happen. What did Pirlo actually do in that match? He.. was allowed to have the ball, and didn't do a whole lot with it. He did of course perform that wonderful step-over to allow Marchiso a lucky shot, but, really the rest of the game went by with him simply being on the pitch, stroking the ball around.

So...

...if he gets knocked out of this World Cup in the group stage, which certainly could happen since Uruguay are not crap, then it will make it 3 out of 4 recent tournaments in which an Italy side, in this era of Pirlo's renaissance, has been eliminated at the first round.

Is that because Italy are not that great, or because Pirlo is not doing a good enough job?

In fact, it's a bit of both, since Pirlo was injured for the 2008 tournament and the start of the 2010 tournament. What this highlights is that Italy have become too reliant upon him, and cannot function properly without him. And even when they do have him? Well, going out with the same number of points as England (which could easily happen) would not be the biggest endorsement of that team, would it? They did only squeak past Japan and got embarrassed by Brazil, last summer, too.

Like I said in another thread: I need to see more from Italy before I credit them with being contenders, this year.

0
  • History
Showing previous versions of this text.

"What kind of player can the midfielder become? And how likely is it that he’ll be able to make that transition?"

Well, he's already successfully become a deep-lying play-maker, operating from defensive midfield. So, that answers THAT question. Seems like the person who wrote this doesn't really understand what he's talking about, or else is a couple of years out of date.

NOT SURPRISING, since this thread is entirely stolen from THIS article:

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/liverpools-steven-gerrard-problem-hes-not-andrea-pirlo/

Oh look. There's that internet again.

The comments section is interesting, though. ;)

"but if Pirlo gets into a rhythm against England and starts to dictate the tempo of the match, gaps may open and he could expose England, setting them off to an early defeat."

Which is interesting, because that didn't actually happen. What did Pirlo actually do in that match? He.. was allowed to have the ball, and didn't do a whole lot with it. He did of course perform that wonderful step-over to allow Marchiso a lucky shot, but, really the rest of the game went by with him simply being on the pitch, stroking the ball around.

So...

...if he gets knocked out of this World CUp in the group stage, which certainly could happen since Uruguay are not crap, then it will make it 3 out of 4 recent tournaments in which an Italy side, based around Pirlo's talents, has been eliminated at the first round.

Is that because Italy are not that great, or because PIrlo is not doing a good enough job?

Answers below...

"What kind of player can the midfielder become? And how likely is it that he’ll be able to make that transition?"

Well, he's already successfully become a deep-lying play-maker, operating from defensive midfield. So, that answers THAT question. Seems like the person who wrote this doesn't really understand what he's talking about, or else is a couple of years out of date.

NOT SURPRISING, since the first half of this thread is entirely stolen from THIS article:

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/liverpools-steven-gerrard-problem-hes-not-andrea-pirlo/

Oh look. There's that internet again.

The comments section is interesting, though. ;)

"but if Pirlo gets into a rhythm against England and starts to dictate the tempo of the match, gaps may open and he could expose England, setting them off to an early defeat."

Which is interesting, because that didn't actually happen. What did Pirlo actually do in that match? He.. was allowed to have the ball, and didn't do a whole lot with it. He did of course perform that wonderful step-over to allow Marchiso a lucky shot, but, really the rest of the game went by with him simply being on the pitch, stroking the ball around.

So...

...if he gets knocked out of this World Cup in the group stage, which certainly could happen since Uruguay are not crap, then it will make it 3 out of 4 recent tournaments in which an Italy side, based around Pirlo's talents, has been eliminated at the first round.

Is that because Italy are not that great, or because Pirlo is not doing a good enough job?

Answers below...

"What kind of player can the midfielder become? And how likely is it that he’ll be able to make that transition?"

Well, he's already successfully become a deep-lying play-maker, operating from defensive midfield. So, that answers THAT question. Seems like the person who wrote this doesn't really understand what he's talking about, or else is a couple of years out of date.

NOT SURPRISING, since the first half of this thread is entirely stolen from THIS article:

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/liverpools-steven-gerrard-problem-hes-not-andrea-pirlo/

Oh look. There's that internet again.

The comments section is interesting, though. ;)

"but if Pirlo gets into a rhythm against England and starts to dictate the tempo of the match, gaps may open and he could expose England, setting them off to an early defeat."

Which is interesting, because that didn't actually happen. What did Pirlo actually do in that match? He.. was allowed to have the ball, and didn't do a whole lot with it. He did of course perform that wonderful step-over to allow Marchiso a lucky shot, but, really the rest of the game went by with him simply being on the pitch, stroking the ball around.

So...

...if he gets knocked out of this World Cup in the group stage, which certainly could happen since Uruguay are not crap, then it will make it 3 out of 4 recent tournaments in which an Italy side, based around Pirlo's talents*, has been eliminated at the first round.

Is that because Italy are not that great, or because Pirlo is not doing a good enough job?

*as it happens, Pirlo wasn't able to play for Italy properly in either the 2008 or 2010 tournaments (only making an appearance in the final group game in 2010). So, without him, the team fell apart. Perhaps this is a good example of a team being unable to perform without a single man, and that's not a very good prospect for that team.

Lodatz 10 years ago Edited
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992

Well, seemingly passing it off as your own work by not citing the source is something I would personally like to discourage, perhaps. ;)

But tiki, I promise you I come in peace.

You mention in the Gerrard thread that you do not value Gerrard's qualities as highly as a Xavi, or a Pirlo, right? And that's fine, by the way. It's your bias. I have my own bias, and I'm about to explain it to you, in a way you might appreciate more than you anticipate:

I'm not saying this to insult, but essentially it's a problem with your level of perspective. What do I mean by that? Well, I mean, you are used to thinking of good football in terms of how they do it in Spain, and in particular at Barcelona. Again, I am not attempting to insult, but to honestly detail what I think is a flaw in your opinion, and a large source of why you and I fight so often. You see good football as the type that your beloved Barca have created, and judge all other teams and systems by how closely they stick to the principles you adore the most.

And why shouldn't you? You support a magnificent team, with an admirable history. You have very good reasons to cherish and value your impression of good football, and it's an honourable one.

But, it's also limited.

See, when you look at Gerrard you view him by his athleticism, as you've said. You judge his performances according to their sheer physical nature, and have declared that he is not creative. At least, not to the level of someone like, say, Scholes or Pirlo. And I think the reason why is because in Spain... there IS no-one like Gerrard. Or Scholes, for that matter, but I'll come to that. Spain just doesn't produce them, as a footballing nation, because Spain's footballing values are acclimated to the climate of Barcelona, first and foremost.

So, how could you be expected to see the creativity in what Gerrard does, when, his form of creativity is largely absent from the type of football you watch?

When you see Gerrard launching a 70-yard pass up the pitch, sailing over everyone's heads and finding his target on the wing, you are witnessing creativity. When you see him loft a cross-field ball over the front of the penalty area, switching flanks because he can see how well-defended is the one he is on, then you are watching creativity. When you see him play a sequence of one-two's along the wing, you are watching it. And when you see Steven Gerrard pick his shot, from 30 yards out, and blast it past the keeper before he knows what's happened, you are watching his creativity.

It's the same creativity as Bobby Charlton, and Franz Beckenbauer in his midfield days. It's Glenn Hoddle, it's Matt Le Tissier, it's Frank Lampard, and it's a host of players you've probably never heard of, in English league history, because THOSE qualities are ones that we value, in England, and have produced players accordingly. It's an English virtue, essentially, though pretty much all of Northern Europe adopted something similar in the 60s and 70s. It's the famous 'long ball' game, that you've spoken of so kindly in the past. ;)

And it's the same creativity as Paul Scholes.

See, Scholes was not a player in the mold of a Xavi or a Pirlo. He didn't need to be, because he came from a different tradition. Like Gerrard, his skill was in hoofing 40-yard passes over the defense with ease. He had the dribbling technique of any of this peers, but he used it to get himself into space to perform the same skill-set that Gerrard exhibits.

You admire Scholes' brain, I presume? It's the common link to Xavi, Pirlo and Iniesta, right? Well, that's great, because you're right. Except, what he used those brains for was the same style and tradition that Gerrard was cut from, by-and-large. The same tone of football. The same league.

Gerrard's brain is not neglected, and never has been. He just has the athleticism to perform what he's trying to perform, at a split second. Gerrard has never needed to play as patiently or cerebral as Xavi or Pirlo, because he doesn't have to wait for the perfect moment. His athleticism lets him launch that rocket-shot from 25 yards out into the top corner, at a moment's notice. He is able to charge down the wing, flick a pass to a wide-man and then receive it back to launch a swift cross into the box. He has the footwork and speed to dribble past his man from deep, if given the space, and sweep the ball up front for the lone striker to hunt down. He can literally pick a 70-yard ball upfield, within the space of looking up and seeing a red shirt running in the distance, and swinging his boot.

Pirlo or Xavi could not do that, though they are no less great of players. They just have a different skill-set, because as you have wanted me to notice many times: they are different players. Don't discount Gerrard simply because his game is developed around this talent and athletic ability; it's all being steered by a world-class ability to read the game, understand its movements, and know where his team-mates are to be found.

And he would do this literally all over the pitch, wherever he was needed, like Puskas and Di Stefano were known for doing, puuting in defensive work and being an excellent tackler of the ball, like the great Edgar Davids. Knowing where to be, having the power and speed to put it into action, and be THE difference, when needed, to save the team, either with a goal or a perfect tackle to prevent a goal-scoring chance.

THAT's brain-power too. And again, it was what Scholes would do (with albeit less successful tackling -- you should see his disciplinary record: he got so many yellows because he just didn't know how to tackle properly. Gerrard does), only with a lower centre of gravity and finer touches. Scholes was not a man known to dink the ball around endlessly in the middle of the pitch, as tiki taka would dictate, nor dawdle around on the edge of his own area, waiting to release a wide-man, as Pirlo has made a career from doing.

Scholes would be hunting around the pitch as avidly and (almost as) athletically as Gerrard does, because they both played in a similar way.

Again, it's the way of the Charlton, and the Beckenbauer, and the Nedved. It's the ethos of Hoddle, and even Zidane, which is why he recognizes and admires so much what he is witnessing when he watches these two English players (though in Zidane's case he surpasses both, as truly one of the greatest players of all time).

It's just a different style of player, a different style of creativity and a different style of genius, to what you're used to watching, and basing your ideas of perfection around.

And it's a style which has been just as successful if not more. It's MY bias, because of what I have grown up considering good football, too.

It deserves respect, and honour, even if you will forever prefer modern Spain, not scorn or devaluation simply because it does not fit your own biases.

0
  • History
Showing previous versions of this text.

But tiki, I promise you I come in peace.

You mention in the Gerrard thread that you do not value Gerrard's qualities as highly as a Xavi, or a Pirlo, right? And that's fine, by the way. It's your bias. I have my own bias, and I'm about to explain it to you, in a way you might appreciate more than you anticipate:

I'm not saying this to insult, but essentially it's a problem with your level of perspective. What do I mean by that? Well, I mean, you are used to thinking of good football in terms of how they do it in Spain, and in particular at Barcelona. Again, I am not attempting to insult, but to honestly detail what I think is a flaw in your opinion, and a large source of why you and I fight so often. You see good football as the type that your beloved Barca have created, and judge all other teams and systems by how closely they stick to the principles you adore the most.

And why shouldn't you? You support a magnificent team, with an admirable history. You have very good reasons to cherish and value your impression of good football, and it's an honourable one.

But, it's also limited.

See, when you look at Gerrard you view him by his athleticism, as you've said. You judge his performances according to their sheer physical nature, and have declared that he is not creative. At least, not to the level of someone like, say, Scholes or Pirlo. And I think the reason why is because in Spain... there IS no-one like Gerrard. Or Scholes, for that matter, but I'll come to that. Spain just doesn't produce them, as a footballing nation, because Spain's footballing values are acclimated to the climate of Barcelona, first and foremost.

So, how could you be expected to see the creativity in what Gerrard does, when, his form of creastivity is largely absent from the type of football you watch?

When you see Gerrard launching a 70-yard pass up the pitch, sailing over everyone's heads and finding his target on the wing, you are witnessing creativity. When you see him loft a cross-field ball over the front of the penalty area, switching flanks because he can see how well-defended is the one he is on, then you are watching creativity. When you see him play a sequence of one-two's along the wing, you are watching it. And when you see Steven Gerrard pick his shot, from 30 yards out, and blast it past the keeper before he knows what's happened, you are watching his creativity.

It's the same creativity as Bobby Charlton, and Franz Becjenbauer in his midfield days. It's Glenn Hoddle, it's Matt Le Tissier, it's Frank Lampard, and it's a host of players you've probably never heard of, in English league history, because THOSE qualities are ones that we value, in England, and have produced players accordingly. It's an English virtue, essentially, though pretty much all of Northern Europe adopted something similar in the 60s and 70s. It's the famous 'long ball' game, that you've spoken of so kindly in the past. ;)

And it's the same creativity as Paul Scholes.

See, Scholes was not a player in the mold of a Xavi or a Pirlo. He didn't need to be, because he came from a different tradition. Like Gerrard, his skill was in hoofing 40-yard passes over the defense with ease. He had the dribbling technique of any of this peers, but he used it to get himself into space to perform the same skill-set that Gerrard exhibits.

You admire Scholes' brain, I presume? It's the common link to Xavi, Pirlo and Iniesta, right? Well, that's great, because you're right. Except, what he used those brains for was the same style and tradition that Gerrard was cut from, by-and-large. The same tone of football. The same league.

Gerrard's brain is not neglected, and never has been. He just has the athleticism to perform what he's trying to perform, at a split second. Gerrard has never needed to play as patiently or cerebral as Xavi or Pirlo, because he doesn't have to wait for the perfor moment. His athleticism lets him launch that rocket-shot from 25 yards out into the top corner, at a moment's notice. He is able to charge down the wing, flick a pass to a wide-man and then receive it back to launch a swift cross into the box. He has the footwork and speed to dribble past his man from deep, if given the space, and sweep the ball up front for the lone striker to hunt down. He can literally pick a 70-yard ball upfield, within the space of looking up and seeing a red shirt running in the distance, and swinging his boot.

Pirlo or Xavi could not do that, though they are no less great of players. They just have a different skill set, because as you have wanted me to notice many times: they are different players. Don't discount Gerrard simply because his game is developed around this talent and athletic ability; it's all being steered by a world-class ability to read the game, understand its movements, and know where his team-mates are to be found.

THAT's brain-power too. And again, it was was Scholes would do, only with a lower centre of gravity and finer touches. Scholes was not a man known to dink the ball around endless in the middle of the pitch, as tiki taka would dictate, nor dawdle around on the edge of his own area, waiting to release a wide-man, as Pirlo has made a career from doing.

Scholes would be hunting around the pitch as avidly and (almost as) athletically as Gerrard does, because they both played in a similar way.

Again, it's the way of the Charlton, and the Beckenbauer, and the Nedved. It's the ethos of Hoddle, and even Zidane, which is why he recognizes and admires so much what he is witnessing when he watches these two English players (though in Zidane's case he surpasses both, as truly one of the greatest players of all time).

It's just a different style of player, a different style of creativity and a different style of genius, to what you're used to watching, and basing your ideas of perfection around.

And it's a style which has been just as successful if not more. It's MY bias, because of what I have grown up considering good football, too.

It deserves respect, and honour, even if your bias will forever prefer modern Spain.

But tiki, I promise you I come in peace.

You mention in the Gerrard thread that you do not value Gerrard's qualities as highly as a Xavi, or a Pirlo, right? And that's fine, by the way. It's your bias. I have my own bias, and I'm about to explain it to you, in a way you might appreciate more than you anticipate:

I'm not saying this to insult, but essentially it's a problem with your level of perspective. What do I mean by that? Well, I mean, you are used to thinking of good football in terms of how they do it in Spain, and in particular at Barcelona. Again, I am not attempting to insult, but to honestly detail what I think is a flaw in your opinion, and a large source of why you and I fight so often. You see good football as the type that your beloved Barca have created, and judge all other teams and systems by how closely they stick to the principles you adore the most.

And why shouldn't you? You support a magnificent team, with an admirable history. You have very good reasons to cherish and value your impression of good football, and it's an honourable one.

But, it's also limited.

See, when you look at Gerrard you view him by his athleticism, as you've said. You judge his performances according to their sheer physical nature, and have declared that he is not creative. At least, not to the level of someone like, say, Scholes or Pirlo. And I think the reason why is because in Spain... there IS no-one like Gerrard. Or Scholes, for that matter, but I'll come to that. Spain just doesn't produce them, as a footballing nation, because Spain's footballing values are acclimated to the climate of Barcelona, first and foremost.

So, how could you be expected to see the creativity in what Gerrard does, when, his form of creativity is largely absent from the type of football you watch?

When you see Gerrard launching a 70-yard pass up the pitch, sailing over everyone's heads and finding his target on the wing, you are witnessing creativity. When you see him loft a cross-field ball over the front of the penalty area, switching flanks because he can see how well-defended is the one he is on, then you are watching creativity. When you see him play a sequence of one-two's along the wing, you are watching it. And when you see Steven Gerrard pick his shot, from 30 yards out, and blast it past the keeper before he knows what's happened, you are watching his creativity.

It's the same creativity as Bobby Charlton, and Franz Beckenbauer in his midfield days. It's Glenn Hoddle, it's Matt Le Tissier, it's Frank Lampard, and it's a host of players you've probably never heard of, in English league history, because THOSE qualities are ones that we value, in England, and have produced players accordingly. It's an English virtue, essentially, though pretty much all of Northern Europe adopted something similar in the 60s and 70s. It's the famous 'long ball' game, that you've spoken of so kindly in the past. ;)

And it's the same creativity as Paul Scholes.

See, Scholes was not a player in the mold of a Xavi or a Pirlo. He didn't need to be, because he came from a different tradition. Like Gerrard, his skill was in hoofing 40-yard passes over the defense with ease. He had the dribbling technique of any of this peers, but he used it to get himself into space to perform the same skill-set that Gerrard exhibits.

You admire Scholes' brain, I presume? It's the common link to Xavi, Pirlo and Iniesta, right? Well, that's great, because you're right. Except, what he used those brains for was the same style and tradition that Gerrard was cut from, by-and-large. The same tone of football. The same league.

Gerrard's brain is not neglected, and never has been. He just has the athleticism to perform what he's trying to perform, at a split second. Gerrard has never needed to play as patiently or cerebral as Xavi or Pirlo, because he doesn't have to wait for the perfect moment. His athleticism lets him launch that rocket-shot from 25 yards out into the top corner, at a moment's notice. He is able to charge down the wing, flick a pass to a wide-man and then receive it back to launch a swift cross into the box. He has the footwork and speed to dribble past his man from deep, if given the space, and sweep the ball up front for the lone striker to hunt down. He can literally pick a 70-yard ball upfield, within the space of looking up and seeing a red shirt running in the distance, and swinging his boot.

Pirlo or Xavi could not do that, though they are no less great of players. They just have a different skill-set, because as you have wanted me to notice many times: they are different players. Don't discount Gerrard simply because his game is developed around this talent and athletic ability; it's all being steered by a world-class ability to read the game, understand its movements, and know where his team-mates are to be found.

THAT's brain-power too. And again, it was what Scholes would do, only with a lower centre of gravity and finer touches. Scholes was not a man known to dink the ball around endless in the middle of the pitch, as tiki taka would dictate, nor dawdle around on the edge of his own area, waiting to release a wide-man, as Pirlo has made a career from doing.

Scholes would be hunting around the pitch as avidly and (almost as) athletically as Gerrard does, because they both played in a similar way.

Again, it's the way of the Charlton, and the Beckenbauer, and the Nedved. It's the ethos of Hoddle, and even Zidane, which is why he recognizes and admires so much what he is witnessing when he watches these two English players (though in Zidane's case he surpasses both, as truly one of the greatest players of all time).

It's just a different style of player, a different style of creativity and a different style of genius, to what you're used to watching, and basing your ideas of perfection around.

And it's a style which has been just as successful if not more. It's MY bias, because of what I have grown up considering good football, too.

It deserves respect, and honour, even if your bias will forever prefer modern Spain.

Lodatz 10 years ago Edited
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992









(skip to 2:13 on the Davids one)

A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

I can do passing, too, if anyone is interested. :)

0
  • History
Showing previous versions of this text.


A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

Passing can be done too, if anyone is interested. :)


A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

Passing can be done too, if anyone is interested. :)


A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

Passing can be done too, if anyone is interested. :)

A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

Passing can be done too, if anyone is interested. :)

A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

I can do passing, too, if anyone is interested. :)



A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

I can do passing, too, if anyone is interested. :)



A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

I can do passing, too, if anyone is interested. :)



A video examination of the similarity in goal-scoring technique.

I can do passing, too, if anyone is interested. :)

tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

I dont have as any time as Lodatz, he seems to have a lot, i didnt wrote both of articles, i took the m from internet
AND ? Did he answered to any of this posts ? NO, he tried to take off some credibility saying that a post is stolen while everyone here paste articles, i wont give my argumentation in English im not at ease debating in this language specially against someone with BAD FAITH.

You couldnt answer the 2 posts, so the only way is to make something else look important, even in your responses you never take points, always take an orphan sentence and write 2 pages just arround this sentence ignoring the arguments.

I call this, Bad Faith and someone unable to change any of his views, so why arguing with me and others ?

0
Emrecan_58 10 years ago
Besiktas 149 3375

This article is the same what I was thinking whole time. Thanks for sharing.

0
tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

You are welcome.

0
Lodatz 10 years ago Edited
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992

"i wont give my argumentation in English im not at ease debating in this language specially against someone with BAD FAITH."

What on Earth are you talking about? Are you seriously attempting to use your lack of proficiency in English as an argument against my analysis?

I have given you 18 paragraphs of content, explaining my position. YOU have simply sat there, stolen words from other people, and throw a tantrum when you have no argument with which to respond.

You can't even seem to write ONE single paragraph of coherent football analysis. Instead all you seem capable of is baby-school insults and the insistence that you MUST be right, even when the facts say otherwise.

You addressed not a single thing I said. You lose, and it's obvious.

This is why you trolled me in the other threads, isn't it?

1
  • History
Showing previous versions of this text.

"i wont give my argumentation in English im not at ease debating in this language specially against someone with BAD FAITH."

What on Earth are you talking about? Are you seriously attempting to use your lack of proficiency in English as an argument against my analysis?

I have given you 18 paragraphs of content, explaining my position. YOU have simply sat there, stolen words from other people, and throw a tantrum when you have no argument with which to respond.

You addressed not a single thing I said. You lose, and it's obvious.

This is why you trolled me in the other threads, isn't it?

"i wont give my argumentation in English im not at ease debating in this language specially against someone with BAD FAITH."

What on Earth are you talking about? Are you seriously attempting to use your lack of proficiency in English as an argument against my analysis?

I have given you 18 paragraphs of content, explaining my position. YOU have simply sat there, stolen words from other people, and throw a tantrum when you have no argument with which to respond.

You can't even seem to write ONE single paragraph of coherent football analysis. Instead all you seem capable of is baby-school insults and the insistence that you MUST be right, even when the facts say otherwise.

You addressed not a single thing I said. You lose, and it's obvious.

This is why you trolled me in the other threads, isn't it?

tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

You shouldnt have disappeared, im not in the mood to loose my time actually. go find someone else.
Hasta luego.

0
Lodatz 10 years ago
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992

^ ?

Next time just be honest enough to admit that you have no counter-argument.

0
tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

Im not in the mood, i know how painful would be argumenting with you, reading each time 6 pages...
So yes, today France is playing, forget about Gerrard, he is god if you want...

0
Lodatz 10 years ago Edited
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992

"i know how painful would be argumenting with you, reading each time 6 pages..."

Sorry if my brain is 6x times bigger than yours. ;)

Seriously, are you actually trying this, now? Just answer my argument, or else let the thread die.

0
  • History
Showing previous versions of this text.

"i know how painful would be argumenting with you, reading each time 6 pages..."

Sorry if my brain is 6x times bigger than yours. ;)

Seriously, are you actually trying this, now? Just answer my argument, or else let the thread die.

tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

You should be sorry for being that arrogant :). Im not claiming being smart...

0
Lodatz 10 years ago
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992

Having a mastery of facts and the ability to explain them in a coherent way for several paragraphs at a time is not a mark of arrogance. It's a mark of knowledge.

Why can't you compete with me, if your knowledge of football is so great? Are you going to blame it on your inability to speak English, again? :)

0
tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

Lol lets end it here :). You seem motivated to pick up a fight, i told you im not in the mood.

0
Lodatz 10 years ago
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992

Feel free to come back, when you are.

Facts do not change according to mood.

0
tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

Dont disappear next time ;). My message was clear, i have nothing to add...

0
Lodatz 10 years ago
Tottenham Hotspur, England 150 4992

Your message, and your ability to argue it, should bear no relation to how often I am around to respond to it. Facts do not change according to who is in the room at the time.

Stop blaming my life away from FootyRoom (you know, my REAL life) for your inability to argue your case.

Either make your case, or just stop talking. Your choice. Nothing else needs to happen here.

0
tiki_taka 10 years ago
Barcelona, France 367 9768

You got the last word :).

0