Forgive me if this is a naive post I'm very much a journeyman of the game. I don't play now but I played as a kid and was definitely raised in the hoofball tradition but have come to appreciate the possession based game that has been employed in australia.

From our youth sides up we seem to be adopting a possession based game. Part of this will undoubtedly benefit Australia - in particular the fact that kids now get 600 touches a session. We are developing much more technical players and shouldn't retreat an inch when it comes to the new ideas in training in my opinion. I recently visiting a High school game in Melbourne (High school!!) and it was more entertaining than a lot of games I saw first year of the a league.
However, a string of key results have gotten me wondering if tiki taka needs to be improved upon.
Chelseas efforts against barca, Roar's 5 game losing streak last year. Roars performance in the ACL last year, young socceroos v el salvador, brazil spain this morning, Celtic beating barca etc.

I think the weaknesses of tiki taka are
1. it puts enormous pressure on the number 6 and the number 9. If you can keep either or both of these positions quiet then the other team becomes rudderless. When your number nine is quiet due to form (berisha) or being marked out of the game a team is often reduced to long shots (thinking of messi being marked out of the game). When your number 6 can't consistently break the first line of defense playing out from the back you at best get a gazillion (boring) passes between cbs and the number 6 or worse you give the ball away in dangerous position. In truth tiki taka teams often use false 9s which undermines this critique a little
2. tiki taka can struggle against teams sitting deep. Enough said, we have seen this time and again. A team dominates possession only to be rudderless in attack and struggles to produce a meaningful attempt on goal whereas the opposite team plays beautiful on the counter with a combination of diagonal long balls to the wings, through balls through the centre and players dribbling past opponents in one v one situations.

It would be nice to improve on tiki taka without losing what makes it so effective. This isn't easy, I remember Rado coaching the roar to occasionally play a more direct game and they looked like a team with half a philosophy. I don't think Roar ever figured out when to deviate from the possession based approach.

I have a few ideas of when but I was interested on what other people thought of the flaws in tiki taka and what solutions people have thought of. But here are some ideas i have thought of to answer the question when should you deviate from a possession based game
1. If the opposition back four isn't straight it can be effective to play a long pass over the top to a diagonal runner. We saw this in Roar's 5-0 demolition of MV
2. If you the opposition has numbers in your penalty area, particularly if a fullback, cb or dm is in the penalty area a quick counter attack may be the way to go if you secure possession quickly. Even against a team sitting deep it might be effective when the opposition gets a corner and you secure possession quickly. This isn't boring. Australia's counter attacks v japan were often beautiful and it is a shame that when teams play tiki taka they seem to lose this ability
3. If the opposition is pressing high and has ridiculously little space between their lines (fc tokyo v brisbane roar where they probably had less than 10 metres between their lines at some stages) perhaps the occasional long ball over the top to try and spread out their lines
4. against teams that like to sit deep I think you need players to drift between the lines and play forward at the risk of posession. There should also be a willingness to take players on in 1 v 1 situations

What do you guys think. Perhaps all this is naive but I'd love to learn if someone has any thoughts

How to build a possession philosophy without copying Barcelona or Spain
Football fanatics, people who truly understand football, know that by trying to copy the Barcelona or Spain model you are unlikely to succeed or even be on the right path to conducive long term development. However, Barcelona’s philosophy (possession-based control) is something that clubs can and do strive towards.
This article will attempt to detail just how Premier League teams currently build upon their possession-based philosophy through tactical solutions. For the purposes of trying to find general principles, this article will consider the opposition to play with a traditional 4-4-2; in reality, many Premier League teams still defend in variations of either a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 defensive block, regardless of their attacking solutions. This article has considered the tactical solutions of Arsenal, Swansea, Wigan (Roberto Martinez) and Liverpool - all of which look to dominate football matches through possession as a primary objective.
In all cases, the ‘secret’ to possession football is two fold: the ability to create overloads on the field and the ability of the players to play under pressure. Many of the teams mentioned above look to achieve possession football through an adaption of the Barcelona method (less attacking) and they achieve this through their positional systems. Brendan Rodgers (Liverpool), Swansea Football Club and Arsène Wenger (Arsenal) all look to play through their own club-unique 4-3-2-1 formations (when out of possession), they then look to overload central areas to facilitate building up from the back and through the thirds. All three teams are therefore outnumbered in the final third when the opposition is prepared, this then means that each team looks to play in between the lines in the final third and that the remainder of the team should look to break forward to support. An attacking solution that is only made possible because of the quality of their players to get back into position when required. On the other hand, Roberto Martinez’s philosophy is one that focuses on two aspects of football: overloads and 1 vs. 1 specialists.
In all cases, the emphasis is very much placed on positioning.

“There is so much depth to this philosophy and I am starting to realise that it is all about ‘the system’ as they call it. It is not about passing. It is not about pressing. It is not about possession. It is all about positioning!”
Jon Collins, Reading Coach

on Collins is a Reading FC coach who has studied alongside Eusebio Sacristán (Celta Vigo) and Carlos Hugo Garcia Bayón (now Barcelona B) during his PhD in Spanish Training Methodology with the assistance of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Athletic Bilbao, Malaga and others.
It wasn’t until I spoke to Tim Lees of Wigan Athletic that I truly understood the importance of Jon Collins’ quote. I’m sure that many reading this will understand the importance of ‘triangles’ on a football field as the pundits on MOTD will highlight (and then say no more on), I fail to understand how this detail alone can offer players any real understanding as to how they should be creating overloads on the greater scale of a football match. What is more valuable information however, is the more general detail that can be offered to players in how to create consistent overloads on a football field through formations.
Tim Lees, who has worked closely with Roberto Martinez in the past and was sent out to study the work of Paco Jémez of Rayo Vallecano in recent years, explained how the overloading details are a result of both the coach’s instructions and the player’s ability to create unique overloads during the football match. Overloads are far more complex than ‘the overlapping of a full-back to create a 2 vs. 1 situation in wide areas’, there are instead two different types of overloads.

1. Through the managers tactical solutions: the formation/system

This type of overload has been made visually clear in the following two diagrams. I have kept Roberto Martinez’s solution separate from the solutions of the other three teams as I believe Martinez’s solution has a different approach all together in how the team should attack in the final third.





In both solutions you are able to build up play from the back due to favourable overloads and this build up is often from central areas. Cruyff always emphasised the importance of building up from central areas through his use of a libero (Rijkaard) and this was because of his positional advantage of being able to pass to the left, right or centrally further afield. If the full-back is used to build up play, you eliminate the possibility of playing to the other side, as the switch is often time consuming and allows the opposition to simply shuffle across the field (remaining in their defensive shape). The 1-4-3-2-1 (1-3-4-3) teams manage to achieve this by instructing their ‘controller’ (deep lying midfielder) to drop into the central defensive space and the two central defenders pushing wide as the full-backs push on into midfield.
Martinez has always possessed players who are considered 1 vs. 1 specialists (Callum McManaman, Antonio Valencia, Victor Moses etc.) and his attacking third approach is therefore one that looks to isolate the opposition’s defence into 1 vs. 1 scenarios. Liverpool, Arsenal and Swansea however differ in their approach to the attacking third due to their lack of numbers against the opposition’s defence.
In the 1-3-4-3 solution, the dynamic movement of the front three is essential to help create overloads in the middle third. While this can also be achieved by the defensive midfielder pushing on forward, it is often more effective to find that long flat ball along the ground into one of the front three – because of the amount of space they will have around them. This was also the solution of Guus Hiddink for his South Korea team back in the 2002 World Cup - where South Korea impressed and finished in fourth position. The ability of the front three is relied upon to help create danger in the final third and this is perhaps an area of the field that Liverpool (in particular) will look to further improve on next season.
In the Martinez attacking shape, you may have come to the conclusion that they have simply ‘ignored’ the roles of the opposition wingers. It is extremely rare that both wing-backs will push on into these attacking positions at the same time and more common that one will accelerate on into a more attacking position than the other. This therefore leaves one full-back in a slightly more defensive position to cover the space on the flank should the opposition attempt to counter-attack through one of their wingers.

2. Through the players tactical intelligence

It is for this reason (the team’s collective tactical intelligence) that it often takes many months for teams to adjust to this particular playing style. It is essential that the players within the team are able to create unpredictable overloads all over the pitch through their own movement (away from the desired tactical shape).
Take the example where your full-back in possession and he is being pressed by the opponent’s winger. The 2 vs. 1 scenario can be created in a number of different ways: (1) your winger can look to drop back and offer an angle away from the pressing player, (2) your deep lying playmaker can break free and offer a pass inside or (3) your central defender may take up a deep position directly in behind the full-back offering support in this deeper position. This type of solution to creating overloads comes with the understanding built between a playing squad and the player’s ability to find space where there is seemingly none. In England we do not create enough players who can take the ball (while closely marked) in tight spaces and draw the opposition into a particular space to make space for another. We cannot therefore consistently think about ‘the second or third pass’ while in possession.
In the Premier League, it is essential that the ball circulation form accounts for the movement of players should they lose the ball and need to get back into their defensive shape. The defensive solution needs to be as considered as the attacking shape and has to relate to how you wish to keep the ball. There is a very good reason that Wigan Athletic’s players take up five of the top ten ‘interceptions per minute’ table (as pointed out by @Kopology) and that reason is simply down to the defensive overloads in key defensive areas.







Roberto Martinez’s Wigan overloads allowed for the Wigan midfield trio and central defensive trio to have two players man-marking and one player looking to zonal mark (i.e. breaking free of the unit to intercept the play). The top-10 table however, shows that this system in place was far from static and it appears that the players involved in the entire team’s set up would look to cover another player’s movement should he look to leave his man unmarked.
In the Liverpool, Arsenal and Swansea defensive set up, the team are set up to defend 1 vs. 1 scenario’s in their defensive third. In the middle and attacking third however, the team’s look to press when appropriate and they do this with a collective effort. The movement from the defensive block to an aggressive press is made through the understanding that the zonal marking player (no. 6) will take up the best space possible to allow you to leave your man and go forward to press the opposition. While I will not demonstrate in this article (as it is covered well in my upcoming book) it is possible that three players can press five opponents effectively to recover possession and eliminate the opponent’s passing options. It is this proposal that leads Brendan Rodgers to the conclusion that the pressing game is the most appropriate solution to recovering possession, rather than Martinez’s more patient and defensive overloading solution.
Much of this article’s content has been discussed and analysed through interviews with many possession-based favouring coaches in the Premier League and La Liga. I do however believe that it is possible, through an effective coaching programme, for more English teams to look to play the game with a possession-based control philosophy.
So what is the secret to Spain and Barcelona’s success? Well there isn’t any one secret, but it certainly isn’t all down to the playing ability of their players alone. The tactical understanding coaches in this country and the implementation process are just as important. That is to say if the coaching qualifications run by the English FA to not allow for a Manchester United coach to use his preferred 3-5-2 formation during his A License prep course and then being instructed he had to use a 4-4-2 formation, then unfortunately at the highest levels of England’s coaching qualifications, overloads are (to a certain extent) overlooked all together
Jed Davies’ book on developing a possession philosophy in football will be available to buy in August 2013. The book has taken over two years and hundreds of club visits and interviews to write with the help of coaches from the likes of Liverpool FC, Swansea City FC, Wigan Athletic FC, Barcelona B, Barcelona-USA, Villarreal, Bahrain-U23′s national manager and many more professional coaches who have expertise in possession football. Please sign up to www.jeddavies.com to be informed about it’s release.
Manchester United coach not being allowed to use 3-5-2 : Read article by @markproskills [Mark Senior] in the DailyMail on the 26th of June
All other quotes are from private interviews conducted by Jed C.Davies and are included in his upcoming publication (August 2013)

http://www.eplindex.com/34538/build-possession-philosophy-copying-barcelona-spain.html

Wow very interesting article will take some time to digest it

Some good observations, there Grazorblade.

Playing out from the back not also puts a lot of pressure on the 6, but also the 8.

In Arthur's excellent diagrams, the bloke has amazing resources, in the last formation of the 1-4-3-3, the FFA preferred midfield triangle is to have two screeners, or a 6 and 8 in the defensive midfield triangle.

This is preferred as adevelopment system from ages 12 - 16, rather than one screener, a number 6, with the number 8 playing alongside the number 10 in the attacking version of the midfield triangle.

The defensive triangle makes it easier to play out from the back.

This is the same development formation they use in Spain, France and Holland. The Germans use the 1-4-2-3-1 system. That is where the two wingers are tucked in a little and play further back in a line with the number 10, or attacking midfielder. These nations development systems are what the FFA bases the National Curriculum on.

Your right that the 8 is also a difficult position in this system as they seem to be required to not only do a lot of defensive work and help playing out the back like a second six, but to be able to control the transition from defense to attack and be a deep play maker. Something like a cross between bresciano and jedi.
Funny enough when I watched roar under ange the 8 was just a hard working box to box midfielder and not a lot of pressure was put on him (thinking of murdocca). Is there a reason why the 8 looks like such a key position in some brands of possession based football but not others?

I know some coaches in the CCMA academy were playing with just one screener until Mark Jones came on board as TD. Now they all have to play with 2 - from the 12's all the way to 1st grade I believe. He has also had a fair bit of input into their defensive duties. The 7, 9 & 11 used to press really hard in defense but now they have to concentrate more on staying compact and just shutting down the passing lanes. Interesting concepts for 12 year olds to be learning.

He also wants the the 7 & 9 to tuck in a little in attack to make space for the 2 & 5 to get forward.

To improve on Tiki Taka one first needs to understand it. What we have with the curriculum and playing style of the National Teams and skillaroo programs is not Tiki Taka.

Our player development style and our playing style is more akin to the French and Dutch schools. While please do not confuse Dutch methodology as being Ajax methodology or Cruyff methodology or Barcelona methodology or Spainish methodology. I would even go as far as saying Guardiola methodology nowadays, as Vilanova's period clearly showed there is a difference. Thats not to say there is not some basis to Dutch/French methods in Tiki Taka but then again there isn't.

To be clear our development and playing model is still about "athletic" ability, it is about moving the ball forward, it is about moving the ball forward with accuracy an SPEED. And thiis means the ball movement itself and players moving with speed into 1v1 situations. Yes we play it out the back then spread it wide to a full back who invariably looks for the long ball over the top or sliding it up the wing.

Tiki Taka is all about a first touch with a laterlal movement away from your opponent. It is about keeping close to your team mate with the ball, not running away from the player with the ball. It is about provoking your opponent into situations and positions on the field you want them to go to. Possesion is a tool to defend with, recover physically with, attack with and score with.
If you go over the goals Barca scored in Pepe's last season, Barca scored over 130 goals from memory six were scored from long range, most were with the side of the foot.

The article I posted above and what is presented as one part of possesion football or Tiki Tkaa is all about "Overloads" the diagrams presented are dividing the pitch into thirds, defensive middle and attacking. Possesion and Tiki Taka is about having numerical advantage in each zone as the ball progesses from defence into attack or "Over Loads" in each tactical area.

If you play at 100MPH how do you acheive Overload in the attacking third?
If you boot the ball long how do you achieve Overload in the attacking Third?
By by-passing the midfield how do use the midfields to support attacks and defence to gain overload?you cannot.

Even teams that use counter attacking methodology waiting to pounce on an error in their defensive third are looking at creating Overload by getting the ball quickly to the attacking third craeting 1v1 or 2v1 or 3v2 situations.

What also nee to consider is the rule changes that have made a difference to the way the game is played.
The pass back rule to the GK.
The offside rule.
The tackle from behind rule and red card interpretation.

Of any style of game Tiki Taka is best placed to cope with these rule changes so far.





1. 2. 3. 4. It becomes a question of are you trying to win the battle or win the war. As a team playing the same style all the time from the 1' to the 90'can produce a powerful consistent performance. as Roar and CCM have shown us. All over the World teams who control possesion are winning titles. You may beat them once but will you win the championship?

While the question is how to improve Tiki Taka I think we need to keep a close look at Bayern Munich this year it may provide the answer.






Edited by Arthur: 3/7/2013 03:34:30 PM

Arthur we have to remember here is we or overall the FFA want to create our version version of tiki Taka, like how the Brazilians have Jogo Bonito and the Dutch that have total football, we need to create our own identity of the playing style that will fit with our cultural characteristics, from watching the young Socceroos play it shows surely but slowly we are learning and eventually with some patience we will have our own version of ala tiki Taka, Jogo bonito etc in the future.
Aussie Style.

Actually I don't believe the FFA wants to create their own version of Tiki Taka, they do want their own version of Possesion football and they do want to develop world class no. 10's 7's and 11's.

Possesion football and Tiki Taka are two different things. Manchester United, Ajax, Arsenal, PSG, AC Milan play Posesion football Barcelona plays tiki taka.
Swansea and Wigan are heading that way looking forward to what Liverpool under Rodgers will produce this season.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/swansea-show-more-than-passing-likeness-to-barcelona-6290621.html

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/analysis-stats-show-laudrups-swansea-2024773

http://www.givemesport.com/336622-top-10-european-pass-masters




Edited by Arthur: 3/7/2013 09:13:42 PM

FFA claim that the NC is based on Spanish curricula as one of the four European methodologies used as a source for the NC.

In workshops, FFA have used Barcelona videos to illustrate certain points in advocating and trying to impart, a national style.

So whether it is tiki taka or not, FFA claim one of the sources for the national system is Spanish.

Edited by Arthur: 3/7/2013 09:13:42 PM[/quote]

The rondo is again very much the basis for Positioning Games, the second stage of a four stage session plan in FFA coach education.

Decentric since you're at the coalface of youth development and have some insight into the improvement of each generation coming through. realistically which group of youngsters will possess better 1v1 skills and better tactical knowledge on the pitch? I know its a long process and its fantastic even seeing our u20s playing a more proactive style of football. But the difference between the u20s and the other teams in the group was that the other players had better 1v1 skills.

Interesting observation about your 1v1 skills in the under 20 games. Sometimes when one goes over a game slowly, there is a different outcome from what one thought prior.

The 1v1 skills should be better in about 7 years, when the first players who were in the original intake for the Skills Acquisition Program start progress through the ranks. This is the opinion of one of the top SAP coaches in the country. I asked him two weeks ago.

Complete Guardiola's first training session with Bayern Munich

[youtube]goyRIS4X8zM#at=11[/youtube]

Melbourne's version of "Tiki Taka"? You decide
Got to 5:12 sec mark Melbourne's Messi? You decide.
[youtube]xG55ffMdcnk[/youtube]