By grazorblade - 1 Jul 2013 11:16 AM
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
|
By Arthur - 6 Jul 2013 7:42 PM
Melbourne's version of "Tiki Taka"? You decide
Got to 5:12 sec mark Melbourne's Messi? You decide.
[youtube]xG55ffMdcnk[/youtube]
|
|