After last year’s World Cup the internet site World Soccer Talk ran an article outlining the top four tactical innovations in soccer. Their selections included:
Helenio Herrera’s use of a “sweeper” in Inter Milan’s team in the 1960’s when he deployed a 1-5-3-2 formation in an era when most teams played with four or five players in attack.
Alf Ramsey’s 1-4-4-2 formation at the 1966 World Cup. Ramsey’s England team were known as the ‘wingless wonders” as he deployed four midfielders playing “narrow” rather than using two players wide as wingers.
Carlo Ancelotti’s AC Milan teams of 2001-2009 which deployed a 1-4-1-2-1-2 formation with a very narrow midfield. As the midfield was so narrow Ancelotti’s teams deployed attacking full-backs such as Cafu to provide width in attacks.
Luciano Spalletti’s AS Roma team of the 2006 which had no recognized striker in a 1-4-6 -0 formation.
Personally, I’m not sure that I would agree with all the selections. Herbert Chapman’s W/M formation (1-3-2-2-3) in the 1920’s revolutionized the game as it was deployed to gain advantages after changes in the off-side rule. The Dutch side of the 1970’s with Rinus Michels provided the game with a rotation of positions and increased movement off the ball. This style of play became known as “total football” and formed the basis of the Barcelona teams under Johan Cruyff in the late 1980’s and more recently Pep Guardioli’s sides between 2008-2012.
Surely the work of Chapman and Michels has had a significant influence on the modern game. Credit must also be extended to the AC Milan teams that Arrigo Sacchi produced in the 1980’s.
Where all these coaches innovators or pragmatists?
A closer look at the four tactical innovations chosen reflects decisions made mostly out of necessity. Alf Ramsey had several talented central midfielders in 1966, rather than wingers and that helped influence his tactical decision to deploy a narrow 1-4-4-2 formation.
Similarly, Ancelotti’s tactical decisions were made based upon the attributes of the players at his disposal, rather than any philosophical decision on how he wanted his teams to play. At that time AC Milan had an over-abundance of highly skilled central midfield players.
Rather than have players play out of position or bring in different players, Ancelotti adapted the system to suit the players. Pirlo became one of the best holding midfielders in world soccer and Kaka was deployed behind the strikers. That way, more centrally minded players could be deployed successfully in a team with a host of other talented midfield players such as Gattuso, Seedorf and Costa.
It is generally acknowledged that Pep Guarioloa was the architect of the false number 9. However, Luciano Spalletti decided to deploy a 1-4-6-0 formation back in 2006 in Serie A because he faced an injury crisis with his forward players.
According to Wikipedia “an innovator in a general sense, is a person or an organization who is one of the first to introduce into reality something better than before. That opens up a new area for others and achieves an innovation”.
Pragmatism is often taken to refer to a “compromise of aims or principles and to weigh reason” which definitely sounds less noble than the work of an innovator.
However, in reality, top coaches, both at the professional and youth levels, are faced with challenges and have to decisions to make every day, based on the resources at their disposal. I’m currently reading Marti Perarnau’s excellent book on Pep Guardiola Pep Confidential which provides an in-depth insight into Guardiola’s first season at Bayern Munich. Many think of Guardiola as a great innovator, who has strict and romantic philosophies on how the game should be played.
Yes, his Barcelona teams were heavily influenced by the work of Rinus Michels and the Dutch concept of “total football”. However, the portrayal of Guardiola in the book paints the image of Guardiola as a coach in relentless pursuit of solving football (soccer) problems. He arrived in Bayern Munich after they were crowned as European Champions but has relentlessly pushed the players in new directions and to embrace new ideas. Many thought that Guardiola would quickly have Bayern play like his Barcelona teams. However, he has looked at the players at his disposal and set his team up to be successful within a German league that has many teams that are very good at counter-attacking.
Not all his ideas are new and he is certainly not afraid to borrow or adapt ideas from others. Apparently, he has sought out the advice of Bayern Munich’s basketball coach to help him devise better team strategies for transition.
Are the top coach’s innovators or pragmatists?
Soccer can be very insular. Simon Kuper and Stefan Szymanski in their excellent book Soccernomics outline the historical insular practices of soccer at the highest levels and the inefficiency of clubs that provide jobs for ex-professionals even when they are not the most suitable candidates. The “new wave” of European mangers like Jose Mourinho, Arsène Wenger and André Villas-Boas has started to change this. Not one of these managers enjoyed successful professional careers, yet they are now recognized as some of the most innovative and successful coaches in the world.
Mourinho famously dismissed his lack of success as a player by stating “I don’t see the connection. My dentist is the best in the world, and yet he’s never had a particularly bad toothache.” When asked why failed players often become good coaches he replied that it was because they had “more time to study”.
Mourinho and Wenger studied sports science and have adapted many training ideas on diet and recovery from other sports to give their teams a competitive edge. Wenger has also studied economics at the graduate level and many observers — including the authors of Soccernomics believe this gives him a huge edge in the transfer market, as he is almost always able to ascertain the correct market value of a player.
When I began taking coaching licenses in Canada, I was required to take NCCP (National Coaching Certification Program) courses which covered the basic theory of coaching all sports, in addition to soccer-specific coaching courses. The great advantage of these courses was that there were coaches from multiple sports in the same room, discussing coaching practices. At one point I fondly remember having to study and explain how I would teach the biomechanics of throwing a baseball. Having grown up in Northern Ireland, I had never thrown a baseball in my life. It was challenging, it took me out of my comfort zone but it was a great learning experience.
Similarly, the Olympics hosted in the UK in 2014 seems to have had a positive effect on the soccer coaching community in Britain. It is now becoming less insular. Check out the performance website of the great soccer magazine FourFourTwo (at www.performance.fourfourtwo.com) and you are as likely to be reading a stretching article by Great Britain’s three time gymnast Louis Smith, and its adaptability to soccer, as about the secrets of Harry Redknapp’s coaching success.
Should we be innovators or pragmatists? Not to sit on the fence on this one but coaches have to be well-rounded and require to be a bit of both. Pragmatic in making good decisions in a fast-paced environment where variables and resources are constantly changing. Innovative in relentlessly pushing the boundaries to find new solutions to improving the performance levels of the players being coached and pushing the game to higher levels.
Ian McClurg is technical director of 1 v 1 FC, a soccer training academy based in Ancaster Ontario and author of the upcoming book, The 1v1Way: Soccer Tips from an Emerging Talent Centre. For more info, contact Ian at ian@1v1soccer.ca or visit www.1v1soccerfc.com
|