Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Do You Watch Football Tactically?

It’s something I’m becoming more and more interested by, the more I read on here about people’s take on tactics.

I’m sure I’m not the only one, but when I’m watching a game - I have to admit that I don’t generally pick out all of the different tactical nuances of what are going on.

I’ll know all the players, and their general positions but I struggle to watch a game and go “oh looks like we’re trying a 3-5-2 with wing backs” or whatever. 

Do you tend to watch the game and spend most of it putting together the tactics/formations/strategy, or do you tend to be a bit more relaxed in the analysis?
«134

Comments

  • I do, but only post 'action' after I see what I believe to be a glaring error - hindsight eh?

    I love to read @Tutt-Tutt's analysis and tactical views. He always seems to get it spot on and has me thinking "oh yeah - that's obvious really".
  • If you are getting into the tactical side of the game, I recommend 'Inverting the Pyramid' (ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1474609296) as a great historical starter.

    It will give you a good overview of how things have evolved over the years, and also help with some of the terminology.  There are, of course, a million other books.

    I love the tactical side of the game, and have explored 'revolutionary' approaches at the amateur level.  Although I'm told that there is limited room for innovation in the modern game, I don't believe that ... although I do agree that there are certain basic principles that cannot be ignored.

    Good luck with it.  It will definitely add to your enjoyment
  • At Charlton I tend to just watch the game and (try to) enjoy it

    proper tactical or opposition analysis is pretty exhausting and not massively enjoyable because you’ll usually be concentrating on one team and noting as much as you can down. 

    The more you watch and the more you do it the easier it gets BUT it’s far from easy to do it right
  • Dave Rudd said:
    If you are getting into the tactical side of the game, I recommend 'Inverting the Pyramid' (ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1474609296) as a great historical starter.

    It will give you a good overview of how things have evolved over the years, and also help with some of the terminology.  There are, of course, a million other books.

    I love the tactical side of the game, and have explored 'revolutionary' approaches at the amateur level.  Although I'm told that there is limited room for innovation in the modern game, I don't believe that ... although I do agree that there are certain basic principles that cannot be ignored.

    Good luck with it.  It will definitely add to your enjoyment
    👍 Jonathan Wilson definitely knows his shit 
  • Addickted said:
    Always disappointed we never to seem use the 'rush goalie' tactic. Who needs wing backs.

    And while we're at it, where have all the inside/outside centres gone?

    False number 9 and number 10 playing in the hole - what a load of old bollocks.
    And don't even get me started on Zone 14.
  • I definitely do and think I appreciate the game more for it, but can also get more frustrated if I don’t see the coaches counteract a more imposing formation/tactical style of play. 
  • And don't bother reading the myriad of football tactic books, they'll just confuse you with their differing ideas and scenarios.

    Football tactics are simple and have worked for years. They need to uncomplicated, effective and easily understood by players at all levels and put across in a straightforward manner so everyone understands their role.


  • Sponsored links:


  • I find it difficult to watch Charlton tactically. My emotions get in the way.
  • Addickted said:
    And don't bother reading the myriad of football tactic books, they'll just confuse you with their differing ideas and scenarios.

    Football tactics are simple and have worked for years. They need to uncomplicated, effective and easily understood by players at all levels and put across in a straightforward manner so everyone understands their role.


    You are Nigel Adkins and I claim my £5.
  • I don't but I expect that I would appreciate football more if I did. It's like Film Studies which I teach at secondary school. My pupils begin the course telling me that I am ruining films for them by analysing everything but after a few months, parents tell me that their kids are ruining films for them by explaining the camerawork, lighting, mise-en-scene, etc. Analysis enhances enjoyment.
  • Or you can be like Klopp or Guardiola and only sign players capable of understanding more sophisticated instructions, while simultaneously instituting rigorous standards of football comprehension in the youth teams. Also simple ;) 
  • Good thread and I have read Inverting the Pyramid. 

    I really believe this has become more acute in recent seasons. Watching the Big Match Revisited on ITV 4. I am sure that most teams played the 4 4 2 formation. 

    I think having three from seven subs has meant that there can be more variation. 
  • I tend to watch the midfielder battle. (Bit bored on Saturday as we didn’t have one). 
  • Absolutely i watch the tactical game, however you need quick brained footballers to know when they way they have been "set up" is flawed. 
    You then need a midfield "general" to identify the problem and "reset" the team as they play.
    The best we had a CAFC.... Mark Kinsella,by a country mile.Also Graham Stuart, could dictate the way and the pace the game was played.
  • Tutt-Tutt said:
     I usually look for the system at the kick off. Every team has a formation or system when in possession and when out of possession. For example 4-4-2 switches to 4-2-4 in attacking play, or 5-3-2 to 3-5-2. Most teams tend to line up in their system at the kick off. The BBC football page is very good. In the line ups for each game, they lay out the formation and adjust it if necessary.

    To pick a system look for the defensive line. If the Right Centre Back has one other Centre Back to his left, it's a flat back four. If he has two to his left, it's a three man central defence. When out of possession, the two full backs drop in a line alongside the centre backs. In the 5-3-2 to 3-5-2 system they will push forward quickly as Wing Backs.

    The characteristic of each system is governed by the style and ability of each individual in that system That will also determine whether a club uses a different system, like 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 which are more constant. So look to see if there are 2 Central Midfielders in front of the Centre Backs or just the one. Then decide whether there is one Centre forward, two strikers, or a Centre Forward with a number 10 playing just in behind him. 

    Every team should have a pattern of play that fits the system. For example, a short passing game through midfield, or an "up, back and through" style of play, into the Centre Forward to set up.the through ball. 

    When out of possession, most teams will either drop off to defend the 18 yard line, in a compact formation or push up as a team to defend high up the pitch and press the ball to suffocate the opposition and win the ball high up the pitch. 

    There are plenty of websites on systems, covering the 4-4-2 Diamond, 4-3-3, 4-4-1-1, 4-1-4-1, 3-4-3, Just put the system into google. 
    Told you.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I watch all football tactically and it means I am not much of a singer as I do get in a zone of concentration. But I enjoy it. I try to read what is happening and think what should be happening etc... I enjoy watching park football and in some ways I enjoy it more nowadays as I feel I can see solutions that look obvious after not a lot of time.

    I watched a girls match on Sunday morning and the Yellow team thrashed the Grey team but I noticed the overall ability levels were similar. It is just the yellow team were playing its better players in better positions. I am often tempted to have a word with the manager as an act of kindness but people don't like a smart alec! Some people like doing Jigsaw puzzles!

      
  • I definitely do when I'm at a game in person, its hard to do on the TV as the camera angles generally don't allow for it 

    In the Premier days under Sir Alan he definitely understood the importance of bodies in the area of the pitch the ball spends most time, the middle and when we had Young and Powell pushing up to support the midfield and Euell dropping off we would swarm other teams at our level and it made us competitive against the bigger boys. Loved seeing that squeeze work and it did a lot 

    Essentially players understand a 442 but that can easily go into a 5 at the back out of possession or 5 in midfield 

    The pressing is what catches me out now, working out what part of the pitch usnir the opposition have been told to press at. Its fucking tough to do that with us at the moment as we seem to have gone for the tactical foul or last ditch lunge approach instead. Also the use of deep midfielders and what purpose they are there to serve, are they playing as a screen to the defence whereby in a midfield 5 they would drop to cover the extra defender moving into midfield such as a wingback or are they trying to do what Pirlo did as he got older and wiser and went where the space was and built things deeper and made the play further back. 

    Our promotion season under Powell was a good example of having all the elements combined to play a 442, Jacko on one flank who would come narrow but have the outlet of Wiggins with the fitness and athleticism to get up and down, on the other wing you had Solly and Wagstaff who would alternate and double up causing a real headache for opposition wingers and full backs and then the traditional engine room of 2 box to box midfielders and a player like Kermorgant who could be the target but also drop back and make up a looser 5 

    The key to being able to be flexible is generally the full backs and sometimes the centre halves, if they can play a bit and are fit that opens up a lot of channels and if you are playing a defensive 5 you need someone to break into midfield who is happy with the ball at his feet 
  • Nope.

    Just watch it & enjoy the game. Tactics mean shit all. Just score more goals than your opponent. End of.


    Thats a tactic!
  • Rob7Lee said:
    Ever since I got to about 14/15 and realised I didn't quite have the ability to make football as a career I've been really interested in the tactical side. Even when playing I felt I had a really good ability to read the game, just not the tools to go with it!

    In my later teens and early 20's I did quite a lot of coaching including a certain Mr Parker aged 8/9 (he learnt nothing from me :D ).

    It drives my daughters a bit mad as I tend to get a bit carried away in the stand with instructions as if they can hear me or as if they'd take any notice  :disappointed:

    Footballs changed a lot the last 30 years, back then almost every team would play 442 or a slight variation. However the fundamentals remain the same.

    To an extent I'm a firm believer in playing a formation based on your opposition but more importantly based on the ability of your team squad. It's OK if you have world class players and a large squad, you can almost play any formation you like as you'll have those tools at your disposal.

    IMHO thats been our downfall a lot of the time the past few years, trying to play a style/formation that we don't have the personnel to do. Whether that's ability or ageing legs.

    If I go back to the time I knew the team inside out;

    Bolder - you wouldn't have played him and asked him to play out from the back, he struggled to keep it in half the time hoofing it up the pitch to Leaburn! Neither would you have with Balmer and Webbo.
    Pitcher (RIP) - you wouldn't have asked him to play wing back in a 5 (Minto however you could quite easily)
    Bumstead in a midfield 3!?! Actually, his knowledge was phenomenal so maybe in his younger years (Nor Gritt, Curbishley, or Pardew)
    Mendonca as a sole striker???.......

    When I look at our squad it cries out for 442, we could comfortably play 451, but 433 is a stretch too far as the top 3 aren't likely to drop back successfully enough, often enough so if you fail with the high press the midfields out and the opposition is already on our defence and probably outnumbered.

    I'm not convinced you can play any form of diamond either that includes Watson or Morgan. You probably could with JFC and Arter in there.

    Part of management is getting the best from what you have, motivationally of course but also using the tools you have as best you can. We have too often try to bash square pegs into round holes.

    Thats why if the owner does at some point remove Adkins I'd go with Jackson, his knowledge and understanding of the game is up there with the best of them. Add in his knowledge of the club, this league etc, he's a high chance of success with the right backing.


    Couldn't agree more about the players we have and how its tied us down, a 442 is tempting but I don't think Kirk and Jayasemi are defensively minded enough to support their full backs. We could play a diamond if all our midfielders are fit but that leaves us with loads of options to play off stockley but fucks us if we lose him. 
  • edited September 14
    Rob7Lee said:
    Ever since I got to about 14/15 and realised I didn't quite have the ability to make football as a career I've been really interested in the tactical side. Even when playing I felt I had a really good ability to read the game, just not the tools to go with it!

    In my later teens and early 20's I did quite a lot of coaching including a certain Mr Parker aged 8/9 (he learnt nothing from me :D ).

    It drives my daughters a bit mad as I tend to get a bit carried away in the stand with instructions as if they can hear me or as if they'd take any notice  :disappointed:

    Footballs changed a lot the last 30 years, back then almost every team would play 442 or a slight variation. However the fundamentals remain the same.

    To an extent I'm a firm believer in playing a formation based on your opposition but more importantly based on the ability of your team squad. It's OK if you have world class players and a large squad, you can almost play any formation you like as you'll have those tools at your disposal.

    IMHO thats been our downfall a lot of the time the past few years, trying to play a style/formation that we don't have the personnel to do. Whether that's ability or ageing legs.

    If I go back to the time I knew the team inside out;

    Bolder - you wouldn't have played him and asked him to play out from the back, he struggled to keep it in half the time hoofing it up the pitch to Leaburn! Neither would you have with Balmer and Webbo.
    Pitcher (RIP) - you wouldn't have asked him to play wing back in a 5 (Minto however you could quite easily)
    Bumstead in a midfield 3!?! Actually, his knowledge was phenomenal so maybe in his younger years (Nor Gritt, Curbishley, or Pardew)
    Mendonca as a sole striker???.......

    When I look at our squad it cries out for 442, we could comfortably play 451, but 433 is a stretch too far as the top 3 aren't likely to drop back successfully enough, often enough so if you fail with the high press the midfields out and the opposition is already on our defence and probably outnumbered.

    I'm not convinced you can play any form of diamond either that includes Watson or Morgan. You probably could with JFC and Arter in there.

    Part of management is getting the best from what you have, motivationally of course but also using the tools you have as best you can. We have too often try to bash square pegs into round holes.

    Thats why if the owner does at some point remove Adkins I'd go with Jackson, his knowledge and understanding of the game is up there with the best of them. Add in his knowledge of the club, this league etc, he's a high chance of success with the right backing.


    What 2 do we have, that are fit and proven, that you could play in the middle of midfield on a 442?

    If you say, for example Clare, tucking in from the right and a more attacking winging, say Leko, on the left, then 2 up top, it's no different to a 433 is it?

    Charlton have not regularly played a proper 442 since midway through the 98/99 season, apart from a brief spell under Luzon.

    I have seen suggested that the 451 Curbs used is the solution, that had a "10" were Lee, Morgan and Washington have ment to have played at verious points.  It also had 2 wingers, Rommedahl and Thomas.  I don't see how, on paper, that's any different to what we play now.  Apart from the obvious quality. 

    IMO what ever formation you throw at the wall the two is the problem.  Especially when most teams play 3, Cheltenham actually played 4.

    I can't see how 442 is the answer (4231 isn't either BTW). 
  • edited September 13
    Carter said:
    Rob7Lee said:
    Ever since I got to about 14/15 and realised I didn't quite have the ability to make football as a career I've been really interested in the tactical side. Even when playing I felt I had a really good ability to read the game, just not the tools to go with it!

    In my later teens and early 20's I did quite a lot of coaching including a certain Mr Parker aged 8/9 (he learnt nothing from me :D ).

    It drives my daughters a bit mad as I tend to get a bit carried away in the stand with instructions as if they can hear me or as if they'd take any notice  :disappointed:

    Footballs changed a lot the last 30 years, back then almost every team would play 442 or a slight variation. However the fundamentals remain the same.

    To an extent I'm a firm believer in playing a formation based on your opposition but more importantly based on the ability of your team squad. It's OK if you have world class players and a large squad, you can almost play any formation you like as you'll have those tools at your disposal.

    IMHO thats been our downfall a lot of the time the past few years, trying to play a style/formation that we don't have the personnel to do. Whether that's ability or ageing legs.

    If I go back to the time I knew the team inside out;

    Bolder - you wouldn't have played him and asked him to play out from the back, he struggled to keep it in half the time hoofing it up the pitch to Leaburn! Neither would you have with Balmer and Webbo.
    Pitcher (RIP) - you wouldn't have asked him to play wing back in a 5 (Minto however you could quite easily)
    Bumstead in a midfield 3!?! Actually, his knowledge was phenomenal so maybe in his younger years (Nor Gritt, Curbishley, or Pardew)
    Mendonca as a sole striker???.......

    When I look at our squad it cries out for 442, we could comfortably play 451, but 433 is a stretch too far as the top 3 aren't likely to drop back successfully enough, often enough so if you fail with the high press the midfields out and the opposition is already on our defence and probably outnumbered.

    I'm not convinced you can play any form of diamond either that includes Watson or Morgan. You probably could with JFC and Arter in there.

    Part of management is getting the best from what you have, motivationally of course but also using the tools you have as best you can. We have too often try to bash square pegs into round holes.

    Thats why if the owner does at some point remove Adkins I'd go with Jackson, his knowledge and understanding of the game is up there with the best of them. Add in his knowledge of the club, this league etc, he's a high chance of success with the right backing.


    Couldn't agree more about the players we have and how its tied us down, a 442 is tempting but I don't think Kirk and Jayasemi are defensively minded enough to support their full backs. We could play a diamond if all our midfielders are fit but that leaves us with loads of options to play off stockley but fucks us if we lose him. 
    In a 442 I'd play Jayasemi and probably Lee on the left, but might be unfair on Kirk as haven't really seen him in a 442. The full backs have largely been unprotected anyway in our current style/formation, 1st goal v Cheltenham? (didn't help that Gunter thought he was a centre half for a minute leaving the winger with a free cross) Even the second to an extent.

    Also if playing Washington please someone spot his runs and play the ball into the channel! He must get so frustrated.
  • Not for me, I just watch what’s in front of me and hope I enjoy it.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!