3 ms·
The question is though how does this differ to what other teams do every year? Many, many teams have played counter attacking football and not done nearly as w
by helipad 10y ago
The question is though how does this differ to what other teams do every year?
Many, many teams have played counter attacking football and not done nearly as well. Ranieri himself, even until very recently, said the target was 40 points.
I purposely never said that Leicester's success is luck or a fluke. The point I raise is that how can we begin to unpack their success? For every point in their favour this season, there are many examples of teams who have adapted very similar policies.
Counter attacking, ball-winning indefatigable midfielders, pacey strikers, treating the players with a caring hand, scouting for players in the lower French leagues, thoughtful managers, creative wingers, colossal centre backs – these are old tricks.
What lessons can we take from this success? Arguably, none.
- stinkytaco 10y agoYou can hardly call it an anomaly, then. If they are doing the same thing other teams are doing, then why is it an anomaly? I think you just unpacked their success fairly well for a single sentence. I could just say "Get better players, play hard". But saying we can't learn anything is just false, considering there are teams that aren't doing these things and are successful, and teams that aren't and are not successful. Crystal Palace lacks any sort of pace or attacking threat, despite having a number of skilled, creative players. Manchester United have arguably better players, but are tactically limiting them by insisting on possession based football (or at least were until about 2 months ago) rather than a counterattacking approach. Clearly if it was obvious, all teams would be successful, no? Saying we can't unpack their success is the Big Sam school of football tactics, it's all just instinct and good ol' English grit and longballing, nothing else to say.