3 ms·
It was going to be interesting to see how long in this thread before someone mentioned Zonal Marking. It is interesting that the analysis doesn't mention Barce
by sien 14y ago
It was going to be interesting to see how long in this thread before someone mentioned Zonal Marking.
It is interesting that the analysis doesn't mention Barcelona. That might be because reactive, kick long football has beaten Barca twice in Champion's League in the past 4 years. Mind you, Barca are one of the best club teams in the past 30 years at least.
Inter Milan and Chelsea had dramatically less of the possession and passing than the tikki-takka of Barca but both managed to get over the top of Barca.
A team's performance is also dependent on the personnel. The Barca core that is also the core of Spain and they are phenomenal. Who knows when another midfield like Xavi, Busquets and Ienesta (and Messi for Barca) will appear.
Or as someone said about Italy vs Spain, Spain won because they had 3 players at least as good Pirlo.
- zzygan 14y agoZonal Marking is a fantastic site for tactical minded football fans. Highly recommended. Not overly surprised that its referenced 2 or 3 times on HN. Switzerland is the closest example of Chelsea/Inter in the case of Spain. Switzerland shut down the midfield pretty effectively, however Spain were particularly awful in that game, and Spain did remedy that situation later on. In watching Euro2012, I have found it amusing about Spain being called boring by plenty of authors. The only way teams have found to stop Spain has been to park the bus, and let Spain have the ball for long periods. The negativity of opposing teams was reason for the lack of activity in the final third of the field. The result Italy in the final was a great example of what happens when a team tries to attack Spain. They get beaten soundly.