Anybody else not care about 'style' of football?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

I think as a club we are putting way too much emphasis in recent years on the 'style' of football, just on the basis that we've historically been respected as a team that gets the ball down and plays.

But I can't help but feel that during the Farke years we went a bit too far into the back patting because we often looked classy, and that pragmatism went out of the window. 

I suspect this might have been the hangover from Hughton's second season, during which we witnessed some of the most negative and drab football ever witnessed at Carrow Road (in that sense, I suppose I've answered my own question, we all care to an extent - but Hughton was an extreme!).

I firmly believe that when a Norwich side is creating chances and scoring goals we are happy. .

We're talking about a club which has a big hard Welsh lump as a club legend, we didn't stick the ball on the head of Iwan Roberts by playing tika taka did we, and whilst we had some real ballers under Lambert like Fox, Hoolahan, and I'd argue Chris Martin was technically blessed too..... similar applies to getting Morrison and Holt into double figures in the Premier League.

We keep going on about how much we miss a Buendia as we've got nobody to thread through balls, but if we're actually that reliant on having that particularly type of player in the team, then doesn't that just say more for the limitations of Pukki and the complete lack of diversity in our attacking options? 

Its not like we played through balls to Iwan Roberts or Steve Morison is it. 

I honestly think that if we stick with Dean Smith and allow him to shape his own squad we'll end up with a team which can play a bit, but also mix it up, he's a pragmatist. He's not a genius, he's not an elite manager, but he is a pragmatist, and in my opinion we've missed having one of those, I'm still looking forward to seeing what a Smith Norwich side looks like personally. 

Edited March 1, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[canarybubbles 2,200]

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

6 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

So you think that we should have kept on trying to play the ball out of defence and try to dominate possession against Liverpool or Man City with the likes of Kenny McLean and Lukas Rupp in our midfield? 

I personally find it refreshing that Ben Gibson is allowed to smash the ball into row Z if he feels a pass is too risky, the players being instructed to try and play the ball out defence 100% of the time irrespective of the quality of the opposition was reckless and practically suicidal. All for the sake of some ideology.

Ideologues with the blinkers on make terrible politicians, and they also make terrible football managers. Sensible pragmatism the way forward. Mourinho's shift from pragmatist who can think outside of the box to somebody who just keeps trying to mirror the style of his old Chelsea side is why he's a massive failure everywhere he goes now and viewed as a dinosaur. 

Edited March 1, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[Worthy Nigelton 1,306]

Disagree entirely.

[Ulfotto 800]

If a team is winning there isn’t much talk about the style of play end of.

I think there is something to be said for having a style of play as it can inform recruitment both staff and players. The sort of training goes into the academy players.

But I agree as well that sometimes you have to give the opposition there due and acknowledge you might need to changes your style to combat them.

[Mengo 852]

Agree with you. Horses for courses. When and if it ever happens.  Smith gets his own squad together , if he stays? Then it will be good to watch I'm sure . The guy is a realist. It's almost an impossible job for him and shakey at the moment. 

someone who deals with problems in a sensible way that suits the conditions that really exist, rather than following fixed theories, ideas, or rules:

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

Bit like asking what is your favourite type of goal. Long shot off the underside of the bar? Header from the edge of the 6 yard box or stunning 20 pass move finishing with a tap in.

They are all the same value.

And the same is true with style and tactics.

Long game can be attractive if its done right and you probably see more goalmouth action. Farke ball was good in the Championship and wasted in the EPL.

I am not bothered what style Deano plays as long as its progressive and exciting.

[Capt. Pants 5,019]

Part of the problem at the moment. A few passes around the back 4, then hoof it in the general direction of the front 3.

[ron obvious 1,711]

17 minutes ago, Ulfotto said:

If a team is winning there isn’t much talk about the style of play end of.

I think there is something to be said for having a style of play as it can inform recruitment both staff and players. The sort of training goes into the academy players.

But I agree as well that sometimes you have to give the opposition there due and acknowledge you might need to changes your style to combat them.

Stoke under Pulis?

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,261]

I agree 100% I want us to win, I love this club and want to see it achieve success. I have no interest in us being the unlucky losers who play lovely naive football, it has gotten really old for me. Under Lambert we didn't play passing football on the deck, we went all out to win and I don't recall anyone moaning. However, if we're going to play pragmatic football it must bring results in whatever league we're in otherwise it's unacceptable. 

good football/good results =ideal but unrealistic at this level, actually,  impossible is a better label

good football/poor results = not for me but if you can tolerate that then fine that's your opinion

poor football/good results = great imo but not for everyone

poor football/poor results = unacceptable 

Edited March 1, 2022 by Christoph Stiepermann

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

11 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

Stoke under Pulis?

To be fair Stoke fans were happy for a long time and probably regret kicking off when Mark Hughes was his replacement. 

 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

9 minutes ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

I agree 100% I want us to win, I love this club and want to see it achieve success. I have no interest in us being the unlucky losers who play lovely naive football, it has gotten really old for me. Under Lambert we didn't play passing football on the deck, we went all out to win and I don't recall anyone moaning. However, if we're going to play pragmatic football it must bring results in whatever league we're in otherwise it's unacceptable. 

good football/good results =ideal but unrealistic at this level, actually,  impossible is a better label

good football/poor results = not for me but if you can tolerate that then fine that's your opinion

poor football/good results = great imo but not for everyone

poor football/poor results = unacceptable 

Happy medium would be average football, sufficient results to stay up in this league!

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,261]

1 minute ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Happy medium would be average football, sufficient results to stay up in this league!

I think in some alternate reality where we had Smith in charge from the start of the season and spent our money this summer a little more wisely we'd be in that happy medium right now. I get so frustrated when people call Smiths football negative or hoofball or worse because it's just not, it's perfectly acceptable and entertaining by any standard, we were just spoiled by Farkes championship seasons and it's warped peoples perspective 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

12 minutes ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

I think in some alternate reality where we had Smith in charge from the start of the season and spent our money this summer a little more wisely we'd be in that happy medium right now. I get so frustrated when people call Smiths football negative or hoofball or worse because it's just not, it's perfectly acceptable and entertaining by any standard, we were just spoiled by Farkes championship seasons and it's warped peoples perspective 

Completely agree.

And he needs a few players of his own, s few tweaks to the playing squad.

I suspect what he wants is a goalscoring centre, a set piece specialist, and a decent target man... like Hugill but less of a donkey. And of course if Cantwell and Onel leave he's going to want a decent winger. 

Hourinhane on a freebie will tick the first box although isn't a long term solution. 

[lake district canary 4,836]

12 minutes ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

I think in some alternate reality where we had Smith in charge from the start of the season and spent our money this summer a little more wisely we'd be in that happy medium right now. I get so frustrated when people call Smiths football negative or hoofball or worse because it's just not, it's perfectly acceptable and entertaining by any standard, we were just spoiled by Farkes championship seasons and it's warped peoples perspective 

Farke's way of playing was a winning way at championship level and that would have translated well to the premier league had the players been able to up their levels. But I think it must be clear to anyone that the problem Smith has is the same as the problems Farke had - whatever style we adopt, the players are not quite good enough - which incidentally is a good argument for having kept Farke on because we have seen that we are in exactly the position we would have been in with him in charge and all the good things he brought to the club in terms of ethos and philosophy - things that would stand us in good stead next season.

 

 

[Ulfotto 800]

Next season will be interesting to see Smith plan A in terms of a formation and style of play. Would suspect it wouldn’t be a million miles from Farke ball given this style seems to be very successful in the championship if you can pull it off.

I have Leeds supporting friend and we both concur that if you can have 65% plus in the championship teams get tired towards the end of games and will present you with the chances to win most matches. This though does not happen in the premiership. Teams don’t get tired.

my main issue with being pragmatic is that when all of sudden you have 6 games in 12 days and one training session to prepare for each then you really see the benefit of plan a and plan b is making plan a better.

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,261]

1 minute ago, lake district canary said:

Farke's way of playing was a winning way at championship level and that would have translated well to the premier league had the players been able to up their levels. But I think it must be clear to anyone that the problem Smith has is the same as the problems Farke had - whatever style we adopt, the players are not quite good enough - which incidentally is a good argument for having kept Farke on because we have seen that we are in exactly the position we would have been in with him in charge and all the good things he brought to the club in terms of ethos and philosophy - things that would stand us in good stead next season.

 

 

Nope, sorry Lakey but I'm not having that at all. Farke's system had realy structural weaknesses out of possesion and our general workrate, positioning and intensity off the ball was completely inadequate. It worked at Championship level because we had most of the ball each game, an exceptional DM and the Buendia-Pukki link up was beyond any Championships teams ability to deal with, it was a cheat code like Huckerby or Mitrovic. At PL level even if we got some good signings in including Skipp, kept Buendia and some who complimented Farkes system it wouldn't have worked due to his weakness at coaching teams how to behave and defend without the ball. I loved the man, he might be my personal favourite Norwich manager ever, but I can see glaring tactical faults with his system and I'm just a casual supporter, people who know what they're doing like PL managers with better teams than our saw it aswell and tore us apart as a result. 

[hogesar 10,775]

I think style of play definitely matters. Farkes style was just unbelievable to watch at Championship level, even with a bunch of unknown players. Watching your team have so much of the ball and play such an intricate style of football whilst also generally winning means we look at his titles more fondly than we would have done if we were promoted in a Stoke/Pulis style.

I also think it matters a lot when buying managers time in an ever decreasing managerial period. Hughton led us to a higher Prem finish than Lambert but his style of football meant as soon as the wins stopped there's much less rope. If you play good, stylish and entertaining football as a manager you'll always get a little bit more time which can be crucial.

Because we've had so many promotions in recent years I think as a fanbase we've been spoilt, to a degree.

If we get promoted under Smith next season I get the feeling it won't be, or feel as special as the ones under Farke.

[SwearyCanary 1,340]

50 minutes ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

I think in some alternate reality where we had Smith in charge from the start of the season and spent our money this summer a little more wisely we'd be in that happy medium right now. I get so frustrated when people call Smiths football negative or hoofball or worse because it's just not, it's perfectly acceptable and entertaining by any standard, we were just spoiled by Farkes championship seasons and it's warped peoples perspective 

I cannot see how games played as we have vs teams like palace or Southampton were in any way entertaining. As others have said though, if the result comes it lessens the blow a tad. Having said that, I’d only really accept playing frankly sh***y football against teams where our chance of a result is slim to scrape something or to win a tight competitive game vs an equal at a crunch time in the season (eg vs a top 6 rival in the championship). That makes the end justify the means. BUT the same sh***y football against a team we should out class on any day would be unacceptable. If we can have a squad that can adapt to both then that’s the happy medium. I’ll not be happy with current style for 90% of our games next season if I’m honest. Mostly because I don’t want to be considered alongside the likes of Stoke on the style front ever 

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,261]

2 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

I cannot see how games played as we have vs teams like palace or Southampton were in any way entertaining. As others have said though, if the result comes it lessens the blow a tad. Having said that, I’d only really accept playing frankly sh***y football against teams where our chance of a result is slim to scrape something or to win a tight competitive game vs an equal at a crunch time in the season (eg vs a top 6 rival in the championship). That makes the end justify the means. BUT the same sh***y football against a team we should out class on any day would be unacceptable. If we can have a squad that can adapt to both then that’s the happy medium. I’ll not be happy with current style for 90% of our games next season if I’m honest. Mostly because I don’t want to be considered alongside the likes of Stoke on the style front ever 

Those games have been terrible due to our physical and athletic deficiencies compared to those teams, it's impossible for us to play any style of football against teams who are not only more skillful than us but much faster, stronger and fitter than us, they can simply stop us playing which is why we looked so poor. It would be the same under a manager like Farke who prioritizes passing football because as we saw in the first game this season it was just that bad, we're not good enough and that's why our current patterns of play end up the way they do. When we've been at our best and the opposition has had an off day thats leveled the playing field and allowed us to see what Smith is trying to do and for my money it's been excellent to watch, fast, attacking football with omitted high intensity pressing and good defensive work, exciting wing play, lots of crosses, set pieces being dangerous etc, it's been great, you just have to factor in the oppositions ability to suppress that

[king canary 8,763]

I care about the style of play but I do kind of agree with the idea that we got a bit smug about it during the Farke years. When you hear people talk about playing 'the right way' as if there is only one objectively good and entertaining style of football it gets a bit much.

I would happily argue that the football we played under Lambert was just as entertaining, enjoyable and 'good' as we played under Farke, it just wasn't the same style as Farke. You can have entertaining football that starts with a solid back line, you can have entertaining football that involves playing longer balls and barely gets above 40% possession and you can have entertaining football in the Farke style. 

It is entirely subjective.

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,960]

2 hours ago, lake district canary said:

...which incidentally is a good argument for having kept Farke on because we have seen that we are in exactly the position we would have been in with him in charge and all the good things he brought to the club in terms of ethos and philosophy - things that would stand us in good stead next season.

This season - 5 points in Farke's 11 games. 11 points in Smith's first 11 games. Same team and Smith even had to cope with a major Covid outbreak during that time.

I know you've still got a serious man crush on Farke but you've got nothing but a wasted hard-on to back up your thoughts. Let it go man; move on.

Great Championship manager. Sh1te Premier League one. 

OTBC

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

Those digging at Smith’s style of play really need to remember the first 11 games of this season under Farke, not the championship winning season of last year or 18-19.

Smith has generally got us playing more competitively, but I’d argue in our best performances also more entertaining football. The high press we executed in the second half versus Southampton and for the full 90 versus Wolves was v effective and made for a good game, DITTO United at home too. More recently we put up a much better fight against Liverpool and Man City than we did under Farke - actually got stuck in and created chances.

What can anyone for Farke’s ‘entertaining’ style of play (or against Smith’s) point towards this season in favour of Farke? The Burnley draw where we clung on from start to finish and created nothing? The Brighton draw where both sides stuttered and missed good chances? The Brentford game where we played well for 45 minutes, scored the only real chances we created then proceeded to hold on for dear life for 45 minutes and nearly threw it away?

We’d scored 5 goals in 11 games. What about that constitutes entertainment? There was no longer such thing as Farkeball in the premier league, not since March 2020 anyway - our premier league football under Farke was dead.

If we go down then Smith can rightly be compared to Farke next season again in the lower league based on Farke’s championship winning sides, and of course I doubt we’ll be close to aesthetic to watch (thought I think we could attribute a bit of that to the loss of Emi too).

But let’s hold fire until we’re at that place under Smith in the league below maybe before slating his style of play? Because what I’ve seen from this season under Smith has been both more entertaining and functional than anything Farke served up.

[hogesar 10,775]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

I care about the style of play but I do kind of agree with the idea that we got a bit smug about it during the Farke years. When you hear people talk about playing 'the right way' as if there is only one objectively good and entertaining style of football it gets a bit much.

I would happily argue that the football we played under Lambert was just as entertaining, enjoyable and 'good' as we played under Farke, it just wasn't the same style as Farke. You can have entertaining football that starts with a solid back line, you can have entertaining football that involves playing longer balls and barely gets above 40% possession and you can have entertaining football in the Farke style. 

It is entirely subjective.

I personally preferred watching Farke-ball at championship level than I did watching Lambert style. Can't be denied Lamberts style provided entertainment though. 

Worth noting our first season in Prem under Lambert we played the most long balls out of anyone in the division but when they were brilliant balls down the channels from a David Fox leading to a Pilkington cross and a Holt header, I have to admit to not giving a single f*ck about the long ball statistic.

[Petriix 3,222]

I'm probably the only one but I'd rather lose playing good football than win playing hoofball. However, it's not exactly a polar opposite: what makes 'good football' good is that it leads to exciting, attacking play with chances and goals.

I still maintain that Farke's downfall was predicated by his loss of faith in his own style, and a failed attempt at pragmatism. He should have been more stubborn and stuck to the winning system which won two Championship titles. I doubt it would have led to fewer than 5 points.

I'm struggling to warm to Smith and his philosophy. He lacks the class that Farke had. There just isn't much to get excited about on the pitch. Obviously I'll give him a chance in the Championship, but it's hard to imagine it coming close to what we saw with farkeball. 

[astro 423]

The 11 games vs 11 games comparison doesn’t really stack up does it? Remember we had virtually no pre-season, and a third or more of our first team were new and way off the pace.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

34 minutes ago, astro said:

The 11 games vs 11 games comparison doesn’t really stack up does it? Remember we had virtually no pre-season, and a third or more of our first team were new and way off the pace.

But then Smith had to deal with COVID and a **** tonne of injuries 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

4 hours ago, SwearyCanary said:

I cannot see how games played as we have vs teams like palace or Southampton were in any way entertaining. 

You've just randomly chosen two poor performances, but why? 

Were you not entertained by the Watford and Everton games?

Anybody expecting to be entertained every week is living in a dream world, no Norwich manager has ever achieved that.

I know that I didn't enjoy the Watford and Everton games earlier this season under Farke! 

 

Edited March 2, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

50 minutes ago, Petriix said:

I'm struggling to warm to Smith and his philosophy. He lacks the class that Farke had. There just isn't much to get excited about on the pitch. 

You are comparing Dean Smith managing another managers group of players with a manager who had 4 years to shape his team. He came into a situation where the group was completely devoid of any confidence. 

Farke had the luxury of a 'write off' mid-table Championship season to blood some youngsters, Smith didn't even get to make a January signing. 

Its a really unfair comparison.

The way that Norwich are playing under Smith this season is not the way that he got his Villa team playing last season, but he's had to be pragmatic and use what he's got. 

Edited March 2, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[Duncan Edwards 2,424]

It’s not all that long ago that it was deemed vital. I’m sure anyone with the wherewithal to dig out the relevant posts from here or social media would be able to locate folk saying that playing attacking football and losing was preferable to the perceived pragmatic dirge under Hughton. I can’t be the only one that remembers the chants of “We’ve got our Norwich back” under Adams?

I guess it’s deemed less important as long as we are winning. Simplistic maybe, but🤷🏻‍♂️