Laudrup gone

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

sounds like another pointless stat to me tbh - united's attacking philosophy for the past two decades has mostly been about moving the ball inside to move it out again, moving the opposition and exploiting the spaces good movement brings.

united were one of the more possession-intensive sides in the league before this season imo.

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

Which isn't true. Any team can increase their possession by playing safe passes and avoiding the risks necessary to be creative. Having more possession may lessen their chance of conceding or losing but it doesn't increase their chance of winning. It only does that if the greater possession results from attacking, creative intent.

I think the basic point here is that if you have the ball, you can score and your opponent can't. If your opponent has the ball, they can score and you can't. And if you ally the possession game with an attempt to win the ball back quickly and high up the pitch, something which is much easier if you're controlling the ball for extended periods, you can restrict the time spent in the defensive phase even more. That doesn't mean you will score, or that your opponent won't, but you've put yourself in a relatively stronger position, all things being equal.

The downside is that, as a team with a high amount of possession, you will have less defence-attack transitions to exploit; rather, your opponent is going to have a compact block with players set in their defensive positions. So goalscoring opportunities generally don't scale linearly with possession. That's why, as Grimson says, a lot of it comes down to moving the ball around to physically and mentally wear out the opposition until they make defensive mistakes you can exploit.

Also, if you lose the ball and your initial press is broken, or you don't press properly, you're very vulnerable to fast counter-attacks, as a lot of your players will caught up the pitch. Hence possession oriented teams tending to use more tactical fouls.

Originally Posted by Serenity Now

I think the basic point here is that if you have the ball, you can score and your opponent can't. If your opponent has the ball, they can score and you can't.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

sounds like another pointless stat to me tbh - united's attacking philosophy for the past two decades has mostly been about moving the ball inside to move it out again, moving the opposition and exploiting the spaces good movement brings.

And this season it's been mostly about giving it to Valencia

Nah, the stat wasn't supposed to be damning or anything, just entirely unsurprising.

Originally Posted by Zorg

Originally Posted by Serenity Now

I think the basic point here is that if you have the ball, you can score and your opponent can't. If your opponent has the ball, they can score and you can't. And if you ally the possession game with an attempt to win the ball back quickly and high up the pitch, something which is much easier if you're controlling the ball for extended periods, you can restrict the time spent in the defensive phase even more. That doesn't mean you will score, or that your opponent won't, but you've put yourself in a relatively stronger position, all things being equal.

The downside is that, as a team with a high amount of possession, you will have less defence-attack transitions to exploit; rather, your opponent is going to have a compact block with players set in their defensive positions. So goalscoring opportunities generally don't scale linearly with possession. That's why, as Grimson says, a lot of it comes down to moving the ball around to physically and mentally wear out the opposition until they make defensive mistakes you can exploit.

Also, if you lose the ball and your initial press is broken, or you don't press properly, you're very vulnerable to fast counter-attacks, as a lot of your players will caught up the pitch. Hence possession oriented teams tending to use more tactical fouls.

cheating you mean. that's the thing with barcelona. the football world drools over their possession game. and turns a blind eye to their professional fouls.

a prime example of it was our 0-0 draw there, when Marquez brought Ronaldo down twice, once for a clear penalty (refused) and once when he was breaking clear. was he sent off? was he £#%&!.

where is the beauty and value in a game-plan that is absolutely dependent on cheating? isn't that the same as - or worse than - any other team setting the prize and the garland above the game itself?

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

where is the beauty and value in a game-plan that is absolutely dependent on cheating?

It's in the brilliant passing and moving.

Originally Posted by Grimson

It's in the brilliant passing and moving.

and the beautiful cheating.

Originally Posted by Grimson

It's in the brilliant passing and moving.

i started to type a response but it was set to be another open goal

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

i started to type a response but it was set to be another open goal

Originally Posted by Zorg