Thats very interesting. Im not very knowledgeable about basketball but I find it fascinating that some of the changes that have happened in football have also occurred in other sports too. Thank you for taking the time to read the blog I wrote and also to comment. I appreciate it.
The same process of analysis and rationalization that has neutered the playstyle of football has operated too on basketball, with similar results. Just as football is now dominated by the efficiencies of gegenpressing and midfield athleticism to the detriment of 'wizardry', so basketball is dominated by floor spread and the three-point shot, to the detriment of every other aspect in the game.
If one's objective is to win, both are clearly the superior style to their alternatives, but it has robbed both sports of much insouciant joy.
I think this became the major point of contention with Southgate’s England. That an initial sense of derring-do had withered. And it’s why so many fans are - stupidly IMO - now saying “good riddance” to a thoroughly decent and thoughtful man who was within a whisker of becoming the greatest Three Lions gaffer of all. Sir Gareth will surely get a fairer reappraisal in retrospect, but the current majority verdict seems to be: ‘middle-class technocrat, suffocated the natural instincts of a golden generation of raw street artists’. Not always in those words, but still. (Also, one does have to ask why these supposedly dynamic free spirits all fell into line behind a cautionary, defensive approach to the bitter end, but I’m no sports psychologist.)
In a way, we’ve been here before. Sven went on a similar trajectory, and the failures of the Graham Taylor era are often pinpointed on his and the FA’s systemising of the game. Just ironic that this time, it’s the passing game getting it in the neck and the people are crying out for more long balls!
TBF, they also want more dribbling. The decline of dribbling over the last 20 years doesn’t get talked about nearly enough by most pundits. Surely they’ve noticed! When I was growing up, many of the most fabled goals were the solo efforts (Villa, Barnes, Giggs, etc). Miguel Delaney once spoke of such moments providing a ‘perverse thrill’ - these players don’t just beat the opposition, they beat the sport itself in a way. They triumph over the very notion of a team game.
As you say, the danger with this topic is you can’t help but end up sounding like Ron Manager - but I can think of many worse fates in this world. Marvellous.
Interesting! I'd come to assume the uglier form of modern football was due to this type of caution just being more effective. It somehow hadn't occurred to me that what was being optimised were manager chances at keeping their jobs rather than necessarily chances of winning. Which sounds roughly the same but really isn't, especially for weaker teams.
So this actually makes me hopeful! Maybe some daring low-top-of-the-table managers might at some point prove that riskier football can pay off, at least for teams with less to lose. And maybe that will help some of those clubs be more patient with their managers and we'll all be better off for it. Or not. But at least there is some hope!
Thats very interesting. Im not very knowledgeable about basketball but I find it fascinating that some of the changes that have happened in football have also occurred in other sports too. Thank you for taking the time to read the blog I wrote and also to comment. I appreciate it.
The same process of analysis and rationalization that has neutered the playstyle of football has operated too on basketball, with similar results. Just as football is now dominated by the efficiencies of gegenpressing and midfield athleticism to the detriment of 'wizardry', so basketball is dominated by floor spread and the three-point shot, to the detriment of every other aspect in the game.
If one's objective is to win, both are clearly the superior style to their alternatives, but it has robbed both sports of much insouciant joy.
I think this became the major point of contention with Southgate’s England. That an initial sense of derring-do had withered. And it’s why so many fans are - stupidly IMO - now saying “good riddance” to a thoroughly decent and thoughtful man who was within a whisker of becoming the greatest Three Lions gaffer of all. Sir Gareth will surely get a fairer reappraisal in retrospect, but the current majority verdict seems to be: ‘middle-class technocrat, suffocated the natural instincts of a golden generation of raw street artists’. Not always in those words, but still. (Also, one does have to ask why these supposedly dynamic free spirits all fell into line behind a cautionary, defensive approach to the bitter end, but I’m no sports psychologist.)
In a way, we’ve been here before. Sven went on a similar trajectory, and the failures of the Graham Taylor era are often pinpointed on his and the FA’s systemising of the game. Just ironic that this time, it’s the passing game getting it in the neck and the people are crying out for more long balls!
TBF, they also want more dribbling. The decline of dribbling over the last 20 years doesn’t get talked about nearly enough by most pundits. Surely they’ve noticed! When I was growing up, many of the most fabled goals were the solo efforts (Villa, Barnes, Giggs, etc). Miguel Delaney once spoke of such moments providing a ‘perverse thrill’ - these players don’t just beat the opposition, they beat the sport itself in a way. They triumph over the very notion of a team game.
As you say, the danger with this topic is you can’t help but end up sounding like Ron Manager - but I can think of many worse fates in this world. Marvellous.
Agree.
You forgot to mention George Best, another one of this type.
The omission of Glenn Hoddle from that list of great number 10s must mean the author is a Gooner. (Ben using Ellie's account)
Haha. Genuinely forgot about him. Will edit it to put him in
Interesting! I'd come to assume the uglier form of modern football was due to this type of caution just being more effective. It somehow hadn't occurred to me that what was being optimised were manager chances at keeping their jobs rather than necessarily chances of winning. Which sounds roughly the same but really isn't, especially for weaker teams.
So this actually makes me hopeful! Maybe some daring low-top-of-the-table managers might at some point prove that riskier football can pay off, at least for teams with less to lose. And maybe that will help some of those clubs be more patient with their managers and we'll all be better off for it. Or not. But at least there is some hope!