 |
| (Left to right): Henry, Werner and Dalglish will have to prove they can do more than clap in unison... |
From the moment I saw this blog explode onto the scene like 1999 Kurt Warner, I swore that I’d get on here or die trying. (Secretly I hoped it required playing in the NFC West in which case I would actually be able to do a totally shitty job and still qualify with a home game.)
In reality, its founder was more than happy to add one more writer, so here we are.
And since I was recently contributed to a heated facebook argument on this topic, I figure I’ll kick off my contributions to this hallowed blog by talking about soccer…and style (and their relation).
As one of our friends recently put it: “Manchester City = Anti-Futbol.”
Personally I couldn’t agree more, but where’s the fun in even arguing that statement? For a team who bought (and is still buying) so many forwards, they certainly know how to avoid scoring goals.
Instead, I think there’s a more interesting issue to examine here. Namely, how the Premier League’s newest owners will approach soccer’s age-old “substance vs. style” argument.
Culture shock for John Henry and NESV.
Naturally I’m referring to the owners New Englanders are most familiar with, the New England Sports Ventures (NESV) group who now control Liverpool. Having apparently rescued Liverpool from their financial issues (at least for the time being), John Henry and the rest of the brain-trust turn their attention to on-the-field issues.
And nothing wins support like firing an unpopular manager. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge Roy Hodgson fan. What he did last year with Fulham was remarkable. Yet more than simply presiding over Liverpool’s worst start to a season in years, his style was, very simply, boring.
Deploying his team in a straight 4-4-2 that was accustomed to sitting deep in its own third, they invited pressure and played on the counter. This was an effective tactic for minnows like Fulham, but it simply eroded pride at a bigger club like Liverpool who are accustomed to constantly playing on the front foot.
With Kenny Dalglish now back in charge, Liverpool have a safe pair of hands. Though King Kenny has been removed from managing for over a decade, he should guide the team to a better conclusion than they seemed headed for under Hodgson.
But Dalglish is only an interim manager. Inevitably, Henry and newly installed chairman Tom Werner will be presented with a managerial quandary soon enough again. And what philosophy will they subscribe to?
It’s a unique issue for the American owners who’re so used to dealing with baseball. When they arrived in Boston to take over the Red Sox in 2002, the legion of faithful fans (soon to be corporately dubbed “Red Sox Nation”) were starving for a championship like few fan bases this side of Cleveland.
That they produced a winner was the only priority. There was never this question regarding the manner of their victory. Style is a non-issue in baseball. In soccer, it’s an eternal debate.
The Beautiful Game or ‘Futbol for the Results’?
Ever since the days of Helenio Herrera and his 1960s Inter Milan teams perfected the cynical and ultra-defensive style, Catenaccio, this debate has been on the forefront of soccer discussion. (And, to be fair, it existed well before.)
Famous clashes on the planet’s biggest sporting stage, the World Cup, have produced epic battles not only of countries but soccer ideologies.
The 1970 World Cup final is probably the most famous of these. Pitting Brazil vs. Italy, it was the ultimate battle of offense vs. defense. Brazilian Joga Bonito vs. Italian Futbol de Resultados. And on that day, Pele, Jairzinho and the samba boys ripped apart the rigid Italians, 4-1 (scoring one of the best goals in World Cup history to cap off their famous win).
John Henry: He didn’t get rich by imitating Nicky Barnes’ style…
The debate continues in soccer to this day. Look at the Champions League semifinal last year. In the second leg, Inter, orchestrated as ever by the “special one”, Jose Mourinho, set out to defend their 3-1 aggregate lead. The Italians “parked the bus” in front of their own goal, playing to stifle the game. Barcelona, as usual, played to dominate possession and attack continuously. Rigid tactical deployment won on that day (Inter just hung on), but it just as easily have seen a different outcome.
Personally, I think John Henry and his top advisors could give a shit about style. They want to win. After all, these are the same people who hired Bill James and started incorporating sabermetrics into their high level decision-making when most of the MLB laughed at what they saw as nonsense (and two World Series later, most of the league has copied them).
Will they pursue Arsenal’s romantic vision of attack-or-bust, subscribing to Arsene Wenger’s declaration that big sides have a “responsibility” to play attractive soccer? Will they play “for the results” as the Italians famously did?
My opinion is that they will take something from Arsenal’s playbook. Henry has already hired former Wenger disciple Damien Comolli to run their personnel decisions. As a proponent of the cost-effective “Wengernomics,” Henry intends to run his club like the Londoners.
As far as on-the-field style though, I’d expect them to zero in on the best formula to win a soccer game and find a method to replicate it on a mass scale. That’s the kind of approach a financial, math-oriented man would take, right? And that’s what they did with the Sox (finding pitching and defense after watching decades of Boston teams built to hit home runs and nothing else).
How exactly they reach the final product remains to be seen. Liverpool fans will surely not tolerate a multi-year rebuilding program, but Henry has clearly said he won’t spend a fortune (notably declaring that he doesn't have “Sheikh” in front of his name).
But you won’t find me questioning the methods of John Henry. I’m a lifetime believer. And for anyone curious about why, you need only remember this.
No comments:
Post a Comment