Koylies

    When that enormous attention seeking plank Sepp Blatter finally handed the World Cup trophy to Iker Casillas last Sunday, Spain became the first World Cup champions in history to win the tournament after losing their opening group fixture. Despite the poor start, and the demonstrable fact that they did not always play with the same attacking flair that dominated the European Championships in 2008 (probably due to the poor form of Torres), there is little question that they are as skillful and comfortable in possession as any international team in recent memory. Worthy champions.

     After the match, the Dutch side were prominently criticized for demonstrating tactical negativity. I think this is extremely unfair. After all, Robben probably should have scored (twice) and they were solid, if extremely aggressive in their defending. It simply isn't realistic for a team to 'out-pass' the Spanish. Cruyff and many other pundits seem to be committed to tactical systems that a tiny minority of teams can pull off. A post-Dunga Brazilian team might have the personnel to manage it, but currently the Spanish out class everyone in their ability to maintain (and capitalize) on possession.

     So how did the Swiss beat them? The simple answer is through the sort of defensive tactics Cruyff maligns as "anti-football." Again, I think this is unfair. The Spanish had a poor game against Switzerland, but the key to the Swiss victory wasn't simply throwing all eleven men behind the ball. The Swiss were young and fit enough to press the Spanish for most of the match, their defensive midfielders were superb, they counter-attacked with speed, and they were lethal with the chances that came their way. They were nowhere near as ugly as the post-match punditry at the time suggested. In fact, England should be very worried about playing them in the 2012 Euro qualifiers.

     Even still, the Swiss brand of football has its detractors. Mainly those that think superior possession should always correlate with victory. But I maintain that there is an important difference between the Otto Rehhagel brand of ultra defensive, physical, dull as dishwater Greek football and a direct, counter-attacking game that doesn't require a majority of the possession, keeps men behind the ball, but is extremely fast, lethal and actually very attractive to watch. Case in point, Joachim Low's German side, or my favourite Sir Bobby Robson Newcastle sides of the early 2000s. There is, of course, a fine line between the economical, direct attacking football of the Germans this summer and the legions of knock-off teams that lack the players or coaching prowess to implement these ideas, and instead end up with a limp, boring, defensive set-up (but which is not always unsuccessful...ask Big Sam or Tony Pulis).

     I suppose it eventually becomes a simple question of aesthetics. We had a very similar debate when Mourinho's Inter Milan won the Champions League title in May. There are some people for whom attractive football will always involve the short, skillful passing demonstrated by the Spanish in South Africa. When the Arsenals or Barcelonas or Spains are beaten by sides that are incapable of playing in the same style, the charge of "anti-football" is always levelled against the victor.


     Technorati Tags: football, soccer, world cup, spain, tactics