weasel wrote: ↑Sun Nov 10, 2024 12:34 am
I do like the style of play. I loved the way we played under Bielsa and I see parts of this in terms of the movement of all the players so that we can play passes all over the pitch. Obviously the attacking verve is different but I actually feel that Farke with the same team Bielsa had might have got more points with them than Bielsa did because he would have had the quality of decision making from Pablo, the goals from Klich and Alioski and a fully fit Bamford. For me if we had brought in a true no.10 we would be walking the league. The style of play works for me because it allows us to control the match, it almost negates the fact there is an opponent because it limits them so much. The only thing that works against us is our woeful lack of quality in the final third. Even Piroe, who is the most natural finisher we have had in years is made to look poorer because we create so little for him - if you look at the goals he has scored how many have been from great passes, not many. If we had a Buendia and Pukki in this team then we are winning 4-0 most matches and then the fans would be lauding the style.
Most of the time the view of the performance is dictated by the scoreline. Against Plymouth, as an example, were we that much better performance wise first half than we were in the second half? I don't feel we were and feel we actually created our best chance in the second half. As it was the fans loved the first half, where we scraped in three goals without really creating them from good football, but thought we were passive second half.
Today is also a classic example of us under Farke. Should have been a comfortable win but instead fans watch us squander chances and the enjoyment is missing because we are expecting the sting in the tail of an undeserved equaliser. So there is an anger that builds up during the second half because we keep missing chances. So if we concede the equaliser the fans get to vent their anger but because we don't the anger hasn't been released so it sort of comes out as a slow release to blame Farke, If we score at a decent ratio to chances created we go home after winning 4-0 and everyone is happy - there has been no anger building up just joy.
Would I enjoy it as a neutral? Probably not because as a neutral you want to see a contest but with us the only reason there is a contest is because we don't take our chances and we don't regularly get the 3,4 or 5-0 wins that we should. It isn't the exciting football because there isn't the risk element apart from again the chance that we don't win because we miss chances.
Thank you for the response.
Not going to debate or whatever because it was genuinely just to get an opinion on personal view of the style.
I will however disagree in the strongest terms that Farke has any hope of beating Mb with the squad Bielsa had.
Not a chance imo, Bielsa raised the levels of those players far above anything any of them had ever achieved before or since.
He had them playing in a style so intricately coached it was almost telepathic and made every player look better than they were as individuals.
Farke doesn't get close to that level of coaching for me, he hasn't raised players to that degree or coached a style that well and made it more than the sum of its parts ever.
He wouldn't have got close to what MB did with that squad, and I say that as someone who isn't as much of a Bielsa widow as some but I can appreciate what he achieved with a far lesser group of players than Farke has now, at Norwich or last season.
So I can't agree on that, very surprised you said it actually given know how much you loved Bielsa.
Pretty shocked tbh
Bielsa raised those players to what they became, he built them, Farke hasn't ever raised a squad to that degree.
And I see very few similarities between the styles either, polar opposites in most ways.
Bielsa coached constant positional change, Farke's are far more regimental and minimal.
Bielsa hated possession for the sake of it, Farke loves it.
Bielsa played 1 holding midfielder, Farke plays 2.
Bielsa loved width in attack and Farke hates it.
Bielsa's team were far slicker on the ball, 1 touch passing moves which are very very rare under DF because he prefers slow passing.
And Bielsa loved switches of play and crosses (1st in the league for both) Farke doesn't.
The only real similarity is they like to press I suppose.
But Farke is as close to the anti Bielsa as you can get, different tactics and idea in most things.
And Bielsa was much braver fundamentally and a far superior coach.
Not without flaws of course, but in terms of making a team better than the players in it he is levels above DF.
