SOLOWE HAS DEVELOPED 2 TACTICAL INNOVATIONS IN SOCCER

[wiseone]

The Guardian actually did some great work on crosses in the modern game:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/bl ... id-beckham

https://www.theguardian.com/football/bl ... ier-league

[JACKAL]

Solowe the schemere would have to possess the fitness and mobility of Kante and Ji Sung Park combined for this to work.

You are indeed a wiseone.... You are the first person who is thinking technically about what I wrote. What you said is the type of contribution I expected. None of the others are asking any of the right questions.

[felarey]

The onside kick in american football is a direct function of the shape of the ball. Can you always volley the ball when out on the wings? You can do an onside kick with an american football on the ground, can't volley a ball on the ground into the ground, that would be a much more difficult kick. Solowe, do you have a video showing the kick you're referring to??

Per the schemer, the defending team will have a more plausible advantage with an extra man freed up in defence, midfield or attack. That extra man could easily nullify the guy blocking off the goalie by playing deep himself. Unless you put the attacking team's goalie on one of the outfield players which is asking to concede from a long range effort.

[JACKAL]

These are my 2 tactical contributions to soccer and I believe it will revolutionize soccer as we know it.

1. Changing the way the ball is Crossed into the Box

2. Introducing a new Position to Soccer: The Offensive Schemer (OS)

Details:

1. Soccer teams have to change the way they cross the ball into the box. Assuming the reason for crossing the ball is to score a goal, the cross rarely results in a goal. My estimate is that 1 out of 100 crosses results in a goal and thats at the top echelons of the game.

Think about it: This is a Telegraphed pass from about 20-30 yards away(Includes Corner Kicks). This a pass waiting to be punched out or caught by the most average of Goalies. Outfield defensive players would have to be completely inept to conceded from a cross telegraphed from 20 yards away. The defence usually have the advantage of numbers, height and refereeing decisions inside the 6 yard box.

So why do coaches keep doing it ???? There is usually a less than 1% probability that this would result in a goal.

First of all, you have no evidence to support your claim.

Secondly, many people don't know how to cross a ball. Which is sheer laziness on their part.
Thirdly, if direct crossing is bad, how will it be more accurate by slamming the ball into the ground?
Fourthly, the OC is a total waste of player who is needed to help out with more critical defensive duties. You will effectively be defending with 9 men against 10-11 attacking opponents.

I have many many years of watching the game to support what I am saying. There are some statistics they have been keeping the last few years and the trend lines support everything I just wrote. And by the way, those numbers are from the best leagues in the world and they are woeful, imaging how much worse it is in the lower leagues. Traditional Crosses are outdated.

Many people dont know how to cross the ball becuase its terribly difficult to pinpoint the head or feet of 1 or 2 player in a tree of other players who can all see the ball coming. Maybe the problem is not the player, but the play itself. Slamming the ball into the ground gives anybody in the box an equal shot of connecting with the ball becuase of its unpredictable path and the lack force with which the ball arrives make it difficult to just punch or head it out.

You fail to understand the effect an OC can have on a team thats trying to keep the ball the ground. These players today are taught from their formative stages as players to play that back pass to the goalie any time there is pressure on the defensive backline. This is why you see the repeated passes to the Goalie. Once you take that option away, you have just destroyed their entire game plan and now they have to improvise something they never practiced.

Also putting pressure on those Backs means they have to get rid of the ball quickly becuase no right back or left back wants to lose the ball in such a sensitive area. Once he cant pass to his goalkeeper he is either going to boot into the open field or face his own goal and play it to throwing or corner. This going to happen repeatedly in the game. It will make it very difficult to execute their game plan

You still have 10 players they are going to have beat to score...that is more than enough to defend...besides even without the OC, most teams are defending with 9-10 players anyway

I don't think you were observant.

One player cannot press up high alone. In fact, even team units cannot press in isolation and get away with it.
They do it as a whole team.

Your OC is a very laughable waste. If I'm a CD and the OC hangs around to intercept a back pass, we could simply put him in a triangle and let him run around like a headless chicken. The moment others come to help him, we exploit the spaces they have left behind.
This is basic footie.

Many players know how to cross the ball too. Watch Bayern Munich, Juventus, Real Madrid, Barca, e.t.c. These players don't just hoof the ball into the box and hope for the best.

I think you have watched too many EPL and Naija games. I suggest you widen your viewing scope.

I commend you for trying though and hope you keep your enthusiasm.

Who am I going to believe ? You or my own lying eyes.

I never said the OC was pressing Upfront alone... What I said was the OC stays in the 6 yard box preventing a back-pass to the goalkeeper, The coach has to decide what he wants to do with the rest of the team from there..... He could press high up front with a high back line. That would be a very aggressive offensive position. The coach has to decide when and how to use this tactic... Some may play it all the time if they have a team talented enough to pull it off...He may play it when his team is behind so that they can get a equalizing goal,,.. or they may use it towards the end of a game to snatch a late win..its up to the coach

And stop talking about Individual teams, think more globally about the sport. This a tactic even the most average team can use to win vs a more individually talented team.

[JACKAL]

The onside kick in american football is a direct function of the shape of the ball. Can you always volley the ball when out on the wings? You can do an onside kick with an american football on the ground, can't volley a ball on the ground into the ground, that would be a much more difficult kick. Solowe, do you have a video showing the kick you're referring to??

Felarey...You are a genius.. God bless you. This is the question I have been waiting for...
Obviously its impossible for 1 player to just volley the ball on his own with the ball on the ground...However if you make it a 2-3 man play, It makes it easy. A 1-2 pass outside of the left or right side of the 18 yard box will do the trick. First player passes to team mate, then team mate passes the ball back high off the ground waist high to the first or another player...The receiving player then volleys the ball cathching it high into the ground and the ball skips and bounces into the heart of the 6 yard box. The play must be executed no further than 5 yards from the 18 yard box.

Per the schemer, the defending team will have a more plausible advantage with an extra man freed up in defence, midfield or attack. That extra man could easily nullify the guy blocking off the goalie by playing deep himself. Unless you put the attacking team's goalie on one of the outfield players which is asking to concede from a long range effort.

First, a man hanging around your goalie preventing him from receiving a back pass will make any team nervous. secondly, most team are too scared to conceded that first goal so they are going to be more concerned about preventing a goal than scoring especially if they are being pressed by 3-4 players upfront. Most coaches will not push an additional man upfront, he is going to more concerned about defence. As I keep saying 9 men can defend fine against 10 men...Right now its the way most teams play.

[Gunzilla]

At the risk of being laughed at ,these are my proposed changes that i feel should make footy more exciting :

1. Drawn matches - 1 point for the home team;2 points for the away team.( i feel that its not fair to split points evenly when the away team has most of the time overcome more adversity,facing a hostile crowd and all that).Also should make the smaller teams try harder to win their games instead of sitting deep all game.

2.Long Range goals over 25 yards( line to be drawn) 2 points (goals) instead of one...Sort of like a 3 pointer in basketball...Make the game more high scoring and interesting.

3 Every penalty call/goal to be video reviwed..Arent we happy that we no longer have to argue about what ball crossed the goal line in the EPL every weekend anymore ? I'm tired of bad calls deciding games.Arsenal have benefited from some ridiculous calls this season (not that it has done us any world of good). But as a fan of the opposing teams i would be livid. Review every goal..it wont take but 30 seconds..instead of the hours we spend debating them every season...

[Kabalega]

These are my 2 tactical contributions to soccer and I believe it will revolutionize soccer as we know it.

1. Changing the way the ball is Crossed into the Box

2. Introducing a new Position to Soccer: The Offensive Schemer (OS)

Details:

1. Soccer teams have to change the way they cross the ball into the box. Assuming the reason for crossing the ball is to score a goal, the cross rarely results in a goal. My estimate is that 1 out of 100 crosses results in a goal and thats at the top echelons of the game.

Think about it: This is a Telegraphed pass from about 20-30 yards away(Includes Corner Kicks). This a pass waiting to be punched out or caught by the most average of Goalies. Outfield defensive players would have to be completely inept to conceded from a cross telegraphed from 20 yards away. The defence usually have the advantage of numbers, height and refereeing decisions inside the 6 yard box.

So why do coaches keep doing it ???? There is usually a less than 1% probability that this would result in a goal.

First of all, you have no evidence to support your claim.

Secondly, many people don't know how to cross a ball. Which is sheer laziness on their part.
Thirdly, if direct crossing is bad, how will it be more accurate by slamming the ball into the ground?
Fourthly, the OC is a total waste of player who is needed to help out with more critical defensive duties. You will effectively be defending with 9 men against 10-11 attacking opponents.

I have many many years of watching the game to support what I am saying. There are some statistics they have been keeping the last few years and the trend lines support everything I just wrote. And by the way, those numbers are from the best leagues in the world and they are woeful, imaging how much worse it is in the lower leagues. Traditional Crosses are outdated.

Many people dont know how to cross the ball becuase its terribly difficult to pinpoint the head or feet of 1 or 2 player in a tree of other players who can all see the ball coming. Maybe the problem is not the player, but the play itself. Slamming the ball into the ground gives anybody in the box an equal shot of connecting with the ball becuase of its unpredictable path and the lack force with which the ball arrives make it difficult to just punch or head it out.

You fail to understand the effect an OC can have on a team thats trying to keep the ball the ground. These players today are taught from their formative stages as players to play that back pass to the goalie any time there is pressure on the defensive backline. This is why you see the repeated passes to the Goalie. Once you take that option away, you have just destroyed their entire game plan and now they have to improvise something they never practiced.

Also putting pressure on those Backs means they have to get rid of the ball quickly becuase no right back or left back wants to lose the ball in such a sensitive area. Once he cant pass to his goalkeeper he is either going to boot into the open field or face his own goal and play it to throwing or corner. This going to happen repeatedly in the game. It will make it very difficult to execute their game plan

You still have 10 players they are going to have beat to score...that is more than enough to defend...besides even without the OC, most teams are defending with 9-10 players anyway

I don't think you were observant.

One player cannot press up high alone. In fact, even team units cannot press in isolation and get away with it.
They do it as a whole team.

Your OC is a very laughable waste. If I'm a CD and the OC hangs around to intercept a back pass, we could simply put him in a triangle and let him run around like a headless chicken. The moment others come to help him, we exploit the spaces they have left behind.
This is basic footie.

Many players know how to cross the ball too. Watch Bayern Munich, Juventus, Real Madrid, Barca, e.t.c. These players don't just hoof the ball into the box and hope for the best.

I think you have watched too many EPL and Naija games. I suggest you widen your viewing scope.

I commend you for trying though and hope you keep your enthusiasm.

Who am I going to believe ? You or my own lying eyes.

I never said the OC was pressing Upfront alone... What I said was the OC stays in the 6 yard box preventing a back-pass to the goalkeeper, The coach has to decide what he wants to do with the rest of the team from there..... He could press high up front with a high back line. That would be a very aggressive offensive position. The coach has to decide when and how to use this tactic... Some may play it all the time if they have a team talented enough to pull it off...He may play it when his team is behind so that they can get a equalizing goal,,.. or they may use it towards the end of a game to snatch a late win..its up to the coach

And stop talking about Individual teams, think more globally about the sport. This a tactic even the most average team can use to win vs a more individually talented team.

That is even worse!
It is like preventing a pass to another defender. Only that in your case, the other team has an extra man advantage in the outfield.
Total waste of player resources.

To make matters even worse, when you get the ball, your OC will more than likely be offside, and again useless to your team, this time in attack too.

My anecdotal evidence suggests that most players in certain leagues do not take the time to learn how to cross properly. It is the function of poor players and not the system itself.

Players cross the ball without looking, something they do not do with any other pass. It's insane!
The only exception would be if they practiced crossing into certain zones and the receiving players didn't show up. Even then, you should look before you cross, if you can.

Similarly, crossing to a solitary forward who is surrounded by 6 defenders.
Even Messi would struggle in this situation.

Players cross high balls to forwards shorter than their defenders, when a low cross could suffice.
Or, not taking advantage of forwards' height. That is passing a low cross to tall forwards playing against short defenders instead of high balls.

Then there is the whipped in cross! If it is not practiced in training or does not have a spin on it, it doesn't make sense!

Blame the players not the cross because if the players fix these few issues, then crossing will lead to more goals.
Your solution would actually decrease the chances of scoring.

You do not see these kind of issues in well developed players and teams.

[JACKAL]

I commend you for trying though and hope you keep your enthusiasm.

Who am I going to believe ? You or my own lying eyes.

I never said the OC was pressing Upfront alone... What I said was the OC stays in the 6 yard box preventing a back-pass to the goalkeeper, The coach has to decide what he wants to do with the rest of the team from there..... He could press high up front with a high back line. That would be a very aggressive offensive position. The coach has to decide when and how to use this tactic... Some may play it all the time if they have a team talented enough to pull it off...He may play it when his team is behind so that they can get a equalizing goal,,.. or they may use it towards the end of a game to snatch a late win..its up to the coach

And stop talking about Individual teams, think more globally about the sport. This a tactic even the most average team can use to win vs a more individually talented team.

[/quote]




That is even worse!
It is like preventing a pass to another defender. Only that in your case, the other team has an extra man advantage in the outfield.
Kabalega..dont make me koboko you through the internet.... Didnt you read what i wrote previously.
Number 1, the goalkeeper is not "another defender" .. the goal keeper is the goal keeper.. Once you beat him, its a goal. You can beat 5 defenders and still not score..once you beat the goalie, its over.

Total waste of player resources.

To make matters even worse, when you get the ball, your OC will more than likely be offside, and again useless to your team, this time in attack too.
No only did I address this issue of offside in my initial post, I repeated it again. A player cannot be offside when he intercepts the ball from an opposing player no matter where he is....

2ndly, I specifically said the OC has to rotate out of the 6 yard box to the top corner of the 18 any time his team has possession ..his team mates have to be groomed never to pass the ball to him until they pass the top of the 18 where he will be waiting for them. ... This literally makes him the most dangerous player on offence becuase his going to be the forgotten man on offence.

My anecdotal evidence suggests that most players in certain leagues do not take the time to learn how to cross properly. It is the function of poor players and not the system itself.

Players cross the ball without looking, something they do not do with any other pass. It's insane!
The only exception would be if they practiced crossing into certain zones and the receiving players didn't show up. Even then, you should look before you cross, if you can.
Anytime a player is passing the ball longer than 10 feet there is a high risk of losing possession. A cross is a 20-36 yard pass into a crowded area. Its not the fault of the player, its just a stupid and ineffective strategy !!


Similarly, crossing to a solitary forward who is surrounded by 6 defenders.
Even Messi would struggle in this situation.

Players cross high balls to forwards shorter than their defenders, when a low cross could suffice.
Or, not taking advantage of forwards' height. That is passing a low cross to tall forwards playing against short defenders instead of high balls.

Then there is the whipped in cross! If it is not practiced in training or does not have a spin on it, it doesn't make sense!

Blame the players not the cross because if the players fix these few issues, then crossing will lead to more goals.
Your solution would actually decrease the chances of scoring.

You do not see these kind of issues in well developed players and teams.

The defending team 9 out of 10 times will outnumber the offensive team in the box by a factor of 3 to 1..its just the nature of the game.. you cant change that..if you do, that will leave you open to serious counter attacks. [/quote]

[JACKAL]

This is an example of what i am talking about, look at Odegbamis 2nd goal at 0;35 Second of this clip. Atuegbu ( or Muda) volleyed the ball into the ground creating a difficult situation for the defence and Ode followed through...

That volley is what i want you to concentrate on.. it could come from anywhere around the 18 yard box with a combination of plays...and even with more defensive players in the box the opposing team will have a fair shot at the ball...


[/video]

[Coach]

^Kindly detail the combination play for a team in possession, culminating in the volleyed cross...One would argue that the difficulty in execution of this skill and the increased element of random that arises at the bounce, takes away from the precision of a cross, offering no more than confusion to the attackers just as much as the defenders. How much of the ball's whip is lost in the bounce? The timing of the forward's run becomes all the more difficult given the complexity in accurately predicting the ball's course. A measured cross requires one player, how many are needed to set the ball up to be volleyed?

Regarding the Advanced Schemer, nonsense, the lack of action will lead to ennui and loss of concentration. Such a player will be often found offside and though not interfering with play, any movement into a position of advantage will see the flag raised, rightly or wrongly. A novel idea, not so much the suggestions, rather the theme, the desire to evolve and invert the pyramid. T'is in the realms of such innovation where the kings to come will be born and bred. Nigeria, Africa, should look deeper into the green, the roll of the ball and search for the questions that will be asked in years to come. Pose new problems and cast a fireball of antithesis at consensus and colloquialisms. Why must fullbacks be full back? Why not full forwards? Arguably the fittest, most durable in a starting 11 and certainly more defensively astute than the wingers ahead of them, who in turn are more skilled at evading them, would it not be a fairer fight to have them duel their opposite?

A Back-Forward for instance, an advanced fullback, who's roles are synonymous with the openside and blindside flankers of Rugby union. Rather than deep-lying before their opposing winger, the fullback is a prominent part of the forward line, with the instruction to disrupt wing play, make tackles and prevent the balls linear movement down their flank. Few fullbacks today are of the 1 vs 1 ball skill to evade an aggressive press, rather their prowess is in powering past opposition once the space has opened ala Danny Rose, Kyle Walker, Hector 'My Son' Bellerin.

It gets better, order another round, its, about, to go, down.

What if the team's attack are, akin to the Game of Kings' (Rugby) backs and the forwards are the disruption, the first wave that softens the opposition and exposes the underbelly? Defensively primed, aggressive, harry, harassing number 8s, much like their counterparts at Twickenham, play in the transitions, effortlessly flitting between back and forward. In possession, engaging the backs (main attack) is crucial. An unselfish Sanchez, if such exists, springs to mind. Ferguson's use of Danny Welbeck vs Real Madrid springs to mind, minus the channel work.

Beyond that, a second row occupied by an Advanced Stopper much akin to the Fly or Scrum-half, their role to recover possession if lost by the defensive forwards, recieve the ball from the 8s and release the wingers. Think Ngolo Kante in the opposition's half.

The Wingers should be the main attacking threat and all that ahead has been aimed at poking holes in the opposition's defence to allow space for the wingers to manoeuvre.


The key question here is, why must yards, territory be conceded before it is sought to be gained? Pressing has indeed changed the mentality of many a manager, the awareness that a team is most vulnerable in possession, has led to greater emphasis on defending from the front. Why not take this further and defend from the front with specialists in certain parts of the front line? Why have the team's attack facing the the opposition's defenders, effectively, limiting the advantage, a good attacker vs a good defender, is often equal. Why not have the attackers facing the unskilled defender and running at a defence occupied by, broken by a forward unit?

[JACKAL]

^Kindly detail the combination play for a team in possession, culminating in the volleyed cross...One would argue that the difficulty in execution of this skill and the increased element of random that arises at the bounce, takes away from the precision of a cross, offering no more than confusion to the attackers just as much as the defenders. How much of the ball's whip is lost in the bounce? The timing of the forward's run becomes all the more difficult given the complexity in accurately predicting the ball's course. A measured cross requires one player, how many are needed to set the ball up to be volleyed?

Actually, I already answered this question... but Here goes again

Obviously its impossible for 1 player to just volley the ball on his own with the ball on the ground...However if you make it a 2 or 3 man play, It makes it easy. A 1-2 pass outside of the left or right side of the 18 yard box will do the trick:
1. First player passes to teammate,
2. Then teammate passes the ball back high off the ground waist high to the first or another player
3. Then receiving player then volleys the ball by catching it high into the ground and the ball skips and bounces into the heart of the 6 yard box.
4. The play must be executed no further than 5 yards from the 18 yard box.

ONCE AGAIN: THE UNPREDICTABILITY OF THE BOUNCE INTO THE 6 YARD BOX IS WHAT THE OFFENSIVE TEAM IS COUNTING ON.

Based on the stats in the EPL alone an average team has to cross 47 times before they can score with a cross. Those are terrible odds. Perhaps its because its a predictable telegraphed pass from over 30 yards. I am actually surprised anyone can score from a cross.

Regarding the Advanced Schemer, nonsense, the lack of action will lead to ennui and loss of concentration. Such a player will be often found offside and though not interfering with play, any movement into a position of advantage will see the flag raised, rightly or wrongly.

I already addressed the issue of Off sides...
1. A player cannot be offsides from an Intercepted pass
2. His teammates are instructed never to pass the ball to him when in possession until they cross the 18 yard line
3. OC understands that once his team is in possession, he needs to move to either the right or left coner outside the 18 yard box and can only rejoin play when his team mates cross the 18 yard line. This will prevent active or passive offsides.
4. The ref getting it wrong may be an issue but coaches have an oppurtunity to talk to the refereeing crew before games to alert them of this strategy. This will help reduce blown calls

The OC is going to be the most active player on the field , trust me. Covering a goal keeper is no joke. The OC has to keep an eye on the goalie as well as 4 or 5 others in the back line who may be attempting a clever back pass. Remember, the back line is under pressure and they will be looking constantly for that goalie back pass relief valve. The OC has to concentrate, be alert and be quick at all times.

A novel idea, not so much the suggestions, rather the theme, the desire to evolve and invert the pyramid. T'is in the realms of such innovation where the kings to come will be born and bred. Nigeria, Africa, should look deeper into the green, the roll of the ball and search for the questions that will be asked in years to come. Pose new problems and cast a fireball of antithesis at consensus and colloquialisms. Why must fullbacks be full back? Why not full forwards? Arguably the fittest, most durable in a starting 11 and certainly more defensively astute than the wingers ahead of them, who in turn are more skilled at evading them, would it not be a fairer fight to have them duel their opposite?

A Back-Forward for instance, an advanced fullback, who's roles are synonymous with the openside and blindside flankers of Rugby union. Rather than deep-lying before their opposing winger, the fullback is a prominent part of the forward line, with the instruction to disrupt wing play, make tackles and prevent the balls linear movement down their flank. Few fullbacks today are of the 1 vs 1 ball skill to evade an aggressive press, rather their prowess is in powering past opposition once the space has opened ala Danny Rose, Kyle Walker, Hector 'My Son' Bellerin.

It gets better, order another round, its, about, to go, down.

What if the team's attack are, akin to the Game of Kings' (Rugby) backs and the forwards are the disruption, the first wave that softens the opposition and exposes the underbelly? Defensively primed, aggressive, harry, harassing number 8s, much like their counterparts at Twickenham, play in the transitions, effortlessly flitting between back and forward. In possession, engaging the backs (main attack) is crucial. An unselfish Sanchez, if such exists, springs to mind. Ferguson's use of Danny Welbeck vs Real Madrid springs to mind, minus the channel work.

Beyond that, a second row occupied by an Advanced Stopper much akin to the Fly or Scrum-half, their role to recover possession if lost by the defensive forwards, recieve the ball from the 8s and release the wingers. Think Ngolo Kante in the opposition's half.

The Wingers should be the main attacking threat and all that ahead has been aimed at poking holes in the opposition's defence to allow space for the wingers to manoeuvre.


The key question here is, why must yards, territory be conceded before it is sought to be gained? Pressing has indeed changed the mentality of many a manager, the awareness that a team is most vulnerable in possession, has led to greater emphasis on defending from the front. Why not take this further and defend from the front with specialists in certain parts of the front line? Why have the team's attack facing the the opposition's defenders, effectively, limiting the advantage, a good attacker vs a good defender, is often equal. Why not have the attackers facing the unskilled defender and running at a defence occupied by, broken by a forward unit?

Again watch this clip to see sort of an example of what I am saying
[/video]

[Coach]

^Was the volleyed "pass" intended to be just that in this instance. Secondly, this was not setup as suggested in your pitch, the doing if which would be far more challenging.

[JACKAL]

^Was the volleyed "pass" intended to be just that in this instance. Secondly, this was not setup as suggested in your pitch, the doing if which would be far more challenging.

Its intended to be a cross, but a cross is also a pass ( Is it not ?)... Its just a different type of cross that's intended to arrive in the 6 yard box with much less force but with an unpredictable trajectory designed to create a confusion for all in the box

I dont think delivering that bouncing cross is going to be any more challenging than what you have today. Wingers dont fly down the wing anymore delivery crosses with a defender in hot pursuit like they did in the 70's. Today, players play as a unit around the box exchanging a series of passes before one of them is free enough to deliver the cross. This all falls right in with today's scheme of playing the game.

[jette1]

^Was the volleyed "pass" intended to be just that in this instance. Secondly, this was not setup as suggested in your pitch, the doing if which would be far more challenging.

Its intended to be a cross, but a cross is also a pass ( Is it not ?)... Its just a different type of cross that's intended to arrive in the 6 yard box with much less force but with an unpredictable trajectory designed to create a confusion for all in the box

I dont think delivering that bouncing cross is going to be any more challenging than what you have today. Wingers dont fly down the wing anymore delivery crosses with a defender in hot pursuit like they did in the 70's. Today, players play as a unit around the box exchanging a series of passes before one of them is free enough to deliver the cross. This all falls right in with today's scheme of playing the game.

Solowe someday you would look back and re-live this your thread embarrassment at a higher level; soccer is not American football where formations are static

[Chief Ogbunigwe]

At the risk of being laughed at ,these are my proposed changes that i feel should make footy more exciting :

1. Drawn matches - 1 point for the home team;2 points for the away team.( i feel that its not fair to split points evenly when the away team has most of the time overcome more adversity,facing a hostile crowd and all that).Also should make the smaller teams try harder to win their games instead of sitting deep all game.

2.Long Range goals over 25 yards( line to be drawn) 2 points (goals) instead of one...Sort of like a 3 pointer in basketball...Make the game more high scoring and interesting.

3 Every penalty call/goal to be video reviwed..Arent we happy that we no longer have to argue about what ball crossed the goal line in the EPL every weekend anymore ? I'm tired of bad calls deciding games.Arsenal have benefited from some ridiculous calls this season (not that it has done us any world of good). But as a fan of the opposing teams i would be livid. Review every goal..it wont take but 30 seconds..instead of the hours we spend debating them every season...

OK, make I laff at you
#1 is interesting, but that's it.
#2 I no gree. Long range goals dey sweet. Let's leave it at that...unless you want PKs to be considered "half-goals"...like a field goal in American Football. On the other hand though, maybe players like ElNeny and Xhaka would actually aim for goal when shooting, instead of just closing their eyes and shooting at birds like Okocha.
#3 I agree.

Anyway, Solowe is what yoruba people call "eda".

[JACKAL]

^Was the volleyed "pass" intended to be just that in this instance. Secondly, this was not setup as suggested in your pitch, the doing if which would be far more challenging.

Its intended to be a cross, but a cross is also a pass ( Is it not ?)... Its just a different type of cross that's intended to arrive in the 6 yard box with much less force but with an unpredictable trajectory designed to create a confusion for all in the box

I dont think delivering that bouncing cross is going to be any more challenging than what you have today. Wingers dont fly down the wing anymore delivery crosses with a defender in hot pursuit like they did in the 70's. Today, players play as a unit around the box exchanging a series of passes before one of them is free enough to deliver the cross. This all falls right in with today's scheme of playing the game.

Solowe someday you would look back and re-live this your thread embarrassment at a higher level; soccer is not American football where formations are static

You know whats embarrasing today ???

That you can only see this working in static situations. I just posted a video of the very play I am describing and yet you think the players have to be frozen to plan the play. And By the way, whats more static than a dead ball situation in Soccer. Coaches plan very rigid plays from static plays like Free kicks and corners all the time

Whats the point of tactics in any sport if you cant bring new ideas into the game ? I am sure it was a crazy idea when one guy said a player should be able to play in any position, or even created new positions or roles like Schemer or wing back !!

[Coach]

@Solowe, one is of the opinion that, till Africa steps off follow me road, she'll never truly rival the rest of the world on the grandest stage. There is a need to pioneer, the greatest of ideas began as murmurings in a public house, opium den or in gulps of air beneath smothering breasts of a well bodied brunette in those establishments near the docks of old.

[JACKAL]

@Solowe, one is of the opinion that, till Africa steps off follow me road, she'll never truly rival the rest of the world on the grandest stage. There is a need to pioneer, the greatest of ideas began as murmurings in a public house, opium den or in gulps of air beneath smothering breasts of a well bodied brunette in those establishments near the docks of old.

Compliment ??....Thanks , I think

[Coach]

And why not. Africa must think outside of the box.

[JACKAL]

I talked about coaches changing the way they teach players to cross the ball into the box.

My idea is rather than telegraphing the long airborne pass from 20-30 yards out, the crossing player should slam the ball into the ground. I firmly believe this system will create more real opportunities to score, and goals, than the direct cross methodology being widely used today.

Here is an example of it this weekend in the Brighton vs Man United game. Notice how the defense froze when they couldn't predict the path of the ball.

[/video]

[metalalloy]

Of course the forwards will be able to "unfreeze" themselves, and detect the path of the ball. Oh, yea a 2-3 man possession play is feasible because the defenders will be watching 2-3 opponents do "tem tem" with the ball before they volley the ball into the ground while their unfrozen teammate is able to track the ball and score?


Ive read some daft things from the peacock, but this one has to take the cake.

[Schillachi]

I talked about coaches changing the way they teach players to cross the ball into the box.

My idea is rather than telegraphing the long airborne pass from 20-30 yards out, the crossing player should slam the ball into the ground. I firmly believe this system will create more real opportunities to score, and goals, than the direct cross methodology being widely used today.

Here is an example of it this weekend in the Brighton vs Man United game. Notice how the defense froze when they couldn't predict the path of the ball.

[/video]

Solowe, my guy, how body?

You do know players are able to put all kinds of spins on the ball when crossing it. What exactly makes you think that a ball slammed into the ground is inherently more unpredictable than the various types of direct crosses there are?

[JACKAL]

I talked about coaches changing the way they teach players to cross the ball into the box.

My idea is rather than telegraphing the long airborne pass from 20-30 yards out, the crossing player should slam the ball into the ground. I firmly believe this system will create more real opportunities to score, and goals, than the direct cross methodology being widely used today.

Here is an example of it this weekend in the Brighton vs Man United game. Notice how the defense froze when they couldn't predict the path of the ball.

[/video]

Solowe, my guy, how body?

You do know players are able to put all kinds of spins on the ball when crossing it. What exactly makes you think that a ball slammed into the ground is inherently more unpredictable than the various types of direct crosses there are?

Toto Schillachi… I dey o.. Hope life is treating you well . !