Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Discuss World Football here. Continental football, International Leagues, and players.
Post Reply
icee
Egg
Egg
Posts: 1959
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 5:56 pm
Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by icee »

My fellow Cybers. I have been pondering this question for a while and reinforced my comments i read about folks like Aribo and co "they don't have African physicality", "some of these foreign bred players are too soft".

After watching a physical Senegal side get outfoxed my England yesterday, I started to wonder if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot based on how we think and define problems.

Don't get me wrong, I think being physical can be a blessing..or more so a good ingredient but not the meal, the main course or even a must have ingredient. On account of the evidence (using this WC as an example), focusing on "physical" players as our primary point of leverage is not a winning strategy. Watching England vs Senegal...I'd argue only Jude Bellingham and perhaps Kyle Walker matched Senegal on the physical dimension. We can reference physical strong holds like Cameroon and to a minor extent Ghana that didn't make it out of the group.

My conclusion we need to elevate to conquer the pull of simplifying both our problems or complicating our opportunities by applying the.."do they have the African physicality" or "are they too soft" filter. What does this mean, how will this help us? I think we should retire these kinds of comments and focus on real impact attributes. Perhaps just focus on the best players that are the best fit.

To boot; the Asian teams in the WC are not overly physical but with discipline, planning, good coaching they are performing

Cheers
User avatar
Bigpokey24
Super Eagle
Super Eagle
Posts: 110227
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 4:58 pm
Location: Earth
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by Bigpokey24 »

icee wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:30 pm My fellow Cybers. I have been pondering this question for a while and reinforced my comments i read about folks like Aribo and co "they don't have African physicality", "some of these foreign bred players are too soft".

After watching a physical Senegal side get outfoxed my England yesterday, I started to wonder if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot based on how we think and define problems.

Don't get me wrong, I think being physical can be a blessing..or more so a good ingredient but not the meal, the main course or even a must have ingredient. On account of the evidence (using this WC as an example), focusing on "physical" players as our primary point of leverage is not a winning strategy. Watching England vs Senegal...I'd argue only Jude Bellingham and perhaps Kyle Walker matched Senegal on the physical dimension. We can reference physical strong holds like Cameroon and to a minor extent Ghana that didn't make it out of the group.

My conclusion we need to elevate to conquer the pull of simplifying both our problems or complicating our opportunities by applying the.."do they have the African physicality" or "are they too soft" filter. What does this mean, how will this help us? I think we should retire these kinds of comments and focus on real impact attributes. Perhaps just focus on the best players that are the best fit.

To boot; the Asian teams in the WC are not overly physical but with discipline, planning, good coaching they are performing

Cheers
All th eAsian teams are about to be knocked out. The Worst CAF team at the worldcup just flogged South Korea wetin dey do una...nah real time ball una dey watch.. whatever you see on TV , you mind go say ah...this one better pass Africa...etc ...abeg some of una too dey jump before una land
SuperEagles

© Bigpokey24, most loved on CE
My post are with no warranties and confers zero rights. Get out your feelings
It is not authorized by CyberEagles. You assume all risk for your use.
All rights aren't reserved
icee
Egg
Egg
Posts: 1959
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 5:56 pm
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by icee »

Bigpokey24 wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:48 pm
icee wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:30 pm My fellow Cybers. I have been pondering this question for a while and reinforced my comments i read about folks like Aribo and co "they don't have African physicality", "some of these foreign bred players are too soft".

After watching a physical Senegal side get outfoxed my England yesterday, I started to wonder if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot based on how we think and define problems.

Don't get me wrong, I think being physical can be a blessing..or more so a good ingredient but not the meal, the main course or even a must have ingredient. On account of the evidence (using this WC as an example), focusing on "physical" players as our primary point of leverage is not a winning strategy. Watching England vs Senegal...I'd argue only Jude Bellingham and perhaps Kyle Walker matched Senegal on the physical dimension. We can reference physical strong holds like Cameroon and to a minor extent Ghana that didn't make it out of the group.

My conclusion we need to elevate to conquer the pull of simplifying both our problems or complicating our opportunities by applying the.."do they have the African physicality" or "are they too soft" filter. What does this mean, how will this help us? I think we should retire these kinds of comments and focus on real impact attributes. Perhaps just focus on the best players that are the best fit.

To boot; the Asian teams in the WC are not overly physical but with discipline, planning, good coaching they are performing

Cheers
All th eAsian teams are about to be knocked out. The Worst CAF team at the worldcup just flogged South Korea wetin dey do una...nah real time ball una dey watch.. whatever you see on TV , you mind go say ah...this one better pass Africa...etc ...abeg some of una too dey jump before una land
I see and get your point on the Asian teams now getting knocked out - Japan is out on a penalty and SKorea....will probably not come back against Brazil. The point i'm making is...on the dimension of physicality OR relative physicality, Croatia should not be beating Japan. Croatia is an old team, they schooled young energetic Canadian team and I'll argue a more physical and mobile Japanese team. South Korea and Japan have outperformed beating heavy weights like...Portugal and Germany...and not necessarily on relative physicality.
olu
Egg
Egg
Posts: 3815
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 9:38 pm
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by olu »

Personally, I think we overestimate the physical strength, speed, and stamina of African teams, and is some cases devalue the tactical organization of some of the elite African teams. The European and South American teams seem to have no problems matching up with us when it comes to speed, strength, and stamina. People forget how physical the EPL and Bundesliga are (and even how physical some of the other leagues in Europe are).

It was also mentioned above and hear time and time again about how difficult it is for foreign born players to cope with the physical side of the African game. Most of the "born in the abroad" players seem to be just fine dealing with the physical aspects of the African game.
User avatar
scholl
Egg
Egg
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 9:35 pm
Contact:
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by scholl »

Nothing physical about poorly fed, indomie “youths”. Keep deceiving yourselves with internalized delusions. Physicality is only good when applied to compliment other attributes or situations, and should never be a primary tool.
User avatar
Damunk
Flying Eagle
Flying Eagle
Posts: 52700
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 5:57 pm
Location: UK
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by Damunk »

Who fizzika ‘ep?
"Ole kuku ni gbogbo wọn "
gochino
Egg
Egg
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:35 pm
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by gochino »

icee wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:30 pm My fellow Cybers. I have been pondering this question for a while and reinforced my comments i read about folks like Aribo and co "they don't have African physicality", "some of these foreign bred players are too soft".

After watching a physical Senegal side get outfoxed my England yesterday, I started to wonder if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot based on how we think and define problems.

Don't get me wrong, I think being physical can be a blessing..or more so a good ingredient but not the meal, the main course or even a must have ingredient. On account of the evidence (using this WC as an example), focusing on "physical" players as our primary point of leverage is not a winning strategy. Watching England vs Senegal...I'd argue only Jude Bellingham and perhaps Kyle Walker matched Senegal on the physical dimension. We can reference physical strong holds like Cameroon and to a minor extent Ghana that didn't make it out of the group.

My conclusion we need to elevate to conquer the pull of simplifying both our problems or complicating our opportunities by applying the.."do they have the African physicality" or "are they too soft" filter. What does this mean, how will this help us? I think we should retire these kinds of comments and focus on real impact attributes. Perhaps just focus on the best players that are the best fit.

To boot; the Asian teams in the WC are not overly physical but with discipline, planning, good coaching they are performing

Cheers
What makes you think Senegal were physically fitter than England? Didn’t you watch the game and see how they were outclassed in every single aspect of the game? Check out the counter from Bellingham, he was so quick that the players could not even get close to him to commit a foul. Or you think african players are fitter by default? Yes we need strong and fit players but these players need to depend less on their natural attributes like running and focus more on tactics which would enable them make "The ball do the talking" similar to what spain is doing. It's all about managing your physical strength through out 90 mins!
Enugu II
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 23533
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:39 am
Location: Super Eagles Homeland
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by Enugu II »

gochino wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 10:28 am
icee wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:30 pm My fellow Cybers. I have been pondering this question for a while and reinforced my comments i read about folks like Aribo and co "they don't have African physicality", "some of these foreign bred players are too soft".

After watching a physical Senegal side get outfoxed my England yesterday, I started to wonder if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot based on how we think and define problems.

Don't get me wrong, I think being physical can be a blessing..or more so a good ingredient but not the meal, the main course or even a must have ingredient. On account of the evidence (using this WC as an example), focusing on "physical" players as our primary point of leverage is not a winning strategy. Watching England vs Senegal...I'd argue only Jude Bellingham and perhaps Kyle Walker matched Senegal on the physical dimension. We can reference physical strong holds like Cameroon and to a minor extent Ghana that didn't make it out of the group.

My conclusion we need to elevate to conquer the pull of simplifying both our problems or complicating our opportunities by applying the.."do they have the African physicality" or "are they too soft" filter. What does this mean, how will this help us? I think we should retire these kinds of comments and focus on real impact attributes. Perhaps just focus on the best players that are the best fit.

To boot; the Asian teams in the WC are not overly physical but with discipline, planning, good coaching they are performing

Cheers
What makes you think Senegal were physically fitter than England? Didn’t you watch the game and see how they were outclassed in every single aspect of the game? Check out the counter from Bellingham, he was so quick that the players could not even get close to him to commit a foul. Or you think african players are fitter by default? Yes we need strong and fit players but these players need to depend less on their natural attributes like running and focus more on tactics which would enable them make "The ball do the talking" similar to what spain is doing. It's all about managing your physical strength through out 90 mins!
Gochino

These are not traits.

Are these Senegalese players not playing for similar clubs? Thus, it is a misnomer to focus on traits. It is about team tactics and strategies employed at particular times and of which the players must use.
The difficulties of statistical thinking describes a puzzling limitation of our mind: our excessive confidence in what we believe we know, and our apparent inability to acknowledge the full extent of our ignorance and the uncertainty of the world we live in. We are prone to overestimate how much we understand about the world and to underestimate the role of chance in events -- Daniel Kahneman (2011), Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics
Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics
User avatar
TonyTheTigerKiller
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 12281
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 7:55 pm
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by TonyTheTigerKiller »

icee wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:30 pm My fellow Cybers. I have been pondering this question for a while and reinforced my comments i read about folks like Aribo and co "they don't have African physicality", "some of these foreign bred players are too soft".

After watching a physical Senegal side get outfoxed my England yesterday, I started to wonder if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot based on how we think and define problems.

Don't get me wrong, I think being physical can be a blessing..or more so a good ingredient but not the meal, the main course or even a must have ingredient. On account of the evidence (using this WC as an example), focusing on "physical" players as our primary point of leverage is not a winning strategy. Watching England vs Senegal...I'd argue only Jude Bellingham and perhaps Kyle Walker matched Senegal on the physical dimension. We can reference physical strong holds like Cameroon and to a minor extent Ghana that didn't make it out of the group.

My conclusion we need to elevate to conquer the pull of simplifying both our problems or complicating our opportunities by applying the.."do they have the African physicality" or "are they too soft" filter. What does this mean, how will this help us? I think we should retire these kinds of comments and focus on real impact attributes. Perhaps just focus on the best players that are the best fit.

To boot; the Asian teams in the WC are not overly physical but with discipline, planning, good coaching they are performing

Cheers
Your premise, from the get go, is incorrect. England beat Senegal because almost to a man, England players were bigger and stronger than the Senegalese. They won all the fifty-fifty balls and almost all the aerials because of their physical superiority. Physicality has everything to do with winning. Skill alone does not cut it anymore. Why do you think Saka is so effective? His physicality gives him a tremendous advantage over most of his markers. I think that ultimately you are confusing physicality with being aggressive. African players need to get more physical ie, bigger and stronger❗️


Cheers.
icee
Egg
Egg
Posts: 1959
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 5:56 pm
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by icee »

TonyTheTigerKiller wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 3:53 pm
icee wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 7:30 pm My fellow Cybers. I have been pondering this question for a while and reinforced my comments i read about folks like Aribo and co "they don't have African physicality", "some of these foreign bred players are too soft".

After watching a physical Senegal side get outfoxed my England yesterday, I started to wonder if we keep shooting ourselves in the foot based on how we think and define problems.

Don't get me wrong, I think being physical can be a blessing..or more so a good ingredient but not the meal, the main course or even a must have ingredient. On account of the evidence (using this WC as an example), focusing on "physical" players as our primary point of leverage is not a winning strategy. Watching England vs Senegal...I'd argue only Jude Bellingham and perhaps Kyle Walker matched Senegal on the physical dimension. We can reference physical strong holds like Cameroon and to a minor extent Ghana that didn't make it out of the group.

My conclusion we need to elevate to conquer the pull of simplifying both our problems or complicating our opportunities by applying the.."do they have the African physicality" or "are they too soft" filter. What does this mean, how will this help us? I think we should retire these kinds of comments and focus on real impact attributes. Perhaps just focus on the best players that are the best fit.

To boot; the Asian teams in the WC are not overly physical but with discipline, planning, good coaching they are performing

Cheers
Your premise, from the get go, is incorrect. England beat Senegal because almost to a man, England players were bigger and stronger than the Senegalese. They won all the fifty-fifty balls and almost all the aerials because of their physical superiority. Physicality has everything to do with winning. Skill alone does not cut it anymore. Why do you think Saka is so effective? His physicality gives him a tremendous advantage over most of his markers. I think that ultimately you are confusing physicality with being aggressive. African players need to get more physical ie, bigger and stronger❗️


Cheers.
I don't quite agree that England won fifty balls exclusively. I think prior to the first Goal, Senegal was on the front foot - and one could see more aggression and physicality. I added two cavetas- Bellignham and Walker...otherwise...Senegalese were generally more physical. Maybe not applying the physicality the right away..aka not bringing down Bellingham on the counter. The key point here is to counter the often made statements here that...Aribo and co can't cope with African physicality etc.
User avatar
cchinukw
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 37398
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 1:27 pm
Location: Displaced Naija. Don't bother
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by cchinukw »

Well Spain just got wifed by a physical African side. Case closed!
MAGA - Make Arsenal Great Again.

Mind that father made collection of Scifi and fantasy stories
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mind-That-Father-Made/dp/1907652051
User avatar
Comrade Machel
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 25920
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 7:30 pm
Re: Will we learn? What does physicality have to do with winning ?

Post by Comrade Machel »

scholl wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 5:35 am Nothing physical about poorly fed, indomie “youths”. Keep deceiving yourselves with internalized delusions. Physicality is only good when applied to compliment other attributes or situations, and should never be a primary tool.
:lol: :rotf: :thumbs:
Thank you oh. We like deceiving ourselves with lies.
Ratlala :thumbs: :D

https://youtu.be/8CZLsYase0Q

Post Reply