15 min?
When it comes to pace, neither Dias, Stones nor Laporte are extremely fast players. There are many teams that do not necessarily have Usain Bolt in defense who have high pressure, or a more conservative variant. Few teams do it for 90 minutes, but do it in periods.
But the point is to follow certain clear guidelines. Already in children's football, you learn to step down when the player with the ball has no pressure on him. If the player is under pressure, then you can keep the line. If the opponent plays a support pass, then you can push up, etc. Eventually you learn more universal rules, and at senior level, the coach usually has some preferences of his own. But all this must be coordinated and practiced.
What has been the most prominent in the last decade in football, and has developed the most, is precisely the pressure game. Without this in place, you have no chance of being successful. However, we choose a variant that most teams have gone away from a long time ago, except for Mourinho, but in return they are good at counterattacks. Nevertheless, Mourinho's success has also been limited over the past decade. It is also difficult to imagine that Tottenham will be a serious competitor to the other top teams with this style.
I've been wondering for a long time what Ancelotti's plan is, but it's really quite obvious; Catenaccio. Then we just have to accept it, and hope it brings success.
Football is cyclical, and in reality there is no 1 perfect way to play. If I had a pound for each time there was, I'd be a lot richer than I am today.
Before the latest iteration of pressing there was a period where it was all about possession, and smaller, intelligent, tricky midfielders. Before that it was you needed to have 2 defensive midfielders who were very positionally disciplined. Before that sides would play with a guy with a free role in a number 10 spot. The back 3 with a sweeper tends to come around cyclically in amongst all of those.
Even within that, you get sides like Leicester, who do none of the above, and produce results that go far beyond any rational, they sit deep, play with 2 up front, have no pace at the back, and ow possession stats and win the league, by basicaly breaking every supposed rule that exists.
The game is constantly evolving, so the idea what is currently the status quo will l always remain so I find very odd. It's just the current phase, and someone bright will find a solution to it soon. To a degree with Liverpool they already have. It's like evolution really. The best managers, are able to adapt, and change what they do to suit the needs of a game.
People go on about the likes of Hassunhuttl, but he's just lost 6 games in a row, and been hammered 9-0 again for the 2nd time in as many years. There's a line where tactical consistency just becomes dogma. It just becomes sending players out to lose.
If Ancelotti tried to play a certain way, we would probably be where Southampton are, as the players aren't good enough to win every week doing it. We've had "philosophy mangers" in Martinez and Silva and it ended badly. I'm much happier we have someone who is pragmatic and gets us over the line. I don't think anybody would want to be waiting 3 years for a manager to get his ideas in place. Maybe thats a bad thing, but thats teh world we live in now. If we lose 2 games, one of them against a side who has won 17 games in a row, people are questioning a manager. What world are we living in where people get years to put their plan together?
