Spherical Planet
Well-known member
There's a good reason why so many decent footballers have often made terrible managers/coaches and it can often be found in their lack of tactical nous.
Guys like Jinky just went and played football. He'd get stuck out wide and the only instruction you would have to give him is to just tie your opponent in knots. Many players focus primarily on their own jobs - they have to trust that their team-mates were doing theirs. More often than not (with good players) it works.
MON's team with Lenny in it could never be regarded as had having a real shape or a strategic gameplan. It cost us in Europe and also cost us two titles which we should and could have won, but for the most part - it was effective and depended upon causing as much chaos and disruption as possible and leaving the genuine (and in one or two notable cases - world class) talent to apply the finishing touches.
It fell short against really tactically aware teams or those with far better footballers, but MON's teams were rarely battered into oblivion and were competitive against top European competition (particularly at Celtic Park).
One criticism I have of Lenny, is that he tends to play in a style that allows opponents to get plenty of bodies behind the ball. We don't play with the tempo we did under the snake and some of our play is reflective of Lenny's own game which was based on breaking play up and laying off the easy ball. That's fine when you have one or two players doing that, not quite so dynamic when 6 or 7 would rather play sideways and then go back. Patience is a good trait in football, but it still requires penetration at the appropriate time and while we see it in flashes, we have players who can be direct and commit opponents, but who tend to turn back inside/outside and play it sideways or backwards.
The key to playing 3 at the back is that it should, theoretically, allow Broonie to play 10-15 yards further up the park, as he shouldn't have to be an insurance policy for a more aggressive defence with Duffy in there. He shouldn't have to be cover when Ajer gets pulled out to the left and he can now properly link up with the rest of the midfield and offer them that third-point in the triangle.
We perhaps put a bit too much emphasis on tactics, but I guess it's important when you have to break down stubborn resistance; however - what really fucks opponents up is when you can alter your shape in real time without having to radically alter your personnel. That was one of MON's teams strengths.........what looked a pretty rigid 3-5-2 could very much end up being a very different formation without many obvious changed having been made. It's the beauty of having genuinely talented players like Lubo, Sutton and Larsson.
Anyway - just some thoughts...........I'm no strategist or war general, I'll trust those who are qualified to know better than me.
Guys like Jinky just went and played football. He'd get stuck out wide and the only instruction you would have to give him is to just tie your opponent in knots. Many players focus primarily on their own jobs - they have to trust that their team-mates were doing theirs. More often than not (with good players) it works.
MON's team with Lenny in it could never be regarded as had having a real shape or a strategic gameplan. It cost us in Europe and also cost us two titles which we should and could have won, but for the most part - it was effective and depended upon causing as much chaos and disruption as possible and leaving the genuine (and in one or two notable cases - world class) talent to apply the finishing touches.
It fell short against really tactically aware teams or those with far better footballers, but MON's teams were rarely battered into oblivion and were competitive against top European competition (particularly at Celtic Park).
One criticism I have of Lenny, is that he tends to play in a style that allows opponents to get plenty of bodies behind the ball. We don't play with the tempo we did under the snake and some of our play is reflective of Lenny's own game which was based on breaking play up and laying off the easy ball. That's fine when you have one or two players doing that, not quite so dynamic when 6 or 7 would rather play sideways and then go back. Patience is a good trait in football, but it still requires penetration at the appropriate time and while we see it in flashes, we have players who can be direct and commit opponents, but who tend to turn back inside/outside and play it sideways or backwards.
The key to playing 3 at the back is that it should, theoretically, allow Broonie to play 10-15 yards further up the park, as he shouldn't have to be an insurance policy for a more aggressive defence with Duffy in there. He shouldn't have to be cover when Ajer gets pulled out to the left and he can now properly link up with the rest of the midfield and offer them that third-point in the triangle.
We perhaps put a bit too much emphasis on tactics, but I guess it's important when you have to break down stubborn resistance; however - what really fucks opponents up is when you can alter your shape in real time without having to radically alter your personnel. That was one of MON's teams strengths.........what looked a pretty rigid 3-5-2 could very much end up being a very different formation without many obvious changed having been made. It's the beauty of having genuinely talented players like Lubo, Sutton and Larsson.
Anyway - just some thoughts...........I'm no strategist or war general, I'll trust those who are qualified to know better than me.