“To make players understand the positional attack, which in my point of view is the most important: make players understand that by not intervening, you are helping. By not intervening, you are helping. And this is very hard to understand even in very top-level players".
‘And why, why?’
“Because players want to be protagonists. To tell a player: you now stay open and in 3 minutes you are not going to touch the ball, but it will eventually come, or maybe not and you have to wait more, but you have to wait there because that means that you are…
“Because players want to be protagonists. To tell a player: you now stay open and in 3 minutes you are not going to touch the ball, but it will eventually come, or maybe not and you have to wait more, but you have to wait there because that means that you are…
“…opening up spaces on other parts of the pitch. The positional attack is very complicated, it is to be still and wait for the ball to reach you"
Guardiola is describing what he calls the ‘Positional Attack’ (with Spain as the prime example).
Notice how he contrasts this with the alternative approaches of others (although his descriptions here are somewhat vague).
Notice how he contrasts this with the alternative approaches of others (although his descriptions here are somewhat vague).
Guardiola’s vision of football has proved to be highly effective.
It’s reasonable to argue that he is now the most influential coach of all time - perhaps no other’s ideas have shaped the global game in their own image the way Guardiola’s have and continue to do so.
It’s reasonable to argue that he is now the most influential coach of all time - perhaps no other’s ideas have shaped the global game in their own image the way Guardiola’s have and continue to do so.
But Guardiola’s Positional Attack is not the only way of playing effective possession football.
It is not blasphemy to critique his preferences for players to ‘be still’, fixed in their designated zones waiting for the ball to come to them.
It is not blasphemy to critique his preferences for players to ‘be still’, fixed in their designated zones waiting for the ball to come to them.
It is not illegitimate to suggest that curbing the player’s role as ‘protagonist’ can also have negative consequences.
Other options are available - less rigid modes of play which emphasise player’s constant movements towards and around the ball carrier are also possible.
Other options are available - less rigid modes of play which emphasise player’s constant movements towards and around the ball carrier are also possible.
Relationism proposes that by intervening in the ball-zone more, not less, players can interact together to produce emergent dynamics coherent enough to challenge Positional systems.
This means more freedom to move to the ball, rather than waiting for it to arrive.
🎬@ThePurist_
This means more freedom to move to the ball, rather than waiting for it to arrive.
🎬@ThePurist_
Relationism foregoes the chess-like strategy of using players to ‘pin’ the opponent to “open up spaces on other parts of the pitch”.
Instead, localised communication and timing are utilised to progress via emergent structures and bespoke, artisanal combinations.
🎬@ThePurist_
Instead, localised communication and timing are utilised to progress via emergent structures and bespoke, artisanal combinations.
🎬@ThePurist_
Guardiola’s vision of the Positional Attack is an incredibly potent one, and his ability to implement it at the highest level of competition is undeniable.
But we must be careful not to mistake Guardiola’s vision of football for football itself.
The field is open.
But we must be careful not to mistake Guardiola’s vision of football for football itself.
The field is open.
Loading suggestions...