TECHNOLOGY

Increasingly, technology is part of our lives, in all aspects. Internet, phones, etc. with their applications and the possibility of contact with anyone anywhere in the world, have opened a number of options unimaginable a few years ago.

I want to talk about the application of technology in the world of football. Statistics, videos, programs that let you do this or that, there is more and more of this style. Are they all good or necessary? I think so. But, what I disagree with, is the use made many times. A team has 80% ball possession and loses the game. A team makes 20 shots on goal and loses a game. A team makes 2 shots on goal and wins a match. A team that commits 10 fouls in a game, with three penalties against and finishes the match with 9 players. And, like this, whatever you want. And, here is where the statistics do not give many clues or give none at all. Recording matches, if we don’t know how to analyze them properly and draw the appropriate conclusions, is useless. Note the number of corners in favor or, the number of turnovers or any other data, if it is not in the context that corresponds, it’s useless.

I will put examples: a player makes 80 passes in a game, with only 1 mistake. His success rate is 98.75%. The problem comes when the lost ball makes the opponents to score a goal and win the game. Another example: A goalkeeper makes 2 saves in a game and concedes 3 goals. Does this mean that his performance is bad? Another example: A player sees a yellow card every 2 games. Does this mean that he is a dirty player?

Consider the examples. In the first case, what we want to know is how and why it came the turnover: Was he passing a long ball when he doesn’t know how to do it? Did he has passing lanes? Did he use them? Did he have support at his side, back, front? Did he receive a complicated pass from a teammate that left him in a difficult situation to pass?

In the second case, the three goals the goalkeeper concedes are second or third play after a corner against that is not rejected, the other goal is in a counterattack in which an opponent is just before him and the third goal is a penalty. Who was the one that didn’t clear the ball? Why it wasn’t cleared? Was it a good clearing but there wasn’t nobody to receive the ball? Why is there a counter? Why anyone stops the counterattack? The penalty, is the result of an isolated play? Was a player dribbling inside the box? Were the marks right? Could we avoid the penalty?

Finally, the third case we could ask questions like, is it right the position of the player? Are the others who have left in the wrong position? Has he excessive ground to cover and, therefore, he’s late for interceptions?

Like these, we can raise a lot of questions for each situation, the numbers tell us "facts" but, in general, do not tell us "why". We as coaches or players have to live in constant doubt: Why this? Why not that? Why to the right? Why to the left?, etc. It’s not enough to know what to do at any given moment of the match. I have to know why I do it, so that, when you have a similar situation later in the game and, elsewhere on the pitch, you can act properly.

The technology can help a lot, or a little. It is suitable use for sure that helps so much. Leave everything in the hands of a number without knowing how “to read"  them is what will not help us. It is not many faults we do in a game, is where we foul and why we have to make fouls.

In fact, the only part of the technology that is indisputable is the final score: The one that scores the most goals wins, although sometimes we do not know why.

Jordi Pascual

You can follow me on Twitter: @JordiPascualP

WHO IS THE BOSS HERE?

It has long been talk of what should be the functions of a coach in a football team. I will speak, only, about professional teams, then, in the amateurs, the budget and the number of volunteers/officials gives the tasks. Not surprisingly, in these categories you can see the President's Club selling tickets before starting the game.

In professional Clubs, however, there are many people around the Coach: Technical Managers, Technical Secretaries, etc. And, the questions are: Who's the Boss? Who should make the decisions? Who decides how the team has to play? Who decides who to sign or who to sell?

Well, any option can be good. At the end of the day, if the team wins, everyone will be happy. Only, however, one condition: that everyone has clear on what should be the operation of the Club. There has to be a clear idea of ​​the type of player or style of playing. There are clubs that, by its character, hire Coaches in a certain way of playing, which is used from the Grassroots to the 1st team. There are clubs where the 1st team (and maybe the 2nd), depending on the Coach, play one way, and the other Grassroots Teams play another way. There are clubs where each team plays one way. There are clubs where the Technical Secretariat takes the players they think more appropriate and then it’s the job of the Coach to put them in place. There are places where the coach demands what he wants to have. There are Clubs signing players only from a certain geographical area. There are clubs that only want players on loan or no transfer fee.

But now. If things do not work, the first thing is to fire the Coach, right? So, is not this one who should have the power? Or, at least, enough power to decide about a number of things?

1) The style of playing. When you hire a Coach, you know how he plays. Therefore, if the club has a game model, why are we looking for someone who plays different?

2) Players that are there must be some features to play in this or that way. The Technical Secretariat should have a list of players that “fit” the way of playing and the coach will decide the ones that he wants.

3) Here comes the economic factor, obviously. The Club has a budget. Therefore, the coach should know what the options are, in order to assess whether it is better player "A" for this function or "B" for that, knowing that you cannot have both and that can be a player "C" useful, because it's more important "A" than "B" and "C" can do the job of "B".

4) If you cannot have the players needed to play a certain way, to what extent is the responsibility of the coach if not achieved the objectives set?

There are many ways to work. All they should have, as a clear starting point, the role of everyone involved in. And, who should take the decisions and the consequences that follow from that.

There is only one formula that I do not like, and it is that the President and/or the Board make the signs because they like this or that player. I’ll never understand why to have a Technical Staff, if later you make a signing without knowing if it is the most appropriate or necessary for the team. And then, comes this sentence: "We have given him the best players." Yes. But, were they the needed ones? However, as he is the boss...

Jordi Pascual

You can follow me on Twitter: @JordiPascualP

MORE SHOPPING

The majority of European seasons, except for the Nordics, Russia, Ireland and some more are coming to the end. We are knowing the champions, the teams that will play in Europe, the ones that will lose the category, the ones that will be promoted, etc. It's the moment the big dance of each year begins, with players and coaches packing to leave a place and go to another.

Now it is the time where you will see the work done by the various Technical Secretariats. It's not an easy job. You have to work many months to provide the coach (a new one or the same one, it’s the same), a number of players that can be used to improve the current squad. Clubs that will be forced to sell to balance their budgets. Clubs that will be able to pay anything for that desired player. Clubs that will miss 2, 3, 4 or 8 players, for whatever reason, and must make a new squad.

Although it is not an easy task, the work of the Technical Secretariat is much better than a few years ago. Today it is possible to watch on TV the majority of the Leagues in the World. In one place or another, you can watch every week hundreds of games and thousands of players. Clubs with less budget may only have 1 person for this job and, in the most modest, is the same coach who does all the functions at once.

And, this is where I start to wonder. How big clubs may not sign virtually unknown players, and later they will pay the price of gold when they start to show up in an average team? How can you have Serbs, Poles or Greeks (to give some examples), which are in some average teams without that great teams know anything about them? How is this possible that often see very good level players in regional categories, which could be much higher? It is true that it is not possible to see all the players in the World but sometimes you understand nothin. Because, of course, to sign Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo (today), my nephew, who is 11, can do it, and he only  watches Barça’s matches. To sign them with 15-16 years you have to work more. Or, to sign a 19-year young Swede playing in the first division of his country and bring it to a Top-Ten, you have also to work. May be is this, not work hard enough or, maybe they do not know, many of them, what they have to look for in a player or, what kind of player the Club searches or, any other reason.

You look for a full-back and you finish signing an "adaptable" winger, you looking for a play-maker and you take a defensive midfielder. You are looking for a striker and you take a quick forward that can open spaces on the side. You are looking for a goalkeeper good on aerial ball and you take one that plays well with his feet. And so, whatever you want. And, when the player is "perfect" for the needs of the team, this is worth a lot of money unreachable. Should not the Clubs have a list of players (4-5 for the more modest, 15 to 20 for those with more resources) for each position? And should not be all its features (technical, tactical, economical, personal, etc.), included in the file? Sometimes it seems that the one that signs has done it because the player is highly regarded in any of the simulation games that are about football, because if not, often you don’t understand things.

And, not all players are good to play in any team. Each team plays one way and the players that go well for it are not the same that go well for another team, which plays differently. A typical question is: And why was this one playing so well on that team and he does not in this one? Simple, because the team plays differently and functions to do by the player are different, and his characteristics are not good for this style of play. And you see that working and watching players and games and, more players and more games. And, also, knowing exactly how your team plays and which player is the one that really serves. And it is hard work and often not done. May also be one of the problems.

And, forgive me, but I don’t understand that, with so many people in the Technical Secretariats you finish asking a player to the “Agent on duty”. I'll take the one he represents, and he will charge the corresponding commission. The fault lies not with the agents, it is clear. Blame it on those who didn’t do the job they had to do. When you go shopping, you have to know what you want to buy, because if not, you’ll pay for a 600 (Fiat 500), the price of a Porsche.

Jordi Pascual

You can follow me on Twitter: @JordiPascualP

AS YOU PLAY...

I've said it once, but now I will be more extensive. For a long time, it has been said, and it is said that "as you train, as you play", referring to that, what was worked and how it worked in practices was reflected in the games. Today, for me, the situation is reversed and we have moved to "as you play, as you train".

What does this mean? Well, very simple: If we want our team play in a certain way, we will have to train in a certain way. I mean, why we have to do "Rondos" and "Possession games" when the team plays counter-attack style or a live direct play style? Or, why do we have to practice plays where the full-back passes to the midfielder and this one to the winger to cross, if this will not be done during the game?

A few days ago I read in a blog about the use (and abuse) of the Small Sided Games (SSG). These SSG are the "fashion" now, and you're not a good coach if you do not use them. But, what should we use, if we do? Well, those useful for your way of playing. An exercise with so much pressure when you do not press when you lose the ball makes no sense. An exercise for building up from the back with the ball when then we don’t play this way neither, does not make any sense. An exercise where our striker is heading the cross of the winger, when we do not have this wingers to do the crossing, it makes no sense. And, well, whatever you want.

Any type of exercise or activity that is related to the way we play is good. Any type of exercise or activity that is NOT related to the way we play is bad. Regardless if we talk about SSG, Automatism, Prepared plays, etc. It has nothing to do with that.

The question we must ask ourselves when we prepare our sessions is not what we do?, If not, why do we do it? Why this activity and not that one? Why I use this exercise? Why this one is not useful? Because everything has to be linked to our style of playing. Therefore for this, only, that's enough.

And, the exercises should include, to the extent possible, the 4 moments of the game (Attack, Defense, and the two Transitions). For me, it makes little sense exercises where the attackers have to score a goal and when defenders clear the ball the exercise finishes and we start the attacking move again. But, what about the game? What do we want to be done? Because if what we want is that the defenders just clear the ball, it’s good as we did. But now, if we want to play a counter or we want the defenders to play from the back, we have to make it be present when training, right? And besides, if we want the ball to go to the center or to the flanks, we have to put this "condition" in the exercise. If we have not practiced it before, unlikely we will see it in the matches.

And, all this comes from the same place: to have a clear and defined “style of playing”. To know what we want to do in every moment of the game, with the ball or without it. In our half pitch, or in the opponent’s half. In our box, or in the rival’s. If this is not clear to us, we can hardly prepare our training sessions so that they are in line with our way of playing. The "style of playing" is the starting point of everything. Without "style of playing", there is nothing.

As you play, as you train. If you don’t know how you play, hardly you will know how to train.

Jordi Pascual

You can follow me on Twitter: @JordiPascualP

GUARDIOLA DIDN'T INVENT ANYTHING

So written it sounds strange. And, after reading everything it's possible than more than one will curse or will  tell me that I have no idea, it can also be.

The fact is that, after seeing Guardiola many years as a player, coach and now as a lecturer, I have increasingly more clear that what he has always done the best is being a pupil. Cruyff, Capello, Lillo, Bielsa, Menotti, Van Gaal, etc.. Guardiola has learned from all of them. He has  heard, he has seen, with many of them in person, their ways of working, their methodology, their understanding of football. And having done that, it has gathered all together with his innate intelligence and leadership skills, communication and work and has made an outstanding blend.

Now, to invent, what is said to invent , I think he hasn't done it. The "1-4-3-3" is used for many years, the "1-3-4-3" was introduced by Cruyff, at the defensive rigor, Capello, rigor and control, of Van Gaal, the spirit of group by Lillo, the philosophy as a concept for working, from Bielsa or Menotti, etc.. But he has had this point to know what was the most profitable of each and then, and later, as a good student, he is best the known understanding the "Principles of the Game" and applying them. In this, I think he is the best, no doubt.

On the Web there are, in the last days, some lectures given recently in South America. Above all, one where he talks about why he changed the position of Messi, who has become a "TOP". I've seen it, as many people, and I come to the following conclusions:

1) Guardiola knows as any other coach how his players are. What "features" they have at technical, tactical level, etc.. What they know and what they can do. The strengths and weaknesses. If they are fast, explosive, patients, "diesel", if they good headers, to the right or to the left. If they run better with or without the ball, etc. This is something that all those who say we are, or want to be, coaches, should know very carefully.

2) Guardiola is a student of football. Of his team, of his opponents and, of any group of eleven guys who play football against another group of eleven dressed in different colors, whatever the place on earth. Scan everything he sees and always looks for the "why" Why do they do this move? Why they don't do that? Why do they go to the right? Why to the left? Why they do not go? Why ...?

3) And, as I said, Guardiola applies the "Principles of football" as anyone. Contrary to what people may think, Guardiola is the most orthodox of all coaches. All of him is pure orthodoxy "Rationa occupatios of space (The ball give us the order)", "Changes of orientation (start on one side, finish at the other)", "Walls (2v1)", "Free espces (winger comes in, full-back appears at the outside"), "Conservation of the ball", "Change of Pace", "support (the false "9")", etc.. and defensive principles, too: "Pressing (do you remember, don't you?)", "Cover", "Markings", "Permanent support" etc..

That is, Guardiola has not implemented anything we did not know, especially for  those who have done the Caoching Courses with the books of the Spanish Federation. What happens to us is that many times we want to be more Catholic than the Pope, and want to invent the "garlic soup" and, apply names to things that already exist and are already named. And all this is already invented. The concepts are the same for everyone. What sets us apart is how we apply and, above all, why we apply this or that way. In this, Pep it's a big "inventor", because he does what his teachers told him. He has achieved what the "Master" Johan Cruyff used to say: The hardest thing is to keep things simple. And he does.

Jordi Pascual

You can follow me on Twitter: @JordiPascualP

COMICS AND SUPERHEROES

When I was little, there was a whole comic series characterized by the appearance of some Superheroes (Captain America, Professor "X", Ironman, Thor, Batman, Superman, etc..), which all them had two things in common.
The first is that they could lose battles, but always ended up winning the war. It may be, that at the beginning of the story told, they were overcome by evil, but in the end, always ended winning.
The second is that his appearance was always towards the end and that he managed to solve the problems, however great they were. Everyone knew it, but not for that we were all waiting for the moment that he started putting the bad guys in their place, which was what they deserved, of course, that's because they were the bad guys.
Jorge Valdano defined Romario many years ago as a "cartoon player", such was the way of moving and doing the Brazilian.
Today, I want to define Messi as a "Superhero Comic". To all who were at the Camp Nou yesterday or, watching the match against Betis on TV, we came a scare when Pepe Mel's team went ahead at the very beginning of the game. We had lost against Bayern (and how), Madrid had won (also suffering more than it was supposed, but had won), and a defeat against Betis could assume that Madrid put to 5 points on Wednesday, having a match against Malaga by that Cup Final to be played on a Friday because Saturday's "Eurovision", etc, etc.. And we all know how it is, in general, the Barcelona's supporter: going from optimism to pessimism (and vice versa), more easily than taking a coffee in the morning before going to work.
Luckily Alexis (yes, the same one that is useless, according to many), equalized a few minutes later and, while Villa was missing all that was possible to miss (and the impossible, too), Betis scored the second -and great goal- , when we were about to reach the half time.
And the Superhero? For, as applicable, was on the bench looking at everything with a face of "I can not believe what we are missing, I'll  have to fix it myself." The second half started and suddenly flipped the Nou Camp. But there is no goal! What is it? Well it happens that the superhero had begun to warm-up and turned pessimists into optimistics.

Villa, finally, scored and Barça tied the game. Messi replaced Villa (I think Barça fans ever, and those that are not, were so clear which the substitution would be), and the Superhero came in for the action: 15 minutes were enough to make two of his plays, to score two goals, one of them, in a free-kic, amazing and send another free-kick, at switched foot (it was for a right players and Xavi was there to kick it), to the crosshead of goal. By the way, "Xarli" Rexach scored this goal at the Calderon Stadium about 36 or 37 years ago. This player also was different.
The Superhero had already done the work. Barça fans could breathe easy, knowing that Wednesday, if Madrid does not win, Barça will be League's Champion, which means something, as much as some people try to minimize it.
By the way, as a good Superhero, when he left the pitch he was not happy at all. What now? What is it? Was he injured? Did he see a card that will make him to miss the next game? None of that. Simply, despite being a Superhero, failed once, a few seconds before the end, taht would have been the "hat-trick" and we all know how Messi dislikes missing a goal. Although you've done everything right. Although the bad guys are already locked up in jail. Even it is good for nothing. Well, for nothing. This goal would have been 47 in the league. Only 3 less than last year. But there are still 4 games. Sure that the Superhero will do something special, that's why he is a Superhero.

SHOPPING

I think that in the coming weeks and months there will be a noticeable increase of flights to Germany, mainly to Munich and Dortmund. Football runs on "fashion" and now, after the Champions League semifinals, the Germans are "fashionable", the new trend to follow. Everyone will want to do like them, in all aspects.

If, until yesterday, the working model were Spanish teams (and in particular Barça, with the entire collection of titles in recent years), starting today this is over, and we'l hear, among other things that:

1. The "tiki-taka" is not longer useful.

2. The possession game has expired.

3. Smaller players are useless for this type of matches.

4. The game should be based more on playing against what the opponents are doing, and not, to apply what we work.

Really? Are you sure? Do we have it clear?

Step by step. The first two statements go together. Believe in what I just put is not knowing what is football based on "possession", or how it works, and how to train it (beyond that like it or not this model: each one plays as he likes, make it clear ). This kind of football - like any other - is about principles at all levels and you have to follow them. I talked about this in the previous post, and now I will not return to it. What should be clear is that, like any recipe or chemical formula, if you don't have the right ingredients in the right order and with the right timing, the final "product" is not adequate. And for me, that, as I said, is what happens now.

More. It has been given the example of small players to understand this model football. Why? Very simple: as the big players are to defend, small are to attack. This I think is also wrong. It's true that having players with 1.90 m. help defend corners and faults but, as Cruyff said, if we have problems defending corners, what we have to do is not to concede corners. What does this mean? Well, we have to play the way we have the greatest choices to maximize our strengths and minimize our weaknesses. On the other hand, I've never been clear that the big players can not be players of high technical quality. I just think that in general, the training of these players has been directed to destroy and not to create play and, therefore, this is what we see happening today in football fields. And, conversely, as only small players are taught to touch and touch and not taught to fight splitted balls, when they find with it, they have problems.

Finally, now you have to be reactive. Everyone says that you have to be proactive, but what we see is more and more to play according to opponents. I disagree. I think the ideas are confused. One thing is to have a model/style of play and make the necessary adjustments based on the opponent that we facing. One day, we will play with the higher defensive line. Another day players at the flanks will be wider; another day, we'll do something else, but we always have to respect our game idea. And this has nothing to do depending on the opponent's play: if the opponent is offensive, we play counters, if the opponent is defensive, we'll play the attack, if ... what you want. Changing of scheme/system means changing mechanisms, and if this has not been worked well in practice, we will not see it at matches. In football there are no miracles. There is much work. Professional teams, may be they do have so many hours that allow them to do things completely different from one day to another but, even that, they have a basic idea of ​​how they play. For the rest, which work grassroots or amateur teams, things are very different. Not better, not worse, but different.

We have to think about all this when we go shopping in Germany. It is not the same a BMW than a Mercedes or a Porsche, even all them are manufactured in the same country. And, may be we are more interested in having an Opel or and Audi made around here.