[Archived] Does Style Matter?

[rover6]

This debate is not a simple matter of style v results. Life is about compromises, not extremes. Imo, a compromise has to be made but I think that style IS important and efforts should be made to preserve an entertaining style - as far as possible.

- We all mocked Bolton, under Allardyce, for their long ball, grappling, gamesmanship tactics. We still mock them, now, for their Megsonball game of dull negativity. It seems that we freely deride other teams for poor style but are not consistent or objective enough to do the same to our own team when we head in that direction.

But why does style matter?

1) It matters because skilful play is what makes the game objectively exciting. Skilful play transcends tribalist attachments. Any football fan (even non-football fan) can appreciate any team that plays skilful football.

2) Therefore, to appreciate style is to recognise that the game is more important than the team. Surely, that's right? Surely, however much we love Rovers, the game of football is more important - because, it is what makes Rovers possible?

3) Why does skilful play make the game more exciting? Because it makes things more unpredictable. It defies predictable physical laws, eg that brute strength and size should dominate in a physical contest or that the fastest players will outdo the rest. This is achieved through ultimate mastery of the ball and pitch, by the players, which is the pinnacle of their profession.

4) Therefore, it is skill and genuine mastery of the ball and the pitch that differentiates the contest of football from a rudimentary contest of physicality, planning and luck. I.e it is what differentiates football from the crumby game of a typical rugby match (which, admittedly, is not entirely devoid of skill). Football is one of those unique games in which the weedy, short guy can use his/her skill to be as important a player in the team as the huge central defender. The slow tubby guy can still dictate with his skilful touch and vision. This beautiful true inclusiveness of the game is not possible unless the skilful game is preserved.

5) Skilful football demands the maximum in confidence, application, attitude and intelligence from footballers. Is this not what we should be demanding from these millionaires who are raking in our money so freely? Why should we let them get away with half-hearted effort and displays? Why should'nt we demand that footballers practice to master the ball?

For these reasons, and probably more, I firmly believe that Rovers should seek to preserve a skilful style to their play. Obviously, it has to be approached pragmatically - we can't surrender our functional strengths for aestheticism. However, I think that clubs should go that extra mile to entertain. Anything less is short-changing the fans, imo.

[philipl]

The blame surely rests fairly and squarely with clubs like Spurs.

Bentley was a brilliant stylish member of the Rovers team who created probably half a dozen chances per match on his own.

Spuds came in with £17m and wrecked his career for Premier League football and England alike.

[G Somerset Rover]

IMO we don't have the personnel capable of playing with 'style'.

Much is dependant on central midfield - our weakest area by some distance.

[Billy Castell]

2 posts and Waggy hasn't contributed? Good Lord!

[brfcs5359]

I wouldn't pay to watch hoofball. In the early 90's i got fed up with us launching it to Alan Shearer to the point where I didn't care if he scored. In the end it stopped me going the year we won the Premiership (that and the prawn sandwich brigade). I knew any old bunch of window cleaners and postmen were better than us if they stopped the hoof to big Al and so it proved rather predictably. I spent £800 going to Trelleborgs and I knew the outcome before going. To listen to Dalglish talk nonsense just added to the dispair. Ditto the Champions League the year after.

Strange because I have gone religiously when we have been utter rubbish with no hope other than hoofball. Paul Shepstone era.

If Rovers want to be a bigger club we have to qualify for the Europa League and we have to progress in it. To do that we have to be able to play football.

[philipl]

I suppose the difference between style purists and pragmatists is seen in the Andrews debate.

Those of us who like flowing football would flog him in an instance!

[Kelbo]

I wouldn't pay to watch hoofball. In the early 90's i got fed up with us launching it to Alan Shearer to the point where I didn't care if he scored. In the end it stopped me going the year we won the Premiership (that and the prawn sandwich brigade). I knew any old bunch of window cleaners and postmen were better than us if they stopped the hoof to big Al and so it proved rather predictably. I spent £800 going to Trelleborgs and I knew the outcome before going. To listen to Dalglish talk nonsense just added to the dispair. Ditto the Champions League the year after.

Strange because I have gone religiously when we have been utter rubbish with no hope other than hoofball. Paul Shepstone era.

If Rovers want to be a bigger club we have to qualify for the Europa League and we have to progress in it. To do that we have to be able to play football.

Hoof to Shearer??? it was well documented that the majority of goals for Rovers was the diagonal ball into the box from Ripley and Wilcox!! OK occasionally the ball was knocked long to Shearer, but many times it was on the floor into the channels, if the defence push up too far you play the ball behind the defence and turn the defenders facing their own goal!

[thenodrog]

I wouldn't pay to watch hoofball. In the early 90's i got fed up with us launching it to Alan Shearer to the point where I didn't care if he scored. In the end it stopped me going the year we won the Premiership (that and the prawn sandwich brigade). I knew any old bunch of window cleaners and postmen were better than us if they stopped the hoof to big Al and so it proved rather predictably. I spent £800 going to Trelleborgs and I knew the outcome before going. To listen to Dalglish talk nonsense just added to the dispair. Ditto the Champions League the year after.

Strange because I have gone religiously when we have been utter rubbish with no hope other than hoofball. Paul Shepstone era.

If Rovers want to be a bigger club we have to qualify for the Europa League and we have to progress in it. To do that we have to be able to play football.

What a loser! From now on your credibility is less than zilch graham. You plainly have no idea what you are talking about. Refusing to watching the best striker BRFC has ever had ply his trade and thrive to the tune of 30+ goals every season simply on hopeful 'hoofball' balls played into him exactly as he wanted them to be. Nobody is ever going to take your opinion seriously ever again.

You missed that season yet you think you can comment knowledgably? Well more fool you on both accounts. Everybody knows that the contributions of Wilcox and Ripley were absolutely massive to our success. Oh btw.......... Jason Wilcox and Stuart Ripley were wingers.

I suppose the great Lpool teams of the late 70's and early 80's who played a 4-4-1-1 keep ball formation would have been hammered by window cleaners and postmen too eh.

Take your silly self imposed blinkers off and understand that a long ball game does not win titles, neither does a total passing game either. It's a combination of both and the quality of the players carrying it out.

[thenodrog]

To 90% of fans it's ALL about results. Always has been and always will be. Getting results and playing the beautiful game is for clubs with the varying resources of Real Madrid and Brazil.

[Amo]

My favourite period as a Rovers fan was the (golden) Souness years. With gems like Dunn, Duff and Jansen complemented by continental stars like Tugay, Berkovic, Hakan Sukur etc. We played some beautiful stuff during that time, and enjoyed our most recent success. Seems like such a long time ago now, but I think we could emulate those days. We would however, need to restructure our academy direction, and also possess a manager who can lure the older stars to Ewood (which we currently do).

That said, I have no problem with our current tactics if it gets results. We don't have the personnel or finances right now to play attractive football. I would have rather see us lofting it into the box than watch Keith Andrews labouring to thread a through-ball. However, if we can get Dunn, Grella, Reid et al back into the side (bear with me), then I would be disappointed if Sam still chose route one football without mixing it about.

[Sir Ranulf Westwood]

I wouldn't pay to watch hoofball. In the early 90's i got fed up with us launching it to Alan Shearer to the point where I didn't care if he scored. In the end it stopped me going the year we won the Premiership (that and the prawn sandwich brigade). I knew any old bunch of window cleaners and postmen were better than us if they stopped the hoof to big Al and so it proved rather predictably. I spent £800 going to Trelleborgs and I knew the outcome before going. To listen to Dalglish talk nonsense just added to the dispair. Ditto the Champions League the year after.

Strange because I have gone religiously when we have been utter rubbish with no hope other than hoofball. Paul Shepstone era.

If Rovers want to be a bigger club we have to qualify for the Europa League and we have to progress in it. To do that we have to be able to play football.

This guy know what he's talking about

[imy9]

Playing a 4-4-2, with two wingers is an attacking line up and produced some decent football on Saturday.

Sam will use what he has at his disposal which means when we are bombing forward, Samba's height will be used, we will use the long throw in and we will play it long- at times.

Liverpool played the apparent "hoof ball" for 45 minutes against Spurs, I have nothing against it, as long as it is not all you do (which we did last season).

[jim mk2]

This debate is not a simple matter of style v results. Life is about compromises, not extremes. Imo, a compromise has to be made but I think that style IS important and efforts should be made to preserve an entertaining style - as far as possible.

Surely, however much we love Rovers, the game of football is more important - because, it is what makes Rovers possible?

Sorry dear boy, but you're not living in the real world.

If you want to watch "beautiful" football, turn on your TV, sit back in your armchair and watch the the likes of Real and Barcelona.

Meanwhile real footie fans go down to Ewood to watch muck and nettles lower Prem classic English-style football.

It's traditional, it's what the fans like, it's what we're good at.

And no, the game is not more important that the Rovers. The "game" begins and ends with BRFC.

[Hughesy]

1st of all results

2nd style - but if you havent got the 1st one, the 2nd point is pointless (see west brom last season)

[mellison24]

1st of all results

2nd style - but if you havent got the 1st one, the 2nd point is pointless (see west brom last season)

That's my philospohy! AND the philosophy of all fans with at least a single brain cell.

[philipl]

Well said jim.

Spurs v Liverpool was an excellent piece of entertainment with oodles of skill on display but Spuds unashamedly hoof balled for the first 45 minutes (and found the Liverpool defence all at sea because of it) and Liverpool hoofballed throughout.

Graham's piece has me utterly gobsmacked. The Championship winning side and the seasons leading up to 94/5 saw some scintilating football from Rovers. I am sorry if 7-1 against Norwich, 4-1 against Liverpool and 4-0 v QPR were not virginal milk and honey stuff but boy they sent me home happy!

For great footy during my adult life, I'd single out Jim Smith's era (when I used to pinch myself as I could not believe we were playing such exciting flowing football) but actually we came 5th played 42, points 45 and a goal difference of minus 5 in that crazy season Blackpool went down with 38 points (2 points for a win); Roy Hodgson's first half season including the 7-0 and 5-1 double over Forest and destroying Arsenal at Highbury, and Graeme Souness' first two seasons before he lost the plot.

But King Kenny was the genius for playing appropriate football- he knew exactly how to set up a Rovers side to take on the opposition in front of them and that 2-0 win over Man U at Ewood ranks as one of the best all round performances I have ever seen from a Rovers team.

That was football that had everything anyone could ever want to see.

[spencey7]

This debate is not a simple matter of style v results. Life is about compromises, not extremes. Imo, a compromise has to be made but I think that style IS important and efforts should be made to preserve an entertaining style - as far as possible.

Fantastic post.

(Interesting how the minions of Allardyce can't post a response without including an insult. "SHUT UP AND SUPPORT THE TEAM~!!!" etc )

[Paul Mellelieu]

If you want art go the Tate.

[spencey7]

If you want art go the Tate.

What's written on our badge again?

[Billy Castell]

Anyone got £350m to buy Xavi, Messi, Robben, Essien, Gerrard and Ashley Cole? No. We have to make do with what we have, and adapt our tactics to who we can get. Only Champions League teams can construct a squad of beauty thanks to the G14 and UEFA, and most other teams have to scrap away with battlers and the occaisional bit of flair. Thanks to the inequality and disparity in resources we cannot try to play sexy football in case we get tonked. You can't see Andrews bossing the midfield and picking out 40 yard passes like Alonso.

And Graham's 'hoofball' statement about the mid 90's was just wrong.

[brfcs5359]

What a loser! From now on your credibility is less than zilch graham. You plainly have no idea what you are talking about. Refusing to watching the best striker BRFC has ever had ply his trade and thrive to the tune of 30+ goals every season simply on hopeful 'hoofball' balls played into him exactly as he wanted them to be. Nobody is ever going to take your opinion seriously ever again.

You missed that season yet you think you can comment knowledgably? Well more fool you on both accounts. Everybody knows that the contributions of Wilcox and Ripley were absolutely massive to our success. Oh btw.......... Jason Wilcox and Stuart Ripley were wingers.

I suppose the great Lpool teams of the late 70's and early 80's who played a 4-4-1-1 keep ball formation would have been hammered by window cleaners and postmen too eh.

Take your silly self imposed blinkers off and understand that a long ball game does not win titles, neither does a total passing game either. It's a combination of both and the quality of the players carrying it out.

What a silly nasty post. We are all Rovers fans.

I just got down on the style. Trelleborg and the CL were so predictable. We were crap outside the premiership IMO. It was heartbreaking to come so far and play hoofball. We're unlikely to ever play in the CL again. (I hated Souness for his silly Euro comments, great to get there/it's a burden and we need to play a reserve side)

If we qualify again, we have to realise we'll quickly lose playing hoofball.

On Shearer, i am not out for an argument ..... away at Warsaw, through on his wrong side, international defenders.... the goal to take us through a weak group... We played too much hoofball and not enough football, that's why we went out quickly with a whimper.

[Kelbo]

90% of football is hard work only 10% is skill, meaning that if you dont put in the effort you will never be in a position to show off what skills you have!!

Style is fine, I love it, most football fans do, but we cant afford they players who would give us that style, flair or total football, whichever you want to call it!

Percentage football?? what does it really mean? hoof ball or long ball ?

I have always been an advocate of total football, wherever possible you try to play it, however, we are not on a level playing field here and even Manchester United are quickly finding out thet their goalposts are moving also, Ronaldo (gone)

Tevez (gone) Vidic next???

Scholes, Neville and Giggs coming to the end of their careers, Rooney apart, where is their flair after the above have disappeared!

If Man U, Liverpool and Arsenal cant keep hold of their better players, what chance do we have here at Rovers.

Arsenal have a brilliant coaching set up, great young players but as with most young players, they lack consistency but they are perhaps the only club who are really producing flair at the moment!!

Spain at the moment is different, Real, Barca, Valencia etc are all producing good young players, I wonder why?

Can that be why the elusive Majiball wants to do his A License in Spain??

I wish the guy was back on here, had the pleasure of meeting him and he is a very knowledgable guy, knows his football

and sees things very quickly during games but he told me we are light years behind Spain, an A license here takes 18 months, in Spain three and a half years!!

Are we fast tracking our coaches to get quantity rather than quality?

Spain had one of the smallest international teams I have ever seen, yet they passed England of the park, our prioriities are wrong, style, skill, flair etc is not confined to the big six footers, so why are so many players sacrificed because of their height or build? At the end of the day, we have very few real flair players in England, to bring these lads from other countries is a gamble, unless you have the odd £40,000,000 to spare, we cant get them, so we are left with football as we see it, workmanlike and well organised sides, style has virtually disappeared, its a results business and the FA are not addressing it properly, we are miles behind.

Should we be taking kids much younger, giving them proper coaching as they do on the continent, maybe then in a few years style may return but it will take time, it wont be easy!

[Paul Mellelieu]

What's written on our badge again?

Arte, Latin for skill.

[mellison24]

Arte, Latin for skill.

Labore, a longer word. Latin for 'to work'. The motto is actually 'to work with skill'. I can see what Spencey's point will be, but as Kelbo said: work = 90%. skill is only 10%

[Parsonblue]

This debate is not a simple matter of style v results. Life is about compromises, not extremes. Imo, a compromise has to be made but I think that style IS important and efforts should be made to preserve an entertaining style - as far as possible. AND WHO DECIDES WHAT IS ENTERTAINING? I FOUND SATURDAY'S GAME HUGELY ENTERTAINING. SPENCEY7 THOUGHT IT WAS HOOFBALL.

- We all mocked Bolton, under Allardyce, for their long ball, grappling, gamesmanship tactics. We still mock them, now, for their Megsonball game of dull negativity. It seems that we freely deride other teams for poor style but are not consistent or objective enough to do the same to our own team when we head in that direction. WHY MOCK A TEAM THAT GOT INTO EUROPE AND A CARLING CUP FINAL? THERE ARE MANY WAYS OF PLAYING THE GAME. SAM USES A SYSTEM THAT IS BASED ON PERCENTAGES. WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE £20 MILLION TO SPEND IT'S A PRETTY SOUND APPROACH.

But why does style matter?

1) It matters because skilful play is what makes the game objectively exciting. Skilful play transcends tribalist attachments. Any football fan (even non-football fan) can appreciate any team that plays skilful football. JIM SMITH PLAYED EXECELLENT FOOTBALL. HOWARD KENDALL PLAYED FAIRLY BORING FOOTBALL. ATTENDANCES WERE HIGHER DURING THE KENDALL ERA EVEN WHEN WE WERE IN THE THIRD DIVISION. WHY? BECAUSE WE WERE WINNING MATCHES. FOOTBALL IS ABOUT RESULTS

2) Therefore, to appreciate style is to recognise that the game is more important than the team. Surely, that's right? Surely, however much we love Rovers, the game of football is more important - because, it is what makes Rovers possible? DO I ASSUME THAT WHEN YOU BUY YOUR SEASON TICKET THAT YOU DO SO WITH THE VIEW THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER IF WE LOSE EVERY GAME AS LONG AS WE PLAY IT IN THE RIGHT WAY? SORRY, I WANT TO SEE THE ROVERS DO WELL USING WHATEVER STYLE OR TACTICS WILL ACHIEVE GOOD RESULTS.

3) Why does skilful play make the game more exciting? Because it makes things more unpredictable. It defies predictable physical laws, eg that brute strength and size should dominate in a physical contest or that the fastest players will outdo the rest. This is achieved through ultimate mastery of the ball and pitch, by the players, which is the pinnacle of their profession. THERE ARE COUNTLESS EXAMPLES WHERE A TEAM USING BRUTE STRENGTH HAS BEEN ABLE TO DOMINATE ONE TRYING TO PLAY GOOD FOOTBALL. I SEEM TO RECALL THAT SAM'S BOLTON ACHIEVED SOME EXECELLENT RESULTS AGAINST ARSENAL. IF IT WAS ALL ABOUT STYLE THEN ARSENAL WOULD BE CHAMPIONS EVERY YEAR.