Football Terminology

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

but in what way is calling it a ‘low block’ instead of ‘defending deep’ or ‘two banks of four’  or a ‘pivot’ instead of a ‘holding/deep lying midfielder’ “Progress”?

Because you're adding further information. The newer, more progressive wording is more detailed, has more tactical nuance & is better understood within football. Influence from abroad, and influence from great footballing minds has changed the way that football clubs & their staff talk football.

[AllRoverAsia]

16 hours ago, Ianrally said:

Just heard a new one while watching Manchester v Leeds. 
“Foden is a master at putting the ball at risk”

This from the female co- commentator whoever she may be. WTF does that mean. 
Should I be ringing The Royal Society for the Protection of Balls?

So, he's been upper level at Nana Plaza

[Guest]

Most of the new terminology people seem so against is merely a way of shortening down what we once knew as a phrase or multiple sentences into one or two words. The language is more specific, goes into more detail and removes some ambiguity. I don't know why Sky and the likes insist on making some of the more technical jargon mainstream, it doesn't need to be, but within football, "low block", "transition" etc.. are words as commonly used as "pass".

[roversfan99]

5 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Because you're adding further information. The newer, more progressive wording is more detailed, has more tactical nuance & is better understood within football. Influence from abroad, and influence from great footballing minds has changed the way that football clubs & their staff talk football.

How are words and phrases like "pivot" and "low block" more detailed and how do they contain more tactical nuance?! 😂

[AllRoverAsia]

5 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Because you're adding further information. The newer, more progressive wording is more detailed, has more tactical nuance & is better understood within football. Influence from abroad, and influence from great footballing minds has changed the way that football clubs & their staff talk football.

FFS that made laugh.

The conceit is almost pitiful

 

[K-Hod]

11 minutes ago, JoeH said:

A low block has nothing to do with blocking shots/passes

Makes the re definition of the phrase even stranger when the new definition doesn’t even make sense!

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

FFS that made laugh.

The conceit is almost pitiful

Oh come off it.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Makes the re definition of the phrase even stranger when the new definition doesn’t even make sense!

People are afraid of change, naturally. Again, I don't know why Sky insist on making some of these terms so mainstream, especially the proper technical ones. 

[K-Hod]

5 minutes ago, JoeH said:

People are afraid of change, naturally. Again, I don't know why Sky insist on making some of these terms so mainstream, especially the proper technical ones. 

I’m not afraid of any of this, just confused by why phrases don’t mean what they should do….

[roversfan99]

6 minutes ago, JoeH said:

People are afraid of change, naturally. Again, I don't know why Sky insist on making some of these terms so mainstream, especially the proper technical ones. 

What has been improved by changing counter attack to transition?

What has been improved by changing holding midfielder to pivot?

What has been improved by changing sitting deep to a low block?

Which phrases are you referring to as "proper technical ones?"

[jim mk2]

30 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Most of the new terminology people seem so against is merely a way of shortening down what we once knew as a phrase or multiple sentences into one or two words. The language is more specific, goes into more detail and removes some ambiguity. I don't know why Sky and the likes insist on making some of the more technical jargon mainstream, it doesn't need to be, but within football, "low block", "transition" etc.. are words as commonly used as "pass".

All sounds very American to me. I don't even like "midfielder" and "wing backs".

Simple, plain English such as half backs and inside forwards please 

[Mattyblue]

45 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Because you're adding further information. The newer, more progressive wording is more detailed, has more tactical nuance & is better understood within football. Influence from abroad, and influence from great footballing minds has changed the way that football clubs & their staff talk football.

What a load of pretentious twaddle that paragraph is 😁

But fair play to all those that make a living out spouting it…

Edited December 15, 2021 by Mattyblue

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

What has been improved by changing counter attack to transition?

 

A transition refers to the short period where possession changes hands. A counter attack refers solely to the team who've gained possession. Transition is a gamestate, a period in play, a counter attack is a tactic. They're different things. In a scouting report one may use both terms as they refer to different things: Eg. "This player thrives in transition, he picks up good positions for opposition counters, breaks up play and shows a nice intensity"

[Guest]

Just now, Mattyblue said:

 

But fair play to all those that make a living out of it.

Everyone in football.

[arbitro]

23 minutes ago, JoeH said:

People are afraid of change, naturally. Again, I don't know why Sky insist on making some of these terms so mainstream, especially the proper technical ones. 

The only thing that has changed is the wording in a rebranding exercise, it's simply cosmetic. All this new speak for exactly the same thing is to make the people using them look clever and try to impress us laymen.

[Guest]

Just now, arbitro said:

The only thing that has changed is the wording in a rebranding exercise, it's simply cosmetic. All this new speak for exactly the same thing is to make the people using them look clever and try to impress us laymen.

These terms are used internally, so the idea that it's to try and look clever is just false. Sky & the likes insist on making some of this stuff mainstream, and I don't know why.

[Guest]

This conversation isn't progressing. These terms and phrases are used internally, so the notion that they're just for show isn't correct. I think there's a general fear of change personally, but I've said that once and I think we're going round in circles. Hard to keep up with several conversations at once and need to go now - will have to leave it there. I do think Sky & the media are making it all worse though - leave people to their own devices, I certainly don't expect people to start talking like that personally. 

[arbitro]

14 minutes ago, JoeH said:

These terms are used internally, so the idea that it's to try and look clever is just false. Sky & the likes insist on making some of this stuff mainstream, and I don't know why.

Well us laymen don't hear what is said internally very often so we hear pundits using baffling terms, as I said to try and impress. But you proved my point with your second sentence 😁😁.

I spent lots of time in and around football clubs with managers and coaches who I would speak to. The majority used to talk about the simplicity of the game and not over complicating it. 

[tomphil]

And we wonder why some managers over complicate things and get themselves and their teams in such a muddle. 

Players are going to need A levels in a bit just to understand all the jargon before they've kicked a ball.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, tomphil said:

And we wonder why some managers over complicate things and get themselves and their teams in such a muddle. 

Players are going to need A levels in a bit just to understand all the jargon before they've kicked a ball.

Good. More intelligent footballers will make for better footballers. I'd rather have a footballer who understands the game don't to the tiniest nuances rather than one who's dim and doesn't get it. Surely you would too?

You're saying that managers who use these technical terms gets themselves and their teams into a muddle, but I think there's plenty of counter evidence of managers who are very technical heavy who are succeeding and have had major success.

[roversfan99]

6 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Good. More intelligent footballers will make for better footballers. I'd rather have a footballer who understands the game don't to the tiniest nuances rather than one who's dim and doesn't get it. Surely you would too?

You're saying that managers who use these technical terms gets themselves and their teams into a muddle, but I think there's plenty of counter evidence of managers who are very technical heavy who are succeeding and have had major success.

But an intelligent footballer is not necessarily one who is up to date with all of the aforementioned jargon, which is unnecessary.

[Mattyblue]

Joe doesn’t know what actual ‘football intelligence’ is, I see…

Edited December 15, 2021 by Mattyblue

[tomphil]

17 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Good. More intelligent footballers will make for better footballers. I'd rather have a footballer who understands the game don't to the tiniest nuances rather than one who's dim and doesn't get it. Surely you would too?

You're saying that managers who use these technical terms gets themselves and their teams into a muddle, but I think there's plenty of counter evidence of managers who are very technical heavy who are succeeding and have had major success.

Yes i suppose the generations coming through just get used to it. When though you have 50 odd year old managers having to adjust because they feel they have to there'll be complications and added pressure.

It'll take time to filter through the game technology has moved on at such a pace over the last decade. With football now becoming increasingly based around that i'm not sure it can move at the same pace to keep up.  

How it affects the game as a whole outside the Prem remains to be seen as it is adding to the cost base of running clubs all the time. 

[Mike E]

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

This conversation isn't progressing. These terms and phrases are used internally, so the notion that they're just for show isn't correct. I think there's a general fear of change personally, but I've said that once and I think we're going round in circles. Hard to keep up with several conversations at once and need to go now - will have to leave it there. I do think Sky & the media are making it all worse though - leave people to their own devices, I certainly don't expect people to start talking like that personally. 

So why is it that 2 coaches and a referee on this forum don't understand them?

More to the point, you (defending the terms and claiming to understand them) haven't been able to explain them either.

Edited December 15, 2021 by Mike E

[Wheelton Blue]

2 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

What has been improved by changing counter attack to transition?

Thanks @roversfan99.

I now understand what 'transition' means 🙂