[han2503]

Dear Han, it's save to say you were all wrong about Conte and Italy. Like I said, he created a cohesive unit, a team with confidence and work rate, speed and a few tricks that come handy. That's why he didn't tip for the Milan-losers.

If you think your "I told you so..." will upset me AT ALL, you're very wrong (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Btw, I did criticise Conte's choices and I did criticise the players. I still do as I'm watching the games. The complete lack of technical quality in certain players (Parolo, Pelle, Eder, Giaccherini) is shocking and it's even more shocking to see how they've managed to achieve what they have so far.

That being said, for all my criticism, I don't think I've ever questioned for a minute that Conte is a brilliant tactician. And if anything I feel even more vindicated watching Conte doing what he's doing now with Italy when looking back at Juve and how he managed to turn a 7th placed team into champions while they were not even in contention at the start of the season.

As for the call ups, I still think he left players home who could have been more help. Sturaro has been terrible whenever he's played. Don't tell me that Bonaventura couldn't have been more useful to this team, especially when they've struggled to pass the ball well in certain games.

[CrazyMilanFan]

But hey, we have Brocchi, or maybe one of Giampaolo, de Boer, Montella...

i think brocchi resigned or something.. anyway Iceland has defeated England

[Fillipo Simone]

He did?

[CrazyMilanFan]

He did?

http://www.football-italia.net/86433/milan-new-mystery-coach

[X-Offender]

Brexit 2.0? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

I don't understand Hodgson. Albeit goalless, England dominated Slovakia and were unlucky not to score. So, why the hell change SIX players from the starting line-up?

[Fillipo Simone]

Hodgson is a hack, simple as that. As I said earlier on, I salute him for having the balls to select such a young and talented squad. But his poor tactics, constant shots in the dark and lack of true conception, needless to say attention to details, turned this yet into another English early exit, with yet another new generation entering the burdening cycle all other bar the 66' did.

[kurtsimonw]

I am obviously very pleased to see Villa's worst ever season and England's worst ever defeat in the space of one year.

Thank **** for Conte.

[kurtsimonw]

Btw, I did criticise Conte's choices and I did criticise the players. I still do as I'm watching the games. The complete lack of technical quality in certain players (Parolo, Pelle, Eder, Giaccherini) is shocking and it's even more shocking to see how they've managed to achieve what they have so far.

Martin Keown, of all people, said something brilliant. He said games of football are often won off the ball. Italy didn't have the on ball quality of Spain, but their shutting down of passing lanes and constant harassing meant that Spains quality on the ball was irrelevant. Spain, however, were very lazy off it. They let Italy play and if you let 11 professionals play, they will make chances.

Pre-game analysis showed how Ramos/Pique would often get forward to assist full backs. Obviously against Italy, that is impossible because Italy play with 2 strikers so Spain's CBs had to remain back. Teams these days jsut are not used to playing against 2 strikers.

[Jack Sparrow]

I don't know about you. Here we have Sunil Chettri (India football captain) and David James as the match analysts.

They pointed out how the Italy forwards would press the 2 CBs and Busquets. De Gea's lack of confidence in playing out of the back (playing to the fullbacks for example) meant that Spain's possession football could no longer be kickstarted. So De Gea was playing long balls into midfield where Spain were always going to be second best to Italy's physicality.

I thought it was an interesting observation.

I'm worried about Italy's chances against Germany. Motta is out suspended and apparently De Rossi is injured.

---

@Filippo: I admit I was completely wrong about Conte. I thought of him as a club coach who needs a lot of time with his players to develop that precise movement and identity. Also felt he wasn't a tournament coach based on his performances in UCL. I suppose the fact that he picked players he knows well, and that he has had more camps than other coaches before him are being the differentiators. But that mid-field just has no quality you have to admit! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Ry4n]

Teams these days jsut are not used to playing against 2 strikers.

I prefer two strikers tbh more chances.

[Fillipo Simone]

If you think your "I told you so..." will upset me AT ALL, you're very wrong (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Btw, I did criticise Conte's choices and I did criticise the players. I still do as I'm watching the games. The complete lack of technical quality in certain players (Parolo, Pelle, Eder, Giaccherini) is shocking and it's even more shocking to see how they've managed to achieve what they have so far.

That being said, for all my criticism, I don't think I've ever questioned for a minute that Conte is a brilliant tactician. And if anything I feel even more vindicated watching Conte doing what he's doing now with Italy when looking back at Juve and how he managed to turn a 7th placed team into champions while they were not even in contention at the start of the season.

As for the call ups, I still think he left players home who could have been more help. Sturaro has been terrible whenever he's played. Don't tell me that Bonaventura couldn't have been more useful to this team, especially when they've struggled to pass the ball well in certain games.

Good God, you'll never learn, won't you? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Firstly, you did cross off Conte as a failure, calling him a let-down if I might recall correctly. But the main problem with your analysis is that it's all theory and no reality. In theory you are correct, by picking more technically gifted players like Bonaventura the chances of Italy succeeding would be (if just slightly bigger). But this is where the actual coaching starts. This is what you never seem to understand (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) - if Flamini is 5% more creative in theory then Ambrosini you would pick him any day. Yet, 5% won't win the game, a right mindset and a role in the locker room, a collective attitude most certainly trumps the 5% difference.

In other words, Conte was very well aware that Italy lacks creativity and extra class technique. But then he decided to build on their other strong sides (physicality, speed, aerial dominance, etc.) instead of trying to overcome the lack of Pirlo and Verratti by selecting second-rate creative players like Bonaventura. He picked a balanced team, he selected players who knew their place and wouldn't affect the team balance and mindset.

[han2503]

Good God, you'll never learn, won't you? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Firstly, you did cross off Conte as a failure, calling him a let-down if I might recall correctly. But the main problem with your analysis is that it's all theory and no reality. In theory you are correct, by picking more technically gifted players like Bonaventura the chances of Italy succeeding would be (if just slightly bigger). But this is where the actual coaching starts. This is what you never seem to understand (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) - if Flamini is 5% more creative in theory then Ambrosini you would pick him any day. Yet, 5% won't win the game, a right mindset and a role in the locker room, a collective attitude most certainly trumps the 5% difference.

In other words, Conte was very well aware that Italy lacks creativity and extra class technique. But then he decided to build on their other strong sides (physicality, speed, aerial dominance, etc.) instead of trying to overcome the lack of Pirlo and Verratti by selecting second-rate creative players like Bonaventura. He picked a balanced team, he selected players who knew their place and wouldn't affect the team balance and mindset.

I think your view is as much based on a puritan ideology as mine is based in theory.

Also, never said Conte was a failure. Just that I think he's more of club manager than a NT one as he's so intense and it takes time for him to really stamp his ideology on the players. What I do admit to have failed to take into account is the fact that he's already had his ideology branded into some of the best and most important players in the team - his Juve boys.

Do you think he'll go to Chelsea with all their primadonnas and it will be like some sort of switch has been pulled?

Also, let's look at games against Sweden and Ireland as an example of how the lack of at least simple technical quality in some of the midfielders can cause Italy problems. I think the bigger teams can be handled much more efficiently by this Italy side than the smaller ones. At this point I'd be seriously afraid of facing Iceland tbh

And still after all this, I'll say that Conte is a tactical genius

[Fillipo Simone]

Good God han, I'm really stunned.

[kurtsimonw]

I prefer two strikers tbh more chances.

2 strikers generally means a lack of wide players who can take men on. Unless you have more of a complete player out wide, like Candreva. But then the likes of Hazard, Willian for Chelsea have no place in the team.

[Jack Sparrow]

2 strikers generally means a lack of wide players who can take men on. Unless you have more of a complete player out wide, like Candreva. But then the likes of Hazard, Willian for Chelsea have no place in the team.

Or you play two wing forwards one of whom has a slightly more defensive bias. So a 4-3-3- when attacking can become a 4-4-2 or a 4-4-1-1 or even a 4-5-1 when defending. That's the theory anyway. But it is quite hard to train. Mourinho did something similar except his was a more prosaic 4-2-3-1 instead of a 4-3-3 proper.



--FB--CB--CB---FB
-----HM---B2B-----
--------AM----------
---WF-----------WF--
--------CF------------