Ever since the derby win the hashtags #iamwithseedorf #jagarmedseedorf #sonoconseedorf and other languages are bursting with activity on twitter. I am so proud of our fans... if only management would listen for once
Tactically Seedorf was ok last night, but honestly it's a system that would fail against any half decent side, as it was almost totally reliant on individual battles being won rather than good team play. Seedorf's best has been when he's managed to dominate games with good team pressing in key areas. Fundamentally, of all his matches so far I would argue his best was possibly vs Juve, despite us losing, as in that match we were completely dominant and played as a single unit.
If fans suddenly feel Seedorf's the right guy for winning a terrible derby, then it's just a clueless display of joy on winning against a rival. As for our system last night, Seedorf apparently wants to use it next season as Berlu loves it. However, 4-3-1-2 in the current era of the game is questionable at best, as so many teams at the moment focus on playing great wide players. It only proves to show Berlu has lost touch with the modern game, still living in tactics that worked a decade ago. Last night, in order to cope with the wide players of Inter we had to push De Sciglio and Constant extremely high when defending, meaning there was space to be exposed behind which thankfully Inter totally failed at doing.
(05-05-2014, 08:39 AM)ACMILAN1983 Wrote: [ -> ]Tactically Seedorf was ok last night, but honestly it's a system that would fail against any half decent side, as it was almost totally reliant on individual battles being won rather than good team play. Seedorf's best has been when he's managed to dominate games with good team pressing in key areas. Fundamentally, of all his matches so far I would argue his best was possibly vs Juve, despite us losing, as in that match we were completely dominant and played as a single unit.
If fans suddenly feel Seedorf's the right guy for winning a terrible derby, then it's just a clueless display of joy on winning against a rival. As for our system last night, Seedorf apparently wants to use it next season as Berlu loves it. However, 4-3-1-2 in the current era of the game is questionable at best, as so many teams at the moment focus on playing great wide players. It only proves to show Berlu has lost touch with the modern game, still living in tactics that worked a decade ago. Last night, in order to cope with the wide players of Inter we had to push De Sciglio and Constant extremely high when defending, meaning there was space to be exposed behind which thankfully Inter totally failed at doing.
If I'm correct Seedorf wants to switch to a diamond tactic next season. I think Seedorf is responsible for the recent upturn which now includes a derby win and no longer just B teams. Therefore it's not a clueless display of joy, but a reason to go watch AC Milan again for 90 minutes,
(05-05-2014, 08:54 AM)mathiask Wrote: [ -> ]If I'm correct Seedorf wants to switch to a diamond tactic next season. I think Seedorf is responsible for the recent upturn which now includes a derby win and no longer just B teams. Therefore it's not a clueless display of joy, but a reason to go watch AC Milan again for 90 minutes,
Switching to a diamond is fine, but he's got to do more to make us competitive than the approach yesterday, which ultimately relies on our individual players being better than their direct opponents. That worked against a poor Inter, it won't against better sides.
About not just beating B teams, but do you consider Inter (especially last night), anything more than an average team? I certainly don't.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Seedorf (I've defended him quite a lot actually), but my point is last night's not the reason to suddenly believe in him, he's shown far more in other matches, even those we've not necessarily won.
(05-05-2014, 10:08 AM)ACMILAN1983 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-05-2014, 08:54 AM)mathiask Wrote: [ -> ]If I'm correct Seedorf wants to switch to a diamond tactic next season. I think Seedorf is responsible for the recent upturn which now includes a derby win and no longer just B teams. Therefore it's not a clueless display of joy, but a reason to go watch AC Milan again for 90 minutes,
Switching to a diamond is fine, but he's got to do more to make us competitive than the approach yesterday, which ultimately relies on our individual players being better than their direct opponents. That worked against a poor Inter, it won't against better sides.
About not just beating B teams, but do you consider Inter (especially last night), anything more than an average team? I certainly don't.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Seedorf (I've defended him quite a lot actually), but my point is last night's not the reason to suddenly believe in him, he's shown far more in other matches, even those we've not necessarily won.
Oh i believe this match against Inter was one of our lesser matches. Yet this was a prime example of a match we would have lost pre-seedorf. Even if against a weaker inter.
Wait, Inter is always weaker
There is no problem with a 4-3-1-2.....but we need the right players for it. First, we need flying wing-backs, that become wingers when in possession. We need at least one great playmaker (which we don't have). We will need a 2-way midfielder, which we have plenty of....problem is that they are simply not good enough.
I agree with Seedorf on some things....but I especially agree that football is a lot more about the mentality and philosophy, rather then the formation....especially in the long run. We need an identity. We need to know what kind of team we are. Are we possession based, counter attacking, high-pressing, low-pressing, etc, etc, etc, etc. Once we have that mentality instilled in our players, then formations will become less relevant and you can even alter them to counter specific opponents. Clearly, some games will need to be different in terms of set up and in terms of what we can achieve realistically, however the bases should stay the same.
I don't think 4-3-1-2 is dead in the modern day, although we see a lot less teams using it. People thought that the flat 4-4-2 is dead in the modern game..yet look at Atletico. There is many variations of tactics. The movement, mentality, and tactics is what matter a lot more though. 4-4-2, 5-3-2, 3-5-2, 4-3-3, etc, etc, are all numbers if you ask me. They mean nothing. Movement on the field is everything. Again, the Atletico example....Arda starts out wide, but floats in front of the 2 CMs the entire game. It's the same with Koke. The basics of the formation is 4-4-2, but the movement makes it a lot more complicated than that.
They need to get Seedorf the players he needs. The players that fit this mentality/philosophy. If he wants to play a high pressing game....then get him players that are willing to press high. Don't get him a Drogba for example. I'm not saying this because of the derby win...I've always felt like this. We'll see what happens though.
(05-05-2014, 05:08 PM)mathiask Wrote: [ -> ]Oh i believe this match against Inter was one of our lesser matches. Yet this was a prime example of a match we would have lost pre-seedorf. Even if against a weaker inter.
Wait, Inter is always weaker
Well, we did lose back in the first half of the season so I agree.
While I respect that the derby is still a big (huge even) match, my point was mainly in reference to the actual quality of the two sides atm. For motivation, confidence, prestige etc the win was good, but on a technical level, it wasn't all that impressive.
Again, I've generally defended Seedorf since he's joined, but beating a mediocre Inter, even if the history, status and prestige is there, is not the way to indicate Seedorf's the right man for the job. Actually, it should be based on everything he's done since joining, good and bad, something I said recently (post Roma match I think).
(05-05-2014, 09:17 PM)nefremo Wrote: [ -> ]There is no problem with a 4-3-1-2.....but we need the right players for it. First, we need flying wing-backs, that become wingers when in possession. We need at least one great playmaker (which we don't have). We will need a 2-way midfielder, which we have plenty of....problem is that they are simply not good enough.
I agree with Seedorf on some things....but I especially agree that football is a lot more about the mentality and philosophy, rather then the formation....especially in the long run. We need an identity. We need to know what kind of team we are. Are we possession based, counter attacking, high-pressing, low-pressing, etc, etc, etc, etc. Once we have that mentality instilled in our players, then formations will become less relevant and you can even alter them to counter specific opponents. Clearly, some games will need to be different in terms of set up and in terms of what we can achieve realistically, however the bases should stay the same.
I don't think 4-3-1-2 is dead in the modern day, although we see a lot less teams using it. People thought that the flat 4-4-2 is dead in the modern game..yet look at Atletico. There is many variations of tactics. The movement, mentality, and tactics is what matter a lot more though. 4-4-2, 5-3-2, 3-5-2, 4-3-3, etc, etc, are all numbers if you ask me. They mean nothing. Movement on the field is everything. Again, the Atletico example....Arda starts out wide, but floats in front of the 2 CMs the entire game. It's the same with Koke. The basics of the formation is 4-4-2, but the movement makes it a lot more complicated than that.
They need to get Seedorf the players he needs. The players that fit this mentality/philosophy. If he wants to play a high pressing game....then get him players that are willing to press high. Don't get him a Drogba for example. I'm not saying this because of the derby win...I've always felt like this. We'll see what happens though.
On your first point, playing 4-3-1-2 is fine, but if it's the basic shape of our side we need to decide how we're going to interpret it. For example, vs Inter we'd push our fullbacks extremely high in line with the midfield to cope with the Inter wingbacks. This was fine, but then you need to consider the gaps behind the fullbacks. Ultimately, it's this sort of reason that 4-3-1-2 isn't widely used at the moment, as commonly the basic shape of teams often put them at an advantage over 4-3-1-2.
You're right though, rigid formations are just numbers these days and no longer really apply to the game beyond giving a base shape. our philosophy and identity and dependant on how we interpret a system and the movement we make during the game.
Marco van Basten showing just how pathetic he is as a person, is now also criticizing Seedorf....
Luckily, the Dutch media doesn't fall for it and immediatly points at Van Basten's shortcomings and that he has never managed to cope with the fact that he himself failed as a trainer.
As great as he was on the pitch, is how weak he is now as a person... poor display.
I can only wonder how Seedorf is coping with this. He's being criticized by all journalists. Milan won't confirm his position. Only the fans love him and the support for him seems to be growing each and every day.
But something sprung to my mind.... Wouldn't seedorf want to leave himself? He's not the type of person that is easily influenced. A strong personality. Maybe there is a hugue rift in the sporting section. He wants to have a say in who and what to recruit, the english model. However, we all know festergut thinks he knows best. So maybe, seedorf knows that he will only lose quality players instead of get new fresh talent. This is why he might be considering to abandon ship / doesn't care about being sacked. Let's be honest: Who on earth would want to work with such a limited team yet such high expectations ?
I'm not surprised since they don't see eye to eye. Marco dropped several senior players including Seedorf when he took over as Dutch NT coach. Believing that they underachieved, he wanted to start with a clean slate, so to speak. He recalled Seedorf two years later but then Seedorf himself decided to retire from the national team. I agree with your opinion that Marco hasn't achieved much in his career as a coach these ten years (he recently took Heerenveen to 5th place in Eredivisie and 8th last season). But at least he humbly admitted few years back when Braida approached him that he wasn't ready to coach a big club like Milan. And I don't think he's ready now either.
From what I read, all I saw Van Basten say is that he would not have hired Seedorf because he would have preferred someone with more experience. Many people have also said this..so unless I am missing something here, what is so bad about this statement?