What's more important: style or results?

Havent fully read all the responses but the questions has to be what is a definition of style? l know what a good result is...when we win. My definition of style may be very different to a Brazilians, Germans or Brits. Good coaches and teams will adapt their style to the different circumstances they face for each game...ManU will no doubt attack West Brom away from home but be more circumspect away to Inter Milan soon. If MV get a score draw or even better a win vs AU this week in Adelaide will l care if they played with style? They will have played good enough to win in Adleaide...in my opinion that overides whether there were 10 passes in a row before the first goal or it was a blast out of the blue from 'The Jackal". What l would expect of the team l follow is that certainly at home they go all out to win the game...TBH l couldn't ask for anymore...unless of course we were spending tens of millions of dollars on bringing to the club the top players around the world.

Das if people are making comments like that about Cambiasso's goal, then it sort of underscores precisely what I'm saying. I'm pretty sure this infatuation with goals from distance is a modern thing - maybe because modern defences are so good these days that it's almost impossible to play straight through the middle of them? That should actually make such goals of more value - but they are rarely seen and the modern audience has forgotten their worth.

Ok, this is it folks: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Fngwo_2bBq0 about half way through the clip. Surely worthy of a top 10 finish? Take a close look at it - notice how once the last Mariners defender sees that Ruka is through he literally dives with outstreched hands to stop the ball? Interesting defensive move!

Speaking of style, you will note that most of the goals in the top 10 in the above clip were long range shots, including the top 5 or 6. I reckon there is a modern trend to pundits giving too much weight to shots hit from distance, and less to goals created through intricate passing and team work. For instance, people might recall the goal Ruka and Dadi created as they worked their way through a nest of CCM defenders for Dadi to then set him up at the edge of the 6 yard box. I reckon that must just about have been the goal of the year - but it's not in this top 10. What do people think? Can anyone find this partciular clip so we can all have a look at it again?

Towser nice ball from Moore and well controlled by Van Dijk! Interestingly, while looking at that clip, I noticed that someone had put up the 10 best A-League goals for 2008-09: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=imLj6wr-1fc&feature=related Van Dijk and Miller feature. Whoever put it together has a mischievous sense of humour, nos 1, 3, 4 and 5 are all goals against the Victory. But I guess we have the last laugh, no. 2, the goal Ward scored against Sydney to tie up the score (after we had fallen to 0-2 within the first 3 minutes of the game) - that's perhaps the goal that put us back on track to win the Premiership.

Tow We sing from the same sheet ... but to me we seem to be approaching almost a style police from some quarters... I have seen some shit games and some excellent games and some Ho Hum and some interesting ...

Vicentin spot on with your last post. Funny thing is, as I was reading (and before you mentioned his name), I already had a picture of Platini hitting the ball from one side of the pitch to the other, inch perfect, in such a manner that the winger or full back would run onto it without losing stride, and reach the byline before the opposition knew what had hit them (with both Juve and the French NT). They were definitely long sweeping passes of beauty. That's a fair enough distinction to make - between what Platini could do, and the balls hit in hope to no one in particular, or to a player hopelessly outnumbered who is never going to make anything of it (and thus effectively giving the ball up cheaply). I should also draw the distinction with the excellent through balls and chips that Carlos can do when he's on fire - no one in the A-League comes close to that sort of execution (where you the casual observer doesn't realise what he's aiming for until ball and player meet having run through a mass of defenders unimpeded) - maybe Corica on a good day. The other distinction I draw is where the opportunity is spotted, where one of the defenders is hopelessly out of position. The quick thinking player with vision will take that opportunity, especially if a team mate of his has instinctively gravitated to the space - on such rare occasions, the team game plan has to momentarily be ignored and you just have to go for it! (and you know what my favourite example is of such instances!)

Midfielder If you have time & to confirm style is in the eye of the beholder,but an absorbing game is universal check the last two Roar home games. Goals game from long short passing & other team play variations . Van Dijk scored his hat trick against SFC by a variety of ways one being a perfect long ball from Craig Moore. http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=JxeDajAQvMQ http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=DyP64xfkOWM

I largely agree with what Midfielder and Pippinu have just written - my only caveat is that if you have a player who can regularly spot a player forty yards away and get the ball to them a high percentage of the time (80% ?) AND in a way that is controllable AND if the player at the other is of sufficient quality to control this ball and make something of it then it is all good. A well thought out (and quickly done) accurate long pass is a thing of beauty and frankly I dont' think you'll find anyone in disagreement even "purists". I have to admit that Platini was my first football hero and whom I modelled my game as a teenager and he was an extraordinary passer of the ball. The reality is that most of these long passes in the A-League and in other leagues are not accurate enough (think about 20%) and therefore can reduce games to pointless "contests" for the ball and games relying on mistakes from the opposition or the ball runs to the opposing goalkeeper, goal line, sideline etc rather than a thoughtful intelligent buildup. There is room for all of this stuff in football and the contrast is often what gets you the result but it is all about balance and personal preferences too ... and yeah I know where mine lie.

Mid I hope you don't think that me referring to CCM's strikepower was a slight in any way?! For the record, I personally believe that the only bad ball is one that misses its mark - and I have often argued a similar point to the one you have made - if a 60 metre ball sets up a goal - that's a pretty good ball in my book!. Also, I too don't have too much time for the style police. As I said, I reckon more than one Asian club will struggle to contain a threesome of Macallister, Simon and Petrovski/Mrdja. Going back to the original question of this thread - yeh - way too simplistic. While mentioning how AU was played this year, I got thinking about the nous they showed at times against better credentialled Asian teams, and I was almost going to write about a fourth dimension! (but thankfully I stopped myself)

Just adding my two cents worth who are the style police ... who is to say a 40 meter pass to a hard running player is less skillful than a short pin point 3 meter pass. Seems to me sometimes when something like the ball from the fulback to striker or long ball is being over played its boreing and easy to defend ... but then at what point can such a pass be made without some saying this match is shit ... never, once, twice or maybe when the player with the ball thinks its his best option... further short three meter passing is also boreing if done all match ... It is very easy to be critical but TBH I think we are just going way over the top with this constant style stuff .. its getting better everyone is working on it ... budgets are small ... Recent example I can give Becks in the last match Milian played set up their first two goals ... Milan fans and coach want to keep him ... both passes off long balls ... if you get my point who is the style judge and what is style ... Or more what is grinding ... would Arsenell with 15 mins to go and 1 nill up against Man U play a open attacking style. Seems to me while I am the first to push the importance of style I also accept that style is not all one sided and BTW the two leagues with the biggest crowds are England & Germany .. go figure that ... so if the games are close and not skill less then it's important ... if anything it is the coaches who will determine how things are done and that will always be to win especially with ACL places for the winners.

Looking at this purely from a fans view, the ones who really care about whether their local club is being guided towards "Absorbing" contests with other teams,its up to you to complain ,whinge ,protest if your club is not giving you this. This happened at the Roar earlier in the season & I like to think that management took note & Roar fans have seen the turnaround since then. Let me note that this is far easier to acheive in many senses in a fledgling club than in older more traditional clubs like Sheffield Wednesday where because of tradition & family following fans begin to accept what I call the constant 'Tapping small hammer on the head". Each match is always slightly painful so that it becomes a blur from one game to the next. Even if the small hammer becomes a full fairground sledge hammer occassionally it doesnt matter. Little pain Big pain its all pain. But so what my Dad,Grandad & Great Grandad followed em 'Up the Owls". Stability,a blueprint for who you are, is needed for any club throughout the world but particularly for clubs in new competitions who need to gather fans in order to become a reputable professional football team. This stability & blueprint are provided to you the fan by administrative ,coaching & playing staff. As far as the A-league goes one only needs to look at where SFC & MV are 4 years on to confirm the benefits of this fact. Make no mistake football fans in Australia can shape the destiny of the A-League its still able to be moulded unlike European football. Just dont accept crap like the Roar put on in the first half of this season.

Interestingly, Michael C's post almost introduces a a 3rd dimension (using Millster's logic) - let's call it strikepower: MV and CCM had it this year, the Roar discovered it in the 2nd half of the season, and AU do not have it, full stop (in fact, Kaz has done a piece on it this very day). This is a different dimension to results, because teams can focus on scoring goals, do so with not necessarily a lot of style and not neccessarily get the result. Whenever CCM went into games with Macallister, Simon and Petrovski starting up front, well, we all know they didn't have a short, sharp, passing game in mind! It will be interesting how some of the Asian clubs cope with this in the ACL. There's plenty of truth to what Ernie is saying - MV went for the win this season in every game - ultimately that's why they finished top - they lost more games than some of its rivals, but they one one more game than AU, and they scored more goals than AU, and that's why they won the Premiership. At times this season, AU played a precision passing game with plenty of tactical discipline, got sufficient results to finish 2nd, but lacked the firepower to finish above MV. Conversely, MV's performances in terms of style and attractiveness were quite mixed - but they consistently set out to score goals - they always went out with an attacking line up - often with three strikers. They lost games as a consequence, but they racked up sufficient 3 pointers to win the premiership. Their next two games against AU will be intriguing. AU do not possess the firepower that MV has, nowhere near it, but they have shown plenty of tactical nous this season in both the ACL and the A-League and they have valued possession far more than MV (who in my view give the ball away a little too cheaply for my liking). Ernie says they will go for the win in the away leg (unlike two years ago when they got the nil-all draw they aimed to get), and all indications from this season are that he will be true to his word. No guts, no glory.

SImple logic. If you have 2 dimensions - Style and Results - this gives you 4 options or combinations of those dimensions. Can I suggest that most people - including myself - would preference in the following order (I'm making the assumption here that we're talking a team that a person supports - not a neutral situation). #1 - Style and Results #2 - No Style but Results #3 - Style but no Results #4 - No Style, No Results So if I'm right most people have Results at preferences 1 and 2, and Style at preferences 1 and 3. This shows a regard for both but a preference for Results if one or the other has to be sacrificed. I would say this is also the preferred order for clubs themselves in terms of their performance aspirations. Neutrals might switch #2 and #3, perhaps, depending on whether their taste is to see a result or whether they would revel in a beautiful game even if it ended in a nil-all. Anyway to me it's not just an either-or. One can navigate among these 4 possible combinations in pondering an answer.

Ernie Merrick spoke this morning on SEN, about how they try to keep mindful of the need to 'entertain', and reckon they have the best crowd in the HAL (certainly by numbers) - - - that may be a reflection of the more entertaining style. He also stressed that it often means less drawn matches. Thus, MVFC suffered 3 straight losses mid year - - but, held firm and finished on top. ON that front though, he stressed the importance of the support of the club. In the light of Kossie being sacked (SFC, a shocking trail of 'ex-coaches' and 'ex-CEOs'), he stressed that the stability at the helm of MVFC of Cole, Miles, Lord and Muscat has been super important. Perhaps only a settle club can define itself with assurance - - - and then be unified in pursuing a playing style that may be more appealling. Anyway - I'm not in a position to make judgements - but, given I was in the car mid-late morning listening after dropping kids off for their first day of school - I figure not many others would've heard the interview. (also, interesting to hear Merrick, in the light of Kossie and SFC indicating that that's a bit of a 'soccer culture', and on that basis, he reckons he's super lucky to have survived season 1. Anyway, he often used 'soccer', whilst Kevin Bartlett was talking about the 'style of football' and 'attacking football'.)

Vicentin just to continue on from what you've said, as a neutral, one can see immediately just how more attractive an Arsenal is compared to its main rivals (although that statement probably applied more to last season than this season, the loss of a couple of midfielders has been telling this season) - and so it's easier to enjoy watching Arsenal regardless of whether they win or lose (as a neutral that is). Of course if you're a fan of, say, Hull City - you are going to go absolutely beserk if you manage to get the 3 points over the Gunners - regardless of how the goals went in! In the Australian context, for the average fan it is sometimes a case of avoiding the trap of having a champagne taste, and a beer income. Talking personally, as an MV fan, I think our last two games were quite ordinary. Against CCM, we didn't get going until Carlos came on around the 60th, and in the last game against the Nix, we never really got it together at all (but I think the Nix can take some credit for that as well). Nevertheless, we got 6 points, scored 5 goals and conceded none, and claimed the Premiership in what was a pressure cooker situation - as a fan, you just have to accept that it's a wonderful achievement even if the play was ordinary at times. I don't really have time for MV fans who whinge even when their team is on top - that's a luxury for Real and Barca fans. Put it this way - I'm not about to write letters to management demanding that they return the silverware!