World Cup technical wrap: total pragmatism falls short

Spain’s Andres Iniesta, right, scores a goal past Netherlands goalkeeper Maarten Stekelenburg, left, during the World Cup final soccer match between the Netherlands and Spain at Soccer City in Johannesburg, South Africa, Sunday, July 11, 2010. (AP Photo/Bernat Armangue)

It is a measure of where the football world is at tactically that a nation like Holland, steeped in the finer traditions of positive, attacking football, a trend-setter in every way, would follow the crowd by resorting to something akin to anti-football to try and achieve World Cup success.

The fact they fell short is also a sign that pragmatism, or, in the case of this Oranje side in the final, cynicism, doesn’t always win out.

It may have worked for Greece at Euro 2004, Italy in 2006 and even Inter Milan in the UEFA Champions League last season, but there are many other recent examples where the virtues of positive, progressive play have been rewarded, or at least had the world talking positively.

Think of Barcelona in the UCL the season before last and Spain here and at Euro 2008. Think of the German sides of the past two World Cups, or the Russian side of Euro 2008, or the Czech’s of Euro 2004.

The sad indictment on modern football is that you can go down the path of being totally pragmatic, suffocating the opposition, sacrificing your natural game, and come so close, even with no meaningful contribution from one of the best technical players in the world, Robin van Persie.

Herein lies the dilemma for the game.

Instead of sticking to their beliefs and turning up with a philosophy to play pro-actively, the Netherlands went down the softer path, gambling that their two front third stars, Wesley Sneijder and Arjen Robben, would have enough class to win them the cup.

They arrived with a 4-2-3-1 built around the physical and aggressive screening presence of Nigel de Jong and Mark van Bommel. These two are like bulldogs in the centre of midfield, snapping and biting at everything.

They are destroyers. In the early stages of the tournament, their roles weren’t so apparent, partly down to the submissive tactics and lesser quality of the opposition.

Denmark, Japan and Cameroon all sat back and let Holland dictate, but even then the lack of creativity from central midfield was clear. Slovakia, meanwhile, looked happy enough to be in the second round.

It was in the quarter final, against Brazil, that the roles of van Bommel and de Jong became clear. In the second half they muscled up on the likes of Kaka, Robinho and Felipe Melo, and drew a reaction. Allowed to get away with it by Japanese referee Yuichi Nishimura, Brazil snapped, retaliated, and were soon out.

Carlos’ Dunga’s men are another side that have gone away from their traditional patient build up style, full of tricks and flicks, to a more rapid style based on the concept of getting the ball in the back of the net as quickly as possible.

It looked great against teams, like Chile and the Ivory Coast, that gave them space but came undone against teams that played the same way, preferring to react rather than act. I refer to the likes of Portugal and Holland.

The former were another side that disappointed with their ultra-defensive and ultra-conservative approach, yet another pro-active football nation succumbing to the simpler way of playing the game.

Best we keep a clean sheet and hope Cristiano Ronaldo conjures up something special, gambled Carlos Queiroz, or Carlos Cautious as Martin Tyler dubbed him.

But at least Portugal didn’t go down the path of thuggery against Spain.

Holland’s battle with the equally pragmatic and defensive minded Uruguay in the semi final was also bound to be feisty, and there was much niggle between van Bommel and Uruguay’s advanced midfielder Walter Gargano throughout.

Los Celeste adopted a similar pragmatic approach to their campaign. With two very solid and defensive banks of four and three, they then relied on the creative genius of Diego Forlan, the finishing of Luis Suarez and the support of Edinson Cavani.

This strategy was no surprise for a nation that has traditionally been known for its robust style. What marked their successful campaign was that they, like Holland, had a couple of front third executioners.

Forlan, in particular was absolute dynamite, whether at the set piece or in general play, whether playing in the last line or floating in the hole. He was a fitting winner of the Golden Ball, but he wasn’t a one man band by any means.

It was no coincidence that, in the semi final, Uruguay were missing one of their two main go-to’s in Suarez, and a vital cog in their defensive brick wall, Diego Lugano.

While de Jong was out for Holland, it was no surprise that this was among the least absorbing of the knock-out matches, despite the five goals.

Contrast it with the semi final on the other side of the draw. At half time, I got a text from a friend asking whether this was the cleanest game ever. He was spot on, and the reason it was so clean is that both Germany and Spain had turned up to South Africa to play football.

Admittedly they had differing philosophies, with Germany preferring to impose their physical power before breaking forward ruthlessly, while Spain used tika-taka, aiming to pass teams to death. But they were united by the desire to play, not disrupt.

Contrast the work of Bastian Schweinsteiger and Sami Khedira against that of van Bommel and de Jong and the picture is clear. Both are physically imposing pairs, but the former two always wanted the ball while the latter two wanted to stop the opposition having it.

Their side of the draw also featured Argentina and Paraguay. It was undoubtedly the stronger of the sides, featuring two offensive teams and two counter-attackers. One of each got through to the semis.

Argentina’s capitulation proved again that any desire to thrill the masses offensively must, these days, be mixed with balance and organisation, lessons that the likes of Barcelona have learnt the hard way.

In trying to address sins of the past, the Dutch tipped the balance too far towards conservatism.

Is it any wonder Johan Cruyff was aghast? While the end so nearly justified the means, in the cold hard light of day there will be many questions asked from within Holland, let alone from outside.

Such tactics are perhaps understandable for nations like New Zealand and North Korea, but not from Holland.

Some of the others who tipped the scale too far towards defensive football came out of the host continent. The Bafana Bafana’s Katlego Mphela was left isolated by Carlos Alberto Parreira’s 4-5-1 in the key game against Uruguay, while Sven Goran Eriksson decided weight-lifters like Ismael Tiote and Aruna Dindane should start ahead of the crafty Gervinho against Brazil.

Ghana was another side that went for muscle, but at least Milovan Rajevac made the right (and tough) selections and had the side perfectly organised.

Fabio Capello started another weight-lifter in Emile Heskey and went back to the future by playing Jamie Carragher and partnering Frank Lampard with Steven Gerrard in central midfield.

Pim Verbeek went to South Africa with only three strikers, started none against Germany, and reacted when it was too late.

Marcelo Lippi didn’t take Franceso Totti and missed him.

Japan, after taking a giant step against Denmark, played for penalties against Paraguay.

Too often, negative decisions leading to negative results.

Thank goodness then for the likes of Mexico and Chile who came to make an impression and did exactly that by introducing us to such gifted footballers as Alexis Sanchez, Andres Guardado, Waldo Ponce, Javier Hernandez, Esteban Paredes, Mauricio Isla and Carlos Carmona.

And thank goodness in particular to Spain, who got the balance between attack and defence right. They weren’t always flowing, mainly because they weren’t allowed to be, but they invariably found a way to wrestle control and get the job done, without sacrificing their ideology.

Many, this correspondent included, criticised Vicente del Bosque for playing two screeners in Sergio Busquets and Xabi Alonso, but his reasoning was undoubtedly about ensuring there was insurance and that his team wouldn’t get stung in defensive transition.

It helped also that these two boys can pass, feeding the likes of Xavi and Andres Iniesta to influence higher up the pitch.

They showed many things throughout the tournament, but the key was the belief in their own, finely refined, method.

It has been a riveting World Cup, full of exciting games and fine margins, and with a little less conservatism might have been truly great from a football perspective. Fortunately it finished with a fitting winner.

My team of the World Cup;

————————————-Manuel Neuer ————————
——————————————————————————–
Sergio Ramos——–Gerard Pique—–Carles Puyol——-Jorge Fucile
————————————————————————————
——————————–Bastian Schweinsteiger————————
—————————Xavi—————-Andres Iniesta —————-
—————————————— —————————————–
———Thomas Mueller ———————————Arjen Robben–
————————————–Diego Forlan——————————-

Reserves; Iker Casillas, Maicon, Diego Lugano, Fabio Coentrao, Sergio Busquets, Wesley Sneijder, Mesut Ozil, Andre Ayew, Lionel Messi, David Villa.