Brisbane Roar football director gives Thijssen seal of approval

That does seem overly simplistic and probably inadequate as a definition. Perhaps offensive would be a better term to replace the word attacking. I think even without the ball teams can have an offensive approach or defensive approach (dare I say the P word).

TK - There is a rather simplistiic but nevertheless realistic differential between what has become known as "attacking football" and "defensive football". As "attacking football "can only be played when possession of the ball is attained conversely "defensive football" can only be played when striving to regain possession. It is only the mis-use of the words or lack of comprehension of what the term actually means that has brought about tons of debate as to what system a team uses.Many people now believe that if possession is retained ,no matter where on the field ,a team is deemed to be playing "attacking football" although the ball could be being played around 70 metres from the opponent's goal. Today this type of play simply allows the opposition team,if well disciplined,more time to get in front of the play and reset themselves into their chosen shape of play. Cheers jb.

Well more the fool me. Seems the 100% humidity that arrived in the second half suited Wellington just fine. A disappointing end to a good contest.

JB, the wanderes last season seemed to me to be effective at prioritizing defensive effort and counter attacking to win games. I cant say i enjoyed their approach but it was very effective in achieving plenty of wins. I know we are straying into semantics...when is a team classed as defensive vs attacking? But I offer the roar last year as an attacking unit vs the wsw who were more defensive but also won the league.

TK = "An attacking game and a win". There is contention in that statement for it hints that a team can play defensively and still win.Now some years ago the Italians developed a defensive game to it's optimum but that tactic died in the early 70's due to a progression in the development of tactical football,first of by increasing the speed of players,ball movement and attack aimed at getting behind and turning defenders and then later the tactic of "pressing" which is a fancy name for saying "as soon as your team lose possession pick up and get goalside of your nearest opponent." That brings us to how teams are playing today,some 40 years later.There are teams in the world who,wealthy enough to buy the best of players can be seen to play "attacking football" but for every one of those teams there are literally hundreds of teams who,not having the financial clout to buy like players, have fallen back to mixed tactics,resulting in a priotity on defence with an eye to scoring through "breakaways. Ange Postecoglue took a chance 4 years ago and introduced "tika taka" football to the HAL, but with the passing of time found it harder and harder to prevail with that style against teams that were adopting the tactical changes described above.,By the time the Roar's outstanding run of being undefeated came to an end it was quite common to see teams like Victory and Newcastle ,steal points away from them playing what our pundits christened "defensive football" It is doubtful if there are any sports media commentators employed in the game today who would ever have ever seen Inter Milan at it's peak in 1960's show off their optimum of that same "defensive football" Tactiacally the game today has moved far beyond the 4-3-3 of the Dutch super team of the mid 1970's whose system Roar appear to base their game on today. Cheers jb

Bob I agree playing well and winning is what the team need to do if they are to build momentum into the end of the season and remaining acl campaign. As JB points out though winning today is the important thing. I've just finished doing a bit of light yard work and was sweating bullets..those wellington boys must be looking forward to playing in this humidity

Waz -My thoughts exactly. There is more than one way to skin a cat and that is priority 1 right at this point in time,let's not worry too much about how it is achieved, just hope it is achieved. jb Ps I happened to say to TK that the Roar philosophy had never been spelled out to any who are interested but I see you appear ,in a later comment,to have inside running to this philosophy .Would you care to inform those of us who are not so well enlightened,----and this is not a joke,I am genuinly interested. jb

That would have a lot of popular support from the terraces - if I recall the debate started after Broich expressed a desire to move into Coaching after retirement and to stay with the club. Continental European clubs and even their international sides do this very well, it's not done so well in England mind you, the difference I've always assumed is a well established philosophy or style of play and a structured coaching team or coaching environment for the former player to operate in - I think the Roar have the philosophy but probably not the coaching structure (after all wasn't that what Theijssen was brought in to set up as technical director?). This would be a bold move by Roar to say the least, it could work but would need to be thought through carefully.

There's been some (fan) discussion on the club web site for a couple of months now that Thomas Broich could be a future head coach option. Is there an option to appoint Theijssen now and groom Broich over the next two years? Hard to judge him without a coaching track record I know but that would be a very European approach though.

That Victory game was the worst game I've seen Roar play - ever but it appears to have been a one-off. Points are now crucial but good performances are still necessary if we are to do more than make up the numbers come finals time but a performance without the points is not what we need. gotta win now fellas.

Seems simple enough to me jb - win the next two (Nix/Wanderers), don't lose the third (City), then beat Mariners, then go win in Korea. Then we have an exciting end to our season. Perhaps until then "shut up and let the results do the talking" might be appropriate :-)

The tone of your comments sums up the feelings of many fans I'm sure; I reread the article after reading your comments as I too didn't take this as a slap for Mike Mulvey ... and reading it second time around poor old Mike comes up a few times - that though is the authors doing not Ken Stead's. Like you I'd be happier if they keep their communications simpler and more relevant (we all remember the "exciting times" news release) and also publicise the fan forums better, I'd go but always seem to find out about them after the event. I guess we'll know we've made it when story's like this don't start with s reference to Mike (who I personally thought got what he deserved but that doesn't excuse the handling of the affair!)

JB, we can but hope for both...attacking game and a win! I agree pragmatically we would all settle for an ugly win....but hopefully as a spectacle not in the style rolled out against victory before MM departed. But as you point out 3 points is the key

TK - Roars communication style has been very poor this season, I'm not sure why but it has been and they've had some contentious decisions with Mike Mulvey and the move to the Gold Coast which gave been handled badly. For a club on a limited budget I've no doubt they don't have a big media dept or necessarily employ the best people with the salaries they're likely to be paying but the impact on the members (and the near 100k followers in Facebook) deserved better than what we got. I'm still not sure what, if anything, to read into these comments - perhaps DeVere signing a contract extension tells us something more significant? I didn't read into this a side-swipe at Mike Mulvey when I read it, I think the club and individuals have actually moved on from the Mulvey/Smith saga (even though some fans haven't) and sitting in 7th place is hardly the time to crow about the change even if they wanted to despite the team only having 3 defeats in 13 games compared to the 5 out of the first 6 we started with - performances are still short of where everyone wants them to be.

TK -Agree with almost everything you say here that is until you get to your last sentence then I must,if I may,make a small correction. As today there appears to be a multi-faceted view on what may be deemed "good attacking football" could I suggest it is much more important that Roar win today's game no matter how it is achieved, despite the much vaunted club philosphy which no one who is remotely interested, has had explained to them. Cheers jb

There is no transparency in communications at the roar, and they tend to treat the members and fans like politicians media staff treat the general community ....like fools without eyes and minds of their own. Based on experience this year I would much prefer the roar media announcements focus on on field matters because I have no confidence in what is said regarding off field matters. Waz, I can contribute to bringing up old adages from family members, my mum used to say 'if you can't say something useful......don't say anything at all' perhaps I could send mum in to talk to roar media. Frankly all the coaching BS this year doesn't need to be bought up again by the club and surely the focus should be on getting the on field performance right and winning as many games as possible. The position should be Frans is coach until the end of the season. End of message. Get on with winning matches. This story smacks of a 'let's fire another shot at Mike Mulvey and pat ourselves on the back for changing coaches'. Water under the bridge now boyos...nothing to see here move on. The win by city last night has really thrown down the gauntlet and fingers crossed brisbane come out and play good attacking football tomorrow, if so it'll be a cracking game. That's the big story this weekend for the club.

Apparently he wasnt offered the job, nothing more than speculation apparently. Could not see him being a good fit with the Roar style or the current coaching team so it never made sense.

Roar weren't good enough to win last week, City weren't good last night (dire in the first half) but won - that's football. Judgement on Roar needs to wait until tomorrow, fail to win and 6th place may be beyond us - but whatever the result the issue remains consistency in individual and team performance as we've discussed before. As for Thijssen - I think this story is paving the way for him to get the job, we were promised a big European coach but it looks like we'll have to settle for big Frans instead! Personally I can live with that, but as you say - I am an optimist!

yep, fifth para from bottom for starers

I watched the Sydney game last night fully expecting (and hoping) SFC would win - I'm not sure that result says as much about the Roar as it does about SFC! I thought Sydney were over-rated early in the season (not unusual) with that belief seemed to be born out with that run of games without scoring and the high number of drawn games before the Asian Cup; since the break they were - up until last night - dynamic and even cynical old me started to believe. The problem was I think the smurfs started to believe their own hype and prominent players started to talk of "doing the double" and comparing the squad favourably to the last championship winning side of five years ago. Last night though they were "all talk and no trousers" as my ol' Ma used to say -- they looked, in the first half, like a side going through the motions - they'd turned up so of course they were going to win! And I'm pretty sure has they have scored they would have won, City were pretty sure in that first half. But the smurfs lacked drive, aggression, commitment where against Roar their crosses were fast and pacy, last night their crosses were below par and rarely made it past the first defender and when they did they were often over hit completely. The question is - which is the real Sydney?