Zlatan Ibrahimovic would have woken up with a sore head the morning after the match between Sweden and Northern Ireland. Unfortunately it wasn’t due to a hangover after celebrating Sweden's qualification for next year's European Championships. His headache would have been due to the fact the ball delivery provided by many of his team mates was aimed at the poor guy's head (or even more often and less precisely, somewhere in the general vicinity of his head).
Swedens performance against Northern Ireland at home was a poor one, there is no other way of saying it. Readers of this blog will know what I think of Zlatan's ability, and as a spectator at Råsunda stadion the other night I could not believe the service Zlatan, and Johan Elmander for that matter, received from their team mates. From my limited knowledge of the Swedish language (with a little help from my friends) it seemed that coach Lagerbäck was equally disappointed with the performance.
The question I put to Lagerbäck is this: Why were you so disappointed? Are you not the person mainly responsible for the tactics of the team under your tutelage?
I know, there were some mitigating circumstances last Wednesday; Ljundberg was out, Wilhelmsson was injured early. Playing without your two best wide midfielders would be tough for any team as Sweden certainly played without width after Chippen was carried off. But it is absolutely no excuse to resort to the primitive tactic of simply lumping the ball in the general direction of Zlatans head. It was as if the defenders (it must be said, mainly Mellberg) couldn’t be bothered passing the ball around trying to patiently construct a move against an inferior opposition. Instead it was almost as if they were saying to Zlatan “Well you think you’re so good and creative, let’s see what you can do with this!” after they stuck their clogs into yet another long ball. Lagerbäck may try to act as if this performance was a one-off but he’s fooling no-one, the long-ball tactics are unfortunately all too common when watching Sweden play and it is such an unfortunate thing because it sells the abilities of the players in his team short.
I can hear people saying to themselves “Hang on a minute, if these tactics are so bad, why is Sweden sitting pretty on top of a very tough Euro qualifying group?” A valid point indeed, and let me say that Sweden have been a very consistent team with regard to qualifying for major tournaments since they missed out on the Euro in England in 96 and France 98. No one can argue with that, they are getting some results. But here’s a thought: maybe the results would even improve if the manager had enough confidence in his players to formulate a game plan around them keeping the ball on the ground at all costs, playing to feet, keeping possession as much as possible, changing the tempo of the game (not always going at 100 miles an hour).
I honestly believe that Sweden have a good enough team to get even further than the second round of a major tournament if their management trust the players enough to liberate them from the undoubtedly safe but ugly and ultimately unfulfilling (for the players and for the general public) long-ball tactics that seem to be the status quo under Lagerbäck.
To me it’s a no-brainer. You’re managing an international team. You possess one of the most potent and skilful attacking players in the world (Zlatan). What this guy can do with a ball at his feet makes the crowd, his team mates, the opposition, EVERYONE for God’s sake, shake their head in amazement. The rest of the team can play a bit as well. You have an athletic up-and-coming strike partner (Elmander), a midfield that includes a former player of the season for Arsenal (that pretty much means the guy knows a hell of a lot about how to play passing football having learnt from one of the masters, Wenger) and other midfielders that have the technical ability to have played in and thrived amongst the best in Europe. A no-frills but effective defence and goalkeeper.
What would be the one tactic that you would not use?
One that makes it hard for your best player to thrive, one where the ball is rarely at his feet where this player is at his most dangerous, one that gives defenders ample time to get back in numbers and try and nullify your main attacking threats, one that is unattractive to the fans, one that can get some good results and means you’re competitive in most matches but is unlikely to win you tournaments or plaudits.
Yep, you guessed it. The one tactic you wouldn’t use is the long-ball.
Last Wednesday against Northern Ireland should prove to be a wake up call for Sweden’s management. They were made to look second rate and were outplayed by Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland, not exactly the most aesthetically pleasing team to watch and certainly not averse to using the long-ball tactic from time-to-time themselves, looked like Argentina compared to Sweden with the way they were passing the ball around. You only had to visit the BBC chat-boards after the game to see what the Northern Ireland fans were writing. Person after person wrote they could not believe that this Swedish team were topping the group. It is hard to blame them for holding this view as they have seen the Swedes at their worst at Windsor Park and Råsunda. And I have to say that the style of play was equally frustrating in Germany at the World Cup and immediately afterwards.
The challenge that should be put to Lagerbäck is this: Okay, it’s great that you’re looking like qualifying for another major tournament. Thanks for the work you’ve done. But qualifying for tournaments and getting out of the group only to go out in the second round won’t be enough this time. Arm your players with a game plan that challenges them to channel their creative side, not their negative side. Play the ball to feet (especially one guy’s feet). Trust your players to execute a game plan that is more technically difficult to pull-off, they’re professional after all; it’s their job to be able to adapt to new tactics. If it doesn’t work for a half, don’t resort back to the tried and true long ball game. Dare to win AND play attractive football. And at least then if you go out in the second round again (or God forbid earlier), at least you can say that you went down taking some risks, having given your great fans their money’s worth.
It’s time for Lagerbäck to give his players the tactics that just might allow Sweden to, for the first time since 1994, get back to the semi-finals in a major tournament.
Swedens performance against Northern Ireland at home was a poor one, there is no other way of saying it. Readers of this blog will know what I think of Zlatan's ability, and as a spectator at Råsunda stadion the other night I could not believe the service Zlatan, and Johan Elmander for that matter, received from their team mates. From my limited knowledge of the Swedish language (with a little help from my friends) it seemed that coach Lagerbäck was equally disappointed with the performance.
The question I put to Lagerbäck is this: Why were you so disappointed? Are you not the person mainly responsible for the tactics of the team under your tutelage?
I know, there were some mitigating circumstances last Wednesday; Ljundberg was out, Wilhelmsson was injured early. Playing without your two best wide midfielders would be tough for any team as Sweden certainly played without width after Chippen was carried off. But it is absolutely no excuse to resort to the primitive tactic of simply lumping the ball in the general direction of Zlatans head. It was as if the defenders (it must be said, mainly Mellberg) couldn’t be bothered passing the ball around trying to patiently construct a move against an inferior opposition. Instead it was almost as if they were saying to Zlatan “Well you think you’re so good and creative, let’s see what you can do with this!” after they stuck their clogs into yet another long ball. Lagerbäck may try to act as if this performance was a one-off but he’s fooling no-one, the long-ball tactics are unfortunately all too common when watching Sweden play and it is such an unfortunate thing because it sells the abilities of the players in his team short.
I can hear people saying to themselves “Hang on a minute, if these tactics are so bad, why is Sweden sitting pretty on top of a very tough Euro qualifying group?” A valid point indeed, and let me say that Sweden have been a very consistent team with regard to qualifying for major tournaments since they missed out on the Euro in England in 96 and France 98. No one can argue with that, they are getting some results. But here’s a thought: maybe the results would even improve if the manager had enough confidence in his players to formulate a game plan around them keeping the ball on the ground at all costs, playing to feet, keeping possession as much as possible, changing the tempo of the game (not always going at 100 miles an hour).
I honestly believe that Sweden have a good enough team to get even further than the second round of a major tournament if their management trust the players enough to liberate them from the undoubtedly safe but ugly and ultimately unfulfilling (for the players and for the general public) long-ball tactics that seem to be the status quo under Lagerbäck.
To me it’s a no-brainer. You’re managing an international team. You possess one of the most potent and skilful attacking players in the world (Zlatan). What this guy can do with a ball at his feet makes the crowd, his team mates, the opposition, EVERYONE for God’s sake, shake their head in amazement. The rest of the team can play a bit as well. You have an athletic up-and-coming strike partner (Elmander), a midfield that includes a former player of the season for Arsenal (that pretty much means the guy knows a hell of a lot about how to play passing football having learnt from one of the masters, Wenger) and other midfielders that have the technical ability to have played in and thrived amongst the best in Europe. A no-frills but effective defence and goalkeeper.
What would be the one tactic that you would not use?
One that makes it hard for your best player to thrive, one where the ball is rarely at his feet where this player is at his most dangerous, one that gives defenders ample time to get back in numbers and try and nullify your main attacking threats, one that is unattractive to the fans, one that can get some good results and means you’re competitive in most matches but is unlikely to win you tournaments or plaudits.
Yep, you guessed it. The one tactic you wouldn’t use is the long-ball.
Last Wednesday against Northern Ireland should prove to be a wake up call for Sweden’s management. They were made to look second rate and were outplayed by Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland, not exactly the most aesthetically pleasing team to watch and certainly not averse to using the long-ball tactic from time-to-time themselves, looked like Argentina compared to Sweden with the way they were passing the ball around. You only had to visit the BBC chat-boards after the game to see what the Northern Ireland fans were writing. Person after person wrote they could not believe that this Swedish team were topping the group. It is hard to blame them for holding this view as they have seen the Swedes at their worst at Windsor Park and Råsunda. And I have to say that the style of play was equally frustrating in Germany at the World Cup and immediately afterwards.
The challenge that should be put to Lagerbäck is this: Okay, it’s great that you’re looking like qualifying for another major tournament. Thanks for the work you’ve done. But qualifying for tournaments and getting out of the group only to go out in the second round won’t be enough this time. Arm your players with a game plan that challenges them to channel their creative side, not their negative side. Play the ball to feet (especially one guy’s feet). Trust your players to execute a game plan that is more technically difficult to pull-off, they’re professional after all; it’s their job to be able to adapt to new tactics. If it doesn’t work for a half, don’t resort back to the tried and true long ball game. Dare to win AND play attractive football. And at least then if you go out in the second round again (or God forbid earlier), at least you can say that you went down taking some risks, having given your great fans their money’s worth.
It’s time for Lagerbäck to give his players the tactics that just might allow Sweden to, for the first time since 1994, get back to the semi-finals in a major tournament.
