Regional playing styles

[soupman]

I have just started watching football after taking in the 2006 World Cup and coming across this site. Anyway, I was doing a bit of reading and came across the following website:

http://www.expertfootball.com/coaching/styles.php

The site in question describes styles of football play in various regions in Europe and the Americas. The site does still leave me with a few questions as it neglects to say anything about North America (specifically Canada and USA/MLS), Asia and Africa.

It seems that the people on this forum follow football in a lot of different regions so I was interested in reading your opinions on how accurate you feel the information presented in the linked site actually is, as well as any comments you may have about playing styles in regions that were not discussed.

[Midknight]

I have just started watching football after taking in the 2006 World Cup and coming across this site. Anyway, I was doing a bit of reading and came across the following website:

http://www.expertfootball.com/coaching/styles.php

The site in question describes styles of football play in various regions in Europe and the Americas. The site does still leave me with a few questions as it neglects to say anything about North America (specifically Canada and USA/MLS), Asia and Africa.

It seems that the people on this forum follow football in a lot of different regions so I was interested in reading your opinions on how accurate you feel the information presented in the linked site actually is, as well as any comments you may have about playing styles in regions that were not discussed.

This is what you call an "infaux" in French:

It SOUNDS like it should be right, but more often than not it isn't.

Essentially there are regional styles of play, but in our days it is more and more rare for a team to actually play a regional style. A lot of it depends on the coaches tactics. For instance some argue that Costa Rica shot themselves in the foot because they refused to play their "natural game" and tried to play something resembling the Italian style. By the way, the Italian "catenaccio" (deadboolt) style for all intents and purposes is dead. Its now more of a tactic than a style. During the World Cup Lippi used it in phases of different matches (first half USA, 2nd Half France etc), but it would be unfair to say that Italy won the World Cup with catenaccio.
There is more of a tendency these days to adapt your game to your opponents. In the past, Brazil was considered the only team that didn't do so, but it would seem that even they have been touched by the scourge. Nevertheless I believe that they lost to France because they didn't adapt the game enough (Incidentally France beat all 'Latin' sides to get to the final (Spain, Brazil, Portugal)

As far as club football goes, I don't buy it. Maybe among the mid table clubs and second tier clubs there are identifiable styles but in the top clubs players come from so many different origins that its hard to see how they will all be drilled in the "Latin" or "Continental" style. Its more of a coaches preference than anything else imo.

a lot of it however just boils down to stereotypes. For instance:
Eastern European football are supposedly closer to the British style than to the "Continental style" (Think Soviet Union). (Black) African teams are supposedly ones that base their game on their physical strength and their athletic capacity. Asian teams (at least the east asian ones) are supposedly ones that base their game on speed. I'm not aware of the 'arab' playing style. The Australian playing style is supposedly rough and tumble, based more on wearing down the opponent than any creativity on their part (like the Irish?)
The US has an unfortunate reputation for a playing style based on mastering the basics, discipline and athletism, but with little creativity like the Northern but with much less talent...

Jamaica has a reputation for reducing themselves and their opponents to 9 men 

My question s what is this famous TRINI style we always hear about?

[soupman]

Thanks Midknight I appreciate the detailed reply. Your response raises some interesting points and brings a few things that I have heard though various articles or television interviews to mind.

I can definitely see where in the modern, globalized game you are less likely (at least at the top levels) to observe strict variations in playing styles based on the country or region from which a team originates. One likely catalyst for this change would seem to be the fact that many of the best players from around the world seem to find themselves playing somewhere in Europe which probably influences (and possibly standardizes) how they approach the game as individuals. I am not sure about the situation with coaches at club level but it definitely seems that in international football coaches from all over the place are showing up at the head of teams far removed from their country of origin.

Beenie for T&T/Poland
Zico for Japan
Hiddink for Australia/Russia (and whoever hires him next)

It would seem to be a stretch to suggest that a Brazilian coach would train any team they run to play like Brazil but I guess most of these goaches for hire make more of a personal impression on the teams they coach so that a team coached by Beenhakker plays like a "Beenhakker" team and not a Dutch team (I have no idea if this is the case but it seems to make sense).

Your comments also made me wonder if sometimes the reference to a regional or natioanal playing style is a way to appeal to people's sense of pride and patriotism -- particularly in international football. It certainly seems like it would be more appealling for Italians (as one example) to believe that they are four time World Cup winners because they played a uniquely Italian style of football rather than because they simply followed the instructions of the coach.

It is also interesting that you mentioned Brazil as not normally adapting as I seem to recall a show where Dunga (I think it was him) was lamenting what he felt was a dillution of the Brazilian style of play in Germany 2006. The basic idea of what he was saying was that they did not do as well as expected because there were too many European based players on the team and they did not play like Brazilians.

The idea of stereotype also suggests that while the qualities that people often ascribe to different types of teams may not be universally true, they may still be more likely to be evident in different types of teams. I remember watching certain World Cup games and being left with impressions that may have supported some stereotypes (or the impressions may have been caused by accepting stereotypes). Some games and teams  that stand out in this regard:

Ghana vs Czech Republic: Sort of plays on the idea of the athletecism of African teams although it was more likely that the Czech team was older and less fit in general. Regardless of where you are from, all other factors being more or less equal, a fit team shoud beat an unfit team.

German team /  Portuguese team: This impression may be swayed by Portugal having Ronaldo on the team. Watching players like Ronaldo "float" around the pitch really seems like a qualitatively different experience to watching the German team destroy some of the teams that they played, particularly in their earlier games.

Netherlands vs Portugal: Some games seem more focussed on fighting style than playing style.


Anyway, those were just a few things that your comments got me thinking about. I too would be interested to hear any technical description of what defines a Trinidad and Tobago playing style, particularly at the international level.