Niclas Fuellkrug gave Borussia Dortmund a 1-0 win over Paris Saint-Germain in their Champions League semifinal first leg on Wednesday as the journeyman striker outshone superstar Kylian Mbappe on the night.
Seeking a return to the final for the first time since 2013, the 1997 winners were dogged and determined, outmuscling their heavily favored opponents in front of more than 80,000 fans.
Fuellkrug, playing in his first Champions League season at the age of 31, collected a lofted pass from centre-back Nico Schlotterbeck in the 36th minute and blasted a low shot into the left corner of the net.
PSG, led by Kylian Mbappe, hit the post twice in quick succession early in the second-half but could not break through.
“I think we today showed a classic team performance. Each helped the other to win the game. We needed a bit of luck a couple of times, but we can be very satisfied with our performance,” said long-serving center-back Mats Hummels. “It was a very satisfying, very grown-up performance from us.”
Dortmund, who had already lost and drawn against PSG this season in the group stage, can continue to dream of a return to Wembley 11 years after their last Champions League final.
Despite the setback, however, PSG will remain confident of overturning the deficit at home next week against a side they thoroughly outclassed at their home venue in September.
“The Parc (PSG’s stadium) and our supporters are giving us hope for the second leg, and we know we can do much better,” PSG captain Marquinhos told Canal+.
Dortmund coach Edin Terzic said pre-match PSG was “built to win the Champions League” since the Qatari takeover a decade ago.
Nowhere was the contrast between the two clubs greater than PSG’s global superstar Mbappe, playing in his last season for his hometown club, and journeyman Dortmund striker Fuellkrug, who was playing second-division soccer this time two years ago.
Spurred on by a passionate home crowd who booed and whistled every Mbappe touch, Dortmund had the best of the opening stages, Jadon Sancho shining down the right flank.
Marcel Sabitzer had Dortmund’s best chance of an opener after 14 minutes, blasting straight at Gianluigi Donnarumma from a tight angle.
The opener came after 36 minutes thanks to some superb old-school forward play from Fuellkrug.
Center back Schlotterbeck had the ball well in his own half and thought about a safe pass back to the ‘keeper but instead punted it forward, with only Fuellkrug aware of the idea.
The striker controlled the ball with one touch and drilled a low shot past a helpless Donnarumma.
Fresh from wrapping up the Ligue 1 title at the weekend, PSG had few chances despite their attacking riches in the opening half, registering zero shots on target.
The visitors however sprung to life after half-time, Mbappe rattling the inside of one post seconds before former Dortmund wing-back Achraf Hakimi rattled the inside of the other.
PSG should have equalised after 56 minutes, Marquinhos curled a beautiful pass through a crowded Dortmund box but Fabian Ruiz’s diving header went wide.
Another former Dortmund player Ousmane Dembele blasted over right in front of goal with 10 minutes remaining.
The impressive Sancho laid on an excellent pass for Julian Brandt with moments left but Dortmund’s hopes of a second were snuffed out by some desperate PSG defending.
The victory, along with Tuesday’s 2-2 draw between Bayern Munich and Real Madrid in the other semi-final, guarantees Germany rather than England or France an extra Champions League place for next season.
That has already secured Dortmund’s place in the competition next season.
dwi/dj
© Agence France-Presse
If Mbappe is considered to be the next superstar of soccer than it is only because there is nothing else out there currently…Enjoy watching Messi as much as possible for Mbappi, technically speaking, couldn’t wear his jock…
yes – Messi – Maradona – dribble skills – another level – generational – both – without peer. For me – Bellingham – not Mbappe, or Haaland – will be world best player after Messi punches plays his final game. He is showing more. Mbappe – still has a game to show himself – but he suffers more than he realize by staying under the rock in Paris – he must win this – and the final – to cross the threshold.
Frank, I’m not sure why you criticize Mbappe every chance you get. He’s not as good as Messi (who is?), but it’s not like he’s a one-trick pony. Yes, he’s got speed and can blow by defenders almost at will (you seem to think this is a bad thing, and if that was all he relied on, you might have a point). But he’s also got a great touch, he’s very deceptive, he passes well, and is a good finisher. He’s definitely the real deal. He can play on my team any time…
Not a one trick pony? Have you watched his positioning and passing?
Define “passes well”. He was the worst passer among the forwards and midfielders when I watched him. I didn’t get a chance to compare him to the backs.
How he compares to the other players on his team matters more than his play during warmups.
Kent, he is a very overrated player…who needs space to perform, like Haaland. But tall players, with long legs are limited in what they can do…Sure he is considered one of the better players in the world but that is not saying much …One, there isn’t much out there to compare him too, he’s not a very good ,savvy , smart player passer as Bob states, he lacks the finer elements. Yeah , he can give you some interesting moments…but World Class…Sorry, noooooo.
Also Kent, how you at soccer and players and how look at soccer and players is a world of difference…So what you think is good ,to me, is probably so so…..I look for more things in judging what makes a player look good…
Kent, what you consider good ,to me, is probably mediocre at times…our perspectives differ perhaps because of our playing backrounds…..I sense , taking the overal collection of good discussions I’ve had with you, you probably were a defender and therefore our experiences and insights into the game differ greatly. Me being an offensive ,very technical player ,I tend to look at the game with more in-depth applying more variables to interpret things because playing up front requires more creativity and insights….
Frank, I feel like you only appreciate one type of player (like Messi, technically gifted, savvy, able to control the game); while I appreciate Messi (and think he’s probably the best player who ever played the game), one of the things I like about soccer is that lots of different players with lots of different talents can excel. Someone like Haaland is amazing (on a recent goal he did a side volley on a ball that was behind him and at about head height; he hit it on his shin (so it wasn’t perfect) but he put it on goal and scored, so it was effective). He does not have the overall skillset you think every player should have (and certainly, in an ideal world, they would), but as a striker, he’s a physically dominating player who has an amazing ability to put the ball on goal from anywhere, which makes him an incredibly valuable player. I like the fact that excellent players come in all shapes and sizes and bring different skillsets to the game.
Given English is your second language, I won’t take offense at your “you’re not as talented a player as I am and therefore you probably don’t understand the game as well as I do, so you’re clearly wrong” comment about forwards and defenders. But I do disagree with your premise that technically gifted forwards are better analysts than defenders. I think, if anything, it’s the reverse. One of my coaches in college argued that it’s the job of the offense to be unpredictable (creative) and the job of the defense to make the offense predictable, because something you can predict is easier to stop. Many truly gifted offensive players (Maradona) can’t even explain what they do; they don’t think about it, they simply react to circumstances and do what comes naturally to them (obviously learned over time spent playing). Defenders have to read the game to understand where the threats are in order to stop them. There’s obviously more to coaching that being able to analyze the game (player management, e.g.), so I’m not arguing defenders always make better coaches, but I do disagree that technically gifted offensive players understand the game better than anyone else.
Kent, you will be surprised but you won’t get an argument from me, for I agree, with just about everything you stated….Kudos to you!!! The only thing I fault you on is your statement that I only appreciate a certain type of player like Messi…
Look ,forget Messi, Cruyff,Maradona, etc. First of all, a basic tenet is that the team that makes the least mistakes wins….That means you need 3 things, BALL CONTROL, KNOWING WHAT YOU DO WITH IT THE BEFORE YOU RECEIVE IT, and YOUR TEAMMATES POSITIONS. The latter two has to do with brains, savvyness, and the former you need good touch on the ball…
There are many players in the world have that, and some have more than others and perhaps have more talent and capabilities or what Cruyff states as ‘extreme’ gifted qualities…like the aforementioned players…
And BTW, I also agree with you on your point on Maradona, for I remember a discussion I had with my nephew who played for Ajax C squad, on Maradona his favorite player. I stated to him watching Maradona is not as enjoyable as much (some of them) for he’s got 4guys on him ,a big dust cloud surrounding the whole pack and I have no idea how he got out of it. As compared to Cruyff, his actions are more singular in nature, chooses his space, beats his opponent 1v1and you can see everything, and the effects he created around him. BINGO….
In sum I want players to have good ball control, that should be a must for any player on the team…With ball control you play the game with your head more and able to carry out what is needed….Yes, I’m biased for players who have confidence with ball and who are ‘Boss over the ball’ (Dutch Expression)…That has nothing to do with preferring an unusual player like a Messi…Without good ball control you can’t talk about tactics or how you want to play….
Yes, all players have different talents and it is up to the coach to choose to play in a manner which allows them to use their particular strengths… and also how to ameliorate or hide their particular weaknesses by positioning certain players together…
Also, I NEVER STATED, “you’re not as talented a player as I am and therefore you probably don’t understand the game as well as I do”…Again , like with the Messi statement, You WRONGLY inferred this…Don’t go reading into things that I didn’t say and even put quotes around it, making it even more rediculous.
As far technical players being smarter, I agree there are very dumb technical players, for example, the Brazilian player Garrincha ,Pele’s teammate, at WC’66 wasn’t even allowed to be present in the locker room for tactical talks, he sat outside. But give him a ball and he’s unstoppable….
I totally disagree with you on Maradona, who stated that soccer is not about speed or athleticism, but BRAINS,knowing what to do ahead of time and Technique…Cruyff ,”you play soccer with your head and carry it out with your feet”. Beckenbauer, idem ditto… and no he was not defender ,he was an offensive ,attacking player, who moved to the backline…Great players don’t neccessarily have the hardest shot or are the greatest dribblers, or the greatest passers, or the greatest headers, but like Cruyff states that the reason he was so successful is that he saw the game a few moves further ahead, and he knew of the presence of all 11 players on the field as compare other who knew perhaps 2 or 3.
That was eloquently stated by your coach about attackers and defenders…The difference is that defenders goal is simply put is to destroy, stop ,destruct. His basic thinking analysis is to see where the threat is and how to stop it. As compared to an offensive player has to be creative, savvy, has to think about all the possible options, therefore they are faced with a larger panorama, and permutations and all of which at the same time as he’s thinking and has to CONTROL the ball, which a defender doesn’t have to worry about…
This is what I meant by an attacker, a creative player tend to have by virtue of his position a better or larger panorama about the game, the player he will face or draw to him and the effects he causes and has to ability to change his plan at any moment if forced to….Yes, in this manner I find attackers, in general not in absolute terms, to have more insight for the game
Kent, far be it from me to speak for Frank. I like where Frank comes from. For me before I knew anything about soccer – let alone watched it – when my son began to play – at 5 – this was 2010ish – and I realize his passion for the game – I – a life long basketball player – looked into the sport of soccer a bit. What I found – was that it had a common thread with basketball – what you do with the ball – in your hands – or your feet – is what makes you the player. There are many other aspects to the game – but that – is the common thread. So I set about – helping my player – become master of the ball – with his feet. We still work on this – today – and he goes of to begin D1 soccer – in August. He will continue – all thru college – working on this single goal – master the ball – in small space – with the feet. We have a Copa America coming – this year. I have my tickets already – to a bunch of games. Last Copa here was 2016. In that event we connected with family member of my wife who had been estranged from the family – he had a 20 year career at pro – including being the #9 for NT of my wifes country – and had continued working around the national team – since and still does today. Thru him we met every player on that team. I met them all – in person – one at a time. I was struck – that – excepting one – Cavani – they all looked – not like stud athletes – not even the ‘biter’ – they looked – like ordinary people. I asked my wifes uncle – he looked at me – and pointed between his ears – he said – that – the brain – that’s what make the player. So we look for smart players who in tight spaces – can do amazing movements with the ball. Schletterbeck’s assist in this game – beautiful – exquisite – I’ve been watching from when he was at Freiburg – did the same kind of thing – his ability on the ball in small space – top class – he was doing it all game – and his movement – to grab a yard – before he launched the ball to Fullkrug – normal for him – even if it was not a goal – still – thing of beauty. Love this.
At the same time Kent – you need many players to make the game – my son – it is not easy for him to be master of the ball in small space – lotta work – he is build like a truck – from waist down – and was brown belt in Karate and played 4 years Rugby before HS. Guess what one of his strengths is? Stinging tackles – he leaves many players on the deck – in fair tackles. In youth soccer – many players and parents have come after him. Part of the game. I love players that bring this too. Many parts of the game – not every great players – master of ball in small space and quick thinker. Defenders frequently just beasts. Goal keepers as well. All good. But the foundation of the game – is this – master the ball with your feet.
Frank, my “quote” was an exaggerated reading between the lines of what you said; I should have put it in “air quotes” to indicate it was not an exact quote, but I figured you’d know I was not quoting you exactly (and my comment about English as your second language was intended to indicate I was writing in a humorous vein).
Anyway, you guys seem to think I don’t appreciate technical skill or thinking in a game, and nothing can be further from the truth. I coached youth soccer for many years and my focus was always on developing skills and soccer brains. My main point is that just because Mbappe has speed to burn, and uses it to blow past players, doesn’t make him an “overrated player” because he doesn’t have to rely on deception or technical ability to beat people. As long as he can blow past people and create opportunities for his team, I think he should do that. Now if he can’t do anything else (as happens a lot in youth soccer with fast kids), that’s a problem. But Mbappe has brains and technical ability as well, so I think he deserves the accolades he gets.
As for possession soccer, I always want my teams to have the ball and control the game. But sometimes, watching possession-oriented teams lose to lethal counterattacks, I wonder whether I’m wrong to always want possession. I would be interested in seeing how often teams that win the possession game lose the game. I’m guessing people have done that, but I haven’t seen it. I want the team that dominates possession to win, but I am open to being wrong.
Kent, possession is a means to an end, not the end itself. Bad positioning makes play more difficult technically.
The counter-attacking problem is not the fault of possession. Blame poor positioning instead.
While attacking the team shape should be well balanced and positioned to stop a counterattack before the ball is turned over. This last sentence should be the coaching focus to improve defense against counter attacks.
Kent, It is very difficult considering the overal past history of our dialogues to tell when you’re being humorous. For example, when I have a dialogue with Santi ,I know when he’s kidding but I have difficulty with you because of the adversarial stance you tend to take with me. NO COMPLAINTS with your adversarial stance which is GREAT for I see this as a way of further dialogue on Soccer that perhaps OTHER posters can learn from; in other words , Thank You for it keeps me on my toes and BTW it helps in my English which STINKS….
Your quote, although you stated this partly in jest it had a ring of truth to it in your mind as you projected it, which comes about from a faulty inference. I hope I don’t come across that way to anyone, ever, for I find that so disgusting….I respect everyone’s opinion pro or con here and that is shown by the amount of time and effort I put in to explain my case in detail, and this is why my posts are often long.
The other thing you wrongly inferred, is that you think that ‘we’ don’t seem to think that you don’t appreciate ‘technique and thinking’ of the game. I can’t talk for everyone else but I consider anyone that posts here loves soccer and likes watching players perform their ‘skills and thinking’ that is why we all go watch the Greats like a Messi’s ballhandling for instance, and THAT INCLUDES YOU, that’s a given!!! why else would anyone go out and watch soccer???..
As far as Mbappe goes read my post to Philip below, that should explain some more things about how I think of Mbappe..
Your quote, basically supports part of what I’m trying to say….Mbappe, is a very ONE_DIMENSIONAL player, although he’s successfull
AT TIMES at what he does. I wish announcers, like they do in Holland be more critical of players of their actions and state what a did wrong or correct and give more insightful comments about players…
Cruyff stated to not rely on just speed for there will always be someone faster…Don’t forget as Mbappe gets older his speed becomes less of a factor .He will realize that he needs to become more sophisticated for otherwise he’s going to endup like most of the English players retiring when they hit 30. Look at Zlatan or Messi, their game is not rely on speed but deception, skills and brains…
As far as the ‘possession’ game goes, Bob’s explanation is right on….Realize good defense is being PREVENTIVE not reactionary….Ball possession is PREVENTIVE defense without playing defense, that’s the beauty of attacking soccer….you have the ball they can’t score. Yes, a ball possession oriented team can lose by a counter , So What??? Sh*t happens, nothing is perfect.
But if you prefer a soccer team playing counter attacking soccer ,playing very defensively, park the bus , wait for the mistake than good luck to you…But don’t infer that I look down on a counterattacking move which I think is great and beautiful but that totally opposite if you play that style….This is why I never watch Italian…Snooze…
Kent, I left out your quote
Kent this was your quote which supprted my point as Mbappe being one-dimensional
Kent, you stated that Mbappe has speed to burn, and uses it to blow past players, doesn’t make him an “overrated player” because he doesn’t have to rely on deception or technical ability to beat people. This makes him a ONE-DIMENSIONAL player
Frank, I am not a fan of counterattacking soccer, and bored to death by teams that “park the bus”, which is anti-soccer (in my book). Teams parking the bus against Barcelona and Spain made their games hard to watch for a while, which is a tragedy given how talented offensively they were (which is why they were my favorite teams).
Soccer is a series of risk v reward calculations, and the more effort (getting more players forward, e.g.) you put into offense, the more you leave yourself open to a counter-attack. Weak teams playing strong teams may not have a choice but to put most of their effort into defense, hoping to keep their stronger opponent from scoring while stealing a goal against the flow of play. I understand that. Why a strong team would ever consciously allow the other team to have possession and work for a counter is a mystery (unless the team’s major offensive weapon is a counter attack).
The US v Netherlands game is a good example; many people argue that GB was outcoached by van Gaal (the master spanking an upstart), and that the Dutch were clearly the better team. Given the score (3-1), you can certainly make that case. But that’s not how I saw it. The US dominated possession (almost 60%) and created many more chances (17-11 shots, 8-6 on target). The Dutch goals were mostly (all?) on counters where individual US defenders (Adams, Dest and A. Robinson) all made errors (ironically, since they were some of our best players in the tournament) and the Dutch finished their chances (so credit to them).
So were the Dutch the stronger team, consciously choosing to allow the US to possess (and create chances??) so they could win on the counter? A genius strategy by van Gaal that Berhalter was to stupid or naive to see? Or did the US force the Dutch to defend, putting them in position to counter. Certainly once the Dutch went up a goal, they might have taken a more defensive posture, but I don’t think they went into the game wanting to concede possession. So while many people saw that game as evidence the US players can’t compete with European powers and GB is out of his league, I saw the game as a sign of progress; we put a strong European team back on its heals at the highest levels of competition, and only lost because of some defensive errors at inopportune times (by players who aren’t really prone to such errors).
That being said, I often get frustrated when the skillful, ball possession oriented teams I like lose to teams they’ve dominated all game. Which forces me to consider if under the current rules, having more possession can actually lessen your chances of winning. But I hope not.
Frank, you are correct to think that I saw your comment (and this is the direct quote): ” you probably were a defender and therefore our experiences and insights into the game differ greatly. Me being an offensive ,very technical player ,I tend to look at the game with more in-depth applying more variables to interpret things because playing up front requires more creativity and insights….” as suggesting that your comments are more valuable than mine, since my view of the game is shallower. Not sure how else to interpret that.
I don’t take it personally, so I’m more amused than annoyed, but if you’re not meaning to be disrespectful, you need to be a little more careful with your words (and by the way, I think your English is generally excellent).
As I think I’ve told you, I probably agree with 90% of your comments, so I don’t think we see the game that differently. I push back mostly when you are (in my opinion) overly critical. Criticism is how we get better (and you go into quite detailed explanations of your critiques, which can be valuable). I usually object when you move from a player can do it this way, to a player must do it this way. You have very strongly held beliefs about how the game should be played, I just think that it’s good to have more variety than you want to allow.
As for players, you say “Sure he is considered one of the better players in the world but that is not saying much …”. How high is your bar?? Mbappe is not a perfect player, but he’s certainly one of the best in the world, not a player who can’t read the game, has poor technical skills, and can only use his speed to run past people. Would you really not want him on your team?
Kent, the “amount” of possession is less important than “where” the possession happens.
In 2009 the US beat Spain by counterattacking and allowing Spain to possess the ball. But they gave Spain possession along the touch lines and denied Spain possession in the center of the field. This avoided Spain’s strengths and forced them to rely on their weaknesses. In other words Spain was forced to play widely spread out and send high balls into the box. That wasn’t Spain’s game at the time.
Kent, pretty sure that in the game vs USA – yes – van Gaal ‘s plan was to concede possession and hit on the counter. Why? Because they could – because their players are trained in the game and adaptable as are their coaches. What he saw and what GB is pretty clear on – is that USA has way of playing – that they want to implement – to stick to. That they are really not flexible. He wanted his team to take advantage of this single-mindedness and – inflexibility – and – they did. When you get out of the group stage in WC – you must have – 1. strong spine all the way down the middle of your team your team – to and including GK – and 2. dynamic players and coaches that can adjust game plans before and during matches. Currently – we don’t have either. This is ok we are so young as soccer nation – do the best you can – just don’t fool yourself – into thinking you are something you are not – or you will get stuck.
Kent, I never thought about if GB was outcoached by van Gaal…maybe he was or wasn’t and he probably was but I never thought of it in those terms until you mentioned it…Look the Dutch did not have a good team, relatively speaking, played a 352 system ,basically, and the US 433.
A 352 is not my cup of tea, for I prefer the standard 433.
The dutch hate counter attacking football, it is not in their nature, in their history nor in their character and that’s why they always want to play attacking soccer…. A counter attack and playing a counter attacking soccer are two different animals in which I find the former enjoyable and appreciative to watch….Similarly I’m not a fan of long ball style football, but I find a long ball placed and timed well with a nice backspin a work of art. You need to see counterattacking football and a counterattack as two totally different issues….instead of all or nothing
The dutch allowed the US to have the ball, and don’t forget the dutch did not or never parked the bus and play counterattacking soccer. Instead the dutch played tight man to man, giving US players little time on the ball, for they knew the US players are not good in small spaces, thereby reducing the US threats. And in so doing they took advantage of the transitions when the US lost the ball. I remember one goal the dutch scored started from midfield by Memphis Depay who ran behind the sleeping Tyler Adams… I never doubted the Dutch wouldn’t win for they had better players and a great coach who is a great coach.
In sum the GB was outcoached which is not nothing to be embarrassed over ,for after all van Gaal is a great coach and had better quality players as well
Kent, you ask me how high my bar is, well it is pretty high…I’ve been stating all along that I find players and the quality of soccer not as good, Maradona, Beckenbauer ,Cruyff, Pele, etc , have said the same….The problem is there are fewer and fewer great players to compare to so that is why Mbappe’s greatness as player isn’t not saying much…
I have never stated a player must do it this way. There are options and better options or a player simple made a bad mistake.. And yes,I look with a critical eye and if I see something wrong , I’ll point it out…As far as how the game should be played, I like good soccer which entails the use of good technique, thinking,good ball control or better , a la Barcelona soccer when Guardiola coached it. Today soccer has become very boring, very predictable…what can I say???
As far as you’re interpretations on what I stated, I explained that offensive players, not all, as compare to defensive players because of the nature of their position have better a panoramic view of how the game is played. Likewise the more technique one develops and acquires the more insight one acquires into the game. This is how I explained why we differ in how we see the game…That has nothing to do with trying to belittle you but only offer an explanation of why we differ.
Until I see a van Gaal (or one of his players) quoted as saying (before the game) that the Dutch plan was to concede possession to the Americans, I won’t believe that their plan from the get-go. The Dutch love possession, believe they are better than their opponents (certainly than the Americans) so they would not feel the need to concede possession to a weaker team. That being said, during the game, I don’t doubt that the possession of the Americans didn’t bother the Dutch, and that they believed they could counter and win. And once they got the lead, they would not feel the need to possess as much, but could protect the lead. As a coach, I can’t imagine a game where I have the stronger team but I want to concede possession, especially when that possession is creating dangerous chances (as the Americans did). Stronger teams want to dominate their opponents, and if they can, they do. If they can’t, then they may adjust to taking advantage of counter-attacks.
That’s not to say tactically they won’t choose to concede some space on the field (leave the wings open, and then trap the players on the wings when the ball comes to them, e.g.).
Anyway, I think this discussion has probably reached its productive limit. I will leave it with my final thought (which was also my initial thought); you guys may all think Mbappe is over-rated and one dimensional, but I respectfully disagree. I would have him on my team anytime, anywhere. He’s one of the best in the world, and that’s no mean feat. I think it’s harder these days to stand out because the general skill level of players today is so much higher than it was in the past….
Kent, I’m glad you brought up this topic, so I searched and got from a dutch soccer magazine ‘Voetbal International’.
https://www.vi.nl/pro/analyse/louis-van-gaal-geeft-amerika-spoedcursus-provocerende-pressie
Translated ,It states “Van Gaal gave America a ‘speed course’ in ‘provoking pressure’.
In the 3rd paragraph beginning with ” Op 71 jaar……..” Translated, basically stated that van Gaal who always believed in ball possession style soccer, analized the US and came up with an alternative plan of allowing the US to have the ball , which meant the Dutch would reduce their own ball possession….
The 4th paragraph, NOS, a dutch news/sport station, had asked van Gaal, will he then allow the US to have more ball possession….NOS, described van Gaal with a smile on his face, replying,”lets call it ‘provoked- pressure”. { in other words pressure them to do something with a ball}.
The 5th paragraph, the results ,is that end of the first half, Ream had made most passes, followed by Zimmerman. In other words, the dutch allowed the least technical and the least threatening players ,the least creative and attacking types , to begin the attack….Van Gaal followed Cruyff’s philosophy of if you want to allow the weakest players to look bad then allow them to look bad. In addition it stated that Pulisic the better more creative had the least passes even less than his goalie.
In the last paragraph it stated and I couldn’t get more because I’m not a member. The dutch allowed the US to have the ball in their own half and allowed them to make the mistakes….
Van Gaal did outcoach GB, but actually that didn’t take much for one thing the US is not known for creativity with ball , which is a glaring weakness and that’s why we tend to play more Turbo, and counterattacking soccer since we are weak at ball possession…Van Gaal took and forced the US to play a possession game which is not our strength …
This brilliant tactics by van Gaal, but is a standard strategy, allow players who are not good with the ball have the ball…..
Frank, thank you for taking the time to post a translation of that Dutch article. Aside from explaining the match, it demonstrates the difference between Dutch reporting and US reporting, which you have mentioned in the past.
Bob, You’re right I really do miss Dutch reporting as well dutch commentating on TV….It is a world of difference for they really do talk about soccer in terms of ‘real soccer’…I feel like here we are at a 4th grade level when it comes to soccer dialogue by reporters…for you don’t learn anything.
Cruyff had stated that a good team is a team that can force the other team to play the they want them to play..And this what the dutch did…They looked at our weakness and forced the US to play to their weakness…
Kent doesn’t understand that the first thing you do in tactics is to see where the weaknesses lie with the opponent, then apply your team tactics to that…Cruyff would often change his front line shifting the players around that is best to take advantage of their weakness.
For example if the opponent has a great central defender, than Cruyff would not place his #9 there but further back, or somewhere away so the defender feels useless for he has no one to guard….
Frank, I do understand that you look for a team’s weakness and try to exploit it. On the other hand, weak teams adjust their game plan to try to exploit the stronger team’s weakest points, strong teams play their game and let the weaker team adjust. That’s not to say you don’t make minor adjustments to exploit a weaker team’s weaknesses, but strong teams don’t change their whole approach based on their opponent (unless they fear they’ll lose if they don’t). So while van Gaal might say they purposely conceded possession to the Americans after a game in which they conceded possession, and they might have allowed US defenders to knock the ball around without pressure (which would be an element of conceding possession), I don’t think the Dutch didn’t want to out-possess the Americans. And not pressuring the American defense in possession is “parking the bus” (dropping all your defenders back). Breaking down a team using that tactic is often hard and leaves your team open to a counter as frustrated players take greater and greater risks. So while I don’t doubt the Dutch took a conservative strategy (defending in numbers, not aggressively pressuring the US defense while they had the ball) that gave rise to successful counters, I don’t think they went into the game planning to concede possession. That would violate the Dutch mentality (wanting to control the game) and suggest that the Dutch had too much respect for American abilities (by changing their tactics specifically for the Americans instead of simply imposing their superiority on the Americans).
Kent, I gave you prove of van Gaal’s plan from the get go ALLOWING the US team more possession, which didn’t believe…And no, allowing the other team ,US, to possess the ball doesn’t mean in any way, the Dutch will just ‘park’ the bus. It also doesn’t mean you allow the US team ball possession , and the Dutchteam runs back to their own half and wait for them to come, and hope they can get the ball back in a transistion..There are many different strategies in how you can employ when allowing the other team more ball possession in order in order to exploit the US weakness ,which is lack of good ball possession…
The very fact, that the Dutch allowed the US team certain things tells you that the Dutch are in full control..
The Dutch was to allow the ball to go the weakest players, in the backline to pass the ball. There is reason why Ream had the most passes and Zimmerman second…This was PLANNED, a brilliant strategy. The dutch than played man to man, tightening up on their defense for they also outnumbered the Americans in their own half. This is why Pulisic had very low pass rating because he couldn’t do much with the ball. You don’t need to park the bus ,you just mark tight and wait for Ream or the other center back to pass the ball up and that happened. The percentages of the Dutch getting the ball in their own half where they outnumber the Americans are excellent which leads to a counterattack and score.
This has nothing to do with playing out a conservative strategy. The Dutch looked at the US weakness, and exploited it to the fullest. You make the opponents play to their weakness and the US weakness lies specifically when they have ball possession. Bottom line , GB go out coached.
Frank, when I watch Mbappe play, I think of other players with jet speed like Marc Overmars: how would you compare them? Their structure, when in movement, looks tighter, less fluid, yet they fly.
Phillip , Great question as usual coming from you….You can’t compare Mbappe to Overmars. Mbappe’s technique is more creative than Overmars and much of his game is relied on employing speed, than Overmars.
First of all, Overmars was speedy in SHORT distances, and Mbappe in long distances. Overmars was a little guy with short legs as compared to Mbappe who is tall with long legs. That in itself is already a world of difference between the two players. Because of Overmar’s size he could not take any defender on anywhere on the field and just outrun them on speed, which Mbappe can do.
Overmars, because of his size and short legs has to be smart and make only quick and short runs, otherwise taller defenders will catch up and beat him. Therefore his runs, his actions, employed more thinking behind it. And his runs took place near or in the opponent’s third where they can be most effective and more functional as compared to Mbappe’s who takes the ball anywhere and wants to outrun you…This is like going to a butcher who cuts his meat ‘gourmet’ style (Overmars) as compared to the butcher at Walmart (Mbappe) 🙂 🙂 🙂
So when I compare Overmars to Mbappe , players who employ running in their attacking play, I will never compare as far as who is faster physically, which Mbappe is, lets say. If was going to compare the two, it would not be on who is faster, or quicker, for that is not really important. In high level soccer it is not about speed of running but speed of THINKING and BALLHANDLING.
Remember what Cruyff stated, “It’s not how fast you are but whether you get there on time or not”.
The operative term here is not ‘speed’ but FUNCTIONALITY of use of speed. A wing only needs one step on a defender to be able to do what is needed and that doesn’t require long runs ,a la Mbappe, but only requires rather short ones AT THE RIGHT MOMENT. It is that one step that allows him to either shoot, pass, cross or to get by a defender that can created a 2v1 situation, a give and go, or draw a defender away another teammate. Wingers basically are SPACE CREATORS and SPACE SEEKERS and that is what Overmars did to perfection.
If Overmars played like Mbappe at Ajax it would ruin the whole team, for Ajax is like a well-tuned watch where the parts ,players, are taught where to employ their strengths in a functional manner. Ajax players are taught that no one is faster than the ball and there they play a positional game whereby you let the BALL do the running, not the player and run only when it is needed……
Philip, the way I think of it is as a common principle. First you figure out how long it takes your marker to recover after you lose him, and then you make sure that for the rest of the match your play is over before he can recover.
Basically you eliminate your marker from the game for practical purposes. Quickness helps a lot to create the separation, but guile works fine too.
Frank made the point about soccer being played with the brain. Long legs, short legs, quick or slow, a great player figures out how to win regardless of the circumstances. That is why Frank likes multi-dimensional players.
I don’t think this adds much to the conversation, other than another way of expressing what makes good players good.
BVB was lucky with that result, and managers will take luck over skill every day. But hustle and graft will only get them so far. They have certainly over-performed in the CL this season, but should have lost that match based on chances created. Maybe they can squeak something out in Paris but I suspect that is too tall of an ask. Glad that Germany gets an extra CL slot next season– there is more parity this season and more surprises.
They have played 3 times this year – next will be – 4th. It was loss in Paris 0-2, tie in Dortmund, 1-1, then win in Dortmund – 1-0. So in the last 180 minutes – PSG has 1 goal vs them. The trend – not good for PSG. We will see.