Good point, well said

When I watched Biereth in the academy. It seems like he is a Vardy type of finisher who is aggressive towards defenders. But in his loan spell, he showed that he has some tricks in his dribbling skills, and his passing game is also quite good creating for his team. I’m glad that his game is more well rounded. I don’t want a one dimensional goal hanger like Haaland who is a liability in other phases.

Who doesn’t with that clown

I agree and disagree on some of your points here but I think you've given a fair argument as to why positional play is better than relationism Agreements: - positional play involves automation, so even the less technical players can adopt this approach because they simply have to occupy a zone or space. There's a structure to fall on, whereas relationism would hurt these type of players because they don't have the IQ or expression to move around freely or creatively. They need to be thought and managed - it's more controlled than relationism so you're expected to dominate the ball, and if you dominate you generate more chances Disagreements: - the positional play teams are often too predictable, and they face a barrier when they meet low block teams. For example, Most opponents are aware that the wingers will stay out wide and that can be countered with an overload, or doubling up on the winger and if the winger plays the back pass or spreads it centrally the opposition can restructure their shape and remain compact in the center - Relationism allows creative expression which is harder to counter because it is unpredictable. If there's small incisive combinations between 5-6 players like you see with Diniz, i think you'll disorganize the opponent structure easier because you're setting up traps for them to come out and: 1) press = which can be bypassed through diniz passing combos 2) overload a side= if you bypass the overload you can transition up the pitch or switch the ball to players that werent part of the "combination phase" if that makes sense. If there are 4 players combining passes and 6 trying to overload on one end of the pitch, if that's bypassed and balls is transitioned to other side of the pitch, you have numerical advantage the moment the ball is switched - Relationism teams like real Madrid, France, still exist and win so there's definitely a place for it in football

⁠@@timeisontheessence You have to have one player wide on each side to stretch the opponent’s defensive line. So that each of their defenders are wider apart, creating spaces to penetrate. If they double up here, it means there are spaces elsewhere. Having skillful central players will allow us to access central area more. That’s why we can’t break low block down when Jesus is not there. Havertz and Odegaard are not actually that skillful if you compared them to Cazorla or Thiago. Otherwise we could access central area easily if we get doubled up on the wing.

@@thierryhenry674 so would you say that a Smith Rowe profile, someone who could ball carry would fix that issue

@@timeisontheessence I don’t think ball carrying alone would fix that issue. ESR is a good vertical ball carrier. He identifies spaces and runs into it. But his ball control is not like Trossard, Cazorla, Hleb, Nasri, which when they are not necessarily running, and when they are in tight area, no one can get the ball off them. ESR also lack that top passing ability, in both combining and playing through. If KDB is the best in that, then you can see ESR is someway off that standard.

@@thierryhenry674 so who would you go for in the market to get the right profile