Tiki Taka [R Implied]

[Alkamista]

I actually have two questions on this:

1) Has it been found out? It's tough to make that claim. Firstly, when
did Barca truly becoming a tiki taka team. I don't recall them being
that in the Ronaldinho era (could be mistaken though), so let's say
since 2007–08, which is 4 seasons now. In that time, they have won 3
out of 4 La Ligas, and 2 out of 4 UCLs, and gone to the SFs in the
other two UCLs. They were "out-bussed" twice in that time, Inter 2010
and Chelsea 2012. Does that constitute being found out? Hard to claim
that, as they won everything in sight between those losses in 2011.
And Chelsea rode their luck bigtime in this tie, and Villa was out, so
IMO it's premature to say that the style has met its demise.

2) Tougher question, but could another manager with a team with a top
budget (e.g. RM, Man City, Chelsea) buy top players, make them play
tiki-taka, and make them as dominating as Barca? In other words, is it
the philosophy/style itself, or is it Barca's unique player/coach
pedigree that made the style so successful? I think if it was the
former then many other coaches would've tried it. It would be
interesting to see Guardiola take this style elsewhere and make it
work.

Be interested to hear other views on both counts.

[Abubakr]

Post by Alkamista
1) Has it been found out? It's tough to make that claim. Firstly, when
did Barca truly becoming a tiki taka team. I don't recall them being
that in the Ronaldinho era (could be mistaken though), so let's say
since 2007–08, which is 4 seasons now. In that time, they have won 3
out of 4 La Ligas, and 2 out of 4 UCLs, and gone to the SFs in the
other two UCLs. They were "out-bussed" twice in that time, Inter 2010
and Chelsea 2012. Does that constitute being found out? Hard to claim
that, as they won everything in sight between those losses in 2011.
And Chelsea rode their luck bigtime in this tie, and Villa was out, so
IMO it's premature to say that the style has met its demise.

They played the same high pressing, possession game under Rijkaard but
it's been taken to another level under Guardiola, especially as he got
rid of the players who weren't so good at passing the ball.

Agree with the rest of your assessment.

Post by Alkamista
2) Tougher question, but could another manager with a team with a top
budget (e.g. RM, Man City, Chelsea) buy top players, make them play
tiki-taka, and make them as dominating as Barca? In other words, is it
the philosophy/style itself, or is it Barca's unique player/coach
pedigree that made the style so successful? I think if it was the
former then many other coaches would've tried it. It would be
interesting to see Guardiola take this style elsewhere and make it
work.

It won't be easy to replicate this seamless one touch passing. Most of
these Barcelona players have been trained to do it for years and the
squad has always remained relatively stable. It has taken Real Madrid 3
years to get to a point of good team work and they still look relatively
amateurish compared to Barcelona when they try tiki taka.

Post by Alkamista
Be interested to hear other views on both counts.

[Alkamista]

Post by Abubakr

Post by Alkamista
1) Has it been found out? It's tough to make that claim. Firstly, when
did Barca truly becoming a tiki taka team. I don't recall them being
that in the Ronaldinho era (could be mistaken though), so let's say
since 2007–08, which is 4 seasons now. In that time, they have won 3
out of 4 La Ligas, and 2 out of 4 UCLs, and gone to the SFs in the
other two UCLs. They were "out-bussed" twice in that time, Inter 2010
and Chelsea 2012. Does that constitute being found out? Hard to claim
that, as they won everything in sight between those losses in 2011.
And Chelsea rode their luck bigtime in this tie, and Villa was out, so
IMO it's premature to say that the style has met its demise.

They played the same high pressing, possession game under Rijkaard but
it's been taken to another level under Guardiola, especially as he got
rid of the players who weren't so good at passing the ball.

That was my point. Many other teams play a possession game, but this
extreme style is unprecedented.

Post by Abubakr
Agree with the rest of your assessment.

Post by Alkamista
2) Tougher question, but could another manager with a team with a top
budget (e.g. RM, Man City, Chelsea) buy top players, make them play
tiki-taka, and make them as dominating as Barca? In other words, is it
the philosophy/style itself, or is it Barca's unique player/coach
pedigree that made the style so successful? I think if it was the
former then many other coaches would've tried it. It would be
interesting to see Guardiola take this style elsewhere and make it
work.

It won't be easy to replicate this seamless one touch passing. Most of
these Barcelona players have been trained to do it for years and the
squad has always remained relatively stable. It has taken Real Madrid 3
years to get to a point of good team work and they still look relatively
amateurish compared to Barcelona when they try tiki taka.

Can't argue with that. The triumvirate of Xavi, Iniesta, and Messi is
the fulcrum of this approach, with others often just filling in the
blanks. Will be hard to replicate without those three present.

[Mart van de Wege]

Post by Abubakr

Post by Alkamista
1) Has it been found out? It's tough to make that claim. Firstly, when
did Barca truly becoming a tiki taka team. I don't recall them being
that in the Ronaldinho era (could be mistaken though), so let's say
since 2007–08, which is 4 seasons now. In that time, they have won 3
out of 4 La Ligas, and 2 out of 4 UCLs, and gone to the SFs in the
other two UCLs. They were "out-bussed" twice in that time, Inter 2010
and Chelsea 2012. Does that constitute being found out? Hard to claim
that, as they won everything in sight between those losses in 2011.
And Chelsea rode their luck bigtime in this tie, and Villa was out, so
IMO it's premature to say that the style has met its demise.

They played the same high pressing, possession game under Rijkaard but
it's been taken to another level under Guardiola, especially as he got
rid of the players who weren't so good at passing the ball.

It's essentially the Cruyff style. Note that Pep always was one of
Johan's favourites (as was Rijkaard, for that matter).

If played well, i.e. with a fit team doing lots of movement off the
ball, it's an exiting style, but vulnerable to a determined defense and
a fast break.

If done badly, it's just static passing the ball around, as boring as
catenaccio (about half the matches of the Netherlands national team
would qualify).

Mart

[Benny]

Post by Alkamista
1) Has it been found out? It's tough to make that claim. Firstly, when
did Barca truly becoming a tiki taka team. I don't recall them being
that in the Ronaldinho era (could be mistaken though), so let's say
since 2007–08, which is 4 seasons now. In that time, they have won 3
out of 4 La Ligas, and 2 out of 4 UCLs, and gone to the SFs in the
other two UCLs. They were "out-bussed" twice in that time, Inter 2010
and Chelsea 2012. Does that constitute being found out? Hard to claim
that, as they won everything in sight between those losses in 2011.
And Chelsea rode their luck bigtime in this tie, and Villa was out, so
IMO it's premature to say that the style has met its demise.

Since 2007-2008.

Post by Alkamista
2) Tougher question, but could another manager with a team with a top
budget (e.g. RM, Man City, Chelsea) buy top players, make them play
tiki-taka, and make them as dominating as Barca? In other words, is it
the philosophy/style itself, or is it Barca's unique player/coach
pedigree that made the style so successful? I think if it was the
former then many other coaches would've tried it. It would be
interesting to see Guardiola take this style elsewhere and make it
work.
Be interested to hear other views on both counts.

The biggest advantage they have is growing up together and getting
breaks from banks and the tax man. When teams develop a rigid system,
others will find a way to counter it. Solutions were developed for
catenaccio and total football, Sacchi's system fell apart with the
change in the offside rule in 1994. Everyone knows how to play
Barcelona. Possession is meaningless.

[Mark V.]

Post by Alkamista
1) Has it been found out? It's tough to make that claim. Firstly, when
did Barca truly becoming a tiki taka team. I don't recall them being
that in the Ronaldinho era (could be mistaken though), so let's say
since 2007–08, which is 4 seasons now. In that time, they have won 3
out of 4 La Ligas, and 2 out of 4 UCLs, and gone to the SFs in the
other two UCLs. They were "out-bussed" twice in that time, Inter 2010
and Chelsea 2012. Does that constitute being found out? Hard to claim
that, as they won everything in sight between those losses in 2011.
And Chelsea rode their luck bigtime in this tie, and Villa was out, so
IMO it's premature to say that the style has met its demise.

The first time I remember hearing the term tiki-taka was in reference
to Aragones's Spain in 2006. I thought that the French had figured out
how to adjust for it by keeping their line back and letting Spain dick
around in the midfield and only look as though they were dominating.
France's subsequent shift to a higher line to disrupt Brazil's ball
movement in the following game (and then more balanced positioning
against Portugal in the game after) gave the impression that for three
matches, at least, Domenech was a tactical genius.

Perhaps del Bosque and Guardiola refined it, and/or had slightly
better or more experienced players for the system? I remember reading
that the Germans considered it the most effective "defense" they
encountered in WC 2010, saying that chasing the ball around all game
just left them plumb-tuckered after awhile. Could they have learned
something by watching how France played Spain in 2006? Or maybe Xavi/
Iniesta (plus Messi with Barca) are just too good in tandem and can
break down even the best, most patient back four in a manner no other
combo ever could?

Post by Alkamista
2) Tougher question, but could another manager with a team with a top
budget (e.g. RM, Man City, Chelsea) buy top players, make them play
tiki-taka, and make them as dominating as Barca? In other words, is it
the philosophy/style itself, or is it Barca's unique player/coach
pedigree that made the style so successful? I think if it was the
former then many other coaches would've tried it. It would be
interesting to see Guardiola take this style elsewhere and make it
work.

So here's a question. What's the difference between Colombia's style
in the early 1990s and tika-taka? It must be some subtle difference in
how the defenders are positioned/integrated vis-a-vis the attack?

[Sven Mischkies]

Post by Mark V.

Post by Alkamista
1) Has it been found out? It's tough to make that claim. Firstly, when
did Barca truly becoming a tiki taka team. I don't recall them being
that in the Ronaldinho era (could be mistaken though), so let's say
since 2007–08, which is 4 seasons now. In that time, they have won 3
out of 4 La Ligas, and 2 out of 4 UCLs, and gone to the SFs in the
other two UCLs. They were "out-bussed" twice in that time, Inter 2010
and Chelsea 2012. Does that constitute being found out? Hard to claim
that, as they won everything in sight between those losses in 2011.
And Chelsea rode their luck bigtime in this tie, and Villa was out, so
IMO it's premature to say that the style has met its demise.

The first time I remember hearing the term tiki-taka was in reference
to Aragones's Spain in 2006. I thought that the French had figured out
how to adjust for it by keeping their line back and letting Spain dick
around in the midfield and only look as though they were dominating.
France's subsequent shift to a higher line to disrupt Brazil's ball
movement in the following game (and then more balanced positioning
against Portugal in the game after) gave the impression that for three
matches, at least, Domenech was a tactical genius.
Perhaps del Bosque and Guardiola refined it, and/or had slightly
better or more experienced players for the system? I remember reading
that the Germans considered it the most effective "defense" they
encountered in WC 2010, saying that chasing the ball around all game
just left them plumb-tuckered after awhile. Could they have learned
something by watching how France played Spain in 2006?

Well, the game was close enough. each team had one chance, we missed,
Puyol didn't. And Spain should have had a player sent off...

Post by Mark V.
Or maybe Xavi/
Iniesta (plus Messi with Barca) are just too good in tandem and can
break down even the best, most patient back four in a manner no other
combo ever could?

Spain didn't break down their opponents much at WC10, did they? Messi is
what makes them score many goals with this approach, without him it's
just a very, very good defense.

Post by Mark V.

Post by Alkamista
2) Tougher question, but could another manager with a team with a top
budget (e.g. RM, Man City, Chelsea) buy top players, make them play
tiki-taka, and make them as dominating as Barca? In other words, is it
the philosophy/style itself, or is it Barca's unique player/coach
pedigree that made the style so successful? I think if it was the
former then many other coaches would've tried it. It would be
interesting to see Guardiola take this style elsewhere and make it
work.

So here's a question. What's the difference between Colombia's style
in the early 1990s and tika-taka? It must be some subtle difference in
how the defenders are positioned/integrated vis-a-vis the attack?

I don't remember any Colombian style, just that they were shite. Maybe
they had only one playmaker compared to Spain with 2 in Xavi/Iniesta?
Maybe their playmaker couldn't score unlike Xavi/Iniesta?


Ciao,
SM

[Jesus Petry]

[snip]

Post by Sven Mischkies

Post by Mark V.
So here's a question. What's the difference between Colombia's style
in the early 1990s and tika-taka? It must be some subtle difference

in

Post by Mark V.
how the defenders are positioned/integrated vis-a-vis the attack?

I don't remember any Colombian style, just that they were shite. Maybe
they had only one playmaker compared to Spain with 2 in Xavi/Iniesta?
Maybe their playmaker couldn't score unlike Xavi/Iniesta?

To fully understand Colombia's débacle in 1994 I recommend you watch the movie
"The two Escobars". They were not as bad as they looked in the finals. In fact
they were capable of great feats, like the 0-5 at Buenos Aires in the qualifying.
The country was in a very dramatic state due to the drug war and it affected
their team.


Tchau!
Jesus Petry

[Bruce D. Scott]

Jesus Petry (***@pop.com.br) wrote:

: To fully understand Colombia's débacle in 1994 I recommend you watch the movie
: "The two Escobars". They were not as bad as they looked in the finals. In fact
: they were capable of great feats, like the 0-5 at Buenos Aires in the qualifying.
: The country was in a very dramatic state due to the drug war and it affected
: their team.

A fantastic film. For me the critical step for the downfall was when
Higuita got caught meeting the drug lords and spoke to journalists. So
he went to jail. It was IIRC the end of 1993, after the qualifier in
Buenos Aires and before the preparation to the World Cup.

--
ciao,
Bruce

drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/

[Mark V.]

Post by Sven Mischkies

Post by Mark V.
Perhaps del Bosque and Guardiola refined it, and/or had slightly
better or more experienced players for the system? I remember reading
that the Germans considered it the most effective "defense" they
encountered in WC 2010, saying that chasing the ball around all game
just left them plumb-tuckered after awhile. Could they have learned
something by watching how France played Spain in 2006?

Well, the game was close enough. each team had one chance, we missed,
Puyol didn't. And Spain should have had a player sent off...

Post by Mark V.
Or maybe Xavi/
Iniesta (plus Messi with Barca) are just too good in tandem and can
break down even the best, most patient back four in a manner no other
combo ever could?

Spain didn't break down their opponents much at WC10, did they? Messi is
what makes them score many goals with this approach, without him it's
just a very, very good defense.

True dat! How many goals *did* they score in the run-of-play from
conventional build-up? Villa's lob against Chile doesn't count, and
I'd say that Iniesta's vs. Chile barely counts, though there was some
great passing on the counter to set that up. Being mindful that tiki
taka ostensibly offers other indirect benefits (the aforementioned
tiring out of opponents), was tiki taka responsible for *any* goals at
all in WC 2010? Can't remember.

Post by Sven Mischkies

Post by Mark V.
So here's a question. What's the difference between Colombia's style
in the early 1990s and tika-taka? It must be some subtle difference in
how the defenders are positioned/integrated vis-a-vis the attack?

I don't remember any Colombian style, just that they were shite. Maybe
they had only one playmaker compared to Spain with 2 in Xavi/Iniesta?
Maybe their playmaker couldn't score unlike Xavi/Iniesta?

Oh, in the Americas we saw a lot of them before WC 1994, and they were
scary. Take a look at their qualifying path.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_%28CONMEBOL%29

They imploded once they got to the US, though. And you're right :
everything ran through Valderrama.

[Sven Mischkies]

Post by Mark V.
Oh, in the Americas we saw a lot of them before WC 1994, and they were
scary. Take a look at their qualifying path.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_%28CONMEBOL%29

So? One great week doesn't make a great team.


Ciao,
SM

[Mark V.]

Post by Sven Mischkies

Post by Mark V.
Oh, in the Americas we saw a lot of them before WC 1994, and they were
scary.  Take a look at their qualifying path.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_%28CON...

So? One great week doesn't make a great team.

But two bad qualifying matches make a "shite" team?

[Mark V.]

Post by Sven Mischkies

Post by Mark V.
Oh, in the Americas we saw a lot of them before WC 1994, and they were
scary.  Take a look at their qualifying path.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_%28CON...

So? One great week doesn't make a great team.

But two bad group stage matches make a "shite" team?

[Sven Mischkies]

Post by Mark V.

Post by Sven Mischkies

Post by Mark V.
Oh, in the Americas we saw a lot of them before WC 1994, and they were
scary. Take a look at their qualifying path.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_%28CON...

So? One great week doesn't make a great team.

But two bad group stage matches make a "shite" team?

Shite relative to the ballyhoo, yes. :)


Ciao,
SM

[Jordi]

Post by Mark V.
The first time I remember hearing the term tiki-taka was in reference
to Aragones's Spain in 2006.

That's when the term started to get mainstream. It was invented several years ago by Javier Clemente as a derogatory term, but the WC'06 commentator Andrés Montes brought it back reversing its original connotations.