AVB: "I refuse to build a team like City...

[1.618034]

As usual there's lots of people jumping off the deep end about quotes that actually aren't quotes at all...

Good piece from a Chelsea Blog on the subject...


<a class="postlink" href="http://www.weaintgotnohistory.com/2012/2/27/2828980/andre-villas-boas-quotes-man-city" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.weaintgotnohistory.com/2012/ ... s-man-city</a>?

More From The AVB Interview - On Manchester City And Efficiency

People are talking about it and it's not going to go away, so I guess I'll weigh in on some of the other parts of the Andre Villas-Boas interview. A little while ago, this tweet from the Guardian's Daniel Taylor, who I normally quite like, popped up on my feed:

@DTguardian
daniel taylor
Surprised to see AVB sniping at Man City - and not exactly well-timed when Chelsea 17 points back and 25 goals fewer scored


The quotes Taylor was referring to were about Andre Villas-Boas saying something along the lines of "If I saw City playing in Italy, I would say that's where they actually belong." The stereotype, of course, is that Serie A sides play boring, defensive football, and if that's what Villas-Boas actually meant, it would have been a deeply silly thing to say - City are a fantastic team and look poised to win the title this year. They certainly deserve to, in my opinion.

But, of course, if you read the interview, that's not what was said. Here's a fuller picture:

@rcatalao
Rui Catalão
#AVB: "There's an exact formula to be successful in PL. And that's what City is doing right now: attacking efficiency above all. City is a very organised, efficient, well-balanced team. All they want right now is to be champions. If I saw City playing in Italy, I would say that's where they actually belong." #Chelsea CFC


Instead of 'sniping' at City, Villas-Boas is paying them a big compliment, even though it's a slightly backhanded one. Roberto Mancini's team is, right now, a Premier League powerhouse, and that's exactly how they're being portrayed. The Italian stereotype the manager is deploying here is a single-minded focus on winning, something that does strike me as fairly Italian, considering the history of their football.

But Taylor's weird characterisation aside, this is an interesting quote, because it shows how divorced Villas-Boas's footballing philosophy is from the team's results. To illustrate what I mean by this, let's take a quick detour to the heart of most things football lately: Real Madrid vs. Barcelona battle. While Jose Mourinho is more than happy to do whatever it takes to win, Pep Guardiola and his player believe in playing the game a certain way, and they win as a byproduct of their style. For Mourinho, style is altered in order to win.

That's a simplistic view of the situation, of course - Guardiola will adapt in order to give his team the best possible chance of getting good results, but Barcelona are, above all things a dogmatic football club, with their way as the correct way. A win by playing in a different style simply isn't as good as a proper Barca victory. From his previous interviews, Villas-Boas seems to come across as holding views very close to Guardiola. Both managers want to win while playing beautiful football - playing to win simply isn't enough.

This, I suspect, is the main cultural element that the manager is trying to change at the club. Under Mourinho, Chelsea were built to win trophies with basically whatever worked. If that meant playing for 2-0 win after 2-0 win, fine. The three points were all that mattered, and the Blues were... well, to borrow from Andre Villas-Boas, we were an organised, well-balanced and efficient team that wanted to be champions. That culture has never been seriously challenged by post-Mourinho appointees.

Now, I personally take the Mourinho side of this argument - I want to win a lot more than I want to see pretty football, and I've been known to make quite a lot of fun of Arsenal other football teams for being so holier-than-thou about their tactics, as though you got an extra point for playing a lot of pointless passes. I like strong defending, physical play and the counterattack. Possession football is less fun for me.

However, my opinion doesn't count for much in the grand scheme of things, and it's Roman Abramovich and Andre Villas-Boas's right to reshape the team the way they see fit. I'm not entirely sure I want to live in a world where the results matter less than playing with style - that's a recipe for self-reinforcing dogma, in my view - but if Chelsea want to play entertaining football while winning everything I'm pretty cool with that.

That said, the prospect of turning into a team that uses style to excuse itself from actually winning things terrifies me, and if we do go down this path... well, we'd better bloody well win. So far, that's not happening.

 

[bluebanana83]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pD4EFGQDhA[/youtube]

I'll take it as a compliment. He's obviously not seen Napoli, Milan, or Udinese this season. Even if he's going off the past, there has been some great teams in the last 20 years in Italy. Sampdoria when Mancini was there, Parma with Zola, Sven's Lazio, Maradona's Napoli, Baggio's Juve to name a few, and obviously Milan, and Inter when they had the three Germans.

What is apparent in all Italian teams that are great is they have a solid spine, that includes great defenders that allow the attackers to focus on that side of things. Ferrara was at Napoli, Vierchowod at Samp, Cannavaro & Thuram at Parma, Maldini & Baresi at Milan, Bergomi at Inter, Nesta at Lazio.

Then throw in awesome attackers, and a strong midfield and you get what is happening at City. Very similar. Besides, who wants to be Portugese in style? Even when they have great players they can't win an international trophy. Italy 4 world cups, & 1 European cup, and a tons of european club honours.

 

[CityCTID]

Duncan Castle's pro-Mourinho
an absolute **** of the highest order

 

[Blue Coop]

As usual there's lots of people jumping off the deep end about quotes that actually aren't quotes at all...

Good piece from a Chelsea Blog on the subject...


<a class="postlink" href="http://www.weaintgotnohistory.com/2012/2/27/2828980/andre-villas-boas-quotes-man-city" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.weaintgotnohistory.com/2012/ ... s-man-city</a>?

More From The AVB Interview - On Manchester City And Efficiency

People are talking about it and it's not going to go away, so I guess I'll weigh in on some of the other parts of the Andre Villas-Boas interview. A little while ago, this tweet from the Guardian's Daniel Taylor, who I normally quite like, popped up on my feed:

@DTguardian
daniel taylor
Surprised to see AVB sniping at Man City - and not exactly well-timed when Chelsea 17 points back and 25 goals fewer scored


The quotes Taylor was referring to were about Andre Villas-Boas saying something along the lines of "If I saw City playing in Italy, I would say that's where they actually belong." The stereotype, of course, is that Serie A sides play boring, defensive football, and if that's what Villas-Boas actually meant, it would have been a deeply silly thing to say - City are a fantastic team and look poised to win the title this year. They certainly deserve to, in my opinion.

But, of course, if you read the interview, that's not what was said. Here's a fuller picture:

@rcatalao
Rui Catalão
#AVB: "There's an exact formula to be successful in PL. And that's what City is doing right now: attacking efficiency above all. City is a very organised, efficient, well-balanced team. All they want right now is to be champions. If I saw City playing in Italy, I would say that's where they actually belong." #Chelsea CFC


Instead of 'sniping' at City, Villas-Boas is paying them a big compliment, even though it's a slightly backhanded one. Roberto Mancini's team is, right now, a Premier League powerhouse, and that's exactly how they're being portrayed. The Italian stereotype the manager is deploying here is a single-minded focus on winning, something that does strike me as fairly Italian, considering the history of their football.

But Taylor's weird characterisation aside, this is an interesting quote, because it shows how divorced Villas-Boas's footballing philosophy is from the team's results. To illustrate what I mean by this, let's take a quick detour to the heart of most things football lately: Real Madrid vs. Barcelona battle. While Jose Mourinho is more than happy to do whatever it takes to win, Pep Guardiola and his player believe in playing the game a certain way, and they win as a byproduct of their style. For Mourinho, style is altered in order to win.

That's a simplistic view of the situation, of course - Guardiola will adapt in order to give his team the best possible chance of getting good results, but Barcelona are, above all things a dogmatic football club, with their way as the correct way. A win by playing in a different style simply isn't as good as a proper Barca victory. From his previous interviews, Villas-Boas seems to come across as holding views very close to Guardiola. Both managers want to win while playing beautiful football - playing to win simply isn't enough.

This, I suspect, is the main cultural element that the manager is trying to change at the club. Under Mourinho, Chelsea were built to win trophies with basically whatever worked. If that meant playing for 2-0 win after 2-0 win, fine. The three points were all that mattered, and the Blues were... well, to borrow from Andre Villas-Boas, we were an organised, well-balanced and efficient team that wanted to be champions. That culture has never been seriously challenged by post-Mourinho appointees.

Now, I personally take the Mourinho side of this argument - I want to win a lot more than I want to see pretty football, and I've been known to make quite a lot of fun of Arsenal other football teams for being so holier-than-thou about their tactics, as though you got an extra point for playing a lot of pointless passes. I like strong defending, physical play and the counterattack. Possession football is less fun for me.

However, my opinion doesn't count for much in the grand scheme of things, and it's Roman Abramovich and Andre Villas-Boas's right to reshape the team the way they see fit. I'm not entirely sure I want to live in a world where the results matter less than playing with style - that's a recipe for self-reinforcing dogma, in my view - but if Chelsea want to play entertaining football while winning everything I'm pretty cool with that.

That said, the prospect of turning into a team that uses style to excuse itself from actually winning things terrifies me, and if we do go down this path... well, we'd better bloody well win. So far, that's not happening.

I agree that the AVB comments have been taken out of context, but something doesn't add up in this blog, or atleast for me anyway. Now don't get me wrong I think we are a well-balanced, organised and effecient side, but I also think we play excellent football, arguebly the best in the league. When infact this blog suggests we just play to win, and disregard the 'type' of football we play. I disagree with this completely, I think we always look to play a slick style of football with a focus on keeping the ball and staying patient to break teams down.

 

[1.618034]

As usual there's lots of people jumping off the deep end about quotes that actually aren't quotes at all...

Good piece from a Chelsea Blog on the subject...


<a class="postlink" href="http://www.weaintgotnohistory.com/2012/2/27/2828980/andre-villas-boas-quotes-man-city" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.weaintgotnohistory.com/2012/ ... s-man-city</a>?

More From The AVB Interview - On Manchester City And Efficiency

People are talking about it and it's not going to go away, so I guess I'll weigh in on some of the other parts of the Andre Villas-Boas interview. A little while ago, this tweet from the Guardian's Daniel Taylor, who I normally quite like, popped up on my feed:

@DTguardian
daniel taylor
Surprised to see AVB sniping at Man City - and not exactly well-timed when Chelsea 17 points back and 25 goals fewer scored


The quotes Taylor was referring to were about Andre Villas-Boas saying something along the lines of "If I saw City playing in Italy, I would say that's where they actually belong." The stereotype, of course, is that Serie A sides play boring, defensive football, and if that's what Villas-Boas actually meant, it would have been a deeply silly thing to say - City are a fantastic team and look poised to win the title this year. They certainly deserve to, in my opinion.

But, of course, if you read the interview, that's not what was said. Here's a fuller picture:

@rcatalao
Rui Catalão
#AVB: "There's an exact formula to be successful in PL. And that's what City is doing right now: attacking efficiency above all. City is a very organised, efficient, well-balanced team. All they want right now is to be champions. If I saw City playing in Italy, I would say that's where they actually belong." #Chelsea CFC


Instead of 'sniping' at City, Villas-Boas is paying them a big compliment, even though it's a slightly backhanded one. Roberto Mancini's team is, right now, a Premier League powerhouse, and that's exactly how they're being portrayed. The Italian stereotype the manager is deploying here is a single-minded focus on winning, something that does strike me as fairly Italian, considering the history of their football.

But Taylor's weird characterisation aside, this is an interesting quote, because it shows how divorced Villas-Boas's footballing philosophy is from the team's results. To illustrate what I mean by this, let's take a quick detour to the heart of most things football lately: Real Madrid vs. Barcelona battle. While Jose Mourinho is more than happy to do whatever it takes to win, Pep Guardiola and his player believe in playing the game a certain way, and they win as a byproduct of their style. For Mourinho, style is altered in order to win.

That's a simplistic view of the situation, of course - Guardiola will adapt in order to give his team the best possible chance of getting good results, but Barcelona are, above all things a dogmatic football club, with their way as the correct way. A win by playing in a different style simply isn't as good as a proper Barca victory. From his previous interviews, Villas-Boas seems to come across as holding views very close to Guardiola. Both managers want to win while playing beautiful football - playing to win simply isn't enough.

This, I suspect, is the main cultural element that the manager is trying to change at the club. Under Mourinho, Chelsea were built to win trophies with basically whatever worked. If that meant playing for 2-0 win after 2-0 win, fine. The three points were all that mattered, and the Blues were... well, to borrow from Andre Villas-Boas, we were an organised, well-balanced and efficient team that wanted to be champions. That culture has never been seriously challenged by post-Mourinho appointees.

Now, I personally take the Mourinho side of this argument - I want to win a lot more than I want to see pretty football, and I've been known to make quite a lot of fun of Arsenal other football teams for being so holier-than-thou about their tactics, as though you got an extra point for playing a lot of pointless passes. I like strong defending, physical play and the counterattack. Possession football is less fun for me.

However, my opinion doesn't count for much in the grand scheme of things, and it's Roman Abramovich and Andre Villas-Boas's right to reshape the team the way they see fit. I'm not entirely sure I want to live in a world where the results matter less than playing with style - that's a recipe for self-reinforcing dogma, in my view - but if Chelsea want to play entertaining football while winning everything I'm pretty cool with that.

That said, the prospect of turning into a team that uses style to excuse itself from actually winning things terrifies me, and if we do go down this path... well, we'd better bloody well win. So far, that's not happening.

I agree that the AVB comments have been taken out of context, but something doesn't add up in this blog, or atleast for me anyway. Now don't get me wrong I think we are a well-balanced, organised and effecient side, but I also think we play excellent football, arguebly the best in the league. When infact this blog suggests we just play to win, and disregard the 'type' of football we play. I disagree with this completely, I think we always look to play a slick style of football with a focus on keeping the ball and staying patient to break teams down.

No it doesn't.

Here's the bit where the blogger gives his opinion of us again, as you seem to have missed it..

The stereotype, of course, is that Serie A sides play boring, defensive football, and if that's what Villas-Boas actually meant, it would have been a deeply silly thing to say - City are a fantastic team and look poised to win the title this year. They certainly deserve to, in my opinion.

 

[Akira]

Nah, it's just his excuse. His defence is too shit to play Italian.

 

[Hart Dog]

AVB got PMT?

 

[zoffie]

I'm a Chelsea supporter. I come in peace.

What you have to remember is that Andre Villas-Boas was with Mourinho at Inter Milan for a while. He has seen Italian football up close & he is now seeing City up close & I completely agree with him.

One thing I do hate is the notion that playing like an Italian team is a negative or it somehow means you don't play good football. That is complete & utter bullshit & I don't believe he meant it that way at all.

Av-B also refuses to deviate from building a team with English style philosophy, the way Tottenham are playing. The same with Brendan Rodgers at Swansea & Guardiola. They are all dogmatic about this one style of play.

I love that Mourinho comes to England & embraces the English style. Initially he came wanting to play a diamond that he employed at Porto, built more for central passing possesion game. He learns the game here more, uses Drogba as the traditional number 9, 2 pacey wingers in Duff & Robben.. Box-to-Box midfielders.

He goes to Italy with Inter, tries to take the 4-3-3 with this, it doesn't work, he adapts to create the Italian way of playing.

Now any one that knows about Italian football knows about the thought put into building their sides. Prima Punta's trequartista's, seconda punta's, regista's, Tuttofare's.

We JUST played Napoli & they were so efficient in attack, they punished us.
What happened when Ac Milan played against Arsenal? Did Milan play boring? No.
Italian football is more about tactical intelligence, demonstrated in this Manchester City side. You have all the different roles you need in a successful side covered.

& when you have the ingredients & you set it out well, then you can achieve tactical efficiency. Boas says that WE need that. We're not functioning in attack well at the moment.

You can see with Napoli they have Hamsik, Cavani & Lavezzi as a front three.
Is it a coincidence? One is a playmaker one is a goalscorer & the other is a 2nd striker?
Kaka, Crespo, Shevchenko.. Totti, Batistuta, Montella, Messi, Eto'o, Ronaldinho..

That's the idea behind having the likes of Silva, Dzeko & Balotelli
Nasri was bought as cover to Silva as an attacking playmaker.. Aguero has become a prima for you etc. etc..

Chelsea have Mata, Torres, Sturridge to try & achieve the same attacking efficiency, but there are some tuning problems.

The big differences Boas is talking of are the principles, for instance Mancini loves a Defensive midfielder, that much is clear from his time at Inter & City, but, it's only to loose the shackles to allow more freedom for his attacking players.

The Italian philosophy is more departmental. Boas likes that Luiz attacks, he plays Bosingwa over the more defensively sound Ivanovic.

Whereas the Italian way is to think intelligently, cut & slice teams & punish them.
He wants to create a team more flamboyant, less cautious.

You look sooo Italian & when you wear that away kit of yours it's incredible, but, I personally much prefer the Italian style to Spanish teams.

 

[IH8MUFC]

... I don't like the standards of their football". "city is an italian team, they follow the italian standards."

This has come from a portugese journalist and is being retweeted by Duncan Castles which possibly carries a bit of weight?

Cheeky arrogant little freak if true

He isn't going to be around much longer to build a team anyway.<br /><br />-- Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:38 am --<br /><br />

I'm a Chelsea supporter. I come in peace.

What you have to remember is that Andre Villas-Boas was with Mourinho at Inter Milan for a while. He has seen Italian football up close & he is now seeing City up close & I completely agree with him.

One thing I do hate is the notion that playing like an Italian team is a negative or it somehow means you don't play good football. That is complete & utter bullshit & I don't believe he meant it that way at all.

Av-B also refuses to deviate from building a team with English style philosophy, the way Tottenham are playing. The same with Brendan Rodgers at Swansea & Guardiola. They are all dogmatic about this one style of play.

I love that Mourinho comes to England & embraces the English style. Initially he came wanting to play a diamond that he employed at Porto, built more for central passing possesion game. He learns the game here more, uses Drogba as the traditional number 9, 2 pacey wingers in Duff & Robben.. Box-to-Box midfielders.

He goes to Italy with Inter, tries to take the 4-3-3 with this, it doesn't work, he adapts to create the Italian way of playing.

Now any one that knows about Italian football knows about the thought put into building their sides. Prima Punta's trequartista's, seconda punta's, regista's, Tuttofare's.

We JUST played Napoli & they were so efficient in attack, they punished us.
What happened when Ac Milan played against Arsenal? Did Milan play boring? No.
Italian football is more about tactical intelligence, demonstrated in this Manchester City side. You have all the different roles you need in a successful side covered.

& when you have the ingredients & you set it out well, then you can achieve tactical efficiency. Boas says that WE need that. We're not functioning in attack well at the moment.

You can see with Napoli they have Hamsik, Cavani & Lavezzi as a front three.
Is it a coincidence? One is a playmaker one is a goalscorer & the other is a 2nd striker?
Kaka, Crespo, Shevchenko.. Totti, Batistuta, Montella, Messi, Eto'o, Ronaldinho..

That's the idea behind having the likes of Silva, Dzeko & Balotelli
Nasri was bought as cover to Silva as an attacking playmaker.. Aguero has become a prima for you etc. etc..

Chelsea have Mata, Torres, Sturridge to try & achieve the same attacking efficiency, but there are some tuning problems.

The big differences Boas is talking of are the principles, for instance Mancini loves a Defensive midfielder, that much is clear from his time at Inter & City, but, it's only to loose the shackles to allow more freedom for his attacking players.

The Italian philosophy is more departmental. Boas likes that Luiz attacks, he plays Bosingwa over the more defensively sound Ivanovic.

Whereas the Italian way is to think intelligently, cut & slice teams & punish them.
He wants to create a team more flamboyant, less cautious.

You look sooo Italian & when you wear that away kit of yours it's incredible, but, I personally much prefer the Italian style to Spanish teams.

Am I missing something? What team is more flamboyant than City in the Prem atm?

 

[malg]

... I don't like the standards of their football". "city is an italian team, they follow the italian standards."

This has come from a portugese journalist and is being retweeted by Duncan Castles which possibly carries a bit of weight?

Cheeky arrogant little freak if true

He isn't going to be around much longer to build a team anyway.

-- Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:38 am --

I'm a Chelsea supporter. I come in peace.

What you have to remember is that Andre Villas-Boas was with Mourinho at Inter Milan for a while. He has seen Italian football up close & he is now seeing City up close & I completely agree with him.

One thing I do hate is the notion that playing like an Italian team is a negative or it somehow means you don't play good football. That is complete & utter bullshit & I don't believe he meant it that way at all.

Av-B also refuses to deviate from building a team with English style philosophy, the way Tottenham are playing. The same with Brendan Rodgers at Swansea & Guardiola. They are all dogmatic about this one style of play.

I love that Mourinho comes to England & embraces the English style. Initially he came wanting to play a diamond that he employed at Porto, built more for central passing possesion game. He learns the game here more, uses Drogba as the traditional number 9, 2 pacey wingers in Duff & Robben.. Box-to-Box midfielders.

He goes to Italy with Inter, tries to take the 4-3-3 with this, it doesn't work, he adapts to create the Italian way of playing.

Now any one that knows about Italian football knows about the thought put into building their sides. Prima Punta's trequartista's, seconda punta's, regista's, Tuttofare's.

We JUST played Napoli & they were so efficient in attack, they punished us.
What happened when Ac Milan played against Arsenal? Did Milan play boring? No.
Italian football is more about tactical intelligence, demonstrated in this Manchester City side. You have all the different roles you need in a successful side covered.

& when you have the ingredients & you set it out well, then you can achieve tactical efficiency. Boas says that WE need that. We're not functioning in attack well at the moment.

You can see with Napoli they have Hamsik, Cavani & Lavezzi as a front three.
Is it a coincidence? One is a playmaker one is a goalscorer & the other is a 2nd striker?
Kaka, Crespo, Shevchenko.. Totti, Batistuta, Montella, Messi, Eto'o, Ronaldinho..

That's the idea behind having the likes of Silva, Dzeko & Balotelli
Nasri was bought as cover to Silva as an attacking playmaker.. Aguero has become a prima for you etc. etc..

Chelsea have Mata, Torres, Sturridge to try & achieve the same attacking efficiency, but there are some tuning problems.

The big differences Boas is talking of are the principles, for instance Mancini loves a Defensive midfielder, that much is clear from his time at Inter & City, but, it's only to loose the shackles to allow more freedom for his attacking players.

The Italian philosophy is more departmental. Boas likes that Luiz attacks, he plays Bosingwa over the more defensively sound Ivanovic.

Whereas the Italian way is to think intelligently, cut & slice teams & punish them.
He wants to create a team more flamboyant, less cautious.

You look sooo Italian & when you wear that away kit of yours it's incredible, but, I personally much prefer the Italian style to Spanish teams.

Am I missing something? What team is more flamboyant than City in the Prem atm?

Fucking hell,how many more times......SPURS! Come on, read a paper for fucks sake.

Oh, and people on here are going way over the top on this comment. Let's not forget that alongside the senior Chelsea players, the journo's would also love to see AVB sacked, so there's a bit of journalistic nonsense going on here.