Time to stop 11 men in the box?

[Akira]

Nope. Defending this way is in fact how some underdog teams even nick 3 points off top sides. It's boring and frustrating to watch especially if your team is the one attacking, but this is football. Probably bothers us more because we are heavily countered by it.

Team A sets-up team to overwhelm opponent's box, Team B responds by defending with 11 men in the box, it's Team A's job and turn to respond.

 

[Cellarite]

Imagine the laughter on here if it was Rawk suggesting a rule change because Liverpool lost a game?

 

[Windrush48]

For me the pitch needs to be made bigger and the penalty area smaller. Blanket defence and getting it to a couple pace babies on the break just so much easier and more effective to set up. Footballers much fitter than years ago with Leicester and Liverpool style "supplements", it's easier than ever to control the game with having none of the ball.
Even peak Barca with Messi/Xavi/Iniesta couldn't create against Chelsea's wall. Every time they try to change to a more expansive style it's a shambles, appoint another defence-first manager an win something in short order.

I’ve said this before and got totally shot down, but here goes again: the goals should be bigger.

When the original rules of football were drawn up I think the width of the goal was three average men lay down end to end. Not sure about the height, but if I’m remembering correctly there wasn’t a crossbar for the first few years, just string.

I bet back then an average man was what, 5ft 7, 5ft 8”. What is it now five 11, maybe six foot.

I think FIFA/Eufa have tried to change the game, get more goals, specifically modern technologies changing the ball from the past (was it the South Africa World Cup that showed this, but it backfired, every free kick flew miles and miles but way over the bar).

I think now is the time to bite the bullet and redefine the goal size based on an average man of this generation.

Of course, the problem would be this: every school, every park would have to do likewise, but that could happen over several years. We already have different rules for different levels of the game, e.g. VAR in the Prem, but not Sunday morning leagues.

 

[Vicious111]

Nope. How would you regulate it? It's the beauty of football. Every team plays to their strengths against the opposition. Defending, done well, is a thing of beauty.

And anyway, max 5 Defenders in the box means 5 other players somewhere else on the pitch. You wouldn't leave them free so less forwards in the box.

Again, I don't want to take away from Chelsea as they were brilliant defensively.

But more and more we see teams not playing to win. They just want to sit back and get a point and play boring football. Obviously smaller teams are more likely to do this, but it seems to be more and more common for teams to play like this and it utterly kills any joy from a game. Look at some of the 0-0 draws when Moanrinho parks the bus.

So the question is, is the result more important than the excitement of a match? And it seems to be the go-to tactics for many teams these days.

For example, removing the offside rule when there are no players in the opposition half might work.

 

[Grealish’s Shinpads]

This thread feels a bit scouse. Also, whilst it is super boring watching teams sit deep, they would just line up right outside of the box instead so can’t see how a rule change like that would stamp out park the bus football

 

[Drubas]

Probably comes across as sour grapes after last night, but surely it can't be good for the future of football to just have teams sit 10 men in the box for the full game in the aim of getting a point?

We make many changes to make the game flow better like the offside rule or no passbacks. Is it time to introduce a minimum players in the box rule?

We see it more and more, teams sitting sitting deep and it turns the game into a shitfest and kills any excitement. Obviously as a City fan it would benefit us and not lesser teams, but surely as a football fan such a rule would improve the excitement of the game?

I grew up watching a lot of Italian football, and it's still common practice to be very defensive minded about how many players are behind the ball. As soon as there is a ball "behind" your players, even if it's out on the wing, the whole team will drop.

When lesser teams plays the good teams, it's been common practice to just ignore the "mid block" formation and go directly to the low block.

For a long period of time, when Milan/Juventus got the ball, they used to just stroll up the pitch, to the meat wall that was assembled in the opponents box. Opponents didn't even bother to try. Kind of like hand ball.

It's nothing new, and I can't remember a manager that has been better at penetrating low blocks than Guardiola. And city is arguably the best team ever at it. So I'm not sure I agree with your assessment.

 

[waspish]

Don’t get it Pep best manager ever comes up against park busses regular and wins, but when he comes up against one that has the quality of Chelsea and you’ve been beaten a few times it’s time to think hey let’s sit back don’t over commit let the opposition have the ball hit them on the break..

 

[Windrush48]

Nope. How would you regulate it? It's the beauty of football. Every team plays to their strengths against the opposition. Defending, done well, is a thing of beauty.

And anyway, max 5 Defenders in the box means 5 other players somewhere else on the pitch. You wouldn't leave them free so less forwards in the box.

Perhaps something similar to goalline technology could be used. Each player has to wear a bracelet thing and the 6th person who tries to get into the box when 5 are already there gets a (mild) electric shock or something.

 

[Long Slow Goodbye]

For me the pitch needs to be made bigger and the penalty area smaller. Blanket defence and getting it to a couple pace babies on the break just so much easier and more effective to set up. Footballers much fitter than years ago with Leicester and Liverpool style "supplements", it's easier than ever to control the game with having none of the ball.
Even peak Barca with Messi/Xavi/Iniesta couldn't create against Chelsea's wall. Every time they try to change to a more expansive style it's a shambles, appoint another defence-first manager an win something in short order.

Peak Barca Messi/Xavi/Iniesta were the most doped team football has ever seen - Messi without growth hormone would be 5’2 working as a mechanic in Rosario.

Probably comes across as sour grapes after last night, but surely it can't be good for the future of football to just have teams sit 10 men in the box for the full game in the aim of getting a point?

We make many changes to make the game flow better like the offside rule or no passbacks. Is it time to introduce a minimum players in the box rule?

We see it more and more, teams sitting sitting deep and it turns the game into a shitfest and kills any excitement. Obviously as a City fan it would benefit us and not lesser teams, but surely as a football fan such a rule would improve the excitement of the game?

You can’t tell teams how to play, especially given the disparity in resources in modern football.

The solution to low blocks is natural width and crosses, legitimate centre-forwards to play off and fast transitions/switches of play. If Pep opts to have his teams make 5 passes to get the ball to where 2 would suffice, it’s not the opposition’s problem.

A front 3 of Foden-Torres-Sterling with De Bruyne and Gundogan supporting would have give us a better chance of scoring than the nonsense he fielded last night.

 

[Goater=Legend]

Also we've been there, does the OP forget the way we played against Chelsea with KK in charge?