In an article I wrote earlier this season, I discussed some comments put forward by Chelsea midfielder Florent Malouda (at a time when Chelsea were absolutely destroying every team that came before them). In short, Malouda expressed dismay at the fact that his side weren’t receiving sufficient praise for their style of football at the time, with commentators and pundits instead choosing to shower Arsenal (and to a lesser extent, Manchester United) with adulation.
Before I go any further, I would like to stress and underline a few important points:
1) I enjoy watching Barcelona, Arsenal and Spain as much as the next person.
2) I am not a close-minded xenophobe who refuses to accept other football cultures or styles.
The proliferation of internet live streaming sites, in conjunction with the growth of the blogosphere, means that access to football and football opinion is greater than ever.
However, this increased access means that theories propounded gain greater currency and become more widespread.
One prominent opinion that is commonly espoused amongst commentators and fans is that a combination of short passing and attacking football is synonymous with purism, and that other styles or brands of football are lesser or not the ‘right way’ to play the game.
In some cases, styles of football preferred and employed by figures such Jose Mourinho and Tony Pulis are mockingly derided as ‘anti-football’.
After losing to Ipswich Town in January, Arsenal captain Cesc Fabregas expressed dismay at the way his opponents had played, he said:
“I don’t know if it is long ball or it is a rugby kick but it worked for them. In England, a lot of teams play like that and it works for them, they create chances like that and it is their football. We just have to put the ball on the floor and try to play football. Credit to them because they played well but Arsenal played the football, the other team refused to play football, they were lucky to score with a long ball.”
This snobbery is not limited to figures within the domestic game. Speaking to The Guardian earlier this year, Barcelona and Spain midfielder Xavi discussed his thoughts on the English game:
“You watch Liverpool and Carragher wins the ball and boots it into the stands and the fans applaud. There’s a roar! They’d never applaud that here.”
Xavi is a clearly an exemplary footballer, and comes across as a thoughtful and articulate man. However, comments such as these serve to reinforce foreign stereotypes of ‘the English game’ and add further credibility to the notion that short-passing-based, ‘tiki-taka’-style football is the ‘right way’ to play the game.
Continue Reading on Page 2 . . .
I understand the intent of your article but I do have to agree with Xavi about Carra because it has bothered me for some time how many times Carra gives the ball away because he is not willing to get the ball up field to another of our players. He could learn from Agger but perhaps it is too late for him. Not all English football is boot it to the stands and you will never find me clapping and yelling for Carra when he boots to the stands. NEVER! ENOUGH NOW CARRA! Look how many chances we lose each match to score goals! And, how many more chances the opposition has to score on us.
hey man that is liverpool way and carra way and its best for us liver fan for barca player its bad luck so pole (sorry) xavi and all fan like so called beutiful pass pass pass style
i am a liverpool supporter but before that, i am a football lover and the reason i started following football was not to see players hoofing the ball up the field.. there’s a reason why its called “the beautiful game”…
if it was just about which team wins the most, then all people in the world wud support manure or chelski..
Yes. Carra has been a great servant for the club, but he’s a liability when he gets the ball. For a thinking player, when is he going to realise that his long hoof forward usually results in giving the ball away.