Only just watched the Spain/Germany Quarter Final, the highlights anyway. Must have been a difficult match to edit. Ought to be some kind of exemplar.
I heard bits of it on the night as I was eating in a hotel restaurant with all my colleagues; saw odd glimpses here and there on iPhones and, as it got darker, the occasional reflection in the windows. These parts signified the whole I thought; hypnotic (maybe boring), a very untense intensity.
I think someone on Twitter evoked Satriani as the guitar equivalent of Spain's technical, virtuous/virtuoso style of football and this reminded me of discussing Hendrix years ago when a friend turned off Electric Ladyland and said: "I can't listen to this. All the notes are in the right place. No flaws; it's not music anymore." And as we talked about this, it turned out that both of us liked only the bits of Hendrix that sounded a bit wrong, a little duff and that, in fact, this wasn't our unique indie-boy spin on Hendrix but these were the bits that most people liked.
Xavi, Iniesta et al are unlovable because of their virtuosity, that kind of thing is often annoying unless you happen to like Clapton. It's why the Sex Pistols sacked Glen Matlock and brought in Sid Vicious. It's why Usain Bolt has to try hard to develop a couldn't care less appearance. It's why we liked it that Socrates of Brazil and Johan Cruyff (even Gazza) smoked fifty thousand cigarettes a day.
It might be why we hate some of our colleagues. Why people find Martin Amis difficult. Why we need Mozart and Beethoven to be a bit mental. Why Jonathan Meades gets up people's noses with all his technically proficient, brilliantly conceived artistic smut.
Spain's game is unlovable because it's not a risky game to play but it's a difficult game to play. And exhausting; the pace (of the ball) might be missing but they need a massive physical effort to force those tight triangles. The style of play makes it essential that their players are in the right places at the right times (and that others are in equally dangerous but unused positions). I'd be interested to know what the distance travelled stats for Spain are: I'd imagine most of them cover a lot of ground before the passes are made.
And therein lies the problem. If people knew they were running hard, us English would like them more I think. We like a plucky trier. We like people to look like they're putting the effort in; it's why bankers have to stay in the office 'til 8 even though they're not doing anything. The Spanish make it look easy and that's not fair.
I heard that Spain had scored via a Spanish colleague dancing a mini-flamenco while a German colleague rolled her eyes. Everyone went dead. There was a brief longeur as everyone stopped eating and expected the old spectre: "Yeah but you can't ever rule out the Germans."
But no one said anything. It was a weird moment. No one believed that Germany would draw level. We hadn't discussed this but we didn't need to: it didn't seem possible.
A bit later, I thought about this, trying to figure out why people were reacting to the German team in such a way. This was the Germans, after all. And then it hit me: no one believes that Germany will pull one back because no one really believes that this is Germany. This German team seemed altogether less methodical and efficient (despite those terms still being applied by plenty of the TV Commentary teams), playing faster and looser and with various associated flaws. England and Argentina weren't comprehensively outplayed by Germany; they were sucker punched and then awe-struck. The Germans looked vulnerable at the back and suffered a lack of quality, game-changing, substitutes. In this way, the Germans were like England and Argentina; very beatable, only potentially wondrous. What if a team does stop Ozil? What if Schweinsteiger can't control the game? What if Muller was suspended? Well, you see where I'm going with this.
The Germans are an interestingly, excitingly flawed team; the team we love to love. The plucky (skillful) triers. This German team is part of a reinvention of German football that began, I think, at the last World Cup, where a less skillful team of plucky triers did well in spite of (because of?) their lack of star talent. Maybe they've always been plucky triers and we've only just noticed. Some awful collective amnesia has only made us think they were ever this ruthless, mechanised Will to win because... well, you know, I shouldn't have to spell it out... because of the...
In other words, could the Samba ever not have come from Brazil?
Anyway, it's these imperfections that we love and hate, in equal measure. Germans kick and rush, Mr Beckenbauer. All the teams we like do, a little. The rush bit is essential to our positive feelings. If only we could look at Spain and see the rush... But we can't. We're following the ball. And it seems to be moving so slowly...
The tick tock of Spain's passing, the grinding boot of The Netherlands +5% style are coming at us, taking over... Mark is right when he said on Twitter that the final, "looks so boring on paper that it might turn out to be a good match..."
That was quite a brilliant characterisation of how Germany have come across. I wonder though if we should just go ahead and change the name of this blog to "Fuck Spain".
ReplyDeleteWell, I like them. So there.
They remind me a bit of Italy 06, actually. Packed with talent, but just a little past their peak, with key players returning from injury (Totti/Torres), and having to keep themselves in check, as it were. But always doing enough to win.
Two bold predictions: it won't be a boring final and Spain will win it in relative comfort. The real final was the game versus Germany.
'I wonder though if we should just go ahead and change the name of this blog to "Fuck Spain".'
ReplyDeleteGenuine lol, as the kids say.
Loki - I agree with what you're saying about Germany. The old (machine) Germany retired with Bierhoff - then for about five years they were fairly scrappy, limited workhorses. With the knack of doing well in (most) tournaments. And *then* this team emerged...
I think the 'interregnum' Germany was an interesting team - recovering from the dismal failure of 2000, everything changing feverishly behind the scenes, but the outward appearance staying intact (as they marched to finals and had pundits reaching for the cliches).
England, by contrast, had a crop of genuinely talented players emerge after 2000, and look where the fuck that got us.
"Fuck Spain" LOL... I don't hate Spain, as such, I just hate the press and Spain... (likewise Brazil)... the way the british press venerate possession per se as some kind of golden ticket... it's disrespectful to other, equally effective forms of play and has had a destablising effect on English players... despite not having the players to play like Spain, England seems torn between their natural instincts (not always good, I'll admit) and the need to be like Spain... it's in this middle ground that England has lost it's way...
ReplyDeleteAren’t the ‘Fuck Spain’ brigade on this blog, who so despise the press coverage of Spain, buying into the same bullshit as that projected image?
ReplyDeleteI think what makes Spain likeable, very likeable, is that in most circumstances their players and tactics would be dismissed in England. Mark Lawrenson stated that Capdevila was “not very good” because he doesn’t play for Real or Barca. Ramos is dismissed in Champions League coverage as unable to defend; Puyol can ‘be got at’, Casillas is out of form, the venerated Torres playing fairly badly, Xavi would be asphyxiated in a premiership environment, not to mention a forward line made up entirely of tiny trequartistas.
Add to this the premiership sin of – horror – two defensive midfielders (recently employed by cold fish eccentric Benitez), zonal marking, the slow building pressure building with ‘no cutting edge’, moving forward as a team even if this requires slowing the pace, and in any other circumstances the press would destroy this team. Spain are destroying premiership dogma . . .
Spain are chasing the Platonic form without even realising it, because even when pragmatic steps are taken (aforementioned two holding midfielders) then end up at the same point – endless intricate passing to create a perfect moment, the culmination of constant movement. This is irrespective of whether they win 1 – 0, or fail to include the elements of risk and randomness demanded by impartial viewers, they are chasing ideals – and what can more likable than that? Wouldn’t you rather watch football played by flawed idealists and Utopians?
They are not dominance comparable to a Federer, this is their first world cup final do not forget. Plus they hold everything that is held to be likeable elsewhere (apart from the fact they are not underdogs): team ethic, lack of ego, the sheer physical hard work that goes into their style, the fact they have an identity as a team (beyond nationalism), that the squad is actually employed to effect (see the decisive impacts of Llorente, Pedro and Navas), that regional identities are transcended (Basque, Catalan, Andalucian, Madrid) . . . [they even have individual characters for the modern age: Captain caveman, a winger who until recently could not even leave his hometown, a sex addict]
What makes Germany so appealing? What makes them so exciting? Since their loss to England that kick-started a restructuring ten years ago, and following their defeat to Spain in the Euros, they are fundamentally adapting and changing their assigned identity. They’re combining English, Germany and Spanish football – they don’t care whether Spain are lovable, because they are learning from them, consider them a similar endpoint, suddenly awakened to the possibility of idealism. German are changing their instincts.
Incidentally some commentators are saying that all that Germany lacked were ‘ball playing’ centre backs to launch more effective counter attacks and control more possession – the next stage in their development, one step from a new form?
[NB: What have England learnt? On this very blog Germany are venerated for their adaptations while England as assumed to be trapped between their ‘instincts’ and trying to play like Spain – isn’t there friction/contradiction in that?]
Aren’t the ‘Fuck Spain’ brigade on this blog, who so despise the press coverage of Spain, buying into the same bullshit as that projected image?
ReplyDeleteI think what makes Spain likeable, very likeable, is that in most circumstances their players and tactics would be dismissed in England. Mark Lawrenson stated that Capdevila was “not very good” because he doesn’t play for Real or Barca. Ramos is dismissed in Champions League coverage as unable to defend; Puyol can ‘be got at’, Casillas is out of form, the venerated Torres playing fairly badly, Xavi would be asphyxiated in a premiership environment, not to mention a forward line made up entirely of tiny trequartistas.
Add to this the premiership sin of – horror – two defensive midfielders (recently employed by cold fish eccentric Benitez), zonal marking, the slow building pressure building with ‘no cutting edge’, moving forward as a team even if this requires slowing the pace, and in any other circumstances the press would destroy this team. Spain are destroying premiership dogma . . .
Spain are chasing the Platonic form without even realising it, because even when pragmatic steps are taken (aforementioned two holding midfielders) then end up at the same point – endless intricate passing to create a perfect moment, the culmination of constant movement. This is irrespective of whether they win 1 – 0, or fail to include the elements of risk and randomness demanded by impartial viewers, they are chasing ideals – and what can more likable than that? Wouldn’t you rather watch football played by flawed idealists and Utopians?
They are not dominance comparable to a Federer, this is their first world cup final do not forget. Plus they hold everything that is held to be likeable elsewhere (apart from the fact they are not underdogs): team ethic, lack of ego, the sheer physical hard work that goes into their style, the fact they have an identity as a team (beyond nationalism), that the squad is actually employed to effect (see the decisive impacts of Llorente, Pedro and Navas), that regional identities are transcended (Basque, Catalan, Andalucian, Madrid) . . . [they even have individual characters for the modern age: Captain caveman, a winger who until recently could not even leave his hometown, a sex addict]
What makes Germany so appealing? What makes them so exciting? Since their loss to England that kick-started a restructuring ten years ago, and following their defeat to Spain in the Euros, they are fundamentally adapting and changing their assigned identity. They’re combining English, Germany and Spanish football – they don’t care whether Spain are lovable, because they are learning from them, consider them a similar endpoint, suddenly awakened to the possibility of idealism. German are changing their instincts.
Incidentally some commentators are saying that all that Germany lacked were ‘ball playing’ centre backs to launch more effective counter attacks and control more possession – the next stage in their development, one step from a new form?
[NB: What have England learnt? On this very blog Germany are venerated for their adaptations while England as assumed to be trapped between their ‘instincts’ and trying to play like Spain – isn’t there friction/contradiction in that?]
I completely disagree with the basic premise of this post. Virtuosity is not necessarily boring. It's on the basis of that sort of argument that so many people (including you) prefer Hendrix to Clapton. But I think this is only the case if you're not really listening. They're both great for slighlty different reasons. Clapton is more technical, Hendrix is more exciting, but they both convey great skill and emotion if you pay attention.
ReplyDeleteSpain aren't boring at all. What's boring about skill and strategy? This sort of thing is only dull if all you want is goals (or loud, fast cliche filled guitar solos). 'It's all about goals' is a very English attitude. It's what Arsenal used to get stick for - playing in the European style rather than 'kicking and rushing'. Oh and by the way, Matlock wrote all the decent Pistols songs. After they sacked him they really were complete crap. Remind me what was good about Sid Vicious, exactly?
Excellent post and comments.
ReplyDeletePerhaps we like a flawed team is because we feel we can help/participate. The shortcomings and deficiencies can all be overcome by our support and well wishes. If we get behind this young German team we can be the extra % that enables them to prosper.
Spain, in their technical proficiency and tactical rigidity don't offer us this opportunity. Not only that, when things are going wrong we can't effect change. Passionate shouts of 'attack, attack, attack' will still be met only with tip-tap, tip-tap. The system is immutable. So why are we here?
A nagging thought unfortunately is that it's resentment based on the premise that when you acknowledge that 'yes, Spain/Barca are the ideal/perfect', everything else is ruined. How can you support Man United over Barcelona in the Champions League final? It can't be justified. The fact that something like support even *needs* to be justified rankles. Why won't they take their supporter owned, Unicef donating, locality based resourcing perfection and piss off and let us get back to being acceptably compromised. We can't all be Catalan. Sigh.
Agree about the immutability of the system.
ReplyDeletePeople say 'Spain have to play patiently because opponents sit back against them now.'
But when opponents don't sit back - like ten-man Chile - Spain don't suddenly explode into life. They just keep up the same meandering in midfield.
If you're not bothered about making chances and scoring goals, it can cost you, as they found out against Suisse - another game that that they 'controlled'.
But what the hell. They don't stick with this style because it's guaranteed to win them games. They don't do it because it's guaranteed to please the crowd. It's just their system and they're not going to change it.
I don't think that 'the only reason to dislike them is that they're too perfect'. Or, for that matter, that if you don't like Spain you're a simpleton who just wants kick and rush and goals goals goals.
The 'Fuck Spain Brigade' (which is basically me, Mark, and sometimes Giovanni, and even then none of us really hate Spain, we just have our reservations) have set out our arguments elsewhere.
but what does 'explode into life' mean in this context? They scored on the counter, they scored a crafted goal, they won 3-0. What is it you want?
ReplyDeletePlaying at slow tempo does not make your midfield meandering - isn't this about our mentality more than theirs?
Also, Switzerland didn't sit back and then counter attack aginst Spain as an ingenious tactical plan, Switzerland also have only one way of playing - defend admirably and try and sneak a goal - as they have proved throughout the last 6 years, resulting in the dullest game in a world cup in my lifetime (vs Ukraine in the last tournament).
They haven't won any game in this tournament 3-0.
ReplyDeleteI'm not necessarily expecting Spain to 'explode into life'. Okay, maybe I would like to see them press their advantage more, put their possession to better use - that's what we saw from Spain two years ago. Otherwise they are vulnerable to uberdefensive teams like Suisse grabbing the odd goal. Germany could have done the same the other night.
My point about the Chile game was that you can't blame the style of the opposition for the attitude Spain bring to games. They've played the same game against everyone.
Yeah - 'meandering' may have been the wrong word. But really - slow build-up play that doesn't build up to anything in particular (Chile had the same number of shots on goal). Tiring-out play that leaves the other team (even a man down) fit enough to successfully counter-attack. Sure, Spain won the game, but I don't think that match stands as a ringing vindication of their slow-tempo game.
From the newest post - 'Frankly, if they ever faced a side who took them on rather than sitting eight men behind the ball, we may see a more overtly attacking Spain.'
ReplyDeleteThey have, we didn't.
Well, I'm not really a Spain hater as such... I just happened to mention they were a little unlovable... It's definitely an attritional style which has been emphasised by the out of sorts Torres; he gives them a quicker out when he's fully fit, allows them to change the pace a little... that slow slow quick quick style IS very attractive... the slow slow slow slow slow style less so... still, I hope they don't win because England'll try and copy the style even more and we'll be terrible at it...
ReplyDeletezeno144 - you're right; What have England Learnt? is the key question. I'm just worried that they'll see the answer in a victorious Spain rather than the beaten Germany, whereas I think Germany (even Holland) might be a better model...
But Mif...
1) Virtuosity is not necessarily boring, no. But this kind is. And the Clapton kind. And the Hendrix kind. I AM listening...
2) Yeah, I think the rushing is important; I like my football rushed... It's why I never really liked watching the Italian Leagues when they used to be on... though it made for a nice Sunday snooze... The 'Kick and Rush' slight ought to be reimagined as a compliment...
3) Arsenal weren't criticised for that when they were winning because then they did have a directness... it's when they lost that directness that they got criticised; it's kinda inherent to at least try and score some more goals than the opposition...
4) Yes, OF COURSE Matlock wrote most of the songs. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT! He was sacked because the Pistols weren't ever about being good at ROCK; his virtuosity was ruining it, making it too close to the bands they were trying to destablise and break away from (and his rock was a little tired and tight and not too different from the pub rock of the time - contrast the later PIL, for instance...)
Sid's obvious lack of talent was perfect for the band and far more influential; you could argue that he (perhaps accidentally - the guy was clearly an arse) kick-started all the Punk / New Wave / LoFi thing... people must have looked at him and thought: "Well, if HE can do it..."
So in a nutshell what you're saying is - we need a footballpunk to overthrow Spain's Prog noodling?
ReplyDeleteYes please...
(Or maybe we should go straight to the postpunk era - what would that be like?)
Zeno
ReplyDeleteGood points about going against the premiership , but my objection to Spain isn't purely a reaction to the pundit consensus. To carry on the punk theme, the problem is boredom, boredom ...
The point about England learning is that, as I tried to argue on k-punk the other day, unlike in Germany, there is no infrastructure that could learn.
But the problem with Spain is that, as exemplified in Ibrahimovich's/Barca's Plan B failure, there's nothing *constructive* to be learned. At this stage, considering the intricate details that make up the cultural identity of Spain's/Barca's players (see Fabregas still being a 'Barcelona player' despite leaving at 16 to a club as progressive as Arsenal) it's almost down to a genetic code at this stage (emphasized by all the players' strikingly similar physicality).
ReplyDeleteLike Hendrix, all we can learn is that, yes, due to certain unique conditions you have resulted in being exceptional. This can't be translated to an improvement of infrastructure or an adoption of a learning method, merely an admiration of quality and a horribly fatalistic sort of recognition of fundamental inferiority.
I can safely say I wasn't anticipating having to link to this in a discussion on this blog. But link to it I must.
ReplyDeleteYes, after realising I was getting a bit muddled, decided to start/keep it to a blog, where it is still muddled but hopefully it will improve. Not much there and basic but if anyone wants, do click through. My last thoughts on the Spain/Barca issue is in my first post:
ReplyDeleteIt is this limited possibility for change from Barcelona that displeases me most, both in those that encounter them and Barca themselves. While I would like to see myself predisposed to wanting a 'proper' club like them to prosper, I find myself hoping for a challenger. But what if they never decline? What if they just keep producing interchangeable 5'7" tippy-tappy players for 20 years (Which one's Pedro? I thought that was Busquets? Is that Xavi or Iniesta)? This thought is far more depressing than, say, thinking that Real Madrid may never decline. Even with Real being permanently dominant I know there will be variety. Managers will come and go, imposing their particular style, new players purchased bringing difference and possibilities.
Anyway, great blog, cheers
Conor