Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: [NTU21]Woody
ptolemeoss to
Woody
Δοκιμασα την τακτικη του Ρουμανου στο αρκειντ. Το 8 - 0 - 2. Ηταν πραγματικα πολυ καλη! Στο β΄ημιχρονο εκανα 2 αλλαγες και εβαλα 2 μεσους. Η αποδοση της ομαδας επεσε. Το μειονεκτιμα ομως ειναι οτι χανεις την προπονηση. Αν το εκανα αυτο σε φιλικο ή επισημο αγωνα, οι επιθετικοι θα παρουν προπονηση; Αν στο κεντρο βαλω 3 αμυντικους με εντολη μεσων θα εχει τοσο καλα αποτελεσματα η τακτικη;
You will lose training, that is also way way low... is not like you lose this will be a disgrace according to polish users that was friend of mine... but cristidinu put in def order because his defenders have low playmaking and pass, so in DEF order he will pass more quickly this ball, if he put defenders is MID order, he will take more time to pass the ball and also in DEF order the players is more agressive ot try to defend.
About România's ''8-0-2'', i talk some months before about it in the international forum in this text...
Deep analysis: What made cristidinu special in this U21 World Cup?
By Woody
Note: This text has both a historical part and an analysis on my part, whether you agree or not with what is written here, speak in a respectful way because the idea here is to show how I think it was the way of thinking of cristidinu accordingly with the pieces he had available and the opponents he faced. If you want to translate this text for you community, give a message in private and i give to you the text if you want...
And the last U21World Cup Final in the flash era happened and the result was an overwhelming victory for Romania against Czech Republic by 3-0, with that Romania wins the U21 World Cup for the third time in its history and is now the second biggest winner of the competition only losing to Poland.
For this U21 World Cup, the Romanian community didn’t think twice about the name, former World Champion with România in the past, cristidinu was the option to try to build a job that would make the Romanian community able to taste the gold trophy for the U21 supporters, something they didn’t celebrate since 2015.
If like me, you after the match went to look at the individual marks of România's team, you were probably a little amazed, 8 players in DEF order in România, what is the reason cristidinu did that? The first time in the U21 World Cup final a team using more than the ''limit is allowed'' in a position, since if you put more players in a role than is due according to the game, they give you a warning, to you check your ''setup'', but according to cristidinu, he had a reason to use this:
''I use 8 defenders because the former coach did not care about your new generation of midfielders... all midfielders are without technique, so I prefered to play with 8 defenders, and they were very effective in the middle of the field most of the times.''
As cristidinu said, when he became the coach, the new generation had a giant problem in the midfield position, without so many good options, he basically try to find ways to be effective, but different than you might think, cristidinu did not use 8 players in DEF order in the entire competition, this happened only in the final, but throughout his campaign, cristidinu used many formations and even when he used similar formations, they were not entirely the same as a player could be in a different order.
But first, we have to know what cristidinu was like when he win his 1st U21 World Cup 5 years ago, cristidinu is an adherent of the Romanian school of tactics, a game model that was used for Romania win 2 World Cups in a row with vacarul and cristidinu as coaches in the past, the style was focused on strengthening the center, controlling the game, be dynamic to be effective in both attack and defense and be often creating a numerical superiority, which was the case of the tactic used in question (diamond 4-4-2). Since most of the teams using that time a 532, the numerical superiority of the midfielders created an imbalance against the opponent and this gave Romania control of the match most of the time. His 1st U21 World Cup was a sucess since he win, but his 2nd U21 World Cup was not good, eliminating in the group stage after be in a group with Hungary, Perú and Finland, cristidinu trying to use variations with a winger, but 2 losses in group stage make România be eliminated and since that, he never coach another U21 team, basically making it not part of the beginning of Woodyrianism and the creation of the Czech school of tactics that were 2 impacting schools for changing the way of tactically seeing the U21 teams in sokker.
After coming back, his 1st match was a loss to Austria after he try to using a diamond 4-4-2 that make he be the number 1 coach in the past, after this, cristidinu sought various formations and this made him evolve a lot, not only with formations, but think the game as more than put players in a specific part of pitch, that is the order of the players, as we will show now in a lot of pics that is the tactics he used in all matches in the U21WC.
As we can see, during the U21 World Cup, he use more of times a central 5-3-2 and a 4-3-1-2 with a winger, we can see that after the draw 0-0 against Poland, cristidinu change the way he play with your midfielders and make that a mark of his tactics during the U21 World Cup... if we watch cristidinu's team on field, we need to put in our mind that his game plan like was on past, cristidinu prefers a strengthened team mainly in the central part of the field, always looking for numerical superiority to be able to control this area, not only thinking offensively, but defensively a line of 3 midfielders helps to reduce spaces in the center for long passes... against Poland he try a 5-3-2 with a winger and he probably realized that only 2 players to protect and seek action in the center against 3 polish players was suicide.
Despite having used several formations, we have to take into account that this was part of cristidinu's game plan, despite different formations in specific matches, his game basically did not change because the objective was always the same, in this case it was to strengthen the midfield and use depth to your advantage, if the generation of midfielders was not the best, it is clear that the defenders generation was very good, and that gave him freedom to be more aggressive in the depth of his defenders, making the team become more compact and eliminate a good amount of spaces from the opponent. He made the tactics according to your opponent, when the opponent used a winger, cristidinu preferred to use a central 5-3-2, he preferred to sacrifice the breadth of having a winger to protect himself more in defense and have the advantage of play with 3 midfielders in the centre giving most of the times a numerical superiority, but is a mistake who thinks that his 5-3-2 was a defensive strategy, cristidinu is a coach who has a mentality of eliminating all possible spaces of the opponent to make sure that the ball is always in the defensive area of the rival and this is proven in statistics... Romania during the U21 World Cup always made the ball more in the area of his rivals more than 60% in the matches, the only match that did not happen was against Poland because he was unable to introduce his style of play:
Play in the half during the U21 World Cup by România opponents:
Poland - 52%
Finland (group stage/semifinals) - 71% / 62%
Venezuela - 62%
Croatia - 67%
Bulgaria - 73%
Czech Republic - 67%
This made Romania a goal machine during the season, scoring 20 goals during the U21 World Cup... Also, different what i write in my book Manual to be a U21 coach and the Woodyrianism, that I gave my personal opinion about 5-3-2 being the tactic of the lazy in U21, this is true in my opinion when the tactic has no dynamics in the positioning especially of the 3 midfielders and attempts to create spaces, and cristidinu's 5-3-2 is quite the opposite of that, in his 5-3-2 he used depth very well to eliminate spaces, and knew how to use the width of his midfielders well, the 2 midfielders who played closer to the sides at certain times were going more to the side of the field to create a width and thus create a space to be created... Although the tactic I most liked to see was his 4-3-1-2 with a winger, he was able to have a better use of the width and still use the 3 midfielders in the center very well.
Most of the opponents, Romania dominated the match and the line of 3 midfielders worked very well, probably the match that was more problem for cristidinu was the semi-finals against Finland, since theKarsten used a 5-3-1-1 with a winger, to eliminate Romania's numerical superiority in the midfield and break cristidinu's strategy since he probably didn't expect Finland to use winger and therefore used 4-3-1-2.... although the Finnish goalkeeper had to make a lot of saves, Finland was very dangerous when he managed to fit his offensive plan.
But back to the subject, according to cristidinu, he actually used defenders as midfielders against Czech Republic, according to him, the reason was because his midfielders was not good enough to play it that role. The defenders that was used was Gabi Copită, Rareş Matei Cocei and Cristel Oraşan. But during the U21 World Cup, these 3 players were sometimes important in different roles in the field... Copită and Cocei play most of the matches as defenders in a line of 5 or 4 that cristinidu using during the competition, Oraşan in other hand, most of times he was used as the midfielder in the centre with DEF order, but he also play as a defender in the 5-line that cristidinu using against Bulgaria, one of the midfielders that were well used by cristidinu during the World Cup was Dacian Iorga (12 pace, 10 technique, 15 passing, 9 defender, 17 playmaking), although he was not fast and did not have a high skill in technique, he was a midfielder with a top skills in passing / playmaker for U21 level, but since he was injured and could not be used, which we can take into consideration for the different choice from cristidinu was that he thought it necessary to play in a 5-3-2 since Czech Republic play with a winger, but that at the same time as probably Iorga should be the best midfiedler of the generation, the other options were not good enough to do the job as Iorga did, so if he wanted to make the ball stay longer in his rival’s territory, the only solution would be to place quick defenders to steal the ball as quickly as possible to prevent the situation from going to the Czech Republic, but put these players as MID order, it would probably make the Romanian game too slow since they were not really midfielders, but defenders, according to cristidinu, that was the skill of Cocei and Oraşan in passing and playmaker:
Cocei - good [7] playmaker and very good [9] passing
Oraşan - very good [9] playmaker and outstanding [12] passing
According to Clau_Goool (A veteran in the Romanian community and owner of Copită), he agreed to show all skills of your player, Copită in case is a classic U21 defender with some secoundary skills (14 pace, 7 technique, 11 passing, 16 defender, 7 playmaking), basically the line of 3 midfielders in DEF order by România was used with players like that, not good enough in technique, passing and playmaker, but with a large skill in defense, to be able to stole the ball, also since they have a decent level in passing for a U21, they was not defenders that shoot the ball randomly, managing to pass the ball between themselves and strikers, with a DEF order, the low playmaking it was not a giant problem and it helped to stabilize things for cristidinu's game plan.
Also, Clau_Goool told that this strategy was used in the past by România in NT level:
''We had another manager who tried it at NT level and won the first gold medal into the Senior team at that time. History re-written.''
Clau_Goool refers to a romanian coach called anaconda who in the past was champion with România at NT level using most of times squads with 6-7 players in DEF order, if cristidinu remembered this and sought to re-create that idea of the past for the final against Czech Republic, we will only know if we ask him, but using many players in a certain position is something that the Romanians have done in the past and returned to use thanks to a problematic situation that cristidinu had in his hand, he himself describes that he did not believe that it would be possible to be champion with this team in his words in the Romanian forum:
''When I took over the U21 team and analyzed the generation, without accusing the former coach, I was simply scared and the idea came up that this generation did not have the slightest chance of being a champion and I could only laugh at the situation that I had in my hands... ''
The romanian coach describes also in the romanian forum that a lot of players was not good well trained, with a lot of midfielders with 9 in technique and 17 in playmaking, becoming useless to use... so the idea to using 3 defenders could be risk, but it worked, Romania dominated the match and had many opportunities to score goals, a 3-0 that each defender give a assist... Romania played well specially because they limited spaces to Czech Republic especially for the beginning of an attempt at something since the Czechs who preferred to use a 4-1-2-1-2, had problems with this midfielder alone in the back to find spaces to pass the ball for the 2 midfielders in the front since the line of 3 romanian ''mid-defenders'' blocking routes for passing and the depth of the Romanian team often hindered the game's continuation with a lot of offsides, many of the Czech Republic's best chances were when they managed to break the first Romanian line and so winger using his speed to create opportunities for the 2 strikers.
As the Czech Republic did not use depth in its defense (probably because it did not have defenders capable of doing this), Romania had plenty of room for the 3 mid-defenders to create a game and then give a pass near to the area for the striker be able to shoot, which proved to be very effective because as the defenders did not press this line of 3 mid-defenders and Czech Republic it had a numerical inferiority in the middle because most of the time, even when the 2 more forward midfields came back to help the defense, since Czech Republic number 8 Písek that was playing in DEF order but a bit more forward, but in defende he play basically as a extra centre defender to help more in the area the line of 4-defenders, Romania got what it wanted in its game plan, which was to dominate the center of the field with a numerical superiority of 3 vs 2 most of the times, even with the 3 mid-defenders lack good skills in technique and playmaking, cristidinu made them play more open at certain times to create more spaces and also to make them have enough time to pass that ball and not lose possesion.
When the team lose the ball, the strategy was basically pressure, trying to steal the ball immediately after the loss, so cristidinu positioned the players very close at certain times to create that pressure, especially the 3 mid-defenders when a striker or a mid-defender loses the ball, since a U21 defender does not have a high level in technique, the chances to a real defender stole this ball is pretty high and and this could create a counterattack at a problematic time for the Czech Republic, since the defense would not be fully organized.
Since romanian defenders probably have good skills in passing the ball, just a few times Romania gave throw-ins to the Czech Republic, thus avoiding a chance of the rival in a aerial duel in the area and forcing them to have to go to the goal building a play in front of all the barricades that the Romanian team placed in the field.
As cristidinu says: ''It was risky, but the result says i made the right decision'', I say I probably wouldn't have done the same thing, that's why I respect cristidinu, because despite the problems he had, he looked for a solution with the team he had in hands and won, and thanks to that he now puts his name him with other U21 legends like ostulc and pazdzierz84 as the biggest winners of the competition with 2 U21 World Cups, and this was probably a sample of his great genius for being able to be competitive... If even after reading this text you still think that Romania only won thanks to the individuality of the players, try to imagine yourself in the situation of cristidinu, would you have the courage that he had to play in this style? Using real defenders as playmakers? I can answer for myself, and my answer is that I would not have that courage, but after watching this game, I would probably risk something like this if I were in a similar situation, Whether it will become a trend in the next edition teams copy the Romanian strategy I don't know, but we will all remember that in a specific edition, a Romanian had iron balls to risk something never seen before in U21 teams.
“A man with new ideas is a madman, until his ideas triumph.”
Marcelo Bielsa
Deep analysis: What made cristidinu special in this U21 World Cup?
By Woody
Note: This text has both a historical part and an analysis on my part, whether you agree or not with what is written here, speak in a respectful way because the idea here is to show how I think it was the way of thinking of cristidinu accordingly with the pieces he had available and the opponents he faced. If you want to translate this text for you community, give a message in private and i give to you the text if you want...
And the last U21World Cup Final in the flash era happened and the result was an overwhelming victory for Romania against Czech Republic by 3-0, with that Romania wins the U21 World Cup for the third time in its history and is now the second biggest winner of the competition only losing to Poland.
For this U21 World Cup, the Romanian community didn’t think twice about the name, former World Champion with România in the past, cristidinu was the option to try to build a job that would make the Romanian community able to taste the gold trophy for the U21 supporters, something they didn’t celebrate since 2015.
If like me, you after the match went to look at the individual marks of România's team, you were probably a little amazed, 8 players in DEF order in România, what is the reason cristidinu did that? The first time in the U21 World Cup final a team using more than the ''limit is allowed'' in a position, since if you put more players in a role than is due according to the game, they give you a warning, to you check your ''setup'', but according to cristidinu, he had a reason to use this:
''I use 8 defenders because the former coach did not care about your new generation of midfielders... all midfielders are without technique, so I prefered to play with 8 defenders, and they were very effective in the middle of the field most of the times.''
As cristidinu said, when he became the coach, the new generation had a giant problem in the midfield position, without so many good options, he basically try to find ways to be effective, but different than you might think, cristidinu did not use 8 players in DEF order in the entire competition, this happened only in the final, but throughout his campaign, cristidinu used many formations and even when he used similar formations, they were not entirely the same as a player could be in a different order.
But first, we have to know what cristidinu was like when he win his 1st U21 World Cup 5 years ago, cristidinu is an adherent of the Romanian school of tactics, a game model that was used for Romania win 2 World Cups in a row with vacarul and cristidinu as coaches in the past, the style was focused on strengthening the center, controlling the game, be dynamic to be effective in both attack and defense and be often creating a numerical superiority, which was the case of the tactic used in question (diamond 4-4-2). Since most of the teams using that time a 532, the numerical superiority of the midfielders created an imbalance against the opponent and this gave Romania control of the match most of the time. His 1st U21 World Cup was a sucess since he win, but his 2nd U21 World Cup was not good, eliminating in the group stage after be in a group with Hungary, Perú and Finland, cristidinu trying to use variations with a winger, but 2 losses in group stage make România be eliminated and since that, he never coach another U21 team, basically making it not part of the beginning of Woodyrianism and the creation of the Czech school of tactics that were 2 impacting schools for changing the way of tactically seeing the U21 teams in sokker.
After coming back, his 1st match was a loss to Austria after he try to using a diamond 4-4-2 that make he be the number 1 coach in the past, after this, cristidinu sought various formations and this made him evolve a lot, not only with formations, but think the game as more than put players in a specific part of pitch, that is the order of the players, as we will show now in a lot of pics that is the tactics he used in all matches in the U21WC.
As we can see, during the U21 World Cup, he use more of times a central 5-3-2 and a 4-3-1-2 with a winger, we can see that after the draw 0-0 against Poland, cristidinu change the way he play with your midfielders and make that a mark of his tactics during the U21 World Cup... if we watch cristidinu's team on field, we need to put in our mind that his game plan like was on past, cristidinu prefers a strengthened team mainly in the central part of the field, always looking for numerical superiority to be able to control this area, not only thinking offensively, but defensively a line of 3 midfielders helps to reduce spaces in the center for long passes... against Poland he try a 5-3-2 with a winger and he probably realized that only 2 players to protect and seek action in the center against 3 polish players was suicide.
Despite having used several formations, we have to take into account that this was part of cristidinu's game plan, despite different formations in specific matches, his game basically did not change because the objective was always the same, in this case it was to strengthen the midfield and use depth to your advantage, if the generation of midfielders was not the best, it is clear that the defenders generation was very good, and that gave him freedom to be more aggressive in the depth of his defenders, making the team become more compact and eliminate a good amount of spaces from the opponent. He made the tactics according to your opponent, when the opponent used a winger, cristidinu preferred to use a central 5-3-2, he preferred to sacrifice the breadth of having a winger to protect himself more in defense and have the advantage of play with 3 midfielders in the centre giving most of the times a numerical superiority, but is a mistake who thinks that his 5-3-2 was a defensive strategy, cristidinu is a coach who has a mentality of eliminating all possible spaces of the opponent to make sure that the ball is always in the defensive area of the rival and this is proven in statistics... Romania during the U21 World Cup always made the ball more in the area of his rivals more than 60% in the matches, the only match that did not happen was against Poland because he was unable to introduce his style of play:
Play in the half during the U21 World Cup by România opponents:
Poland - 52%
Finland (group stage/semifinals) - 71% / 62%
Venezuela - 62%
Croatia - 67%
Bulgaria - 73%
Czech Republic - 67%
This made Romania a goal machine during the season, scoring 20 goals during the U21 World Cup... Also, different what i write in my book Manual to be a U21 coach and the Woodyrianism, that I gave my personal opinion about 5-3-2 being the tactic of the lazy in U21, this is true in my opinion when the tactic has no dynamics in the positioning especially of the 3 midfielders and attempts to create spaces, and cristidinu's 5-3-2 is quite the opposite of that, in his 5-3-2 he used depth very well to eliminate spaces, and knew how to use the width of his midfielders well, the 2 midfielders who played closer to the sides at certain times were going more to the side of the field to create a width and thus create a space to be created... Although the tactic I most liked to see was his 4-3-1-2 with a winger, he was able to have a better use of the width and still use the 3 midfielders in the center very well.
Most of the opponents, Romania dominated the match and the line of 3 midfielders worked very well, probably the match that was more problem for cristidinu was the semi-finals against Finland, since theKarsten used a 5-3-1-1 with a winger, to eliminate Romania's numerical superiority in the midfield and break cristidinu's strategy since he probably didn't expect Finland to use winger and therefore used 4-3-1-2.... although the Finnish goalkeeper had to make a lot of saves, Finland was very dangerous when he managed to fit his offensive plan.
But back to the subject, according to cristidinu, he actually used defenders as midfielders against Czech Republic, according to him, the reason was because his midfielders was not good enough to play it that role. The defenders that was used was Gabi Copită, Rareş Matei Cocei and Cristel Oraşan. But during the U21 World Cup, these 3 players were sometimes important in different roles in the field... Copită and Cocei play most of the matches as defenders in a line of 5 or 4 that cristinidu using during the competition, Oraşan in other hand, most of times he was used as the midfielder in the centre with DEF order, but he also play as a defender in the 5-line that cristidinu using against Bulgaria, one of the midfielders that were well used by cristidinu during the World Cup was Dacian Iorga (12 pace, 10 technique, 15 passing, 9 defender, 17 playmaking), although he was not fast and did not have a high skill in technique, he was a midfielder with a top skills in passing / playmaker for U21 level, but since he was injured and could not be used, which we can take into consideration for the different choice from cristidinu was that he thought it necessary to play in a 5-3-2 since Czech Republic play with a winger, but that at the same time as probably Iorga should be the best midfiedler of the generation, the other options were not good enough to do the job as Iorga did, so if he wanted to make the ball stay longer in his rival’s territory, the only solution would be to place quick defenders to steal the ball as quickly as possible to prevent the situation from going to the Czech Republic, but put these players as MID order, it would probably make the Romanian game too slow since they were not really midfielders, but defenders, according to cristidinu, that was the skill of Cocei and Oraşan in passing and playmaker:
Cocei - good [7] playmaker and very good [9] passing
Oraşan - very good [9] playmaker and outstanding [12] passing
According to Clau_Goool (A veteran in the Romanian community and owner of Copită), he agreed to show all skills of your player, Copită in case is a classic U21 defender with some secoundary skills (14 pace, 7 technique, 11 passing, 16 defender, 7 playmaking), basically the line of 3 midfielders in DEF order by România was used with players like that, not good enough in technique, passing and playmaker, but with a large skill in defense, to be able to stole the ball, also since they have a decent level in passing for a U21, they was not defenders that shoot the ball randomly, managing to pass the ball between themselves and strikers, with a DEF order, the low playmaking it was not a giant problem and it helped to stabilize things for cristidinu's game plan.
Also, Clau_Goool told that this strategy was used in the past by România in NT level:
''We had another manager who tried it at NT level and won the first gold medal into the Senior team at that time. History re-written.''
Clau_Goool refers to a romanian coach called anaconda who in the past was champion with România at NT level using most of times squads with 6-7 players in DEF order, if cristidinu remembered this and sought to re-create that idea of the past for the final against Czech Republic, we will only know if we ask him, but using many players in a certain position is something that the Romanians have done in the past and returned to use thanks to a problematic situation that cristidinu had in his hand, he himself describes that he did not believe that it would be possible to be champion with this team in his words in the Romanian forum:
''When I took over the U21 team and analyzed the generation, without accusing the former coach, I was simply scared and the idea came up that this generation did not have the slightest chance of being a champion and I could only laugh at the situation that I had in my hands... ''
The romanian coach describes also in the romanian forum that a lot of players was not good well trained, with a lot of midfielders with 9 in technique and 17 in playmaking, becoming useless to use... so the idea to using 3 defenders could be risk, but it worked, Romania dominated the match and had many opportunities to score goals, a 3-0 that each defender give a assist... Romania played well specially because they limited spaces to Czech Republic especially for the beginning of an attempt at something since the Czechs who preferred to use a 4-1-2-1-2, had problems with this midfielder alone in the back to find spaces to pass the ball for the 2 midfielders in the front since the line of 3 romanian ''mid-defenders'' blocking routes for passing and the depth of the Romanian team often hindered the game's continuation with a lot of offsides, many of the Czech Republic's best chances were when they managed to break the first Romanian line and so winger using his speed to create opportunities for the 2 strikers.
As the Czech Republic did not use depth in its defense (probably because it did not have defenders capable of doing this), Romania had plenty of room for the 3 mid-defenders to create a game and then give a pass near to the area for the striker be able to shoot, which proved to be very effective because as the defenders did not press this line of 3 mid-defenders and Czech Republic it had a numerical inferiority in the middle because most of the time, even when the 2 more forward midfields came back to help the defense, since Czech Republic number 8 Písek that was playing in DEF order but a bit more forward, but in defende he play basically as a extra centre defender to help more in the area the line of 4-defenders, Romania got what it wanted in its game plan, which was to dominate the center of the field with a numerical superiority of 3 vs 2 most of the times, even with the 3 mid-defenders lack good skills in technique and playmaking, cristidinu made them play more open at certain times to create more spaces and also to make them have enough time to pass that ball and not lose possesion.
When the team lose the ball, the strategy was basically pressure, trying to steal the ball immediately after the loss, so cristidinu positioned the players very close at certain times to create that pressure, especially the 3 mid-defenders when a striker or a mid-defender loses the ball, since a U21 defender does not have a high level in technique, the chances to a real defender stole this ball is pretty high and and this could create a counterattack at a problematic time for the Czech Republic, since the defense would not be fully organized.
Since romanian defenders probably have good skills in passing the ball, just a few times Romania gave throw-ins to the Czech Republic, thus avoiding a chance of the rival in a aerial duel in the area and forcing them to have to go to the goal building a play in front of all the barricades that the Romanian team placed in the field.
As cristidinu says: ''It was risky, but the result says i made the right decision'', I say I probably wouldn't have done the same thing, that's why I respect cristidinu, because despite the problems he had, he looked for a solution with the team he had in hands and won, and thanks to that he now puts his name him with other U21 legends like ostulc and pazdzierz84 as the biggest winners of the competition with 2 U21 World Cups, and this was probably a sample of his great genius for being able to be competitive... If even after reading this text you still think that Romania only won thanks to the individuality of the players, try to imagine yourself in the situation of cristidinu, would you have the courage that he had to play in this style? Using real defenders as playmakers? I can answer for myself, and my answer is that I would not have that courage, but after watching this game, I would probably risk something like this if I were in a similar situation, Whether it will become a trend in the next edition teams copy the Romanian strategy I don't know, but we will all remember that in a specific edition, a Romanian had iron balls to risk something never seen before in U21 teams.
“A man with new ideas is a madman, until his ideas triumph.”
Marcelo Bielsa
Thats why i prefer the MId player must have defence.Especially for Big NT if you have players with no Defence at the Mid you have no chance to achieve anything good.
(edited)
(edited)
For NT... yes... For U21? Maybe... depend of the position he plays also...
About analysis to why Romania beat Czech,Romania was with the best tactic ,
if you see again attackers and winger was in offside potition all the time ..
Czech have lost the passing game,and Romania was lucky coz the ME was fair! ))
Players don't loose their skills if they play in wrong line,skills still working.
Romania's MID's having wages very high,that means high skills
some of them are close to wages with our senior players!
For me is sad a team like Czech to play like this in the final
if they decide to play like their opponent,maybe the result was diffrent
if you see again attackers and winger was in offside potition all the time ..
Czech have lost the passing game,and Romania was lucky coz the ME was fair! ))
Players don't loose their skills if they play in wrong line,skills still working.
Romania's MID's having wages very high,that means high skills
some of them are close to wages with our senior players!
For me is sad a team like Czech to play like this in the final
if they decide to play like their opponent,maybe the result was diffrent
Romania's MID's having wages very high,that means high skills
Cocei - good [7] playmaker and very good [9] passing
Oraşan - very good [9] playmaker and outstanding [12] passing
Copită in case is a classic U21 defender with some secoundary skills (14 pace, 7 technique, 11 passing, 16 defender, 7 playmaking)
the skill of the 3 mid-defenders was in the text if you do not see it....
Cocei - good [7] playmaker and very good [9] passing
Oraşan - very good [9] playmaker and outstanding [12] passing
Copită in case is a classic U21 defender with some secoundary skills (14 pace, 7 technique, 11 passing, 16 defender, 7 playmaking)
the skill of the 3 mid-defenders was in the text if you do not see it....
if they decide to play like their opponent,maybe the result was diffrent
if they decide to play in a 5-3-2, was to be a battle of stength and if they do not have similar pieces to that... probably the result was not be different!
if they decide to play in a 5-3-2, was to be a battle of stength and if they do not have similar pieces to that... probably the result was not be different!
stength,there is no such skill :p
I can't believe Czechs have no players for a decent tactic
I can't believe Czechs have no players for a decent tactic
I can't believe Czechs have no players for a decent tactic
This i can't answer for you... but according to his strategy during all U21WC, they probably do not have quick defenders for example... and what they talk to me... is that they do not have a good generation of strikers.
This i can't answer for you... but according to his strategy during all U21WC, they probably do not have quick defenders for example... and what they talk to me... is that they do not have a good generation of strikers.
And I do not think Czech's tactic was not decent... is what I talk... a good... ''perfect' tactic just exist depending of the situation.
Μην τον προκαλεις!
ειναι ικανος να κανει αναλυση των παικτων και των τακτικων της Τσεχιας!
ειναι ικανος να κανει αναλυση των παικτων και των τακτικων της Τσεχιας!