REHckingballing on BigFooty [Bye Week]

BigFooty member RussellEbertHandball, or simply REH, has sent me some questions about my perspective on the game of footy and about myself. I did answer him already, a while ago, but I have decided to edit those a bit and publish them here. is one of my most important teachers on things related to PAFC.

---

REH: Have you seen Port play enough Jogo Bonito to keep a Brasilian supporter/member happy since you joined up at the start of last year.

GP: I’m Southern Brazilian, and a Grêmio fan to boot, so this question always seems kind of tricky to me. I tend to imply that whoever asks it has a different idea of what “Jogo Bonito” (Beautiful Game) is than my own. I’ve told you elsewhere that Diego[1] and I support the Alpha and the Omega of Brazilian soccer. If “Jogo Bonito” would be somewhere in the middle between Grêmio and Flamengo, then Grêmio would represent its defensive side. There is beauty in defense, after all!

To give you a better idea of what I am saying, Grêmio’s club song mentions only one player – a goalkeeper. For us, Immortal’s barrackers [2][3], the most beautiful play in soccer would be a clean sliding tackle. We love simple game plans: get the ball; put it inside the box; and score.

You probably already recognized that Grêmio has something common with the 2014 Port Adelaide team, and I would agree. Grêmio even had a 2014-like season in 2008 – a great tournament that ultimately fell short in the end. We lost the title to a team that won tons of game by 1-0. Ultimately, they out-Grêmio’ed Grêmio – just like Richmond out-Port’ed us last year.

However, I cannot talk on behalf of anyone, but me. For me, the key here is “purpose.” A play, a gameplan, they are only completely beautiful if meaningful. I would call “Jogo Bonito” any style – from Barcelona’s tiki-taka (which matches Flamengo’s carioca style, by the way), to parking-the-bus, to Total Football. It simply needs to work, to be well done. If it is well played, then it is “Jogo Bonito.”

Having said that, my direct answer to your question would be: “meh.” I’ve watched really good Port games so far, but we still do too many mistakes - we are still too inconsistent, we can’t keep our game in a high standard for long enough. This season, I expected we would be able to improve. I am not so sure now.

I expected early struggles, but the fact that we lost Ryder, Rockliff is only now reaching his best form, Marshall and SPP had personal issues and were out of some games, this all made the task of playing our best footy way worse. I am afraid we lost time for practicing our gameplan as we should.

I was hoping we could reach the game against Hawthorn ready.  Let’s see how we do there. Hopefully, Marshall comes back well and firing with all cylinders, and we keep improving and winning. This second part of the season is about moving up to the top of the ladder, so we can use the last part as “pre-Finals.” We must see more than glimpses of what we can do. We need to win, win well, and impose respect from others. I want to answer “yes” to your question.

REH: How well do we play Total Football?

GP: We are REALLY far from Total Football. Believe me… Total Football is a soccer obsession, but no one could ever play the game like the Netherlands National team of 1974 did; not even the Dutch themselves. It was more than 40 years ago, but still teams could only manage so far to replicate parts of the concept, but not all of it. I have found interesting that footy has brought the issue into the code as well.

Total Football is about three pillars: (a) preserving the structure at all times, although every player would be moving around the field like Westhoff does; (b) pressuring the opponent the closest to the goal, the further down the pitch as possible;[4] and (c) keeping possession of the ball.

Total Football is as a defensive as an offensive style of play. Defending or attacking, the style or gameplan doesn't change. It should be almost impossible to know whether the team is attacking or defending,[5] being able to defend while having the ball or to attack without it.

Defensively speaking, the ball must be as far as possible from your defensive end; while, offensively speaking, it should be as close to your goal as possible. Both objectives are exactly the same. Total Football is about keeping the ball around your attacking half all the time. Moreover, since one needs the ball to score, the best way to defend is by keeping possession of the ball, anyway.

Total football is supposed to tire out your opponent like how a bullfighter does to the bull. So, you will move the ball around, making your opponent run to chase it. In case you lose it, the opponent is far away from their goal to do any damage. Still, you want to get it back right away, because you want to stop the threat before it begins, and because you need the ball to score yourself. Thus, you pressure, pressure, and pressure some more.

Finally, Total Football is about winning. Dominating the opponent with possession and pressure is not enough, such dominance must be present also on the scoreboard. The ball is not moved only for possession’s sake, but to open and to explore spaces in the opponent's defense. The “chipchipping” must be aggressive as those little jabs thrown during a boxing fight.

The opponent cannot feel comfortable. If their defense is settled, you must start kicking from the outside, speeding up the tempo, disposing quicker the ball, attempting push yourself through their lines, etc., as a way of finding or creating cracks to explore, either by spreading the field or forcing a mistake. In brief, Total Football is about sieging and teasing your opponent until their morale is destroyed. Then, you win.

I can see why some people say[6] that Port is aiming at Total Football, but we haven’t been good enough and/or gelled enough as a team to pull it off; not yet, at least. Having 22 Westhoff in our line-up would be helpful, but we only have one – although, I see potential in both Marshall and Howard to follow his steps.

REH: Do you understand the holding the ball - BALLLLLLL!!! / incorrect disposal / push in the back / ride the player like a horse / ball up / PLAY ON interpretations when a player without the ball, tackles a player with the ball situations, and the different combinations of results you get for the umpires for identical pieces of play during different parts of the game? If not, do you have a solution from an outsider, for the AFL, because they seem aimless?

GP: I do not understand at all, and I am not sure the umpires do it either! Similar plays are called differently all the time. Sometimes, the umpires yell “play on,” and other times, they blow the whistle. There isn’t much consistency, which is the worst.

The first measure of good umpiring is consistency. The question on whether a ruling is correct/incorrect, good/bad, just/unjust can only emerge after certain level of consistency is achieved. That is why in common law, precedents are so important; that is why in civil law, legislation is written down and codified. The goal is to achieve consistency. Justice comes only after that.[7]

As solutions, there are some things that could be done. For instance, I would suggest:

a)     stopping micromanaging the game from outside;

b)     simplifying the rulebook and establishing clearer guidelines (references, standards) for umpires, coaches, and players to rely on;

c)      establishing umpiring crews, which would call games together every week;

d)     reaching out those crews and revising the games with them, finding mistakes and ways to avoid them;

e)     accepting that different crews will have different interpretations of the rules, and that's mostly fine;

f) organizing yearly meetings between umpires, coaches, and leader players to discuss inconsistencies and how to solve them; etc. [8]

REH: What is your favourite beverage to watch a Port game with? Or does it vary with the way we are playing?

GP: It varies according to day and time, but it is usually either coffee or mate. Time slots do not allow me much to drink alcohol while watching Port. When I do drink, it is either red wine or beer.

REH: What have you got growing on the farm at the moment?

GP: Oat and Ryegrass, for the cattle. We also rent part of the farm for rice plantation, but the harvest just finished.

CARNE THE MAGGIES![9][10]

---

Notes:

[1] Diego is the other Port’s Brazilian barracker in BigFooty. We don’t know each other personally. 

[2] Grêmio’s nickname is the ‘Immortal’ – nice, right? It comes from the anthem, which says: “Fifty years of glories, you have/oh, Immortal Three-Coloured!” The song was composed as a celebration of the club’s 50^th Anniversary, but it was considered so good, that it has become the official anthem since.

[3] Now, since “there will be a Port Adelaide Football Club forever,” I’m speaking this from an Immortal to another.  My opinion is that the Power’s mascot should be Zeus. The team’s badge has a hand holding a bolt, for Christ’s sake! Besides, Zeus was the Greek ruling god, a primus inter pares (first among equals). You tell me, isn’t it precisely how Port sees itself to be?

[4] In soccer, it is the other way around; a team attacks moving up the field. I find amusing that in footy the forward line is down the field.

[5] One may call it the "Schröhinkley's Cat" strategy.

[6] cough!(Janus)cough!

[7] I have Master degrees in Legal and in Political theories. I love this subject!

[8] It is humanly impossible to establish norms free of interpretation. Worse, the more detailed and specific is a rule, the more it is subject to a plethora of distinct interpretations. In other words, whenever one tries to avoid interpretative judgment, the result ends up to be the opposite of the one intended.

[9] It is not a typo. Carne means ‘meat’ in Portuguese.

[10] It is bye week for the Power, so I am all in for the Magpies against North Adelaide this weekend.