Walker

[thinktank]

Honestly mate, this is utter bollocks, high quality bollocks.

Having spoken to a good few, experienced and highly qualified coaches from around Europe who have worked in academies etc - Holland / Germany / Spain etc they say the one thing they notice from English players they see and in some cases work with, is generally they lack football intelligence compared to their European counterparts, not as is commonly thought, technique. Over here we tell kids where to stand, where to move, how to do things and we create robots who are robbed of their decision making process. Places that develop top talent guide them towards their own solutions, allow players to make mistakes and constantly challenge their decision making skills - or football intelligence.

It's true that our coaching methods are way behind, but the most modern methods that the best developers of talent use are generally geared towards game intelligence, developing players who can use their technique under pressure. Training is geared towards players being constantly faced with decision making opportunities, the rise of Belgian talent has coincided with them focussing on 'brain centred learning'. Read up on it, it's really interesting.

Bear, I love you and all, but you've got this football intelligence malarky completely arse about face here.

From the reaction to BC's post, people are obviously struggling with the concept.

*and I'm no fanboy of BC's, but on this subject (and Dawson) I can literally sit back and let him post what is already in my head. It's very convenient. Mind-meld.

 

[idontgetit]

Back to Kyle Walker though, it's still fundamental that he doesn't lack intelligence, especially in the football sense. Composure, technique maybe sometimes which gets him into trouble, BUT YOU CANNOT BE A FUCKING PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALLER WITHOUT HAVING FOOTBALL INTELLIGENCE AND I CANT UNDERSTAND HOW SOME OF YOU CANT GRASP THAT.

Everything is relative. Tom Huddlestone is probably quicker over 100m than the majority of posters on this site, doesn't make him a quick premiership footballer. I've seen Emile fucking Hesky get in behind Kyle Walker before, and Walker had been watching him and knew exactly where he was! Walker is a top quality right back but that isn't because of footballing intelligence.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

Rubbish. Milner's technique is very good. It's his thought process that's not. You have got your theory completely back to front.


Just watch that England v Germany game again. The most startling difference is in the decision making on the ball and movement off the ball of the two sets of players.

This is about processing the game as it flows in their brains.


Good technique (and good technique under pressure especially) is very important but this is much easier to teach and master than the thinking and processing (intelligence) side.

This is spot on and something I have been saying is wrong with English football for years.

The Germans were opening up the England defence by will with just a few quick one touch passes and good off the ball movement. This has nothing to do with technique but being able to process situations quickly - either knowing where to move off the ball or the best pass to make on the ball.

English players in contrast - although they had alot of possession - seem to make slower or poor decisions on and off the ball.

The fact German players could attack so fluidly baring in mind it was a mish mash team has to point to good coaching in this respect.

 

[Nocando]

To accuse somebody of a lack of intelligence in any field or sector you first need to know better or be better informed yourself.

The problem arises when people accusing others especially professional others of lacking intelligence in whatever field it is they are referring to don't have the first idea of the subject or profession in hand, and that is when it becomes excruciatingly embarrassing.

Football as they say is all about opinions and there in probably lies the beauty of it, it's a game for everybody to comment on and dismiss others who make exceptional livings at it of being at least in footballing terms thick, retarded and stupid etc. If only these thick, stupid & retarded idiots knew as much as the people who call them such, just imagine how good they would be.

You're really starting to piss me off you are. Come on here with your clever clog attitude thinking just because you are normal you can fit in with the rest of us. Well sunshine it aint happening.

 

[DEFchenkOE]

Does Defoe have football intelligence? If so can someone explain to me why he still gets caught offside so much?

 

[Nocando]

The state of coaching in this country? Exhibit A: James fucking Milner.

And just slightlybetter in terms of ability, Exhibit B..

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

Does Defoe have football intelligence? If so can someone explain to me why he still gets caught offside so much?

I don't think it's about whether you have it or not. It's about differing levels.

I actually think in a lot of situations it can develop with experience but that obviously hasn't happened in Defoe's case.

 

[Legend10]

Nobody is saying that some players aren't tuned in more than others, of course they are, however it doesn't change the fact that no top level players (Aspas may be the exception) lack for footballing intelligence and it certainly isn't surpassed by people on here who accuse them of such. And to say the difference is primarily down to intelligence levels is wrong.

Superior technical ability buys you so many things, such as time which makes movement easier, the next pass easier, better options etc, opportunity to play with more penetration, to beat people to create situations etc, they can all be achieved with superior technical ability. You could even say that superior technical ability buys you time enough to make your play seem more intelligent and develops the thought process because the confidence and time that ability brings allows you to think one step ahead.

As England have been mentioned it might be good to compare England with say Spain, the major difference between these 2 teams is the huge gulf in technical ability and it could be argued that it's only the 'know how' that allows England to compete with such a team.

England beat Brazil last year, are England technically as good as Brazil? No chance! It's only the know how that gives countries like England a chance against Brazil.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

To accuse somebody of a lack of intelligence in any field or sector you first need to know better or be better informed yourself.

The problem arises when people accusing others especially professional others of lacking intelligence in whatever field it is they are referring to don't have the first idea of the subject or profession in hand, and that is when it becomes excruciatingly embarrassing.

Football as they say is all about opinions and there in probably lies the beauty of it, it's a game for everybody to comment on and dismiss others who make exceptional livings at it of being at least in footballing terms thick, retarded and stupid etc. If only these thick, stupid & retarded idiots knew as much as the people who call them such, just imagine how good they would be.

Exactly. I actually think it's quite embarrassing.

 

[Legend10]

This is spot on and something I have been saying is wrong with English football for years.

The Germans were opening up the England defence by will just by a few quick one touch passes and good off the ball movement. This has nothing to do with technique but being able to process situations quickly - either knowing where to move off the ball or the best pass to make on the ball.

English players in contrast - although they had alot of possession - seem to make slower or poor decisions on and off the ball.

The fact German players could attack so fluidly baring in mind it was a mish mash team has to point to good coaching in this respect.

It has everything to do with technique, it buys you time and allows you to do things quicker, combine the 2 together and you see the outcome!

 

[Coyboy]

You seem to be taking this personally. I'm English as well and I don't. Do you ever watch the national team? We are 15 years behind the other top nations in terms of "footballing intelligence".

We don't produce anywhere near the amount of top quality coaches or managers or players a country of our size and wealth should. This isn't exactly shocking news.

I don't think there is anything to take personally, just the lazy throw away terms and cliches used by certain posters about certain players. SB explains above.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

It has everything to do with technique, it buys you time and allows you to do things quicker, combine the 2 together and you see the outcome!

German players do not have significantly better technique than English players. That's BS. Movement on and off the ball is lacking.

 

[ShelfSide18]

It has everything to do with technique, it buys you time and allows you to do things quicker, combine the 2 together and you see the outcome!

I see it the other way round myself L10, not that I think that a good technique is not fundamental for a good player, but I think a good football intelligence, or insight, or whatever you want to call it is the thing that separates players.

People talk of Xavi's first touch which is phenomenal, but if you watch him play he is always scanning the field so he builds a picture of his surroundings, where the space is and where the other players are. When the ball arrives, he is more relaxed and composed to take that first touch. This is what I believe makes players great, they have the technique, but the understanding and insight of the game to apply it.

You take a lower level player who doesn't scan as much, and they are much less confident and composed because they haven't built the same picture in their head. They are easier panicked and more liable to have a poor first touch. It's not always technical, it's their understanding of where they are in relation to the space and pressure. Obviously, as you say, when you combine technique and insight together you have your perfect match but for me, technique is easier to spot and train that football intelligence.

When it comes to English players, I think technically we are slightly deficient, but in my opinion the gap in game intelligence, understanding and insight is the biggest. A majority of the experts within youth development, those who continue to produce the best players tend to agree that game insight and intelligence is the most important thing in football going forward, I even read that Ajax value it over technique in their recruitment process.

 

[weststandvoice]

Walker is as thick as time expired paint.

 

[jezz]

It has everything to do with technique, it buys you time and allows you to do things quicker, combine the 2 together and you see the outcome!

Dembele this season.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I don't think there is anything to take personally, just the lazy throw away terms and cliches used by certain posters about certain players. SB explains above.

So it's a fallacy perpetrated just by posters on SC that English football is inferior to most of it's leading peers now. We all imagined that great luminary of world football Chile giving England a bit of lesson last week ?

Come on, stop bringing a stupid personal agenda into every post.

This isn't something posters on SC made up. There is a national fucking task force being set up to tackle it for christ sake.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

Dembele this season.

Classic example of a player with outstanding technical ability but limited football intelligence.

 

[Legend10]

I see it the other way round myself L10, not that I think that a good technique is not fundamental for a good player, but I think a good football intelligence, or insight, or whatever you want to call it is the thing that separates players.

People talk of Xavi's first touch which is phenomenal, but if you watch him play he is always scanning the field so he builds a picture of his surroundings, where the space is and where the other players are. When the ball arrives, he is more relaxed and composed to take that first touch. This is what I believe makes players great, they have the technique, but the understanding and insight of the game to apply it.

You take a lower level player who doesn't scan as much, and they are much less confident and composed because they haven't built the same picture in their head. They are easier panicked and more liable to have a poor first touch. It's not always technical, it's their understanding of where they are in relation to the space and pressure. Obviously, as you say, when you combine technique and insight together you have your perfect match but for me, technique is easier to spot and train that football intelligence.

When it comes to English players, I think technically we are slightly deficient, but in my opinion the gap in game intelligence, understanding and insight is the biggest. A majority of the experts within youth development, those who continue to produce the best players tend to agree that game insight and intelligence is the most important thing in football going forward, I even read that Ajax value it over technique in their recruitment process.

Firstly quoting Xavi just doesn't work for me, because as I've said previously in this thread to expect players to control games, tempo etc in a way that Pirlo, Xavi and so few others can is not going to happen. There are lots of top movie directors but they can't all make films like Spielberg can or Stone can but it doesn't mean the others lack intelligence, pick pretty much any field you want and it's the same. The other directors aren't slow, dim witted retards, they're still intelligent in what they do but some others are better. There are lots of surgeons but not all can do heart transplants, are those that can't lacking in surgical intelligence?

IMHO technique has a huge impact on a players ability to process the game, if you have such quality at your disposal technically to start with it allows you to play with your head up more or less continuously, so to start with you're seeing more than everybody else and you're seeing it before everybody else. Before you can be a top top quality player like Xavi you need top quality technique, there's no point in having a great game brain if you can't trap a bag of cement or pass a ball into the right area or with the right pace!

Now thinking seriously about Walker for a minute, he's a FB, the same as every other FB in top level football if he had the game brain of a Xavi or a Pirlo he wouldn't be playing FB would he? He'd be playing in the middle of the park running the show, the same as every other top level FB would be. Let's look at Gareth Bale, well guess what he's got too much in his locker to be playing FB so he doesn't play there anymore, he now plays in a position where he can use his extra quality. Let's look at Philip Lahm, Pep's taken a look at him and thought you're far too good a player to be playing FB, come and play in the middle of the park son where you can exert more influence.

Name me one Premiership FB who would make a top quality central midfield player?

Name me one Premiership FB who is clearly so much more intelligent than Walker that Walker 'lacks intelligence' in comparison to?

But what makes me laugh is the people who band these sentiments around and accuse these players of being thick etc do so on what knowledge? What experience, what know how, what education in the role that their saying people lack intelligence in? It's an easy criticism and an easy slur to label somebody with and is a cheap attempt at trying to sound smart.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Firstly quoting Xavi just doesn't work for me, because as I've said previously in this thread to expect players to control games, tempo etc in a way that Pirlo, Xavi and so few others can is not going to happen.

The ridiculous nature of this argument.

These are shown as the best examples of how intelligence separates player A from Player B. This is the whole point, They are just extreme examples of a huge spectrum.

Gary Neville v Walker is a great example. I don't think if you put both in a field with a football that Neville's technique would look any better than Walker's. In fact Walker might even look more technically proficient. And Walker is faster. But in terms of footballing intelligence Neville was Einstien to Walker. Which is why he played and captained the most successful team in the EPL for years. It was purely his footballing intelligence than kept him in his job. He wasn't super quick and wasn't Danny fucking Alves.


And I'm not saying he's an analytical genius as a pundit either - but he's better than many - but on a football field.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Name me one Premiership FB who is clearly so much more intelligent than Walker that Walker 'lacks intelligence' in comparison to?

But what makes me laugh is the people who band these sentiments around and accuse these players of being thick etc do so on what knowledge? What experience, what know how, what education in the role that their saying people lack intelligence in? It's an easy criticism and an easy slur to label somebody with and is a cheap attempt at trying to sound smart.

And again, this has been said several times over. Walker compares adequately with other rb's around right now. But one of the reasons for that might be that the more intelligence and technique a player shows the more likely he is to be moved into other areas of the pitch. Maybe ?