Hóng Mata, Kagaywa và Fel xù mùa sau cùng đá hộ công cho Pepsi Thế này thì khỏi lo từ phối hợp nhỏ tới tạt cánh đánh đầu
Lúc thay vào là đá gần như tiền đạo luôn còn gì nữa? De Byrne với Witsel phải thủ tuyến giữa nhiều hơn, chứ Fellaini là cắm hẳn ở trên rồi, thỉnh thoảng ko có banh mới chạy về phòng ngự . Cu Witsel hôm qua mới là hay hơn tỉ lần, đúng kiểu tiền về MU cần, vừa phòng ngự vừa phân phối banh từ xa đc, Fellaini đá đúng bài ở Everton nên vậy thôi chứ ở Mu mơ mà đá kiểu đó tranh chỗ với Mata/Rooney.
Một tên trên r/reddevils dịch từ tiếng Hà Lan, đọc khá hay. Six reasons why the much too modest Louis van Gaal can beat Spain There are plenty of reasons to assume that Louis van Gaal is a brilliant coach. He coached Ajax (1991-1997), FC Barcelona (1998-2000; 2002-2003), AZ (2005-2009), FC Bayern München (2009-2011), and after the World Cup he'll start his job at Manchester United. As Sander IJtsma and I recently wrote here, coaches almost never get more out of their players than the sum of their individual qualities. It's set in stone that the teams with the most money almost always win. Van Gaal proved the opposite twice: with Ajax he won the Champions League with a team that included Danny Blind, Frank Rijkaard and nine unknown teenagers; and with even smaller AZ, which had the 6th highest budget in the Eredivisie, he won the league. Based on his CV, Van Gaal should be regarded as a hero in the Netherlands. But he's not. Most people only know the image of the angry man who gets flustered at press conferences and argues loudly and aggrievedly with journalists. There's a reason for that: the image is correct. But that's the side of Louis van Gaal that's easily spotted. The more relevant and more interesting Van Gaal keeps himself to the areas where cameras and journalists are rarely seen: on the training ground, in the locker room, in meeting rooms. It is what he does there, that makes him a rare success in one of the most competitive industries in the world – the football. But what does he do? That seems to be precious information, but there's not a lot known about it. You can't even blame the media. The furious, unsociable Van Gaal is irresistable spectator material, while the professional Van Gaal resembles a not very media friendly school teacher who uses a lot of jargon. Luckily there are several sources that describe his methods, especially his autobiografie Visie from 2009. Unfortunately it has the same charm as Van Gaal's press conferences (rather illegible), but if supplemented with other sources, it eventually reveals six arguments that support the claim that Van Gaal is a brilliant coach and maybe even Holland's best hope for a World Cup that isn't a complete fail. [spoil]Louis van Gaal is modest This may come as a surprise, but it's true: Louis van Gaal is a modest man. He knows that a coach has a limited influence on his team. “My best quality,” he said during the press conference where he announced his resignation as national coach in 2001, “is the 10% extra I can draw from a player.” His delivery was far from modest, with lots of dramatic silences and raising of the voice, but in essence, his observation was modest – 10%, that's his contribution. If all goes well, that is. Economists agree with him: a study by sports economist Stefan Szymanski showed that money accounts for 80% to 90% of a team's results, which leaves a maximum of 20% for the coach. Some economists even think that coach make no difference at all. Centraal Planbureau (Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis) economist Bas ter Weel compares the influence of a football coach with the influence of a Prime Minister on the economy. There's probably no one with more influence, but it's still marginal. Van Gaal gets this. And to get that 10% extra from his players – that's why he's a coach after all – he will go to any lengths possible. He had the rooms in the Dutch team's hotel in Noordwijk remodeled in such a way that it would entice the players to have instructive conversations about football. He had the wifi connection improved, so that players wouldn't be annoyed by slow internet speeds. According to Van Gaal, an annoyed person can't learn, and players can get better, but only if they are prepared to learn from him. The problem is: you can only have a measurable impact as a coach if you control everything tightly. If you let the reins slip, if you don't take learning opportunities as they present themselves, you might as well not be there at all as a coach – 10% isn't a lot to begin with after all. Using that logic, and Van Gaal does, it can go far. In 2009 his video analyst Max Reckers explained how Van Gaal's “learning process” works. “The reason people find him so dominant, is that he wants to control the whole process. He wants to know about all the feedback a player gets. He wants to know what family, friends and especially journalists tell him. That's how he decides which videos a player gets to see. Every stimulant is customised.” [Insert your preferred Big Brother phrase here] He tries to ease his control of players by limiting their contact with the outside world. This is why during his time at Ajax and his subsequent clubs, journalists and former players were banned from the players' lounge. “Only people who are working together towards the same goal are allowed in,” he wrote in Visie. Van Gaal realises – justly – that he doesn't have a lot of influence, but he tries to maximise that influence. Louis van Gaal is all about the individual Individuals are subordinate to systems and Van Gaal rules as a dictator over his players. That's his reputation. According to him, not the players, but the system or the coach are supposedly most important. For instance, during his last stint as national coach he ordered everyone to wear socks. This bothered among others his assistant Ruud Krol, a man who, according to former press officer Rob de Leede in the tv programme Andere Tijden Sport, “has not worn socks for years.” Rules like that – and more reasonable rules – are introduced by Van Gaal to create structure. “That's important,” he says in Visie, “because it gives logic to thinking and doing and it helps people.” The individuals are free to do what they please within those rules; outside the rules they hurt the collective – which in turn hurts the abilitiy of Van Gaal to realise his 10% magic. His appreciation for the individual was given a name, the “total human principle”. In 2012 he explained to KNVB news site Ons Oranje: “A pass from A to B is not just that pass, that technical performance, there's a whole human behind it. That human is influenced by his mind.” To get a hold of the minds of his players at AZ, he employed organisation advisor and practicioner of “menskundige bedrijfskunde” (I'm very sorry, but I have no translation for this) Leo van der Burg (died in 2007), who according to Visie was very important for Van Gaal's development. Van der Burg taught Van Gaal and his staff two lessons: it's better to work at the strong points of players rather than focus on their weak points, and every player is different and requires a different approach. It was necessary to intimately know the players. First Van Gaal visited his players at home and wrote his own reports. That didn't work; “the reports were snapshots,” he wrote in Visie. “That's why I contacted a professional company that helped me to write a profile of the player.” Using those profiles, Van Gaal sorts his players into one of three categories, devised by Van der Burg: blue intellectually oriented players, green emotional players and red creative players. They differ in the way they digest information, which can have an impact on, for example, Van Gaal's half time talk. “That's why I increase or decrease the pitch of my voice, why I use silences. They all have to sit quietly, because they all need to hear it.” The same goes for the feedback players get after a match. They always get to see videos of positive performances, explained video analyst Reckers in 2009, because positive images stick. The other images and Van Gaal's matching commentary are customised. Was the player asked critical questions by a journalist? Did a journalist praise the player for something we didn't appreciate all that much? Van Gaal's feedback depends on that and is different for each player. A red, intuitive player like attacker Mounir El Hamdaoui was shown different images and given different commentary than intellectual blue player Niklas Moisander. Individuals have become more and more important for Van Gaal in recent years. In the 90s he hated individualistic players like Bryan Roy, who was fond of unexpected dribbles. Later he learned to appreciate those players and made them important, like El Hamdaoui at AZ and now Arjen Robben in the Dutch national team. Previously every position in Van Gaal's teams had a specific definition and could be played by a minimum of two of his players. Nobody was indispensable. He seems to have abandoned that. When midfielder Kevin Strootman was injured, he changed his whole system. It surprised many Van Gaal-experts, but in November 2012, after only 3 World Cup qualification matches, he already identified Strootman in the magazine De Voetbaltrainer as the indespensible midfield link. “Collective” might be Van Gaal's favourite word, he knows the individuals within it by heart. Louis van Gaal understands the power of the media Van Gaal despises the media, because in his eyes they're lazy and don't understand football or football coaches. But there's more. When he, during the aforementioned press conference in 2001, touched his nose, he heard the shutters of dozens of cameras. He became angry – oh yes – and requested curtly that the media not use any pictures of him touching his nose, “when they wanted to imply a certain meaning.” Van Gaal knows how the media work, he knows he has no influence on it, but he can't accept it. “The media know you were a teacher (he is a qualified gymnastics teacher and worked in that capacity in secondary schools) and it influenced which questions they ask and how they write about you. They put a label on you and you're stuck with it,” cites biographer Maarten Meijer in Louis van Gaal, de biografie. Poor football knowledge annoys him even more. The media might explain a lost match through a lack of commitment or “hunger”. Van Gaal writes in Visie: “Media always write: they didn't do enough. When the layman says: he has no commitment, it means something is the matter. The team is tactically off balance. It causes somebody to be constantly late and makes it look like someone isn't sharp enough or doesn't work hard enough.” In magazine Vrij Nederland Van Gaal's brother Gerard advised him how to respond to dumb questions. “Just think: a dumb person can't insult me.” You could indeed say that. But Van Gaal isn't insulted by stupidity, he's concerned. Like his video analyst Reckers said, Van Gaal is all about learning. And the biggest disruption in that process are, in Van Gaal's opinion, the mass media. The players don't just hear and see that themselves, the people they talk to also mention it. “That's a dangerous mechanism, because those players sometimes tend to parrot the media,” writes Van Gaal in Visie. This can lead to players losing their confidence in Van Gaal's method, wanting to learn less from him and thus reducing his 10%. He can add that 10%, but as he said in 2001, “we have to work together towards the same goal.” Louis van Gaal thinks the procedure is more important A classic: his team loses, but Van Gaal says that he thought his team played well, or even great. Louis van Gaal looks differently at a match. Where the public and the media look at the result, Van Gaal looks at what the players did, regardless of the outcome. If a player does what he was told to do, Van Gaal is happy. Because that's what he and the player worked together for. “It's not even about the result,” he writes in Visie, “it's about the quality of the team's play, where the goal is to keep improving that.” But: then there are the annoying media, who only look at the result. “Media always have the same old unimaginative reasoning when it comes to scoring,” cites Meijer in Louis van Gaal, de biografie. “The press reasons: there aren't enough goals, thus they played badly. You can look at it differently though: given the fact that they played a terrific game, there should have been more goals.” The last friendly (against Wales) before the World Cup was horrible to watch, but Van Gaal didn't care. He'd prefer to not play friendlies at all. “I coach for each situation,” he writes in Visie. “I can only do that during training. Then I can say “stop!”. Teach something on the spot. I can't do that in a match, I don't think the referee would appreciate that.” Van Gaal's concentration on the procedure instead of the outcome, means he has a preference for players who want to learn. Like Bart Vlietstra recalled in The Guardian, defender Bruno Martins Indi told Van Gaal respectfully upon meeting him that he “really wanted to get better. I will ask you a lot of questions.” LvG: “That's good, because I can help you with that.” BMI: “Really?” LvG, beaming: “I love you already, Bruno.” Van Gaal's love for learning and the long term seems to go nicely with league football, where the most constant team will win. The coach has more influence during a season with 34 matches, than during a World Cup: luck is important there, a mistake or a ball hitting the post can make the difference. That makes his wish to be a national coach almost masochistic. Louis van Gaal wants to keep learning Van Gaal is always looking for new football knowledge. He says it, and his staff say it. “Louis is very open towards innovation,” says Max Reckers in an interview in Visie. He spends a lot of time on it, it's really unbelievable. You don't see that anywhere else in football.” This is why endurance training was banned at Ajax in 1993, when Van Gaal learned from exercise physiologist Jos Geijsel that it made players slow. When the daughter of a friend graduated at the VU University after writing a dissertation about the optimal preparation period before a match, he concluded that his team should not focus four, but three days on the next opponent. Only then will players keep that concentration. And he borrows knowledge from different sports. During his time at AZ he learned about training methods in Australian Football. Field hockey was also an inspiration: his wish to let players learn from videos, led to the employment of Max Reckers, who was assistant coach at field hockey club Oranje Zwart, where he used an advanced video analysis system. Van Gaal kept him on his staff after that, to Bayern Munich, Oranje and after the World Cup to Manchester United. Nowadays, Reckers and Van Gaal have a system that shows each contact with the ball through the eyes of the player via an Oculus Rift headset. That way, they can judge whether a player could or couldn't have seen something and if the chosen line up offered enough options. He's always writing in his notebook, disciplined information collector that he is. A famous example is that at Bayern Munich, he once gave every player an information sheet on the strengths and weaknesses of the opponents most likely to be encountered, for a friendly against an amateur team. Over the top? Maybe, but he always gives out such an information sheet. He wants to approach every match in the same way, to get his players used to the structure, to get them used to using a lot of information about their opponents to improve themselves. He uses knowledge and innovation to make his 10% count. Louis van Gaal changes his tactics Van Gaal is a follower of the attacking Dutch School of football: using three attackers on the opponent's side of the pitch. “I sometimes think I'm more fond of 'playing the game well' than 'winning',” he says in Visie. “I want my teams to be remembered.” That may be true, but the way he goes about it has changed. Winning the ball on the opponent's half is great, but what came after often wasn't lucrative: too many opposing players making follow up impossible. So he came up with 'provocative pressure': Let the opponent attack, then when they get to your half, you chase them down, take the ball and quickly use the space in their half. This break with the past doesn't end there: tonight Holland will probably play with five defenders against Spain. It's not only a break with the tradition of the Dutch School to never adapt to the opposing team, it's also contrary to Van Gaal's previous statements in De Voetbaltrainer. “A system change is not easily done, it takes work to train for and you don't have that kind of time as national coach.” The fact that Van Gaal decided to go for it, proves that his confidence in the qualities of individuals has grown. It may not be Dutch School. Better yet, it looks a lot like counter play, as Wesley Sneijder and Arjen Robben have admitted. It might not lead to the kind of football that will be remembered. On the other hand: does anyone remember a team that played beautifully, but didn't make it past the group stage? The opportunistic conclusion If Holland draws or wins tonight, Van Gaal will probably get something he doesn't know all that well: appreciation. That's the beauty of a World Cup – a reputation stands or falls on the basis of a small series of matches where luck plays a large part. Look at Bert van Marwijk, national hero after the World Cup of 2010, and national schmuck after the European Championship of 2012, even though him, nor his group of players had barely changed. The past few weeks Holland has been sure their chance of winning the title is small. Partly due to Van Gaal's deviation from the Dutch tradition and play more defensively. There's a message: we're weaker, we're adapting. Now he's in a situation where he can't really do any wrong. If he loses, it was expected: losing to Spain, there was no alternative. If he wins with his improvised line up full of inquisitive followers like Bruno Martins Indi – not everyone's ideal of a great talent in football – the conclusion will be: brilliant coach. It would be an opportunistic conclusion, one that would irritate Van Gaal. The coach who prides himself on his long term approach – on his procedure – would be awarded on the basis of a single outcome. Paradoxical? Yes. But also deserved, by the brilliant coach who improved every team he coached, but is mostly mocked.[/spoil]
Lại quay về thương vụ Ander Herrera. Không biết đá đấm sao mà giá mắc quá, 36 triệu euro, tầm này tiền mua mẹ nó Vidal, Bastian Schweinsteiger hay Toni Kroos không phải ngon hơn chục lần hay sao ?
Ath. Bilbao nó có truyền thống không bao giờ thoả thuận bán cầu thủ cả, cho nên MU phải kích hoạt buy-out clause, nghe trên reddevils nói thì sang tháng 7 clause sẽ tăng lên đến 42mil euros cho nên bây giờ mới tự nhiên có tin mua đột ngột vậy. BBC đưa tin luôn này: https://twitter.com/BBCSport/status/481358117918486528
Anh em nào hay coi La Liga và Bilbao đánh giá dùm mình khả năng của ku này với. Chứ thiệt tình kỳ Bilbao hành nhà mình hồi đó chỉ để ý Javi, Llorente, Muniain với thằng Oscar De Marcos thôi.
Hàng Tbn ko đc RM Barca để mắt, cũng ko đc gọi lên tuyển thì chắc cũng bt thôi. Mà căn bản năm say ko đc đá CL nên làm gì dễ hốt hàng ngon. Mà nghe nói Fergie theo lâu rồi, LvG cũngng đồng ý nên thôi kệ tiền của clb liên quan gì mình
