The ancient Greeks told us, "Everything is in a state of flux."
Without ever delving into it by defending a stance, we often hear fans and misguided sports writers categorically conclude, "they play the game the way it was meant to be played." A curious mind will ask what this means.
Generally speaking, people who assert this do so in defense of an argument about an athlete or team they prefer. Most fans to believe his or her team plays "the way it was meant to be played."
Take hockey in the 1970s. The Montreal Canadiens prevented the Philadelphia Flyers from winning a third straight Stanley Cup in the middle of that decade. It was widely regarded as finesse triumphing over violence. Had the Flyers won the general consensus was that NHL teams were going to adopt the Broadstreet Bullies template.
As I will illustrate shortly, some teams are better suited for certain styles. Every team has their own DNA so to speak. There will always be a clash of, well, sports civilizations.
Let's tackle this notion right here, right now. For this, I will turn to soccer. One can easily apply this to any other sport.
Once upon a time a long time ago in a land far away, the game of soccer differed very much from what we have today. The tactics and formations used would be alien, if not unthinkable in today's highly scientific soccer landscape. Soccer was under the sway of a 1-1-8 or 1-2-7 (in England where individualism or the “kick and rush” strategy prevailed) and 2-2-6 (as was they case in Scotland where team oriented skills were used). Even with the attackers stacked at the front it didn’t necessarily translate into more goals.
Was this how soccer was meant to be played?
From there soccer evolved. And not just in England. Many countries contributed to new ideas and tactics while others perfected systems in place. In the 1920s, the Austrians, the Hungarians and Czechoslovakia took the first steps at building on the Scottish method. Playing a style that predicated on short passing and individual skills, the Danubian school (as it was known) generally employed a 2-3-5 system that had originated in England. By the 1930s, this style earned the term Wunderteam for the Austrians.
Okay. That’s two styles I have introduced here.
Not to be outdone, the Italians under Vittorio Pozzo came up with the Metodo in the 1930s, which essentially asked players to be more responsible at the back end while using a creative midfielder. Result? Italy won back-to-back titles with the 2-3-2-3 formation. It was the beginning of sophisticated tactics that mark the carefully calibrated Italian style that remains until this day.
Article comments
1 - Enlightened Planet
And here I expected a discussion on sportsmanship, not a treatise on football tactics...
In my mind, 4-4-2 vs. 4-2-3-1 is not the same conversation as the Broad Street Bullies vs. the Montreal Canadiens.
Anyway, here's to playing by both the spirit AND the letter of the law, NOT by pushing the envelope of the "professional foul"... whatever your positional tactics might be in whichever sport you choose to participate.
2 - RJ Elliott
Great article.
But, call me old fashioned, I still believe that hockey was meant to be played with a bloody glove and a missing tooth...
3 - alessandro Nicolo
EP. sportsmansip might have been interesting. Sorry to have let you down. I recognize that some Europeans (or soccer fans) are already aware of this but I was merely laying down how it's hard to pin point the essence of a game. Nor was I trying to equate the Habs/Flyes with 4-4-2. I absolutely agree with you but it doesn't mean it's the only way. I won't fault teams that "push the envelope" as you have described - you know, like the New Jersey Devils or maybe the New England Patriots. I'm trying to seperate the two. The article could have spun off into several directions. RJ, hey I'm with you on that. Like EP, I like a mixture. That's exactly the point we have our preferences but should we cross over and categorically say it's the "way it was meant to be played?" Bobby Clarke with no teeth smiling with the Cup. How do you top that? So many of us fans have a primal instinct to admire that.
4 - Christopher Rose
RJ: In England, where all the greatest games were created, Hockey is mostly a girl's game - albeit still with bloody gloves and missing teeth! Pretty it ain't.
5 - Matthew T. Sussman
Sports were not meant to be played with me on either team.
6 - RJ Elliott
"RJ: In England, where all the greatest games were created, Hockey is mostly a girl's game - albeit still with bloody gloves and missing teeth! Pretty it ain't."
Chicks without teeth. Hmmm. I'm not sure that's entirely a bad thing. :-/
7 - Christopher Rose
RJ: Let's just say the after match celebrations could be fun!
Actually, girl's Hockey matches were/are very popular with boys of a certain age. Those short skirts with fleeting glimpses of white or navy knickers and figure hugging tops were endlessly fascinating...
8 - The Haze
Your title could be used to explain how "SPORTS" has morphed into "ENTERTAINMENT". They don't "PLAY" sports anymore,they "ENTERTAIN". Don't know much about hockey but damn! those boys can fight!