|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Video Plus Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities 
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
What's best for Italy? Sacchi's criticisms of Italian soccer lead to debate
A few days ago Arrigo Sacchi, winner of two European Cups with AC Milan and the man who led Italy to second place in the 1994 World Cup launched a startling attack against the Italian game. He accused Italian soccer of being stuck with a cynical, ultra-defensive mentality, where results are always more important than entertainment. He alleged that little has changed in one hundred years and that what Italians call "furbizia" (roughly translated as a corner-cutting cleverness) has always been valued more than attacking play. He said this made the Italian game stale, dull, and ultimately self-defeating. The "Catenaccio" mentality is alive and well, he says. Italian clubs are guilty of overemphasizing defense, physical fitness and tactics aimed not at scoring goals, but rather preventing opponents from playing. Instead of establishing organized systems which produce offensive chances, Italian clubs to this day sit back, defend and wait for either an opponent's mistake, a set-piece or a flash of individual brilliance by a star player. Sacchi's attack has caused much controversy across Europe. I'm not sure where I stand, but I can understand both sides of the argument. I therefore nominate myself as judge and invite you, the CNNSI.com readers to listen to both sides of the argument and be the jury in this debate. JUDGE MARCOTTI: All rise. This court is now in session. Italian soccer stands accused of being stale, dull and unwilling to evolve. Will the plaintiff, acting on behalf of Mr. Sacchi, please outline his case? PLAINTIFF: Your honor, Mr. Sacchi has hit the nail on the head this time. Italian clubs have spent more than anyone over the years and, with very few exceptions, consistently failed to produce anything approaching real soccer. Let's take a look at history. Yes, Italy did win two World Cups in the 1930s, but that was a long time ago. And, let's face it, it was playing at home in 1934, under a Fascist dictatorship which I'm sure did not harm things one bit. The 1950s were utterly barren, Italy even failed to qualify in 1958. Same goes for the 1960s: need I remind the court that in 1966 Italy lost to North Korea? Yes, things did improve at club level in that decade, with Milan and Inter winning two European Cups each. Again, however, both of those teams employed the rigid, mind-numbing catenaccio style. It was all based on defending in numbers and then counterattacking. Not to mention the fact that Inter's wins were clouded by allegations of bribes as well. Accusations which were never proven, granted, but still it was nothing to be proud of.
Italy did reach the final of the 1970 World Cup, beating West Germany in an epic semifinal, 4-3. Of course, the fact that Germany's best player, Franz Beckenbauer, played most of the game with an arm strapped to his chest certainly helped. They got what they deserved in the final, being blown away by Brazil, 4-1. Don't be fooled by their success in the 1982 World Cup either. They would have never made it if Brazil hadn't self-destructed and if Dino Zoff hadn't pulled off arguably the greatest save in history in the last minute of their encounter. Sure, Italian clubs won lots of trophies in the 1980s and 1990s. But, apart from Sacchi's Milan, which was truly innovative, their victories came largely because they had better foreign players than anyone else and because other clubs couldn't figure out how to beat what was still, in effect, a "Catenaccio". A more evolved "Catenaccio" perhaps, but still an arid, safety-first mentality. Look what happened last season, when Serie A teams were pitiful in continental competitions. Once the rest of Europe caught up tactically, Italian clubs found they were no better and often worse than the competition. Apart from a brief spell in the late 1980s with Sacchi, Gigi Maifredi, Giovanni Galeone and Zdenek Zeman, Italian clubs have always frowned upon attacking managers. The Italian mentality is to obtain the maximum result with the minimal effort. Look at Pippo Inzaghi. A dive here, a counterattack there, a rebound there and the guy scores twenty goals a season, not because of his ability, but because he preys on opponent's and referee's mistakes. With very few exceptions, Italy has never produced open, attacking sides like the Dutch Clockwork Orange teams of the 1970s or Real Madrid (just about any Real Madrid, bar Fabio Capello 's team). Why? Because Italian teams live in fear of making mistakes. To attack, you must take chances. It's not a question of talent. Serie A clubs are far and away the most talented in the world. The problem is that they turn talented stars into nervous wrecks, they rob them of their license to create, invent and entertain. If Roberto Baggio had been born in any other country he would have been hailed as one of the greatest ever. Instead he had the misfortune of playing in Italy, where he was under fire for most of his career. He still made his mark, but how many talented Italian players, from Gianni Rivera to Bruno Conti, from Gigi Riva to Roberto Mancini ever truly enjoyed the chance to show what they were worth? Neutral fans around the world support countries like Brazil, Argentina, Holland, even England. Only Germany is as unpopular as Italy among neutrals. And that is because, simply put, Italy refuses to play the game properly. JUDGE MARCOTTI: And now, the case for the defense, representing the entire Italian game. DEFENDANT: Your honor, I would like to remind Mr. Sacchi that the object of the game is to win, something he himself hasn't managed all too often. Admittedly, his Milan teams were stellar in winning their two European titles, but on the home front, Sacchi won just one Italian championship. That was in 1987-88 and that came only after a bizarre late-season collapse by Napoli. The man who replaced him, Fabio Capello, adopted a more traditional Italian style and took four titles in five seasons, plus a European Cup. Sacchi preaches open, attacking soccer, but in his time as coach of Italy, we rarely saw it working. Apart from a 2-1 win over Bulgaria, Italy was unimpressive at USA 94 and was knocked out in the first round at Euro 96. Let's not forget that and let's not forget that Mr. Sacchi, in 53 matches in charge of Italy, used 52 different lineups. I would also like to remind him that he failed miserably in his two latest jobs, when he returned to Milan in 1996-97 and when he took over Atletico Madrid in 1998-99. But there is no need to attack him personally. I would rather focus on his ideas. Does the Italian game care about results more than entertainment? Of course, but that is because results make history. No matter what he says, only Brazil has won more World Cups than Italy and that is something to be proud of. People remember winners. Brazil in 1982, Denmark in 1986, Argentina in 1994 ... these were all wonderful, attacking sides and they all have one thing in common: they all failed to make their mark. Soon, only purists will remember them. When people think of Italy's 1982 team they think of Dino Zoff's saves and Paolo Rossi 's goals and the fact that the azzurri won the title. That was entertainment, no matter what he says. Was the Catenaccio of the 1960s to blame for Italy's failures at national team level in the following decade? Possibly, but then the game is constantly evolving. Holland was wonderful in the 1970s, poor in the early 1980s and great again with Marco Van Basten and Ruud Gullit. These things happen. But the bottom line is that Holland, for all its greatness, has won zero World Cups. Argentina, his other shining example, won just one without Diego Maradona and that was at home. If Italy's win in 1934 was dubious, then so was Argentina's in 1978. The point is that fads and tactics come and go, but Italy has a solidity and a consistent track record matched only by Brazil and Germany. Sacchi lambasts Italy's counterattacking style, but he forgets that Manchester United, for example, hardly the paragon of defensive soccer, scores most of its goals on the quick counter. Technically gifted players are at their best in open spaces and, in the modern game, you only get those when you counterattack. Sacchi is also wrong when he says the Italian game is not evolving. Apart from Lazio, most top Serie A clubs play with just three defenders and either three strikers or two forwards plus an offensive midfielder. That is hardly ultra-defensive and, more importantly, it shows that they have evolved, they are trying to innovate. And, it should be said, they aren't innovating because they want to entertain, they are innovating because they want to win. A game of soccer is not a circus or a rock concert. You are there to win. Ultimately, the game belongs to the fans and the fans, at least in Italy, would rather win than be entertained and lose. Italian soccer is fine the way it is and it does not need Sacchi's arrogant, misguided, utopistic attacks. JUDGE MARCOTTI: Ladies and gentleman of the jury, you have heard arguments from both sides. Will you please retire now and issue your verdict?
| |||||||||||||||||||||
