Jump to content

Capello's Juventus 2004-2006


Recommended Posts

THAT TEAM! As a juventus fan since 95, im glad to see that team recreated in FM. I tried it too in 2008 with G. Rossi - Andy Carrol playing the central duo in attack :D Most games won 1-0 hah! They were knocked out of cl in 2005 cause Ibra lost a shot from 1-2 meters whith no GK in front of him. Liverpool had a very  difficult mission otherwise. Second leg in Liverpool and del piero was having great combinations (and also should have been given a penalty).

Do you remember that Capello was trying to force Del Piero out of his starting 11, or maybe out of the club, and everytime he subbed Ibra or Mutu there was a goal from Del Piero who came in!

Great to see m8. Thanks a lot the memories!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Il y a 2 heures, Der General a dit :

I do believe his rigidity was the key factor of unsuccessful CL campaigns in both 2005 and 2006, but this Juve literally destroyed Serie A opponents through physical dominance

Completely agree. 

Remember the game vs Arsenal at Delle Alpi and it was like they dont want to attack for win. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOVE this thread!!!

I’ve always found Serie A 80s-90s the most interesting period so will be amazing to see a few examples (Lippi's Juve with Zidane in the diamond also really cool)

Will be watching closely as I’ve never been able to work out tactics in FM

 

Edited by Optimal-Kiwi
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a good tactic but it's wrong if you want to emulate that team. From watching Serie A on tape delay via the then-PBS affiliate WNYE (and live on GolTV/FSC), I have great remembrance of that team.

 

Zambrotta was an attacking FB. Chiellini was more of a disciplined FB. I don't remember him coming forward too often. Zlatan was a CF while Trezeguet was more of a classic 9 (AF is fine). Emerson was DLP (d). Very disciplined but he has good ball playing abilities. Viera could be either RPM or a SV (a) depending on how you shape your tactic. He made a lot late runs into the box.

Pablo Nedved was a WP (a). He certainly was more attacking than you put him in. Hit a lot of killer balls and cut in often. Cameronesi I agree he was a WM (s). Zambrotta and him tend to overlap and underlap each other.

 

I don't remember much pressing from this side. Capello was in a stage of his career when his team would regroup and put 8 or 9 men behind the ball and play narrow and compact. The only time they would press is if the ball was in their own half. But the first priority was to get back into shape.

Edited by Jean0987654321
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Der General said:

Key concepts:

  • Structured 4-4-2 shape in defence
  • Tight at the back

I do believe his rigidity was the key factor

Talk that structure and rigidity are key.  Certainly sounds like Capello to me.

But then you have chosen six roles with a support duty.  I don't follow the logic of that?  Not in the sense of this being a recreation.  I bet Team Fluidity doesn't say structured.

Link to post
Share on other sites

il y a 10 minutes, Robson 07 a dit :

Talk that structure and rigidity are key.  Certainly sounds like Capello to me.

But then you have chosen six roles with a support duty.  I don't follow the logic of that?  Not in the sense of this being a recreation.  I bet Team Fluidity doesn't say structured.

But more fluidity means more compactness too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jean0987654321 said:

Looks like a good tactic but it's wrong if you want to emulate that team. From watching Serie A on tape delay via the then-PBS affiliate WNYE (and live on GolTV/FSC), I have great remembrance of that team.

Zambrotta was an attacking FB. Chiellini was more of a disciplined FB. I don't remember him coming forward too often. Zlatan was a CF while Trezeguet was more of a classic 9 (AF is fine). Emerson was DLP (d). Very disciplined but he has good ball playing abilities. Viera could be either RPM or a SV (a) depending on how you shape your tactic. He made a lot late runs into the box.

Pablo Nedved was a WP (a). He certainly was more attacking than you put him in. Hit a lot of killer balls and cut in often. Cameronesi I agree he was a WM (s). Zambrotta and him tend to overlap and underlap each other.

I don't remember much pressing from this side. Capello was in a stage of his career when his team would regroup and put 8 or 9 men behind the ball and play narrow and compact. The only time they would press is if the ball was in their own half. But the first priority was to get back into shape.

I won't say you are wrong, but you are not completely right as well, since you are not looking at the whole picture. Zambrotta was an attacking FB indeed. However, Zebina on the right wasn't. The only reason why - they interpret the role in a completely different way. This is something I used here, focused on the squad building and utilized default roles in order to complement them.

Zaniolo/Nedved cuts inside, Zaracho/Camoranesi as well. Vieira/Pogba gets forward whenever possible, even with a CM role. Everyone passes into space (TI selected).

The only thing I'd change would be Zlatan's role. However, CF tends to work a lot better when used as a lone striker, so I went on with this. Del Piero/Zlatan were also different interpretations of the role.

As for pressing - they would press the defense, and then get back into shape. I've looked through a lot of matches during the past few weeks, I'm positive about pressing. However, it doesn't look nearly as intensive as nowadays. As for shape, you can see in the screenshots.

 

8 hours ago, Robson 07 said:

Talk that structure and rigidity are key.  Certainly sounds like Capello to me.

But then you have chosen six roles with a support duty.  I don't follow the logic of that?  Not in the sense of this being a recreation.  I bet Team Fluidity doesn't say structured.

Stop thinking in FM terms, use your logic. Does the defense in the screenshot look structured (2 banks of four)? Is the striker isolated upfront, waiting for the ball?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Der General said:

Stop thinking in FM terms, use your logic.

It's kind of difficult not to.  This is a FM site and you are using FM language.

It may be a fine tactic, and if so I congratulate you  wholeheartedly.  Successful tactics are always an achievement.

You're right, my observation was easy and quick to make.  Using a balanced mentality and all those support roles is - in FM terms :) - either going to be fluid or very fluid.   Those support roles will ensure the team plays as a unit and the forwards contribute to defensive as well as attacking phases. 

On the other hand however, you have also quoted Capello in the OP knocking Ajax and saying it isn't Dutch style.  Do you fee that is the case with your tactic?

May I ask a quick question?  Do you know what sort of possession numbers Capello's side got and how does that compare with what you are seeing?

Edited by Robson 07
Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't care much about possession. Neither do I :D It varied from 35% to 65%. I'll share some stats from Champions League matches:

https://m.football-lineups.com/match/17121/

https://m.football-lineups.com/match/17115/

https://m.football-lineups.com/match/17101/

https://m.football-lineups.com/match/15449/

https://m.football-lineups.com/match/7365/

https://m.football-lineups.com/match/7364/

https://m.football-lineups.com/match/7361/

Comparing to what I'm getting - pretty similar. For example, Manchester United in CL 1/4F:

m1.thumb.JPG.a3d123c5e8bc73df2658772d3f1e4edc.JPG

Averages in CL and Serie A

CL.thumb.JPG.792363154faaf834f490a86695540801.JPG

ser.thumb.JPG.ca751ee9a90dea87faee74c130fd28e5.JPG

It most certainly doesn't feel Dutch, the attacks are simple, without useless passes across the field. Against a weaker opponent, faced with a defensive opponent (Serie A mostly), I managed solid 60s, but with stronger, more open sides, 30s to 40s were maximal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/04/2020 at 00:20, Jean0987654321 said:

Zambrotta was an attacking FB. Chiellini was more of a disciplined FB. I don't remember him coming forward too often. Zlatan was a CF while Trezeguet was more of a classic 9 (AF is fine). Emerson was DLP (d). Very disciplined but he has good ball playing abilities. Viera could be either RPM or a SV (a) depending on how you shape your tactic. He made a lot late runs into the box.

Pablo Nedved was a WP (a). He certainly was more attacking than you put him in. Hit a lot of killer balls and cut in often. Cameronesi I agree he was a WM (s). Zambrotta and him tend to overlap and underlap each other.

zambrotta was playing at the left, zebina was on the right. he bought him in a duo packet along with emerson. chiellini was just bought from fiorentina and played only at LB in cup matches or if zambrotta was injured.  Nedved was a runner with an eye for the pass also but his trademark was his runs, he was terrifying. he runned outside and inside of a defense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DimitrisLar said:

zambrotta was playing at the left, zebina was on the right. he bought him in a duo packet along with emerson. chiellini was just bought from fiorentina and played only at LB in cup matches or if zambrotta was injured.  Nedved was a runner with an eye for the pass also but his trademark was his runs, he was terrifying. he runned outside and inside of a defense.

Yeah...actually you're right. Zebina was more of a disciplined FB from my memory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...