Posted by Stephen Kuzner

By Stephen Kuzner - WFD Fan Correspondent

Spain just won the World Cup scoring only 8 goals and conceding only 2. How did they do this? The answer to this question lies in the never-ending debate about beautiful soccer vs. effective soccer, or in more evocative terms positive football versus anti-football.

Spain and the Netherlands both played 4-2-3-1 formations, but very different styles of play. Spain used a possession style offense and pressing defense. Essentially, they took part of FC Barcelona's style of play (I assume because they started 7 FC Barcelona players), namely possession and pressing in numbers, and implemented it in 4-2-3-1 instead of a more attack-minded 4-3-3. The Netherlands played a more cagey pressing counter-attacking style from the same 4-2-3-1.

Let's define what possession means in soccer. As an FC Barcelona supporter, I've felt over the years that when I heard people say we played the right way, i.e. beautiful football, that they didn't really understand what was going-on. Yes, Barcelona plays an attack-minded 4-3-3, but possession lied at the heart of the philosophy. Simply having the ball and passing it around whether it be directly forward, laterally, or back had many advantages. On one hand it tires your opponent physically, mentally, and emotionally. And on the other hand, it builds up your confidence, precision, rhythm and momentum. This possession game has the same effect on opposition as the short-yardage running game in the gridiron, working the body in boxing, playing small-ball in baseball, and making more than the extra pass in basketball. Possession more so sets up the attack than actually being on the attack. Iniesta's goal in the 115th minutes was the total accumulation of this style of play. The dam finally broke.

As much as I love the possession game and would use and teach it if I coached, it is not necessarily the de-facto best style of play. Holding back and counter-attacking can be just as effective. This style guarantees acres of space to run into once you eventually win the ball back. Twice, Arjen Robben had two golden opportunities on the break that were squandered. It just depends on your personal, execution, and it Robben's case a little luck. Possession means moving a lot of people forward slowly so you can out-pass your opponent because of superior numbers in an area of pitch. This requires extraordinary technical skills. Holding back and counter-attacking requires better overall defensive skills and speed. A completely direct approach like Arsenal can be effective as well.

Possession does not mean beauty. They are not synonymous. Is connecting 30 passes in a row beautiful if half of them are backwards or lateral? I'd guess that half of people would say yes and the other half would say no. As much as I loved seeing Spain connect a zillion passes, it probably was because I was rooting for them. To the person who is rooting against Spain, the short-passing possession game may have seemed like a cheap game of keep-away. So what is beautiful soccer?

Beautiful soccer is really how successful you attack. In the end it's about goals. The goal can come at the end of 30 passes through a possession game or a counter-attack after repeated absorbed blows. The goal can also come through a direct attack as well. Any system that attacks effectively will be viewed as beautiful. I had to stomach it, but Intermilan's defeat of FC Barcelona was beautiful. Ouch, it hurts to write that!

It may be easy to define a team's style of play as either positively or negatively charged like an atom or some subatomic particle. The positively-charged teams make more direct forward passes and deploy more players up the pitch when out of possession. The negatively-charges teams make more backwards passes and keep more players defending at home in their side of the pitch. This really seems like a silly way to define teams as negatively or positively charged, but it seems to be how people do it. In these terms, Spain is probably neutrally charged because of all the lateral and back-passes.

However, to define a team as negative or positive misses the point. It also seems kind of bi-polar as well. We don't live in a black and white world and like a reflection of life; soccer has a lot of gray areas. Football can be viewed in many hues including beautiful as defined above, effective (i.e. winning), or as anti-football. What is anti-football?

First, let's define what anti-football is not. Anti-football is not throwing 10 men behind the ball and hoping for a fluke counter-attack. That might be a team's only legitimate chance against a superior opponent. Anti-football is not defensive football. Anti-football also is not negative football as discussed above.

Anti-football is a strategy of stopping your opponent or gaining an advantage over your opponent through deliberate breaches of the rules of the game.

This could include diving, play-attacking, jersey grabbing, and a host of other infringements that could get you a yellow or red card. What it means most is fouling as a strategy. Fouling as a strategy to stop your opponent means you are out-classed tactically and personnel-wise. A lot of people around the globe say that if you gain your team an advantage from fouling diving, etc., you are doing the right thing for your team. That it's really street-smart; especially if you don't get caught. Even if you do get caught and get a yellow or red card, as long as you won its ok. This is absolute rubbish! This same logic would be like saying it's not breaking the law when you commit a misdemeanor, but its only breaking the law when you are convicted of felony.

Anti-football is not clever. It's cheating.

Unfortunately, anti-football can not eradicated by changing the rules or even a referee individually in a game. How can you manage 29 fouls? Howard Webb's job was impossible. Video technology won't help either with 14 yellow cards being issued. Would you want to see 14 minutes of stoppage time added? Although, video and goal-line technology would help with other things. Soccer is a simple game with simple rules; a game that reflects the human-condition and not a fairness utopia like the American Gridiron. The truly great teams will still win through bouts with anti-football. However, Anti-football can be slowed down by pressure from soccer's culture, namely the coaches, fans, and press. Anti-football starts with the coach using it as a strategy. It can also end there.

The Netherland's problem was the fouling. They committed 28 fouls, 8 yellow cards, and 1 red card. When you are solely concerned about stopping a team, how are you going to go forward? Spain wasn't too much better with 19 fouls and 5 yellow cards. Fouling spoils the game and turns it ugly.

This World Cup final came as a mixed-bag. Spain won their first title, the seven winning countries became eight, and we saw a lot of drama. Unfortunately, we also witnessed a lot of anti-football in the final and have a World Cup winner that for the first time lost a game in the group phase and only scored 8 goals in 7 games. Spain may not have been beautiful, but they were effective. For me, as an FC Barcelona supporter, this World Cup Final will be remembered for when Xavi, Iniesta, and Puyol became soccer's ultimate winners having won this World Cup, the Euro's two years ago, and FC Barcelona's six titles a year ago. In the end, winning is always beautiful.

Please send any feedback to skuzner@gmail.com.