So just how significant is pace to the game?

[Gallowgate Toon]

Without pace we are woeful side. All the best teams have lots of pace. Arsenal, Liverpool, Man City, Chelsea and Man united. It's not a coincedence at all, Pace is major factor in players and in a team.

[Guest Knightrider]

It was because he was too slow and didn't have the positional sense to make up for it tbh.

 

Positional sense is a mental strength. Of course Bellamy's pace was a huge advantage for him in that instance but Terry, a slow defender like Blanc, would have no problem dealing with Bellamy and his pace by way of mental strengths, i.e. quick reaction times, discipline, positional sense and decision making. Things that all go on the wane with age as Blanc, a once most accomplished defender who never relied on pace, found out to his cost that day and to Bellamy's advantage.

[Guest Knightrider]

Without pace we are woeful side. All the best teams have lots of pace. Arsenal, Liverpool, Man City, Chelsea and Man united. It's not a coincedence at all, Pace is major factor in players and in a team.

 

 

 

I wouldn't say Chelsea nor Liverpool are exactly a pacey side, and neither are Man Utd although they do attack with pace. Arsenal obviously are but I'd say they were more of an exception. Not many teams have as many quick players as they do, certainly not with mentally strong quick players with great technique. That's why they are such a good team, they have the lot.

 

PS added my reply to your own post by wrongly pressing modify and not quote, hence why it says modified, sorry.

[Guest Pie]

Not sure what your point is, HTT. A player only shoots at goal 0.000001% of the time, but it's a crucial part of the game.

 

Of course shooting is a crucial part of the game, but a speedy player isn't so crucial, contrary to popular opinion. Indeed a speedy player will very rarely get to utilize that pace as these stats show.

 

Don't know what kind of point I'm making btw, I guess I'm just sick of seeing players and indeed teams downgraded because they lack pace, Milner and our own team being the prime source of this issue at times on here, and of course the emphasis placed on pace in youth football/player development which I personally believe to be a retarded way of thinking.

 

The "lacks pace" mentality really bugs me, because fans, managers, pundits and academy directors alike are all overrating it in my opinion to a point where it's starting to have a detrimental effect on the game.

 

The stats btw come from an article  in a magazine called "Total Youth Football" discussing the importance and significance of pace and the article basically states that pace isn't half overrated. It also states that quick reaction times is and always will be more significant to the game and more use to a player and a team along with skill and mental strengths of course.

 

(I guess the article is trying to force coaches of kids to think differently, to not place too much emphasis on pace which is a good thing IMO)

 

I'm also reading other articles that kind of change your outlook on the game, based on stats of course. For example most footy fans and indeed managers and pundits will consider tackling to be vital yet stats are saying different. We don't need reminded of Souness' era where the ability to tackle it seems was the key to success.

 

I'm also reading stuff on why certain players are significantly better than others and surprisingly individual ability has very little to do with for example why a player like Michael Owen is 10 times the player Shola Ameobi is. Mental strengths are what separate the two, that "experiences" in development years.

 

Just little gripes of mine.

Arsene Wenger is obsessed with pace tbh. Not sure his thinking is retarded.

 

Wenger looks for the complete package and can afford to. Most don't though. Skill, technique, power and mental strengths rank as high or higher than pace on his list of "must haves"

Wenger looks for pace, power and technique. His words, not mine. You're missing the point. The football world is littered with technically gifted players who simply didnt have the legs to excel. Good players have that package. If Milner had legs then he may well go from being an everage to a good player. Clarky had technique way beyond anything Milner is capable of. However, he was held back by his lack of pace. It's obvious. Players with below average pace struggle, particularly if their technique isnt the best. Solano was never below average in his prime.

The main point is that if we take pace away then the player loses one of his weapons. Luis Figo, Ryan Giggs, Michael Owen etc are able enough to compensate when they lose it. Mainly because they are exceptional and they were all explosive in their prime. When they lost it they were still not operating at a level that suggested they had below average pace. Those who do like Clark and Milner struggle.

[Guest Pie]

Without pace we are woeful side. All the best teams have lots of pace. Arsenal, Liverpool, Man City, Chelsea and Man united. It's not a coincedence at all, Pace is major factor in players and in a team.

 

 

 

I wouldn't say Chelsea nor Liverpool are exactly a pacey side, and neither are Man Utd although they do attack with pace. Arsenal obviously are but I'd say they were more of an exception. Not many teams have as many quick players as they do, certainly not with mentally strong quick players with great technique. That's why they are such a good team, they have the lot.

 

PS added my reply to your own post by wrongly pressing modify and not quote, hence why it says modified, sorry.

Steven Gerrard and Torres have the pace and power to unsettle any team. Ronaldo at Man Utd is simply the latest in Fergusons desire for pacy wide players - Wallace, Giggs, Kanchelskis, Ronaldo..... Robben, Drogba, SWP werent slow were they?. I cant understand why anyone would suggest that pace isnt important. It's a lame discussion tbh.

[Gallowgate Toon]

Without pace we are woeful side. All the best teams have lots of pace. Arsenal, Liverpool, Man City, Chelsea and Man united. It's not a coincedence at all, Pace is major factor in players and in a team.

 

 

 

I wouldn't say Chelsea nor Liverpool are exactly a pacey side, and neither are Man Utd although they do attack with pace. Arsenal obviously are but I'd say they were more of an exception. Not many teams have as many quick players as they do, certainly not with mentally strong quick players with great technique. That's why they are such a good team, they have the lot.

 

PS added my reply to your own post by wrongly pressing modify and not quote, hence why it says modified, sorry.

Liverpool have some very fast players in their side. Torres, Babel, Pennant, Gerrard to an extent, Riise, Benayoun and Voronin that are quick players.

Chelsea aren't as pacey but they still have players like Wright - Phillips, Cole, Drogba, Kalou, Malouda, Belleti and Essien who have plenty to burn.

Those players are also in teh first team.

[Guest Knightrider]

Not sure what your point is, HTT. A player only shoots at goal 0.000001% of the time, but it's a crucial part of the game.

 

Of course shooting is a crucial part of the game, but a speedy player isn't so crucial, contrary to popular opinion. Indeed a speedy player will very rarely get to utilize that pace as these stats show.

 

Don't know what kind of point I'm making btw, I guess I'm just sick of seeing players and indeed teams downgraded because they lack pace, Milner and our own team being the prime source of this issue at times on here, and of course the emphasis placed on pace in youth football/player development which I personally believe to be a retarded way of thinking.

 

The "lacks pace" mentality really bugs me, because fans, managers, pundits and academy directors alike are all overrating it in my opinion to a point where it's starting to have a detrimental effect on the game.

 

The stats btw come from an article  in a magazine called "Total Youth Football" discussing the importance and significance of pace and the article basically states that pace isn't half overrated. It also states that quick reaction times is and always will be more significant to the game and more use to a player and a team along with skill and mental strengths of course.

 

(I guess the article is trying to force coaches of kids to think differently, to not place too much emphasis on pace which is a good thing IMO)

 

I'm also reading other articles that kind of change your outlook on the game, based on stats of course. For example most footy fans and indeed managers and pundits will consider tackling to be vital yet stats are saying different. We don't need reminded of Souness' era where the ability to tackle it seems was the key to success.

 

I'm also reading stuff on why certain players are significantly better than others and surprisingly individual ability has very little to do with for example why a player like Michael Owen is 10 times the player Shola Ameobi is. Mental strengths are what separate the two, that "experiences" in development years.

 

Just little gripes of mine.

Arsene Wenger is obsessed with pace tbh. Not sure his thinking is retarded.

 

Wenger looks for the complete package and can afford to. Most don't though. Skill, technique, power and mental strengths rank as high or higher than pace on his list of "must haves"

Wenger looks for pace, power and technique. His words, not mine. You're missing the point. The football world is littered with technically gifted players who simply didnt have the legs to excel. Good players have that package. If Milner had legs then he may well go from being an everage to a good player. Clarky had technique way beyond anything Milner is capable of. However, he was held back by his lack of pace. It's obvious. Players with below average pace struggle, particularly if their technique isnt the best. Solano was never below average in his prime.

The main point is that if we take pace away then the player loses one of his weapons. Luis Figo, Ryan Giggs, Michael Owen etc are able enough to compensate when they lose it. Mainly because they are exceptional and they were all explosive in their prime. When they lost it they were still not operating at a level that suggested they had below average pace. Those who do like Clark and Milner struggle.

 

I don't think Clark nor Milner struggled/has struggled. Clark was a good footballer and lack of pace never spited him just as it hasn't spited Milner. It will do eventually because we all look for pace now and so do managers. The only thing that can help him become a top class player from just a plain old good player is by keep improving that technique, those mental strengths. If he can do that which is a big if, he can shine despite any lack of pace, just like Joe Cole who has no pace either, or David Beckham who has never let a lack of pace spite his game or those teams he's played for. In short Milner is not a lost cause because he doesn't have any pace. No player is so long as their ability and mental strengths are good or above average.

[Guest Knightrider]

Without pace we are woeful side. All the best teams have lots of pace. Arsenal, Liverpool, Man City, Chelsea and Man united. It's not a coincedence at all, Pace is major factor in players and in a team.

 

 

 

I wouldn't say Chelsea nor Liverpool are exactly a pacey side, and neither are Man Utd although they do attack with pace. Arsenal obviously are but I'd say they were more of an exception. Not many teams have as many quick players as they do, certainly not with mentally strong quick players with great technique. That's why they are such a good team, they have the lot.

 

PS added my reply to your own post by wrongly pressing modify and not quote, hence why it says modified, sorry.

Steven Gerrard and Torres have the pace and power to unsettle any team. Ronaldo at Man Utd is simply the latest in Fergusons desire for pacy wide players - Wallace, Giggs, Kanchelskis, Ronaldo..... Robben, Drogba, SWP werent slow were they?. I cant understand why anyone would suggest that pace isnt important. It's a lame discussion tbh.

 

Gerrard has the power, he lacks the pace though and that's why he often mistimes his tackle, because he's always stretching. He's not a snail but he's not quick either. Man Utd et al do have quick players of course as we do too, but their game doesn't hinge on the quickness of those individuals in the way that maybe ours does on the quickness of N'Zogbia or Martins but the movement and precision of the team which comes from the mental side and technical side of the players and not so much the physical.

[Baggio]

What is your point, HTT? pace is an important attribute, that's not to say you have to have pace because you don't, however you have to excel with other attributes to make up for that shortcoming. Figo was never the fastest but he made up for it by being technically brilliant, Milner on the other hand isn't fast and doesn't excel at anything else to make up for it.

[Guest Pie]

Without pace we are woeful side. All the best teams have lots of pace. Arsenal, Liverpool, Man City, Chelsea and Man united. It's not a coincedence at all, Pace is major factor in players and in a team.

 

 

 

I wouldn't say Chelsea nor Liverpool are exactly a pacey side, and neither are Man Utd although they do attack with pace. Arsenal obviously are but I'd say they were more of an exception. Not many teams have as many quick players as they do, certainly not with mentally strong quick players with great technique. That's why they are such a good team, they have the lot.

 

PS added my reply to your own post by wrongly pressing modify and not quote, hence why it says modified, sorry.

Steven Gerrard and Torres have the pace and power to unsettle any team. Ronaldo at Man Utd is simply the latest in Fergusons desire for pacy wide players - Wallace, Giggs, Kanchelskis, Ronaldo..... Robben, Drogba, SWP werent slow were they?. I cant understand why anyone would suggest that pace isnt important. It's a lame discussion tbh.

 

Gerrard has the power, he lacks the pace though and that's why he often mistimes his tackle, because he's always stretching. He's not a snail but he's not quick either. Man Utd et al do have quick players of course as we do too, but their game doesn't hinge on the quickness of those individuals in the way that maybe ours does on the quickness of N'Zogbia or Martins but the movement and precision of the team which comes from the mental side and technical side of the players and not so much the physical.

Nonsense tbh I'll leave this cos basically I can barely believe what I'm reading. Wonder why Andre Shevchenko has struggled lately? Ever wondered why players retire in their 30s? Owt to do with them losing pace?

[Guest Pie]

What is your point, HTT? pace is an important attribute, that's not to say you have to have pace because you don't, however you have to excel with other attributes to make up for that shortcoming. Figo was never the fastest but he made up for it by being technically brilliant, Milner on the other hand isn't fast and doesn't excel at anything else to make up for it.

He was quick. Very quick feet and over short distances. Also exceptional.

[Guest jimmy1982]

Pace is a massive asset to any player at any level, but of course you don't need pace to be a good player, i don't think anyone would ever say that, but it gives you a heck of an advantage. figo was an absolutely top drawer player who was not lightning quick. would he have been worse if he'd been slow? impossible to say because its likely that his game would have developped in a different way.

 

it is not a vital individual characteristic but in the modern game i'm afraid it is a vital asset for a team to have. happily the game hasn't changed so much that it is ALL about pace, strength and power, so there is still a place for blokes such as Riquelme, who manages to be arguably the planet's finest footballer whilst also being unquestionably its slowest human being.