Is there a reference site that can counter the idea that spectacular (and effective) football is only for teams playing in the Champions League? Is it within the reach of all educators, coaches, and clubs, to offer a moving football where the spectator feasts in the sight of his team?


My answer is clear and definitive: YES it is possible. The aim of this blog is to prove it, article after article, example after example, by drawing on current events, tactical retrospectives and philosophy. First of all, what does it mean to “play well” football? What is the beautiful game after all? “Play well” and “good play” are they already the same thing?


In football, "the beautiful game" is a commonly heard expression. Yet it deserves a clear definition by separating the terms. First of all, the "game" itself must be considered in its simplest form. “To play” comes from the Latin jocari , which means to joke, to have fun, to distract oneself. Getting back to the essence of this word makes it possible to realize that despite all that football can have that is serious, global, and important, it remains a distraction within society.

It is the introduction and institutionalization of “competition” by the players in this sport (financial stakes, nationalisms, etc.) that creates the conditions for a deviation from this initial idea. However, are competition and game to be opposed? Tell us what you think. Beauty football aims to show that the two words can be associated. It all depends on the men who bring football to life.

From there each team makes a proposal to reconcile all the constraints of this game in its favor: it is the “game project”. The history of this sport is crossed by innumerable very different projects which almost all allowed the victory without being unanimous among the specialists. This is what makes this sport so original.

What is "beautiful" in this magma of proposals?

Warning! Do you think that the supporter and especially the spectator in general, is only a trivial fact of football, that he has no say? Do you think that the emotion of victory or defeat is enough for any average spectator? Very well, then go your way, the rest of this text is not likely to interest you.

In line with Thibaud Leplat's analysis, we like to mobilize the philosopher Kant to try to be as precise as possible. As the German philosopher does, by definition we distinguish "the beautiful" from "the pleasant".

This is a fundamental distinction. The notion of pleasant refers to something subjective, which each individual is free to share or not. Conversely, the notion of "beautiful" is not subjective, since the word refers to a higher emotion, which an initiated individual or not experiences in front of the observed thing.

What is beautiful provides universal emotion, beyond our subjective love and context. The whole problem is to formalize it, to express it in words to share it. Wanting to share it is already putting you in difficulty because the words are not up to the emotion felt. Behind each word hides a different interpretation for each one which will create debate.

Francisco “Pacho” Maturana, great Colombian coach, he admits how difficult it is to put these emotions into words: “Playing well, people know what it is. We must not look any further. There are games where even if their teams lose, the spectators applaud at the end. The public knows how to recognize good football. People are not stupid and footballers play for them. "

However, by analogy with Kant, we believe that football is a total social fact and that the spectator is the one who brings it to life in our hearts day after day. In this context, the "beautiful game" is to bring emotions to the spectators, to the players, and to one.

The emotions provided by the "beautiful game" are positive: joy, pleasure, enthusiasm, inspiration. If the spectator is bored, takes no pleasure in watching his team, or worse, falls asleep, he develops negative emotions while watching a match.

Can we say that the teams on the field are producing great play? Alas, no, even if in the end the result is a 1-0 victory...


But stopping there in the explanation would clearly be insufficient. Because playing "good" football does not always mean "good" football. Many followers or technicians are not aware of this fundamental difference. If a coach tilts the constraints of the game in his favor and wins at the end, he will have played football “well”. This argument is undeniable and used by many coaches but it is clearly limiting.

For example, a manager who uses the strengths of his workforce, strong beefy players in the aerial game and on long balls, which he wins like that, he will have played football “well”.

He maximized the potential of his team. The idea or group of game ideas that a team manages to apply on the pitch, thus posing problems for the opponent while also solving those the opponent might come up with, all while winning the matches, it is is that “playing well” football.

Although we must remember that victory depends on many factors that no game plan can anticipate 100%.
However, are all means good to win? For all those who have touched a ball one day, played a game in the schoolyard; are all football gestures really equal?

In this sport, is the individual achievement simpler than the harmonization of a collective? The goal of this blog is to show that some means are definitely superior to others. Who defines what is beautiful?

The answer is difficult. But whether we like it or not, everyone knows it's easier to destroy than to build. Because building requires a technique, a compulsory thought process, while destroying is often very instinctive. This premise also applies to football.

For example, clearing the ball when it approaches us is always easier, more instinctive, than taking the time to control it to give it to a partner despite the pressure. Any football player has realized, whatever his level, that it is more difficult to express himself technically when space and time are reduced.

This variable is less strong when it comes to destroying the opposing game. These examples, admittedly caricatured, make it possible to understand the element which, in football, Technique and intelligence is the two most important values in trying to succeed in this project.

Who has not often joked about his inability to dribble two or three players on a field despite the afternoons of training he has done? Why does Gasperini's Alalanta Bergamo, Amsterdam's Ajax, Ferguson's Manchester or Guardiola's teams admire? Because, with different, less famous players, there is both an individual quality and expression in a complex collective framework to set up. In these teams, everyone can feel that one is playing “for the other” before playing “for oneself”.

So who is the judge of beauty, of creativity? The spectator. It is an essential keystone. The footballer, manager or president should never forget that he is playing this game not only for himself but also for other people. These spectators must be respected. These individuals prioritize, value even if they do not always have the words or the adequate language.

Even unconsciously, the enthusiast always goes beyond the simple victory or defeat when he comes to see a match. They place the match on the scale of beauty. How else to explain that we remember the Netherlands of Johan Cruyff when they won nothing? How to explain these “classics »Where the supporters (Real Madrid for example) applaud Ronaldinho despite the defeat of their team?


It is now that many trainers, coaches or educators will retort that this technical and intelligent game in short protagonist, is reserved for an elite, an elite of clubs, or an elite of famous coaches. In addition, we could not play protagonist football with all the players. It takes a very large budget to meet this ambition. This idea is not wrong but totally restrictive.

If the protagonist football is difficult to define as a whole as its variations are numerous, we can approach it by explaining what it is not. The protagonist football opposes speculation. It is first and foremost made up of initiatives. Let us take the example of football for children and adolescents in which some accuse him of an excess of "championship [sic]".

During the training of the practitioner, should we teach him as a priority to "wait", to "speculate on the error of the opponent"? Although it would take an entire article to define what it is to 'wait in football', we believe it is more useful and educational to teach the player first to 'take charge', to 'take charge'. His responsibilities”, to“show his talent”.

This is where this blog comes in, constituting a resource portal for all enthusiasts and autodidacts who share the idea that attractive football is not just a question of means. Through these articles and analyzes, we offer reference game models that can serve as inspiration for all enthusiasts and coaches who want to embark on such an adventure. A famous technician summed up the situation perfectly: “There are no good or bad coaches: there are courageous coaches and there are others.".

This clear sentence sums it all up, because the decisive conditions for defending a football that pulls this sport upwards are simple but difficult to apply: be ambitious, demanding, assume defeat, know this sport from A to Z, its history, its culture. Technical and tactical while being always alert, observer.

Through the publication of regular articles, the aim is to give the opportunity to those who like protagonist football to discover it. Just like the apprentice painters taking the time to observe the great masters in order to become one in their turn, it is a question of analyzing the coaches of the present and the past who knew how to give a style to their team in order to help you. To create your own style!

Author's Bio: