Why do so many people have a problem with "parking the bus"?

Scroll to see replies

I'm not sure. You could have the semi-finals played over one leg at a neutral venue. Teams could still 'park the bus' but they would have to try to score at some point.

Because in two-legged affairs you don't have to?
Two-legged affairs are more profitable and much more convenient for fans and ticket holders.
Plus, they require more strategy than luck.

Besides, the finals are at neutral venues anyway

Reply 21

mojojojo101

Original post by MrSupernova

Because it's boring. Klopp and Ancelotti have shown it is possible to defend deep, break with pace and win trophies doing it, all while entertaining the neutral. How can anyone who isn't a Chelsea fan say they enjoyed the match against Atlético last week?!

Boring is entirely subjective. I remember that 3-3 Liverpool derby earlier in the season ws awful to watch for me, I remember there being a distinct lack of care and attention wrt defending and keeping hold of the ball in favour of just smashing it up the pitch because 'lol lol lol lets score goals!!'. For me, that game was very boring.

Reply 22

MrSupernova

Original post by 9MmBulletz

I have honestly seen no difference in how Real Madrid play since Ancelotti joined.
Real Madrid are scoring just as much and so is Ronaldo.

I honestly think it's impossible to impose your own style of play on the team as a manager of Madrid.

I meant the way they played tonight in terms of defending for most of the game yet still looking by far the most dangerous side. I'd say the front three behind Benzema have been a lot more fluid this season, since with Isco being fairly average Di Maria has replaced Özil in the starting XI and they haven't really got a proper number 10 anymore. Ronaldo certainly seems to be picking the ball up in central areas a lot more

Reply 23

MrSupernova

Original post by mojojojo101

Because some people get a little confused and think football is some majestic moral crusade for the pinnacle of their own sordid entertainment.

The truth is football, as all in all sport, is about winning by whatever means (remember its not cheating if you don't get caught).

Boring is entirely subjective. I remember that 3-3 Liverpool derby earlier in the season ws awful to watch for me, I remember there being a distinct lack of care and attention wrt defending and keeping hold of the ball in favour of just smashing it up the pitch because 'lol lol lol lets score goals!!'. For me, that game was very boring.

To an extent, I agree, if it was all about goals with no regard for quality we'd all be down the park watching fourth division under 11's football. What is boring is subjective I suppose - for example I really enjoyed watching Barcelona in their pomp even though a lot of people (mainly in this country) complained about their passing being too sideways, and I can see their point even if the positives outweighed the negatives for me. Chelsea put a lot of care and attention into defending last week, but none into keeping the ball, just lumping it up for Torres or Ramires to chase. It's been very effective in the past, but I really can't see how anyone finds it enjoyable to watch. I suppose it's different in finals, because despite their negative play I loved the 2012 Champions' League final because of the tension and drama at the end

Sport is about entertainment as well as winning though. It's why spectators watch football and why the vast majority of players (i.e. grassroots level) play it

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 24

JuliusDS92

I think it's less that it's boring and more that it's very frustrating to watch your team hold the ball but not have a chance to score.

Reply 25

9MmBulletz

Original post by MrSupernova

That's more down to the dynamics of the team than a managerial change.

The only time Mourinho really parked the bus was against Barcelona when they were in their peak. Most teams played like that against them and it's not like opposition had much choice when playing Barcelona.

I'll say one thing Carlo has done is centralise diMaria which is bringing the best out of him.

I think people are exaggerating how much Mourinho plays defensive tactics. He just uses what he has in front of him.
I always thought Bayern Munich were abit overhyped and even though they dominate possession more, they are quite far from the team that Barcelona became a few years back.

Mourinho has been playing fairly defensively with Chelsea recently because Hazard has been injured and we have little threat going forward. We couldn't afford to do anything else but keep it tight defnsively. We don't have the resources that Real Madrid do to be more ambitious

With Madrid, they have Ronaldo and a whole host of attacking players. He wouldn't have parked the bus against Atletico or Liverpool if he had Real Madrid's team. It's beggar's belief

Mourinho would've probably played the same way against Bayern Munich if he was still at Madrid. Their defensive record was hardly better than Real Madrid's current one.

Reply 26

doobucks

Mourinho's eggs comments from 2007 were right tbh.

If he believes that the team is capable of playing attacking football he would make them play that football. Chelsea play attacking football against norwich and and the likes e.g. because we have better players in keeping the ball and in attacking without being too open.

Ancelotti has basically done the exact same thing Mourinho has done but with playing players in different positions/different formations.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 27

doobucks

Original post by JuliusDS92

I think it's less that it's boring and more that it's very frustrating to watch your team hold the ball but not have a chance to score.

Well then they should blame their team on not being able to break them down?

My brother complains about this on fifa lol since I rarely press him high up the pitch and only press in from the centre circle and says I play like Chelsea and it's too tactical and robotic how I play...

He usually says that when he loses.

Reply 28

Swanbow

You get the same argument with Rugby. People complain whenever a team plays a tactical kicking game, or one dominated by forwards. At the end of the day a team's objective is to win the game. They can do that by playing exciting, attacking football or by playing defensive, counter-offensive football. So long as they get a result it doesn't matter. If you find Chelsea boring don't watch them.

Reply 29

ZÃ¼rich

Original post by Mr Smurf

If the team doing it feels like it gets them results, what is wrong with it?

Most of my Chelsea mates will selectively choose whether to be insulted, or proud of their reputation. They are in denial about how hideous it is, and I'm not the man to tell them. They all say the ends justify the means, then again they know nothing else. Where would CFC be without it and Roman's money? Chelsea fans convince themselves...they wrap themselves up in mental gymnastics to justify it.

Real play on the counter, but they dont humiliate themselves with their style. Maybe Chelsea could pikc that up? Oh that's right, Mourinho was sacked innit

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 30

doobucks

Zurich is an incredibly bitter man, he leaves a pretty bad taste in peoples mouth tbh

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 31

So Instinct

Original post by jam277

he leaves a pretty bad taste in my mouth tbh

Stop sucking his dick then.

Couldn't resist soz.

Reply 32

Isometrix

Original post by jam277

Zurich is an incredibly bitter man, he leaves a pretty bad taste in peoples mouth tbh

Lol don't say that, he'll get off on comments like that knowing he's achieved something with the x number of times in a day he mentions our history/lack of class/bought success. I'm tempted to call it a mild form of OCD but it doesn't fit all the criteria...

I might just go and watch the highlights of the 6-0, good times :h:

Reply 33

Jordooooom

Why are people acting as if Jose is some tactical genius who invented parking the bus?

No one likes it because it is incredibly boring and is used by inferior teams who want to get a scrappy win. The problem with Chelsea is that they have millions to buy the best players yet still use these cheap tactics

Reply 34

Idle

I have no particular problem with it but when your team was bought for about as much as most of the bottom half of the table combined and that is all you can do then it's a poor reflection on Chelsea.

Reply 35

Petyr24

What's parking the bus? I have a feeling it's not just parking an actual bus, based on how others are using the term here.

Reply 36

Solemn Rain

Original post by Ajibola

What's parking the bus? I have a feeling it's not just parking an actual bus, based on how others are using the term here.

someone has just discovered chelsea :rofl:

OP, it's a cheap tactic, and not something a sugardaddy club should be embracing lol
Plus where is the entertainment?

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 37

9MmBulletz

Original post by MrSupernova

Yeah and it was to our strength. Our first-choice striker was missing, while Hazard was missing, and Oscar was not playing too. We didn't have the players to play on the break or even keep the ball so Mourinho just thought "let's get a clean sheet and we'll take it from there".

If Mourinho has players like Ronaldo, Benzema he won't play like this. Real Madrid hardly played defensively/parked the bus unless it was against Barcelona and it's not like things have changed because teams are forced to play this way against Barcelona

Reply 38

pane123

Original post by 9MmBulletz

Because in two-legged affairs you don't have to?

Of course you do but only over the course of the tie. As far as I'm concerned, teams should be encouraged to win every single match and I would not say the current format encourages that. Chelsea will try to score tonight but I didn't see any real effort to do so in the first leg.

Reply 39

9MmBulletz

I see no problem with it. I mean City played fairly open and lost 3-2 to Liverpool and it was a good game to watch. We made the game terrible for the neutral but we won 2-0 at Anfield, and I'd take that any day.

Would I have preferred to watch a more entertaining game? Yes, but
Would I rather my team win even if it upsets neutrals? Yes

I like to watch entertaining football, but when it comes down to it, I prefer the team I support to win and I will support them regardless of whatever method they use.

People say it's a cheap tactic, but a lot of effort goes into it. It's not simply just defending, like we did in the 2012 final. Because in that, Bayern Munich created chances and enough to win in normal time. Against Liverpool and Atletico, we did not give them space.

Not many teams can go to Anfield and Atletico and come back with a clean sheet, even if that is their intention. We happen to be very talented across the back-line, and because our attack was less potent than Liverpool's given injuries, it was the only way to play. There was no point going gung-ho because Liverpool would've probably scored early on, which is what normally wins Liverpool matches. They seem to run out of steam in the second half, but it doesn't matter by then because the game is usually over.