call me eben
539 posts















Amorim ball operated with two 10s behind the striker and Bruno joining them high. That meant creativity in the final third wasn’t coming from one player it was coming from multiple angles. Bruno, Mbeumo, Cunha, Amad drifting inside, Dorgu overlapping, Sesko occupying defenders. When you pin a defence with that many threats, goals can come from anywhere. That’s why the team was scoring more and creating better quality chances. The build-up was structured, movements were coordinated, and we were constantly forcing set pieces because defences were under pressure. I’m not pretending Amorim’s system was perfect. It had flaws. But its biggest strength was the final third structure players knew where the next option was before receiving the ball. Carrick ball is the opposite. There is no clear attacking structure. No defined patterns in the final third. It often looks like 11 players running basic drills and hoping individual brilliance saves the day. And that’s the biggest problem with it long term. Football at the top level cannot rely on improvisation. Players need automatisms. They need to know: •where their teammate will be •where the next pass is •who attacks the space •who arrives late in the box That’s what systems do. They drill behaviours until they become instinct. Without that structure, sharpness drops, timing disappears, and attacks become predictable. That’s why Carrick ball feels ….. showmore






























