Positional Play vs. Relationism—Are they so different? 🧵
In recent years, these two ideas have been treated as opposites, competing for the “truth” of football.
In this thread, I’ll explore some shared principles that belong to the game itself 👇🏻
In recent years, these two ideas have been treated as opposites, competing for the “truth” of football.
In this thread, I’ll explore some shared principles that belong to the game itself 👇🏻
1/ The Diagonal
Diagonal positioning or passing helps the receiver control forward and forces defenders to adjust their body and attention.
It’s a universal foundation that benefits players in any style, disrupting defensive stability and opening new angles.
Diagonal positioning or passing helps the receiver control forward and forces defenders to adjust their body and attention.
It’s a universal foundation that benefits players in any style, disrupting defensive stability and opening new angles.
2/ Movement > Static
Defenders rely on references: players, spaces, or both.
Creating advantages in movement forces defenders to constantly adapt, making it harder for them to decide who or what to protect.
If the advantage is in motion, means less time for the defenders.
Defenders rely on references: players, spaces, or both.
Creating advantages in movement forces defenders to constantly adapt, making it harder for them to decide who or what to protect.
If the advantage is in motion, means less time for the defenders.
3/ The 3 Players
In tight spaces, the three-player connection is key.
Using an intermediate player forces defenders to shift focus, creating blind spots and new options for players close to the ball.
3-Players Connection opens new options for the attackers and defenders.
In tight spaces, the three-player connection is key.
Using an intermediate player forces defenders to shift focus, creating blind spots and new options for players close to the ball.
3-Players Connection opens new options for the attackers and defenders.
4/ Space, Time, and Engaño
Both Positional Play and Relationism aim to surprise opponents.
A well executed Positional Play will be unpredictable.
A well executed Relationism will be unpredictable.
Different approaches, same objective.
Both Positional Play and Relationism aim to surprise opponents.
A well executed Positional Play will be unpredictable.
A well executed Relationism will be unpredictable.
Different approaches, same objective.
5/ Shared Language and Intentions
It’s not about one philosophy being better than the other.
Success depends on players speaking the same language and sharing intentions.
This alignment is what truly makes a team work.
It’s not about one philosophy being better than the other.
Success depends on players speaking the same language and sharing intentions.
This alignment is what truly makes a team work.
6/ Tools for the Same Game
The Positional vs. Relationism debate often creates division, but it doesn’t have to.
By focusing on what’s shared, what’s different, and how to mix them, we can gain new insights.
Different tools—but always for the same game.
The Positional vs. Relationism debate often creates division, but it doesn’t have to.
By focusing on what’s shared, what’s different, and how to mix them, we can gain new insights.
Different tools—but always for the same game.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
