World

Europe

Netherlands

The Debate: Marco vs Bert

April 6th, 2009 | By: Jan | 42 Comments »

Well, this could be a very heated debate here… Or not… Because, at the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter .

But in my view, Marco made many mistakes and some were made due to inexperience, others were made due to Marco’s personality. Look at his dealings with JC at Ajax, Marco sometimes believes he’s above “the law”, because he once was a great player.

MARCO

His first mistake, was to announce that he’d go for “attractive and dominant football in the Dutch School style”. When he saw he couldn’t bring that, he denounced that and started to call every half-decent performance with superlatives. He should have said 1) I was wrong when I stated those goals or 2) I am still behind what I said, but yes we did play sjite today… By claiming Oranje played very well, he lost a lot of credibility.

Second mistake was his claim to play 4-3-3 and to allow “lesser” players on that position if he needed to. He would also only play players on the spots where they play at club level. He did experiment with a number of “lesser” players, but it didn’t work out. He also dropped the “I play players at their usual spot” rule but – again – he never admitted that publically. He should have said: “this is what I wanted to do, but I was wrong. It didn’t work.”

Third mistake was holding on to 4-3-3 religiously. It took a lot of debating – Van der Sar, Van Bommel, Van Nistelrooy – to finally convince him to change his tactics. I wouldn’t say Marco deserved credit for moving to 4-2-3-1. The players deserve that credit. And it wouldn’t surprise me at all if Van Bommel was axed due to his vocal opposition to Marco’s tactics.

Fourth mistake is in Marco’s man-management and communication. Jokes about Seedorf (”Why Seedorf? I’ve got Nicky Hofs and Theo Janssen!”), Davids (”I don’t select Jan Wouters either”) and his continious criticism on Van Bommel hasn’t helped San Marco hold on to credibility. He blamed Mark van Bommel letting “his man run away”… But isn’t that what’s football is all about? Taking a risk? Which players doesn’t let his man go every now and then? He wrongfooted Huntelaar before the WC2006, when a kid reporter from some school newspaper asked him if he’d take Hunter along. Marco said: “Take him along? Man, he’ll be the tournament’s top goalscorer!”. That made the headlines and the news on telly. Two months later, Huntelaar is not selected for the WC.
Highpoint was the way he treated Van Nistelrooy (or low point I should say) when he publically criticized Van Gol at a press conference without having told Ruud his ideas. And at the same time, Ruud complained he didn’t get any service. This cost Oranje our main striker against Portugal.

In terms of delivering attractive, dominant and offensive play, Marco gave us the Italy and France match at the EC. And it’s true: he always said the EC would be the tournament he focused on, not so much the WC2006. Granted. Still, a poor result.

The qualifications weren’t a problem for Oranje under Van Basten, as they aren’t now under Bert. At the WC, we played 4-3-3 but never dominated. The Serbia game was a close call, could easily have been a draw. We won that due to one moment of brilliance by Van Persie and Robben. The first 20 minutes against Ivory Coast were ver good, the remainder disappointing and again, could have been a draw. The Argentina game was not great. He should have played the normal eleven to keep momentum. Instead of winning the group, we had to play a motivated Portugal.

Now, I won’t blame Marco for that match. But…the bad vibe between Bommel and Basten and the benching of Ruud – they had this clash the night before the game – surely didn’t help. Van Bommel was irrate during the game and Marco could have and should have coached better during that game, for instance by taking Boulah off at half time.

During the EC, where we played 4-2-3-1 thanks to the players!, we did impress at the group stages. But against Russia, it all fell to pieces. Was it the impact of the Boulah tragedy? Was Oranje outsmarted by Guus? Did Marco’s coaching let us down? We’ll never know for sure…

BERT

It’s not possible to judge Bert at this point. Cruisin’ through the series is one thing, the real prizes are being handed out in a year or so. So, the jury needs to wait till the tournament is over, I guess.
But, in terms of people management, consistency in selecting, clarity in objectives/mission and policies it seems Bert is the more capable manager. It’s true that Bert builds on Marco’s foundation, but I feel it should be said that Bert builds on the players’ foundation. Marco didn’t make Wesley, Arjen or Robin what they are. They did that themselves, with their club coaches.

But Bert’s statements that 1) he wants to work with a smaller selection, 2) he won’t exit players because they go through a bad spell at their clubs, 3) wants to win a prize, and 4) any player that can’t engage to the Team will be left out gives me a lot of confidence.

Bert also assembled a good team. Instead of selecting mates to run Oranje, he only selected one confidant (Cocky Voorn, with whom Bert worked for years and years). A loyal assistant and consigliere. The ex Feyenoord coach furthermore selected a future top coach and Ajax man Frank de Boer and a potential top coach in ex PSV man Phillip Cocu.

Tags: Bommel, Group C, Oranje, Ruud, Van Basten, Van Marwijk

Netherlands World Cup RSS Feed

Comments

Displaying the most recent 25 comments from a total of 42 comments.

Read the rest of the comments

By Gerard | April 6th, 2009 at 7:39 pm

I will always respect San Marco but I think his cool, clinical personality led to a lot of personnel problems sometimes. I think the turning point for Marco came when he finally listened to the players and went to a 4-2-3-1 formation. It seemed the team really began to gel together after that. Ironically though, I think it was his sentimentality that let him down for the match against Russia when he sympathetically played Boulahrouz when he really should have grabbed hold of the situation and sent him home. Guus Hiddink had no problem exploiting that by causing all the play to go through Boulahrouz where it ended up at a dead end. I really can’t be too harsh on Marco for that though. It’s all 20-20 hindsight as they say and we were all in a bit of shock at the time. At the end IMO if Oranje does well at the WC, San Marco can justifiably take a lot of pride in laying the groundwork.

Posted from Canada

By Jan | April 6th, 2009 at 7:46 pm

I’ve always said that the Boulah tragedy snapped the team. Not only with Marco’s decision to play Khalid, that indeed is all hindsight. But the prep of the team was disturbed. The lads felt untouchable and unbeatable. They were on a high, and suddenly football wasn’t important anymore. The mind can do weird things. The mind can make you a better player but it can also stifle you.

The Russia game did show Marco’s inability to stand up as a coach. As said by Lights, he didn’t respond to Russia at all. And when that clown ref gave the Russian a second yellow and then withdrew it because the ball was out of play (!!!!), he should have reaped havoc. The ref was wrong in pulling the card back. It doesn’t matter what the ball does, when some players challenges another – ball in or out play – he is eligible for a card! Marco let it all happen…

And then compare Guus’ antics at the WC2006 with Australia when they played Japan (?) and Guus wasn’t allowed at the monitor? That’s the type of psychological games coaches need to play to influence the officials and the team.

Marco, to me, is a great youth coach. He can spot talent, he can nurture them, but he is not (yet) a great coach.

By Bob | April 6th, 2009 at 8:26 pm

Another great blog, and many terrific opinions. Sure, this debate “doesn’t matter”, but nothing we write about regarding professional football “matters” in any kind of an ultimate sense. We do it because it is fun–fun to think about, to talk about, to simply enjoy the exchanges with others who are ultimately, like us, avid Dutch fans.

During van Basten’s tenure as the Netherlands manager, I was critical of much of what he did. From player selection to formations to morale problems, it was my opinion that Marco was over his head, did not have sufficient experience and training to COACH well. I retain that opinion, which I believe is now reinforced with the “success” of van Marwyck. None of the van Basten issues are now problems. van Marwyck is simply a more gifted COACH. In no way does this opinion affect my absolute admiration for van Basten as a PLAYER–he was one of the two or three Dutch best of all time, and I see no one now playing for the Netherlands that is his equal as an athlete.

As an American, I am much more confident in the federal government now that Obama is the nation’s chief executive, rather than the arrogant and incompetent Bush. I feel the same way about the Netherlands national football team, much more confident in their future possibilities of success now that van Marwyck is in charge and not van Basten.

Posted from United States

By Michel-Olivier | April 6th, 2009 at 9:04 pm

“As an American, I am much more confident in the federal government now that Obama is the nation’s chief executive….”
all your presidents including osama are the same, all they do is cause conflicts and wars.

Posted from United States

By Michel-Olivier | April 6th, 2009 at 9:04 pm

sorry i mean obama

Posted from United States

By Carlos | April 6th, 2009 at 9:11 pm

Good Summation Bob – Fun to debate and discuss but no one will lose sleep over the talks we have agree or disagree. We only lose sleep when watching late night matches (in our part of the world) and if Holland plays badly.

On the topic of losing sleep, the world cup timing schedule is just wonderful for Asia even not too bad for Jan in Oz. Early round games are (Singapore time) 5.30pm – 10pm and midnight. Great for the FnB business. Bring it on. Final is on my Birthday !!!

Posted from Singapore

By finnster01 | April 6th, 2009 at 9:12 pm

@MO: I think there were quite a few Germans who showed considerable talent at causing conflicts and wars as well.

At the very minimum, they should bring back the bicycles they borrowed last time around.

By Carlos | April 6th, 2009 at 9:12 pm

Wow M-O some slip of the tongue/type that was .

Posted from Singapore

By Tiju | April 7th, 2009 at 1:09 am

Marco Vs Bert
Inexperience Vs Experience
Drastic changes Vs Steady changes
Miracle Vs Normal performance
Controversy Vs Noncontraversy.
Ego Vs Psychology
Good for younth Vs Good for oldies.
Immediate changes Vs Normal orthodox changes.
Youth Vs Oldie
Unique thoughts Vs Systematic Thoughts

Posted from India

By Tiju | April 7th, 2009 at 1:11 am

Non consistancy Vs Consistancy

Posted from India

By Tiju | April 7th, 2009 at 1:11 am

Bad for vanbommel VS good for vanbommel

Posted from India

By Tiju | April 7th, 2009 at 1:17 am

Apart from marco’s slight mistakes like vermeer over stekel,kuyt over nestel.never concentrated on players stamina,never had special tactics for best players of the opponent etc i like vanbasten more than Bert.we never beat france and italy(in good margin) under So many SOCALLED coaches but Vanbasten did that with his unique thinking.Can bert do this against brazil and arjentina?let us wait and see.bert is cruel to stijn schaars and this is unpardonable.

Posted from India

By Carlos | April 7th, 2009 at 1:25 am

Tiju – I think Schaars is eternally grateful to Bert for giving him the 14 minutes against Scotland and then have him in his 18 players squad against Macedonia. I think Schaars knows time is on his his side. He and de Jong will sooner or later be the backbone of Hollands midfield.

Posted from Singapore

By Jan | April 7th, 2009 at 2:32 am

Agree with Carlos. Stijn Schaars’ time will come. Fabregas started as a sub even for Spain last EC. Schaars reminds me of him. He could even make a great libero. I have all the confidence in Schaars and De Zeeuw. Both incredible passers with excellent vision. De Jong is more a destroyer but boy do we need one of them.

As for M-O’s remark re: American presidents. Let’s leave our political views out of this blog ok ?

I think Bob is trying to make a point regarding the psychology and the confidence with leader/coach A vs leader/coach B.

I rather not want geopolitical elements clutter up what we’re doing here. Let’s not mistake an American (of Dutch descent) citizen for an American politician. Or German. Or Italian.

We have our own little utopian nation here in cyberspace and our country is called…. Brilliant Orange!

By Tiju | April 7th, 2009 at 2:42 am

@jan true our country is brilliant orange thats why we are here.

Posted from India

By Gerard | April 7th, 2009 at 4:03 am

I think Van Basten came across as way too icy and detached a lot of the time. I’m sure these were qualities that served him well as the best striker in the world but as a coach it often worked against him. Actually there were times I wished I could have reached through the TV screen and shaken him just to show some emotion sometimes.

Instead all he often did when we scored a goal was sit there and write something in his notebook as if one of his assistants couldn’t keep track of which guy just scored the goal !

Posted from Canada

By sandesh | April 7th, 2009 at 4:32 am

looking at the situation in oranje its gonna be van persie vs sneijder in the adv midfield role for the next few games or so. seems like we are getting used to in 4231 formation and its been 1 year or so since we adapted to this system. but one thing is for sure…. if the front 4 are fit and in form then RVDV and RVP has to sit on the bench. there is no way u can leave kuyt and sneijder and hunter. the one on the left wing.. robben is a bit injury prone so his place is up for sale. whether RVP and RVDV will be able to buy it time will tell but i would like to see 5 attacking players on the pitch. there may be a possibility that oranje can switch to a 3-2-3-2 formation
back three-gio-mathijsen-ooijer
mid 2-van bommel-de jong
mid3-robben-sneijder-kuyt or sneijder-vaart-kuyt with robben coming after ahlf time
front2-hunter-rvp and if ruud joins again then ruud-rvp
tonight i.e early tomorrow morning its gonna be a real thriller
i will be watching vallareal vs arsenal
i hope arsenal wins

Posted from Nepal

By Jan | April 7th, 2009 at 4:50 am

yeah, hahaha

By Jan | April 7th, 2009 at 4:51 am

Is Arshavin eligible to play?

By sandesh | April 7th, 2009 at 4:56 am

no he isnt.
he is cup tied and will play next year for sure

Posted from Nepal

By Rob | April 7th, 2009 at 6:32 am

I’d just like to point out that Schaars is 25 now. That’s the physical peak of a human male. He should be playing by now if he’s to really become a star on the international stage. Van Bommel’s 31 – he’ll be 33 by the time the World Cup comes around. Having him in over Schaars is a real shame.

Posted from Japan

By Jan | April 7th, 2009 at 7:22 am

Well, there’s Mark the son in law. Then there’s Mark the experienced Oranje player. And there’s Mark the Bayern player.

Stijn should quickly make his move from AZ to a big club. But which big club is awaiting Schaars?

Hamburg? Everton?

By Miguel Rosado | April 7th, 2009 at 7:53 am

Schaars should wait because he could make it in top European football. I don’t know if there are any offers from the top elite for him but next year when he plays UCL with AZ he’ll be able to show himself to the world and then take the big step.

By Rob | April 8th, 2009 at 5:01 am

Schaars should go link up with Van Persie at Arsenal, especially if Fabregas is leaving.

Posted from Japan

By Carlos | April 8th, 2009 at 5:35 am

He would do well to work with Fabregas – Great combination !

Just read Demy de Zeeuw not in a hurry to renew with AZ but also not super keen to leave them. Champions League coming up for them.

Posted from Singapore

Comments are closed