I have to apologize for the following metaphor since most readers of this blog reside in a place where soccer isn't popular. And for the fact that I know very little about soccer myself. Well, I had played it for about a year in my youth when my coach proposed to change to a martial art, given my style of playing. My ball treatment was non existent, but no one could pass me. Without stumbling for the rest of the week, that was. And so I started with jiu jitsu, judo and boxing (I never do things half).
In soccer there is a strategy where you try to work at the half of the opponent for as much time as possible. I even belief that this system is a dutch invention originating from 1974 or so.
The idea is that statistically the chance is higher to shoot in your opponents goal than in your goal when you play at his half.
This kind of play is characterized by a ball possession during a great amount of time, and playing from left to right around the hostile goal.
This kind of play I like to compare with position play in chess. You play just around from left to right until the opponent makes a mistake. When you lack a good forward player, you will never make a goal.
Cutting thru the enemy lines to make a goal I compare with tactical play in chess.
Positional play alone can never bring you the victory. You must be able to finish it by tactical means. Speed is all important.
In the comparison there are teams that don't play positionally at all, but just wait for a good opportuny to (counter-) attack by tactical means, based on great individual technique.
Just a thought.
The Art of Balance: High School and Chess
9 hours ago