Though there will always be those who look to detract from Pep Guardiola’s accomplishments, most fans and pundits alike can appreciate what’s special about his style of play. Initially branded as ‘tiki-taka,’ a term meant to reference his teams’ consistent use of heavy passing, what is often obfuscated about the purpose of his possession is that it’s enacted with intention. Lesser sides have fallen prey and wholly embody the derogatory connotation the term has taken on in recent years, while Pep Guardiola’s ever-evolving incarnations always look to pass with a purpose. The purpose being: move the opposition.

Whether it be playing it out near their own goal for the sake of creating space further up the field or on either flank to overload the defensive structure, Pep’s style of play is always looking to provoke a reaction. The lines between Guardiola’s intricately organized style of play and mindless passing may always be blurry to the untrained eye, but interviews with players, current and former, suggest otherwise. Guardiola’s players tend to gain an understanding of what they’re doing because the system demands it. It’s why his possession teams are seen as the gold standard for those with the intention of keeping the ball. Maurizio Sarri, because of various ostensible similarities, has been lumped into the same school of football. However, there may be more distinctions than similarities when looking past what is immediately apparent.

While all possession-dominant systems have their distinct quirks, many tend to operate under the principles of positional play. The aforementioned concept of passing to move the opposition is the focus of Guardiola, Pochettino, Tuchel, Bielsa, Sampaoli, etc., when in possession. In my own conversations with tactics writer, Nathan Clark, it became clear that though Sarri clearly utilizes some of the structural advantages that are often closely associated with positional play, or juego de posicion (which is just Spanish for positional play), like positioning five players across what is typically a line of four defenders for the sake of creating numerical advantages, his teams don’t seem to enact the same strategy when it comes to actually moving the ball.

One of the most eye-catching characteristics of ‘Sarriball’ is the ‘bounce back’ passing used throughout the team. Aside from these mesmeric passing sequences giving Chelsea’s social media team plenty to work with, the quick, seemingly superfluous passes, do serve a purpose. By engaging defensive players at various points in progression, Sarri’s teams slow the opposition from getting back into their defensive shape. With the ball pinging around so quickly, defenders turn to try and disrupt possession that appears to be coming close to them, only to have it quickly moved to a different part of the field. The result is a disheveled amalgamation of players that Sarri’s technically gifted ball carriers can easily play through.

However, though Sarri’s method of progression does technically fall under the idea of passing to move the opposition, his teams do so in a more ‘rehearsed’ manner. When passing so quickly, players are more reactive than proactive in their actions. The description of Chelsea’s play as ‘rehearsed’ isn’t in the same vein of action as those in the NBA or NFL, where specific players are drawn up to receive specific passes as an execution of a play. Rather, the passing pattern is what’s being practiced.

This Napoli training video demonstrates the consistent pattern he coaches with a variety of players to sear it into their muscle memory.

By combining his augmented passing triangle with a compact use of space, Sarri has amplified the triggering effect of the passing mechanic. In other words, the disruptive effect a passing triangle usually has on a teams defense has been magnified by Sarri’s compact spacing because the defensive team is always in range of its effects. The physical realm, however, stops this from being a perfect football tactic. While the system’s tight spacing on the ball allows for the destructive triangles to appear all over the pitch, the cartoonish quickness of the passing move, despite it being the very thing that makes the tactic so effective, leaves the team susceptible to exploitation.

Tottenham, for example, enacted a tailored game-plan to stop this method of progression. By employing a press-heavy midfield diamond that negated the organizing presence of Jorginho -the essential catalyst for their passing moves- Spurs were able to stop Chelsea from ever moving forward. Dele Alli man marked the Italian out of the game and Tottenham’s organized aggression and heavily drilled high line locked Chelsea in their own half. From there, Spurs had an easier time winning the ball high up the pitch and created dangerous opportunities as a result.

Instead of being able to adjust to the game plan set forth at the start of the match, Chelsea weren’t able to accommodate for the alterations Tottenham had made for them. Without a holistic understanding of a fluid system, they were trapped by their reliance on ‘scripted’ actions.

By comparison, Manchester City’s 0–0 draw against Liverpool is a prime example of understanding a philosophy as opposed to just performing a series of actions. Because City, better than most, knew the deadly implications of Liverpool’s mid-block, every take-on and risky forward pass needed to be taken into consideration. A ball lost in transition to Liverpool presents a far greater danger than any other team- and not just because of their quality. With the corralling defensive play of their front three and the pressing expertise of their midfield and defensive lines, Liverpool have put many good teams to the sword by forcing them into their pressing traps. City, with an understanding of both Liverpool’s strengths and their own weaknesses, were able to limit Liverpool to just 0.4 xG.