The interview of a veteran player in the V.League ignited controversy. People put on the scale the highlights in that statement to ask the question, in the end, what do you mean? Not to mention expressions and attitudes, the issue stems from the way of expression.
First, how to understand the idea that the opponent scored because their team "created conditions"? Is it because the home team's defense system has problems (which is not acknowledged), or is it charity, grace? Each person has their own understanding, but following the comments, it seems that people tend to believe that that confidence has overwhelmed even the minimum respect for colleagues.
Similarly, saying "defenders just have the ball and move it long is not football" is understood in a multi-meaningful way. With good intentions, it is a "wake-up" for Vietnamese football that has long lived with the mindset of focusing the ball on foreign players in the upper line to "do everything". The general idea is that we should move towards "playing" more than playing an emotionless football.
But understood from the direct perspective of football, long ball is still... football. It is a tactic that many teams apply - short or long-term according to specific circumstances, which can lead to success. Like the opponent of this player and his teammates in the match in the V.League, the shortage of personnel in the key line may force them to choose to change tactics.
If only the words were associated with a humorous smile, the tension would not be pushed up. A little humor, the world would be lighter. But the expression of this player makes people lean towards the arrogance of someone standing high looking down.
Well, controversial speeches are rampant in the football world in particular and in all other areas of life, and need to be accepted as everyday matters. The problem is that words also partly reflect an individual's cultural background, so finding ways to express ideas in the right context is very important. Lack of language can easily lead to "own net".
