When it comes down to it, football managers can get their players to play however they wish to, and there’s not much that supporters can do about it. Each person in the dugout will have their own sense of how to get the best out of their team, but there is little question that football fans like to watch a specific brand of the game.
The notion of someone being ‘anti-football’ can seem a little bit silly when you consider that all they’re trying to do is get as many points on the board as possible, but there is no arguing against the fact that the phrase exists and is used on a regular basis.
The question is, what does it mean?
Not How People Like to See the Sport Played
Depending on where you exist in the world, the phrase ‘anti-football’ might be more commonly understood as ‘terrorist football’ or ‘Haramball’. Whatever it’s called, it tends to mean a style of play that puts defensive play first and asks the players to be aggressive in their approach.
When the opposition has the ball, such teams will look to put 11 men behind the ball and just leave a striker up top to go long to if the chance to do so presents itself. The proponents of such a style of play will look to see the ball in play as little as possible, wasting time whenever the opportunity to do so presents itself.
Anti football 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼 https://t.co/xwNvAxid0W
— Alif (@AlifMohdK) September 14, 2025
When Fear and Loathing in World Football, a book by Gary Armstrong and Richard Guilanotti, was released, it appeared to contain the first reference to anti-football that we know of. The book, which came out in 2001, looked at the tactics that Estudiantes de La Plata during the 1968 Copa Intercontinental.
In essence, the notion behind the phrase is that the team playing that way has no desire to see the ball being passed around the pitch by the players, but instead free-kicks given, long balls booted out from the back by the goalkeeper and generally looking to win points in the least entertaining way possible.
Is it a Fair Criticism?
Whilst the idea of a team being ‘anti-football’ might well have been around for some time, the reality of the matter is that teams have to do whatever they can in order to achieve what they’re hoping to achieve. If you have a team like West Bromwich Albion in the Premier League, coming up against the likes of Tottenham Hotspur or Liverpool, a decision to play open and expansive football might look attractive, but it is almost certainly going to result in them being relegated.
If, on the other hand, they dig deep and defend with their lives, they might at least be able to win some points.
@onsidebanter Did Arsenal Play Anti-Football Against Man City After Red Card? Defensive Tactics Cost Them the Win? Arsenal defended their box for 45 minutes after a red card against Manchester City, but was it anti-football or a great show if determination trying to win ugly? #arsenal #manchestercity #footballdebate #arteta #footballtactics #guardiola ♬ Dramatic Epic Action Serious – Mosquito
It is all well and good having an idealistic way of playing the game, which many people do. Yet the job of managers isn’t to be idealistic, but to keep their team as safe as possible.
Even if they are likely to lose when going to Anfield or the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, keeping the loss down to just a goal or two could make all the difference come the end of the season. The majority of ‘anti-football’ managers are well-known to the sport in general, so if a Chairman decides to employ the likes of Diego Simeone or Mikel Arteta, they can’t then complain about what they’re having to watch.