One issue in pointing out things that might be considered to be part of positionism or relationism is that there is some overlap between the two playing styles. It’s not a light switch that is turned on and off; it is more like a gauge that swings back and forth.

The stock market moves up and down every day. Traders use technical analysis to try to predict the direction of prices. There are hundreds of different methods or strategies that traders use to analyze price action. Some simply read candles, some draw trend lines, some use different indicators like an RSI, MACD, or Bollinger Bands, some use moving averages, and others shake a magic eight ball.

The one thing that remains the same for everyone is the underlying price. No matter if you are losing money or making money, wrong or right, if your strategy works or it doesn’t, the price remains the same for everyone.

To me, positionism and relationism change the way we look at football. That can be either for us, the fan or viewer, or the team on the field or manager. They are two different strategies.

You see different things, based off past experience, once you are made aware of either strategy, in the same way price action moves based off your technical analysis. The football and players are moving, whether or not you spot positional or relational principles.

We are trying to make sense of what we are seeing by finding patterns within an unpredictable game. We are humans after all; we want to be able to predict things to avoid being surprised.

If I do this, this will happen, so I’ll do this instead. If I move here, this will happen, so I’ll do that. Players look for patterns. The team creates a structure to create more of those patterns that work.

You will grow exhausted trying to assign a label to a team or manager because I think that you will find both principles of positionism and relationism in every game. Whether that be for smaller or longer periods of play.