Aduh why u start a thread like this

It's gonna be a Glory Hunter V2, where a harmless definition discussion thread turns into a god-knows-what argument after 50 pages For example, 1 will come in and say their team is attractive, then another will come in and say "win ugly is more important" and it goes on and on..

But anyway to contribute my opinion, attractive football simply means making the fans awake the entire game, or won't switch it to other channel because they don't wanna miss a single second of it (another game on another channel for example). Doesn't matter which style...total football, tiki taka, counter attacks, wing overlaps etc. As long as you can keep audience eyes glued to the match, then it's attractive.

I'll be first to say, no single style is the most attractive/least attractive, so try to keep this in mind so as to not create another "opinion war"

No I'm not blaming TS, I'm "pleading" other posters to show some class before anything starts I like discussions more than anything, but like minority says, bashing can start from nothing in this forum

Anyways!

Crunching tackles can also form beautiful football, or rather a beautiful match..provided both teams go all out. Classic MU v Arsenal match anyone? Keane v Vieira provides the same adrenaline and pleasure to watch no? (btw it depends on what your definition of "crunching tackles" are. Not all hard tackles are foul-worthy.)

Generally fast tempo plays are nice to watch, provided they don't lose the ball every other time they try to play it fast.