Barcelona's 2009-2011 Tactical Revolution

Theonas

Full Member
Scout
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
5,047
https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blog...iki-taka-and-remade-themselves-120604224.html

Definitely one of the best reads about tactics, that famed Barcelona side and an interesting mention of Van Gaal. I've always thought that that famed Barcelona's side best achievement is the commitment and tactical religious like following that their players followed which explains how much it took out of Pep. I thought it was worth a look since Van Gaal has a lot of similar ideas on how the game should be played.
 
Before the final in Rome, Guardiola himself claimed he took a lot of inspiration from United and the way we played with the rotating forward line drifting and interchanging with each other.
We, in turn, had borrowed this from Roma and the way they used Totti dropping deep etc.
He said he showed a video to Etoo of Rooneys performances out wide and told him he would do that for Barca.
If not he would be moved on.
That interview really stuck with me. For all the hundreds of articles written about that Barca side, Uniteds influence was never brought up again.
 
cyberman said:
Before the final in Rome, Guardiola himself claimed he took a lot of inspiration from United and the way we played with the rotating forward line drifting and interchanging with each other.
We, in turn, had borrowed this from Roma and the way they used Totti dropping deep etc.
He said he showed a video to Etoo of Rooneys performances out wide and told him he would do that for Barca.
If not he would be moved on.
That interview really stuck with me. For all the hundreds of articles written about that Barca side, Uniteds influence was never brought up again.
Click to expand...
Well I suppose because in the grand scheme of things, the size of that influence was very minimal and similar influences could be found everywhere. The reason many articles and books were written about them is the overall approach they adopted, the clockwork movement on and off the ball and how they dominated games in an unprecedented way. Whereas rotating strikers and running through the channels may have played a part in that, it certainly was nothing in relation to the other more complex tactics they employed.
 
Guardiola deserves a ton of credit for building that team. When he came in Barcelona had just finished 17 points behind Real Madrid and had barely qualified for Champions League. He immediately got rid of half the seniors, for which he was highly criticized at the time - Ronaldinho, Deco, Thuram, Zambrotta, Edmilson etc all sold off. He promoted Busquets, brought in Alves, Keita, Pique and gave Iniesta a fixed position on the left, who had been utilized as more of a handy man up till then. He also got Henry to perform who hadn't had a good first season. In his first year they won every trophy in club football. I hear people say their grandmorther would have won with that team but what they forget is Pep built that team with his own hands which required taking some ballsy big decisions for which he took a lot of heat in the beginning. He also got them to play like never before, tiki taka with pressing tactics.
 
prarek said:
Guardiola deserves a ton of credit for building that team. When he came in Barcelona had just finished 17 points behind Real Madrid and had barely qualified for Champions League. He immediately got rid of half the seniors, for which he was highly criticized at the time - Ronaldinho, Deco, Thuram, Zambrotta, Edmilson etc all sold off. He promoted Busquets, brought in Alves, Keita, Pique and gave Iniesta a fixed position on the left, who had been utilized as more of a handy man up till then. He also got Henry to perform who hadn't had a good first season. In his first year they won every trophy in club football. I hear people say their grandmorther would have won with that team but what they forget is Pep built that team with his own hands which required taking some ballsy big decisions for which he took a lot of heat in the beginning. He also got them to play like never before, tiki taka with pressing tactics.
Click to expand...
It is the old British mistrust of philosophies and tactical complexity that is responsible for that view. A deep ingrained belief that it is all about sending 11 players to fight it out and whoever is more talented, hungrier, more passionate will come out on top. Of course Xavi and Iniesta are some of the best ever players but maybe, just maybe you can display those talents more easily when you have twice as many passing options as any other midfielder elsewhere. Maybe also they won the ball back so quickly because they moved in such a well synchronized manner that they isolated the opponents regularly. They did not have to run so much so could afford to field the same team week in week out which is also maybe because they were always positioned in the right place and the right time. In Britain though, that is not even acknowledged as tactics, Savage will call it philosophy nonsense and so on. In case I wasn't clear enough, of course I agree with you perfectly except that it was not only Guardiola who built that but rather a combination of influences taken full advantage of and complimented by him.
 
I have a different take on this, to me its 85% players quality and 15% "tactical revolution" "mad scientist managers" storyline people try to enforce.

What happened was a golden generation all reaching its prime at the same time.

Spain and Barcelona continued to play in this philosophy but their players declined almost in half in their performance, and they got smashed many times for playing such a high risk playing style, Barça 0-7 Bayern, Spain decadence comes to mind
 
fontaine said:
I have a different take on this, to me its 85% players quality and 15% "tactical revolution" "mad scientist managers" storyline people try to enforce.

What happened was a golden generation all reaching its prime at the same time.

Spain and Barcelona continued to play in this philosophy but their players declined almost in half in their performance, and they got smashed many times for playing such a high risk playing style, Barça 0-7 Bayern, Spain decadence comes to mind
Click to expand...
I think it is a given that it's a bit of everything. As is the case with most things life, when it goes really well or really bad, it's a combination of factors coming at play together. It is a given here that those players were at their peak and when they couldn't give as much, the level deteriorated. The thing though is there has been plenty of other teams with players at their peak, why did nobody exert so much control over every game they played? That Barcelona side played a Madrid side who you could argue also had a collection of players at their peak and dismantled them over and over again.

Of course the media like to have these wild theories about that one guy who is responsible for it all which is also equally simplistic. What I am saying here is that whereas Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta are unquestionably some of the best players ever, the thorough tactical work, religious like commitment and following of instructions had elevated them from just another great team to a unique one. When other sitting midfielders like Carrick for example received the ball, he had two wide men, two up top and a deep defense. It meant when you pressed him he had very little options and looked unable to get out of those situations. When Busquets was in the same position, his midfield and wide players came inside and created so many more passing options for him. That is not one player better than the other, that is one system functioning better than the other. I am not saying here that Carrick and Busquets have the same quality, I am saying that we can't judge based on that specific data.

Your example about Bayern vs Real is simply completely and utterly wrong since that is actually an example of the opposite. It was quite famously revealed that Pep was swayed by his players to go for it rather than play the patient game he thought more appropriate. Real took full advantage of that and hit them on the break. If anything, Bayern's approach to that game was closer to ours when we played Madrid in 2003 than his Barcelona side. Of course, I am not saying that had he stuck with his game plan, they would have won, nor that I think he is the one responsible genius for Barcelona's feats but I am saying that is as wrong an example as you can come up.
 
Theonas said:
It is the old British mistrust of philosophies and tactical complexity that is responsible for that view. A deep ingrained belief that it is all about sending 11 players to fight it out and whoever is more talented, hungrier, more passionate will come out on top. Of course Xavi and Iniesta are some of the best ever players but maybe, just maybe you can display those talents more easily when you have twice as many passing options as any other midfielder elsewhere. Maybe also they won the ball back so quickly because they moved in such a well synchronized manner that they isolated the opponents regularly. They did not have to run so much so could afford to field the same team week in week out which is also maybe because they were always positioned in the right place and the right time. In Britain though, that is not even acknowledged as tactics, Savage will call it philosophy nonsense and so on. In case I wasn't clear enough, of course I agree with you perfectly except that it was not only Guardiola who built that but rather a combination of influences taken full advantage of and complimented by him.
Click to expand...

Indeed. And also the galacticos era was enough proof that you can't simply buy the best players and send them to win trophies. This Atletico side are a much better team than that galacticos even though they're far inferior on an individual basis comparison.
 
Theonas said:
It is the old British mistrust of philosophies and tactical complexity that is responsible for that view. A deep ingrained belief that it is all about sending 11 players to fight it out and whoever is more talented, hungrier, more passionate will come out on top. Of course Xavi and Iniesta are some of the best ever players but maybe, just maybe you can display those talents more easily when you have twice as many passing options as any other midfielder elsewhere. Maybe also they won the ball back so quickly because they moved in such a well synchronized manner that they isolated the opponents regularly. They did not have to run so much so could afford to field the same team week in week out which is also maybe because they were always positioned in the right place and the right time. In Britain though, that is not even acknowledged as tactics, Savage will call it philosophy nonsense and so on. In case I wasn't clear enough, of course I agree with you perfectly except that it was not only Guardiola who built that but rather a combination of influences taken full advantage of and complimented by him.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is that Iniesta become one of the best midfielders ever only after Pep went there. Until then he either played as Deco/Xavi backup or as a left striker. And he wasn't a young player, he was 25 years old. Pep went there, Iniesta flourished, Messi became from a great player to the greatest ever, Xavi became the best midfielder I have seen, etc etc. Yet people somehow try to belittle Pep's achievement.

What he did was nothing short of fascinating. I don't like Barca much but I doubt that I'll ever see a team who wll be as dominant as Pep's Barca.
 
Revan said:
The funny thing is that Iniesta become one of the best midfielders ever only after Pep went there. Until then he either played as Deco/Xavi backup or as a left striker. And he wasn't a young player, he was 25 years old. Pep went there, Iniesta flourished, Messi became from a great player to the greatest ever, Xavi became the best midfielder I have seen, etc etc. Yet people somehow try to belittle Pep's achievement.

What he did was nothing short of fascinating. I don't like Barca much but I doubt that I'll ever see a team who wll be as dominant as Pep's Barca.
Click to expand...

It shocks me how many people claim Pep's been lucky. That he just had a group of geniuses. They forget how bad Barça were the year before. Look at United last season, woeful yet this year the same players look much better. The manager is so important.
 
loony said:
It shocks me how many people claim Pep's been lucky. That he just had a group of geniuses. They forget how bad Barça were the year before. Look at United last season, woeful yet this year the same players look much better. The manager is so important.
Click to expand...

Third place, semi-finals of the CL and double winners just two years before. And some important payers for that team would go on an win the Euros in 08 with Spain. He did a fantastic job there but, it wasn't a miracle.
 
Keeps It tidy said:
Third place, semi-finals of the CL and double winners just two years before. And some important payers for that team would go on an win the Euros in 08 with Spain. He did a fantastic job there but, it wasn't a miracle.
Click to expand...

No, not a miracle. But he had a huge role in their success which should be acknowledged. They were so good. Great players but Pep gave them the system (and Spain) to be as successful as they were.
 
Theonas said:
It is the old British mistrust of philosophies and tactical complexity that is responsible for that view. A deep ingrained belief that it is all about sending 11 players to fight it out and whoever is more talented, hungrier, more passionate will come out on top. Of course Xavi and Iniesta are some of the best ever players but maybe, just maybe you can display those talents more easily when you have twice as many passing options as any other midfielder elsewhere. Maybe also they won the ball back so quickly because they moved in such a well synchronized manner that they isolated the opponents regularly. They did not have to run so much so could afford to field the same team week in week out which is also maybe because they were always positioned in the right place and the right time. In Britain though, that is not even acknowledged as tactics, Savage will call it philosophy nonsense and so on. In case I wasn't clear enough, of course I agree with you perfectly except that it was not only Guardiola who built that but rather a combination of influences taken full advantage of and complimented by him.
Click to expand...

More patronising, pompous rhetoric from you in regards to British football. We could sure do with you and your progressive tactical acumen over at St. George's Park.
 
Keeps It tidy said:
Third place, semi-finals of the CL and double winners just two years before. And some important payers for that team would go on an win the Euros in 08 with Spain. He did a fantastic job there but, it wasn't a miracle.
Click to expand...

Not a miracle but there was a big difference between that team and the one that won the CL a few seasons prior at their peak. Only 3 players played in both finals. The team was rebuilt by Pep.
 
Theonas said:
https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blog...iki-taka-and-remade-themselves-120604224.html

Definitely one of the best reads about tactics, that famed Barcelona side and an interesting mention of Van Gaal. I've always thought that that famed Barcelona's side best achievement is the commitment and tactical religious like following that their players followed which explains how much it took out of Pep. I thought it was worth a look since Van Gaal has a lot of similar ideas on how the game should be played.
Click to expand...

Great article, thanks for the link. I really liked the part about Enrique having more individual brilliance while Guardiola had collective brilliance. The Busquets part personifies this.
 
Kag said:
More patronising, pompous rhetoric from you in regards to British football. We could sure do with you and your progressive tactical acumen over at St. George's Park.
Click to expand...
Oh the old pompous insult! What next? pretentious? I love how you don't debate any point and just act in a typical teenage rebel mode. Defensive and insecure are we? Everyone contributing to the debate and you behaving like an angry teenager. Behave yourself please. I love English football and is the one I follow, I am also discussing with others about it in a forum that is mainly interested in the issues of one its teams. What else exactly do you expect to talk about? Or wait a second? Is it the fact that I am criticizing its issues you're not happy with? Alright let me give you something. The Germans like to preach to us about how successful their model is as it's cheap for fans and promotes youth conveniently forgetting the monopoly their system produces. Barcelona like to have a holier than thou attitude whereas they don't seem to mind having connections to suspected terrorists and Real Madrid have outspent everybody in world football since they bought Ronaldo with a return of 1 league title in 6 years which is an embarrassment as far as I am concerned. Can you calm down now? See I don't think everybody is better, I am just not as interested in their problems.
 
Theonas said:
Oh the old pompous insult! What next? pretentious? I love how you don't debate any point and just act in a typical teenage rebel mode. Defensive and insecure are we? Everyone contributing to the debate and you behaving like an angry teenager. Behave yourself please. I love English football and is the one I follow, I am also discussing with others about it in a forum that is mainly interested in the issues of one its teams. What else exactly do you expect to talk about? Or wait a second? Is it the fact that I am criticizing its issues you're not happy with? Alright let me give you something. The Germans like to preach to us about how successful their model is as it's cheap for fans and promotes youth conveniently forgetting the monopoly their system produces. Barcelona like to have a holier than thou attitude whereas they don't seem to mind having connections to suspected terrorists and Real Madrid have outspent everybody in world football since they bought Ronaldo with a return of 1 league title in 6 years which is an embarrassment as far as I am concerned. Can you calm down now? See I don't think everybody is better, I am just not as interested in their problems.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Pompous, pretentious and full of hot air. You can't speak of an entire footballing nation and claim it lacks "tactical complexity," or whatever the hell that really is, and expect few raised few eyebrows.

You're generalising badly, and playing down the hard work and progressive thinking that does exist throughout the British footballing pyramid, in spite of legislation that prevents young children from spending enough hours on the football field in comparison to their continental peers, the extreme cost of taking on successive coaching badges for adults, and the poor weather, combined with a lack of indoor/3G facilities in many areas of the UK, that prevents many people from playing the game safely.

No professional coach genuinely believes that football is all about sending out eleven players full of only heart and determination. Albeit you should underplay it at your peril. If you want to present the idea that we are in fact cavemen with a wooden log then go ahead, but it's largely patronising guff.

And if Robbie Savage is your example of this kind of thinking, inflating the urge to judge an entire sport in one country, then you're full of more shit than I initially thought.
 
cyberman said:
Before the final in Rome, Guardiola himself claimed he took a lot of inspiration from United and the way we played with the rotating forward line drifting and interchanging with each other.
We, in turn, had borrowed this from Roma and the way they used Totti dropping deep etc.
He said he showed a video to Etoo of Rooneys performances out wide and told him he would do that for Barca.
If not he would be moved on.
That interview really stuck with me. For all the hundreds of articles written about that Barca side, Uniteds influence was never brought up again.
Click to expand...

I thought I was the only person who believed this.

Agree with what you say about the movement of our attackers but would also add that Guardiola gets tons of credit for his use of high pressing at Barcelona but it's rarely pointed out that we were doing it the previous year. Rooney and Tevez were the hardest working pair of forwards in Europe and we would frequently use someone like Park, or Hargreaves on the wing in the final, to add more pressure. Much of our success in 07/08 was down to that tactic and it was pretty gutting to see Guardiola take it forward and dominate while we went in the opposite direction, replacing Tevez with Berbatov and sitting back more and more.

Of course Guardiola made the same mistake when he signed Ibrahimovic, and Rodgers has done the exact same thing this season by replacing Suarez with Balotelli and Lambert.
 
loony said:
No, not a miracle. But he had a huge role in their success which should be acknowledged. They were so good. Great players but Pep gave them the system (and Spain) to be as successful as they were.
Click to expand...
Spain's success is down to Luis Aragones. Guardiola's contribution to Spain's success is minuscule in comparison to his. For years he got shit from everyone for the decisions he was making (like leaving Raul out of the team, playing so many "small" players with little physical strength together in midfield and having the team make too many "pointless" passes amongst other things) but he stood by his decisions and changed for nobody and in the end not only did he win Spain's first trophy in a long time, but he left behind a team with confidence that it never had before and the foundations and groundwork for the team that would go on to win at the World Cup and the 2nd European Championship. Winning Euro 2008 was the most important moment in Spain's history because if they did not win that trophy then they most probably would not have won the World Cup (and perhaps Barcelona would not have gone on to win the CL the following year due to the players not having the massive confidence boost from Spain's win as well as the confirmation from that win that playing such a style of football could be successful) and Spain would still be referred to as the "perennial underachievers" and Spain's reputation of being "bottlers" would have remained intact.
 
Last edited:
Theonas said:
Well I suppose because in the grand scheme of things, the size of that influence was very minimal and similar influences could be found everywhere. The reason many articles and books were written about them is the overall approach they adopted, the clockwork movement on and off the ball and how they dominated games in an unprecedented way. Whereas rotating strikers and running through the channels may have played a part in that, it certainly was nothing in relation to the other more complex tactics they employed.
Click to expand...
its a bit naive of you to think "running through the channels" is as far as that went.
Rooney playing from wide set the benchmark for the way Pep used Henry / Etoo / Villa for example. You can say the influence was minimal but when Pep himself claimed United were a massive influence in the structure and work rate of his side, you have to take notice. They did when the treble that year after all, and that was before the tiki-taka style was in full effect.
Dont forget that United were the best team in the world at that time, setting all sorts of records in Europe. 2 finals in a row, the greatest attempt at defending the CL title that any side has managed in its current format.
 
Revan said:
The funny thing is that Iniesta become one of the best midfielders ever only after Pep went there. Until then he either played as Deco/Xavi backup or as a left striker. And he wasn't a young player, he was 25 years old. Pep went there, Iniesta flourished, Messi became from a great player to the greatest ever, Xavi became the best midfielder I have seen, etc etc. Yet people somehow try to belittle Pep's achievement.

What he did was nothing short of fascinating. I don't like Barca much but I doubt that I'll ever see a team who wll be as dominant as Pep's Barca.
Click to expand...

Iniesta was 24 and had just come off a very good season for Barca and a very good Euros for Spain. He was one of the few players who did play well in Rijkaard's last year. He was in his prime and Guardiola saw how to use him.

Personnel-wise it was the perfect combination in terms of players in their prime (like Puyol, Xavi, Iniesta, Alves), players reaching maturity (like Messi) and players schooled in the Barcelona style like Busquets ready to break through. Guardiola's combination of knowledge of the players and vision in terms of enhancing the Barca/Spain style base created a very special team.

Guardiola or the players then? It's a false dichotomy, Guardiola saw how to use the players and created a structure in which his very best player/s could be utilised to maximum effect. Put him in charge of the Sunderland squad and I think he would have found them just as frustrating as Roy Keane did.
 
Kag said:
Indeed. Pompous, pretentious and full of hot air. You can't speak of an entire footballing nation and claim it lacks "tactical complexity," or whatever the hell that really is, and expect few raised few eyebrows.

You're generalising badly, and playing down the hard work and progressive thinking that does exist throughout the British footballing pyramid, in spite of legislation that prevents young children from spending enough hours on the football field in comparison to their continental peers, the extreme cost of taking on successive coaching badges for adults, and the poor weather, combined with a lack of indoor/3G facilities in many areas of the UK, that prevents many people from playing the game safely.

No professional coach genuinely believes that football is all about sending out eleven players full of only heart and determination. Albeit you should underplay it at your peril. If you want to present the idea that we are in fact cavemen with a wooden log then go ahead, but it's largely patronising guff.

And if Robbie Savage is your example of this kind of thinking, inflating the urge to judge an entire sport in one country, then you're full of more shit than I initially thought.
Click to expand...
Can you even hear yourself? You sound like a sensitive patriotic angry man. Let's dissect this shall we:

Your first paragraph: No of course I can't, I don't see why you think that I think I can. But you can apply that to anybody who ever gave a view on an issue that includes a large portion of people and if you are going to do that well God help us all. I, like many other people on here and everywhere, have the view that there is such a thing as cultural sensibilities which play a big role in how a large number of people belonging to that particular culture feel about different things. Is that really news to you? Obviously nobody can generalize everything but that's a given. Honestly, you sound like a teenager going "YOU DON'T KNOW ME! YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT I HAVE BEEN THROUGH! DON'T JUDGE ME!"

Second paragraph: Yes? See if that was your first response, that would be a very useful contribution. Only I don't understand why are you telling me this? Did you see me anywhere arguing that England's approach to tactics is a genetic issue? I am fully aware of the conditions and difficulties kids face when it comes to training and such compared to how it is in sunnier countries. I didn't play down anything, in fact I am pretty sure I was one of the very very few ones who thought England's performances in the last WC were a step in the right direction. I also think it is only a matter of time before things change due to what I hear is being done behind the scenes.

Third: Einstein spoke about something called relativity. Go and read about it seriously. It's tiresome how one has to end every sentence with "relatively". At some point I have to write with the assumption that I am discussing with grown ups and not sensitive teenagers like yourself. No, I don't think British coaches believe that. I think that RELATIVELY, they don't place the same emphasis on tactics as foreign coaches with more than a few exceptions of course. Of course if you have bothered to discuss this, I would have told you that I actually was arguing against the view that Moyes is a British tactical dinosaur last year. I always thought that was such a stupid simplistic view about British coaches and that it is more of a case of aesthetic preferences rather than actual competence that makes British coaches the way they are. I remember arguing that Britain produced some of the smartest people in history, it is therefore idiotic to argue that its football people are somehow retarded.

Last paragraph: Again, of course Savage doesn't represent a whole culture but if you can't see that a large portion of the British public scoffs at the idea of a footballing philosophy, you really need to get out more. Look at the questions the media ask managers, look at how many managers even speak about their tactics. Heard the smirks Van Gaal was met with when he spoke about his philosophy? I'll let you use that brain of yours to figure out a link there. That is of course when you can get your emotions out of the way and think straight.
 
cyberman said:
its a bit naive of you to think "running through the channels" is as far as that went.
Rooney playing from wide set the benchmark for the way Pep used Henry / Etoo / Villa for example. You can say the influence was minimal but when Pep himself claimed United were a massive influence in the structure and work rate of his side, you have to take notice. They did when the treble that year after all, and that was before the tiki-taka style was in full effect.
Dont forget that United were the best team in the world at that time, setting all sorts of records in Europe. 2 finals in a row, the greatest attempt at defending the CL title that any side has managed in its current format.
Click to expand...
I might be underestimating the influence as you say. I think what I am getting it is that it was still to an extent that is common between teams and therefore not as significant when compared to what they did after that which is comparable to the Milan team of the late '80s and early '90s. But of course I might be a misjudging a bit.

I definitely agree that that was the best team in the world at the time. I, in fact, think it was the best Manchester United team under Fergie even though I like the 1999 one more. However, I think you would agree we never reached their heights in terms of absolute dominance and authority during every big game they partook in. I think great players and solid tactics can make you a top team like ourselves at the time. Great players and revolutionary tactics made them a unique team.
 
The second leg of one of the arsenal Barcelona CL matchups was the most dominant performance I've ever seen. (The one where bendtner had a chance at the end to put us through on away goals but he mitched it) That arsenal team had 60% possession in the league and Barcelona just suffocated us. We couldn't play two passes in a row. Nasri made a great run just to win a corner that busquets subsequently put in his own goal and that was really the only positive thing all game. It was literally Nasri dribbling on his own into a corner and fluking a deflection. It's hard to describe how dominant they were that day. Maybe someone else remembers it.
 
Raul Madrid said:
Spain's success is down to Luis Aragones. Guardiola's contribution to Spain's success is minuscule in comparison to his. For years he got shit from everyone for the decisions he was making (like leaving Raul out of the team, playing so many "small" players with little physical strength together in midfield and having the team make too many "pointless" passes amongst other things) but he stood by his decisions and changed for nobody and in the end not only did he win Spain's first trophy in a long time, but he left behind a team with confidence that it never had before and the foundations and groundwork for the team that would go on to win at the World Cup and the 2nd European Championship. Winning Euro 2008 was the most important moment in Spain's history because if they did not win that trophy then they most probably would not have won the World Cup (and perhaps Barcelona would not have gone on to win the CL the following year due to the players not having the massive confidence boost from Spain's win as well as the confirmation from that win that playing such a style of football could be successful) and Spain would still be referred to as the "perennial underachievers" and Spain's reputation of being "bottlers" would have remained intact.
Click to expand...
True. I also remember Xavi saying that the coach who made the most impact on his career was Aragones.
 
Eboue said:
The second leg of one of the arsenal Barcelona CL matchups was the most dominant performance I've ever seen. (The one where bendtner had a chance at the end to put us through on away goals but he mitched it) That arsenal team had 60% possession in the league and Barcelona just suffocated us. We couldn't play two passes in a row. Nasri made a great run just to win a corner that busquets subsequently put in his own goal and that was really the only positive thing all game. It was literally Nasri dribbling on his own into a corner and fluking a deflection. It's hard to describe how dominant they were that day. Maybe someone else remembers it.
Click to expand...

There's a match, I think it was the first time you played Peps Barcelona. The first half was as good a half as you will see from a big team away to another big team. Some how Arsenal went in 0-0. Barca came out the second half went 2- 0 up and really should have seen the game out. Game ended 2-2 in the end.

First half video below.

 
Theonas said:
Can you even hear yourself? You sound like a sensitive patriotic angry man. Let's dissect this shall we:

Your first paragraph: No of course I can't, I don't see why you think that I think I can. But you can apply that to anybody who ever gave a view on an issue that includes a large portion of people and if you are going to do that well God help us all. I, like many other people on here and everywhere, have the view that there is such a thing as cultural sensibilities which play a big role in how a large number of people belonging to that particular culture feel about different things. Is that really news to you? Obviously nobody can generalize everything but that's a given. Honestly, you sound like a teenager going "YOU DON'T KNOW ME! YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT I HAVE BEEN THROUGH! DON'T JUDGE ME!"

Second paragraph: Yes? See if that was your first response, that would be a very useful contribution. Only I don't understand why are you telling me this? Did you see me anywhere arguing that England's approach to tactics is a genetic issue? I am fully aware of the conditions and difficulties kids face when it comes to training and such compared to how it is in sunnier countries. I didn't play down anything, in fact I am pretty sure I was one of the very very few ones who thought England's performances in the last WC were a step in the right direction. I also think it is only a matter of time before things change due to what I hear is being done behind the scenes.

Third: Einstein spoke about something called relativity. Go and read about it seriously. It's tiresome how one has to end every sentence with "relatively". At some point I have to write with the assumption that I am discussing with grown ups and not sensitive teenagers like yourself. No, I don't think British coaches believe that. I think that RELATIVELY, they don't place the same emphasis on tactics as foreign coaches with more than a few exceptions of course. Of course if you have bothered to discuss this, I would have told you that I actually was arguing against the view that Moyes is a British tactical dinosaur last year. I always thought that was such a stupid simplistic view about British coaches and that it is more of a case of aesthetic preferences rather than actual competence that makes British coaches the way they are. I remember arguing that Britain produced some of the smartest people in history, it is therefore idiotic to argue that its football people are somehow retarded.

Last paragraph: Again, of course Savage doesn't represent a whole culture but if you can't see that a large portion of the British public scoffs at the idea of a footballing philosophy, you really need to get out more. Look at the questions the media ask managers, look at how many managers even speak about their tactics. Heard the smirks Van Gaal was met with when he spoke about his philosophy? I'll let you use that brain of yours to figure out a link there. That is of course when you can get your emotions out of the way and think straight.
Click to expand...

I'm not a teenager, I'm not angry and I'm don't consider myself to be patriotic. I'm not getting into a battle of the paragraphs either, although I'm partial to waffling, as I plan to play golf very soon. I'll keep it somewhat short.

I'm glad you're aware that youth football, and in fact sport, in this country is at a severe disadvantage from the outset due to issues that are out of the coaches' control. I don't think it's necessarily true to suggest that managers from this country don't place as much emphasis on the tactical side of game as their continental peers. I think they do, but the aesthetics, something you make a good point about, can vary. Tony Pulis may not be renowned for gung-ho and glamour, but his philosophy and tactical acumen are as astute as they come.

Relativity is all fair and well but you can't blanket generalisations with that as an excuse. You initially stated that British football had a mistrust of philosophy and tactical complexity. I don't think it does. I think British football has represented itself impressively for over half a century. I also think that British football is modernising, in part due to the influx of foreign players and coaches. Shared ideas and experiences etc. British football has been given a lot of stick over the years, primarily due to a lack of home nations' success.

Some of it justified, some not so much. But now, I think there is a clear initiative to get British football back to the top of the pyramid. Attitudes are changing and the right framework appears to be getting put into place. That should be noted, and I don't think assertions to the contrary are fair. You'll probably bring up relativity once again, but stating that what Xavi and Iniesta would do to ensure they were correctly positioned "isn't even acknowledged as tactics" by whoever it is you're suggesting doesn't see it that way can certainly be construed as patronising, because it falls in line with that dinosaur image of British football that has so often been projected. If you can't see that then so be it. We'll have to leave it there.
 
RedStarUnited said:
There's a match, I think it was the first time you played Peps Barcelona. The first half was as good a half as you will see from a big team away to another big team. Some how Arsenal went in 0-0. Barca came out the second half went 2- 0 up and really should have seen the game out. Game ended 2-2 in the end.

First half video below.

Click to expand...


Arguably the best half of football by a team I've seen.

I often wondered how they maintained that intensity and quality for 2-3 seasons without major injuries. Tactical revolution or medical revolution? Thinking aloud now: since Fuentes got locked up Barca have dropped a level and over in Germany Pep has struggled to maintain performance levels beyond March. Too far-fetched?
 
VP said:
since Fuentes got locked up Barca have dropped a level and over in Germany Pep has struggled to maintain performance levels beyond March. Too far-fetched?
Click to expand...
Yup.

What about this season? Other than Vermaelen who was bought while injured, they haven't had any major injuries this season. They've even upped their performance level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.