Theoretical Scenario, you're the DoF for Unted and have been asked to put together a midfield three ala Neves, Ruiz and Vitiniha. Who do you buy?

[Mmm-Qatarian]

I think that’s more a function of PSG having an a squad full of technically gifted players (Barcola didn’t even make the starting lineup for the final) and Liverpool getting particularly lucky with injuries.

I think it has more to do with two things:

1. Rather obviously, there are just four more matches in a Premier League season, so even if every player played every match the players from Premier League sides would play at least 360 more minutes than their Ligue 1 counterparts.

2. The depth of quality in the Premier League is much higher than in Ligue 1, so you can't get away with resting players as easily.

And this leads nicely on to my next point...

And as Hammondo said…

PSG really wouldn’t be running all that much. If you’re an average PL team, Vitinha WANTS you to try and recklessly press him for the entire match. You’ll rarely dispossess him, tire yourself out and get picked off at will.

Sure, I'm not arguing that PSG wouldn't be near the top of the charts for possession in the Premier League, but I find it exceedingly unlikely that they'd be even close to the 68% average they managed in Ligue 1. Just by virtue of that, their midfield would have to cover more ground because they'd almost certainly spend less time with the ball.

I really don't think it's controversial to suggest that physical factors matter more to the top tier Premier League clubs than they would for PSG. It's not a bad counter to point out that City won titles with a midfield that wasn't made up of physical specimens but they are a complete anomaly when it comes to possession numbers in the Premier League, and although this might be controversial given that they just won the Champions League I don't think PSG are yet good enough to even get near the possession numbers that City were putting up in their peak years under Guardiola.

 

[Hammondo]

I think that’s more a function of PSG having an a squad full of technically gifted players (Barcola didn’t even make the starting lineup for the final) and Liverpool getting particularly lucky with injuries.

And as Hammondo said…

PSG really wouldn’t be running all that much. If you’re an average PL team, Vitinha WANTS you to try and recklessly press him for the entire match. You’ll rarely dispossess him, tire yourself out and get picked off at will.

Exactly.

 

[Mmm-Qatarian]

Exactly.

But do you think PSG would keep possession as effectively in the Premier League as they do in Ligue 1? I'm somewhat doubtful.

I'm not even arguing that Vitinha, Joao Neves, and Fabian Ruiz wouldn't cope with the Premier League. I have no doubts that they'd still do very well as a midfield trio in the right setup in the Premier League because they're exceedingly talented players. With that said, the physical demands placed on them would be much tougher than they have been this season so I think it's fair to ask if they'd be as effective.

 

[Daydreamer]

But do you think PSG would keep possession as effectively in the Premier League as they do in Ligue 1? I'm somewhat doubtful.

I'm not even arguing that Vitinha, Joao Neves, and Fabian Ruiz wouldn't cope with the Premier League. I have no doubts that they'd still do very well as a midfield trio in the right setup in the Premier League because they're exceedingly talented players. With that said, the physical demands placed on them would be much tougher than they have been this season so I think it's fair to ask if they'd be as effective.

They kept the ball just fine against City, Liverpool, Villa and Arsenal when they defeated each of them - so yeah, I think they would be fine.

The PL is more physically demanding than other leagues, but we don’t play a different sport here.

 

[FortunaUtd]

PSG literally kicked out all of Villa, Liverpool and Arsenal but apparently their midfield would struggle in the Premier League.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Pace is overrated in central midfield for sure. Nice to have sure, but it’s not even in the top 10 for most desirable attributes in a midfielder. Keane, Scholes, Carrick none of them were rapid, they made up for it in other areas. Pace has always been more important down the flanks. Wharton reads the game well, he’s not exceptionally quick but has a decent engine that I would see evolving in years to come.

Keane was quick in the 1990s, if you watch the early 90s in particular or watch the 1996 FA Cup final he’s zipping all over the place, even if you see highlights by 2000 he has a notably sharp first few steps.

 

[klayton88]

Milligan, Cleese, Everett.... Sessions.

 

[Daydreamer]

PSG literally kicked out all of Villa, Liverpool and Arsenal but apparently their midfield would struggle in the Premier League.

Yep. All sandwiched between defeating City and winning the competition in the most one sided Final in history.

I keep coming back to this thread cause I’m struggling to get my head around it. It almost feels like either side of the debate must have been watching entirely different games this season.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

I think it has more to do with two things:

1. Rather obviously, there are just four more matches in a Premier League season, so even if every player played every match the players from Premier League sides would play at least 360 more minutes than their Ligue 1 counterparts.

2. The depth of quality in the Premier League is much higher than in Ligue 1, so you can't get away with resting players as easily.

And this leads nicely on to my next point...

Sure, I'm not arguing that PSG wouldn't be near the top of the charts for possession in the Premier League, but I find it exceedingly unlikely that they'd be even close to the 68% average they managed in Ligue 1. Just by virtue of that, their midfield would have to cover more ground because they'd almost certainly spend less time with the ball.

I really don't think it's controversial to suggest that physical factors matter more to the top tier Premier League clubs than they would for PSG. It's not a bad counter to point out that City won titles with a midfield that wasn't made up of physical specimens but they are a complete anomaly when it comes to possession numbers in the Premier League, and although this might be controversial given that they just won the Champions League I don't think PSG are yet good enough to even get near the possession numbers that City were putting up in their peak years under Guardiola.

You quoted me but I didn't even say what you quoted

 

[Mmm-Qatarian]

You quoted me but I didn't even say what you quoted

Yeah my apologies, not quite sure how that happened.

 

[Mmm-Qatarian]

PSG literally kicked out all of Villa, Liverpool and Arsenal but apparently their midfield would struggle in the Premier League.

Again, the point isn't that they'd struggle in the Premier League. The point is that they'd almost definitely have to exert themselves more in the Premier League because they'd be playing against higher quality opponents on a weekly basis.

I'm quite sure that PSG would manage just fine in the Premier League, and feck there's a good chance they'd have won it last season, but I don't think it's unreasonable to consider that there would be increased physical demands on their players.

 

[Hammondo]

But do you think PSG would keep possession as effectively in the Premier League as they do in Ligue 1? I'm somewhat doubtful.

I'm not even arguing that Vitinha, Joao Neves, and Fabian Ruiz wouldn't cope with the Premier League. I have no doubts that they'd still do very well as a midfield trio in the right setup in the Premier League because they're exceedingly talented players. With that said, the physical demands placed on them would be much tougher than they have been this season so I think it's fair to ask if they'd be as effective.

They did it Vs Liverpool and beat 4 players teams. Obviously some teams require more effort than others, but they still won. City from previous seasons though, that might be tough.

 

[FortunaUtd]

It would be also worth noting that the French League is actually very physical and athletic.

 

[Wolfbot]

Physicality doesn't mean size, does it? Yes Foden and Bernardo are way more physical than David Silva in terms of the distance they cover in a game and their ability to press and sprint back. De Bryune until age has caught up with him was great at this as well. And they proved they could do it every weekend and mid week. The PSG team just had to do it 6-7 times a season in Europe. They don't need to play with this intensity every week in Ligue 1 and neither do they actually need to be at full strength to win matches domestically.

Your arguing based on the assumption that just because they arguably don't need to play with the same intensity as Premier league games every week that they couldn't do it.

From the energy and intensity I saw in some of their Champions League games I would think that with the appropriate conditioning, they very much would be able to cope with the PL with no issues at all.

 

[King7Eric]

Your arguing based on the assumption that just because they arguably don't need to play with the same intensity as Premier league games every week that they couldn't do it.

From the energy and intensity I saw in some of their Champions League games I would think that with the appropriate conditioning, they very much would be able to cope with the PL with no issues at all.

It's fascinating to me how so many on here ( not just you mate) are seeing PSG'S games in the CL and extrapolating they will be able to do it every week in the PL. Physical conditioning doesn't work that way and there will be certain players who just will never be able to do that. Again I'm not saying PSG for sure can't do it but it's not a guarantee they can as some are believing on here.

I don't think you can extrapolate how a team will perform over a season based on a select few games. If we just look at Utd's games this season against City, Villa, Arsenal and Liverpool, those weren't the worst performances and would suggest the team should finish higher than 15th and yet here we are.

 

[Wolfbot]

It's fascinating to me how so many on here ( not just you mate) are seeing PSG'S games in the CL and extrapolating they will be able to do it every week in the PL. Physical conditioning doesn't work that way and there will be certain players who just will never be able to do that. Again I'm not saying PSG for sure can't do it but it's not a guarantee they can as some are believing on here.

I don't think you can extrapolate how a team will perform over a season based on a select few games. If we just look at Utd's games this season against City, Villa, Arsenal and Liverpool, those weren't the worst performances and would suggest the team should finish higher than 15th and yet here we are.

Whilst I totally understand what you're saying about them probably not being able to match the same intensity they played at in the Champions League every week (I don't disagree with that),I don't think there's any decent evidence to suggest that they wouldn't be able to get as fit and strong as their peers if they were to play in the PL (if nothing else, at least to a competitive enough physical level, and they then have their superior footballing ability on top.

Ruiz has a great engine, Neves looks super fit too. Vitinha is the one that I think maybe wouldn't quite cut it physically but his ability and intelligence is such that I don't think it'd hold him back much.

There would be a couple of teams, maybe Newcastle as a good example that probably would be a bit too physical for them, but I don't think generally they'd struggle to get the better of most midfields.

 

[King7Eric]

Whilst I totally understand what you're saying about them probably not being able to match the same intensity they played at in the Champions League every week (I don't disagree with that),I don't think there's any decent evidence to suggest that they wouldn't be able to get as fit and strong as their peers if they were to play in the PL (if nothing else, at least to a competitive enough physical level, and they then have their superior footballing ability on top.

Ruiz has a great engine, Neves looks super fit too. Vitinha is the one that I think maybe wouldn't quite cut it physically but his ability and intelligence is such that I don't think it'd hold him back much.

There would be a couple of teams, maybe Newcastle as a good example that probably would be a bit too physical for them, but I don't think generally they'd struggle to get the better of most midfields.

Fair enough. I suppose we will never really know unless some team signs them 3 players.

 

[Hammondo]

I think it has more to do with two things:

1. Rather obviously, there are just four more matches in a Premier League season, so even if every player played every match the players from Premier League sides would play at least 360 more minutes than their Ligue 1 counterparts.

2. The depth of quality in the Premier League is much higher than in Ligue 1, so you can't get away with resting players as easily.

And this leads nicely on to my next point...

Sure, I'm not arguing that PSG wouldn't be near the top of the charts for possession in the Premier League, but I find it exceedingly unlikely that they'd be even close to the 68% average they managed in Ligue 1. Just by virtue of that, their midfield would have to cover more ground because they'd almost certainly spend less time with the ball.

I really don't think it's controversial to suggest that physical factors matter more to the top tier Premier League clubs than they would for PSG. It's not a bad counter to point out that City won titles with a midfield that wasn't made up of physical specimens but they are a complete anomaly when it comes to possession numbers in the Premier League, and although this might be controversial given that they just won the Champions League I don't think PSG are yet good enough to even get near the possession numbers that City were putting up in their peak years under Guardiola.

I still can't believe real Madrid beat city by parking the bus like that. City should have won more CL titles no doubt, but at times luck was a factor.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Pace is overrated in central midfield for sure. Nice to have sure, but it’s not even in the top 10 for most desirable attributes in a midfielder. Keane, Scholes, Carrick none of them were rapid, they made up for it in other areas. Pace has always been more important down the flanks. Wharton reads the game well, he’s not exceptionally quick but has a decent engine that I would see evolving in years to come.

Yeah I disagree, it's one of the most important things in football in any position. The fastest players just tend to be up top or on the wider positions - when CMs are fast it opens a whole new dimension to the game like Yaya Toure just running straight through teams, or how good Szob has been for Pool. All well and good referencing world class players who weren't that athletic (Scholes) or just a general world class allrounder (Keane) but that's the top end of the tree.

 

[Daydreamer]

It's fascinating to me how so many on here ( not just you mate) are seeing PSG'S games in the CL and extrapolating they will be able to do it every week in the PL. Physical conditioning doesn't work that way and there will be certain players who just will never be able to do that. Again I'm not saying PSG for sure can't do it but it's not a guarantee they can as some are believing on here.

I find it fascinating that you see PSG's performances in Ligue 1 and extrapolating that they would likely struggle in the PL. There's so much evidence to the contrary...

1. D. Silva, B. Silva, de Bruyne, Foden have racked up 100s of appearances, goals, assists and medals playing predominantly in midfield
2. PSG beat four of the PL best teams this very season
3. Ligue 1 is itself a physically demanding league
4. Technically superior teams often actually prefer to be pressed
5. Most opponents would drop into a mid or low block against them as they do against top PL sides now

I don't think you can extrapolate how a team will perform over a season based on a select few games. If we just look at Utd's games this season against City, Villa, Arsenal and Liverpool, those weren't the worst performances and would suggest the team should finish higher than 15th and yet here we are.

PSG just played 58 games across 3 competitions and won the treble. This included 17 games in CL. No one is "extrapolating how they will perform over the season based on few select games". We've seen how they perform across a season. Results, performances, stats and even the much-vaunted eye test all point to the same thing.

Guardiola coming third in his first season was the high point for the "Wet, windy night in Stoke" argument. But then, for most of the world, it was settled when he won 6 titles and 4 domestic cups in England. Yet somehow, in a year where the CL winner defeated four PL teams on their way to the title... it's back.

And because the argument is unfalsifiable as PSG will never play in the PL, it will never truly die. It cannot be defeated. It is... inevitable.

 

[King7Eric]

I find it fascinating that you see PSG's performances in Ligue 1 and extrapolating that they would likely struggle in the PL. There's so much evidence to the contrary...

1. D. Silva, B. Silva, de Bruyne, Foden have racked up 100s of appearances, goals, assists and medals playing predominantly in midfield
2. PSG beat four of the PL best teams this very season
3. Ligue 1 is itself a physically demanding league
4. Technically superior teams often actually prefer to be pressed
5. Most opponents would drop into a mid or low block against them as they do against top PL sides now

PSG just played 58 games across 3 competitions and won the treble. This included 17 games in CL. No one is "extrapolating how they will perform over the season based on few select games". We've seen how they perform across a season. Results, performances, stats and even the much-vaunted eye test all point to the same thing.

Guardiola coming third in his first season was the high point for the "Wet, windy night in Stoke" argument. But then, for most of the world, it was settled when he won 6 titles and 4 domestic cups in England. Yet somehow, in a year where the CL winner defeated four PL teams on their way to the title... it's back.

And because the argument is unfalsifiable as PSG will never play in the PL, it will never truly die. It cannot be defeated. It is... inevitable.

I don't know why this Stoke argument is being bought up because I'm talking about something totally different. But anyway I guess the bolded part at the end is the one thing we can agree upon.

There's no way to definitively prove or disprove this argument. So let's just leave it that.

 

[brian9100]

Varela
Camavinga Larsson​

 

[Dion]

Yeah I disagree, it's one of the most important things in football in any position. The fastest players just tend to be up top or on the wider positions - when CMs are fast it opens a whole new dimension to the game like Yaya Toure just running straight through teams, or how good Szob has been for Pool. All well and good referencing world class players who weren't that athletic (Scholes) or just a general world class allrounder (Keane) but that's the top end of the tree.

Generally speaking the ball moves quicker than the man. In midfield (especially in a double pivot) your dribbling is there to create space for yourself to pass the ball forwards, not carry the ball forwards yourself. It's a useful skill to have, to be sure, but it's not essential. Xavi was better than anyone at getting the ball up the pitch quickly, far, far better than Yaya Toure for example. Pace will never not be an advantage, but it's a luxury on top of the essentials which pretty much all of the best midfielders ever lacked anyway.

It's why all the fawning over Dembele at Spurs used to make me laugh, he was a good player but the whole "he was impossible to take the ball off" stuff seemed to miss the bigger picture. Loads of the time when he ran with the ball he should have just passed it, he slowed down the team and let the opposition get back in shape. Szoboszlai is much more of an attacking player, so it's a bit different for him. Pace in the 10 position/most advanced 8 in a 3 gets a lot more value.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Generally speaking the ball moves quicker than the man. In midfield (especially in a double pivot) your dribbling is there to create space for yourself to pass the ball forwards, not carry the ball forwards yourself. It's a useful skill to have, to be sure, but it's not essential. Xavi was better than anyone at getting the ball up the pitch quickly, far, far better than Yaya Toure for example. Pace will never not be an advantage, but it's a luxury on top of the essentials which pretty much all of the best midfielders ever lacked anyway.

It's why all the fawning over Dembele at Spurs used to make me laugh, he was a good player but the whole "he was impossible to take the ball off" stuff seemed to miss the bigger picture. Loads of the time when he ran with the ball he should have just passed it, he slowed down the team and let the opposition get back in shape. Szoboszlai is much more of an attacking player, so it's a bit different for him. Pace in the 10 position/most advanced 8 in a 3 gets a lot more value.

That’s just obviously not true. Xavi wasn’t pinging long balls for the most part, they would progress the ball slowly versus a man charging up the field alone. The point is with someone like Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets you were almost guaranteed the ball would get into decent areas. With someone carrying the ball or going super direct it’s way quicker but much more likely you lose the ball.

 

[Dion]

That’s just obviously not true. Xavi wasn’t pinging long balls for the most part, they would progress the ball slowly versus a man charging up the field alone. The point is with someone like Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets you were almost guaranteed the ball would get into decent areas. With someone carrying the ball or going super direct it’s way quicker but much more likely you lose the ball.

It most definitely is true. Basically only post eye-op Scholes made more long passes than Xavi around that time in the PL/La Liga. For all you remember the relentless possession, it happens first because Barcelona attacked quickly. They won the ball back and their first instinct was to get the ball forward as quickly as possible. Only then if the counter attack broke down did the recycling start. Toni Kroos is the same. It's why Thiago and Busquets feature high up too. Being able to get the ball from front to back is absolutely critical in beating low block teams because you never let them get settled into their defensive shape, by the time they're back there you're already moving the ball side to side to disrupt them.

Spoiler

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

It would be also worth noting that the French League is actually very physical and athletic.

People seem to forget this and just call it a farmers league even though I end up far more impressed watching regular French teams than some of these La Liga sides.

 

[msjmohd83]

Wharton

Baleba Mastantuono​

 

[tomaldinho1]

It most definitely is true. Basically only post eye-op Scholes made more long passes than Xavi around that time in the PL/La Liga. For all you remember the relentless possession, it happens first because Barcelona attacked quickly. They won the ball back and their first instinct was to get the ball forward as quickly as possible. Only then if the counter attack broke down did the recycling start. Toni Kroos is the same. It's why Thiago and Busquets feature high up too. Being able to get the ball from front to back is absolutely critical in beating low block teams because you never let them get settled into their defensive shape, by the time they're back there you're already moving the ball side to side to disrupt them.

Spoiler

Just to dissect this. You have put up a stat which a) excludes any player not in an extremely filtered accuracy % (not ideal if we are talking about long passing), but also that has no indication of distance/progressive (which is your point) and also seems to include about 95% Barca/Real players which, again, makes me wonder how many players are excludes by the accuracy %. I will also point out you seem to have misread your own graphic as the number of passes per 90 is bracketed, so Xavi has categorically not made the most passes anyway...

However, let's analyse what you have presented. The obvious thing for me would be to then try and work out if all these long passes are going forwards quickly, as you suggest, or if they are not. Pass map from the 6-2 win at Real below, feel free to find others this was what came up when I searched. Very clearly many lateral, less direct passes, linking everything up and running the show - the exact type of game Xavi was known for, come across the pitch, link stuff up, really what would you call a long ball on that? Yet many of these would show up on your graphic as long passes. For contrast, Bruno's pass map versus City below is showcasing some direct passing.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

I'd probably go

Reijnders, Guimares, Camavinga

 

[Dion]

Just to dissect this. You have put up a stat which a) excludes any player not in an extremely filtered accuracy % (not ideal if we are talking about long passing), but also that has no indication of distance/progressive (which is your point) and also seems to include about 95% Barca/Real players which, again, makes me wonder how many players are excludes by the accuracy %. I will also point out you seem to have misread your own graphic as the number of passes per 90 is bracketed, so Xavi has categorically not made the most passes anyway...

However, let's analyse what you have presented. The obvious thing for me would be to then try and work out if all these long passes are going forwards quickly, as you suggest, or if they are not. Pass map from the 6-2 win at Real below, feel free to find others this was what came up when I searched. Very clearly many lateral, less direct passes, linking everything up and running the show - the exact type of game Xavi was known for, come across the pitch, link stuff up, really what would you call a long ball on that? Yet many of these would show up on your graphic as long passes. For contrast, Bruno's pass map versus City below is showcasing some direct passing.

The filtering is there to show players who are actually good at it, which is why all of the top midfielders in the world are in there. That's literally the point.

Are you sure you've actually read what I wrote about the graphic? Because I can assure you I did not misread it. I almost put a bit in my post to direct you to the number in brackets but I assumed you had basic comprehension skills. The list is sorted by accuracy, but the number of long passes per game is as you said, in brackets. Xavi averages between 8-10 long passes per game, the only really comparable figures in terms of consistent volume are Kroos and Scholes. The key takeaway is 1) Xavi produced these passes more than most of his peers and 2) He was very good at them. No matter where you decide to draw arbitrary cut offs those two facts wouldn't change.

I have tremendous issues with your choice of games for a whole host of reasons, but firstly and primarily that was the Messi F9 game where Pep realised he could play him in the middle and let him drop deep and link up play. It monumentally fecked with Madrid and was a major reason they lost as heavily as they did. However, that was far from the "usual". As noted in the statsbomb article, Xavi actually played higher up between the lines quite a lot in this game and let Iniesta drop deep to take advantage of the Madrid confusion.

https://preview.redd.it/ah4ut8z7swb61.png?auto=webp&s=1757f6c29bc361dd87aafabe8400df499427a40e

You can see in these Xavi's classical direct switches out to the inside forwards/Dani Alves on the charge. It was an absolutely fundamental to their play and how they started off attacks more often than not. They were just exceptional at recycling possession after those counters broke down and then breaking down teams with low blocks, but Xavi was absolutely unafraid of releasing the ball early and going long to force transitions. It's how they got back up the pitch and reapplied the 'carousel'. It was also a feature of his time as manager at Barcelona too.


This isn't some rewriting of history either, whoscored were writing articles like Europe's Best: Xavi Stands Tall as Long Ball Master back in 2011, when he was around his peak.

 

[Kingslayer18]

That PSG trio are unique in that they are all well-rounded players but also complement each other so well. If you look at their games and superpowers, Vitinha is the press-resistant monster and controller, Neves the worker and Ruiz the box crasher.

So if I'm looking at a group that is gettable from the view point of a United DOF: a trio of Stiller, Baleba, Bouaddi would be the midfield I would be targeting.

 

[tomaldinho1]

The filtering is there to show players who are actually good at it, which is why all of the top midfielders in the world are in there. That's literally the point.

Are you sure you've actually read what I wrote about the graphic? Because I can assure you I did not misread it. I almost put a bit in my post to direct you to the number in brackets but I assumed you had basic comprehension skills. The list is sorted by accuracy, but the number of long passes per game is as you said, in brackets. Xavi averages between 8-10 long passes per game, the only really comparable figures in terms of consistent volume are Kroos and Scholes. The key takeaway is 1) Xavi produced these passes more than most of his peers and 2) He was very good at them. No matter where you decide to draw arbitrary cut offs those two facts wouldn't change.

I have tremendous issues with your choice of games for a whole host of reasons, but firstly and primarily that was the Messi F9 game where Pep realised he could play him in the middle and let him drop deep and link up play. It monumentally fecked with Madrid and was a major reason they lost as heavily as they did. However, that was far from the "usual". As noted in the statsbomb article, Xavi actually played higher up between the lines quite a lot in this game and let Iniesta drop deep to take advantage of the Madrid confusion.

https://preview.redd.it/ah4ut8z7swb61.png?auto=webp&s=1757f6c29bc361dd87aafabe8400df499427a40e

You can see in these Xavi's classical direct switches out to the inside forwards/Dani Alves on the charge. It was an absolutely fundamental to their play and how they started off attacks more often than not. They were just exceptional at recycling possession after those counters broke down and then breaking down teams with low blocks, but Xavi was absolutely unafraid of releasing the ball early and going long to force transitions. It's how they got back up the pitch and reapplied the 'carousel'.

Kind of odd you'd be rude when I am responding to this point:

Basically only post eye-op Scholes made more long passes than Xavi around that time in the PL/La Liga

Which your own graphic disproves. I disagree re the % piece because - as an obvious example - it would exclude someone like Bruno who is our main playmaker and passer (his long passes this season are around 50% accuracy).

That map has like 2-3 really long balls on it, one is a corner. Most of them just confirm what i already wrote about what Xavi is known for. You're getting steered to think something that isn't true by anyone who watched Barca even a little (i.e. think of the difference is passing from someone like Pirlo vs Xavi or Alonso vs Xavi) because the stat wants to define anything over 20metres as a long pass. 20m is like passing from one side of the centre circle to the other (technically I think it's ~19) but you get the point. Either way, this again disproves your point, the bulk of those passes are quite clearly side to side, most actually seem to be backwards if you look at where the arrows heads are. None of this is a slight on him but just wasn't someone who launched long direct balls regularly.

 

[Smudger22587]

Baleba, Reijnders and Jobe Bellingham, all 3 have the ability to attack and defend, physicality and ability on the ball as well as two out of the 3 being very young and as a group could easily grow and gel together for years.

 

[Dion]

Kind of odd you'd be rude when I am responding to this point:

Which your own graphic disproves.

At no point was I rude to you.

And no, the graphic doesn't "disprove" it? Are you just assuming that because Xavi was at the top that's what I based the numbers on? I explained the reasoning.

I disagree re the % piece because - as an obvious example - it would exclude someone like Bruno who is our main playmaker and passer (his long passes this season are around 50% accuracy).

He's also not especially good at them, especially from deep. I wouldn't have Bruno anywhere near a "midfielders who play in a double pivot" list for anything.

That map has like 2-3 really long balls on it, one is a corner. Most of them just confirm what i already wrote about what Xavi is known for. You're getting steered to think something that isn't true by anyone who watched Barca even a little (i.e. think of the difference is passing from someone like Pirlo vs Xavi or Alonso vs Xavi) because the stat wants to define anything over 20metres as a long pass. 20m is like passing from one side of the centre circle to the other (technically I think it's ~19) but you get the point. Either way, this again disproves your point, the bulk of those passes are quite clearly side to side, most actually seem to be backwards if you look at where the arrows heads are. None of this is a slight on him but just wasn't someone who launched long direct balls regularly.

Passes don't have to be "really long balls" to be direct. There's probably 20+ passes on there in the Atletico half which are longer than a midfielder is ever going to get to run with the ball, a dozen forward into the wide right position. It's across the center circle plus another 5 meters, it's between a 5th and a quarter of the pitch. A progressive pass is defined by most football stats companies as 15m if it starts in your own half and ends in the opposition half or 10m if it starts in the opposition half. A pass 50-130% longer than the standard definition of a progressive pass is a perfectly normal definition of a long pass. You've simply got a very odd definition of what a long/direct pass is, it's very rare that anyone other than defenders play passes longer than 20m. A 23m pass from midfield is clearly going to break lines into the forwards, and that's the absolute shortest pass counted.

 

[Ekeke]

I've seen Reijnders a few times but hes 2 years older than the 24 year cut off in the OP

Its hard to say who is an impossible transfer and who isnt. For a midfield like PSG's you're looking mainly for midfielders who play the most passes and one of them having good ball winning stats on top like Neves

Pavlovic at Bayern as the main DM, Wirtz from Bayer as an AM and Angelo Stiller from Stuttgart as a mix

2 of them would seemingly be unavailable to us. Maybe all 3

Zaire-Emery same thing, high profile and at a big club probably not available.

Rovella from Lazio could be a good alternative for mix or AM

Pablo Barrios from Atletico a decent alternative for the mix role

Asllani at Inter might be a consideration purely for passing the ball. He's weak in the other areas

Nicolas Seiwald as a cheap alternative to Pavlovic as a DM

Lamine Camera would be a good mix

Enzo Millot as a cheaper alternative to Wirtz as an AM

 

[tomaldinho1]

At no point was I rude to you.

And no, the graphic doesn't "disprove" it? Are you just assuming that because Xavi was at the top that's what I based the numbers on? I explained the reasoning.

He's also not especially good at them, especially from deep. I wouldn't have Bruno anywhere near a "midfielders who play in a double pivot" list for anything.

Passes don't have to be "really long balls" to be direct. There's probably 20+ passes on there in the Atletico half which are longer than a midfielder is ever going to get to run with the ball, a dozen forward into the wide right position. It's across the center circle plus another 5 meters, it's between a 5th and a quarter of the pitch. A progressive pass is defined by most football stats companies as 15m if it starts in your own half and ends in the opposition half or 10m if it starts in the opposition half. A pass 50-130% longer than the standard definition of a progressive pass is a perfectly normal definition of a long pass. You've simply got a very odd definition of what a long/direct pass is, it's very rare that anyone other than defenders play passes longer than 20m. A 23m pass from midfield is clearly going to break lines into the forwards, and that's the absolute shortest pass counted.

I think many would find this rude, personally.

but I assumed you had basic comprehension skills

Again, you said 'only Scholes', not me. I can't help if you type something but mean something else.

Man, just look at the map you showed, it's about an non direct as a CM can be - that's not a criticism, again, but Xavi lived and breathed positional possession as a player. It's especially clear when you see the number of passes in total, so his percentage of long passes is actually quite low but, again, your original graph is so specific it misses loads of players who likely do play much longer, more direct balls.

Bruno's long pass ability isn't in question here, the manner in which he passes is. Your point was:

Xavi was better than anyone at getting the ball up the pitch quickly

I think that's just a bad take.

 

[Dion]

I think many would find this rude, personally.

I think you might have misunderstood this if you have taken offence to it. I'd be interested to know what you thought it meant to be offended by it.

Again, you said 'only Scholes', not me. I can't help if you type something but mean something else.

I said "Basically only post eye-op Scholes made more", you can make arguments Kroos is similar to Xavi but Scholes is the only one who appeared on that list with regularity who was making more long passes per game. I don't think that's especially difficult to determine.

Man, just look at the map you showed, it's about an non direct as a CM can be - that's not a criticism, again, but Xavi lived and breathed positional possession as a player. It's especially clear when you see the number of passes in total, so his percentage of long passes is actually quite low but, again, your original graph is so specific it misses loads of players who likely do play much longer, more direct balls.

I'm not going to sit here while we repeat our interpretation of what a pass map looks like, I'm more than happy for everyone else to judge it with their own eyes and reach their own opinion on it.

The second bold bit misses the point though, the point was never that most of Xavi's passes where long. If you make one direct pass into the forwards and the move breaks down and then you make 10 short ones further up the pitch because your team is world class at recycling possession and breaking down low blocks then you're still progressing the ball up the pitch quickly to start attacks. You just spend much longer in the recycling phase than most teams after that. Xavi was the absolute best in the world at that for ages, better than Scholes, better than Pirlo and better than Xabi Alonso. Him playing in a team which also controlled the ball higher up the pitch once that pass was made than any other doesn't change that.

Bruno's long pass ability isn't in question here, the manner in which he passes is. Your point was:

I think that's just a bad take.

Bruno does try a lot of long passes (especially in the last couple of years), he's also not that good at them, which is why he's not included in the list. Attempting 12 long passes and making 7 is a fair bit different from someone who attempts 10 and gets 9 of them.

And you're quite welcome to think it's a bad take, but I'm also pretty happy with the argument I've put forward about why that's the case and I'm happy to let everyone else judge at this stage.

 

[tomaldinho1]

I think you might have misunderstood this if you have taken offence to it. I'd be interested to know what you thought it meant to be offended by it.

I said "Basically only post eye-op Scholes made more", you can make arguments Kroos is similar to Xavi but Scholes is the only one who appeared on that list with regularity who was making more long passes per game. I don't think that's especially difficult to determine.

I'm not going to sit here while we repeat our interpretation of what a pass map looks like, I'm more than happy for everyone else to judge it with their own eyes and reach their own opinion on it.

The second bold bit misses the point though, the point was never that most of Xavi's passes where long. If you make one direct pass into the forwards and the move breaks down and then you make 10 short ones further up the pitch because your team is world class at recycling possession and breaking down low blocks then you're still progressing the ball up the pitch quickly to start attacks. You just spend much longer in the recycling phase than most teams after that. Xavi was the absolute best in the world at that for ages, better than Scholes, better than Pirlo and better than Xabi Alonso. Him playing in a team which also controlled the ball higher up the pitch once that pass was made than any other doesn't change that.

Bruno does try a lot of long passes (especially in the last couple of years), he's also not that good at them, which is why he's not included in the list. Attempting 12 long passes and making 7 is a fair bit different from someone who attempts 10 and gets 9 of them.

And you're quite welcome to think it's a bad take, but I'm also pretty happy with the argument I've put forward about why that's the case and I'm happy to let everyone else judge at this stage.

Man, the graphic was almost irrelevant given how it filtered out players and had no indication of progression, the pass maps don't support your point, the eye test certainly doesn't and the ability of someone making a pass has no bearing on the type of pass they are trying to make. I get you have this idea in your head, but Xavi was not sitting there and pinging balls around like Pirlo did, or Alonso did, or Bruno does (regardless of how good or bad they are at it), he was not firing the ball up the pitch as quickly as he could. It's so left field a take I've honestly never heard it before but yeah I don't have anything to add.

 

[Dion]

Sorry but there's nothing in this for me to actually address. If actual, contemporary, sources praising Xavi's long passing as the best in the world aren't enough to convince you that you might just be misremembering things or allowing the styles of the teams involved to cause you to overlook things then this is going nowhere and I'm happy to leave it there and let everyone else make their own minds up.

 

[Daydreamer]

Man, the graphic was almost irrelevant given how it filtered out players and had no indication of progression, the pass maps don't support your point, the eye test certainly doesn't and the ability of someone making a pass has no bearing on the type of pass they are trying to make. I get you have this idea in your head, but Xavi was not sitting there and pinging balls around like Pirlo did, or Alonso did, or Bruno does (regardless of how good or bad they are at it), he was not firing the ball up the pitch as quickly as he could. It's so left field a take I've honestly never heard it before but yeah I don't have anything to add.

As third-party without a dog in the fight... what do you mean by this? The only filtering in the graphic is that you had to play 100 long passes and 5+ per 90 mins in a season. Therefore...

• The only "filtering" is for precisely the attribute being discussed
• There are exclusions, but that's because it only shows the top of the list
• Progression as it's actually quite difficult for a midfielder to make a successful long pass that isn't progressive