Ivan Rakitić

Yashar1899 said:

Amadou Diawara

Click to expand...

And the pricetag is Barça shows up? Think that the price always go up when big clubs show interest.

JerseyAddict said:

And the pricetag is Barça shows up? Think that the price always go up when big clubs show interest.

Click to expand...

Less than 50m and Rakitic's price in the summer of 2017 is about 35 - 45m

BBZ8800 said:

The board didn't think too much about player's ageing.
They probably thought that player's quality alone will be enough to neutralize the effects of ageing.

If we don't buy anyone, look at our attacking and midfield line in the summer:

Click to expand...

They did buy young players this summer. 1993. 1994. Kids. And they until now are showing 0 in prospect to carry the team. Only Umtiti shows capability to play in 1st 11. Paco is 1993. and he looks to me like he is 1986.

So it comes to mine: say buy someone born in 1990-1991. and proven quality CM. It is big money today.Barça should sell 3-4 players for it.

Lucho planned to "strenghten the bench" and avoid the "stamina downfall" of first team. In regards he got unusable replacements and no replacement for worn out first team.

P.S. Don't have more time to elaborate more. I think you got me... we do agree that there is new pair of young and resh legs needed. But WC.

BBZ8800 said:

Ok, I will try in numbers.
(Petroh, I know that you said that he ran a lot of kms in the past)

Example:
Neymar has pace 99/100
Neymar has natural stamina 98/100

Rakitic by default:
Pace in peak physical shape 70/100
Stamina in a peak physical shape 80/100

Now, all players will naturally lose some of their natural peak pace and stamina over years.
Some players will lose it slowly, for example:
peak pace aged 25: 99/100
peak pace aged 26: 97/100
peak pace aged 27: 95/100
peak pace aged 28: 92/100
peak pace aged 29: 88/100
peak pace aged 30: 83/100 etc

While some may lose their pace for some reason, because their body will age and lose it's peak slightly sooner (that's because of our DNA, each person will age differently and at different strength and pace)
Guy 2:
peak pace aged 25: 99/100
peak pace aged 26: 95/100
peak pace aged 27: 90/100
peak pace aged 28: 83/100
peak pace aged 29: 75/100
peak pace aged 30: 65/100

So, you see, these 2 guys had the same peak pace aged 25 at 99/100.
But a guy 1 aged slowly and still had pace 83/100 aged 30.
A guy 2 lost abilities faster and dropped to 65/100 aged 30.

Now, imagine that Rakitic is one of people who are losing physical abilities in earlier age than an average sportsmen.
Add to this that his default peak pace was always quite poor (even on his peak he was as slow as Cesc, Gomes, Internet explorer and similar).

So, sum his natural weaker pace and stamina with a chance that he is one of people who will age pretty fast.
Some guys aged 40 are like teens, like J. Zanetti and Giggs.
Some other guys aged 28 are a shadow of whom they used to be, in a physical terms.



He will be 29 in 3 weeks actually.
Born: March 10, 1988
He is not that young either...

Click to expand...

+1

BBZ8800 said:

Add to this that his default peak pace was always quite poor (even on his peak he was as slow as Cesc, Gomes, Internet explorer and similar).

Click to expand...

BBZ8800 said:

I have no idea where did you get those data or how old are data from those studies.
Newer studies (just google around the internet) say that sportsmen start to physically decline after the age of 26.

Click to expand...

Good try! I admire your diligence and the way you try to turn the data of these studies against what I rather briefly explained.
Unfortunately most of those studies do NOT distinguish between the cause of performance deterioration! They ONLY measure the easily MEASURABLE, hence the physical factors.

You need to be more precise and show me a reliable and widely quoted study or studies which prove that the performance deterioration is merely or dominantly somatic, physical, because THAT was your original statement that I reflected upon.
You may find those, but they can only be taken as a single-sided, therefore pseudo-scientific approach.
BTW, the data is current, that is what we try to teach in our local universities and related institutions and as far as I gather, it is accepted as the standard globally, in football that is.

The studies often mention and list some of the psychological and mental factors but naturally theoretical and practical notions widely depart there, because practicalities do dominate the field.
If coaches did not remember the lessons taught at courses, the realities will certainly teach them the same, In case of coaches who have no good sense of psychological aspects, will hardly learn the essence but time and experience will force them to understand and use at least SOME of the mentioned factors.

Scientifically speaking it is relatively easy to study the results of sportsmen (let's remain at football) in this regard and come up with statistical significance values, but to actually study the psychological part would take long decades, historic correlations and tremendous amount of manpower and finances.
That's why you will rarely find studies on the correlation of mental and somatic causes of performance deterioration, and studies will hardly concentrate on the list of psychological factors, because those simply cannot be easily studied scientifically.
Sports-psychology as such is bound by quite a few obstacle factors for international football, like languages, cultural boundaries, habits, financial differences, etc. although the left & right posts always have the same height in a stadium.

Therefore this short list I wrote down mirrors the actual and mental practicalities of the matter, whereas one can always study the more pragmatic psyshical factors WITHOUT proving those would be the major cause of deterioration. Would be easy and cheap to come up with examples like Sir Stanley Matthews (who was a NT player at almost 50) but there are always cases to prove exceptions.

You may browse the internet for weeks but you will NEVER find a single study that tries to prove that in football the psyshical deterioration would be the MAIN and ONLY factor in a player's decay. If they exist, then they are rubbish.
International players are surrounded by medical, therapical and other experts taking care of their psychical bodies, but even at Barcelona there is one single psychologist (employed full time) to take care of the player's mental side, which in itself shows how difficult that aspect can be.
The coach (usually retired players with a considerable playing carrier behind them) ARE actually responsible for those aspects, because they were taught the basics and they are also "supposed to know" them from their own experiences. Of course often they do not...
The only problem is that coaches are either reluctant on this VITAL aspect or they have no time and energy left to deal with it.

"The results show that the average professional soccer player peaks between the ages of 25 and 27. In the preferred models, the average forward peaks at 25, whereas the typical defender peaks at 27. For midfielders, the estimated peak age varies by model but still occurs in the 25–27 age band. Defenders experience relatively minimal curvature in the age-performance relationship.

Click to expand...

My utmost respect goes to those studies but a peaking performance (of two years ???) differs, which we all know. We also know that in some cases elderly players outperform the young ones.
If studies were significant for decision making, always the team of the right (peak) AGE players would succeed, about which we all know that in practice it is far from the truth.

"Further results show that peak age may vary directly with ability."

Click to expand...

This is my favorite. It may vary with ability, yes we all know that... So regardless the content of the study anything can happen...

So, one more time, if I claim that Rakitic aged 29 is slower and has weaker physical skills than Rakitic aged 26, I am quite sure that a science is on my side also.

Click to expand...

No. The scientific PROBABILITY factors are on your side, but you can easily find studies that pretend 29 as the peak.
But you were still talking about the mere physicality factor, which is NONEXISTENT without the psychological content.

SeloBarca said:

True, but Umtiti is a great passer when not under preassure.
Makes better cuttrough passes than our midfielders.
Highest pass % in the team.

Click to expand...

Umtiti is not a good passer and a big reason for his pass percentage is that he takes the easiest option so often and clearly in past few games the opposition have wanted him on the ball.

The likes of Masch and Pique are miles ahead in passing out from back than he is.

I would agree with Potroh here, my friend studied kinesiology and he basically claims the same..of course it depends somewhat on individuals as well as sports, for example most MMA fighters peak arround 31-36.

He is a shell of the player he was 2 years ago, just shocking

JamDav1982 said:

Umtiti is not a good passer and a big reason for his pass percentage is that he takes the easiest option so often and clearly in past few games the opposition have wanted him on the ball.

The likes of Masch and Pique are miles ahead in passing out from back than he is.

Click to expand...

Like i said, hes not good under preassure, but he makes better passes then both Pique and Mascherano by far when given time.
He makes more forward passes than both aswell.

SeloBarca said:

Like i said, hes not good under preassure, but he makes better passes then both Pique and Mascherano by far when given time.
He makes more forward passes than both aswell.

Click to expand...

No he doesnt. Those two are in a different league to Umtiti in passing out from the back and Umtiti is given time on the ball almost all the time he has it as opposition know he is not that good on the ball.

Masch is probably the best passer of the ball from the back in world football and a far bigger threat to teams if given time than Umtiti is.

Well, agree to dissagree

So, according to sport, his renewal is done. Got a raise and 4 more seasons. A bit too much, imo.

Poor decision for me.

Would have sold him.

JamDav1982 said:

Poor decision for me.

Would have sold him.

Click to expand...

Or given him less than 4 seasons. He has a contract until 2019 already. At the most, one more year. This board is pretty bad at this.