Barca Transfers and Rumors

So, if you play SOME crosses, it doesn't mean that you will win, but you will raise your chances.
Lately in all matches in a CL between Real-Barca-Atletico-Bayern, almost all goals are:
1. after crosses
2. after set pieces
3. or after counters

Click to expand...

1. Manchester City have scored more goals than Madrid via crosses in the Champions League (13 vs 8). Barcelona managed 2. (Manchester City scored 9 headers vs Madrid's 3 as well). As a side note Madrid cross the ball 25.5 times per game whereas Manchester City only cross 16 times per game. Barcelona cross 11 times per game. (Madrid's game is hit and hope which many Spanish sides have figured out already)
2. Manchester City have scored more goals via set pieces than Madrid in the Champions League (11 vs 2). Barcelona have managed more... (4)
3. Manchester City have scored more goals via counter attacks than Madrid in the Champions League (4 vs 3). Barcelona managed 3 too.

Regarding conceding goals on the counter...

Manchester City conceded less goals via counter attacks than Madrid (1 vs 2). Barcelona conceded 0.

Barcelona's problem in the Champions League was not one of the type of players but rather a coach with an overly defensive mindset and no attacking width whatsoever (where do think the crosses are supposed to come from when you're the one advocating a 4-4-2 with 4 CM's).

I really wish you wouldn't make up numbers like you do because they're easy to debunk. Rather stick to the facts.

All these figures are Champions League only.

MessiCam said:

1. Manchester City have scored more goals than Madrid via crosses in the Champions League (13 vs 8). Barcelona managed 2. (Manchester City scored 9 headers vs Madrid's 3 as well). As a side note Madrid cross the ball 25.5 times per game whereas Manchester City only cross 16 times per game. Barcelona cross 11 times per game. (Madrid's game is hit and hope which many Spanish sides have figured out already)
2. Manchester City have scored more goals via set pieces than Madrid in the Champions League (11 vs 2). Barcelona have managed more... (4)
3. Manchester City have scored more goals via counter attacks than Madrid in the Champions League (4 vs 3). Barcelona managed 3 too.

Regarding conceding goals on the counter...

Manchester City conceded less goals via counter attacks than Madrid (1 vs 2). Barcelona conceded 0.

Barcelona's problem in the Champions League was not one of the type of players but rather a coach with an overly defensive mindset and no attacking width whatsoever (where do think the crosses are supposed to come from when you're the one advocating a 4-4-2 with 4 CM's).

I really wish you wouldn't make up numbers like you do because they're easy to debunk. Rather stick to the facts.

All these figures are Champions League only.

Click to expand...

Nice post.

That Roma game was the most negative game I’ve ever seen Barca play.

We decided to attack in the last 5 minutes when we were 3-0 down.

I’m 99% sure if we’d gone with 4-3-3 with Dembele playing we would have gone through.

Vilarrubi said:

Nice post.

That Roma game was the most negative game I’ve ever seen Barca play.

We decided to attack in the last 5 minutes when we were 3-0 down.

I’m 99% sure if we’d gone with 4-3-3 with Dembele playing we would have gone through.

Click to expand...

It’s not so much about the formation but the overly defensive tactics. Barcelona could have easily attacked Roma with any formation but these were the sort of tactics which were used in basically all away games. It was a point of not losing as opposed to winning.
[MENTION=16942]BBZ8800[/MENTION] wants to play narrow with 4 CM’s but he wants quick counters and crosses as well. That’s not going to happen when the only width you have is your full backs whom are required during the defensive phase. To top it all off a flat 4-4-2 is never played with 4 CM’s (well almost never because Valverde actually did on occasion).

MessiCam said:

1. Manchester City have scored more goals than Madrid via crosses in the Champions League (13 vs 8). Barcelona managed 2. (Manchester City scored 9 headers vs Madrid's 3 as well). As a side note Madrid cross the ball 25.5 times per game whereas Manchester City only cross 16 times per game. Barcelona cross 11 times per game. (Madrid's game is hit and hope which many Spanish sides have figured out already)
2. Manchester City have scored more goals via set pieces than Madrid in the Champions League (11 vs 2). Barcelona have managed more... (4)
3. Manchester City have scored more goals via counter attacks than Madrid in the Champions League (4 vs 3). Barcelona managed 3 too.

Regarding conceding goals on the counter...

Manchester City conceded less goals via counter attacks than Madrid (1 vs 2). Barcelona conceded 0.

Barcelona's problem in the Champions League was not one of the type of players but rather a coach with an overly defensive mindset and no attacking width whatsoever (where do think the crosses are supposed to come from when you're the one advocating a 4-4-2 with 4 CM's).

I really wish you wouldn't make up numbers like you do because they're easy to debunk. Rather stick to the facts.

All these figures are Champions League only.

Click to expand...

I have no idea where are these numbers from.
And are they from 2 seasons or what since you mentioned 24 goals from City in that post.

I have no idea how City is able to cross when their attackers are Sane, Jesus, Aguero and Silva, lol. It is like having Xavi-Messi-Iniesta's physique in attack.

Also, remember that Barca's style works against smaller La Liga teams.
Barca's and City's style don't work against big teams in CL's knockout matches.

Maybe City's headers and crosses came in a group stage matches or something because I didn't see them against bigger teams.
Their last 2 CL exits:
Liverpool:Man City:

Monaco:Man City:

City scored 2 goals from set pieces, which is nice.
From an open play, they just played 100s of actions through the middle or on the ground through the wings.
Basically, they are playing Barca's DNA game without zero crosses and headers.

I doubt that City's crosses would make any sense against AM's, Juve's or Bayern's defense.
Their short and weak attackers vs 185-190cm defenders.

In short, in general, Pep's City didn't move that much far from Barca's style of play.

Gundogan, Bernardo, David Silva, Sane, Aguero, Jesus, it's like watching a team full of Iniestas and Denis Suarezs.
Good on the ground and against weaker teams.
Totally invisible against bigger, physical teams. That means, against more or less any team in CL's quarters.

BBZ8800 said:

I have no idea where are these numbers from.
And are they from 2 seasons or what since you mentioned 24 goals from City in that post.

I have no idea how City is able to cross when their attackers are Sane, Jesus, Aguero and Silva, lol. It is like having Xavi-Messi-Iniesta's physique in attack.

Also, remember that Barca's style works against smaller La Liga teams.
Barca's and City's style don't work against big teams in CL's knockout matches.

Maybe City's headers and crosses came in a group stage matches or something because I didn't see them against bigger teams.
Their last 2 CL exits:
Liverpool:Man City:

Monaco:Man City:

City scored 2 goals from set pieces, which is nice.
From an open play, they just played 100s of actions through the middle or on the ground through the wings.
Basically, they are playing Barca's DNA game without zero crosses and headers.

I doubt that City's crosses would make any sense against AM's, Juve's or Bayern's defense.
Their short and weak attackers vs 185-190cm defenders.

In short, in general, Pep's City didn't move that much far from Barca's style of play.

Gundogan, Bernardo, David Silva, Sane, Aguero, Jesus, it's like watching a team full of Iniestas and Denis Suarezs.
Good on the ground and against weaker teams.
Totally invisible against bigger, physical teams. That means, against more or less any team in CL's quarters.

Click to expand...

Apologies. I mistakenly added group stage teams + final stage teams thinking they were split...

However, it doesn't make a difference because City still outperformed Madrid in your metrics...

Play around with the parameters

Headers - City = 5 vs Madrid = 3
Cross assists - City = 7 vs Madrid = 6
Counter goals - City = 2 vs Madrid = 2
Set piece goals - City = 6 vs Madrid = 1

You're just making things up as you go along... Confirmation bias at its finest.

There is absolutely no way you can know that City's crosses would be ineffective vs certain teams... That's just guessing.

The Eriksen-rumour is mostly fan-made isn't it? I haven't seen a source I trust report that we are going after him.

I think it is sad that all the midfield-talent is pouring away to other clubs - mostly PL with Sergej Milinković-Savić, Jorginho, Fred and the likes moving to topclubs in England, while we are stuck with Paulinho, Denis and a lottery-ticket in Arthur (he could be great, but we have no way of knowing for sure, like with talent proven in Europe).

BarçaBarça said:

The Eriksen-rumour is mostly fan-made isn't it? I haven't seen a source I trust report that we are going after him.

I think it is sad that all the midfield-talent is pouring away to other clubs - mostly PL with Sergej Milinković-Savić, Jorginho, Fred and the likes moving to topclubs in England, while we are stuck with Paulinho, Denis and a lottery-ticket in Arthur (he could be great, but we have no way of knowing for sure, like with talent proven in Europe).

Click to expand...

once the Griezmann situation is resolved we'll know more. if we do buy Griezmann that spells the end of any pursuit for a midfielder imo other than Arthur ofc. Eriksen transfer should be our #1 priority but i think the board would rather bring back Thiago - id be happy with either at this stage.

Savic has a 100m price tag so not sure United will be paying that, Jorginho will be a star at City and i have no idea who Fred is so i wouldn't say all the talent are going to the PL

Barca dont need Eriksen.

He is a very direct AM who gets ball in box a lot to target man like Kane and shoots from anywhere.

Good player but Coutinho is better than him and Alena is that type of AM also.

Far better served getting some pace and work rate into the front line.

JamDav1982 said:

Barca dont need Eriksen.

He is a very direct AM who gets ball in box a lot to target man like Kane and shoots from anywhere.

Good player but Coutinho is better than him and Alena is that type of AM also.

Far better served getting some pace and work rate into the front line.

Click to expand...

While I agree with adding work rate in the front line, it's not the only needed thing.

We need at least one trustworthy CM. Can't be just Rakitić-Busquets.

Joan Laporta said:

While I agree with adding work rate in the front line, it's not the only needed thing.

We need at least one trustworthy CM. Can't be just Rakitić-Busquets.

Click to expand...

CM yes, another AM not needed and thats what Eriksen is.

Even then if had the choice would rather Griezmann than that as it is more lacking in the team in my opinion.

JamDav1982 said:

CM yes, another AM not needed and thats what Eriksen is.

Even then if had the choice would rather Griezmann than that as it is more lacking in the team in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Agreed. True versatile central midfielder.

Griezmann is just too good for this price.

Vilarrubi said:

Nice post.

That Roma game was the most negative game I’ve ever seen Barca play.

We decided to attack in the last 5 minutes when we were 3-0 down.

I’m 99% sure if we’d gone with 4-3-3 with Dembele playing we would have gone through.

Click to expand...

Roma outplayed Barca so bad, the idea that changing one player or the formation would have changed the result is pure fantasy. Barca would have needed 11 vs. 9 for the whole game to have had any chance of beating Roma that day.

This was not the first time that Barca just was not good in a big away game in Italy. I remember some real stinkers in Paris and Munich, too.

It makes my heart hurt to have to admit that there has been only one great CL away team in recent years. They are playing this weekend.

Rabiot is miffed at QSG and may be looking to leave. Childishly excludes himself from the WC reserves on not being called up for the squad; if only it wasn't the vermin that is PSG we had to deal with, I'd have definitely wanted us to go for him. Would be a great addition to what our midfield needs.

MessiCam said:

Apologies. I mistakenly added group stage teams + final stage teams thinking they were split...

However, it doesn't make a difference because City still outperformed Madrid in your metrics...

Play around with the parameters

Headers - City = 5 vs Madrid = 3
Cross assists - City = 7 vs Madrid = 6
Counter goals - City = 2 vs Madrid = 2
Set piece goals - City = 6 vs Madrid = 1

You're just making things up as you go along... Confirmation bias at its finest.

There is absolutely no way you can know that City's crosses would be ineffective vs certain teams... That's just guessing.

Click to expand...

I guess that these stats count corners as headers.
And they count low crosses/backpasses as crosses, as long as they were created by a LW or a RW.

City played only 6 CL Knockout matches in the last 2 years:
Man City:Monaco 5:3
1st goal Sane passes to Sterling, he scores a tap in with feet. I guess that your stats counted this as a cross :/
2nd goal: Aguero with feet after a through ball.
3rd goal: Aguero with feet after a corner. I guess that stats will count this as a cross again.
4th goal: Stones with feet after a corner. Another cross again, I guess?
5th goal: Sane, tap in with feet.

Zero true crosses (from an open play). Zero goals with headers.

Monaco:City 3:1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hECfRw0Gays
The only goal: Sane a tap in with feet.

Basel:City 0:4

1st Goal: Gundogan, a header after a corner. They'll count this as a cross and a header again.
2nd goal: Bernardo, well here there was a true cross and a goal after that... with feet again. So, let's say: the first cross from City in these 3 matches.
3rd goal: Aguero, long range drive.
4th goal: Gundogan, long range drive.

City:Basel 1:2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2rerBttN2U

The only goal: Jesus, tap in with feet. They will count this as another cross, I guess? :/

City Liverpoool 0:3, 1:2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuePKxQhlnQ

The only goal, a tap in with feet.
I really hope they won't count this as a cross.

So, City scored 12 goals in these 6 knockout matches.
They scored 3 goals after corners, 2 with feet and one with a header (Gundogan).
And they scored zero headers from an open play.
Also, apart from 3 crosses at corners, the only "true cross" was when Bernardo scored with a feet after a cross.

So, I have no idea where these crazy numbers are coming from:

MessiCam said:

Headers - City = 5 vs Madrid = 3
Cross assists - City = 7 vs Madrid = 6
Counter goals - City = 2 vs Madrid = 2
Set piece goals - City = 6 vs Madrid = 1

Click to expand...

City 5 headers. When that happened?
7 cross assists, well, I see, for them, every wing action and a simple pass, through balls, low cross or a backpass from a wing to the edge of a box is=a cross assist.

All in all, imo:
Pep's City still play quite similar to Pep's Barca.
Tons of short midfielders and attackers.
Tons of passes and through balls around the box.
And here and there some rare "true cross" since their attackers are short, fast and horrible in the air, as expected from Pep.

[MENTION=16942]BBZ8800[/MENTION], what crazy stats? I put up the link.

I suppose the City player head ground balls now...







You make these wind theories and back them up with YouTube highlights.