BBZ8800
Senior Member
I think that you have missed a point.
It goes something like this:
Insert a player whom a forum hates, like Rabiot:
1. if he plays well=nothing happens
2. if he plays bad=what a shitty player
Insert a player whom forum likes, some Barca DNA player, like Arthur:
1. if he plays well=omg, what a player
2. if he plays bad=it is because of EV, it is because of a system, it is because of teammates who don't move. Or: he has just returned to a training 40 days ago, don't judge him too harshly.
When Rabiot loses in a CL:
= what a shitty player. It is obvious that he sucks
If Arthur will lose in a CL:
= if I will say anything bad=you are an idiot. What a pathetic comment. You are a disgrace.
Do you get a point?
Double standards.
I am not saying that I not doing the same. Just saying that majority of us doing the same and this is why I have relied to McLovin in that way.
When players whom people like play bad= people always have 1000s of excuses (coaches, system, injuries).
When players whom people don't like play bad= they are bad because they are bad, not because of coaches, system, injuries etc.
I won't even try to argue deeper and raise some concerns: how come that even a new coach is preferring Rakitic over Arthur as a starter in key CL away matches?
A coach who is a known Cruijffista and who talked highly about Riki Puig when he came.
When you sum it all, there are probably some way deeper problems and issues with Arthur (for a CL level) than majority of people here realize.
** Btw, this is not even a post about Rabiot vs Arthur.
I am not even comparing those two.
I am just talking about double standards and a huge bias towards Barca's DNA.
I am not saying (anymore) that Rabiot is the answer.
But a pure Barca's DNA is surely NOT the answer either in 2020.
Last edited:
