FC Barcelona Tactics

DonAndres

Wild Man of Borneo
We see things in different perspective as per the scenarios so let's just agree to disagree at this point.

As for the system in general, once again I'm not suggesting that we make a massive switch immediately. Just proposing the system as a possibility and something to try, if it doesn't work then there's nothing more to it. This is a speculative discussion after all, and I'll say that back lines with sweepers have been a part of teams with just as much success as teams without, so you can't immediately jump to the conclusion that one is definitively better in all circumstances.
 

Hamzah

High Definition Member
I have nothing against sweepers. I'm just saying with our high line and back four it's a bad idea. Nothing personal.

Agree to disagree... Sure. Just remember that football is very fast these days and against top teams with thier quick wingers that system is suicide.
 

DonAndres

Wild Man of Borneo
In the end, there's a good chance that I'm wrong and that putting a sweeper wouldn't work in football today but people like Jamdav dismissing it without any constructive discussion or thought isn't how to prove it. If people were that close minded than almost all tactical modifications wouldn't be present today, there has to be a balance in terms of practicality and innovation. You on the other hand did provide good evidence to counter the idea, and the only way to conclusively decide who's right or wrong would be to test it out and see the results which is almost impossible. So, good discussion but I think taking this any further would just end up going in circles and be pointless anyway.
 

JamDav1982

Senior Member
In the end, there's a good chance that I'm wrong and that putting a sweeper wouldn't work in football today but people like Jamdav dismissing it without any constructive discussion or thought isn't how to prove it. If people were that close minded than almost all tactical modifications wouldn't be present today, there has to be a balance in terms of practicality and innovation. You on the other hand did provide good evidence to counter the idea, and the only way to conclusively decide who's right or wrong would be to test it out and see the results which is almost impossible. So, good discussion but I think taking this any further would just end up going in circles and be pointless anyway.

Constructive discussion?

I said exactly why I think it would fail and why teams dont play it in todays game.

All you seem to make out is that all change is a good thing and football goes in cycles.

The same sort of arguments could be made for switching to 4-4-2 or switching to a long ball style of play.

They would be changes but would not work and not improve the team in any way.
 

DonAndres

Wild Man of Borneo
Your evidence was saying "this is ridiculous" or "teams don't play like that nowadays" or "thankfully this won't be used". Forgive me if I don't consider that constructive in any sort of way.
 

JamDav1982

Senior Member
Your evidence was saying "this is ridiculous" or "teams don't play like that nowadays" or "thankfully this won't be used". Forgive me if I don't consider that constructive in any sort of way.

No, i said that after saying numerous times that you give up a man in midfield and pass the initiative on to the opposition. Resulting in less possesion and pressing. Which in the long run is more damaging.
 

DonAndres

Wild Man of Borneo
No, i said that after saying numerous times that you give up a man in midfield and pass the initiative on to the opposition. Resulting in less possesion and pressing. Which in the long run is more damaging.

How do you give up a man in midfield? the sweeper is behind a 3 man back line (making it 4 defenders total, same amount as a flat four back line)
 

ebieymjunior

Senior Member
No, i said that after saying numerous times that you give up a man in midfield and pass the initiative on to the opposition. Resulting in less possesion and pressing. Which in the long run is more damaging.

I've played as a permanent sweeper (PS as of now) in a back four for 2 years, and it has non of those disadvantages you talk about.

A PS can choose to play at the back of the defence, with the CB and DM as a "true" libero pairing/double pivot in front of him (DM slightly more forward, and goes further forward more than the CB), or he can move up in one line with the other three defenders and the DM moves further forward (mostly for the offside trap, if desired).
It's like a mix of many formations, but defensively: a 3-4-3 and 1-4-2-3 (both with double pivot), a 1-3-3-3 and finally the common 4-3-3. The advantage is that you don't need another midfielder for the double pivot.

When the fullback moves forward, the PS covers for him until he's back. It's better that one fullback stays behind to form a 3 man defence line. He could even stay alone at the back during attacking corners, but it's not necessary, and he can also move to the left or to the right, depending on where the ball is, to balance out the defence.
Thus a PS is a "false" libero: moves up (or sideways) at will but at the back (a defensive false 9/defensive Messi if you will - a #5 as "false 3" :p).

He anticipates attackers running towards him much better, cause he sees them coming, and has a view of the whole field (and of the defenders, making him able to communicate much easier). That's why a PS has to have very good reflex, positioning and intelligence (and determination as well of cause), which compensate for the stamina a bit, making him able to play that way for a longer time (it does exhaust a lot mentally, though). He also has to be able to pass the ball really well, cause he's the link between the keeper and the other players (Barcelona likes playing from the back).
It's strange that Pep, Tito and now also Martino desire such players and those are the players that are needed for this system to work…

It's a perfect defensive formation for Barcelona cause it takes all their concepts and just maximises them: the pressing, the possession and reduces significantly the goals conceded. It's the only missing piece to total football, an enhancement to tiki taka in defence. It's also perfect against teams on the counter-attack.

I can understand you thinking it has all these disadvantages, cause you've never seen a team play that way, but don't make up thinks you don't know about. I mean as DonAndres says, no one would think that a false nine is a good idea, but look how it works with Messi. And Barcelona have trained the right players for that, throughout their whole youth system, but just don't know it (yet)!
Our team plays like that, and we almost don't concede goals, and we also like possession and pressing, and playing from the back. Now imagine what Barcelona can do.
 

Hamzah

High Definition Member
I played as a sweeper too and know its strengths and weaknessess. In the right scenario it works but not in this example.
 

oz187

New member
Sweeper with a high line? You'd get the opposition wingers one on one with the sweeper ten or twenty times a game. Not gonna work.
 

ebieymjunior

Senior Member
I played as a sweeper too and know its strengths and weaknessess. In the right scenario it works but not in this example.

Explain how you play as a sweeper.

Sweeper with a high line? You'd get the opposition wingers one on one with the sweeper ten or twenty times a game. Not gonna work.

That's why you need good reflex and positioning, imagine someone else playing in Messi's position, they'd not play that well.
 

Hamzah

High Definition Member
We had a back three. I was the middle centre back but behind the others. any through balls were intercepted by me and I'd make long passes from the back. I also had a vision of everything in front of me and marshalled the defence.

If it was in a back four it would not have worked aswell, infact it would have been a disaster. Passes to the wings wouldn't be intercepted in time and we would have conceded. I already explained the weaknesses and reasons for them in earlier posts.
 

ebieymjunior

Senior Member
We had a back three. I was the middle centre back but behind the others. any through balls were intercepted by me and I'd make long passes from the back. I also had a vision of everything in front of me and marshalled the defence.

If it was in a back four it would not have worked aswell, infact it would have been a disaster. Passes to the wings wouldn't be intercepted in time and we would have conceded. I already explained the weaknesses and reasons for them in earlier posts.

It clearly works for us… With 3 it's harder for the sweeper as he has to do more, while interchanging positions (CB and DM) allows more liberty and control over the game, just like in attack. And it's better to not play long passes but building from the back, that way you loose less balls/less counters.
 
Last edited:

Home of Barca Fans

Top