Luis Enrique
- Thread starter Barcaman
- Start date
DonAndres
Wild Man of Borneo
Re-watching the game and, while there is a clear structural issue that is holding us back, the system itself is not lacking terribly.
Our ball circulation may not be so dominant on the central trinity (Messi-Xavi-Iniesta) but if the responsibilities are properly diffused to multiple areas then the system can still work. I am fine with Rakitic moving out wide sometimes because Alves then goes inside and acts as a midfield proxy to combine with Messi/Busquets. I prefer Neymar playing to the interior because he can/does act as an attacking midfielder often to be a part of quick passing sequences (re: Messi's goal for example). Rakitic is always versatile and mobile to help out his teammates (Alves/Messi/etc.) and support whatever moves we are building. Busquets now has a greater responsibility in our passing game than he did back in 2011 as well. All of this shows how we aren't so 'central midfield' heavy in our approach anymore ever since Xavi's decline and Pep's departure. That is the correct evolutionary path to take, we're playing to our strengths (the forwards) rather than trying to cater to the old golden days.
The biggest disruption that we've seen is a disconnect between the left/right sides. This is because both of our midfielders are width-based. Rakitic plays like this by design to turn Alves into a faux-midfielder while Iniesta always naturally gravitates to the left. I hate to say this, but I see Iniesta as a big issue here. Even when Alba is level with the back line, he played very much shunted to the left side. Yesterday, it was almost Roberto-esque how he left voids in our buildup sometimes (unless it was on the flank with Alba). Though his defensive presence is larger this year, he wasn't 'babysitting Alba' the way Rakitic does and was generally not acting as a consistent outlet for the ball to move between both sides.
This is why I think a player like Xavi is the way to go for big games to help us actually 'control' the midfield. With the likes of Neymar, Messi, and even Alves acting as creative attacking midfielders to be direct, our central midfielders need to be the platform/support system to circulate the ball through all zones. Rakitic does this for the right, Busi as the pivot, but Iniesta isn't much of a distribution outlet and that creates a divide in our midfield that leaves us approaching the flanks all the time from either side instead of having a connection in the middle. Xavi on the left, as seen against Granada, will always make himself available and combine with Rakitic in central areas so that we do have better control. 3 foundation/supporting players in Rakitic-Busi-Xavi with 3 attack minded midfielders playing centrally/wide in Neymar/Messi/Alves and the extra men (Alba supporting the left flank, Suarez in the final third). I believe this formula for big games will work much better as a unit than Iniesta-Rakitic which creates a split that weakens our domination.
Defensively, it was all managerial/player errors. This calls for improvement but it's not a 'fundamental' issue (except I would highly advocate for a tactic of playing Mathieu on the left and Pique-Vermaelen/Masch/Bartra in some big games).
Our ball circulation may not be so dominant on the central trinity (Messi-Xavi-Iniesta) but if the responsibilities are properly diffused to multiple areas then the system can still work. I am fine with Rakitic moving out wide sometimes because Alves then goes inside and acts as a midfield proxy to combine with Messi/Busquets. I prefer Neymar playing to the interior because he can/does act as an attacking midfielder often to be a part of quick passing sequences (re: Messi's goal for example). Rakitic is always versatile and mobile to help out his teammates (Alves/Messi/etc.) and support whatever moves we are building. Busquets now has a greater responsibility in our passing game than he did back in 2011 as well. All of this shows how we aren't so 'central midfield' heavy in our approach anymore ever since Xavi's decline and Pep's departure. That is the correct evolutionary path to take, we're playing to our strengths (the forwards) rather than trying to cater to the old golden days.
The biggest disruption that we've seen is a disconnect between the left/right sides. This is because both of our midfielders are width-based. Rakitic plays like this by design to turn Alves into a faux-midfielder while Iniesta always naturally gravitates to the left. I hate to say this, but I see Iniesta as a big issue here. Even when Alba is level with the back line, he played very much shunted to the left side. Yesterday, it was almost Roberto-esque how he left voids in our buildup sometimes (unless it was on the flank with Alba). Though his defensive presence is larger this year, he wasn't 'babysitting Alba' the way Rakitic does and was generally not acting as a consistent outlet for the ball to move between both sides.
This is why I think a player like Xavi is the way to go for big games to help us actually 'control' the midfield. With the likes of Neymar, Messi, and even Alves acting as creative attacking midfielders to be direct, our central midfielders need to be the platform/support system to circulate the ball through all zones. Rakitic does this for the right, Busi as the pivot, but Iniesta isn't much of a distribution outlet and that creates a divide in our midfield that leaves us approaching the flanks all the time from either side instead of having a connection in the middle. Xavi on the left, as seen against Granada, will always make himself available and combine with Rakitic in central areas so that we do have better control. 3 foundation/supporting players in Rakitic-Busi-Xavi with 3 attack minded midfielders playing centrally/wide in Neymar/Messi/Alves and the extra men (Alba supporting the left flank, Suarez in the final third). I believe this formula for big games will work much better as a unit than Iniesta-Rakitic which creates a split that weakens our domination.
Defensively, it was all managerial/player errors. This calls for improvement but it's not a 'fundamental' issue (except I would highly advocate for a tactic of playing Mathieu on the left and Pique-Vermaelen/Masch/Bartra in some big games).
How do you account for the fact that pass-stat wise there was no difference between when Xavi who you say plays more centrally, was introduced and Rakitic who plays more on the wing, both just repeatedly passed to Alves, as Iniesta to Alba?
Last edited:
DonAndres
Wild Man of Borneo
I said I'd prefer Xavi-Rakitic for big games, not Xavi-Iniesta so I don't see how it's relevant. Playing Xavi on the left against Granada gave us a lot more control in the center and (with rest) he ended up covering the most distance of any of our players with relative ease.
serghei
Senior Member
indeed.The fact remains that he came on and nothing changed you said that both Rakitic and Iniesta played too much on the wings which i agree with, but when Xavi came on against PSG he who you say is supposed to be more central didn't do what you said would happen in that he just ended up playing to Alves most of the time. Now if you're saying that Xavi-Rakitic has a better understanding of each other then Xavi-Iniesta the greatest midfield duo well ever, then I mean idk. One game against granada does not make a season.
BerkeleyBernie
Senior Member
Ball lost by Barcelona in the match against PSG:
Says it all (and shows the Alves and Alba turnovers that lead to goals). As I said in the match thread, while PSG did apply pressure, most of these (to use tennis terminology) were "unforced errors"- Barça players have routinely possessed the ball well under similar or greater pressure in the past. The Alves and Alba incidents were simply poor decisions to dribble.
I've been watching the first half and keeping a similar list to the graphic. One also needs to evaluate the risk/reward. If Messi loses the ball dribbling at the top of the box, that's far different than Alba losing the ball taking on a single marker at the half line.
F
Flavia
Guest
@euleri
Watched match v PSG for detail-individual errors major factor-but far from whole story. FCB's positional play-very erratic-at times confused
Individual errors weren't enough to account for lack of control w/ ball. Positional play was a major driver for losing ball 54 times
What Lucho seems to be attempting to do has real merit. But it's a massive shift/risk from a team based on MF play to one based on forward line
Transition may prove very difficult-particulary v top sides this yr. A lot of work- still needed. Key players may no longer fit. Very risky
FB play-such a major issue for what Lucho wants to do.Difficult to believe Barca didn't upgrade that position given how system is structured
Until Suarez comes-Lucho's concepts can't be fully realized. But a picture is emerging. &it's a very different, high risk future.
I really like euler's analysis. I guess most agree it's risky. Still missing a key piece to it, Suarez. But imagine this system without Alves. It's not working well now, I can't see it being better with Montoya or Douglas.
4m for douglas, instead of 40m for Cuadrado, could be costlier :/
Watched match v PSG for detail-individual errors major factor-but far from whole story. FCB's positional play-very erratic-at times confused
Individual errors weren't enough to account for lack of control w/ ball. Positional play was a major driver for losing ball 54 times
What Lucho seems to be attempting to do has real merit. But it's a massive shift/risk from a team based on MF play to one based on forward line
Transition may prove very difficult-particulary v top sides this yr. A lot of work- still needed. Key players may no longer fit. Very risky
FB play-such a major issue for what Lucho wants to do.Difficult to believe Barca didn't upgrade that position given how system is structured
Until Suarez comes-Lucho's concepts can't be fully realized. But a picture is emerging. &it's a very different, high risk future.
I really like euler's analysis. I guess most agree it's risky. Still missing a key piece to it, Suarez. But imagine this system without Alves. It's not working well now, I can't see it being better with Montoya or Douglas.
4m for douglas, instead of 40m for Cuadrado, could be costlier :/
54 lost balls is immens and worrying. It´s not a coincidence that in the last 14 away games in CL barça only won 4.
Don´t talk about Douglas, please. And Cuadrado was no answer to FB problems. Is awful in defending. He´s a winger.
Alves, Montoya and Adriano is not bad. In certain games the Masche-Busi approach would be commendable. Curiously, PSG key tactical change came from Ibra´s absence. With him on the field our we would have played better. That´s my opinion. We would have midfield superiority instead of being overplayed by an intense 5 man PSG with Lucas included.
Don´t talk about Douglas, please. And Cuadrado was no answer to FB problems. Is awful in defending. He´s a winger.
Alves, Montoya and Adriano is not bad. In certain games the Masche-Busi approach would be commendable. Curiously, PSG key tactical change came from Ibra´s absence. With him on the field our we would have played better. That´s my opinion. We would have midfield superiority instead of being overplayed by an intense 5 man PSG with Lucas included.
F
Flavia
Guest
Cuadrado would make sense in the way Lucho is setting the team. Much more than current Alves. Lucho doesn't seem to rate Montoya, and Adriano also is not suited to the RWB role.
Best solution would be 3cbs plus Cuadrado, but he wasn't signed, or will be, with the ban. Maybe Adama can fill this void.
Cule4life
The Culest
Alarcón
New member
Because he told the truth?
Stric
New member
Even if it was true, which I personally think it is not, a coach who takes zero responsibility for a loss and even explicitly blames the players doesn't get bonus points in my book.
Home of Barca Fans
