11 - Raphinha

P

Porque

Senior Member
Loki said:
As expected and predicted in the summer, Rapha benefits the most out of Flick's fast pace football. Our game has now more similarities with the english football than under Xavi's slow ball and Rapha feels like a fish in the water if can run around the entire pitch with full speed. It doesn't even matter if he plays on the left side or behind the striker like yesterday because of Fati. The whole pitch is his position anyways. He finally looks like the player we hoped he'd be paying €60m.
Rapha will never be the technical genious Neymar was, but he doesn't need to be. He makes up for that with effort big enough for 3 players. Absolutely no need anymore to go for Nico next summer.
Click to expand...

To be fair to Xavi. He managed to figure out how best to utilize Raphi at the tail-end of last season during our hot run.
 
Gazzznigga

Gazzznigga

Well-known member
Barcaman said:
Typical knee-jerk reaction. But you're a low tier troll here anyway. Raphinha has been consistently great since the start of the season.
Click to expand...
Are you a moderator/administrator or someone who cant tolerate a different perspective from the herd one?

I recall you were the same fellow who threatened to ban me for having a different view from yours on one of the threads.

Come on! Admins and mods are tolerant as far as i know. Dont see you threatening xenophobe and racists with a ban since i have been a silent observer of this forum more than a decade ago.

Grow up bro!!
 
Last edited:
Masetro10

Masetro10

Member
Maradona37 said:
Lol, teams that win while playing beautiful football (and sometimes don't even win, as per my examples) will always be looked upon as better or more fondly than Mourinho or Herrera type 'win ugly' sides.

Not sure what is controversial about that. It's like some of you don't even watch football. If you play the game yourself you know the importance of playing good football. I take it you two don't play.
Click to expand...
100% Winning playing a dominant offensive game will always be preferred. RM fans get salty because they shithouse a win in a watered down UCL that currently has about 3 clubs capable of winning the competition. While having superstars that usually play like ass for 50% of every game. They can't fathom the circus that was Peps Barca or MSN. Only Bayern has matched those sidess in level somewhat.

Barca UCL against Arsenal is not remembered because the team wasn't that great that year. Barca'a Dream Team and 2009, 2011, 2015 are all legendary squads for a reason. Nobody gives a damn about Real Madrid vs Dortmund final last year.
 
Gazzznigga

Gazzznigga

Well-known member
Masetro10 said:
100% Winning playing a dominant offensive game will always be preferred. RM fans get salty because they shithouse a win in a watered down UCL that currently has about 3 clubs capable of winning the competition. While having superstars that usually play like ass for 50% of every game. They can't fathom the circus that was Peps Barca or MSN. Only Bayern has matched those sidess in level somewhat.

Barca UCL against Arsenal is not remembered because the team wasn't that great that year. Barca'a Dream Team and 2009, 2011, 2015 are all legendary squads for a reason. Nobody gives a damn about Real Madrid vs Dortmund final last year.
Click to expand...
:ROFLMAO: ....bolded. It is hilarious this is coming from a fan of the club that won its first UCL defeating Sampdoria with a lone goal. Same set of people hitting the roofs with their heads 3 seasons ago when Barca won the league playing the most atrocious football in the last 2 decades under Xavi have suddenly become advocates of football being beautiful without winning.

I understand if you want to throw objectivity away when it comes to discussions on Barca because you are a fan, but being delusional all the time is comical. I am a Barca fan and have been for decades but i don't let that overrule my reasoning.

Who wouldn't want to win while playing dominant and attractive football. That was never in contention.

Question was choosing between playing so beautifully and losing vs playing so poorly but then winning.

History will be kinder to one of those....and guaranteed it will certainly not be the "beautiful loser".


50/60 years from now when you all dead and buried, little will be known about how beautifully Barca MSN played while losing to Athletico,Juve, etc....in the UCL but record will remember the eventual winners more whether players put in 50% or 10% of their talent in winning.
 
Last edited:
Maradona37

Maradona37

Well-known member
Masetro10 said:
100% Winning playing a dominant offensive game will always be preferred. RM fans get salty because they shithouse a win in a watered down UCL that currently has about 3 clubs capable of winning the competition. While having superstars that usually play like ass for 50% of every game. They can't fathom the circus that was Peps Barca or MSN. Only Bayern has matched those sidess in level somewhat.

Barca UCL against Arsenal is not remembered because the team wasn't that great that year. Barca'a Dream Team and 2009, 2011, 2015 are all legendary squads for a reason. Nobody gives a damn about Real Madrid vs Dortmund final last year.
Click to expand...
Yes. People who say it's just about winning have an ok point, ultimately that goes down in the history books. But we now live in an era where everything is recorded - unlike the first half of the 20th century, the 90s onwards have so much footage that can be watched. Hence, people can educate themselves on who the most entertaining, dominant teams are and were.

Surely if you win by squeaking by you aren't really displaying your dominance or superiority as a team? You're 'winning', but not really showcasing that you are much better than other teams. The reason Barcelona were so good is because other teams were forced to bend to their will and compromise their own game to stop Barca, as you say. Whereas recent Real Madrid teams have won because the opponent wasn't scared to go toe to toe with them, and that allowed Real to expose space they left. No denying their counter-attacking ability but dominant possession teams (in big games) will always marvel more as they can dominate throughout a game rather than in spells and moments.

That Gazzznigga guy (I am loath to use his name as he's clearly a troll looking for attention and I am daftly giving him it) produced a post that proves he doesn't really get the essence of football. He basically said Greece '04 are remembered as much as teams that play great football, because the achievement was the same. Winning while playing wank football is empty and hollow (not so much for Greece as they were underdogs, but definitely for bigger teams who play attritional football) - I am sure players love looking at their medals when they do that, but deep down they know they weren't actually superior. Like I say, the Netherlands sides of '74 and' 78 and the Hungary side of '54 are looked upon more fondly than the teams that beat them in the respective World Cup Finals of those years. Everyone still remembers Portugal '66. Brazil '82 are more beloved in their homeland than the '94 and '02 victors. This is when football becomes art and more about leaving a legacy in the history of the game (as Hungarian and Dutch Total Football did, despite winning fuck all).

Guys like Gazzznigga will never understand that though. Football is emotionless to people like that, it isn't about art or aesthetics for him as it is for you and I. For him it's all about winning even if you do it in the most desperate manner. He doesn't understand that some of the great teams he gets to watch now were built on the foundations and principles of those past teams I reference that won fuck all. They were pioneers, and didn't have to win to be remembered.
 
Last edited:
Gazzznigga

Gazzznigga

Well-known member
Maradona37 said:
Yes. People who say it's just about winning have an ok point, ultimately that goes down in the history books. But we now live in an era where everything is recorded - unlike the first half of the 20th century, the 90s onwards have so much footage that can be watched. Hence, people can educate themselves on who the most entertaining, dominant teams are and were.

Surely if you win by squeaking by you aren't really displaying your dominance or superiority as a team? You're 'winning', but not really showcasing that you are much better than other teams. The reason Barcelona were so good is because other teams were forced to bend to their will and compromise their own game to stop Barca, as you say. Whereas recent Real Madrid teams have won because the opponent wasn't scared to go toe to toe with them, and that allowed Real to expose space they left. No denying their counter-attacking ability but dominant possession teams (in big games) will always marvel more as they can dominate throughout a game rather than in spells and moments.

That Gazzznigga guy (I am loath to use his name as he's clearly a troll looking for attention and I am daftly giving him it) produced a post that proves he doesn't really get the essence of football. He basically said Greece '04 are remembered as much as teams that play great football, because the achievement was the same. Winning while playing wank football is empty and hollow (not so much for Greece as they were underdogs, but definitely for bigger teams who play attritional football) - I am sure players love looking at their medals when they do that, but deep down they know they weren't actually superior. Like I say, the Netherlands sides of '74 and' 78 and the Hungary side of '54 are looked upon more fondly than the teams that beat them in the respective World Cup Finals of those years. Everyone still remembers Portugal '66. Brazil '82 are more beloved in their homeland than the '94 and '02 victors. This is when football becomes art and more about leaving a legacy in the history of the game (as Hungarian and Dutch Total Football did, despite winning fuck all).

Guys like Gazzznigga will never understand that though. Football is emotionless to people like that, it isn't about art or aesthetics for him as it is for you and I. For him it's all about winning even if you do it in the most desperate manner. He doesn't understand that some of the great teams he gets to watch now were built on the foundations and principles of those past teams I reference that won fuck all. They were pioneers, and didn't have to win to be remembered.
Click to expand...
Lol...another rant full of incoherence, lies and stupidity. I stopped reading when he typed about Greece and misquoted my point just to table himself for more validations and some rub on the head again like a spoilt kid.

I also like that you admitted you are daft enough on football matters which has been long obvious for the discerning. Whoever labelled a serial winner a "lucky" player needs to find something else to do online. Your attention is worthless for me but your delusion is astounding.

He brought up a foolish and laughable point(to buttress his poor judgement on value)about the Chezch republic team being better remembered than the the Greek team of Euro 2004 because they played "beautifully" but lost to Greece in the semis. Whether recorded or not, the poster team for any competition are the champions, irrespective of how "ugly" they played. Those who watched the losers "loose" beautifully take the memorry to their graves. History often remembers the winners more when they are dead and buried. Winning a tournament can never be placed on a lower pedestal to someone who was defeated by the eventual winners. Such can only be equal in the eyes and minds of dafts. A winner is placed above the "pretty losers" in the ranking for a reason.

Brazil played beautifully against Uruguay in 1950 but little is remembered or said about that and even if anything is recalled, it can only be subversient to Uruguay being remembered more for winning the world cup, everything else is a matter of perception. Brazilian historians even hate to mention the World cup of 1950 despite the "beautiful" football displayed by their team in the run up to the final. Some of their players of 1950 died from depression induced by the shame of losing the world cup to Uruguay at home despite the "beautiful" football and the constant jibes they received in public. The 1950 was nearly a full century ago and was recorded too.

Go to any football history webiste and google 1974/1978 world cups and you would not see much bout how much "total football" was on display by the Dutch team but a lot more reverence will be given to W.Germany and Argentina as winners. In 40/50 years no one who watched and enjoyed the "total football" would still be alive but it is certain Germany and Argentina would continue to have the stars of those world cup on their jersies.

History is kinder to the victors. Given playing beautifully and losing vs playing terribly and winning as options, it is clear the one I will choose. One will be remembered more, the other is a matter of judgements or perception.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Home of Barca Fans

Top