Enjoy it the way it comes, or read this!
Welcome to football club of Barcelona. I am not sure if we will qualify to the final of the Champions league or not. The only certain thing is that this loss against Inter will bring back a taste I missed for many years, now that I’ve been a Barcelona fan since 15 years or so. See…Supporting Barcelona is not an output of high expectations but a sort of excitement the gambler feels when he places a bet. I am not a gambler myself, but I know some people who are. They can tell you about the joy they get from the sour taste of defeat. It bring them a wilder desire to place higher bets and to come back again, moments after leaving with a frustrated angry decision that they will not do it anymore. With time, they learn to neglect that frustration flu, they just keep on raising their bets. Sometimes lead by reasonable calculations, but most of the time for the passion behind it. Whether it ends up being a bad day or a good day, it doesn’t matter. The pleasure is in the adventure, not in the output. Anyone who reaches that level of psychological defect, complete the evolutionary process of becoming a Barcelona fan.Why am I starting from there? No, it’s not the repetitive anthem of:”Support your team in ups and downs” let’s avoid the “showing up” carnival about true fans Vs so-and-so supporters that I read about, since the final whistle. Anyone who sits and watches a Barca game serves the club a favor (at least by increasing the number of viewers so the TV channels make sure to broadcast the games more often). It’s more about the nature of this club, the method of play, and the consequences. Based on all that, we can evaluate the performance at any time. The question:”Was it possible to get a better result against Inter?” is not valid, if you take this one game and analyze. The suitable question (in my Opinion, as I am not lecturing here) is: “Was it possible to do better considering the football criteria we set and expect?”. The difference? Simple: I am more than certain that playing a 4-3-2-1 With Busquets-Yaya-Keita in front of our defense with Pedro and Messi behind Ibra would have brought a better result (notice: you don’t even need Xavi). Don’t bother putting high pressure and running for 99.99% possession. Bring Inter players out of their own half (if they didn’t move you get a draw, at least) and hit them by counters generated through your two fullbacks (Alves and Maxwell, with Yaya moving back as a third CB) Supported –from a deep position of course- by Keita and Busquets, and lead by Messi and Pedro with Ibra leading the offense the way he used to do –SUCCESSFULLY- when he played for Inter. Piece of cake. Squads with barely half the quality of ours do it and win titles. In fact, we could have won the liga already if we were a less “Naïve” football club, or let’s say less romantic when it comes to our game approach. We don’t bargain to hand 10 % of our possession and offense drive to the opponent even if we get the three points in return. Stupid? Unpractical? Suicidal? Blablatata…whatever? Yes. But that’s the way we do it. That’s the special thing about this team. Not being better. Not being worse. Just being…different.
That’s exactly why I jumped to defend Pep Guardiola after the game. People are bringing up some secondary reasons to explain the defeat. This player started, that player was benched, this sub, that pass, this tackle… In fact nothing would have guaranteed this game regardless of who starts (Aside of Iniesta may be) as long as we play the same way we played last season where Pep was praised because he won titles. If you want this squad to secure more titles sack Pep, hire Benitez (without giving him the right to buy any players!). “But we won last season!” I can hear you. Dude, I didn’t say “failure is your destiny, live in disgrace”. I said the possibilities of underachieving when you play this football style are higher than ending up on the victorious thrown. Fact.
That’s why –And here we get to the point- last season I was the most critical fan when it comes to Pep’s game approach. I praised him for fixing the bugs I was criticizing during Rijkaard’s days (Even when we won titles). But there were still some issues that need to be tuned. Was I demanding a Benitez style? Get outta here! I simply demanded an upgraded total football that matches the demands of modern game. Giving credit where due, Pep walked a long distance in that direction, but still there are urgent requirements that will keep us fragile if we do not fix. We can win against Inter in the second leg the way we play. We can win the CL and the Liga. But it’s not because we are systematically undefeatable, it’s because we have such an uncontainable squad (Unless if: Later). That was the situation last season. That was the case during the Ronaldinho era. In fact, that was the case even during Cruyff era. If we don’t paint a clear idea about our system with its pros and coins, we can’t analyze any game properly, whether we praise a win or criticize a defeat.
In order not to make a hindsight analysis after being a bit critical about it in the last post, Let me refer back to the Issues I tackled last season the way I pointed it in previous posts I wrote since Pep was hired. Re-reading it now may bring a different evaluation. Simplifying the situation as:”Last season we were great” while this season we screwed ourselves may sound bit too harsh. This obviously means that the new signings are the reason of all troubles. In fact we were not better last season, it’s just the opponents are more experienced to deal with this team now. Let me be a bit harsh and point out one significant difference between the two seasons in the Champions league, for example: The Referee this season in the away game of the semi final was less friendly with us than last season. It doesn’t mean that we had no quality back then (we had the best quality, no doubt). But we were as fragile as we are now as well. Lets refresh the memory about last season, Then we take the game against Inter this season as a demonstration.
Talking about semi finals of Champions league. If you want to have a better idea why we lost against Inter, check my article before our game against Chelsea last season. But I will paste some parts that may sound interesting at the moment:
Defensively:
Lets be honest, we are not fresh enough for a transition battle back and forth. We need to break down the transition distance between players, rather than forcing them all to run all the way.
The Anvil and the Hammers:
This was a subject for the article I planned as a follow up to the Previous article "Barcelona: System Analysis". But there is no way to avoid clinching it here while discussing the game against Chelsea, so let it be.
We play high pressure to defend. This way we stay closer to the Opponent area all the time, and we keep the opponent in their own half rather than moving to ours. This system has its advantages, and we all know it. Yet, it has lot of disadvantages. It is exhausting, and demand running all over the place all the time. It requires lot of transition if the opponent succeeded to overcome the initial pressure and generated counter attacks through the spaces we leave behind. Linking the two disadvantages together lead to conclude: It is exhausting, while to work perfectly it requires fresh legs. This is why Barcelona is more fragile while dealing with fatigue issues. And that’s why the intensity of games has more impact on Barcelona form than it affects any other team.
So what about applying a Catenacio but in the opponents' half, while executing our pressure on ball holder upfront? It decrease calories burning, close spaces and gaps the opponent may use to generate counter attacks, and still keep you close to the opponent net so when you win back the ball you can move the ball to opponent box in five seconds. I believe there is a possibility to upgrade the Barcelona style by adding some Italian methods. Creating something…"Barcetalia".
Let's demonstrate this through the Game against Chelsea merging that Barcetalia methodology with Chelsea game specific demands:
The moment we lose the ball, the two players closer to Yaya on the flanks drop back creating a line in front of our defense in the midfield, while the other four players keep doing our high pressure strategy on the ball holder and his closest outlets. Now the new line positioning depends on the team you play against, the higher it goes the more it squeeze opponent, though a balance need to be made between squeezing the opponent and keeping the ways to our own half sealed.
It is important for the following reasons:
1) Close any path for counter attacks Chelsea may generate.
2) Will Put another line to win back the ball in front of our defense incase initial ball pressure failed. It will keep Chelsea ball far from our box, and doing so we don’t only prevent them from scoring through counters, but also decrease the number of corners and Free kicks on the edge of our box. I believe that’s the best way to avoid Chelsea threat in set pieces, making sure they don’t have it at all. This line can play the ball out to the touch line, or even do some tactical fouls to stop the ball in the midfield. Chelsea are planning this for us, let's do the same, if needed.
3) This way our pressure on the ball holder will be more fruitful. It may sound that having a trio of Alves-Yaya-Xavi positioned behind four players doing the pressure, takes more time to win back the ball than Yaya behind six players hunting for the ball, not true. Here is a question for you: What is the best plan to catch a Rabbet? Running after it in an open field, or squeezing it in the corner? How many men you need to achieve the mission in each of the two cases? That’s the core idea here. Squeeze the opponent between the anvil of the well positioned trio and the hammers of those who are applying the pressure.
4) When you have Only a Yaya behind the six players doing the pressure not only you leave spaces in your midfield and expose the defense, but you even create an incentive for the opponent to counter attack, simply because that’s the only space they find to run out of pressure. Having a positioned midfield trio close any space. It makes the helpless opponent clear the ball with no sense just to get some air, rather than building up a counter attack. Had anyone noticed that the teams we play against rarely clear the ball nonsensely(Compared to the level of pressure we apply)? There is a reason for that, something like having a better option, or open outlets to pass the ball to, mostly behind our high defense line.
5) This line will keep players like Messi, Iniesta, Henry and Eto'o closer to the opposition area all the time. Instead of running back to our own half when the initial pressure fails, they will have a line behind them to pick the unaccomplished mission and make sure it is done.
6) This way, for Chelsea to score goals, not only they need to beat the initial pressure and run to the box to battle with defenders. They have an additional solid line to deal with. And that line may cut the communication with Drogba and anyone upfront.
7) Tactical wise, I believe the way Barcelona opponents usually attack require more a Right/left defensive midfielders than fullbacks. The opponents usually use humble number of players offensively and count on counters; they rarely hug lines while approaching Barcelona half. They approach barcelona half and cut inside. Its better to bury the opponent attack in the midfield before it go further, because the deeper it survive the more it get directed straight toward the box.
The Three Defensive Layers
(Click to enlarge)
At Barcelona the defense is mainly the job of the players who attack the opponent territory (....)The role of the defensive midfielder (Call him Yaya) is to create cover, and the role of the three defenders left behind is to create depth.
It’s a kind of win-win deal between defense and offense. Defenders agree to take the risk of guarding a wide sector of the field without sufficient number of players, which save more players for the offense section of the pitch….Offense in return pay for that by applying high pressure in the opponent's half, winning the ball as fast as possible, increasing possession time…
The Dangerous Compromise Between Defense and Offense
When the Pressure on the ball drops by 15 %, it doesn’t demand 15% more effort from the defenders to cover that declination. It actually leads the whole system to collapse. Because the defenders role then switch from creating depth and Freezing the opponent’s last man standing upfront, to become a mission impossible of standing and facing a counter attacking tsunami, to mark, tackle, cover, with continuous re-positioning and pressure. And still falling under the obligation of building up the game from behind with accurate passes, Nonsense clearance is a crime in Barcelona. That’s too much for a defensive trio, right? This is not something we train our defenders to do. This is not something we like. And it's not something Defenders of any team can handle.
If we agree on that, then we know that the periods when the team face a drop in form, we need to evaluate the whole team defensive contribution (and specially those who are upfront), before looking for the scapegoat who made the last mistake before the goal. More pressure upfront means fewer counters, leading to less catastrophic mistakes. That’s the magic of probabilities.
Our offense and defense performance is interrelated. The systems we play say it, and the records approve.
Then I wrote a three parts series about Barcelona’s champions league chances Last season: Roads Leading to Rome: Part One, Part Two, and Part three). I introduced the series as follows:
Barcelona Won the Champions league two times. And for a club of Barcelona standards, let’s admit it, that’s not the best thing to be proud of. We can find fair excuses for the lack of titles in the old days. Yet, even in the modern era our Champions league records were not that impressive, at least compared to Milan, Liverpool, or Juventus.
Why is it happening? When I look back in history it seems that we won every time we had a “too good” squad to lose, not a squad that is “Good enough” to win. If that’s true, then we are traditionally over dependent on individuals’ potentials (plural) rather than the systematic potentials of the group=team. Is it a chronicle defect in our system and football methodology? Is it that difficult to Liquefy individual talents in a system? Is it only a bad luck? That’s a very controversial issue to discuss….
And while the second part was a bit more theoretical, the third part explained some of what we lacked against Inter last week:
… things Barcelona needs to improve to enhance champions' league hopes.
We didn’t solve the “Counters' Blind Tunnel” we create when we move forward.
Thats a defect in our system: when we move forward, we create a three central backs line, one defensive midfielder, while the rest of players move to serve the offense operations in and around the box. The first clear return of this structure is the space created between our midfielders on the edge of the box and our defenders stepping on the midfield line. That’s more than (30m X 68 m) area where we only have one player – defensive midfielder- to cover. If the defensive midfielder moved closer to the offense operation lines, he will be able to gain the middle range opponent clearance. Yet, a long range clearance may catch the defensive midfielder out of position.
The Vacuum Tunnel
CASE STUDY:
As a living scenario, I will pick Man Utd (the current champions of the world), and imagine their coach playing a 4-3-2-1 at the Nou Camp. Four defenders plus three Defensive-midfielder-like players to create the defensive Bus, with the trio Tevez-Ronaldo-and Rooney rotating for the three other roles (yes I dropped Berbatov). Giving the instructions for Ronaldo to run through Alves Territory, and instructing Rooney or Tevez to stay close to Barcelona deepest defender while the third player with his high work rate bark for any cleared ball, racing the wind for it. The first result is the insecure feeling Barcelona will get when Alves move forward while Ronaldo positions himself on the right. We cant afford losing Alves in the offense operations, so one central defender will have to move wide to cover the right flank. One marker without support will not be enough so: either our defensive midfielder take Ronaldo in the midfield- unlikely because it leaves the field empty, or the other Defenders will be forced to create depth in case Ronaldo passed the fake right back. Moving the backline deeper will enlarge the space between backline and the rest of the team, while keeping them on the midfield line means getting beaten by the Man Utd trio pace in the counter. With the absence of sufficient cover infront of our defense, the opponent counters will be too fast for the midfielders transition to take place. Result? Man Utd defense clear the ball to the empty space mentioned above, a Man utd player receives it and plays it to the other empty space between our defense and Goalkeeper, then a race between Pique-Marquez and Ronaldo-Rooney/Tevez for the ball.
(...)we need to approach the champions’ league knock out stages as it needs, not as we succeeded to do in the liga. May be considering two defensive midfielders as a must for any tactical structure we apply in the Champions’ league will be a good start. At least after we pass Lyon. Last season, I was calling for a three players in the back when the team move forward instead of giving the two backwards the instructions to attack. It is happening this season when needed, we have more balance in the team this way and I like it! Now my new call is to have two defensive midfielders in front of our back when we play out of home in the Champions'. Let a combination of five players from the panel of Messi, Alves, Xavi, Iniesta, Gudjhonsen, Hleb, Bojan, Eto’o and Henry move forward squeezing the opponent box with no concerns. Noting that having two defensive midfielders is not less lethal at offense than the system currently applied. I can assure you its even more productive and generate more scoring opportunities, because we Barcelona fans know it well: dominate the game, and then enjoy your victory.
The Two legs Approach:
When I question our system compatibility with the Champions' league needs, I do not mean its less powerful. But the Champions' league force you to install more elements in your Game management. For example, your approach to the first leg game away from home must take the following in consideration:
- If you will play the second leg at home. you don't need to be so obsessed to finish the opponent away. All what needed is to come back home with a result that will make your life easier.
- When you play abroad, time is on your side. No need to rush to crush! Let the opponent feel they are running out of time, they need to score or else! Then you will hunt the result you are seeking.
- Keep being loyal to Barcelona Philosophy about earning back the ball fast, and dominating possession. Scoring will come as an unavoidable outcome of dominating the opponents at their homes.
You need to make sure the opponent do not score early. Dominate the possession (pst!Control the midfield) . Then you get advantage of their need to score a goal opening spaces at the back and you generate fast counters. Our Classical tactics of 4-3-3 do not serve these objectives. It either win you the game or throw you out of the Champions' league. One of the recommended tactics goes as follow:
This is one sample of possession+Counters strategy. A 4-2-2-2 can also be another option, where Messi play on the free role around the striker, with two midfielders and two Defensive midfielders behind. What I like about the one represented above is that it pulls the opponent out of their area, or else their stadium fans will put more pressure on them to get a good home result. It creates more spaces in the opponent half. It will insure that you dominate the midfield, and the match in return. And with fast counters you can score at least once, while the opponent will find no spaces to generate counters. The star on the right top show where I believe most of the game will be played. I don't think we will have to go deep in our half that often. Barcelona players are well known for being able to earn back the ball fast, and With this structure it will get faster. The red Zone show the area where we are fragile when we use our classical 4-3-3 as shown in the last frame of the animation to compare. Instead of having one player to cover your back(classical approach), this way you will have two, and without damaging Barcelona offense power. you do not need More than Messi-Iniesta-Xavi-Alves-Eto'o/Henry combination to move forward and hunt goals when you play outside Catalonia.
Not only the team that lost against Inter was the same team (As a squad) that won the classico, but it’s even the same team that won everything last season. With the structural strength and systematic weaknesses. We switched a striker who has qualities and weaknesses with another striker who has different attributes we need more (but that’s another story that I don’t dare to tackle now that this post is XXL already). Pep is also the same coach, he did nothing worse against Inter than whatever he did in any game he coached before.
Against Lyon last season I pointed out that: ” When you are 1-1 in an away game, and it’s the last 5 minutes, and you are already satisfied with the result, and you have two more substitutions in hand, USE THEM! “ and that: “Barcelona style sucks lot of energy, no squad can give you enough fuel to keep playing that way all the time, you need to be more selective in the games, when to play attractive high pressure possession game and when to play more tactical and direct tactics. The Champions’ league is not a show business, it’s a Mission to make possible.” Then I want you to remember the following from Lyon game as well when you check the Figures below: “To go far in the CL we need to be able to slowdown the opponents counters, filling the space behind our offense operation Zone. Whenever we lose the ball the opponent counters seems to be so fast as if sucked through a Vacuum tunnel from the first edge (opponent box) to the other edge striking our defense. One Yaya to act as a tunnel cork is not enough, and when he join the party upfront then even that Tinny cork vanish.” Mind you, we were talking about a defense with only one offense obsessed fullback (Alves), not with two (Alves+Maxwell). So you can imagine. More? Against Atletico last season:
1) I didn’t understand how against a team having two dangerous strikers and two wings with pace we play Sylvinho and Alves and with only one defensive midfielder in front. I always mentioned the Vacuum tube between our Defense and offense where the opponent generate fast counter attacks. But at least we usually had 3 defenders to cover our back and the opponents were not Simao-Maxi-Kun and forlan. I didn’t understand how this was meant to work. I really like to know…
2) When it felt that our Players knees are not handling the fast tempo anymore, I thought we can play it the German way. Absorb the tempo, cool down the heat, and then hunt a goal. But we kept playing our own way attack, attack and then attack...and don’t look behind you while looking forward!
3) Two weeks ago, when we were still having the 12 points advantage, I said now its time for two Defensive midfielder to avoid exhausting transition and fast counters while we are passing through a heavy schedule. How come I was right?
And here is a very interesting note from that game as well (from the same article):
“Playing Henry and Eto'o as forwards with Messi behind was a great idea, But I couldn’t understand what was exactly Eto’o role? Inbox striker? Second striker? It just felt he was only closing the space Messi needed to penetrate to the box.” HA!!! Can you believe it?! And no one in the comments session even hesitated to agree on that remark regarding Eto’o. Well I suggest watching that game again before starting this:”Ibra swallows Messi” argument. Fair enough?
I end up with this notation from Barcelona (Total) Football club:
“That’s why, while planning offense, defense has to be in mind in an attempt to make the transition planning easier. And while deciding the best defense to apply, offense has to be in mind to make sure the team can bounce back to cause damage the moment you earn back the ball.”
As I mentioned before, every system has its own flops. We choosed to play this system and we praise the club when we win. Its important to keep in mind that this adventure can backfire any moment, and to realize the key factors for the defeats from within the system itself.The problem with some analysts is that they do not see the whole picture. In football, it’s important to browse the team dynamics as a whole before jumping to evaluate a specific department or weigh up individuals’ contribution. If the goalkeeper can serve as a libero or not makes a huge impact on defense line and defenders decision making. If the defense is not structured properly, the midfield will put more effort supporting defense than building up offense, Offense will not be efficient, and you will only face a collaborative chaos all over the field.
The reason why I do not criticize Pep anymore is the belief that –beside some little modifications here and there-this is how far he will go in modifying the tactics and game approach (take it or leave it). Or else, I will have to nag about each and every point I mentioned above after each and every game we play. Taking in consideration where he is coming from as a dedicated total football coach, he made some impressive changes to the original football methodology. I can’t think of any other coach who can do better. I can’t demand more during the short period he coached this team. It’s true that our total football still need modifications toward a more reliable attractive offense oriented performance. That’s easy to admit for someone who love it (Me), but more difficult for someone who live it (Pep). Regardless of the fact that it’s easier to say than to implement, especially when you have that number of games to play, leaving no time for you and your squad to practice tactical changes. What we need to consider, is something like:
- Using two pivots instead of one in the midfield so the players in front of them can shuffle the lines forward without being worried about deep build up responsibilities and the fullbacks –who are the most important players to contribute with offense in modern football- can move forward without compromising the defense stability. No doubt, the two holding midfielders are not static, but we are taking about the original structure, not the team dynamics.
- When the team loses the ball, there is a need to mix between positional defending and high pressure. As advanced on the field as possible (depending on the opponent’s structure). Some positional cover in the midfield is an unavoidable need. That’s an advanced zonal positioning that close spaces (“The Anvil” as mentioned above in the Barcetalia figure). It gives fewer outlets and spaces for the opponent to break through the pressure initiated by “the hammers” of the four players in front the Anvil line. Will that demand more movements from the hummers now that the team is employing less number of players for the pressure operation? Not if you take in consideration that the hammers 1) will make less exhausting transitions backward (as they are well covered) 2) They will apply the pressure in a smaller territory squeezed between the opponents box and the Anvil lined in an advanced position in the middle third. Besides, even now that we are applying pressure every way we can, there are always players in front who are useless for that process (being on the opposite flank of the possession battle?). Such players –instead of being unemployed- need to move back to contribute in constructing the Anvil line.
- While setting offense, and now that there is enough stability in the midfield, the total football concept of switching positions can take place now. The lines will be properly spread as the team will have players pending for the ball within four lines from defense to offense rather than forcing the skillful players to move deeper to contribute in the buildup operation away from the offense third. Players like Yaya, Busquets, Xavi, Keita, Iniesta, Pedro (four of the six) must be the players who contribute with the defenders in the deep buildup, moving the ball forward while Messi and Ibra need to operate in the offense third even during the buildup stage. Messi for example may switch sometimes with Pedro the same as Pique may run forward to the midfield when the midfielders lack passes outlets (one of the holding mids take his place in defense). In set offense, there will be a good combination of Pedro-Xavi-Alves behind Messi and Ibra to be fully dedicated to attack while having enough security behind them. To avoid static situations, two holding midfielders bring lot of unpredictable mobility on the table. The Left fullback will have no worries to make flashing runs forward (Even Pique can do it) now that there will be a player to cover (one of the holding mids). The holding midfielders will also synchronize their offense contribution (going forward) as needed.
That’s how I see it, which is more an opinion than a fact to be taken for granted. Till then, I have to evaluate Pep performance as a coach depending on the current system, not the wishful thinking.
Inter demonstration:
Every team has its counter. Every tactical system has its flops. In our case, we have troubles against teams with high work rate that can put pressure on our defenders and disturb build up, and teams with enough tanks to park and depend on counter attacking the landscapes we leave behind. There is no other team that can expose our systematic fragilities this season like Inter. Last season after the groups stages lot of fans were concerned about meeting Manchester United, Arsenal, an Italian team, etc…For me, there were only two teams to be worried about: Chelsea and Liverpool. This season after all the changes Inter made, they were the team to avoid (Beside Chelsea). Before the Arsenal game I mentioned that I am calm about it. They have the players to put high pressure, but their holding midfielders are fragile, so as their defense. Inter in return got the tanks needed in defense and midfield, the Italian sense of organized tactics, the Argentineans’ work rate, and the likes of Milito and Eto’o to complicate our defenders’ stability while in possession or while defending near the half line.
Based on the current system we play (One Holding midfielder, two midfielders) The starting lineup was:
Valdes, Alves, Puyol, Pique, Maxwell, Busquets, Xavi, Keita, Pedro, Messi, Ibra
Abidal was not ready to start. Personally, I would have preferred to start Milito over Maxwell. In fact I think it was better to start Milito as a third defender while having Maxwell instead of Keita. Three Center backs with one holding midfielder sounds more reliable for me –defensively- than Two center backs with one holding midfielder even if he is assisted by Keita (in principle, not practice in this game). Yet, the question is: Was Milito an option for this game? I mean, he is still not fully fit. He got a knock in the last game he played. Not sure if I can boldly say Pep was wrong not to start him. If Milito was not an option, then Maxwell or Marquez? Maxwell for me. Checked.
I already commented about Busquets starting this game. No doubt (for me) he was a must. Keita (before his injury) was one of our most consistent performers this season. Before the game I said that Busquets-Keita-Xavi is my automatic option but I am not sure about Keita’s form (and I demanded Busquets-Keita when I thought that Abidal will be able to start, which makes a big difference). After watching Keita in this game, and now this is hindsight, I admit that I feel a Yaya who can move to play as a third Center back when Maxwell and Alves move forward (with Busquets as a holding midfielder sounds a better option for me. But again, without notice we are shifting back to the systematic changes I demanded last season and repeated above. Something we agreed to put aside at the moment.
I already commented about the offense line selection in the previous post. We will tackle things in more details as we rewind the game scenarios. That’s all what I have regarding the lineup.
Kick off. The game starts. The lineup is not bad (considering all the circumstances), but 1) the team is not in a good day. 2) Playing against their counter football style. What Inter succeeded to do was stretching Barcelona’s selection. Milito ran like a wolf till he broke, pushing Puyol and Pique backward. Pandev was dedicated to Alves while Eto’o pressed Maxwell and Sneijder checked Busquets (sometimes danced between Busquets and Xavi/Keita depending who come for the help). They did it in Barcelona’s half for a reason: Instead of letting Barcelona’s defense contribute in the offense build up, they forced Xavi, Pedro and Messi to play deep in order to provide outlets and keep possession. They didn’t need to worry as they had sufficient cover behind with two holding midfielders creating central and lateral cover based on Barcelona’s offense circulation. Another thing about Inter’s performance was that they didn’t get frustrated with the lack of ball possession. In fact, they gave up on trying to battle for it. Their mind set was obvious: Wait patiently for an interception, and when they get the ball they change the play diagonally to the space caused by Barcelona’s unbalanced positioning and generate counters putting as many players on the attacked flank as possible.
A fully fit Barcelona might break through that. The Barcelona we had for the game was not. To break through there is one word:”Movement” We lacked that Move-receive-pass-move-receive spark .Without it, there was no chance. Claiming that putting Bojan instead of Ibra would have generated supernatural energy in Pedro’s, Messi’s, Xavi’s Keita’s Busquet’s, Alves’s, Maxwell’s legs make it sound as if Bojan has nuclear fission processors behind his ears. The players were not dancing on the right tempo. The ball didn’t move forward fast enough to attack the tiny spaces that appeared here and there for few moments before Cambiasso and Motta put a block to close it. We were forced to play the passes back more than forward. With every back pass the lines moved further from Inters’ third. Ibra was completely isolated. And Inter’s transitions were much faster than Barcelona’s offense pace. It’s easy to say anyone else could have done better. But watch the game again and tell me how often the offense arrived to Inter’s third and Messi was in need for Ibra to switch positions or anything.
When the team is not secured at its own half, it always happens that the players who are supposed to set offense tend to play more out of trouble. It’s more secure to play the ball back than forward. It’s more secure to demand the ball in the space available in your own half than to make the runs forward seeking the pass in the opponent’s territory. Inter knew about this tendency that we have. They stitched their game plan based on our system’s defects. Our possession game didn’t frustrate them because it was predictable. In fact, the opposite would have done better. Secure defense with three center backs and two holding mids (sending the message “We are not in a hurry, you want us to open up, open your lines first!”), and they will start to get more frustrated. While they will have no more spaces where they expected to generate scoring opportunities players like Messi and co will forget (relatively) about defense concerns. They will receive the ball and set offense rather than trying to avoid a disastrous loss of possession. If the defenses of the both sides cancel offense, it’s all cool. Bring them to the Camp Nou!
The problem is that we played an ultra offense structure that ended up struggling to serve defensive demands.
Regarding the subs, as much as it sounds strange, there is some reasoning behind it. Henry for example was a good option to use, but any stat for his performance this season can tell that he causes more possession loss than offense threat. With the team struggling, the last thing we needed is to lose possession more often in the last segment of the game and track back again and again (Mou was combing Balotelli to get him ready for a reason). The idea was to create a better offense movement on the left flank using two of Abidal, Maxwell, and Keita with one of them at a time (Keita or Abidal) staying back when Pique moves forward. One of the earnings could be creating more space for Messi on the other flank to catch Inter by surprise. Besides, it will keep Maicon in his position rather than having to deal with his runs forward. It was a nice try, without lot of expectations that it will do miracles. At least, it was better than any other option that may lead to losing possession. It’s true that we were 3-1 down. But when Pep did his substitution we were closer to 4-1 than 3-2. Playing at the Camp Nou to overcome a 1-3 defeat is not easy, but a 1-4 would have been almost impossible. May be in the last few minutes, We could have used Bojan/Henry to pick the balls roaming toward the box to hunt a goal. Especially after Maicon’s injury that created a more defensive Inter.
Visual demonstrations:
First Goal: Notice the space behind the initial pressure attempt. Especially with the holding midfielder contribution in the build up. If you think any holding midfielder can cover that huge toritory alone, you are putting unrealistic expectations:
Fig 1: Positioning mess?
Fig:2 Attacking the space by change of play.
Fig: 3
Pique out of the play, while on the other flank the team is outnumbered
(Not Pique's fault, its the overall structure)
Fig: 4
Fig 5: Systematic collapse.
Just before Pedro's goal:
Notice our players' movement:
Fig:6
Now imagine that the ball was intercepted. How complicated will it be for Inter to generate a counter?
Even in this moment where we are in possession, if you think about it, we are more threatened than them to concede.
Even in this moment where we are in possession, if you think about it, we are more threatened than them to concede.
Talking about Pedro (the red circle in the following fotos), If you think the first goal was Alves fault, think again:
Third goal: More systematic positioning mess:
As long as you see more players running behind the ball rather than pending to intercept it, then you are in a huge trouble. You chase the ball, while the ball chase the valid open players.
Inter putting pressure:
Interested to know what two holding midfielders can do?
- Notice Maicon, Motta and Cambiasso movement
- Notice when Pandev switch with Motta and act as a DM in some fotos.
-The photos represent a continious play as the time show.
-The photos represent a continious play as the time show.
The Maxwell-Keita-Abidal operations:
And finally, the spicey dish everyone is looking for: Ibra standing in Messi's path to dribble the world (Some samples):
If you are wondering where is Ibra,
he is there pushing the defense back creating space between the lines.
Was it better that Ibra bring Lucio with him to pay Messi a visit?
Spaces...hah?
Its fair to be critical. Whether regarding the manager's choices or the players' performance as long as we keep in mind the tactical platform. So we understand the challenge facing every player accurately, before checking how far he is responsible of the good days, or the bad ones.
Ramzi Said,
Not sure if any editing needed, I cant wait till I am back to publish it as it will be too late. Will review it later.
Posted on April 23, 2010 at 11:34 AM
Anonymous_69 Said,
Always a pleasure, even if it did take longer to read this than Lord of the Rings ;)
Posted on April 23, 2010 at 2:34 PM
Anonymous Said,
great article always a pleasure reading your material. really can you change the background it's really confusing and a simple color will make the blog much better appealing thank you
Posted on April 23, 2010 at 8:07 PM
Anonymous Said,
Fantastic, as usual.
The photos showing Pedro not tracking Sneijder for the first goal are fascinating. I can only imagine Pep looking at the video the next morning, and pulling him by the ears to the principal's office.
As you said, the sides which have the greatest success against us pressure the initial passing outlets (Valdes to Pique-Puyol, Pique-Puyol to Busquets-Xavi), and disrupt the operational workflow of the midfield. We can get around it some of the time with quick passing, but we clearly struggle with it.
What I didn't like about pushing Pique up in the last stage of that Inter match is that we can utilize his excellent distribution by moving him up to midfield alongside or slightly behind Busquets instead of throwing him at Lucio and Samuel. To compensate, slide Abidal over to the center, bring Keita back a bit to act as a semafor, and push Alves up.
But, anyway, I don't think Pep will change too much. Other than the motivational video. The players might not want to see another Gladiator montage. Perhaps The Beauty and the Beast would suffice, and the metaphor would be obvious enough for even Alves to understand it. :)
Posted on April 23, 2010 at 8:18 PM
adal Said,
Great stuff. I read it last night before I went to bed, gonna read it today again.
Agree with what the first Anonymous said about the background.
Posted on April 23, 2010 at 11:51 PM
y2k156 Said,
Excellent artcile. We do play football in certain style and sometimes it does not go well. I guess we are too spoiled by recent success. But am sure that we have ability to win the tie. That said, Inter have ability to soak up the pressure so fascinating tie awaits.
Posted on April 23, 2010 at 11:57 PM
barca96 Said,
another amazing article.
you could write a book ramzi!
i will buy it!
btw, i still think it's alves' fault for sneijder's goal. he left him man..
Posted on April 24, 2010 at 1:31 AM
kamikaze kontiki Said,
Ramzi, I had a look at the length of the article and decided I had better get some rest before I sit through it. :)
Of course after reading through I found the first half was mostly a reiteration of stuff you had posted last year so I could skip through that bit a little faster. I just have a couple of notes for that part.
1. Regarding the 3-man midfield wall with the forwards pressuring ahead of them I remember appluading the idea not perhaps when you posted it but after the 6-2 Classico when Pep actually used it with Iniesta, Xavi and Yaya. He had tried it out before against a smaller team (maybe Almeria, dont recall) and proceeded to use the same system against Man U in the final. That is just to point out it is not a system we have not used and we have used it very successfully.
2. What you refer to as Vacuum Tunnel is in fact the area most managers choose to target Barça. QSF has gone on recod saying that he asked his players to pass the ball quickly to the flanks and attack with speed from there. That way they bypass the DMs and take on static defenders and the space vacated by Alves/Maxwell.
I cant argue with the Inter analysis since you call for the double pivot which is what I was shouting from the rooftops for, before the game.
Keita I think was given too great a task. His first duty appeared to be to mark Maicon. At the same time there was a huge space in the left half of midfield which both he and Busquets kept scrambling to cover. With Maicon running on the sidelines Keita was neither able to keep up with him nor cover the space that opened up on the inside channel to the left flank (Barça's left flank).
2 DMs or the double-pivot would have meant one player covering that space. So who takes Maicon?
This is an issue I feel which hasn't been dealt with. Why not Pedro on the left? Alves moving forward to occupy Zanetti on the right and the rest remains the same. Why was the whole attack ganged up on the right side?
(err.. before the game I had actually speculated that Zanetti (who is probably one of my most favourite players ever) might have gotten too old and should be attacked as Inter's weak link. hmm.. so much for that)
Anyway Pedro should have been the one marking Maicon.
Another key point that Mourinho counted on for this game was the indiscipline in the Barça defense. The ZM article pointed out Pandev moving inside (Alves following) and Sneijder moving free outside for the first goal. In the photos you have put up above I think you will find Eto'o and Milito playing similarly with Maxwell never in a position to cover Maicon turning up on the outside right channel.
This tie always scared me. Mourinho's approach is so radically different to ours. He doesn't think "How can I win the ball from Barça", instead he thinks "Where can I let them have the ball without being dangerous " . He was willing to concede possession in the centre of the pitch but his forwards, all four of them, put pressure every time our defenders had the ball and his DMs covered the passing lanes so Xavi was allowed space but no passing options.
I have no idea what Pep is going to do for the 2nd leg but Mourinho I expect will come out with much the same formation. Maybe you have some ideas.
p.s: The Messi Ibra pics proove that on those particular seconds Ibra wasn't bringing defenders close to Messi, he was just standing around, doing nothing.
Posted on April 24, 2010 at 7:53 AM
Anonymous Said,
nice post, but lookn at d pix of inter's 3rd goal, was milito offside, considerin where he was wen sneider headed the ball
Posted on April 24, 2010 at 7:58 AM
Anonymous_69 Said,
He was a good foot offside.
Posted on April 24, 2010 at 7:46 PM
Ramzi Said,
Calling an offside is the ref job. We didnt do our defensive job or else there wouldnt have been a case in the first place.
Alves tried to terminate the existing threat which gets the priority over Predicted threat. The ball reached Milito who was not checked well, he could have easily turned and placed his shot.
It was Pedro's fault not to track back and the Center backs fault for not positioning themselves well that lead Alves to take that decision. Watch it again on youtube, and put yourself in Alves place.
Kami, Ibra performance was bad so as the performance of the rest of the players. Whether his bad performance damaged the whole team performance or the overall passive display effected his game, thats subject to everyone's opinion. For me, its the mix of both. What I am certain about is that:
- No one could have done a better job there.
- Having him in the selection was not a mistake. In fact it wasnt even a work of genius, as its too natural and definite to be praised (like selecting Valdes as a keeper). Any coach of any level would have done the same.
Posted on April 25, 2010 at 11:24 AM
Ramzi Said,
And I think you are refering to the game against Sevilla when it come to the three midfielders tactic. At least I remember us applying it in the second half (After being exposed in the first) and it brought magic!
Posted on April 25, 2010 at 11:27 AM
Ramzi Said,
I will make sure to meet the "Ibra's performance evaluation" request. I was planning to write about it by the end of the season, as I think that will be more reasonable. But with most of the season behind us, we can go for it before the season end.
Yet, I think there is lot of nostalgia regarding last season, something I will try not to have in mind when we evaluate the current season. A good example is what I pasted from last season's game against Lyon, as a respond to: "Ibra closes Messi Path, Eto'o was opening highways last season". Just to point out that we actually had this problem in some games last season as we have it in some games now. The same as the interchanging process and everything.
No doubt Eto'o was a more dynamic player (though not as efficient on the flanks as we are praising now). We can’t put Eto'o's attributes on the table and compare Ibra to. Ibra will have no chance. The same as Eto'o will have no chance if we do it the other way.
Till we make the overall evaluation together (I will initiate it with a post), lets keep in mind that its Ibra's first season. People say that Barca paid too much to take that in consideration (regardless that I think he cost us 40 M or so), but at the end of the day, its not his fault that Barca paid. He is still a new player in a new team. In his first year, he almost matched (not sure if he exceeded) Eto'o's average number of goals per season. The team with him won more points in the league than with Eto'o even in a season where the team as a whole didn’t have it as easy to cross through the league than last season. Messi is playing his best season as well? (which at least means that Ibra didn’t damage his game). And we are in the CL semi finals.
At least, we can’t say that signing him damaged the team. That’s a good place to start from.
Posted on April 26, 2010 at 12:05 AM
Anonymous Said,
Considering Eto'o went as an exchange, How can that be only 40 M? I thought it was around 70M (40+30).. I might not be correct though...
Posted on April 27, 2010 at 7:03 AM
Feech Said,
By the way, was it 46m or 49m in the end? It was 46m + 1 year loan of Hleb and we would pay his salary or most of this salary(I don't remember exactly but it would cost us 3m) + Eto'o. Final cost: 49m + Eto'o.
Transfers complete, but then Hleb announced that he won't go to Inter. So I guess we had to pay that 3m, but I never saw an article back then that yes, we payed that additional 3m or not. Ramzi, do you have any info about this?
Posted on April 27, 2010 at 8:58 AM