Milan v Barca

Andersonisgod

castletownman wrote: »

I've just copped it. You ARE Graham Hunter. With that realisation I'm out.

No, though I did thoroughly enjoy his book about Barcelona.

Blatter

Andersonisgod wrote: »

To be honest my view of both games and indeed that entire Champions League were completely distorted by my (slightly unhealthy) love of Didier Drogba. Seeing Drogba (my all time favourite player) single handedly drag a team to a tournament which had been so painful to Chelsea the previous years and to Drogba himself was almost a vindication, a really wonderful sporting triumph.

That's all well and good, but it completely side steps the question! An answer that'd make Bertie proud.

Andersonisgod

Blatter wrote: »

That's all well and good, but it completely side steps the question! An answer that'd make Bertie proud.

lol admittedly I'm quite good at that.

But just for that season, just because we all knew it was the end of the line for Drogba at Chelsea, just because he had been written off and most said he was too old to drive a team to Champions League glory, because I am such a huge fan of Drogba, all my opinions about the right way of playing temporarily went out the window. That won't happen again.

It also made me quite happy when we spent some of the Champions League money on small, technically gifted players like Hazard and Oscar.

764dak

Andersonisgod wrote: »

. These big teams who have spent huge money to assemble their squads sitting back and playing counter attacking football. This Barcelona team represents an ideal, a philosophy, one which I believe is the correct one in football. Their style of play is admirable, it brings with it risks but they have reaped the rewards.

They spend money on good defenders, midfielders and attackers.

What ideal philosophy is that? Having 73% possession and still taking less shots than the other team?

eagle eye

764dak wrote: »

They spend money on good defenders, midfielders and attackers.

What ideal philosophy is that? Having 73% possession and still taking less shots than the other team?

How often have you seen that happen with this Barcelona team?

Andersonisgod

764dak wrote: »

They spend money on good defenders, midfielders and attackers.

What ideal philosophy is that? Having 73% possession and still taking less shots than the other team?

Getting the ball, keeping the ball, passing the ball, making the other team chase the ball. How often has that happened by the way?

LuckyLloyd

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Real Madrid have been forced to up their game considerably since the rise of Barcelona. All teams must raise their standards since the emergence of this Barcelona team. The greater importance put on possession is evident in any top European league, the greater success of smaller playmakers is another consequence of Barcelona.

Since 2008-2009 it's 3 La Liga's, 2 Champions League's, 2 Copa Del Rey's, 2 World Club Championships and it looks like a 4th La Liga is on the way. Also I wouldn't rule them out of winning the Champions League this season.

Their trophy haul is not unprecedented - infact, it's been bettered over the same period before.

And the first part is also fundamentally incorrect. Inter won it all in 2010 playing the same Mourinho ball that won it all for Porto in 2004. Chelsea won the CL last season in the same fashion that Liverpool won it in 2005. Any greater emphasis on possession football is part of a broader trend. The Premiership radically changed its footballing culture over the past 20 years for a million reasons that have nothing to do with Barcelona.

You've swallowed the kool aid whole. That is your perogative. Barcelona are a fine team, but that's where it ends. They are not more or less responsible for a change in football than any of the other great teams of the modern era.

LuckyLloyd

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Getting the ball, keeping the ball, passing the ball, making the other team chase the ball. How often has that happened by the way?

You play to win the game. Arsenal are an example of the Barcelona method without the players necessary to implement it successfully. When Wenger leaves they will become more practical and - considering the resources available to the club - will quite possibly succeed because they have become less idealistic in their approach.

There is also a great art to taking Barcelona down town in the way Inter and Chelsea did in 2010 and 2012. It takes great character and discipline to make that work; to be ruthless and crisp when you have the ball and make limited possession count.

Ultimately, people have allowed themselves to become confused. Aimless short passing for aimless short passing sake is not the beautiful game. When Barcelona click, they are awesome. When they are ground down and stifled ala Wednesday night and last year's semi final it's not some great injustice - it's just an indication that, like every team before them, they are beatable. They are not special, everyone gets got.

Bodhisopha

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You play to win the game. Arsenal are an example of the Barcelona method without the players necessary to implement it successfully. When Wenger leaves they will become more practical and - considering the resources available to the club - will quite possibly succeed because they have become less idealistic in their approach.

There is also a great art to taking Barcelona down town in the way Inter and Chelsea did in 2010 and 2012. It takes great character and discipline to make that work; to be ruthless and crisp when you have the ball and make limited possession count.

Ultimately, people have allowed themselves to become confused. Aimless short passing for aimless short passing sake is not the beautiful game. When Barcelona click, they are awesome. When they are ground down and stifled ala Wednesday night and last year's semi final it's not some great injustice - it's just an indication that, like every team before them, they are beatable. They are not special, everyone gets got.

Barcelona/Arsenal comparisons are redundant and have been for years.

As for the great art of taking Barca down town, the only thing Chelsea displayed was the great art of huge luck.

Morzadec

The idea that a team should not play to its strengths is just absurd.

Stoke, Milan, Barca, whoever should be able to play whatever way they so wish, as long as it's within the rules.

Strangely the argument against playing counter-attacking football is that it's not entertaining. But imagine how boring football would be if every team played 'the proper way' (i.e. short passing, possession-based, attacking football). It would become a very predictable game in which the favourites would generally win, as there would be no way to gain a tactical or even physical edge. There'd be no 'magical' cup ties where David beats Goliath. People would stop watching.

I seriously have no time for people who complain about a teams' style of play. We heard it in the World Cup against Spain (supposedly boring, cautious, repetitive and unadventurous) and routinely against Stoke.

You work to your strengths, and against the oppositions weaknesses. I didn't hear much outcry against Villa and WBA for their tactics when they beat Liverpool. They were congratulated, and rightly so.

The bottom line is that football is about winning. The attraction of the game, more than anything, is in this - its competitiveness, both teams doing everything to win, the moments of drama that come with not knowing what's going to happen next.

Barca may well have revolutionised football to an extent and I love watching them when they're at their best. But it's up to the rest to figure out a way to nullify them and exploit their weaknesses.

Milan did that on Wednesday and it was great to see. A surprise result that reminded us why we watch football - because we never know what's going to happen.

Davaeo09

Morzadec wrote: »

The idea that a team should not play to its strengths is just absurd.

Stoke, Milan, Barca, whoever should be able to play whatever way they so wish, as long as it's within the rules.

Strangely the argument against playing counter-attacking football is that it's not entertaining. But imagine how boring football would be if every team played 'the proper way' (i.e. short passing, possession-based, attacking football). It would become a very predictable game in which the favourites would generally win, as there would be no way to gain a tactical or even physical edge. There'd be no 'magical' cup ties where David beats Goliath. People would stop watching.

I seriously have no time for people who complain about a teams' style of play. We heard it in the World Cup against Spain (supposedly boring, cautious, repetitive and unadventurous) and routinely against Stoke.

You work to your strengths, and against the oppositions weaknesses. I didn't hear much outcry against Villa and WBA for their tactics when they beat Liverpool. They were congratulated, and rightly so.

The bottom line is that football is about winning. The attraction of the game, more than anything, is in this - its competitiveness, both teams doing everything to win, the moments of drama that come with not knowing what's going to happen next.

Barca may well have revolutionised football to an extent and I love watching them when they're at their best. But it's up to the rest to figure out a way to nullify them and exploit their weaknesses.

Milan did that on Wednesday and it was great to see. A surprise result that reminded us why we watch football - because we never know what's going to happen.

Brilliant post
As a Barca fan i've got to hold my hand up and say Ac were not just better at the back they were brilliant in taking there chances too. Any one who really moans about a team defending they way they did needs to realize that it's always going to be that way against a superior team.
I had said for weeks before to mates that AC are definitely good enough to take there chances against our poor back line. They did exactly that, regardless of how they defended the other end of the field and it's a great achievement for there young team.

What does worry me though is how soon people are writing Barca off. In the nou camp Barca will have a chance yet again to prove the doubters and haters wrong, and I just think that over coming a defeat as big as the first leg may just be a great way to shut some people up :P

Turtwig

Davaeo09 wrote: »

Brilliant post
As a Barca fan i've got to hold my hand up and say Ac were not just better at the back they were brilliant in taking there chances too. Any one who really moans about a team defending they way they did needs to realize that it's always going to be that way against a superior team.
I had said for weeks before to mates that AC are definitely good enough to take there chances against our poor back line. They did exactly that, regardless of how they defended the other end of the field and it's a great achievement for there young team.

What does worry me though is how soon people are writing Barca off. In the nou camp Barca will have a chance yet again to prove the doubters and haters wrong, and I just think that over coming a defeat as big as the first leg may just be a great way to shut some people up :P

I'm really looking for to the second leg, Barca are going through a bit of a lull at the moment (they always seem to have it around this time of the year) so it'll be interesting to see if they can regain form before facing Milan again. Whether they do or don't it's still going to be a fascinating match.

The only thing that depresses me about the game on Wed is that people seem to think Chelsea's defence was on par with that of Milan's. That greatly denigrates Milan's effort imo. It's almost as if a Serie A team can't be complimented or something?

dfx-

Bodhisopha wrote: »

As for the great art of taking Barca down town, the only thing Chelsea displayed was the great art of huge luck.

As did Inter tbh. They will all still be mentioned.

2-0 is very difficult to overcome, even for this Barcelona team. What is hopeful for Barcelona is that they have a chance to right their own self-inflicted wrongs so to speak.

For me it's probably the worst performance since the 4-1 defeat in the Bernabeu. That defeat got a reaction the following season alright:pac:

Winston Payne

Unfair to characterise Inter's performance as benefiting from huge amounts of luck imo. After the joke of Motta's sending off the way that they defended was incredible. The discipline and the intelligence they showed, to mark zonally the way they did, it was the best stretch of defending I've ever seen. A ten man team watertight at the Camp Nou. I acknowledge that they got slices of luck at crucial times, like Milito's header being offside in the San Siro and Bojan's disallowed goal should have been legitimate, but every team needs at least a bit of luck to win the Champions League usually, and given how they defended with ten I don't think Barcelona would have scored once if Motta hadn't been sent off. Mourinho's finest individual night in my opinion.

IvySlayer

Can't fault Chelsea, Inter, Milan, Stoke etc for having a winning strategy.

Giggsy11

Winston Payne wrote: »

Unfair to characterise Inter's performance as benefiting from huge amounts of luck imo. After the joke of Motta's sending off the way that they defended was incredible. The discipline and the intelligence they showed, to mark zonally the way they did, it was the best stretch of defending I've ever seen. A ten man team watertight at the Camp Nou. I acknowledge that they got slices of luck at crucial times, like Milito's header being offside in the San Siro and Bojan's disallowed goal should have been legitimate, but every team needs at least a bit of luck to win the Champions League usually, and given how they defended with ten I don't think Barcelona would have scored once if Motta hadn't been sent off. Mourinho's finest individual night in my opinion.

Milito's goal was offside but before that he was one on one with GK and he was onside, but was flagged offside IIRC.

And yeah there was nothing lucky about Inter game, after that ridiculous red card they did superbly to stay in the tie.

Liam O

Mourinho is the best team ever I think is the logical conclusion to all of this.

Renn

dfx- wrote: »

As did Inter tbh. They will all still be mentioned

Nothing at all lucky about Inter's victory

Turtwig

Iirc wasn't Pique's goal against Inter in the Camp Nou offside.? So that balances out Milito's one anyway. That said, in the first leg Barca were denied two stonewall penalties. Howard Webb though, being howard webb, didn't have the guts to actually give them.

But forgetting the officiating stuff, Inter's defence was fantastic and could be hardly be construed as luck.