Guardiola showing his class again

Corholio

eagle eye wrote: »

If there was an agreement to not have hard tackles before the game and the manager of the other team told them to go in hard towards the end of the game then he had every right to be annoyed and refuse to shake hands. I'd actually admire a man who refuses to shake my hand in a situation like that. At lease you know where you stand with him.

The guy who shakes your hand after something like that but really doesn't want to is the guy I don't like. How can you trust a man like that?

I'm sure Pep's players liked that he was annoyed about it.

The opposing manager openly apologised when an early tackle went in on a Bayern player. How do you know he told them to go in hard at the end of the game??

Guardiola also said he wants 'revenge' next year if they play the game again next year. He also lied saying he didn't see Porter.

Andersonisgod

Corholio wrote: »

So your saying he has no faults? For what it's worth, he's an excellent manager, but the constant, almost exhausting defence of any sort of criticism of him is equally exhausting and quite childish actually. His use of both Martinez and Lahm are valid criticisms IMO. But then again that's probably going to be answered in the following way: some dates mentioned, La Maisa thrown in, the comparison to past great teams and then a sprinkling on top of some superlatives.

He is constantly changing though, I give you that. He changed Bayern from a team that won everything to a team that didn't win everything. Try and argue something without being so dramatic, it doesn't add anything to your points to do so. There's actually a good argument in there.......somewhere.

Guardiola is an excellent manager who was a bit of a prick last night. Amazing so many can get so jumped up about just that singular point.

I don't see where I said he has no faults. I said "what faults?" As I would like to know which faults in particular the poster is referring to rather than using vague, sweeping terms. In Lahm he sees a terrific player, an incredibly intelligent player who can do a great job in midfield or at full back. In Martinez he sees a player he didn't buy, who simply does not have the tools to play as a holding midfielder in Guardiola's 4-1-4-1 but who can be used as a central defender.

Your second paragraph is childish and I've already responded to the core point of it in this thread. I know there's a good argument in there, there's a correct, logical argument in there.

Corholio

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I don't see where I said he has no faults. I said "what faults?" As I would like to know which faults in particular the poster is referring to rather than using vague, sweeping terms. In Lahm he sees a terrific player, an incredibly intelligent player who can do a great job in midfield or at full back. In Martinez he sees a player he didn't buy, who simply does not have the tools to play as a holding midfielder in Guardiola's 4-1-4-1 but who can be used as a central defender.

Your second paragraph is childish and I've already responded to the core point of it in this thread. I know there's a good argument in there, there's a correct, logical argument in there.

So despite the many criticisms of how he played Lahm and Martinez, you still offer bulletproof defence of it? That's fine. He does a good job in midfield, he does a great job at right back. Martinez is an excellent player and has all the tools for any system.

Come on, it's not logical when you argue how you do. You offer a defence of everything......everything. How is repeating buzzwords in all your posts not childish too though? But been there and done that saying all this. It won't ever change and that's fine.

gosplan

Corholio wrote: »

You question Boards sanity yet completely dismiss the idea of shaking hands with someone as anything important at all?

He acted like a prick last night. I dont really have a strong opinion either way on Guardiola either. Good manager but his faults are consistently covered by what he did with a fantastic squad, and any criticism is immediately pointed towards Barca in put your finger in your ears syndrome.

Yes.

A manager was annoyed at the end of a game and felt justified in not shaking someone's hand.

BIG FCUKING DEAL!!!!!

Andersonisgod

Corholio wrote: »

So despite the many criticisms of how he played Lahm and Martinez, you still offer bulletproof defence of it? That's fine. He does a good job in midfield, he does a great job at right back. Martinez is an excellent player and has all the tools for any system.

Come on, it's not logical when you argue how you do. You offer a defence of everything......everything. How is repeating buzzwords in all your posts not childish too though? But been there and done that saying all this. It won't ever change and that's fine.

Criticisms from people who don't understand what Pep wants, criticisms which, ultimately, take the same form as they have in your first paragraph. It's a black and white way of looking at football, it's "Lahm is a better full back than midfielder" when the reality is that Pep felt he had few midfielders who understood how to play the rather complicated holding midfield role in his 4-1-4-1 but Lahm was one of the few capable of it, Schweinsteiger's injuries and recovery time were also a factor.

For a really excellent look at why Martinez doesn't work as the lone sitting midfielder take a read of this http://www.bavarianfootballworks.com/2013/8/21/4644330/guardiola-4-1-4-1-single-pivot-attack-defense-schweinsteiger
It says it as eloquently as I could and saves ne the hassle of writing it.

Backstreet Moyes

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I don't see where I said he has no faults. I said "what faults?" As I would like to know which faults in particular the poster is referring to rather than using vague, sweeping terms. In Lahm he sees a terrific player, an incredibly intelligent player who can do a great job in midfield or at full back. In Martinez he sees a player he didn't buy, who simply does not have the tools to play as a holding midfielder in Guardiola's 4-1-4-1 but who can be used as a central defender.

Your second paragraph is childish and I've already responded to the core point of it in this thread. I know there's a good argument in there, there's a correct, logical argument in there.

He has a big fault he only want's to play football one way. He took over a Bayern team who played quick counter attack football which destroyed the style he implemented at Barca.

Then he goes and changes Bayern to his Barca style who then get humiliated to Madrid who adopted the same approach as Bayern under Heynckes.

That to me it is a big fault. He had a team who were devastating playing a counter attacking system and changed it. For what reason because he only know's one way of playing football.

Andersonisgod

Nuts102 wrote: »

He has a big fault he only want's to play football one way. He took over a Bayern team who played quick counter attack football which destroyed the style he implemented at Barca.

Then he goes and changes Bayern to his Barca style who then get humiliated to Madrid who adopted the same approach as Bayern under Heynckes.

That to me it is a big fault. He had a team who were devastating playing a counter attacking system and changed it. For what reason because he only know's one way of playing football.

Why did Bayern appoint him? Why were so many of the great clubs in Europe vying for his signature? Afterall they will all have known what they were getting.

Bayern won the Champions League playing counter attacking football. Chelsea won the Champions League playing counter attacking football. Inter won the Champions League playing counter attacking football. All great successes for the fans of their respective clubs yet it is Barcelona who will go down as this generations truly great team, like Milan of the early 90's, like the great Dutch and Brazil sides, we will remember the Barcelona of Guardiola above and beyond all rivals of their time. Winning is fantastic, winning and doing it in style, that is where greatness lies, that's what history remembers.

Also the idea that Pep only plays one way is ridiculous, Pep has a philosophy which he abides by but his methods of implementing that philosophy are various and ever-evolving. Guardiola is never content to sit still, he must always change, he must always be a step ahead of others.

Larry Wildman

The precious holier than thou attitude that he propogated at Barca seems to have followed him to Bayern.

I don't like Barca and I don't like Guardiola.

Disgraceful behaviour last night.

gosplan

In fairness, and I apologise for earlier saying this argument was stupid because I'm now about to wade in ...

(though the handshake thing is ridiculous. Anyway it seems from the OP and the general tone that people just want to bring Guardiola down a peg or two and don't actually care if he shakes hands)

... a lot of what Anderson says is correct.

He did amazingly well at Barca, amazingly well. People say it's because he had a special team and he did but so did Rijkard and Vilanova.

3 leagues and two champions leagues in four years is simply nuts.

there have been lots of very special teams but not many with that output.

Then supplying the backbone of the Spanish team and the Spanish team adopting Barca's style led to unprecedented national success.

And now that same process exactly has begun with Germany. And if people think for a minute that there was not an overall plan involving Jogi Lowe, the German FA and Munich to engineer this situation, then I honestly think they're not giving the Germans enough credit for forward thinking.

There will of course always be ammunition for people that want to knock the guy, same as with Mourinho. But for every point there's a counter point.

Humiliated by Real this year - set record points total in Bundesliga and record winning margin

Can only do it with great players - lots of people can't. And of all the teams assembled in history, has anyone matched his Barca's achievements? I mean Jose's Madrid team were equally ridiculous in terms of quality.


I'm not getting into playing style. I have very strong opinions on that but I believe it's entirely subjective and can't be a criteria for judging quality (sorry Anderson).

All people are achieving here though is to say that Guardiola isn't perfect. But neither is Mourinho, neither is Klopp etc.

What he is is very very very successful

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

In fairness, and I apologise for earlier saying this argument was stupid because I'm now about to wade in ...

(though the handshake thing is ridiculous. Anyway it seems from the OP and the general tone that people just want to bring Guardiola down a peg or two and don't actually care if he shakes hands)

... a lot of what Anderson says is correct.

He did amazingly well at Barca, amazingly well. People say it's because he had a special team and he did but so did Rijkard and Vilanova.

3 leagues and two champions leagues in four years is simply nuts.

there have been lots of very special teams but not many with that output.

Then supplying the backbone of the Spanish team and the Spanish team adopting Barca's style led to unprecedented national success.

And now that same process exactly has begun with Germany. And if people think for a minute that there was not an overall plan involving Jogi Lowe, the German FA and Munich to engineer this situation, then I honestly think they're not giving the Germans enough credit for forward thinking.

There will of course always be ammunition for people that want to knock the guy, same as with Mourinho. But for every point there's a counter point.

Humiliated by Real this year - set record points total in Bundesliga and record winning margin

Can only do it with great players - lots of people can't. And of all the teams assembled in history, has anyone matched his Barca's achievements? I mean Jose's Madrid team were equally ridiculous in terms of quality.


I'm not getting into playing style. I have very strong opinions on that but I believe it's entirely subjective and can't be a criteria for judging quality (sorry Anderson).

All people are achieving here though is to say that Guardiola isn't perfect. But neither is Mourinho, neither is Klopp etc.

What he is is very very very successful

At least a bit of thought went into that and I'll happily accept that as a valid, well-put opinion, one of the few in this thread.

woof im a dog

A nothing story who cares

The hatred by some of the posters here towards Barca/Spain/Guardiola is as cringey as Andersonisgod's love for them

Bateman

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

You said "again" in the thread title. When else has he shown a lack of class? Not disagreeing, just can't recall anything else that really stands out.

He went bonkers at refereeing decisions during the run-in the year Madrid won the league. On one occasion (might have been Villarreal away) his antics were a disgrace, he ran onto the pitch at one stage. It is the sort of stuff that JM is hated for.

Like Messi’s diving, this stuff happens in front of people’s eyes and they choose to ignore it.

Bateman

woof im a dog wrote: »

A nothing story who cares

The hatred by some of the posters here towards Barca/Spain/Guardiola is as cringey as Andersonisgod's love for them

Sound, any chance you can whack up a list there of what stories are important enough to discuss, and what ones aren't

Cienciano

Andersonisgod wrote: »

He has taken Bayern from being a reactive side, under Heynckes, to a proactive side. I suppose to understand that you must first understand the mindset of Guardiola, to do that you must understand Guardiola's principles. A fascinating glimpse into these principles came from Xavi Hernandez in an interview a few years ago.

"Some teams can't or don't pass the ball. What are you playing for? What's the point? That's not football. Combine, pass, play, that's football."

The mindset is that while they may not always win, though winning is obviously hugely important, history will look favourably on the teams who play with beauty, history remembers greatness. There's winning and then there's writing your name down as being one of the great sides. Guardiola's influence on Barcelona, Spain, Bayern Munich, Germany, the football world, can't be denied, he is the overwhelming force for good in football.

Personally I think pep is a brilliant manager and he made Barca into a brilliant team. But what I don't like being told what is football, and what type of play we should like. Reactive/proactive doesn't matter. What's exciting to watch is what matters, and that's subjective.
While I think he's a great manager, I find tiki taka an incredably boring form of football. I hate being told that's "real football". Real football is variety, with lots of teams playing different styles and having to adapt to who they play.

Corholio

Andersonisgod wrote: »

At least a bit of thought went into that and I'll happily accept that as a valid, well-put opinion, one of the few in this thread.

Of course you'll accept it as valid, he agrees with you. I'm devastated that you didn't "accept" mine.

In fairness, I started the thread as I was watching the game. It was simply just an observation of his actions on the night, which were pretty childish and immature. I don't know if I have commented on Guardiola before for any reason. Lot more people here have stronger opinions on Guardiola, positive and negative.

It was just an observation on what he did. Not an analytical history of his performances.

Too Tough To Die

Bateman wrote: »

He went bonkers at refereeing decisions during the run-in the year Madrid won the league. On one occasion (might have been Villarreal away) his antics were a disgrace, he ran onto the pitch at one stage. It is the sort of stuff that JM is hated for.

Like Messi’s diving, this stuff happens in front of people’s eyes and they choose to ignore it.

I was taking your post seriously until the last line.

I wanted the op to answer.

Corholio

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

I was taking your post seriously until the last line.

I wanted the op to answer.

Your badgering the wrong person because I have very little general annoyance at Guardiola to be honest, lot more people here seem to dislike him a lot more.

But off the top of my head since you asked, the time he threw the ball away when Ronaldo tried to get it from him.

Andersonisgod

Cienciano wrote: »

Personally I think pep is a brilliant manager and he made Barca into a brilliant team. But what I don't like being told what is football, and what type of play we should like. Reactive/proactive doesn't matter. What's exciting to watch is what matters, and that's subjective.
While I think he's a great manager, I find tiki taka an incredably boring form of football. I hate being told that's "real football". Real football is variety, with lots of teams playing different styles and having to adapt to who they play.

There in your post is the difference between being great and being good. The great teams, the really great teams (Barcelona and Spain being two examples) don't make sweeping reactions no matter who the opponent is, they play their football, they ask the opposition to react to them. They have a philosophy and they do not compromise. They have a set of players who come from an academy which treasures and enchances technique and talent over physical prowess. Look at the greatest players to come from that academy: Guardiola, Xavi, Iniesta, Messi being 4 well known examples. Iniesta, Messi and Xavi are tiny, Iniesta, Xavi and Guardiola weren't/aren't terrifically quick, the same three lacked strength yet despite their physical deficiencies these are players who have come through La Masia to become 4 of the greatest players to have played for the club. Master the ball, master the game, combine attacking with defending, fluidity, spatial awareness, ultimately work for the collective. That's football, football as it should be, that's Barcelona, that's Pep Guardiola.

Andersonisgod

Corholio wrote: »

Your badgering the wrong person because I have very little general annoyance at Guardiola to be honest, lot more people here seem to dislike him a lot more.

But off the top of my head since you asked, the time he threw the ball away when Ronaldo tried to get it from him.

Ronaldo's push was ok though?

Also I hate the idea that he is holier than thou, he's always come across as a very humble man who doesn't care for mind games. As has been documented, he's never forgotten where he is from, at heart he is still the son of a builder.

Corholio

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Ronaldo's push was ok though?

Also I hate the idea that he is holier than thou, he's always come across as a very humble man who doesn't care for mind games. As has been documented, he's never forgotten where he is from, at heart he is still the son of a builder.

So what happened before the push is ok then? Ronaldo was petty to push him back, but understandably frustrated.

I wasn't stating any holier than thou attitude for him. A poster asked for another example and I simply gave it to him.

wandatowell

Oranage2 wrote: »

No need for tough tackles and playing hard in a friendly, It's a scummy tactic at the best of times

You play to your teams strengths. Not many teams have the luxury of being littered with world class players like Bayern.

In no way is it scummy.

SlickRic

the idea that Guardiola is brilliant because he's dogmatic is fúcking hilarious.

he's brilliant for other reasons, but he's not better than others because of dogma.

having that as your differential is absolute lunacy.

Muff_Daddy

Andersonisgod wrote: »

That's football, football as it should be

Football is a lot of things to a lot of people, and people garner enjoyment from football in many different ways. Some enjoy the tika taka, some enjoy the tribalism and the win at all costs approach to football, some enjoy the entertainment/sky/showbiz aspect to football some even enjoy the plucky underdog overcoming the odds, and seeing a good defence come out on top against a technically superioir opposition, believe it or not.

For you to say that the Barca way, the Pep way, the Catalan way, and thats the way it should be just gives the impression that you live in a bubble and you sound like a spoiled child throwing the toys out of the pram when someone disagrees with you. It gets people's back up, but i'm sure you're aware of that.

Optimalprimerib

What the fcuk is proactive football. Is it just another buzzword like synergy or clutch player?

Blatter

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I absolutely don't think it is. It's a side, and a group of players, that have been playing reactive football for quite some time. Germany's core group of players almost all belong to Bayern, their style was essentially counter attack, except for when the need was to break teams down. While I threw out the Xavi quote earlier, I have no problem in admitting that they weren't a negative side, simply that when they had to break teams down in the really big games (Spain World Cup 2010, Italy Euro 2012, Inter Champions League 2010, Chelsea Champions League 2012) they really struggled to do so. Playing quick, counter attacking football (vs. Barcelona) is when they shone. It's not necessarily a criticism to say they were a reactive side, it's simply stating a fact.

They counter attacked Barca over the two legs in 2013 as that was the best way to beat that side. In general though, that Bayern side dominated possession and killed teams playing a proactive style.

Donnielighto

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I absolutely don't think it is. It's a side, and a group of players, that have been playing reactive football for quite some time. Germany's core group of players almost all belong to Bayern, their style was essentially counter attack, except for when the need was to break teams down. While I threw out the Xavi quote earlier, I have no problem in admitting that they weren't a negative side, simply that when they had to break teams down in the really big games (Spain World Cup 2010, Italy Euro 2012, Inter Champions League 2010, Chelsea Champions League 2012) they really struggled to do so. Playing quick, counter attacking football (vs. Barcelona) is when they shone. It's not necessarily a criticism to say they were a reactive side, it's simply stating a fact.

Ah but if your plan is to counter then how is that reactive, create the space, use it. Rinse repeat.

Donnielighto

A style cannot but ultimately better than another based on asthetics despite how much you hate it.

The organisation that goes into defensive play is more draining than attacking flair. Barca and their derivative spain were largely boring to watch with slow attacks. I dont like that and many others dont either. Some do and I can accept why if it is based on accurate passing but where is the benefit in keeping the ball for 8 mins before you get a shot off and have to get the ball back or a team taking that opportunity quicker and turning the ball over quicker.

How do you define being proactive and reactive, without using sweeping statements. I would contend that pep built a very good passing system with hi energy pressing built on doping (personal opinion relating to lance armstrong's case). This depends on other teams sitting off or not being able to turn the ball over quickly, it plays to some strengths like any system.

I and many others acknowledge it's effectiveness but it can often be torture to watch. If people want to watch passing drills thats fine (the flipside to people who dismiss the score as a near irrelevancy).

Cienciano

Andersonisgod wrote: »

There in your post is the difference between being great and being good. The great teams, the really great teams (Barcelona and Spain being two examples) don't make sweeping reactions no matter who the opponent is, they play their football, they ask the opposition to react to them. They have a philosophy and they do not compromise. They have a set of players who come from an academy which treasures and enchances technique and talent over physical prowess. Look at the greatest players to come from that academy: Guardiola, Xavi, Iniesta, Messi being 4 well known examples. Iniesta, Messi and Xavi are tiny, Iniesta, Xavi and Guardiola weren't/aren't terrifically quick, the same three lacked strength yet despite their physical deficiencies these are players who have come through La Masia to become 4 of the greatest players to have played for the club. Master the ball, master the game, combine attacking with defending, fluidity, spatial awareness, ultimately work for the collective. That's football, football as it should be, that's Barcelona, that's Pep Guardiola.

I know the difference between proactive and reactive. My point is, it doesn't matter, it makes no difference, you might as well say I should like spain because their jerseys are nice. All that matters is what makes the best games to watch, and that's purely subjective. While it was successful, I find it boring to watch a team pass the ball around the back and midfield for 3 minutes. It may be hard to do, but I find it boring to watch.
Football as it should be is 11 v 11 on a pitch trying to score goals, tiki taka is not football as it should be, it's just another tactic that you happen to like.
In hell we'll have every team playing tiki taka with no variation of tactics and no plan b.

Too Tough To Die

Cienciano wrote: »

In hell we'll have every team playing tiki taka with no variation of tactics and no plan b.

If every team is as good at the style as Barca were circa 09, then bring it on!

Sure it got a bit boring in the end, but the Barca of that time were hands down the most exciting team in recent memory. Easily. Would've been amazing to watch them go up against a similar side, similar style, similar ability.

Backstreet Moyes

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

If every team is as good at the style as Barca were circa 09, then bring it on!

Sure it got a bit boring in the end, but the Barca of that time were hands down the most exciting team in recent memory. Easily. Would've been amazing to watch them go up against a similar side, similar style, similar ability.

Bayern two years ago and Madrid last season were hands down much more exciting to watch.

Milkers

Andersonisgod wrote: »

There in your post is the difference between being great and being good. The great teams, the really great teams (Barcelona and Spain being two examples) don't make sweeping reactions no matter who the opponent is, they play their football, they ask the opposition to react to them. They have a philosophy and they do not compromise. They have a set of players who come from an academy which treasures and enchances technique and talent over physical prowess. Look at the greatest players to come from that academy: Guardiola, Xavi, Iniesta, Messi being 4 well known examples. Iniesta, Messi and Xavi are tiny, Iniesta, Xavi and Guardiola weren't/aren't terrifically quick, the same three lacked strength yet despite their physical deficiencies these are players who have come through La Masia to become 4 of the greatest players to have played for the club. Master the ball, master the game, combine attacking with defending, fluidity, spatial awareness, ultimately work for the collective. That's football, football as it should be, that's Barcelona, that's Pep Guardiola.

This is clearly subjective and simply repeating it in that nauseating aphoristic style of yours will not magically transform it from opinion to truth.

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

There in your post is the difference between being great and being good. The great teams, the really great teams (Barcelona and Spain being two examples) don't make sweeping reactions no matter who the opponent is, they play their football, they ask the opposition to react to them. They have a philosophy and they do not compromise. They have a set of players who come from an academy which treasures and enchances technique and talent over physical prowess. Look at the greatest players to come from that academy: Guardiola, Xavi, Iniesta, Messi being 4 well known examples. Iniesta, Messi and Xavi are tiny, Iniesta, Xavi and Guardiola weren't/aren't terrifically quick, the same three lacked strength yet despite their physical deficiencies these are players who have come through La Masia to become 4 of the greatest players to have played for the club. Master the ball, master the game, combine attacking with defending, fluidity, spatial awareness, ultimately work for the collective. That's football, football as it should be, that's Barcelona, that's Pep Guardiola.

I just got sick in my mouth.

Sacchi's Milan were also football as it should be, no?

They were far more physical and direct but an equally 'great' team.