Barcelona 1-0 Inter: Mourinho’s side progress – deservedly
There are times when the hype about Jose Mourinho is frustrating and cliched, there are times when it is fully deserved. Tonight was the latter in one of the great defensive performances in recent footballing history.
Barcelona reverted to their ‘traditional’ 4-3-3 they had persisted with until recently, with a midfield trio of Busquets-Keita-Xavi, Yaya Toure in defence, and Gabriel Milito surprisingly pushed out to left-back. Pedro Rodriguez stayed wide-left, Lionel Messi cut in from the right, Zlatan Ibrahimovic was the striker.
Inter’s line-up initially looked to be unchanged from the first leg, but a change after the warm-ups saw Cristian Chivu replacing Goran Pandev – a surprise given the nature of the switch, but one predicted in ZM’s preview. They played a lopsided 4-2-3-1, with Samuel Eto’o high up on the right-hand side, and Christian Chivu playing in front of Javier Zanetti, blocking the runs forward of Dani Alves.
An inevitable point given the nature of this site’s previews for the two legs and the report on the first game, but one must question Pep Guardiola’s inclusion of Zlatan Ibrahimovic. He was surprisingly deployed last week at the San Siro, and it resoundingly failed – and rather than learn his lesson from the first leg, Guardiola again included Ibrahimovic to little effect. That’s not to say that the Swede was useless – he wasn’t, but Barcelona struggled to get the ball to him in a static central position, because of the presence of Lucio and Walter Samuel.
The key moment of the game was unquestionably the sending-off of Thiago Motta. Although Inter’s display for the rest of the game consisted of putting all their men behind the ball and defending deep, one must note the fact that Mourinho didn’t turn to the bench after the sending-off. Many managers would have removed one of the three attacking players in favour of another holding player (considering it was a central midfielder that was dismissed), but Mourinho instead shifted Chivu inside, switched Eto’o to the left, and moved Diego Milito to the right-hand side.
The result was a 4-5-0 where Wesley Sneijder was generally the furthest forward player, rather than the two strikers who often found themselves defending deep in their own full-back zones. In this respect, Inter were not controlling the ball, but they were still controlling the space. The two lines of four covered the width of the pitch on the edge of Inter’s area, but Sneijder’s presence ahead of those lines made it slightly more difficult for Barca to create in that deep-lying, central position. Xavi and Busquets still dominated the ball, of course, but they were forced to shift it wide to Alves (who had a poor game) or Gabriel Milito, who was not comfortable on the ball.
And when Barcelona got the ball wide, it was surprising how rarely they looked to create an overlap. With Messi drifting in from a right-sided position and Milito offering no attacking threat, Barcelona only had two players stationed in wide positions - Alves on the right, Pedro on the left. Alves was met by Zanetti with the rest of the side shifting across to cover the space. Pedro was met by Maicon, with the same effect. But the other eight outfield players all remained between the ball and the play when this happened – the lack of an overlap meant that none of the Inter players were never drawn outside by a decoy run. Barca always had ten players to get past, and their tendency to shoot from long-range demonstrated the fact that they were simply finding it impossible to play through Inter.
Of course, the sending-off meant that Inter found it very difficult to get bodies forward in attack, but this contributed to their defensive ability. Not only were their forward players forced to do less running up and down the pitch, their defensive players were able to hold their shape easier. They were able to sit deep – there was no space in behind for Barcelona’s pacey players to exploit, nor was there any space between the lines for Messi to work his magic in. It also meant that it was near-impossible for Barcelona to play their favourite ball – the one from central midfield between the opposition centre-back and full-back, for a wide players running onto the ball, because the angle was simply too acute.*
As is customary when a good ‘footballing’ side struggle against a good defensive side, Barcelona were accused of having no ‘Plan B’ by the (British) commentary team. Aside from the obvious sheer hypocrisy that stems from simultaneously criticizing Barcelona in this respect whilst marvelling at their patience that proved victorious against Chelsea last season, this somewhat misses the point. In the final half hour, playing exclusively through small, quick, tricky players (a front four of Jeffren, Pedro, Messi and Bojan) was Barcelona’s plan B. Their plan A had been playing through Ibrahimovic – they’d created a good chance in the first half by simply lofting towards him in the box, where his knock-down found Pedro.
We then come back to the idea that, as proposed in the preview, Guardiola surely should have played it the other way around – the small, tricky players to start the game and wear Inter down, then Ibrahimovic to come on and provide a more direct threat late on. Certainly, when you’re withdrawing your 6′ forward for a 5′7 winger – and then shoving your 6′ centre-back upfront to compensate, you’ve probably got muddled somewhere, ignoring the sheer brilliance of Pique’s goal.
In Inverting The Pyramid, Jonathan Wilson explains how Arrigo Sacchi once demonstrated in a training session how five organised players could hold out against ten disorganised ones – taking his Milan back five of Galli, Tassotti, Costacurta, Baresi and Maldini and pitching them against the club’s best ten attacking players. The 15-minute game finished scoreless, despite the attacking talents of the likes of Gullit, van Basten, Rijkaard, Ancelotti and Donadoni. This game was a match version of that. Barcelona completed 555 passes compared to Inter’s 67, and produced the most dominant display of possession in European competition this year, 86%. And yet, for all that – how many times did they actually get the ball into serious goalscoring positions?
This was a match that wasn’t won by individual performances (although the likes of Lucio and Esteban Cambiasso were superb), or by player v player battles on the pitch, it was won by the understanding between the nine outfield Inter players. Mourinho will probably be asked tonight about his late pre-game switch, his post-match celebration and his thoughts on the Barcelona fans, but hopefully he will also be asked to expand on quite how he managed to set his team out to withstand that amount of pressure. It outfoxed a manager as talented as Guardiola and negated the ability of Messi and Xavi to create – without ever seeking to deprive them of getting the ball. Mourinho’s approach was not to man-mark, and not to press high up the pitch, but instead to sit deep, use strict zonal marking and only pressure the Barcelona players within 25 yards of the Inter goal. Easier said than done, and to pull it off against such great players requires a brilliant tactical brain from the manager, combined with intelligent players and hours of work on the training ground.
It could have all been so different had Bojan’s last minute ‘goal’ not been disallowed for a contentious handball decision, and whilst the result of the tie would have changed, the tactical analysis would have not. Inter were defensively superb tonight and over the course of the tie, deserved to go through. It’s easy when looking at football games – especially for a website like this – to simply say that the winning manager got it right, and the losing one got it wrong – but it’s hard to argue in this case. Mourinho remains the master, and tactics remain the key to winning football games.
*diagram needed?
Barcelona 1-0 Inter: Mourinho’s side progress – deservedly






a very good defensive display indeed
with barca enjoying substantial possession as they claim to play great football, i just could not see their resilience in defense a great team should have. it is as if barca is unwilling to be tested in defense. mourinho knew that losing possession, dropping back into their own half to allow more inter players forward and thus create space for barca’s offensive, isn’t the way barca would play.
barca may arguably be a great football reference – but inter went to the defensive extreme to neutralize barca’s offensive extreme. what a perfect antidote!
Reminded me of Greece 2004 style in neutralizing opponents assets
The only difference being that Greece actually was passing the midfield line and creating chances!!! Inter might as well have sat all their players under the posts!!!
Xavi best player in history – his assists collection
http://feelplayer.com/Xavi_videos/190_video_xavi-assists-collection.html
Xavi videos
As good as Inter was in organization, how poor was Barcelona? The only players who looked interested in penetrating and picking up the tempo were Toure and Pique… their two center backs.
I simply cannot understand Barca’s inability to use real live wingers in this situation. They almost never attacked Inter down the flanks. With their size, strength, and organization in the middle, Barcelona was never going to play in the kind of areas they wanted to against Inter, yet they never seemed particularly interested in getting Messi or Pedro into wide areas and down the sideline.
Even when Pedro switched to the right, he only once tried to get to the touchline — and it resulted in a threatening cross that ended up being a corner. More of that — particularly if Pep had put Messi out left against Maicon — and Barca could have actually broken Inter’s organization.
Even Alves and Maxwell would get the ball in wide positions and look to circulate it back to the middle. It was like watching Arsenal play, which is something I never expected Barcelona to succumb to.
As a neutral and fan of football, it was extremely frustrating to watch Pep refuse to adjust his side’s shape. I appreciate the idea of playing Zlatan up front for his height, but how exactly are you supposed to take advantage of it when nothing comes from wide positions? How is he supposed to attack the ball or find himself in 1v1 situations if the back line never has to change their basic shape?
Whether it was switching to a 4-4-2 or having Messi and Pedro start the left and right respectively as traditional wingers, Barcelona surely would have had better success disrupting Inter’s shape.
Messi is just not really good on the left, has never been and never will be. I don’t really know how this could have hurt Maicon, specially since the game Pedro did for most parts against Maicon hurt him and them more. Pedro moves good without the ball, Messi better with the ball. Also, moving Messi to the center gives him much more options to play and specially against defensively deadlocked team doubling up against him, he can use the space between lines better.
i agree with you. kind of reminds me of the spurs arsenal game where spurs players just defend deep and arsenal keep knocking the ball around the edge of penalty box with no effect. i’m slightly disappointed with barca but credit goes to mourinho in these two legs.
Please, don’t compare Spurs to Inter. It is an insult to Inter. Their reading of the game, of passing moves Barca might try, their closing of space, they are on another level to some middling team like Spurs.
No one’s comparing the quality of the teams (it’s as much an insult to compare Barca with Arsenal, as we’ve seen in the CL this year), but rather the tactics of the game and the similar failings of the team in possession to create, partly due to their poor usage of width. The likes of Fulham and various other weaker teams have also frustrated the PL’s top four through deep, narrow defending. It’s not a brand new tactic, but Mourinho and Inter should be given great credit for their perfect execution and teamwork.
barca were not at fault here, as you suggest, it was just mourinho’s tactical superiority and gameplay that influenced their game.
Oh, I beg to differ. Ibra was so isolated up front, barca was relatively slow switching sides and they were just keeping possession way too much, given inter’s strategy. They should have focused on crossing to the area and trying to be assertive.
Still, credit goes to Mourinho for correctly predicting that barca would be rigid in their style of play.
Well, obviously Mourinho did a great job but I don’t know how much you can really blame Pep for anything. I don’t really know how much effect small quick players like Bojan and Jeffren would have had against still fresh defenders. Besides, leaving Ibra out, would have been worse for Barca on the defending end with corners. We could maybe also say that Pep for all his greatness is a bit stubborn and had to make sure it works with Ibra, but still. And don’t you think that for tired players it might be more difficult to defend against quick ones than a more static one?
I think that Sid Lowe had a good point, that Barca are one or two forwards short. Maybe leave Ibra out but when you have no real alternative to play from the beginning, it’s not that easy.
I think more than anything a second ball playing midfielder like Iniesta to also help push Messi more forward and give him less playmaking duties would have helped the team, but injuries are part of the game.
In the end it came down to details and Mourinho is usually the master of details and it worked better for him, same as those details worked last season better for Barca.
“I think that Sid Lowe had a good point, that Barca are one or two forwards short. Maybe leave Ibra out but when you have no real alternative to play from the beginning, it’s not that easy.”
Yes, definitely. After all Henry retired and didn’t tell anyone, and while Pedro has stepped up very well, it’s still not a replacement.
And they needed another forward when Henry was playing too. They definitely need a first-choice level player, and one or two squad players (or promote Jeffren etc and actually play them more).
Im am shocked to see something about ibrahimovic yet again. /sarcasm/
What a goal by bojan anyway.
The thing is, I’m actually a massive fan of Ibra, I seem to have spent most of the last five years defending him, and the issue some people have with him…I don’t get. I just don’t think he was right for this tie.
If he wasn’t right for the start of the tie, wasn’t he perfect for the end of the tie when Inter parked the bus? Ibra was the tallest man on the pitch before he left and Pep had to send Piqué forward when he left. What about Henry? I mean, it’s not like Pep brought an Iniesta or a Larsson (the best Swedish player they ever had
he brought on Jeffren!
“I just don’t think he was right for this tie”
Have to disagree with you here zonalmarking. If Ibra is not right for this sort of tie what was the point in forking out all that money for him? I was always under the impression that he was bought as a result of last years close escape against chelsea to unlock watertight defences as we saw tonight. Instead again he contributes less than nothing. If he is now just to be used as a sub to come on and add height when Bojan has run the legs off the defenders, why not just sign crouch or zigic or someone of that standard for around 12million euros and use the remaining 30million to strengthen the rest of the squad.
It may only be his 1st season but ibra really is everything the naysayers said he would be. To think him and chygrynskiy cost around 80 million. sheesh
Yet he’s got some important goals (clasico, Stuttgart away when Barca were crap, Mallorca away etc), and has a better than 1 in 2 goal ratio. If that’s everything the naysayers said he would be, I can’t wait till he proves them wrong.
Ah of course because the man he replaced never scored a single goal in a classico. Nor did he ever score an important away goal in a champions league knockout tie (Stamford Bridge 2006 springs to mind), Nor did he ever score important goals in league matches when the team was playing poorly.
I understand there were other reasons behind Eto’o leaving but the sad fact is Zlatan was bought specifically for matches like this and in the tie barca’s 23 year old CB was more of an attacking threat in his combined (roughly) 30 minutes up front over the 2 legs than dear old Ibra in his combined 120 minutes in attack.
I think the effect Ibra brings to Barca is the same as what Berbatov brings to Man Utd
OK, from what I heard last summer – IBRA was bought for his unique ability to score goals literally out of nothing and when it’s not exactly going Barca’s way. You see, IBRA was Barca’s PLAN B and if that’s not the case why was bought here in the 1st place?
Why will a static Ibra work against two ‘heavy’ defenders in Lucio and Samuel without any support of anyone else in drawing one of the two defenders. If Pep really wanted to succeed he should’ve gone for more width and get those crosses in the box.
And I also don’t understand Pedro’s role here? Why doesn’t he try crossing the ball into the box a bit more? You don’t give Ibra his bare minimum service and then people blame him for his ‘poor’ show. Not exactly the way to go.
ZM,
Clearly Ibra or an Ibra-type player (Adebayor is another) has his uses, but the doubts remain:
- if Ibra was bought to address difficulties in ties like last year’s Stamford Bridge clash, how many times could Barca realistically expect to face such Hiddink-like opposition? In most matches? Some? Few? And is this a sensible way to go about planning a season?
- If the answer to the previous question lies between “some” and “few”, then surely such a player qualifies as a Plan B. Therefore, shouldn’t you buy a player who will adjust to the requirements of this profile; i.e. who will tolerate large periods of bench time, accept that he is lucky and no less valued to be able to play a squad role in a major team aiming for all the titles? If we hold this to be true, then it is difficult to convince anyone (least of all said player) that a 60 million quid player is just an option to come off the bench.
- Surely Adebayor would have been a more suitable candidate for the Zlatan role?
he didnt cost 60 million.just saying.
maybe Llorente would have been a better option or would even still be the better option, although poor Athletic will then struggle.
but with regards to getting a plan B player that would be happy with a bench role: it seems Pep is more like Arsene Wenger. If he wants a player in his team, he wants to count on him for full games, not just part of a game. So the idea to have a player for the last 10 minutes or something like that doesn’t seem to come to his mind.
Usually all strikers coming to Barca bar Samuel Eto’o and Romario always do better in their second season, so maybe he will get a second chance, but it would be good if they would get another forward that plays it different to Ibra for having a plan B for Ibra.
Well said Roberticus. No one doubts Ibra is a talented player and has done some decent things this season, but whatever the price paid for him it was astronomical compared with what Barca have got in return. If he was purely a plan B then why not spend less and get 2 strikers?
And this is not hindsight, many people said this at the time
@ Jordi,
I know, technically he cost 40 million and yes, Etoo’ had to go )let’s give Guardiola the benefit of the doubt). Even so, Ibra was our most expensive signing ever.
@Mahdi
The thought of creating a Plan C when you have Ibra as Plan B when your plan A fails is the equivalence of soccer bulimia (what stops us from having plan D,E.. etc). A good coach should work with horizontal adjustments not vertical restructuring of a team
@constantine
Ibra is no longer Plan B but rather Plan A. Besides, it was a half joke, because there has been an obsession over the past with Ibra = Barca’s plan B.
The idea however is that Barca in attack should be able to play it different and in various styles. They should be able to play a passing game and also a route one game and that’s why the addition of Villa would even make some sense.
I agree that Ibra was a good idea for Barca but the problem is that in this game he kept getting wide. It seems rather silly to me for your tall striker to go outside and try to give a cross and yet I saw him go out again and again. Perhaps it was because he wasn’t receiving any crosses so he thought he’d go show how it was done but every time I saw him out there I was wondering what on earth he was doing. Did anyone else notice this?
Any information on the selection of Milito over Maxwell? Inter weren’t particularly likely to attack very often, and when they did it would probably be on the break with pace, so why sacrifice the attacking ability of Maxwell for more sturdy figure of Milito? Especially given that Milito isn’t exactly fast enough to deal with Eto’o in space?
Pandev was supposed to play .I really think jose caught wind of the lineup and sacrificed him to go defensive with chivu.Noticed maxwell was warming up from about 20 minutes in.
I also saw it more as a last minute change for that reason.
Really don’t get Milito over Maxwell at all.
If you consider that the point of playing Toure was partly to facilitate an extra midfielder (so in essence both centre-backs will be moving up the pitch to support the midfield) then playing a committed defender like Milito makes a lot of sense.
I think Pep should be given credit for what he tried to do here. Add more support in midfield by playing 2 attacking centre-backs, retain width with Pedro and Keita while still playing Ibra and Messi together.
Where he failed was as you have pointed out in not instructing the full-backs to overlap. I think this was poor from Maxwell who was brought on specifically for this purpose. The Inter players of course helped by constantly allowing the wing-players to cut in but Barça got sucked into it.
Pep has also tried too hard to justify his Ibra signing and this has been his handicap in this tie. Ibra, like you said should have been left on the bench and brought on rather than taken off after 60 mins.
I think Mahdi is absolutely correct; the rationale for picking Milito over Maxwell was that a nominal back three of Milito-Busquets-Pique could be maintained when Alves and Toure ventured forward.
If you’re able to get ahold of the average positions, ZM, I think you’ll find that Toure stepped up into midfield very often (not unlike what Demichelis does for Bayern – as you have noted previously), even prior to the sending off.
Edit: It seems I am four minutes too late with this post – just saw Kamikaze’s contribution!
I think it was intentionally to play a three-man defence. Keita was playing his narrowish left-midfield role but had responsibility for moving out wide to help Milito whenever there was an attack coming down that flank. By contrast and unlike a wing-back, Keita was expected to advance diagonally through the centre. It was a 3-4-3 with a relatively flat midfield (Alves, Xavi, Busquets, Keita).
The idea was to have a 3 men defense and I actually saw it more like a 3-3-1-3, at least as long as it was 11 vs 11 over a 4-3-3.
The idea might have been that with Pandev in the game, either Alves or Toure would have been more freed up to roam forward but Pandev was out or open more space between lines.
Ya it looked like a 3 man defence with one of them (usually Pique or Toure obviously) making forward runs often.
Milito over Maxwell was shocking! Milito was so uncomfortable on the ball it was painful to watch! It meant that Pedro (one of the players who had a chance to really make an impact in the final third) was totally isolated. Pedro stood on the touchline, Maicon with him, and no one penetrated the space that created with an inside run.
Those passing stats are unbelievable! Can we get a nice chart of the passes per player, and where do you get the data anyway? I can’t find it on the UEFA website
Great article.
“Mourinho’s approach was not to man-mark, and not to press high up the pitch, but instead to sit deep, use strict zonal marking and only pressure the Barcelona players within 25 yards of the Inter goal. Easier said than done, and to pull it off against such great players requires a brilliant tactical brain from the manager, combined with intelligent players and hours on the training ground.”
..and all that with five players in the starting eleven in their first season with the team..good business Inter..good job Jose..
It’s all swings and roundabouts isn’t it? Last year, Barcelona we’re lucky to beat Chelsea (they should have had at least TWO penalties given against them at Stamford Bridge, a fact that Mourinho took great pleasure in reminding Xavi about at the end of the 3-1 Inter win in the first leg at the San Siro…..), and this year the Luck has gone with Inter (the referee tonight bought most of Inter’s gamesmanship, including the last-gasp “handball” by Bojan which should have been allowed, therefore knocking Inter out…….I must add that the referee also bought Busquets shamefull play-acting).
Inter have been guilty of some heavy-handed defending this season (again, Chelsea should have had at least one penalty via Lucio’s pushing and pulling), and I will say that the referee will have a massive part to play in the Final. I do hope Inter win it though, and then Mourinho can get out of Milan and go somewhere that hopefully appreciates him (surely NOW the Italian press must bow down and do an act of worship to Mourinho, regardless of whether or not he actually wins the final……).
WHOAH! Wait, you think that the luck went Inter’s way in this fixture?!
I’d like to politely disagree. Im not an Inter fan but that really was an absurd red card and performance of the referee. Tonight the ‘mighty’ barca went down hugely in my opinion – its pretty clear they dive a lot(Dani Alves especially) generally but the amount they threw themselves to the ground and dived in the game tonight was astounding. Shameful even. I really felt sorry for Motta and Eto’o being former Barca players, you could clearly see they were revolted and ashamed at the clear cheating from Busquets.
It was pretty amazing how much they resembled arsenal tonight aswell – loads of possession in the opponent half with strangly very few shots…
Totally agree with Steve. The piece of theatre of Busquets was quite shameful, and with the ref buying it, the match completely changed. Indeed, quite a manual game on how to defend and not loose your mind.
Busquets plays to get fouled, he’s easily my least favorite Barca player. And Alves is like most attacking players, once they know they’re going to lose the ball they hit the floor.
However, the rest of Barca are honest players that would rather carry on playing than stop to win a free kick.
Towards the end of the match you could see as soon as an Inter player received the ball he was just trying to get touched so he could fall on the ball. They knew what they were doing, but it doesn’t mean I have to enjoy or applaud it.
Busquets is such a nasty old ham of an actor. Its interesting to see if he can earn the mantle “despicable cheat that you respect” like Van Bommel or Ballack, or whether he stay into his current role of most annoying player on any pitch. I understand Barcelona need a bit of a grit in their team but that lad is an asshole.
And he adds no grit…
No, they’re not honest at all. Even Puyol is starting to dive. Iniesta is an extreme diver (I remember him diving in the box two games in a row, winning two penalties). Xavi dives as well. Messi dives from time to time. Pedro dives. I’ve seen Keita and Touré dive. And let’s not even stark talkinga about Busquets and Alves… they are outclassing Cristiano Ronaldo for God’s sake.
Hi Steve, by all means you can politely disagree (or impolitely if you wish, I love a good heated confrontation – lol), but the fact remains that over BOTH legs of this semi-final Inter have had the majority of the decisions go their way – in the first leg the third goal was offside, and Lucio gave away a STONE-WALL penalty which wasn’t given to Barca, plus the disallowed “goal” at the end of last nights game (which should have been allowed, thereby knocking Inter out). You must have some luck to go all the way in a tournament; last year Barca had it, this year Inter have it. I do think Inter deserved to go through though (in the same way I thought Barca deserved to go through against Chelsea last year – Chelsea were toothless after Essien scored that wonder-goal, and instead of playing football and trying to score another – thereby killing the game and tie off – they just sat back and shut up shop – a very negative way to play the game……).
Frankly a ridiculous statement there. In the first leg Milito was ruled offside when he was at least a yard onside to go 1 on 1 with the keeper. Eto’o was in an extremely promising position and pulled back for a non existent foul on the Barca left back.
Barca dived twice to try to win penalties (Dani Alves particularly disgraceful). So in the first leg Inter were hard done by. Sure take away the offside Milito goal but give back the goal he would certainly have scored after 10 minutes.
Second leg Motta should have been on the pitch. Shocking red card decision and shocking play acting (peeping through his fingers). That changes the game completely.
Sure Barca COULD have won…they’re a very good side. Bojan’s goal should have stood.
But if you look at the good chances in both games (not impacted by the referee) you will see Inter created far more. They should have been 4-1 up at half time at the San Siro.
Add to this the general negative approach the barca fans had, setting firecrackers off and banging drums at the hotel, police taking 4 hours to turn up, Eto’o being hounded for unpaid taxes from 5 years ago, Mourinho’s car being attacked… if you want to talk about the spirit of the game then let’s talk fairly.
I can only agree with Paul. The best winners have shown to be also bad losers.
To be honest, Motta should probably have been sent off, although due to a second yellow card, not a straight red. Whilst his action was not violent conduct (the reason for a straight red), it certainly appeared to me like unsportsmanlike conduct (which warrants yellow). Of course, had the ref seen it like that, maybe he wouldn’t have given him the yellow.
The only big mistake I saw was the lack of yellow on two dives: one from Ibrahimovic and another from Daniel Alves. He motioned to them to get up, which means he saw it as dives in the box. That usually gives a yellow.
Bojan’s goal should have stood indeed, but there is a simple sentence in the rules of the game about handballs that says something like «the referee must adjudge the movement of the hand». Since Keita’s hand moved towards the ball (even if inadvertently), it becomes more logical that the referee saw it as a handball (he doesn’t have the luxury of a slow motion replay).
No, I disagree. Motta uses his hand to check where Busquets is. Busquets acts as he’s been shot. The hand’s not even in his face, it’s on his chest/neck.
Is there any penalty for diving? I mean UEFA/FIFA should really penalize this type of behavior! Sergio was shameful today:
http://www.b3ta.cr3ation.co.uk/data/gif/a095b62ba601cdf2e9b5ff3d0e9c8069_biscuitsshakey.gif
Well, if Dida’s punishment some years agao (against Celtic I think) is any standard, then Sergio may indeed be punished.
Eduardo, famously at Celtic, received a ban but was waived on appeal. I don’t want to say anything about Barcelona, but I haven’t heard much of a media frenzy about Busquets – so, probably nothing.
Let this be a lesson to all – if you dive in an important televised match, stay down and DON’T PEEK.
He’s a cheater for diving, but an absolute idiot for peeking. If you must pique, turn Cesar and score!
Diving isn’t the same as play acting, it was a foul, Busquets just enjoys rolling on the floor for five minutes whenever physical contact is made with him.
Very good display indeed. Until they got that goal, Barca looked like they had run out of ideas. Of course, if that second goal had been allowed, would it still have been a brilliant plan by Mourinho? Part of his brilliance is getting that luck every great player/manager needs.
Every great manager has a touch of luck… Sir Alex in 1999, Pep last year vs Chelsea
I tend to think “you create your own luck…”
The red card was a blessing in disguise for Inter, as from then on they pretty much eliminated the idea of trying to score, and were content to just defend for the whole game…
I wholly agree with this statement. It showed the basic tendency of Italian clubs: defend first and defend while attacking.
Inter really isn’t an Italian club — 11 non-Italian players and 1 non-Italian manager.
I concede your point about their footballing philosophy though. Having said that, a good defensive display can be as pleasing to watch as a good attacking one.
Oh… I just thought this idea had at last become just an old clichè. Not yet.
It was a bigger blessing than Inter even realized. The most important part of Barcelona’s game is not possession itself, but recovering possession. Their ability to press and recover possession leads to quick transition from defense to attack and the ability exploit space between the midfield and defensive line.
You can usually tell within five minutes of a Barca match if they are going to struggle to create offense. It is all based on defensive pressure and moving the ball quickly to attacking positions. Inter’s defensive discipline lulled Barca into passing the ball around at a very slow pace. The red card played right into that strategy. By continuing to punt the ball long and allow Barca to walk in back into the offensive zone, Inter denied Barca the ability to turn the ball over and create quick offense.
Not so much blessing in disguise as it was Mourinho’s willingness to make lemonade when life threw him lemons
Incredible defensive organisation from Inter.
But they benefitted immensely from the fact that Alves was utterly hopeless, as he was last year against Chelsea.
Late in the game, they seemed content content to leave him unmarked. Inter with their massive height advantage backed themselves to defend the crosses from those areas on the off-chance that Alves produced something decent.
Guardiola should have gambled on Henry.
He would have at least mixed things up by making driving runs to the by-line. Jeffren seemed content to make deep crosses from the left. He didn’t seem to be under instruction to take on his man.
When you’re aiming at a bunch of 5-footers in the middle you nees someone with the drive to get behind the defence and cut the ball back.
Still, in saying all that, if Bojan’s goal had stood then Pep’s a genius…
I see your point but even if they went through, is/would Pep be a genius? Got beaten in Milan 3-1 and couldn’t get past a 10-man Inter for 84 minutes when it took a centre-back to score the goal…The guy’s a great manager but in my estimate Mourinho is the ace, he proved it tonight as well.
I was being facetious. Merely pointing out that there’s a very fine line between making a double substitution that proves to be ineffective and making one that turns out to be a tie-winner. It wouldn’t have made him a genius, no, but it would have been hailed as a tactical masterstroke but for a very debatable decision.
The decision was not very debatable. All in all, in this tie Barca were the Refs love child. First the sending off, which was either the first or second most ridiculous that i have EVER seen. Usually there is at least some sort of fore-arm or elbow or fist, in this case it was an open palm which was used to push off, barely touching the guys neck. This sending off was worth 2 goals. Remember, it came at the 28 minute mark. That early in the game, you’re forced to go down to 10 men against Barca at Barca in the semi-final of the champions league! H-u-G-E! Next was the goal by Pique, which was offsides. No call. Then the call you say is debatable, the ball clearly hit his hand and then dribbled over into the penalty box. This is a foul. If it happens inside the penalty box, then it is not a foul (it would be harsh to give a penalty to a defender for something like this), but anywhere else on the pitch, it is a free kick. Not to mention that the whistle blew BEFORE Bojan even kicked it into the goal, which caused a lot of players to stop. To count this goal would have been outrageous, especially with all the other “lucky” calls Barca got throughout the game….not to mention the disaster at Chelsea last year. That was also a disgrace in favor of Barca.
So it is quite unfair to simply look at 1 call. You have to look at all the calls. What you want to do is say: “if we can keep all the calls Barca got in their favor, and reverse the one correct call which went Inter’s direction, then Barca would have won and Pep would be a “genious.”" Doesn’t really work like that.
spot on!
I think you’re mixing the rules of the game and the interpretation that some referees have of them to “protect” themselves.
Firs the red card: it wasn’t violent conduct, that much seems obvious. But it may have been unsportsmanlike conduct (debatable, I know) due to a raised hand to stop the action of the opponent. In that case Motta might have received the second yellow (he had been booked 10 minutes on) and still been sent off.
In terms of the rules of the game, a handball is the same all over the pitch, so it doesn’t matter where it happens. It’s always punished with a direct free-kick. If it’s in the box by a defender, then it’s a penalty kick. If it’s by an attacker and gives a goal, it’s still a free-kick. But, as I wrote above, the referee is instructed to evaluate the movement of the hand. Keita’s hand (even if without intention) moved in the direction of the ball (just happens sometimes). The referee, in this split second, had to decide and that movement of the hand was enough to give the handball.
Sulley Muntari over at left back played Pique on if you look at the lines in the grass. If the linesman had been on Pique’s side I’d say he’d a have been given off but he was not.
red card is worth 2 goals? in which world? besides, it was yellow-red, second yellow for second bookable offense, although Busquets made more of it than it was. Goal was offside? Alright, love the bitterness.
Smarten up.
I think there are elements of your comment, Kaveh, which are not founded in truth. I don’t know if you’ve seen all the highlights of the game which I’ve seen, but Pique was not offside when the ball was played through to him – he was inline with Muntari (side-on replays clearly show this). Also, the “handball” at the end of the game was not a handball at all – close-up slow motion replays show that the ball hit Toure’s CHEST and didn’t strike his arm at all – although in real-time I agree that it did look like it came off his arm. Again, I don’t know where in the world you are and what TV coverage you have seen……
at a first glance: the game showed that Barca’s players are only mortals and that it is not “too difficult” to achieve a draw (or close defeat) when the opponent focuses on concentrated defending…. Barca lost the tie in Mailand….
Suprisingly Barca wasn’t able to use the space (Inter with one man down) and to apply more pressure from the wings (that could have been a plan B) and creating only 3 – 3.5 chances is quite disapointing against 10 men….
Inter’s defence was impressive, but in the final I guess there have to show more to win; I don’t think that they are better than Bayern …chances IMO are 50%/50%…
I don’t know. Inter defended superbly, and yet it took:
1) Missed sitter from Bojan.
2) Quite incredible save from Cesar (save of the season surely?)
3) Effectively 3 free goals from the officials (Milito’s goal+hitting Toure’s chest for Bojan’s+Ibra’s shirt being ripped in two on a set piece…)
Personally I find it remarkable that Barcelona can make obvious mistakes, have players have absolute stinkers, have Inter defend quite marvelously, and yet had officials made correct calls, or Julio Cesar had fingers 2 centimetres shorter, they still would have won.
How thin the line is between brilliance and failure…
Had the things that you mentioned happened (officials, Cesar’s save etc.) then Barca would have qualified and every1 would be praising how brilliant they are etc.
But they didn’t, and now every1 thinks that Barca are in crisis and that Inter is a magnificent team etc…
Yeah, I’m seeing people dismiss Messi because he didn’t score/”control the game”(whatever that means). Aside from ignoring how close he was to a goal+assist, it’s just incredible how people’s opinions are formed almost entirely by…the last game.
So true
HA! I know. If Bojan’s header goes in and Caesar doesn’t get his hand to it, Messi would be hailed today as the greatest player ever.
Just need to look at the shots on target to give Inter their due as a defensive power this game. And stuff like Bojan’s header miss? It happens all too often in football–it is not really an aberration.
We can play “what if officials had made all the correct calls” ad infinitum for every single match in the history of football. At least in this case it is somewhat balanced given last year’s semi-final with Chelsea and the horrible refereeing.
I’ve certainly given them their due. Best defensive display I can remember. Cambiasso in particular is just amazing.
I was just pointing out how, in spite of that brilliant defending, they were within a whisker of going out to a clearly underperforming/hard done by Barca. I find that amazing.
Sure Maradona should seriously thinking of bringing Cambiasso to South Africa, this year he has been especially impressive
It’s tough as I’m not sure Masch & Cambiasso can play together. Neither are the greatest passers.
Should still go as backup for Masch, mind. Can come on to help close out games if needed too.
UNDERPERFORMING Barca ?
Hahh. Mate you only have to look at the stats to know how much Barca had the ball but cudnt do anything with it, all cuz of Inter’s defence.
The way they defended was just brilliant. The communication b/w the players as which man to mark, pure brilliance from Mou and his players.
You’re clearly a barca supporter. Inter had milito called offside for the 1 on 1 in the first leg, pique’s goal was marginally offside. The motta red or yellow was really harsh thanks to busquets’ nasty/pansy dive. Keita’s hand moved into the path of the ball so it’s still handball. I don’t think anyone apart from barca supporters would agree with Ibra’s shirt tear being a foul. Add that to your little summary.
Stop whining about how this was barca’s game to lose and how amazing it is that barca underperformed so much, made so many mistakes and still barely lost. You try to act objective by saying inter defended well but the crux of the matter is: Barca played badly precisely because inter defended so well. The two are not mutually exclusive. Barca were outplayed by inter. Inter didn’t just defend marvelously, they also put 3 past valdes. So stop having that fanboy tone that the “real” barca would have beaten inter, or a poor barca side would still have beaten inter if not for external circumstances.
Inter did a great job of sitting on the two-goal lead they were gifted in the first game, and still required a huge helping of luck to survive. But I’m not nearly as impressed as ZM; it’s not really that hard to defend one third of the field if you never leave it.
Like most Barca fans, I am disgusted by Busquets. A defensive mid does not go looking for fouls. Why that boy gets in ahead of Toure is a mystery. Still, Motta would have been sent off for a second yellow even if Busquets had stayed on his feet.
There were close calls which could have gone either way, and different refs would have seen them differently, but any commenters who claim the ref favored Barca should take a close look at the sequence where Lucio ripped Ibra’s shirt. That is a penalty in any game anywhere. There is just no excuse for that level of official incompetence.
I agree that the red card helped Inter. Gave their wingers absolutely no reason to get forward, allowed their defense to keep their shape and prevent Barca from exploiting space between the lines– Messi really excels between the mids and the backs, and there was virtually no space there because the mids never felt like pushing forwards. In the first half hour, Milito up top was essentially a time-waster, running around with no support anyway.
Iniesta was the one missing here, I think. He and Xavi together are worth far more than either one by himself, and I do think that his creativity (he’s much more willing to run at the defense than xavi) from midfield would have been of great use.
I agree. Very little one-touch passing or movement off the ball in the central parts of the field.
Perfectly stated. Iniesta has been a huge miss for Barca over these two legs.
On Xavi:
I wuv him greatly, but this showed his serious limitation. Close down the space and his passing angles and he simply doesn’t offer anything. Iniesta’s dribbling was sorely, sorely missed.
Xavi is absolutely brilliant, but only at one thing.
One thing?! Again, he provided the assist for Pique, generally whippes in amazing free-kicks and corners, never loses the ball and is the best passer in the world
When the ITV commentator said during a free-kick which Messi and Xavi were looking to take that “the world’s best player stands over the ball”, I actually thought he was talking about Xavi… Messi, in my book is far more one-dimensional!
Thought Pique mostly did the work for that tbh. What a goal from a centre back!
His free kicks/corners are blah imo.
I totally agree on the passing/not losing the ball. I love him for it, he’s incredible. But he doesn’t have anything else, and this was one of those rare times Barca needed something else.
Pique’s brilliant on the ball, so composed (if he had been on the end of that cross instead of young little Bojan?) I wouldn’t have minded if Guardiola had put Milito/Yaya at centre-half and then let Pique push forward even more in the beginning, maybe let him get in the box and help Ibra out with the crosses.
On Xavi, though, I agree he has only one dimension, but he is the best in the world at that one dimension. He’s not a true attacking mid though in the likes of Sneijder and Fabregas, he’s not one to probe and run at the heart of the defense. Iniesta is that role, and I agree that he was very, very much needed in this game. he would force one of Inter’s back line to step up and meet him, making gaps, rather than sit in front of them and try to slip something through 6 players standing at the top of the 18.
Had Iniesta been on the pitch with Xavi, the scoreline tonight could have been drastically different.
yes, and also had motta didn’t get sent off or the offside goal had been disallowed the scoreline would have been different also, inter proved in the first leg (where its 11 v 11) can score goals against barca) im sure they can so it again ant the scoreline would’ve been alot different
Well, I couldn’t believe how static Barca’s gameplan was after the sending off of Motta. It was all about giving it to either Xavi or Messi and then waiting for them to create something. However, have you noticed that the team Ibrahimovic plays for was the one that got knocked out?! Last year it was Inter, this year Barca…I think the guy is a real hindrance tactically and morally as well and Guardiola should get rid of him ASAP but won’t be able as he was crazy enough to pay 45 million for him, plus selling Eto’o who played his heart out tonight.
And I agree with the comment that Barca got what they deserved after last year’s lucky escape! It was inevitable that either Sergio or Messi or Alves would get an Inter player booked or sent off, it was in the air. UEFA really needs to look at themselves long and hard as their referees are destroying most of the so-called big games, making tactical previews unnecessary…Or shall I say, every tactical preview should start with “provided no one gets sent off from X or Y teams”…
While Busquets certainly playacted a great deal, he didn’t get Motta sent off. Motta got himself sent off. Hand in face = card, Motta was on a card, Motta gone. Simple.
I can’t disagree with you there Matt, I do think Motta should only have got a yellow card for the hand-off, but as he was already on a yellow card he would have had to go anyway……shame on Busquets though……
Yeah I don’t like it, but I don’t like that Ibrahimovic can have his shirt ripped to pieces and no foul is given, either. ALL the dark arts need to go, not just some of them.
I have this thought that if I ever became a referee (even at a Local-Park level) then I would probably give at least 5 or 6 penalties a game, and all the games I refereed would end up around 5-all…..I’d love to see some professional referees go penalty-happy, it would really change how defenders go about their game……
It wouldn’t be hard to do. Announce before a new season that shirt pulling of ANY amount will be blown. If that results in a game with 10 penalties, so be it. Defenders will get the message quicksharp.
If Ibrahimiovich is going to dish it out, he better be able to take it without complaint as well.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47742000/jpg/_47742000_ibrahimovic_samuel_ap.jpg
And – as all the best adverts say – that’s not all! Have we forgotten Julio Cesar’s yellow card for time-wasting in the first half? Or the half dozen occasions when mysterious off-the-ball “injuries” had Inter players writhing on the ground waiting for the man with magic hair-lacquer to come on and kill a couple of minutes more? Or Ibrahimovic’s magically self-destructing shirt? Or Mourinho’s instructions to the San Siro ground staff not to mow or water the pitch for the first leg, thereby ensuring that Barcelona’s passing game would be a slo-mo no-show?
Busquets’ drama-queenery was not exemplary, granted, but, hey, if you can’t beat ‘em….
Motta wasn’t looking at Busquets, so it wasn’t premeditated, just so happened that Busquets’ face was near Motta’s hand and he made a meal of it after he got the slightest of touches.
That’s absolutely ridiculous. This was definitely one of the most insane red cards that i have ever seen. I understand that you’re a Barca fan and that you need to make excuses. But i remember telling Arsenal fans the same thing about Puyol’s red card + penalty. That it was a BAD call. What did they say? “The penalty was warranted and the rules are simple, last person foul = red card.” Of course the Puyol red card / penalty was reasonable to a degree. This was absolutely INSANE. I doubt that if you took a poll of non-biased refs and aloud them to witness this, i highly highly doubt that 1 out of 10,000 refs would see this as a red or even a foul of ANY KIND! Your bias is obviously clouding your judgement.
I AM a Barca fan, and I don’t agree with the red card. Eto’o hit Messi in the face later in the game, but Messi kept playing. A foul was given, but no yellow, as far as I remember. I can’t stand Busquets, and am appalled at how many times he plays ahead of Yaya.
and sergio “pick a boo” busket should get a straight red and an Oscar for this
http://www.interpersempre.com/apps/blog/show/3599324-sergio-busquets-performance-
I reckon after half time Pep should have istructed Pique to go up front WITH Ibrahimovic and told his wide players to simply cross the ball in to those two from all angles, whilst telling Messi to stand on the edge of the box and pick up the pieces……
……all these discussions about complex football tactics on this website, and what Barca really needed to do tonight was play good old-fashiond English Conference Long-Ball hit-and-hope tactics………where’s the ingenuity in these top European managers, eh?!?
Barca only began to create chances when they sent players forward en masse. What took so long? Indeed it should have been Ibra AND Pique up front. What were Inter going to do, hit them on the break? Please! If Barca had created chances over the entire second half at the rate that they were created from the 80th minute onward, they would have scored more goals.
Moreover, Guardiola needed to recognize that Inter were going to defend with their backs to the wall and that it would be best to have Ibra on the field when Barca went for broke and crowded the final third. Whether that meant not starting him per ZM’s suggestion, or simply leaving him on, surely he must recognize that if the situation demands that Pique advance up front (and it did!), it would behoove Barca to have Ibra on the field at that time as well.
I suppose it could just be Mourinho’s suffocation treatment, and I’m not discounting his ability to make a chance out of nothing, but to my eyes, Messi looked knackered in both legs. That said, he still produced a fantastic shot in the first half, a sumptuous service that Bojan should have finished, and a decent look that unfortunately went straight at Cesar.
Dani Alves crossing was nothing short of a nightmare!
problem is however that Ibra is SLOW in transition and in the end, it wasn’t aerial power that made Barca score but rather great on the ground footwork.
As much as I like Ibra and I have been defending him, I don’t see him having a long career at Barca, if ManCity come with a decent check.
And, if Inter win the CL, he might just have qualified for the Ewing Theory.
Barca were even slower without him because they were just passing the ball around without ideas at the end. There was no transition for Ibra to slow down because Inter were content to sit back and prevent any quick counterattacks from Barca. And if Bojan had scored his header, or had Ibra been there to take that chance instead, it would be obvious how useful aerial power would have been to help Barca score.
Does height help? Yes. Is it an essential part of the true winger-less, through ball passing Barcelona? Not at all.
transition is also stepping out of offside trap and you might have placed Ibra and Pique in the box for crosses, but then Inter would have crowded that area too, Ibra and Pique marked by 2-3 men each and it still would have ended like that.
Ibra might never have got that chance in the first place. Bojan ghosted himself behind the defenders and got the free header. Don’t see this happening with Ibra.
Hi Mahdi, yes, Inter definitely would have crowded the box if Ibra and Pique were in there, but, with the ball in the air constantly, Inter would have given away more corners, which are always dangerous (the ball can drop to anyone’s feet in the box, and a Barca player would only need to poke it into the net – remember, when Barca beat Inter 2-0 at the Nou Camp in the group stage, their first goal was direct from a corner). Also, Inter would have headed the ball back to the edge of the box a number of times wgere Messi/Xavi/Bojan could have been waiting to shoot the ball into the goal……It was the one tactic that Barca DIDN’T try…….
truth? and insight?
you’re having a laugh if you think Barca should have just playing hit-and-hope…they’re not winning anything with amongst that backline.
Barca needed to get to the endline and play the ball low across the box to stretch the outside backs, then Xavi would have been able to slide a ball through…
As my above comment to Mahdi says, Jason, in Barca’s 2-0 win at the Nou Camp in the group stage, Barca’s first goal came direct from a corner. I think Barca were trying to get to the byline last night, but were a: doing an awful job of it, and b: Inters cover and closing down in the wide positions was not allowing Barca to pull the ball back…..the amount of times Dani Alves had the ball out wide only to be met by one, – sometimes two – very disciplined Inter defenders, so that his only option was to play the ball back around the outside of the area was unbeleivable. Your theory is a good one but they were rubbish at doing it……The Ball in the air can cause a lot of problems if the crossing is good…..
I think these …
1. Barcelona were accused of having no ‘Plan B’ by the (British) commentary team. Aside from the obvious sheer hypocrisy that stems from simultaneously criticizing Barcelona in this respect whilst marvelling at their patience that proved victorious against Chelsea last season,
2. It could have all been so different had Bojan’s last minute ‘goal’ not been disallowed for a contentious handball decision, and whilst the result of the tie would have changed, the tactical analysis would have not. Inter were defensively superb tonight and over the course of the tie, deserved to go through.
… are really interesting points mostly because of how the narrative of the game after the fact forms so often not from what happens on the pitch for the 90 minutes but for the few seconds during a game when the critical incidents occur and also the ultimate final result.
Had Barca progressed tonight I’m sure much of the the talk would have been praising Pep Guardiola and saying how he stuck to his principles and how they ultimately paid dividends (regardless of if one agrees with yourself or with the ITV chumps that Barca don’t have a plan B, I would tend to think as you do but at the same time there are very strong similarities in how the plan A and plan B sides play). Similarly I’m sure that there will also be a lot of talk of how Barcelona didn’t do enough to win through tonight despite all their possession but I think that that is bunk insofar as they got the ball into the net twice only for a decision with the second goal to, wrongly as far as I’m concerned, go against them and that was out of their hands. They themselves went out and did what was required of them, it was circumstance that scuppered them.
All that being said, Inter were fantastic in both legs, certainly not in a spectacular way and I’d definitely hate to watch them play that way every week but they performed brilliantly as a team and Mourihno and the players deserve great credit and admiration for that.
This was actually one of those rare matches where I’d argue that both teams deserved to win, that may sound contradictory but what I mean to say is that I would have no complaints had Barca’s second stood and I have no complaints that Inter will be playing in Madrid next month.
“This was actually one of those rare matches where I’d argue that both teams deserved to win, that may sound contradictory but what I mean to say is that I would have no complaints had Barca’s second stood and I have no complaints that Inter will be playing in Madrid next month.”
Totally agree. Should’ve been the final, damnit.
I’m ecstatic to see Zanetti and Maicon fight off Ribery and Robben. I wouldn’t say it’s better than watching the holders, but it’s still worth something.
You will only see one of those battles, maybe not even that. Ribery is suspended for his horrible tackle, well stomp, on Olic and Chivu might start at left back, although Zanetti probably will to match his right foot versus Robben’s left.
Completely agree…. As I said before, how thin the line is between brilliance (praise of Barca’s patience and persistency) and failure (Barca being condemned for their lack of a Plan B and being inefficient)
People don’t realize that getting through 9 Italians, experts in “Catenaccio” football, that are banked in their own half (and maybe 5 meters spaced from each-other) isn’t a particularly easy thing to do….
I’m also mulling what possible tactics can be used to break a defense that is essentially 8 players determined to camp on the trap line at the top of their box. Of course, such a scoreless-draw oriented defense-only tactic is generally only desirable in a tie such as we’ve just seen; in a regular game, the necessity to counterattack at some point is going to open some space for the opponent.
But would could Barca have done? I think possibly fight ugly with ugly. Rather than try to gain space by stretching out (since Milan was never going to stretch out far enough), gain space by forcing the defenders even closer together.
You would do this by synchronous player shifts to the same space, by unbalancing the field. This is the exact opposite of how teams like Barca intuitively play, by moving into unoccupied areas to create passing lanes. Players are always repositioning to create a balanced web of interconnection. With a flat compressed defense, the angles are too tight.
So instead, crowd 4 forward players into the same space on the edge of the opponents box, within a yard of each other- it could be at the center, or the left or the right. One of two things happens: the defenders crowd the same space, which opens space elsewhere (i.e. for a free roaming Messi), or the defenders hold their spaced zonal positions, giving the compact offense 4 a chance to push through into the box. If the ball is actually with this group, I see them moving almost like a group of blockers protecting a runner in American football, a compact unit, trying to keep defenders outside, and bulldozing ahead. Instead of keep-away (with defenders in the middle of passing lanes), it’s keep-out (don’t let any defenders in where the ball is being passed between them). In such a compact formation pushing into the box, I’d also think the likelihood of winning penalty kicks would increase.
Has anyone ever seen such a tactic employed? Would it work? Obviously, you would only use it in this very situation, where there is little need to preserve spacing for defensive reasons. I think it could really break down the discipline of such defenses, and any cracks become openings for scoring.
I think that’s a very interesting and intuitive suggestion, BerkeleyBennie. I think you may need the referee on your side for it to work though, all that blocking of the opposition away from the man with the ball could be deemed as obstruction in certain instances……maybe not though……the thing is, most teams would never have even thought of playing with that type of tactic – it goes agaisnt what we know to be football….
One way we do see the “crowding” tactic used to herd defenders together is in certain set pieces, where all the offense rushes one post except for a single player who rushes the other. The purpose here is to crowd the defenders into one area to clear space on the other post, where hopefully the lone player will, at worst, be marked by a single defender. So perhaps also worth implementing from the run of play in siege situations like these.
The strategy of a possession/patience game is to allow pathways to scoring to present themselves as defenders make zonal mistakes and leave open lanes. With parked-bus defenses (where the defenders have no intention of scoring), such chances are going to be few. Had Barca tried a crowding tactic, even only on corners, they might have had more clear opportunities to score.
I also want to clarify that I’m not suggesting 3 guys “block” for the other player, but instead, that the 4 pass the ball between them at very tight proximity (a few feet) so that they are essentially a unit. The intuitive thing to do is to move away from the player with the ball so they have room to move or pass. I’m saying do the opposite- stay close together and keep the ball on 4 players feet as the unit moves forward. Once in the box, any hacking fouls become penalty shots.
I’m not so sure about this. First because at that proximity, it’s very easy for a defender to
A) stick out a leg and block that close proximity passing
B) allow a single defender to mark multiple players, and make it easier to shut Xavi’s passing lanes down, rendering him completely useless. This would be especially true if you have a squadron of Messi, Jeffren, Pedro bunched together – the only way any of them would beat a Lucio to a header is by fouling him, and he’s a seasoned vet when it comes to gaming.
C) You’re essentially building Route One highways for Inter to counter attack – bunch three players together, and there’s bound to be a maaaassive hole for some quick guy like Eto’o to run through
D) That kind of system would take quite a while to deploy in a way that wouldn’t quickly break down into useless chaos – defeating its whole purpose. Who runs where when the balls on the wing, etc. Definitely not a system you want to use for the first time when you need to score 2 and concede none.
“All that being said, Inter were fantastic in both legs, certainly not in a spectacular way and I’d definitely hate to watch them play that way every week but they performed brilliantly as a team and Mourihno and the players deserve great credit and admiration for that.”
You wouldn’t want to see Inter score three goals against Barça every week?
There is this misconception about Mourinho that his teams always play ugly football. In the first leg they came out aggressive, pressed, attacked. In the second they did what they had to do. It is pragmatic certainly, and perhaps not purely principled enough for you, but I was fascinated by how disciplined Inter were tonight. Just as exciting for me as if four or five goals were scored.
Ok, I’ll rephrase to clarify, I wouldn’t want to watch them play the way they did tonight every week.
and perhaps not purely principled enough for you
I’ll thank you not to make assumptions about me or my principles in future.
True mate.
Their defending and the understanding b/w the players.
Really exciting
That’s a very good point about Barca’s plan A and B being similar. So similar in fact that the ITV commentary team couldn’t differentiate!
Most readers of ZM noticed the different plan but I guess not many others did!
Anyone notice Messi seemed to not be sure himself where he was sposed to be playing, when Barca were pressing in the final 15 mins he was basically playing as a central midfielder but it really hampered Barca. He was basically playing right on top of Xavi which resulted in Barca just playn several 5 yard passes from Messi to Xavi and vice versa, which stopped them playing the old Xavi to messi through ball, and so there was no real creativity
At the end, the only way for Messi to touch the ball was to drop deep, especially with Bojan, Pedro, Jeffren and Pique playing up top.
I really wish he would have gone wide right and tried to combine with Alves to get down the side…
His role was to link, not to finish. That was the biggest problem.
it’s been done before though. if you remember man united vs barca over two legs in the champions league semi final in 2007/2008 season.. how much pressure did united just soak up by defending deep, not allowing messi to get between the lines, not allowing them to play their favourite ball as described in the write up, and making them face 9 organized players whenever they had the ball, with ronaldo generally left up top, and tevez and rooney tracking back and harassing the defenders.
it worked well at the nou camp, with ronaldo missing an early penalty, and united not really creating many chances of note there, but at the same time, dictating how barcelona would play the game, negating their threats very well. and at old trafford, it was slightly open more open until scholsey’s long range wonder, and after that united seemed confident enough that barcelona won’t be able to break them down, and that’s exactly what happened. organized defending, keeping their concentration, and it was pretty straight forward actually. Which begs the question as to why Fergie changed this approach completely in the 2008/2009 final vs Barca when it worked so well the year before.
agree with you re: not starting with Ibra and plan B being sending on Bojan; but, I think he missed a trick with not bringing on Henry – especially with the way the game was going. He’s used to playing teams with two sets of 4, defending deep, being organized etc from his time in England, and he’s always been successful. Plus, he’s got a great shot from outside the box, and anyways it’s about time something went right for him this season!
Think Mourinho will be thanking his little cotton socks that Iniesta was injured throughout the tie, as he would definitely have made a massive difference with his dynamism and incision – he offers something similar but markedly different compared to Xavi/Busquets/Messi/Pedro etc, and the referee will get a big pot of gold with an Inter flag on it for his decision to disallow the Bojan goal (two clear chances for him after he came on, compared to 0 for Ibra … just a point)
Not sure about Henry… If you check, he NEVER scores in a “big”/important game (no goals in WC98 final (granted, hasn’t played in that), no goals in EURO 2000 final, no goals in UEFA 2000 final, no goals in CL 2006 final, no goals in CL2009 final..). The guy bottles it when it really gets important, I hate to say it…
i beg to differ. he’s surely worth a punt though, he wouldn’t have such a reputation if he wasn’t a proven goal-scorer and game changer.
some stats to boost:
top french goal scorer of all time
equalizer vs portugal in the semi finals of euro2000, man of the match in the final of the tournament as well.
france’s top scorer in world cup 98 and euro 2000
golden goal winner in confed cup 2003 final
3 goals in world cup 2006
list goes on… i reckon those are pretty important games.
and plus, he knows how to engineer a goal. just look at that goal vs ireland that got them into the world cup……
Yeah, important games and had a terrific EUro2000 for sure – what did he contribute to WC2002 or Euro2004 or Euro2008?… Also, I am talking about the BIG games, the finals. How many goals? Zero…for a player deemed to be great, that is very ordinary (and please, the Confed Cup final, give me a break, against a spent Cameroon team who were mourning Vivien Foe…). Yes, he is a great player, but not in the same bracket for me as an Eto’o or a Ronaldo (the Brazilian) who scored when it mattered and didn’t look like a shadow of themselves.
Yeah, maybe Henry is immune to getting seen by the ref with handballs so Barca could’ve used him.
Henry only has two goal in a knockout stage in his five big ones (WC 98, Euro 2000, WC 02, Euro 04, WC 06, Euro 08) – quarterfinals of WC 06 against Brazil and semi of Euro 2000
He’s been a flat track bully, scoring most of his international goals against the likes of the Faeroe Islands and Iceland in qualifying tournaments. That said, it is still meaningful sign of talent to score as much as he has. I think his promise was not matched by result because of the mental component of his game – the broody, moody crap.
When people say that Henry is not a “big game scorer” I think they are comparing him to a Ronaldo or a Gerd Muller, who had goal ratios of 80% + over the course of multiple deep tournament runs, as well as scoring in big finals – guys that are prolific against any and all competition.
He wasn’t played today because, as someone here has alreayd mentioned, he’s retired without telling anyone this year. His form this year would have made his inclusion an act of pure desperation. And Barca could have, and maybe should have scored without getting desperate.
I remember exactly two games of Henry where he came in as a sub and had an effect on the game/scored a goal. One was Arsenal-ManU 2006/2007 where he came in as a sub and scored what was if I remember right his last goal for Arsenal.
The other was Valencia-Barca, Barca 2-1 down and he scores after a corner kick and makes it 2-2.
Otherwise?
And this isn’t even taking into account how absolutely dreadful he’s been all season..
Yep, he said himself that his legs are gone, has been playing a very athletic style of play since he was 17, he can’t keep it up any longer.
He’s been a starter for most of his career so it stands to reason that there won’t be many occasions where he was launched from the bench to change a game.
He’s better than a youth player like Jeffren.
He’s a coward and cheat also so that mightn’t have helped the team.
Also excellent point about United playing exactly this way against the last year of Rijkaard’s Barca. Scholes wondergoal plus shutting up shop all night. Why they tried to play anentirely different way in last years final was unusual. And I don’t think it had anything to do with missing Fletcher because its a team tactic.
I think the best display of this was the Chelsea ties both legs. Hiddink set up his defence just right and knew Barca could have all the possesion they want as long as they cant do anything with it.
Oh and news just in Messi is human (not directed at you) lol
wrt the “Bojan goal”: I’m not sure, but I had the impression that the whistle of the referee came immediately and therefore the players close to the referee stopped playing thus allowing that Bojan broke through?
I think the referee only blew for the free-kick AFTER the Inter players appealed for it. By that time Bojan was about to lash the ball into the top corner……
Nah Inter played you could see Cesar was completly focosed on trying to save Bojan’s shot
They didn’t seem to react to the whistle. Looked like he’d have scored regardless though.
If he had allowed it to stand, he would have gotten a big Barca pot of gold thanking him for sending off Thiago Motta
Fergie couldnt have used that tactic, as it was only one game, so you have to try and score for yourself. I would be happier if he tried to match barcelona attacking strength with united’s: rooney, tevez, berba and ronaldo up front is as good as it gets. But well, never mind now
One of the things I didn’t understand from Guardiola’s point of view is why he waited with subbing Milito with Maxwell until the half time break, why not simply sub him immidiatly when Thiago Motta was send off? It was clear that Inter would not be a threat down the left (Or anywhere else) at all after the sending off, and even before that, why not play the most minutes with two attacking full backs as possible. Especially considering how narrow Inter played which left alot of space out wide.
It was also strange to see Messi almost playing in what would’ve been Iniesta’s role for most of the second half, outside the Inter ‘Wall’. He was to far away from goal to dribble, since there was simply to many bodies, so he was just distributing the ball around. It also left Bojan alone upfront, which almost made him redudant since he was to easy to mark. It was only when Barcelona pushed Pique up as a striker (Which he’s apparently pretty good at) that they began to become really dangerous.
About Inter only thing I found strange was that they kept Sneijder as the front man instead of Eto’o when they went down to 10 men. Wouldn’t it be a better solution to have Eto’o (or Milito) in Sneijder’s role, and then Sneijder in Eto’os role, so they actually could be some kinda threat. It completly removes the strength’s of a player like Sneijder to play in front since he has no one to pass to. He kept getting the ball, but he can’t hold on to it, he can’t pass it, he just lose it.
Sneijder’s role at this stage was the first defender, nothing else … just to chase the Barca player that has the ball down…
I don’t think you make the Maxwell-Milito sub in the 1st half just in case there is an injury. I’m surprised he didn’t move Yaya up and push Keita out wide…
This was a spineless display and a very poor representation of a football match from Inter. Mourinho might be called the “special one”, but tonight he was the “scared one”. I know he had the upper hand from the first leg, but playing an all defensive strategy was just…well lets just say it pissed me off. Mourinho knew he wouldn’t win at the Camp if he played his team like the first leg. Inter didn’t go through in style at all. You cant say Inter played a good game with ZERO shots on goal, ZZZZZEEEERRRROOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!! Pique= MAN OF THE MATCH! and not because of his goal, but his passing was amazing.
As ZM said in his review, Barca had all the possession and what good did it to for them? If one of your men is sent off in a CL semi final in a packed Camp Nou with an amazing Barca facing you, you don’t think of attacking, you just think of defending. So well done Inter, the result vindicated Jose and his team.
As for Pique, he is like a footballer in Pro Evolution, can play basically anywhere!
it’s a matter of debate as to whether results vindicate people and performances. if barca had gone on to win, would busquets have been vindicated in his playacting?
Puyol as well, not just a defender. He was excellent on attack with some brilliant moves and passes up the right wing a few games back when Alves was out.
While I felt that watching the game was almost torture, I do not begrudge Mourinho or Inter their aggregate victory. They earned the right to defend their lead by winning the first leg. Without the red card, the match would have been somewhat different.
What would you do if you had a two-goal advantage at the Camp Nou, a man down against a team full of that quality, featuring many quick, tiny attakers and an immobile totem who is skillful in space but naive when surrounded by defenders?!
Let’s be honest, what happens when teams try to dispossess Barca? They wear themselves out, they don’t retrieve possession, and they give Barca space to exploit!
11 v 11 and Inter would have created chances.
Absolutely agree.
also agree. I dont see any smartness in trying to create chances or keep the ball facing Barca and with a man down, you just sit deep and organized and defend the first tie advantage. After the match, Mourinho said ‘we did not want the ball, Barca is very good in putting pressure on the ball, we better let it to them and close the space’. Like it or not, defending is also football, and defending well is great football.
Completely agree
I think we were deprived any hope of seeing Inter “go through in style” once Motta was sent off…..before that happened it was a reasonably open game which Inter may have ended up winning (they would have won on the break though, – you don’t go to Barca and play open, attacking football – that would be suicidal – Stuggart tried that earlier in the tournament and got massacred…..).
With all due respect, Stuttgart didn’t get massacred. In fact, in the first leg, they absolutely DOMINATED Barca. Stuttgart missed at least 5-10 good chances while Barca scored on their ONLY chance and the game ended 1-1. To say Barca dominated is going overboard.
Unfair to make that judgment when Inter had 10 men. Most 10 men teams who have a 1 goal lead will just play defensively.
we all as football fans certainly like to see open attacking football but great teams know when to win in style or to defend superbly like inter did. afterall it’s the result that matters.
I’m a huge fan of Barcelona, but I’m also a huge fan of football. I’d say that was one of the most impressive matches I have seen yet, even though Barcelona couldn’t come out on top. A clash between a total football, total offense vs. a total catenaccio, a defensive mastermind. As much as I hate to say it, it was one of the best ties in the CL history.
I don’t fully agree. Catenaccio is, or better was, a completely different playing scheme. The system called “Verrou”, or “Catenaccio”, was built on an obsessive one-to-one play by the defenders, following their men everywhere around the field. What we saw yesterday evening wasn’t Catenaccio: imho it just was something new – yes, here I do agree with you -, it was a “defensive mastermind”. I never had the pleasure to see such a great defensive organization. A full fledged defensive match played by Inter, perfectly planned by Mourinho in a superb, modern, even scientific way. The red card just spoiled the match, anyway: without being suicidal, Inter would have tried to do something more, while still 11, just counting on Snejider-Milito-Eto’o. And, as it happened in Milan a week before, it could have been really substantial.
You have to look at it as the second half of one “game” with the first being at the San Siro. They played as open as you can expect of them at home, and then with a 2 goal lead and a man sent off they defended.
Really that was the key difference between Inter this year and Chelsea last year, Chelsea tried to sit back the entire tie, which is a huge gamble and it did not pay off. Inter left themselves room for error, which they had to use in the end.
Let’s be honest, it didn’t work for Chelsea for only 1 reason, and that’s that Pep’s older Brother, Overbo or whatever the refs name was, absolutely CHEATED for Barca. It was an absolute DISGRACE, and this is from someone who dislikes Chelsea. It was the worst refing. I mean, just picture 3-5 of decisions like the Biscuits “red card” joke.
I can’t believe I would see such comment here. You almost sounds like other bitter Barca fan-boys out there. Before openly mocking Mourinho for taking such a defensive stance, you should put yourself in his position. Having a two goal lead, one man down and playing in Camp Nou against the most talented attacking side in the world. What would you do?
I completely agree with everyone else here. No sensible coach in the world would think anything else other than sit deep and defend. I would call Jose a moron for doing otherwise.
As Guardiola himself said it, Motta sending off is probably went against his plan. Having down to 10 men actually gave Inter the license to ‘park the bus’.
I believe Inter could’ve won this leg if its 11 vs 11, just as Jose said after game. dont you guys remember the 2nd leg in Stamford Bridge of Inter vs Chelsea? It could happen again in Nou Camp. Sneijder long ball break through, Eto’o/Milito finish…
I also believe that’s why Guardiola did not put Pique forward earlier in the game. He must have studied that match carefully.
And, if I’m the coach, I will also play half-recovered Sneijder top front instead of Eto’s defensive position in wing.
I’d say that the title of this article is putting it right: mourinho won both legs over guardiola, whom didn’t get that with 2 tall, muscular players like samuel and lucio a shorter, quicker player like bojan could have been extremely dangerous for inter.
still, inter gave an impressive performance against the best bunch of talents (among world’s football clubs).
I respectfully disagree with some comments above: even though this year inter had the chance to improve their defensive skills by resisting to sampdoria in 9 vs. 11 for half a match, I wouldn’t say that thiago motta’s red card was a blessing (btw, I would add it to the list of ref’s mistakes: it wasn’t a yellow card either !), as I can’t see how playing 62 mins + injury time of a CL semi away vs. the incumbents in 10 could be deemed as such.
moreover, inter tonight spent a huge amount of physical resources, and they’re still struggling to win the league.
too bad ribery will be missing the final; btw, for ZM, I’m looking forward to reading a preliminary analysis of bayern-inter as it will be ! (I mean, without motta and ribery: van gaal will have to come up with some unusual plan…)
I think that it was a blessing because it effectively eliminated any plan of attack and they resorted to what they do best: Catenaccio football.. They simply parked the bus (like seriously parked ALL their players in the final third of their field, Cesar could probably feel Lucio’s heart beat due to how close they were to each-other)… Defending is what they do best (and especially this year they are tremendously concentrated and disciplined) so it made them play their favorite game…
See now if Barca were defending a first leg lead, THEN it wouldn’t have been a blessing, but a pure curse…
well, of course we could fantasise about how different the 1st leg could have been with no useful conclusion. thing is that, as more comments (other than mine) said, if you play a CL semi at nou camp in 10 for 62 mins you can’t do anything else, and I wonder how many teams could have behaved any differently.
still, I doubt that any single manager in the world would be glad to play under these circumstances, if they had the chance to choose from the outset…
and yep, it’s true that inter defended really effectively this season; actually defensive organisation has been the basis of every success that teams managed by mourinho could grab so far. if you think of it, usually the most successful managers are those who apply the best defensive tactical tricks !
To be honest with you gianni, when I first saw the challenge (Motta’s hand-off) I didn’t think it was a yellow card either, but the television commentators all seemed convinced it was worthy of a card (the referee obviously deemed it worthy of a card) and the law suggests that it could be a borderline decision, so I’m happy to accept that a yellow card could be justified……but only just…….
Altintop looked good in Ribery’s position but it was against a Lyon that looked dead from the beginning.
How about a word for Inter’s fantastic offside trap. They caught Barca out a couple times with quick step ups over the 18-yard line. Very impressive. Their shape looked more and more like a pyramid whose base started at the bottom of the D as the game went on.
….didn’t worked for the goal (also it was quite close)…
I don’t think any defence is good at pulling an offside trap against a central defender.
i think a new rule should be introduced where teams have to leave at least one player in the opposition half at all times. that way we’d get to see barca desrvedly play in a european cup final. that way teams like inter, man u and chelsea, who are happy to put everyone behind the ball and defend to get a result, would have to improve technically rather than be rewarded for being inferior.
i’m very proud to be an arsenal fan, we gave it a go against barca and we got deservedly beaten, but at least we always try to play the game the right way. the tactics employed by those teams mentioned above at camp nou were embarrassing. c’mon bayern in the final, lets hope an attacking coach/team win it
The rule wouldn’t work, because of the offside rule (you’re offside if you’re in the opposition’s half and their last defender is in your half)
each team must have at least one player in both halves
lol sure.
glad you like it rahul
Then you’d get the same effect, just with one player less from each side. Besides, after Gabriel Milito was brought out, Inter played for a while with Diego Milito very much upfront, so that Piqué wouldn’t do what he did later (become another striker).
a team chasing the game might be forced to go 1 vs 1 at the back. this way, the pitch would be lengthened, there’d be more space to exploit and the defensive team would have to work harder. there would be an incentive for the defending team to attack, and it means teams going down to 10 men wouldn’t be rewarded for doing so, they’d have to defend with 8 players maximum.
yeah, and every year you create another rule like in the Formula I lol …. tactic is part of the game …. just score always 1 more than the oponent and you are on the bright side of life lol…
That opinion is predicated on the assumption that football “deserves” to be won only by technically superior teams or teams which build games around passing and possession. Tactics are as much a part of modern football as any individual’s skill or any particular team’s philosophy of playing, and Mourinho’s tactics – and Inter’s admirable discipline – are what got them a ticket to the Bernabeu.
Check out Roy Hodgson’s Fulham – another team that’s not terribly good at the technical side of things, but are so disciplined and led by a tactically adept enough manager that they’ve somehow gotten themselves in a good position to win the Europa League. That’s football, too.
it’s not based on that assumption at all. i love the tactical side of the game, just don’t like to see complete negativity rewarded. tactics would still play the same important role, you’d just have to base your tactics around having less players available to defend.
i too admire defensive discipline, but when your whole team’s mentality is to defend, waste time and generally play negatively it’s easy to be disciplined and organised.
fulham’s achievements are quite remarkable, absolutely amazing. but if they were to reach the champions league semi-final one day, i’d expect them to have the finances, the experience and a sort of moral obligation to the beauty of the game of football to persuade them to play more positively. but if teams as wealthy and endowed with talent as inter, man u and in particular chelsea can’t manage that, we need to change the rules to force them to do so.
Didn’t Inter score three goals against the Barcelona side? Do all goals have to be scored in the manner Arsenal score? A goal is a goal, no matter how you get it. Ask Iniesta (last year’s semi), Henry (handball, quick freekicks into net while goalkeeper is preparing wall etc etc etc). Arsenal supporters should be the last ones to moan about non technical football after being played off the park by BOTH United and Chelsea this season.
ridiculous to suggest united and chelsea were technically superior. yes inter did score 3 times, no all goals don’t have to be scored the same way
Well, if your rule was introduced, your club would be on an even longer run without a trophy since Arsenal put forward one of the most negative displays I’ve ever seen in the 2005 FA Cup Final.
And sorry, but if you can’t see the brilliance and beauty of how Inter played today then, well….
that was an awful performance, individually and collectively, from a team trying a completely new formation. we played badly, we didn’t set out to play for penalties.
i’m sorry, but no i fail to see any beauty in the way inter played today. can you try and explain in what way it was beautiful? was the way chelsea played there last season beautiful too? i bet your missus is a cracker
Okay, well, leaving aside 2005, today’s match was a terrific performance from a team playing with ten men for sixty minutes away from home against one of the most potent attacking teams in the world, and they looked completely comfortable and in control for the entire match. Again, if you can’t see the beauty in that then I think you need to think about the football and philosophy a little bit more.
And I’ll leave your “missus” out of it; I have a little class. Cheers.
wow, wasn’t meant personally jonathan just trying to inject a little humour into proceedings, given there was such little fun to be had from watching the football.
it’s interesting you say that as i’m actually studying philosophy at university. i’d say inter’s philosophy last night was to negate barcelona’s skill, to frustrate them, and to waste time, much like teams such as hull and stoke when they come to the emirates.
the fact that inter have very good players means they can do this very well. but i’m not a fan of such a philosophy, and i’d like to see the teams with the best players adopt a more positive approach. therefore i’d like to see the rules changed to make this happen.
beauty just seems completely inappropriate to describe that performance, maybe it just really is in the eye of the beholder.
Out of curiosity, how much do you play a team sport like football (of 11 or 5 players), basketball or handball? Defence is an integral part of the game in any of those sports. You have to understand the movement of the players off the ball in defence to understand how that was beautiful. It has to do with the covering of the space, the reading of the play, the compensation and teamwork (one player drifts away from position and another covers him immediately).
If you’re studying philosophy you should understand that the concept of beauty is not one-dimensional. Undoubtedly a typical Barcelona’s victory would have been beautiful, just as it was against Arsenal. But there other sides to it as well.
Well, maybe 2005 wascan aberration but Wenger’s 4-5-1 march to the 2006 champions league final can’t be excused away. Any true Gunner knows their history of “One-nil to the Arsenal”. Will you now start discarding League titles as not having been won playing a particular style?!
joao andre;
i agree, all the aspects of inter’s defending you mention were excellent (although the sheer numbers they had back there, and how deep they were, certainly made those aspects easier).i’m a defender myself and certainly appreciate the defensive side of the game, but that doesn’t make what inter produced beautiful in my opinion, and i was expressing that opinion.
defense should be a basis for attack in my view, not an overwhelming philosophy in itself. regardless of a team’s defensive abiities, i don’t think they should just abandon the ball and the art of attacking completely. can’t understand how anyone can see that as beautiful. however, studying philosophy, i accept that not only is the concept of beauty not one-dimensional, it is entirely subjective.
charred;
formation means nothing in terms of attacking or defensive philosophy. arsenal played some exhilerating football in that champions league campaign, i don’t think many people would deny that. they always looked to attack and keep the ball. i’m very lucky to support a team like arsenal with their current philosophy
suggesting new rules to advantage your favourite teams? Fair enough, I will also go for that: you can not have more than one striker in the rival’s penalty area at any given time. And from how Barcelona played tonight they seem already preparing for that!
it’s a rule change to advantage positive teams. your sarcastic rule change would probably encourage negativity, you’re not an inter fan are you?
Except your rule change wouldn’t have that effect. All it would encourage is long punts down the pitch and fewer defenders joining the play going forward.
it wouldn’t. it’s incredibly rare to see no defenders in their own half, so having to have one man back would make no difference. it would make the pitch bigger, creating more space. and i’d sooner see teams chasing long punts down the pitch, than champions league semi-finals turning into attack vs defence/falling over on the edge of the penalty area.
obviously I am, and my sarcastic rule was only to point out that football is good as it is (ref mistakes and acting apart), and by the way, what is a positive team? Inter, Chelsea, and Man U are negative in which sense?
they are negative in the sense of the nature of their performances against superior opposition, mostly (but not exclusively) away from home. last night’s match and chelsea last season are great examples, if you don’t see how those performances are negative then i don’t know what to say
to play more open in a away game is already rewarded via the away goal rule….. Bayern used this rule to their advantage….
Feel free to get off your high horse anytime you like, steve. This is professional football, the right way to play is the way that gets you silverware. Have fun feeling morally superior with your empty trophy cabinet
it’s no fun being morally superior, no, and it is a shame that entertaining the public, imagination and creativity, and a positive attitude aren’t rewarded with trophies.
much like life in general, the good guys don’t always win, but in some definite sense, that i’m not sure inter fans (and certainly not mourinho) could possibly understand, barcelona came off the pitch last night as winners (busquets aside).
Steve, lay off a little. Just a wee bit vehement here. Positioning Barcelona as the good guys – I’m sorry, what vile evil have Inter committed?
I think you’ll find Inter tried to attack. Inter have a ridiculously defensive formation – it’s analysed on the site – and this wasn’t it. Eto’o, Sneijder, Milito, Pandev (who I’m assuming got injured) – these are not the names of cynical Italian catenaccio defenders.
Unfortunately, somebody decided to play peek-a-boo, and the rest is mathematics. Imagine if, in the first leg, Barca lost a man after going 1-0 up; it’s not likely they’re going to swarm forward and do their swashbuckling attack. They wouldn’t be accused of being the bad guys and being negative, now would they?
If it ever only came down to skill, technique, brilliance, etc – well, that wouldn’t be a competition; it’d be Football’s Got Talent. Everybody loves it when Fulham beats Liverpool or Stoke manage to upset Chelsea, in a tie that the better side would be expected to win 9 times out of 10.
It’s nice to see this; that hard work, grit, and sheer (sure) bloody-mindedness can topple genius and class and all the laurels you’d care to bestow on Barcelona.
Steve,
It sounds like if you had a choice between style and substance, you would pull for style. Fair enough.
But take into consideration your definition of entertaining. My father has been an Arsenal supporter since Wenger first arrived, but he has ceased to find Arsenal entertaining when year after year they find themselves saying “Wait till next year!” after yet another late season collapse. Maybe you don’t think results are that important – that’s fair. Some fans do. For those that do, Arsenal’s philosophy of “yes we lose, but we lose pretty!” rings a bit empty when there are other teams that make concessions to reality (ie, it’s ok to win ugly) in order to actually win something.
i think you’ve summed it up really well. i can understand the frustration fans feel, and why they think wenger needs to compromise. personally, i just think that not compromising is more important than trophies, and i accept that i’m in the minority there.
but it is possible to do both – spain and barca have shown that recently. certainly arsenal are a long way off that level, but they’re aspiring to it and i admire that
This is as if FIFA made a rule that says “a keeper cannot cross the centre line” or “there must be two players present in the own half at all times.” It would be taking away a part of a tactic.
Please don’t judge all Arsenal supporters based on steve here.
agree with you mate! one major problem for arsenal is also we defend poorly sometimes.
absolutely. a lot of arsenal fans want to see wenger sacked because he hasn’t won a trophy for 5 years. a lot of arsenal fans boo their own players. i don’t want to be associated with that
Well firstly, positive attacking football does not equate to the right way. It’s far more attractive to the neutral, but that does not make defensive football wrong.
Secondly, Barca are the best pure attacking side in the world. It’s daft to suggest that teams should go against them trying to outplay them at their own game. It might please you to see Arsenal go out in a blaze of glory at NC, but honestly most people remember the game as the game where Arsenal didn’t defend well and got crushed.
Thirdly, Inter put 3 past Barca at the San Siro. They were tactically and possibly technically superior in that particular game. They had good balance and played great counterattacking football. No one is going to win a two legged tie by being purely defensive. Inter created and took their chances well. If inter could go to nou camp and defend, it’s because they did something right to deserve the 3-1 cushion they had.
Fourthly, Inter always had etoo and milito in barcas half pre-sending off. Down to 10 men, with a 3-1 lead, its only natural that inter would pull back the attackers to fill the gap in midfield. It’s not a sign of inferiority. It was just tactically necessary to win. 10 vs 11 at NC versus the most rampant attacking team in the world, and you think inter was gonna try 2 upfront for the 6-1 on aggregate? Please.
Lastly, the world’s best attacks are given the most praise when they unlock the world’s best defences. Similarly, praise is due when a great defensive side – far more than the sum of its parts, shackles the world’s best attack.
‘barca desrvedly play in a european cup final’
There’s definately something wrong with that statement… I’m not sure if intentionally getting players of the other team sent off really means you are deserving?
Im also an Arsenal fan but surely if you can’t appreciate the tactics employed by Mourinho in this match you must have a very small-minded outlook on football – essentially if teams don’t play like arsenal and barca then they shouldn’t be playing at all.
Instead should we just rule out defending all together and change football into keep-ball and whoever can pass the ball to their players most wins?
nope.
It’s too dificulty to Barcelona penetrate in Internazionale’s lines. Internazionale have good players, Mourinho don’t need be too defensive. In Champions League, Inter have 47% of possession of ball, the same of Apoel. I think Inter don’t need that because their players can do more than this.
http://esquemastaticos.blogspot.com/2010/04/barcelona-1×0-internazionale-analise.html
The notion that Inter being down to 10 was a “blessing in disguise” is sheer stupidity.
Why?
Had they played with 11 men, they would have tried to go forward, hence leaving FAR more space in their half for Barca to exploit and there would have actually been shots on target
The possibility is there, although if you check the possession stats prior to Motta’s dismissal, it was something approaching Inter 15% – Barca 85%, and Inter had until that point shown no inclination to aggressively attack Barca’s goal – so the space that Messi et al so desperately needed would likely have been hard to come by anyway.
I feel confident in saying that Inter’s plan was to sit back for the first half hour, survive the inevitable Barca surge, and then begin to look to counter in a similar manner to how they played in the first leg. After the sending off and knowing Barca needed two goals, there was no reason for Inter to worry about anything other than defending until Barca scored the first goal and when it only came with around ten minutes left, it was obvious the tie was going to be decided on whether Barca could score a second. And until the last few minutes, I can only remember one or two chances for Barca. Inter never looked like they were anything but comfortable in how things were going.
to FORCA JUVE
i have been reading this blog and now i feel the urge to addres u, since u stubornly keep insisting in your theory…u say Motta’s sent-off is a “blessing”…i can give u some credits if you rephrase it as “it changed/affected/influenced/brought” Inter’s defensive act to another level…calling it a “blessing” it’s pure amateurish, since no one forces a team to bring 11 man in the field, why not start with 10 men only, if it’s better as u’re suggesting, or even 9, OR come with 11 and have the same plan as u’d if u’re stuck with 10, see my point???
then u say: ”they would have have tried to go forward, hence leaving FAR more space in their half to exploit…”
…why are u assuming this? Excuse me, did u c the sansiro match or not???!!! Isn’t that enough evidence that Inter already pulled that successfully, WITHOUT leaving any spaces for Barca to do anything? plz, don’t assume anything if the evidence is already there, and fresh…u can assume other stuff, such as if Iniesta played or if Motta still in there and Inter pulling the same deadly counter-attack in the second half, after Barca getting a bit tired and impatientand opening up…and i’m pretty sure there’s room for other assumptions, but NOT something that already happened a week earlier…
The facts r indisputable:
- Inter did an excellent first leg, totally motivated and disciplined, scored three times (one barely offside, but i’m convinced they would have scored again, if that was called off, the way they were biting that night)
- they come to barcelona with a 3:1…why the fuck wouldn’t they defend that great valid advantage? who says they shouldn’t??? u should be on crack not to, especially already having the best defenders in the world…
- why press against a billion dollar team??? Barca is build to be the pressing power…Inter’s only left with very few options…that’s exactely what MOU did, TWICE, SUCCESFULLY!!! i don’t understand why peeps don’t get this…
- Inter is still a baby team compared to these spanish mega-teams…just imagine, they traded IBRA, got 45 mils and ETO’O, used it to get Lucio and Milito, and probably ended with some spare cash…while barca spent all this on Ibra alone…and they beat an EXPENSIVE barca, with a cheap team (remember the awesomely cheap deal on the great Sneider)…do the math, man…even if they would have lost to Barca, Inter would still feel glorious…
- Inter’s playing in three fronts simultaneously: in serie A, italian TIM Cup, and CL…they have a great chance for a triple, which is writing history…
-Did u notice how with even 10 players, @ the beginning of the second half Inter started pressing with Zanetti and Maicon, Snider and Milito and Cambiaso…I couldn’t believe my eyes they were doing it…they bought 7-10 min max, but what do u expect, daring it is crazy enough…
-a lot of peeps are overlooking the fact of 85% ball possession for Barca…did you noticed the shots count in inter’s goal? 4 (four)…if Barca would have had, 32 goal shots, 7 posts, 14 saves and 32 fouls suffered, I would have been the first person to target Inter as lucky sons of bitches…but the stats were, 555 passes, 82% bp, and 4 shots and they did comit more fouls than Inter…where did all this fury ended-up? Inter’s superb defense absorbed it all like a sponge…I saw a Zanetti, Maicon, Cambiaso, Lucio, Samuel that ran like a crazy train…u think it’s easy to be in sync and defend in block? Have u ever tried that yourself? Give it a shot, call a few buddies and try it…I dare u to try looking forward your markee and sideways to your line-buddies @ the same time…
- the spaniards r very arrogant (they’re not the only ones thou, but among the worst offenders IMHO)…their fifa non-existent titles speaks in volumes, yet they think they r soccer gods…they played IBRA again, and again, right after shown obviously ineffective, just to prove a stupid revenge…they can afford this risk…they think a revengeful player is worth the shot…great, they got the answer there…
- Barca got beat both offensively and most of all defensively (the only goal yesterday was slightly off-side, as Milito’s in the first leg)…so unless you got some goood facts, sheeesh
Apologies for the loooong message
hope this post helped
While I agree in this case, I do think it can be beneficial. It can provide a clarity of purpose. Sometimes you see teams not quite sure how to balance attack vs defence. Going down to 10 can then get the whole team working together.
Of course, this should never happen if the manager is doing his job properly, as he should make it crystal clear what his team should be doing.
True
Whether it was a blessing or not, it was an aggregate win for the defence nonetheless.
throughout this season i have always wondered what busquets actually does for this barcelona team that toure cant do, and why guardiola is so fond of him. well tonight i got my answer; his acting abilities! hes a mug. he adds nothing at all in my opinion to this side, and all he ever seems to do is be falling down or hacking at someones ankles. how he manages to get into the spanish squad ahead of the likes of arteta and de la pena are beyond me..
Positioning is good, reads the game well, passes well, doesn’t make mistakes.
Except those “Busquet’s moments” where he passes the ball to the opposition. That’s his one big problem.
True, he’s just a little bit of a baby, but I guess he’s a good player…
Still prefer Toure though…
I prefer Yaya normally too, but until recently he’d been having a pretty poor season.
And of course Busquets is a baby, so long term I don’t see a future for Yaya sadly. Hopefully we can rip off City for him and he can join his brother:)
We’d all take Cambiasso over Toure any day, though.
Did you see some of Toure’s passing tonight? I’m a massive Yaya fan but some of his distribution leaves a lot to be desired at times. And don’t even get me started on his shooting…
doesnt sound like your much of a fan
I think one of his shots seriously threatened the linesman.
I’m a frustrated fan after last night! He’s a great player but not above criticism.
Yaya last year was massively better than Busquets this year. Unfortunately, Busquets this year is better than Yaya this year, and I contribute most of that to Yaya no longer being in the team on a regular basis. Just seems he’s trying to do too much when his role is to facilitate and support…
I hate to be the one to bring this point but, to my mind, referee decisions had a far bigger influence than tactics on deciding the finalist. Inter had a goal wrongfully allowed while Barca had one wrongfully disallowed and a penalty in the first leg. That’s three key decisions going against the Catalans.
In spite of a superb defensive display, last night, Barca managed to score twice and create two huge chances. Admitedly, they weren’t at their sublime, cutting edge, best but they still did more that enough over the to legs to go through.
you know, if you take this direction you must be aware that it’s a dead end. for instance: didn’t you notice that pique’ was offside when he scored today ? and that the football had a clear deflection when chivu tackled messi (and was subsequently cautioned for that) ?
I think that a fair point made by ZM is not to talk about ref’s decisions, because everyone will look at them from one’s own perspective…
Sure, of course the referee’s decisions had an influence (can’t forget Busquets rolling around on the ground though) but that’s true almost every year. If you can find me one year in the last decade where there wasn’t some sort of controversy in at least one of the semi-finals I will be shocked. Right or wrong, it’s part of the game. And I think Barca used up all their good fortune last year.
As much as I hate to say this as a Barça fan, referees are a part of the game.
A lot has been said here, and elsewhere, about the penalty incident at the San Siro involving Alves.
Well, having watched that incident many times in slow-motion, I have to say it’s one of the best decisions I’ve seen this year.
The view from behind suggests that Sneijders reckless challenge merits a penalty; but the view from the front shows something entirely different: Sneijder doesn’t complete what would’ve been a perfectly executed scissors challenge, no, instead, Alves anticipates this move and typically goes down with there being no contact.
Am I the only one here who saw this?
lol … I would like to read the comments when Barca would have reached the final with respect to the red card for Inter and a goal where likely a hand/arm was used to control the ball …. reminds me on Henry’s assist against Ireland … lol…. poor referees, they never will get it right …
guess it’s time to bring technology to soccer. lol.
…lol ….with more technology it is terrible too or at least not much better: here in down under they use video footage for football (= rugby here)… interrupts the game for minutes and sometimes they still can’t get it right…
Kills the tempo. Completely unnecessary.
I also don’t like the idea of replays. Kills the tempo (which is bad enough in rugby which is a game of a lot more stops) and besides, where would you draw the line? When to use it?
Whenever I see comparisons between technology in rugby and its application to football, I have to wonder whether any football journalists actually watch rugby.
It doesn’t kill the tempo in rugby, because it’s not used except when a contentious try is scored, which is a fairly rare event (if you watch Northern hemisphere rugby, then any try at all is a rare event these days).
Play has to stop when the ball goes down over the try line, regardless of what’s happened, and all the video ref is deciding is whether it’s a 5-metre scrum or a conversion attempt that comes next. In football, the video ref could be ruining a counter-attack while he ponders.
Rugby doesn’t use a video to enforce its offside line (which is far more regularly incorrectly patrolled), or to check whether penalties given were correct (and in rugby, many, many games are won by kicking penalties, and penalties are awarded for things that go on, half-seen, under a pile of bodies, where video angles can discern much better than the human ref) so I don’t see why football writers think it does.
They could try hawk-eye for the goal-line, though it’d rarely be needed; and I’m fine with incidents like with Zidane – where his headbutt was seen on the video, not by the ref, but even american football – where there’s a break in play every 15 seconds (literally.), and where a break in play is not a negative, but an opportunity for ads – doesn’t like to use too much video reffing.
Fully in agreement. I actually wasn’t aware that video in rugby would be used just after a dubious try, although I had seen it only then.
I remember that in 1994, during the world cup in the USA, the americans TV producers asked whether it would be possible to introduce breaks in the game for showing advertisements. I remember that they were given the technical reasons why not and then were explained that riots could erupt if that happened at the wrong times.
The present system is fine. Add more referees, maybe, but don’t add technology. There are mistakes and those would always be there. In the long run, most of the teams even out the mistakes for and against.
Just to point out one thing for everyone making the Inter cynical fouling blah blah blah point..
Fouls Committed
Barcalona – 20
Inter – 15
And yes I understand that numbers aren’t everything, but still, they do count for something. and considering Barca had the ball for over 80% of the match to only commit 15 fouls is the sign of an extremely disciplined team.
agree 100%
Same.
Not just the cynical fouling though. I think those stats go some way to prove how good Inter were at *winning* fouls cynically.
And with Barca’s high tempo high pressing “defence from the front”, it was all too easy for an intelligent/experienced player like Samuel or Eto’o to win a cheap free-kick when under intense pressure.
You mean like Busquets getting someone sent off?
Well both teams were at it – and all teams on the big stage do it. But I felt Inter were particularly smart tonight, although Barca got the biggest shout with the red card. Simply trying to explain here how Barca managed more fouls.
@ Steve – wish it’d let me reply one more time to your post, but I’ll just do it here.
“it’s interesting you say that as i’m actually studying philosophy at university. i’d say inter’s philosophy last night was to negate barcelona’s skill, to frustrate them, and to waste time, much like teams such as hull and stoke when they come to the emirates.
the fact that inter have very good players means they can do this very well. but i’m not a fan of such a philosophy, and i’d like to see the teams with the best players adopt a more positive approach. therefore i’d like to see the rules changed to make this happen.
beauty just seems completely inappropriate to describe that performance, maybe it just really is in the eye of the beholder.”
When I speak of philosophy I’m not speaking of football tactics, but of the idea of beauty as something more. Inter’s performance was miles apart from any from Stoke or Birmingham. Inter was in control the entire match, they never did anything other than what they set out to do, and they did it perfectly. Sure it was defensive and sure if you wanted to see two teams running back and forth then that wasn’t the match for you. But I can see that if I go down to my local Sunday rec league. Inter just put forth one of the most impressive defensive displays in years. You have to look for the subtle aspects of the performance to appreciate it – how Inter never allowed Xavi to play a pass to Messi in the middle of the Inter defence, how defenders and midfielders seamlessly passed off responsibility for Barca’s attackers to one another, how Inter was never pulled out of position. It was a masterful performance in so many ways and that is what was beautiful about it.
To use an example from outside football, look at Picasso’s ‘Guernica.’ Is is pretty? Not really. But it is absolutely beautiful.
So if Mourinho is Picasso, who is Harry Redknapp?
Braque – good but limited.
Instead of pressing on the man, Inter closed the passing lines. That reminded me of Christian Gourcuff, unknown genious and father of, who made his much more limited sides play a similar way.
Exactly – and they closed those lanes very smartly. It was especially to watch Sneijder cover Xavi. Whenever another player, say Busquets, wold have the ball, Sneijder would first look for Xavi and get in position to prevent the pass to Xavi that would put Xavi in position to make a incisive pass before Snijider would close down the man with the ball. Resultantly, almost every pass Xavi hit went to the side, not the middle of the park.
hi jonathan,
Picasso’s ‘Guernica’ is a creation. inter’s all-consuming philosophy was one of destruction, of denying creativity.
for me, beauty isn’t really about appearances, it’s about intentions. that’s why a mis-hit cross going over the keeper and in would not, in my opinion, be beautiful, whereas a deliberate lob would be. it is what was in Picasso’s imagination, his conception of his work, that is truly beautiful, the actual painting itself is just a way of communicating that.
i don’t mean to say that brilliant defending, organisation, discipline etc. cannot be beautiful, but this depends on what that team is trying to achieve, what’s in their mind. in inter’s mind was the intention to do anything (including constantly falling over and feigning injury) to stop the other team.
the way in which Busquets got Motta sent off was very skillful, so should we look at the way he went down, and rolled around on the floor and say that was beautiful? no, because of what his intentions were. but on your account, don’t we have to say his actions were beautiful? i know cheating is against the rules, and defending for the sake of winning isn’t, but then are we to say that what is beautiful is determined by the rule book?
for defence to be beautiful, just like attack, i think it needs to be a means to an end, a way of achieving a beautiful vision. i love the way clichy defends for instance, the way he reads the game and makes interceptions is beautiful. what’s in his mind when he does this? to set up an attack, and contribute to the overall vision of the team – to excite and to create.
Steve,
All fair points, I guess it all depends on how you look at Inter’s intentions. Personally, I choose to try and ignore the minor instances of the “darker arts” simply because I don’t think there’s usually that big a difference between teams. Barca engage in all the same practice that Inter might have yesterday, if we didn’t see them it was only because the circumstances didn’t call for them after Busquets had managed to get Motta sent off. And if you look at the fouls committed, Barca actually committed more. But all that is beside the point.
As I mentioned, what I found beautiful and so very impressive was the way that Inter played together. And it was no different than Barca at their most brilliant and fluid going forward. I think that Inter’s defence did achieve a beautiful end: it was a complete and seamless collective. And I think you have to account for the occasion and the opponent. They took what most people consider to be the best attacking team in the world and made them look inept. Oh, and they did so with ten men for the majority of the match. They went out there with the intention of controlling the match and I don’t see how anyone could say they were not in complete control for the ninety minutes.
And to answer your question about the rule book – yes I do think that playing within the rules is important and I think Inter did (as much as any team does, as I said above).
Anyway, we probably won’t see another performance like this for a while. If you can find the chance to watch the match again, or even twenty or thirty minutes of it, I suggest doing so and really looking at how Inter defended. Sometimes a second look at things can show us parts we missed in the heat of the moment. Thanks for the discussion. Cheers.
Call me crazy, but I think a good adjustment at half time by Guardiola would have been to give up possession, allow Inter to attack, and hit them on the counter-attack. Lucio and Walter Samuel’s strength comes from sitting at the top of the 18 yard box and allowing nothing to come through. Guardiola tried to stretch them wide, but didn’t try stretching them length wise. In the final 10 minutes that wasn’t an option anymore, but i think early on in the second half a couple of good counter-attacks would have been helpful for Barcelona.
After reading your and Jonathan Wilson’s article about a the emersion of an attack minded CB, Yaya-toure, and in the final minutes, Pique, were a good example. Thanks for changing my approach to the game. If I would have watched this without having followed you for the past couple of months, i probably would have hated on Inter for “parking the bus.” Instead, i give most of the credit to Mourinho’s tactical saviness and Guardiola’s lack of creativity.
Guatty, have you watched Barca at all in the last 2 years? They’re game is predicated on pressing and holding a high line. If you want Inter to come forward…tough, they’re not going to, especially once they were down to 10.
Ya I know, that’s why i said call me crazy…
everything about inter’s tactics made it incredibly difficult for Barca to use there speed, especially by sitting back so far. The numerical advantage and Yaya-Toure’s repositioning into a more advanced role did nothing. Stretching out wide did nothing either. I was just looking for some holes in Mourinho’s almost perfect tactical approach to this game. and romanticising. But I am glad Barca aren’t through…
I actually was thinking the same as guatty throughout the match. Barcelona wasn’t getting space, so they should have changed the approach. Maybe not by giving the ball away, but by starting to exchange it in the back, inviting the Inter players forward. Piqué is comfortable on the ball, so is Touré, the same for Dani Alves and Maxwell. They could simply exchange passes, await for Inter to come up and then try to attack faster. Unfortunately, on the two occasions they did have space to counter-attack (yes, there were two moments) they simply took too much time to make use of it.
in my opinion if barca players exchange passes at the back (say just before the halfway line) i dont think inter players will come out and press them. inter are comfortable sitting deep and it will only be a waste of time.
For all a starting lineup diagram’s worth, seeing Messi surrounded by Zanetti, Chivu, Cambiasso, Samuel and, to a lesser extent, Thiago made it obvious he was not going to have a quiet day at the office…
Hi ZM,
Great site! Having followed J Wilson’s columns and read his book ITP, I thoroughly enjoy this site as your articles (and the ensuing discussions too!) are very constructive and informative. Keep up the good work!
I’ve been following your site closely since its inception, but I haven’t had chance to comment
You didn’t mention about Jose’s substitutions which saw Milito and Eto’o coming off… What’s your opinion on them?
I am not convinced with those subs. My mind goes back to last year’s semi-final at the Bridge, where Hiddink took off Drogba (constant source of threat to Barca’s defensive line) and replaced him with Belletti (playing DM). Today and last year, those substitutions liberated the CBs such that Barca could put more in attack. I think my concern is backed by the fact that after Milito was taken off, Pique scored; and then after Eto’o was taken off, Toure was allowed to stride that far forward to provide the assist for the goal! Toure and Pique, of course, are the two guys directly affected by Mou’s substitutions.
Well. Of course, Toure didn’t end up assisting a goal that would’ve sent Barca to the final. But still, I think those were strange substitutions (bordering “blunders” even), and Barca was desperately unlucky to not score 2.
Overall, I think the game goes like this:
0 min: Barca played their Plan A (tiki-taka), but Zlatan looked out of place in that Plan A.
28 min: Red card to Motta. I didn’t think this really influenced the game.
63 min: Pep realized, that Zlatan looked out of place, so he replaced him with the guy who suited Plan A better.
~70 min: Pep must be thinking, “Sh**, Plan A not working. But I just subbed out the 6′5″ guy who would have worked in Plan B (route one), and introduced the 5′7″ guy who wouldn’t have worked in Plan B.”
81 min: Inexplicably Mourinho took out Milito. Suddenly Barca was presented with a Plan B that they wouldn’t have had otherwise — sending the center-backs forward to be a physical presence in the box.
84 min: Pique scored.
85 min: Eto’o taken off. One more Barca CB (Toure) liberated to attack.
90+4 min: Mourinho hailed as a hero by all. But really, things could have gone very wrong for him, had Toure not been penalized for handball.
Do you agree?
I disagree. As much as Guardiola failed in utilizing Ibrahimovic, he is no fool like you make him. The reason for him putting on his most expensive player is because it would be utterly ignorant not to do so. That much money for nothing in the most necessary win of the season?
I do agree, though, that Mourinho would have been blamed for the loss had Barcelona scored in the two chances Bojan received before and after the Pique goal. Then again, when do we ever not criticize the losing manager?
I agree. When he took off Milito for Cordoba(a CB) it definately liberated Pique to push forward. It also changed the shape of the Inter team into something more resembling a 5-4-0 and they were finding it increasingly hard to press further from their goal.
Tactically, I agree that Mourinho was an idiot for taking off his strikers. The only thing keeping Valdez & the defense from joining the attack was the threat of Milito, Eto’o and a lucky ball from Sneijder.
Probably, though, they were both out of breath defending so much (Milito in particular). Possibly, though, Mourinho could feel Barcelona were off their game – when Toure starts taking shots, you know you’re in trouble.
And I’m not sure the loss of Motta was insignificant. Eto’o broke past the entire touchline and ended up the only Inter player within miles of the ball. If it had been 11 v 11, Inter would’ve definitely tried to make an attack of it.
He was not a idot for taking out tired strikers and putting in fresh defenders.
Barca was against the wall it had nothing to lose.
Pique would have gone forward regardless of how many strikers Inter still had on the field.
Did Ink just call Mourinho an idiot for taking off a forward for a defender when all they needed to do was defend? Thats the last post by Ink I’ll read…
> 81 min: Inexplicably Mourinho took out Milito.
Well, if you need a reason, he was totally spent. And on the bench Inter had just two FW, Arnautovic and Balotelli: teens you really don’t want to spend your reputation on, I think.
While I can appreciate a cohesive defensive performance, and Inter certainly provided one tonight, I was disgusted by some of the other details in Mourinho’s anti-football. Instructing your entire squad to engage in time wasting whenever possible, and consistently feigning injury has no place on a football pitch, but they seemed to be part of the “gameplan” tonight.
I will be the first to condemn this kind of behavior when it happens on a team I support, and some members of the Barcelona blogging community have been quick to denounce both Alves and Busquets for similar behavior.
In Inter’s favor, they were able to play defensively in the way they did tonight because of their intelligent attacking display a week ago. You have to admire their tactical flexibility, but I’m still praying for a Bayern win in the final.
Well said. Not to make this sound derogatory, but I think the way MOST (other than the two aforementioned) of Barcelona played tonight was posh, while the way Inter played was the classic “Italian” way of playing football.
The referee is partially to blame for his calls, the lack of, on diving players. Maybe the press and the FA should do a better job of exposing, fining, and humiliating divers.
I thought the formation was a lop sided 3-4-3 rather than a 4-3-3. With Puyol, Toure, and Gabby Milito playing as 3 man defense, Dani Alves as an out and out right wing back rather than fullback, Busquets and Xavi and Keita in the middle, Messi playing off Ibra up front and Pedro on the left wing.
Due to the brilliant defensive display from inter barca didnt seem to have any ideas of how to break them down. Is it the case that having too much of the ball is a bad thing? an obsession for possession. Its truly a great achievement for mourinho 10 men single mindedly set out to do just one thing… to defend, follow what their master has told them to do. master motivator mourinho
nearly 200 comments and such a high level of agreement – impressive! …. this is one of the best and most interesting webpages about soccer ….
Not enough talk about how Inter stopped Messi.
Essentially, Cambiasso stood on his left foot all day and dared him to go the other way, knowing that second defender was right behind him. I think Messi got past Cambiasso once – for that shot/Cesar save. Otherwise, absolutely no change from Cambiasso at all. Of course, many of the other tactical points made here are correct, but the key to stopping Barca is in fact to stop Messi (or at least, if you don’t stop Messi then you are out of luck). Cambiasso did the job, and Maradona is even more of a fool than I thought if he’s not on the plane to SA.
I agree, although someone pointed to me his possible overlapping with Masch in Argentina team. Nevertheless, Cambiasso has been impressive…would I be Maradona, also Zanetti would come to SA.
I disagree with the suggestion that the sent off was a blessing in disguise. The only reason Inter survived was because of their disciplined, well-communicated, rock-solid defending. Anything short of a masterclass defending would have turned this game into a slaughter after the red card.
Before the sent off, Inter rarely had the ball anyways and was content with defending deep. So with or without Motta, Inter was unlikely to be caught out of position. However, Motta’s red card took away an important defender, and forced Cambiasso and Chivu to cover more ground in front of the back four, and gave up more space on the flanks. It also took away the possibility of launching counter attacks, which we all know is one of Inter’s best weapons this game. Eto’o had a moment that he had plenty of space inside the box. If Motta was not sent off, it’s almost certain that Inter would have created more moments like that, and quite possibly ended up with a goal.
Congrats to Inter for pulling off the best defensive display in years.
I like the way Barca play, but I think Inter deserved to win the tie.They were superb defensively and I hope Barca had done more overlapping runs from their fullbacks or wingers as said in the article but they wanted to play that killer pass through the middle which was never gonna happen against a side like Inter.Mourinho won the tactical game against Pep.Simply he is one of the best coaches around.Apart from one instance from Xavi skipping away from cambiasso and Motta I think,and the goal from Pique there was no magic moment in this match neither from Messi nor Xavi.They missed Iniesta’s creativity,movement off the ball, and his passing and once again Julio Ceasar has kept a clean sheet against Messi..
If Piqué had converted into a center forward earlier in the 2nd half Barça’s crosses would’ve been more effective and helped us to the final.
ALWAYS BARÇA NO MATTER WHAT!!!
I just don’t think there was anything Barca could do to break down the best defensive display I’ve ever seen. As someone mentioned before because of Inter’s 2 goal lead from the home leg they never had to come forward at all.
I don’t believe that any tactical decision from Guardiola could have allowed Barca to get through them. And it was the pure determination and organisation from Inter that didn’t allow any (apart from Pique’s wonderful goal – very close but just about onside I reckon)individual piece of skill to surface.
Wonderful game.
Just wanted to clarify one thing – Mourinho WAS planning on going with 3 strikers + Sneijder, looking to hit Barca on the counter. Pandev pulled up with a strain during warmup and Chivu slotted in for him.
wow! So many comments
Nice to see that 
The trick Barca missed-not bringing on Henry-a proven finisher and someone who is taller as well..he would have given them a lot more movement as well…best player for Barca on the night – Pique.
Its amazing how far he’s fallen since last year that Jeffren comes on instead of Henry
Oh! and I have to add that barca’s play had a bit of Asian effect to it- not enough players taking on the defenders..but then again that is because of Inter’s genius..Barcaa should have invited them to attack.
even though barca played the ball back, inter players still stayed in their penalty area.
they just wouldn’t come out. happy campers.
1. ZM was spot on with Ibra analysis in the 1st leg by saying he was taking space from Messi and thus slowing the play for Barca. Very surprised to see Ibra starting the 2nd game. Adding the fact that Ibra is not 100% fit I don’t know why Pep tried him a 2nd time. Einstein once said that madness is when trying the same thing over again and hoping for different results.
2. Busquets is a diver. This is a fact and the dismissal of Motta was ludicrous.
3. That WAS a handball, the Barca player created advantage with his hand and that is not FOOTball.
4. Inter were brilliant and played exactly what Mou wanted, so few managers achieve that kind of display from their teams.
The same tac, same sub as the first leg for Barça. Pique played better in ST position, just the same as first leg as well. Why using Ibrahimovic?
“Matt on April 29, 2010 at 1:01 am
Please, don’t compare Spurs to Inter. It is an insult to Inter. Their reading of the game, of passing moves Barca might try, their closing of space, they are on another level to some middling team like Spurs.”
Some middling team? A team that has beaten liverpool, arsenal and chelsea this season (along with virtually every1 else in the league) and is vying for a champs league spot?
1) Inter are far better than spurs but “middling” is just plain wrong
2) Let’s try not to be childish and insult people’s teams ok?
I bristle at the blogger calling catenaccio brilliant tactics. It’s the same system perfected decades ago.
It’s cynical, and with a bit of help, it worked for Inter. But if credit should be given it should be to the 3 outstanding Inter players, Eto’o, Cambiasso & Samuel. The rest was, as the blogger highlighted, dogged organisation.
Tactically, it was a zero.
If you didn’t know better you’d think Mourinho invented catenaccio last night.
Oh come on. There’s not that many tactics these days that strictly speaknig haven’t been done before.
As the opening paragraph indicates, often the faunnig over Mourinho is media-fuelled drivel but in this instance it was pure genius. One of the best uses of the catenaccio (or any other tactic), sticking doggedly to the principle and executing it at the Nou Camp (against arguably the greatest ever team?) and pulling it off with a man down. Credit where it’s due.
Why does something have to be ‘original’ for it to be respected? To say the performance was ‘tactically, a zero’ is just…laughable.
Question: If that were Stoke City lining up that way tactically, against Aston Villa, would you have been as impressed? Be honest!
Answer to your question on whether tactics have to be original: Because Mourinho did the same thing Ferguson did in 07/08 against the same team, what Hiddink did last season against the same opponent.
To me, giving tactical credit for a team parking the bus most unimaginatively is like giving Martin O’Neil credit for playing with 2 wingers.
There’s nothing outstanding about it.
Especially since, Barcelona did score two valid goals and Bojan missed a sitter, and the ref missed a peno on Ibra when Samuel ripped his shirt.
Don’t get me wrong, the defending from cambiasso & Samuel was outstanding, as good as any I’ve seen. Same with Eto’o’s performance.
They defended well. But from a tactical perspective it’s not as great as you’re making out.
@Ole Gunner
Yes the catennacio at the end of the day has been mastered and executed before. But that’s not the full story. It is the coming together of *every aspect* that Mourinho can realistically (or unrealistically) be expected to manage. I’m not just talking sticking 10 athletic thugs behind the ball in a 4-5-1 and hoping for the best. We’re talking the *correct* catenaccio, an adaption of Mourinho’s standard 4-2-3-1, the motivation and stubborn organisation of his players, the adapting to an (unfair) red card, the “gamesmanship” which I am not a fan of (since Porto Vs Celtic 2003) but which you have to respect, the choice of individuals.
I mean it is sheer bravery to defend within your own QUARTER at the Nou Camp for the entirety of the game, and essentially give the ball to Barca and say “I know you are the greatest team ever, I know we’re a man down but we are prepared to go toe to toe – do your worst”.
No it’s not the first time I’ve seen a backs to the wall “victory”. But for the manager to unequivocally get every single aspect so right in the face of such adversity I really have to applaud him.
I also don’t want to go down the route of “Barca missed a sitter, should’ve had a penalty, had a goal disallowed”, because let’s be fair, that isn’t Inter’s responsibility and should have no bearing on our judgement of strategies. I wouldn’t have said it was a red card and I wouldn’t have said Ibra deserved a pen since he was giving as good as he got.
I’d have to agree with Ole Gunner here. Mourinho’s tactical battle was won in the first leg and Jose had anticipated, as did all else, that Barcelona would just attack and attack. Due to Barcelona’s potency, Inter were forced to drop way back – not exactly all by choice – something also Stoke, Villa or Chelsea would have done.
Jose wanted to counter a la the first leg but didn’t have the speed, the ball retention or the numbers to do that.
the greatest ever team lol is that a joke?
I admit it’s a superlative too far but there really is a genuine shout for the current Barca side to be considered that.
of course not…they are worse than last year (in-form Henry, Iniesta, Etoo!!) and even then they were not the best side ever…sorry but that’s just ludicrous
I think their current season is a bit overrated…they had problems in group stage in CL, they drew Stuttgart (!!) and were quite poor in the first game, they played Arsenal with their 3 best (arguably) players injured etc
they are (still) first in the league, but they weren’t so superior than last year and there is quite a big chance they won’t even finish first
don’t get me wrong they are a good side, one of the best (if not the best) this season…but I think great Messi’s season camuflaged their flaws
Well I know they’ve not reached the heights of last year (especially given last nights result). But they are essentially an improved squad from last season – the season in which they won every single competition they entered. (Wat it 7?)
Now that in itself is an extra-ordinary feat which no team has ever managed to accomplish, and to do so with such flair and style, but remember last night they were favourites for the CL and for La Ligua once more (and I’m sure further domestic trophies).
I respect that it’s entirely a moot point now, but the Barca team despite the result should surely still be considered at this moment in time the worlds best? Anyway, that wasn’t really the purpose of my post and as I say may be a superlative too far.
I also fear we’re all running out of room to argue! lol
I just don’t think they are an improved squad from last season.
And I don’t it’s so easy to say that they are the best team in the world.
McShay, Keiton,
Barca 09 is better than Barca 10. I don’t care about statistics… Barca 09 nearly went out in the semis to Chelsea, Barca 10 did, but the diff in those 2 results is razor thin…
But when you look at the options Pep had in 09, Henry, Eto’o & Messi scoring 100+ goals! Going into the Inter game, Messi, Pedro & Ibra had combined for 80+… BUT the huge difference is the flexibility and versatility of the front 3.
Last year any of those 3 could play across any part of the pitch (although Henry rarely came off the left, he was capable of it, and did in some La Liga matches). This year, Ibra must play centrally and unless Messi sticks to the right then they have an unbalanced side and it does help the defense knowing where to find Ibra…
@ Jason
I was worknig with the assumption that the exchange of Ibra for Eto’o worked in Guardiola’s favour – I guess it was him that pushed through the deal. Yes 09 were more successful than 10 but the team isn’t THAT different. I believe Barca are still generally far and away the best team in the world right now. This isn’t a god given right to win every game – a combination of intelligent pragmatism from Mourinho and perhaps poor decisions by Pep ensured this. I still cannot name a better team in football, can you?
McStay, I think you’re selling Inter short, mind you they’re in the lead of Serie A, in the domestic Cup final and CL final…
You might be able to make the argument that if you had to choose a group of players to go through the entire season, this yes Barca would probably be picked more than Inter. But if you really want to break it down…
Cesar > Valdes
Maicon > Alves
Lucio & Pique > Samuel & Puyol
Zanetti > Maxwell
Cambiasso > Busquets
Xavi & Sneijder > Keita & Motta
Messi & Eto’o & Milito > Pandev & Pedro & Ibra
For me, thats 3 Barca and 8 Inter
And perhaps most importantly, Mourinho > Pep
Mourinho has contributed nothing to football from a tactical perspective and is seen as a tactical genius. We’ve seen the likes of Benitez and the way his 4-2-3-1 changed football for a while. We saw Zeman’s 4-3-3 adaptations. We saw Van Gaal win the Euro Cup with kids in ‘94 with an interesting 3-4-3/4-3-3. We saw Wenger give the 4-4-2 a new lease of life and turn it into a fluid formation that didnt require wingers.
We’ve seen tactical innovations in the game.
So it begs the question; who is a genius? The guy who creates or the guy who executes what somebody else has created?
I’m not playing “whatifs” about Barca missing a sitter. I am saying that this tactic could well have ended in a loss, as well as Inter defended (which I don’t deny).
I think giving a team like Barcelona or even any team the ball, in the semi-finals of the Champions league, is a not necessarily a clever strategy because it can be done by 1) Individual errors, 2) refereee decisions 3) individual brilliance.
Put another way, it’d be more impressive if Barcelona had actually been reduced to know chances. But they had enough chances to turn the tie.
I sense a touch of bitterness there, as is the case with 99% of your posts on this site. Remember Chelsea & Barca were hot favourites for this season’s CL and Mourinho overcame both. He doesn’t need to create a formation or “philosophy” to be considered tactically brilliant. The fact is he gets the best out of his players through excellent organisation and motivation and wins even in the face of adversity. He won the CL with Porto for Christ’s sake. The CL still eludes Wenger up to this date.. Food for thought.
Mourinho’s brilliance and genius is being tactically flexible, outmaneuvering his opponent, engineering a belief in his players that they can succeed and creating an environment where stopping a goal is celebrated as much as scoring a goal (see Motta and Lucio celebrations in the 1st leg)
How many teams usually line up with 4 attacking players (Milito, Eto’o, Pandev, Sneijder)? Barca don’t…
Plan Ibra didn’t work in both legs. At times he was at his not-interested best. He does give Barca a different dimension but he not the kind of target man say like Kevin Devies. It was all so easy for Lucio & Walter Samuel to track him down. With the tricky small forwads on, Barca scored a goal, had a disallowed goal and Bojan (a 5′ nothing lad) missed a glorious free header, easy to score than to miss. What surprised me most that Barca didn’t win many set pieces around the box with the kind of tricky midfielders they possess.
Mourinho’s plan was obvious from the time they had a 2 goal lead. Its the kind of ugly-football genius that Maurinho thrives on. Their players executed it to near perfection was superb.
ZM; do you think Mourinho would have planned differently if Iniesta was playing. I consider him to be more of a CREATING genius than Xavi and Messi together.
Since this site is so much in to tactical analysis and you are such a great fan of Mourinho, why not start a series of career & tactical analysis of great managers with their masterpieces and blunders. Start with MOURINHO
LOVE THE SITE.
I think ZM commented on the possibility of Manager specific articles which I am hopeful / looking forward to!
But of course you have to start with probably the biggest genius in world soccer management – Gordon Strachan
You got it wrong. ZM is not “such a great fan of Mourinho”. He has applauded Pep Guardiola a lot more in his articles.
Hmmm…tactics. I think Inter played well in first leg and tactically exposed Barca.
What Chelsea and Inter have shown is that if you put 10 very experienced, expensive, well drilled players behind the ball it is very very difficult to get more than one goal over 90 minutes. Call it tactics if you will but I feel that is a bit over kill.
Losing a man had no real impact to Inter’s game plan but gave them good PR and excuse for playing that way.
It also demonstrates that Barca should have been more cautious in the San Siro and threw less people forward as the key to the tie was keeping the San Siro result to a draw minimum.
This means that the to play against Mourinho you need to fight fire with fire…the result will inevitably tend towards “shit on a stick” as happened with Liverpool against Chelsea but Benitez did manage to win.
completely agree ray. although i think it’s better for a team like barca to lose playing the right way than to lower themselves to inter’s level
Aha, but isn’t bowling. There is no “goldfish” here – you don’t just play your best game, and if your best is good enough, you win. You must beat your opponents, by outscoring them, or by preventing them from scoring and then scoring one more PK than your opponent.
May I introduce you to two-player game theory?
If Barcelona ever lower themselves to Inter’s level, though – working hard, having the centre forward run all the way back to play left-back and defend, being capable of dishing it out for ninety minutes and then taking the blows for the next ninety with essentially the same players, and generally shutting up and not taking the bait with all the hype and t-shirts and firecrackers and sprinkers – if Barca ever come down to Inter’s level, surely they would win everything forever. And no, that’s not even in jest – Barca’s players are that good.
But sometimes, if you are too talented, too genius, too good, you forget about hard work, and you become arrogant…
Anyway, I was wondering your opinion of the battle at Thermopylae (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae). Those damned Spartans with their negative evil philosophy of destruction, ey? They should’ve just upped and rushed the hordes of Persia, instead of sitting back and defending deep until they all died. What a load of cowards, right? Should’ve died with an attacking philosophy, never mind of Greece was invaded.
enjoyed the refernce there ink, but i hardly think you can compare being invaded with playing in the champions league semi-final. i don’t think you’re under any obligation to protect your lives in a certain way, after all there’s no tv audience paying your wages in a Greek-Persian war is there?
maybe the war thing did inspire inter though, they were certainly good at playing dead.
How important was that miss from Bojan, that header he virtually missed while it could have turned the game. And to add to that, you need to agree, Pep was never wrong with his tactics, it was just that Jose was a bit superior with his tactics tonight!!!. Hats off to ‘The Special One’
Even though I know the epithet is (I hope) ironic, just how special is Jose Mourinho as a tactician? How is last night’s performance by Inter tactically any more special than the 4-0 annihilation of Cruyff’s Barcelona by Capello’s Milan? Or the way Hiddink’s Chelsea held off Guardiola’s Barça – a much perkier Barça – last year (or would have done had it not been for Andrés Iniesta’s lucky last-ditch strike)?
I don’t think Mourinho’s tactical approach last night was special in the slightest. I don’t think it was even particularly remarkable. The task was to consolidate a strong first-leg advantage and get past a fine attacking team with a good yet definitely not watertight defence. There were really only two options open to Mourinho. The first was to press forward and try to score just one goal, thereby obliging Barcelona to respond with not only one but with four. The other was to blow the dust off a fifty-year-old notepad initialled “HH” that he found in the back of a cupboard when clearing out his office in Milan. Guess which furrow Mou chose to plough?
Effective? Certainly. Pragmatic? Indeed. Appropriate in the circumstances? Perhaps it was that too. But special? Bold, imaginative, exciting or, some might say, even sporting? No.
Purely reactionary tactics, whose only ambition is to stall, spoil and stymie those of your opponents are quite valid, inasmuch as they fall within the rules of the game (er, well, mostly), but they’re not “special”. If reaction were truly more laudable than action, then the argument about the world’s greatest footballer would not revolve around Pele and Maradona. It’d be a toss-up between Lev Yashin and Gordon Banks.
Agreed.
Still, I hope Inter go to defeat an attacking Bayern and inspire a generation of tactically brilliant defensive teams. It’ll be like Italy back in the day, when a great match meant a 1-0 game with maybe 3 shots total. The thrill of watching disciplined teams camped almost permanently in their own halves for eons is why we love the tactical game so much.
>There were really only two options open to Mourinho. The first was to press forward and try to score >just one goal, thereby obliging Barcelona to respond with not only one but with four. The other was >to blow the dust off a fifty-year-old notepad initialled “HH” that he found in the back of a >cupboard when clearing out his office in Milan. Guess which furrow Mou chose to plough?
1) Motta’s red card sure changed the whole Inter perspective, and you must consider also Pandev’s injury
2) Trying to assault Barcelona at Nou Camp (or Camp Nou?) to score one more goal wouldnt have been bravery or genius or art: it would have been just the most stupid approach you can have, letting the opponents do what they love to do: run into spaces. Come on. Would you play tennis against Nadal trying to beat him using raw power and resilience?
Motta’s red card came after the goalkeeper’s booking for timewasting. Mourinho’s intentions were clear right from the start. The sending-off might have changed how far from their own penalty area Milito and Eto’o were (i.e. 15 yards rather than 25), but not much else, I don’t think.
After the match Mourinho chirpily admitted that he didn’t want the ball at all (who knew?), because Barcelona press so well that he didn’t want to risk losing it again when the team was out of position, and he never, ever wanted them to lose their shape (a shape for which the technical term is, I believe, “the washing line”).
His maximum ambition for that match was to lose it, but not by much. “This loss is my sweetest success,” he said afterwards.
Losing to win. Rather than a strategy for playing football, it sounds like it should be the title of a vanity-published self-help book.
MOU said that to summarize the day…do you know what he said in details thou?
he said he felt really sad for the loss, and wanted the tie since it was the right result that night…0-0 was the right picture that night, and he regrets taking the (off-side) goal very much…but this loss, nevertheless, is the sweetest loss of my life…true enough
Archie, you’ve just said everything i’ve been trying to say and more.
I really think Pep should send out Henry in the first place. He has something Ibra don’t have – speed. Henry is speedy and experienced. This should be an asset when playing against slow but tough defenders like Lucio and Samuel.
Besides, it is such a waste that iniesta couldn’t play. If not Barca would win hands down.
Dissapointed.
I’m not sure it was tactical brilliance, more an astute observation of how Barca play by Mourinho, and a 2 goal lead. There was nothing new in his defensive tactics. The execution was key, with Inter players putting their body and soul into the contest, and concentrating for the 90 minutes.
The disappointing aspect was, as other posts state, the fact that Barca didn’t attempt to get an overlap. Alves was poor, always bringing the ball back inside, or trying to cross it from a deep positions. As tall as Ibra is, I don’t fancy him against Lucio/Samuel in the air as they are too cunning.
Even on the rare occasions that Inter attacked, Barca was too slow to take advantage of the brief opportunity of Inter not having 10 (then 9) players behind the ball.
Also, not much mention of the penalty Barca should have had in the first half. Ibra didn’t rip his own shirt and if you observe Inter, they have made shirt pulling and the arm around the attacker into some art form. An early goal from that would have changed the game.
I was also disappointed by Barca in the second half. Again as other posts have noticed, they seemed to slow down, and Messi lost his usual zest to get into a position where he could take the ball in to his feet and start testing the defenders. He seemed to loose heart.
People are comparing Barca with Arsenal in terms of ineffectiveness against a determined deep defense and that is true. However, during the game I was mentally comparing Inter with the Arsenal team of 1994 who beat a much more talented Parma in the Cup Winner Cup final.
Those with good memories will remember Arsenal going one up after 30 mins through Alan Smith (commentator last night), then defending in a similar style to Inter, forcing play to always come inside where they crowded out their more talented opponents. The centrebacks that day were also heros, throwing their bodies in front of every shot that Parma did manage to get away.
agree about the part about the same old defensive tactics.
But also, even with those “same-old” tactics, Barca couldn’ break Inter down.
Doubts over Pep’s tactics anyone ?
This article hit the nail on the head perfectly. Watching the game yesterday, I knew I was watching brilliance, but couldn’t figure out what it was that made it so historic. The defending was stunning. Inter completely shut out the area around the 18-yard box arch, pushing the play out wide, where Maicon and Zanetti won every one-v-one. The lack of overlapping is a good point, but Alves and Pedro were hugging the touch lines.
Typical Italian defending, by non-Italians.
his was a match that wasn’t won by individual performances (although the likes of Lucio and Esteban Cambiasso were superb), or by player v player battles on the pitch, it was won by the understanding between the nine outfield Inter players. -> I have to say that THEY ACTUALLY LOST THE MATCH, still manage to pass to the final, but they did not won the match.
I must admit my favored team, Barca, disappointed me. That’s not taking anything away from a valiant Inter, rather the opposite. Tactically, Inter fully deserved to meet Bayern in the final. Busquet’s playacting was atrocious! There’s no way ex-Blaugrana, Motta, should have seen Red. The ref’s disallowing of Bojan’s goal marred a good game, albeit hard on the eyes. Inter’s organization is astounding. They denied a uncreative Barca space, and despite being outpassed, still looked dangerous. They didn’t even need Balotelli’s pace in the end! I can’t wait for a final that pits van Gaal’s technical astuteness against Mourinho’s organization skills.
so 4-2-3-1 Inter vs 4-4-2 Bayern? Inter with the same 11 like first leg against Barca and Bayern with the same as against Lyon (Altintop on the left against Maicon, Robben against Zanetti?).
Message foor all the Inter-lovers here:
if all th eteams have defensive coaches like mourinhio, that would be the end of the sports called ‘football’. It will all be dull and boring and tactically with a lot of 0-0 results, nobody would like to watch these games anymore and the only players to start are going to be the big tall players with zero technique but who can defend like wounded lions. Is that what you really want to see Inter-lovers? Even if inter would win the CL, the will never be remembered a a great team, they will be teh Greece that won the Europa Cup by doing just what inter did, defending liek crazy. The great teams that enter the history books, are teams like Brazil, Barcelona, Spain, France, Argentinia with maradonna, they all were dominating their ennemies and played to WIN games. Mourinhio-lovers if everyone starts playing NOT TO lOSE games, that would be the END of football, the end of magical players liek ronaldio, messi, Cristiano Ronaldo, Ronaldo 9, Pele, Maradonna, Cruif etc… .
So Inter-lovers, Inter lsot the game, won the tie and progress but ultimately footbaal lost and even teh inter-lovers deep down in their hearts know that Inter will never earn anyones respect with such a cowardly display.
The more defensive teams there are, the more inventive attacking teams will become. It’s clear that no side wins if you have two defensive sides so your point is moot.
How would you counter Barcelona? Or did you expect them to give up?
laughble statements. Defence is an integral part of good football, unless you prefer primary school football, with storms of ‘players’ running behind the ball like flies. Moreover, you seem to make confusion between great players on the one hand, and teams devoted to ball possession and attacking-minded on the other. Just one example to stay in the theme: Ronaldo may have been a magic player, but the Inter in which he played was largely based on fast counterattacking, not on ball possession.
sAM,
You would have had Inter play open, attacking football while protecting a 3-1 lead? Have you ever watched Barcelona play? They rip teams apart that actually try to play them straight up. They decimate them. And would have done so to Inter if they came out of their defensive 3rd.
Inter did PLAY TO WIN, they played to get to the final. Did you forget they had already scored 3 on Barca? Their gameplan was correct to deal with Barca. Get behind the ball, allow them to have it and most importantly, don’t lose it in their half because it opens the field up for a quick attack.
Aw, such bitterness Sam. The semi-final is a match of 2 halves. In the 1st half, Inter nullified Barca’s play, countered-attacked incisively and scored 3 goals. Barca had a lot of the ball but not much attacking. That is enough to demonstrate Inter’s tactical…um…superiority? Did you miss that one? In the 2nd half, Inter went down to 10 men, and lost a striker to injury. What choice is there for Inter but to hold on to their lead and defend? If anything, Inter played beautiful defensively. Are you not able to appreciate the tactical versatility of such a team? It takes a lot more to be able to play both styles well and to win the tie. Barca, on the other hand, is one-dimensional, one-style (yeah beautiful) and predictable, laying out the same game plan regardless of who they’re up against. You may call Barca’s style ‘football” but others call it “keepball”.
Therefore, football lost nothing there. Instead, Inter has shown you that it’s better to have tactical flexibility. Remember – different strokes for different folks. Not your cup of tea perhaps, but to many others, it’s brilliant. Because THAT’s football.
@ sAM:
Wed 20 Apr 2010 20:45 CET
Inter – Barcellona 3-1
HELLOOOOOOO
what, u’ve never seen barca defend??? one of their triumphant players and “el capitán” is Carles Puyol, one of their prides, a classic FULL back (with no attacking-skills at all, compared to Maicon or Zanneti or Roberto Carlos)…spain has always been EQUALLY known for their strikers, midfielders, DEFENDERS and g/keepers…
i’m sad to notice the poor soccer knowledge of some sore-losers on this excellent site…i’m expecting the sprinklers to come on at any minute on this blog as in camp-(m)ou…
plz sAM, don’t ruin the analysis on this site
Im actually not so disappointed that we have lost, now the team has to be reinforced
Well this was a tough one. Inter won because each man on the pitch was experienced and knew their duty. Barca, on the other hand, was a little confused. Messi and Ibra don’t play welll together. There’s no shame in Ibra being shackled by Samuel and Lucio because it happened to Drogba too. The odd thing is that Pique seemed to have so much success against them in both legs. The real problem for Barca was a lack of incisiveness from the middle. When Messi cuts in from the flanks his angles are sealed off too quickly. Beacuse no one could make a run through the middle they went to the flanks. Sadly for us, the odds of beating Inter on a headed goal are small and we missed our to do it with Bojan. Inter were ridiculed by injuries to Samuel and Cordoba the last few years. It helps to have a healthy squad! Hopefully next year we’ll have ole no. 8 healthy so he can win more free kicks and kick up the tempo of the game. Great games for Pique, Samuel, Lucio, Maicon, Zanetti, and Cambiasso. Good luck Inter!
ZM – congratulations. You’re being lauded everywhere and name-dropped on the guardian, you got so many hits your site actually went down for exceeding its bandwidth, you managed to generate so much discussion – admittedly with more than a little trolling. I hope you’re feeling at least a little happy ^^ Alas that this might mean a less personal touch, since you used to answer all the comments…
It’s easy to speculate on regrets and what-might-have-beens, but, watching the match, after the initial shirt-ripping it was pretty evident that Barcelona weren’t sure how to go about playing. Certainly their passing felt slow and languid, rather than measuredly deliberate. Pep certainly lost the intiative by not changing things around at half-time.
If you do find yourself some time though, rather than analysing managers, why not write a discussions on emergent player positions; full-length treatment for the attacking centrebacks/reinvented liberos, marauding fullbacks, and false nines (though I think Wilson’s done that). You’ve covered a bit of it with the excellent How the 2000s Changed Tactics, but I suspect more could be discussed, especially with the material you’ve accumulated.
Also, I’d like to know – do you have a “favourite” formation, one that you feel you might play if you were a manager? I’m aware that no formation works for every game, but I’m sure you have a pet you enjoy.
Fabulous analysis, once again…
Mourinho was just perfect against Barcelona in the two hands and I could only expect that becouse I’m one of his biggest fans and, as a FC Porto supporter, I know what he’s cappable of. He simply shut up those who said thar Inter would going to be smashed.
Mourinho is the God of Football. Prepare for the big final. He will win it.
Best regards
..he, he .. lol… if Mourinho is the God of Football than LvG would be his father…. don’t forget where he learned his skills …. lol….
Inter played the DESTRUCTIVE brand of football, playing not to concede, winning is an added bonus. They faked injuries (Busi was acting but so did Schneider and Maicon), wasted time agaian and again. thi sis not defending, this is no “tactical wonder’, this is KILLING the game by ANY MEANS POSSIBLE.
Barca play CONSTRUCTIVE footbaal, beautifull passing, like art, with technical players and geniuses like Messi and Xavi and Iniesta.
There is no doubt that Barca WON the game with total doimination, people forget this and they are STILL the BEST TEAM in the WORLD who will dominate European football for YEARS to come.
Even if football was diving or iceskating, with judges and jury… Barcelona would have lost: insufficient defensive performance (those three goals in Milan!), barely sufficient offensive (one in Milan, one in Barcelona). Too easy telling who would have won the contest…
..that’s it …. it is a 180 minutes game, not only a snapshot of 90 minutes…
Maicon was push by Messi into the pub boards. So the injury could have been real and messi could have had a card for doing that. A nice Red Card since they were out of play and he was just pissed Maicon din’t let him onto the ball.
Football is a game with two aspects to it, Attacking and Defending. The Barca v Inter game was an incredible show piece of both aspects.
The attacking aspect is definitely more attractive to those who just watch the game but those who understand the game realize that defense is just as beautiful.
Who here would like to watch games in which only strikers played? It would be about as thrilling as watching only defenders play defense. It’s the skill of getting past the defense that makes a great goal.
We all enjoy football because it is in essence a match between skill and will to win.
I want to see a game in which I will have to suffer thru to finally know the result.
I want to see a game in which will to win and suffer still matters.
If football was a question of skill we would be today sick and tired of watching Real Madrid win everything for the last couple of decades. Who would still be watching football knowing that the team with the biggest names would win every game?
I love the fact that a well organized team willing to give everything it has on the pitch can still win. That player’s who are willing to train and have the will to succeed can still make the difference regardless of skill.
If the only thing that matters to football is attacking soon you will end up with only one or two teams that win everything. Who here is ready to give up their team ever winning the CL because Barca and Real have the most technically gifted squads in the world?
It is easier to defend than to attack and that’s why we praise attacking teams. However to win any competition defense is still the most important factor. Go back thru the statistics and you realize that the teams that win usually suffer the least goals. This is a fact of life and not just in football.
What the hell are some people trying to do to the game? Are we going to start with that crap about losing with style? I sorry but I think that is just stupid, anything else is ignoring reality. Arsenal and Stuttgart showed what happens when you try to live in a fantasy land in which you are the equal of Barca in offense.
Barca are considered the best attacking team in the world right now. The idea that Inter should have gone toe to toe with them is … Arsenal or Stuttgart. There is no team that goes to Barça to play to win that doesn’t leave black and blue. They all play for a draw, to hold against that incredible machine and then hope for luck. Inter played it smart and went thru. Why is it that playing smart is bad and playing dumb is good?
Inter went in to defend their lead, whether with 11 or 10 it would still have defended its previous result. Any sane coach would have done the same and been ridiculed if he attempted otherwise after suffering defeat.
Inter played to win its place in the final and they worked for it in the previous match. In this game Barca had to win and they failed. It was not Barca’s attack that failed, this game was from the outset a game in which defense would define the winner. Barca’s defense lost in Milan and Inter’s defense won in Barcalona. It is no secret that Mourinho plays defensive sides with fast counter attacks, Guardiola went to Milan to win and came out black and blue. Thats where Barca lost its place in the final.
I’m not suprised that Inter pulled off a defensive masterpiece. We are after all talking about a Italian side and Mourinho who brings a level of defensive disipline to another level. Eto playing defense? Superb tactical training, I wont mention Milito because he has been playing in Italy for a while.
As for Inter parking the bus in front of Barca, you may want to watch some of Barcas games in Spain. Barca is use to having a bus and everything including the kickten sink parked right in front of it. It was never a unheard of concept to them, the only thing that was different this time is that that bus held.
P.S. I can understand some Arsenal fan no liking the result since it means Arsenal lost not to the future CL winner but to the team that only made it to the semis.
completely agree, they parked the bus and this time the bus held. so well done inter for parking the bus, and well done for it holding.
don’t think you should have bothered with your P.S. point though, why on earth should this matter to any arsenal fans? speaking for myself, whether barca got past inter or not has no bearing on what i think about my own team.
Thank you but my point is that parking the Bus is part of football as is overcoming the parked bus. Barca failed to over come a 10 bus when its overcome 11 man buses before. Just how would you have had Arsenal play in barcelona if they were a man down and had a two goal lead?
If a read your posts correctly you enjoyed the fact that Arsenal lose against Barca? I mean by your own logic you should have, since Barca are by far the best attacking team in europe and Arseanl definetly are not.
I definitely agree Joe, every team has to play to its strength and I have no qualms that Inter played to their defending best. But disregarding the team favoritism, I believe teams to have a footballing philosophy. Cruyff’s team played best football at their times without winning any major honour, still it is in history as the best team of all times. For saying Barcelona as the best attacking team, I would disagree here as they have been miserly in conceding as well. The pressing style keeps other teams from attacking and that not only is the best defensive ploy but also pleasing on the eyes.
Overall in this year’s CL Barca v Inter is 2 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss to Barca, so it has been style on top, just that Barca had a goal less when it mattered.
No matter Inter won over two legs and may go on to win CL, Serie A and League Cup as well but will they be remembered in history at par with this Barca side. I dont think so.
Mourinho is a genius but over the years he has proved that style is not his forte. He may spend millions and world’s footballing talent at his disposal still we know how his teams will play.
wonderful site. sorry to see some of the discussion getting a little nasty, but what can you do?
i think Mourinho needs to be credited not just for brilliant tactics (although in some ways it’s really not such a stroke of genius to park the bus with 3-1 advantage) but the amazing level of preparedness and discipline his team showed. their execution was almost flawless. you may love it or hate it, but to play the kind of defense like inter did requires a level of organization and communication that is practically symphonic, balletic. hell, my pub team can’t even get a flat back four straight! every single inter player knew exactly what they were supposed to do at all times in all situations. barcelona, in contrast, often looked directionless, clueless.
i would also like to point out how much of barcelona’s offense depends on baiting the defense — the game against arsenal being the perfect example of this. they’ll toy with the ball just outside of the opponent’s grasp, lure the defense into stretching a bit, and then apply a deadly incisive pass (or Messi-drible.) they love the little triangles on the sideline around the 25 yard line, forcing defenders into chasing shadows with quick one-touches. but in this game inter just couldn’t be suckered.
finally, as much as i hate to say it, i would like to point out how Mourinho makes football (not just the game, but the sport) interesting. when was the last time you could think of such a successful, interesting (and at times even likable) egomaniac? i often can’t stand what he says but i’m always eager to hear it, and his opinions are always insightful, if self-serving.
i think much of the nastiness could be avoided if people actually took the time to consider alternative points and respond to them constructively rather than aggressively.
in what way do you reckon mourinho is likeable, because i find him completely unlikeable?
The nastiness could be avoided if people would just accept that playing defensively is part of the game.
One can say he doesn’t enjoy a defensive playing team, I can understand that.
However calling the game ugly, denying the blood, sweat and tears along with the skill that was displayed is not understandable.
i for one have never said any of those things
-
Actually Steve,
I’d say that in many games (not last night’s of course!), this Inter plays more assertively than Dunga’s Brazil. I could never fathom Dunga playing a 4-2-1-3 for instance, or pressing high up the pitch.
Any chance you could post the passing statistics? They must be even more extreme than the first match.
I believe I saw somewhere that Inter completed fewer passes (63) than 4 or 5 individual Barca players.
how ironic barca’s lost to inter was. mourinho’s philosophy in the match was expressed by cruyff before. the same cruyff whose principal is heavily adapted by barca themselves.
as cruyff put it, Ieder nadeel heb z’n voordeel (every disadvantage has its advantage) and mou simply goes along with it, claiming that inter “didn’t want the ball because when Barcelona press and win the ball back, we lose our position”.
while we all know that barca’s strength is in keeping possession, mou saw it as an apparent weakness to exploit instead, which result in inter, as ZM would put it, “negated the ability of Messi and Xavi to create – without ever seeking to deprive them of getting the ball”.
bravo the special one.
I think everyone’s right of course. Show me a fence and I’ll sit on it!
Steve, usually a team that sets out to play defense is totally boring to watch, but I have to say I was gripped watching this game. Half of me wanted Barca to win because Inter were only defending, but after the sending off and gamesmanship, the other half wanted Inter to win.
I’m an Arsenal fan and I love the way we play, but it frustrates the hell out of me when we don’t have players who , unless the circumstances are right, are prepared to show the sort of dedication that Inter showed. Vermaelen is a favourite because he shows the heart and desire. Campbell vs Spurs was another example. Arsenal should have ripped into a tired Spurs team, but they seemed to lack the fire required. No one doubts their ability, but some players don’t seem to have the heart – yet.
As you say, there is nothing wrong with good defending, and I agree with the others, what did you expect Inter to do? They had a 2 goal lead. It was always going to be up to Barca to show inventive flair to get past the defense and they really didn’t do it. I was surprised and as I’ve said in a post above, even Messi lost his sparkle and will to always receive the ball.
@steve
I call it snobbery because you continually refer to good defence as “good organisation and hard work”, and never as skill – a term you seem to reserve for passing triangles. You could not teach Silvestre to play like Samuel did, any more than you could teach Delap to be Fabregas. Notice how in the 1st leg, when Inter were more open, Zlatan still looked like the donkey the English press love to paint him as, whilst he was banging them in for fun at Emirates.
Wenger definitely couldn’t buy a player like Fletcher: Chelsea, for all the cash they spent, only found one Essien, no back-up, which is why his fitness is always such a concern.
What Wenger DID buy is Alex Song, who tries to do these things, but often fails.
Song has definitely not been bought for his vision or technique.
You ignored another point of mine (fair enough, twas a long post) – for you, does your team’s philosophy date back only to 06/07 (when you stopped winning anything)?
Because I distinctly remember posting the results of your 05/06 run to the UCL final, and they seemed to show Wenger shutting up shop in the 2nd leg against every side he faced.
I can’t remember an occasion since then, though you may be able, when Wenger hasn’t needed a goal in the second leg, and so had to open up.
I’m no Mourinho fanboy, his team’s dive, feign injuries to halt counter-attacks (a pet peeve of mine) and hassle refs, and if he’d done this in both legs, he’d be rightly criticised, but there’s a big difference. Any Stuttgart player would be proud to play under him, and to win a result this big, in this way, with him at the helm.
(Just as Wenger’s boys celebrated when they ground out wins in 05/06.)
@dredge
i absolutley accept that good defence is extremely skillful – inter’s defending was skillful in many ways. tackling is just as much a skill as passing for instance.
maybe i can illustrate what i’m trying to say like this. say the firt leg had been at nou camp and barca had won 3-1. they then go to the san siro, and use their excellent technique, ball control and body positioning to keep the ball by the corner flag for as long as they possibly could. whenever inter try to dispossess them, they fall to the ground, win a free-kick and it starts all over again.
surely we would criticise them – but we wouldn’t be criticising their close control, just like i’m not criticising inter’s defensive qualities, we’d criticise their overall philosophy – the attitude and intention with which they went into the game.
i re-iterate that wenger certainly could buy a fletcher type player if he wanted to, he might not find one as effective as fletcher is at doing what he does, but his style of play isn’t suited to wenger’s philosophy. there are some arsenal fans who wish that wenger would change that philosophy and buy a fletcher type player to give us a better chance of winning trophies, but i’m not one of them.
song most definitely was bought for his vision and technique, as he showed on loan at charlton he has great vision and passing ability. this is precisely the point – wenger wants his DM to have attcking attributes first and foremost, and many people would criticise him for that, but i don’t. song’s sense of positioning, understanding and strength have all improved, and i hope they continue to do so.
wenger’s overall philosophy hasn’t changed one bit since he came to arsenal in 1996, let alone 2006. to say that we shut up shop in those european games, because we kept clean sheets, is nonsense – the mentality of the arsenal sides that played in Madrid, Turin and Villareal just couldn’t be more different from what Inter displayed the other night. Yes we played with 1 up front, but that in no way indicates shutting up shop.
we went to Roma with a 1-0 lead last season, with a severely depleted side as usual. although we didn’t play well, and they had a couple of chances, we still dominated possession and tried to create chances.
We’re going to have to agree to disagree on the Song front – I’d rate Fletcher’s attacking play as superior to Song’s. I’m not saying Song is Makelele, but he’s a former defender moved to midfield – his technique and passing might be impressive for Charlton, but other than John Obi Mikel, I don’t think there’s another top 4 CM with less attacking skill.
We’re also going to have to agree to disagree on the 05/06 campaign, because I watched it all, and it was all defensive. Playing one up top is not automatically negative, but Arsenal were not looking to score, unless they could do it with three men at most. The Villareal game was a bit of a disingenuous inculsion, because that was quite open, but against Real M, I think my point stands.
Shan’t be checking this thread again, so I’ll just say it’s been good chatting. It’s nice to have a site where people aren’t just shouting “Man Yoo suck!” and “Liverpool are gay” at each other, but actually trying to discuss what makes football what it is.
Have to step in here and point out that Wenger was in line to sign Essien as well as several other players such as Cech only to be unable to offer anywhere near the same wages. Even back then Arsenal had higher gate receipts and were a more attractive team to join, so you’d have to say that Chelsea’s money won the day.
Arsenal today with Essien and Cech would be a formidable team. I think we can all agree on that….
Song is not a patch on Essien. Arsenal have tried to develop their own defensive central midfielder in Song, but unsurprisingly he hasn’t stepped up yet, though he is doing better than I’d hoped. Defensive CMs are thin on the ground. It’s a position that has often been at the heart of great teams both club and national.
I am a big fan of this website, the analysis is often very insightful and the opinions provided are well considered.
However, I have a slight problem with the way every single result seems to come about “deservedly”, when infact, they are often skewed by the arbitrary manor in which they are refereed.
Inter were very good defensively, keeping Barca out for so long with 10 men is something that only a handful of teams in the world could do.
But, to my mind, Inter conceeded 2 goals;`The handball decision against Toure in the lead up to the second was ludicris, and the goal should have stood.
Now, I know that, in reality, the game finished 1-0 and Barca went out, so Inter achieved what they set out to do. But had Barca’s second stood, it would be very hard to argue that Barca didn’t deserve to progress, given the fact that they had about 75% possession in the second leg.
Then again, Inter were a man down after Motta was sent of for almost nothing. So maybe, had it not been for the referee, Barca wouldn’t have been so dominant in the first place.
What I’m really getting at is this fallacy in football commentary, and indeed in society generally, that where you’re at is where you deserve to be.
Obviously most football games are decided by the skill levels of the respective teams, but I think far more are decided by referees than people care to admitt.
Prior to this tie, both coaches would have strategized meticulously, only for a referee to radically change the complexion of the game.
Mourinho’s team defended well despite being cheated, did they deserve to go through? I guess so.
Guardiola’s team did what they set out to do; score 2 goals, despite one of them being incorrectly ruled out. Did they deserve to go through? Given that they scored enough goals, it’s hard to argue that they didn’t.
Football is a very intricate game, but the way in which it is refereed is clunky and based on the patently absurd notion that “the mistakes even themselves out in the end”. It’s time to introduce video evidence. This system is broken.
,
Until a team comes up with a style of play that win 100% of the time, its a bit ridiculous to be overly critical of the way Barca play. They push teams back, make them chase and when they do lose the ball they press frantically. Will they occasionally lose? Of course, but what team doesn’t?
They lost to a strong Inter squad that is currently leading Serie A and in the Italian Cup Final, I don’t think thats anything to be ashamed about. A few instances going their way instead of Inter’s and they could be in the CL final…
???
delete
Just for those, specially in the UK media, blaming Barcelona and Guardiola to be one trick ponies and overrated: Did the same thing apply to a certain Chelsea manager who lost a CL semi final against a team that “parked the bus”? It’s well known that a well organized defense can outwit any great attack, we know all about the drills by Sacchi at Milan, where he played 5 defenders against 10 attackers. The only 2-3 ways you can really score against a well organized defense seem to be from set pieces, individual brilliance, fluke, something like that. It’s just extremely difficult to break such a defense down and some suggestions made by as an example Honigstein in the Guardian pod were just ridiculous, as if you can easily score from far against a keeper like Julio Cesar.
Chelsea had shooters, wingers, doubled up on the wing, sent in Robert Huth as a center forward, did everything and couldn’t score against Liverpool, so how are Guardiola and Barcelona disappointing when they don’t score against a much better defense?
Fictional revisionism is a true disease.
I think Barca is so brilliant at what they do, they decided to keep doing it, despite deep-defending (which is clearly the most effective tactic at reducing Barca’s offensive potency). They very nearly succeeded, so one can’t say it was a poor choice. That said, I think a patient possession team like Barca needs to practice alternative tactics for situations like these where they can’t draw the opponent out from their final third to open passing lanes. The possession tactic is about *waiting* to see what passing lanes develop. When it becomes clear no lanes are available because of a packed defense (because the opponent has decided to defend their score), then Barca needs to have tactics to *force* the defense open. I’ve suggested in a previous comment that the way to do this is to further compress the opponents defense, rather than futilely try to draw them out.
As Barca doesn’t have the height and would literally draw the “short” straw crossing into the box against big defenders, the smartest tactic would have been “side overloading,” both from set plays and from the run of play. Rather than keep a balanced web of (useless) perimeter passing, push the frontmost attackers to one wing or the other to create space on the opposite side for a 1v1 attack. One of two things happens: the opponent defense crowds the same area the attackers are pressing, creating space on the opposite side. Else, the defenders maintain their zonal position, which gives a controlling advantage to the attackers who are pressing together.
Since Inter was not going to come out, pressing immediately to side overloading would have resulted in faster turnarounds, and many more attacking opportunities than patient possession. There was no question that Barca was going to regain possession almost every time they gave up the ball. Therefore, it would have made more sense for them to give it up more often, by side overloading and taking whatever shots were available when the defense shifted. Sooner or later, they would have gotten a result, and sooner or later, Milan would have had to come out in order to score again.
One question. Which tactic should have displayed Guardiola? Because this match against inter has been commonly repeated through last years against FCB, but what should has Pep done? I have seen this match against ManU (semifinals 2 years ago, Ronnie playing as left defender), famous Chelsea semifinal, against Real Madrid previous year, and against minor rivals which play with 2 lines of 5 and 4 men in 5 meters in front of the area and one for the CA. I need to know that if its not with free kick, corner, defensive failure or something like that if you are playing against world class defenders it’s almost impossible to cross through thess ultra-defensive sistems.
your propousals? Thanks.
Of course I wouldn’t be as impressed if it was Stoke versus Aston Villa, because Aston Villa have players like Emile Heskey rather than players like Lionel Messi.
Funny you should say that, ZM, because I spent most of last night’s match wishing that Guardiola had the option of sending Ashley Young to start warming up. (And, if rumour is to be believed, next year he might.)
but stoke haven’t got defenders like Lucio and Samuel, they’ve got retarded apes like shawcross. so surely it amounts to the same?
it’s just easier for the best defenders to negate the best attackers, than it is for the best attackers to overcome the best defenders.
And Stoke have Dean Whitehead, not Esteban Cambiasso
only if your team is well organized.
yeah true, but when you set out in an ultra defensive way you certainly ought to be organised. there’s no point in inter training with the ball as they never wanted it, so i should hope they were doing sth in training.
You can tell uninformed Barca/Arsenal fanboys from miles away. It’s not even funny.
Inter had no possession because they were facing Barca, the masters of passing and possession. It’s idiotic to play to your opponent’s strength, like certain naive English team did. It would be insane if Inter tries to keep to ball with 1 man disadvantage. If you ever watched Serie A or other CL games, Inter usually had much more even, if not superior, statistics.
Also, playing ultra defensive just means putting everyone at the back. Playing an organised defensive game means much more. The team need to:
a) Anticipate and intercept through-passes (watch Cambiasso)
b) Clear EVERY BALL tossed into dangerous area (see Lucio and Samuel)
c) Do not get caught out of position (see Zanetti and Maicon, with support from strikers)
d) plant good offside traps (and not have Muntari play opponent onside)
e) Have good communication between players
f) Cover any space and do last ditch blocking if needed (see Samuel)
g) Close down all the space near the box
h) Do all of the above for 90 minutes. Consistency is key.
How many teams can actually do all of the above for 90 minutes, against the best team in Europe? If you cannot appreciate the hard work and brilliance behind the Inter defensive display, perhaps you should start watching different kinds of play style and learn to understand them. Then you will realize how stupid it is to assume playing ultra defensive can get you an organized team.
a-h: yes inter did these things well. much easier to do these things well when almost no-one in the team shows any attcking intent.
i’m a fan of arsenal, yes well done, but i’m also a fan of football teams who try to excel in all aspects of the game, not just the destructive, nullyfying aspects. that’s why i’m looking forward to seeing brazil at the world cup more than i’m looking forward to seeing greece. if the two meet, which would be the international equivalent of inter vs barca, i’ll be cheering on brazil. does that make me a brazil fanboy?
as for uninformed, maybe you could inform me of what exactly i’m lacking information about? maybe you could show me those statistics that have inter with more possession than top italian/european teams?
not many teams could play successfully like that against barca, no i agree, but hopefully not many teams would try. i have much more respect for teams like stuttgart who tried to play football rather than chelsea and inter, who played defence vs attack. defence is not football, it is a part of football. watching inter last night, you’d think you were watching a game of foot.
i understand inter’s game very well thank you, doesn’t mean i have to applaud their approach. i never assumed ultra defensive football means being organised, maybe you can learn to interpret comments better. i just said it makes being organised massively easier.
Oh, so it is with ultra-defensive tactics that Inter scored 3 goals at San Siro, even with Milito missing two sitters 2 feet from goal? And then in 2nd leg, Pandev was injured, whereas Balotelli was simply unusable at that stage, so Inter was stuck with Chivu in midfield and left without a real threat from left flank. Naturally Inter became more defensive. It’s called applying correct formation and tactics at the right time and situation, something Arsenal wasn’t able to do against Barca.
It’s funny that you are bringing up Brazil national team, who are fiercely criticized in their own country for playing a more pragmatic approach, despite great results in recent years.
You sounds exactly like some classical music fan who dismisses every other type of music. It’s okay to dislike certain style of football, but dismissing them is just narrow minded.
Btw, if you actually look up some stats from Inter this season (from soccernet for example), you should find Inter having over 50% possession against Roma, Juventus, Milan, Fiorentina, and so on. Thanks for proving that you don’t do your homework. I like how people are crying hell when Inter played just two games of extremely defensive football all season. First game being against Fiorentina in Coppa Italia semi-final. They are capable of playing good defensive game, but they don’t play it all the time.
Steve, your snobbery is astounding, though perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised: Arsenal fans all seem to either have very short memories, or to be very recent converts to the Arsenal cause.
I refer not just to George Graham’s Arsenal, but to every Arsenal team Wenger has had that actually won anything: to start with, Wenger built off the legendary Arsenal back 4; then with the 01-02 team (I consider them better than the “invincibles”) he had two defensively solid CMs (even if Vieira did like to surge forward) and he had the same set-up for the “invincibles”.
The one time that Wenger has actually done well in Europe with Arsenal was when his team played a 4-5-1, which revolved around everyone sitting back and defending while waiting for Henry to do what he used to do back then – win games single-handedly, with a little help from Pires every now and then.
Arsenal’s knockout round scores in 05/06 UCL? 1-0, 0-0 against Real Madrid, 2-0, 0-0 against Juventus, 1-0, 0-0 against Villareal and then the 1-2 loss to Barca.
If you’re looking REALLY carefully, you’ll notice that Wenger, that supposed lover of free-flowing football, had a side who didn’t score a second leg goal for the whole knockout stage. Why? Because they didn’t need to.
That was back when Arsenal used to, as you call it, “try to excel in all aspects of the game.” Nowadays, they try to excel in only one aspect of the game, and then claim that all the others are boring and anti-football.
The main reason Arsenal didn’t “stoop” to Inter’s level (rise would be a more appropriate verb) is that they CAN’T. They don’t have Samuel, they have Silvestre; they’re not organised, they’re ramshackle. You seem to think this makes them noble. I don’t understand how.
Yes they tried to attack, but that’s because they had to: even in their own ground, Barcelona slapped them around from the first kick-off – they were always chasing the game, and went to the Nou Camp not to see out a win, but to chase an elusive victory. They had to gamble.
And for all their gambling, what did they manage? 12 attempts on goal, across 2 legs, compared to Inter’s 8.
You claim that you want to see a side try and win the game. Guess what? Inter did win.
A 2-legged tie is only one game. Inter had already demonstrated their attacking ability in the first half of that game, going 3-1 up, when they could have had 5. Why did they have a duty to continue to attack after that? When they’d had a man sent off, to boot?
Furthermore, you don’t seem to be able to appreciate the difference between Inter’s performance yesterday, and the likes of Bolton giving a backs-to-the-wall job against a big 4 team.
When Bolton put ten men behind the ball, it’s in the hope that with enough players back, they can make up for each other’s cackhandedness. You tend to see a scrappy game, with last-ditch tackles and goal-mouth scrambles galore as the crappy team clings on. Inter weren’t scrappy – they were serene.
No one got a second on the ball within the danger zone, no one got a moment’s space. Messi could beat three men, against a numerically weaker opposition, and still not create space for anyone within passing range. Beautiful. Barca just sat in front of the box unsure of where to pass, before giving it to Alves to mess up again. To see players humbled like that is just as impressive as seeing Messi knock defenders over just by a swivel of the hips and a feint.
I don’t understand how someone can appreciate Xavi’s ability to read the game, but fail to appreciate the same skills in a centre back. A defender can track a Messi run 999 times to perfection, but the one time he fails, it can cost a goal – defending is where the true art lies.
It fits that you’re an Arsenal fan, because Wenger these past 4 years has not been playing football. He has been playing a closely related game of his own devising wherein a team wins points for length of possession and number of passes completed. I find Arsenal not exciting, at all, to watch – not like that 01/02 team, with their lightning counter-attacks, and resolute (except for Stepanovs) defence.
Playing keep-ball is boring most of the time. Barca, as the losing team, had the duty to attack. But did they meet ultra-defensive with ultra-attacking? No. They passed the ball around, kept possession, racked up their passing stats, to what end? Even toward the end, when Valdes was coming to half-way to collect clearances, how many men did Barca really throw forward? what area of the pitch did they try to overload, to force something? What different approach did Xavi try? When Messi got switched wings, why didn’t he head wide, run the overlap, beat his man wide and see what he could pull back from the byline?
Barca refused to play differently, when facing a formation purely designed to stifle the way they normally play – it’s arrogance and stubbornness.
But when Barca are patiently keeping possession, you find it beautiful, and when Inter are patiently keeping them out, you think it ugly.
I’m repeating myself, not for the first time, but I genuinely don’t understand what team in the entire world you think would go to the Nou Camp with a 3-1 lead, go down to ten men, and still try to attack.
Man United went down to ten men at home to inferior opposition in the previous round and still just tried to see the game out.
The team in the lead gets to dictate the contest. Barcelona stubbornly refused to be dictated to, and paid the price. If that bored you, it was Barca’s fault.
Though, I find it view you above fanboy status when you are still holding up Brazil as your example of a national team playing beautiful, intricate football. Spain, sure, but Brazil? Under Dunga? They’re all about the organisation and hard-working set-up that you disdain.
How did it work though? We’re always told giving up possession is a suicidal tactic against an ordinary side, nevermind the world’s best.
@Steve: You said “i have much more respect for teams like stuttgart who tried to play football rather than chelsea and inter”
And what is Stuttgart gonna do with your respect? They they have breakfast with it? Do their players sleep better with it? Do the club make more money with it? Do they smile at themselves happily everytime they look at the trophy cabinet and recall the wonderful times they had losing out to Barca and enjoying Stevie’s respect?
When was the last time you watched an Olympics event? Did they train, make sacrifices, train again, make more sacrifices to win the competition? Or just to gain respect? I don’t know what culture you come from, man, but I think most of the world I know, compete to win. Winning bring respect. The loser gains nothing. If the loser thinks his lose brings him respect, he’s being delusional.
let me get this straight. i criticise the way inter set out against barca. you said that they dont always play like this, and often had more possession than their opponents. i asked you to back this up, and somehow i’m not ‘doing my homework’? this is most confusing. fair enough if they haven’t played so negatively all season, but i was talking about barca, not all season. but what i love about arsenal under wenger is that they won’t ever resort to such tactics. in fact watching inter made me feel so fortunate to be an arsenal fan, so i thank them for that.
i’m not dismissing anyone or anything, i’m criticising them. i’m dismissing their need to train with the ball for the barca matches, because they didn’t want it. their own manager even said so, and when a manager of a wealthy team, with top class players, playing in the champions league semi-final in front of a world-wide audience says that, i think criticism is called for. if you don’t, then that’s your opinion, but don’t put words in my mouth.
i bring up the brazil team precisely because they marry efficiency and beauty. they would never completely abandon the latter for the former though, and that’s exactly the point. i shudder to think what brazilians would have made of the way Maicon and Lucio were made to play, but at least they’ll be back in gold soon, able to express themselves a little.
i think it basically worked because inter have excellent defenders, and barca are somewhat a shadow of last year’s team, especially without iniesta. yes they destroyed arsenal, but arsenal were a mess defensively. to beat such numbers in defence, when that defence possesses every single defensive quality imaginable, you have to be at your very sharpest, and barca weren’t. they still very nearly managed it though.
don’t understand the accuastion of snobbery. i happen to appreciate a certain mentality, the team i support happen to have that mentality at the moment, so i’m very happy. i remember the george graham era very well. if, God forbid, we were to return to that way of playing i’d still support arsenal, i just wouldn’t refer to them as an example of how i like to see football being played. where’s the snobbery in that?
certainly i do not disdain organisation and hard work, and i regret that arsenal are so lacking in these qualities at present. i certainly don’t think my team is perfect, far from it, but i think they have the right philosophy, and for me this is more important than tactics/attacking qualities/defensive qualities/trophies.
i wish our players would ‘rise’ to the work rate and sheer will to win that all the inter players showed. but i wouldn’t take all of those if it meant we had to ’swoop’ to a mentality of stopping the other team from winning, as opposed to winning. of course arsenal CANT play this way, as you say they haven’t got the right players. but they haven’t got those players because they’d never WANT their players to play with such a mentality. i’m sure wenger could find a fletcher type player if he wanted one, but he doesn’t, so he hasn’t got one.
to say brazil are ‘all about’ organisation and a hard-working set-up, as if to compare them with inter, is just not true. yes their current team possess those important qualities, but they still cherish the ball with an effortless style, and still recognise the need to entertain their people, and the football world as a whole. this is entirely my point – the athleticism, teamwork, discipline and commitment of players like Melo and Gilberto is beautiful and admirable because it is part of something bigger, something special, precisely what inter lack.
@ Dredge. Completely agree with what you said. I don’t like feeding the troll but I have to question what is so beautiful about Arsenal that everyone raves about. To start with, both United and Chelsea have scored more goals in the EPL and conceded less than Arsenal while dominating Arsenal in their respective games to boot. So United and Chelsea play extrememly boring football and score more whereas Arsenal play attractive football and score less? Does that make any sense? Senselessly passing the ball around without any purpose or believing in a divine right to win everything due to passing the ball around more often than the opposition is really pitiable.
Additionally, the nonsense about Arsenal being a young team and their so called ‘project’ is laughable not because they haven’t won anything but because most teams have young players. It’s not like United have a squad of 36 year olds. I’m assuming Arsenal supporters think Nani, Rafael, Fletcher, Anderson, Macheda, Rooney are dinosaurs?
in 2-3 years time, this Arsenal project will be a squad of 27-30 year olds without having won anything and then it’ll be another transition phase for them.
Perfect. I agree and second your post
As far as i can understand Arsenal are a beautiful side because they play attacking football….only.
If you defend it seems your side plays ugly football.
God forbid you actually use your brain and realize that you are a man down playing at the home of the worlds best attacking team and try to defend a 2 goal lead.
I mean we would call any coach that went on trying to win against this Barca at home with a 2 goal lead and just 10 men a IDIOT.
Nobodies saying Man United or Chelsea play particularly ugly. In fact Man United are considered one of the best teams to watch in world football. As a neutral however I have to admire the “tippy-tappy” way in which Arsenal play – very rarely going direct with long-balls and crosses.
I’m not in any way saying that is the correct way to play football, in fact in a way it’s a massive flaw. But for the neutral it makes for pretty football to watch.
In terms of age, Rafael, Anderson and Macheda are hardly first team regulars? Macheda especially has about 2 games to his name this year and hardly any starts. The idea with the Arsenal project is in 2-3 years *the same players* will be 27-30. This part is vital.
I equally like to watch Man U and Chelsea so it’s not as if I’m biased here. Just trying to level the playing field with some neutral comments.
if you don’t like the way arsenal play, that’s your opinion and your entitled to it. i don’t like the way mourinho often sends his teams out to play, and in a debate about barca vs inter match i think it’s fair to express that.
not once though have is said that defending isn’t important, or the art of defending cannot be admired. so it might be a good idea to read what someone is actually saying, (not what you want them to be saying so you can criticise them easily) before you use inflammatory comments.
Not really. It could be argued that 100% defence was not, in fact, the safest option. If Inter had scored one goal – a task that’s not that difficult at the Camp Nou this year; even the likes of Villarreal and Getafe have managed it – Barcelona would have needed to score four if they were to avoid extra time and penalties. With one away goal in the bag, Inter could then have defended to their heart’s content and Barcelona’s increasingly disheartened desperation. What’s “stupid” about that?
As it was, they were just a whisker – or rather the ill-positioned knuckles of a rather large gentleman from the Ivory Coast – away from blowing it completely. I wouldn’t call that a particularly smart master plan. I’d call it just another example of what has always been the principal factor in winning and losing at this level: a spot of luck.
“And what is Stuttgart gonna do with your respect? They they have breakfast with it? Do their players sleep better with it? Do the club make more money with it? Do they smile at themselves happily everytime they look at the trophy cabinet and recall the wonderful times they had losing out to Barca and enjoying Stevie’s respect?”
funny stuff. no, they’ll look at the match, they’ll look at barca’s ability as something to aspire to, and they’ll reflect that although they were well beaten, they can have a great deal of self-respect for the way they tried to play their game. it’s not losing itself that brings respect, it’s one’s attitude in trying to win.
we are living in two different worlds if you insist that a loser can gain nothing. but i’m glad i live in mine, and i hope you’re happy in yours.
Well I wont argue about us living in different worlds.
I just thank god that most of the peolpe in the world actually understand that reality matters more than fantasies.
Sometimes one has to grit his teeth and realize that his opponent is better. Barca were the better attacking team but as a teram that is composed of attacking and defending they were weaker this time around.
In the real world, the one that doesn’t existe in a philosophical Utopia, the weaker don’t try to measure strength for strengh they use their brains. I mean if that wasn’t true we would still be hairy little apes living in the trees of africa to stupid to work together.
@steve
hmmm, i don’t know where to start with u…u seem an intelligent fella…plz reconsider u’re statements…let me offer my logic, maybe (hopefully) helps a little…
- inter barely got any italian players in there, the manager’s NOT italian either, his personnel/entourage is brasilian/portugese too…yet, they perfectly deliver(ed) a “catennacio”, exclusivity of the italian school…smth all of these guys learned in the country/culture they have A CONTRACT with and did it in a superb synchronization…
- whats more important they never lied about it, nor hid it, BUT PROMISED and DELIVERED it above any expectation…they used deadly counter-attack in the first leg, scored 3 times (1 barely offside, less visible than pique’s thou) would have scored more if the 3 didn’t stand (my personal point of view), submitted 1 in the only mistake in defense (credit to barca)…
- on the weekend after the first leg they PROMISED the fans and told the press they would go to barcelona to qualify, and would STAND and DEFEND the score…i’ve seen every goddamn interview in english and italian, of the manager, inter’s spokespeople, the players, and there’s not a single occasion where they claimed anything different from what they exactly did on the field…
- it’s exactly this, that raised this respect (not love) for this team, from tokyo to toronto, canada…
- on the other hand, barca claimed they didn’t deserve to lose 3:1, did not accept the loss; instead, in between the 2 Wednesdays, they found the time to ridicule, refuse to accept the fact they lost the first leg, found time to have a clip out where they promised to PUNISH that team like never done before…they PROMISED they were going TO BERNABEU…they pulled every little trick before the match to intimidate this team…and the fact is THEY DID NOT DELIVER 1% of what they PROMISED to do, while inter DELIVERED exactly what they PROMISED to do…i don’t wanna repeat myself, check my long response to FORZA JUVE’s entry, i back it up with a few numbers as well…
- inter has been characterized as a deadly attacking team, in the recent years in serie A…they beat, actually humiliated AC Milan in the derby, 0-4 with 2 man down, and could have easily scored more…so did they against juventus, roma was the luckiest team to win while inter produced an overwhelming game, but the posts kept getting on the way…they also gave chelsey that beautiful lecture in london, did that in kazan, less in moscow…actually we’ve never seen such an attacking power since the ‘90 with the germans (Matthäus , Brehme and Klinsmann)
now, if you don’t like the italian way of playing, you’re right every time u want to be…there’s no one that can debate your taste in food, speedboats, chess and curling, as nobody can debate my taste in collecting pantyhose and/or dead mice…
but FACTS are FACTS and Indisputable
just respect the facts and stick to your tastes
cheers
@ McStay: I agree. The way Arsenal and Barca play their football is easy on the eyes. It makes football enjoyable to watch, especially to the layman. Doesn’t mean it’s the only way to play though.
Football is not circus. There’s more to it than meets the eye. There’s organization, discipline and strategy involved. And beyond all that, every team play for a purpose, whether it’s to win a competition, or to avoid relegation.
To play defensive is not a sin, if it’s a means to an end. Inter has done their job in the first leg well. The fact that they score three goals already proved their offensive capability. It gives them the right to play defensive in the 2nd leg. I don’t condone the way a team play ultra-defensive without the slightest intention to go forward, but what else could we expect from a team with a two goal lead, down to ten men, and playing away to the (arguably) best attacking side in the world?
And as Joe said also, to stand against a stronger opponent, we should use our brains. Play to our strength, and exploit the opponent’s weakness.
I agree with you, Steve. You are living in a different world. You see football as an entertainment, a show. Therefore you view defensive, direct play, or long ball as boring. While what the others are trying to discuss here is the tactical aspect of the game. That’s why there’s no way this dispute would never end in an agreement.
“With one away goal in the bag, Inter could then have defended to their heart’s content and Barcelona’s increasingly disheartened desperation. What’s “stupid” about that?”
Yes, Inter could have. I have no doubt Mourinho intended to play the way they played in the 1st leg. But circumstances forced the change in plans. Pandev pulled up with a muscle strain just before startup. He had to be replaced by Chivu. Sneijder entered the pitch not 100% fit. The game was still scrappy in the first 20+ mins because, as expected Barca came out seeking blood and Inter had to absorb the pressure before building up for counters. Motta’s red card changed everything. It’s already obvious that Barca’s tweaked formation increased their ability to dominate the midfield. With Motta out, and attacking power being reduced, there’s absolutely no chance to defend and attack effectively. It’s obvious that Plan B had to be activated – defend the lead. It is in this context that any coach who choses to play otherwise would be committing his team to suicide i.e. he would be “stupid”.
@ druvar
this really made me laugh, pantyhose and dead mice? what a combination! don’t even get me started on my tastes in curling!
i do agree with you about tastes, and all i’ve been trying to is put mine across. i haven’t once disputed the facts – inter defended excellently, they desperately wanted to win, they stuck to their gameplan, and they used all the tricks of the trade very intelligently. these facts are undeniable, but whether anyone respects a team, a manager, or a performance is completely down to one’s taste, not the facts.
@ bier
i think i see football as an art, more than as entertainment. i remember the champions league final between juve and milan a few years back – while i don’t think it would be right to call that entertainment, i thought it was art. there was certainly a lot of defensive play involved, but i definitely wouldn’t say it was boring, i found it enthralling.
i think the tactical aspect of the game is the most fascinating of all. this is why i really like this website. if it was entertainment i was after, i’d be on the x-factor blog talking about susan boil. what have i said that makes you think i’m not interested in tactics? if i wasn’t, i wouldn’t bother criticisng inter’s tactics.