Barcelona 5-0 Villarreal: Guardiola switches to a 3-4-3 (diamond) and Barca run riot

Barca's system in detail
Barcelona demolished a lacklustre Villarreal side in their first La Liga game of the season.
Pep Guardiola was without Dani Alves, Carles Puyol and Gerard Pique, so played just one nominal defender, Eric Abidal, and used Sergio Busquets and Javier Mascherano alongside him. Xavi Hernandez and David Villa were benched with Thiago Alcantara, Cesc Fabregas and Alexis Sanchez all starting.
Juan Carlos Garrido went for the side that was largely expected – Bruno Soriano returned to midfield after his midweek spell in defence, and Gonzalo Rodriguez returned to centre-back.
This was much less competitive than the excellent game last year – Villarreal offered little attacking thrust and rolled over for Barcelona.
Barca’s system in isolation
First, this was such an unusual system from Barca, that it’s worth outlining exactly how it worked on the pitch. Lining up as roughly a 3-4-3 with the ‘4′ a diamond, the two players who remained in their positions at all times were Busquets, the sweeper, and holding midfielder Seydou Keita.
Abidal and Mascherano pushed slightly higher up the pitch, trying to force Giuseppe Rossi and Nilmar back. The outside midfielders, Andres Iniesta and Thiago Alcantara, tried to come inside and moved forward to switch with Cesc Fabregas. With those three fluid and Keita the only holder, it was more like a 3-1-3-3 for much of the game.
With Barcelona having nothing like full-backs or wingers, the front three spread even wider than usual, with Sanchez and Pedro keeping more width rather than coming inside immediately to make diagonal runs towards goal (although this still happened, simply less frequently). In all, it was very similar to Marcelo Bielsa’s 3-3-1-3 system, albeit with ball-playing midfielders on the outside of the diamond, rather than wing-backs making diagonal runs, as in Bielsa’s system. Sanchez, of course, knew how to play this formation perfectly.
Perfect for playing Villarreal
This was Barca’s first match of the 2011/12 season, and there is some speculation that this will be their first choice system this campaign. Some caution is required, however, because Guardiola has a history of playing different systems in one-off games to counter an opponent’s particular strength, or exploit a certain weakness. He moved to a 3-4-3 (with wing-backs) against Atletico last season to push their wingers back into their own half, for example. He also played Dani Alves even higher up the pitch than usual against Sevilla. In fact, he generally tries something different against teams that play two strikers against Barca.
This system, then, was perfect for Villarreal. They usually play a 4-2-2-2 with two wide midfielders coming into the centre of the pitch, though sometimes they play more of a 4-3-1-2. Either way, it’s very narrow – the system here was probably a cross between the two, as Borja Valero shuttled between a role on the right, and a position closing down Keita.
Starting from the back, Barca had a spare man. Mascherano tracked Rossi and Abidal moved on Nilmar as those two typically moved wide, whilst Busquets could sweep up. One danger of playing against Villarreal’s 4-2-2-2 is that they sometimes have four central midfielders, but by playing a diamond, Guardiola was able to counteract that threat by keeping it 4 v 4 in the midfield zone. Further forward, Villarreal’s full-backs – who must overlap to allow the narrowness further forward – were pinned back by Pedro and Sanchez. It was the best theoretical formation to use against Villarreal.

The starting line-ups
This was such an unusual battle of formations, but there is a parallel with Kenny Dalglish’s tactics earlier in the year against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge. Carlo Ancelotti, having just acquired Fernando Torres, played a 4-3-1-2 system, and to keep a spare man at the back whilst not being overpowered in the midfield, Dalglish went for a back three with a diamond midfield.
The difference was that Dalglish’s formation was much more reactive than Barca’s, and so on the flanks he used wing-backs in deep positions, rather than wide forwards. But they did the same job – in tracking the Chelsea full-backs, and so the idea was pretty much the same.
How Barcelona won
So, the actual details of the game. The first goal of the match made perfect tactical sense, because it came from the Barca player with the most freedom. Villarreal’s system involved playing two holding midfielders, using Valero in that shuttling position, and Cani much wider on the left to provide an easy out-ball when Villarreal won possession.
That worked well a couple of times early on as Cani dribbled forward, but the downside was that he often let Alcantara go. That was the reason why the youngster was allowed to come inside, dribble, and dribble, and dribble, and shoot into the net – without any pressure from Villarreal’s midfield.
The second goal demonstrated what Cesc Fabregas brings to the side. Barcelona did slightly lack a player like him last year – someone who runs from central positions to exploit Messi’s movement deeper. Iniesta occasionally did this, but he prefers to play deeper. Fabregas is perfect if Barca want that additional movement from central positions – he’s not so much a classic number ten (which often doesn’t work well with a false nine) but instead a player who likes bursting forward past the defence. Indeed, his relationship with Messi worked so well immediately because he’s done roughly the same thing with Robin van Persie at Arsenal for the last two seasons. It fits with Tom Williams’ astute observation last year that to go with a false nine, we may have a false ten.
The three second half goals came largely because Villarreal pushed their defence higher up, and Barca played balls over the top easily. At 3-0 it was over.
Conclusion
A brilliant performance from Barca technically, and a great selection from Guardiola tactically. He could have maintained a back four, perhaps by dropping Keita into the back or bringing in Andreu Fontas, but his decision to go 3-4-3 was logical and fully justified. 5-0 is a huge scoreline against a team who gave them such problems last year.
Will it be Barca’s permanent formation? Maybe. It’s important to remember that they were playing against opponents who play a very particular way (probably different from any other La Liga side), and also that 3-4-3 is not necessarily any more attack-minded than a 4-3-3. Dani Alves would also need to be accommodated.
The future – hopefully, for reasons of tactical interest – is a hybrid between this system and the usual 4-3-3. If Pique and Puyol returned to the defence and allowed Mascherano or Busquets to step forward, Barca could switch between the two systems, with a forward-playing centre-back able to drop in when he likes. Ironically, that might be the best way to stop systems with a false nine thriving, if that becomes the tactical norm.
Edit: Mike notes in the comments below that a comparison to Ajax is probably in order. He’s right – check out Mohamed Moallim’s excellent post on Louis van Gaal’s Ajax.
Barcelona 5-0 Villarreal: Guardiola switches to a 3-4-3 (diamond) and Barca run riot





Another step forward as Guardiola’s Barcelona continue to revolutionise football. I have honestly never seen anything like the fluid, cohesive play on show from this team tonight, particularly between Fabregas, Iniesta, Messi and Thiago. Truly total football. Sorry for the hyperbole but I was astounded at some of the stuff I saw in this game.
I agree. The Messi goal where he went around the keeper was superb. It’s a cliche, but it’s amazing how simple it looks…
As soon as I saw the line-up I was looking forward to this write-up. Guardiola is slowly but surely following his ideas (Busquets dropping between two CBs) through to their natural conclusion here with the shift to DMs playing at the back, though I would expect having Alves would change things. He would nullify the Cani threat, I assume.
Having six attacking players pushes Barca’s pressing game even further than with the 4-3-3. Villareal are comfortable with the ball (see last year’s 3-1 game), yet they couldn’t pass out of the back or through the middle at all with six players constantly pushing them. I think you made this point with Sanchez and Pedro pinning the Villareal fullbacks back, but more than that I think Barca did such a complete job of pressing, perhaps the best I’ve seen them do it.
If the pressing from Barca’s front 5/6 causes a problem for short-medium passes, would a more physical team with great athleticism like Madrid or even Chelsea just ignore that threat by pursuing longballs down field or even using pure speed to just beat the wingback and whip in crosses?
In the supercopa clash with Madrid, 3 out of 4 of Madrid’s goals resulted from corners. If Barca has a weakness at all, it is definitely defending against set pieces. That is probably the only part of their all round game that looks average at best. Granted they didn’t have Puyol.
I’m not advocating that every team should try the longball approach against Barca, but it worked for Madrid is the Copa del Rey final, and pure agression coupled with quick counters and pace worked for the most part in the supercopa. If Benzema was better with his finishing, he would have buried Ozil and CR7’s excellent crosses as well.
I still think the key to beating Barca is set pieces and pure pace.
I would like to see how a team like Stoke would match up against Barcelona.
Just wanted to note that you linked the wrong Barcelona – Sevilla game. You linked the 1-1 Sevilla game, while you probably meant the Camp Nou 5-0 trashing ( http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/11/01/barcelona-5-0-sevilla-tactics/ ).
I would suggest that you should change your icon to Pep Guardiola
excellent article. i have to say that i did notice barca were playing this 3-4-3 diamond system but to be really honest with you it was not easy to notice on tv you could only see glimpses of it when the camera shown a wide angle and having never seen this kind of formation before i was confused most of the game and actually did not enjoy the game because all the time i was keeping an eye on the formation and even though from time to time i did realize that i should be enjoying the game more and should not go into the details too much but was shocked by the barca formation so much that could not do it, i guess it is one of the bad influences (in a good way) ZM is having on me would be nice to know if anyone else is having the same problem. one more thing i think barca started with their usual W-W formation only when they lost possession did they switch to this 3-4-3 formation and only after some time did they just kept this formation would be nice to know if any one else also noticed this.
I think this match shows the brilliance of Guardiola. At first, he got no credit. “It’s just a bunch of amazing players”, people argued. Then folks cottoned on to his STRATEGIC thinking, how he had proved that the pressing game could work with the new offside rules and that keeping possession was as defensive as it was offensive. But he’s also a TACTICAL master. No other manager I can think of — Mourinho included — is as adept in changing his formations and personnel to suit specific teams, and nobody does it more often. Tonight’s formation completely neutered an extremely good team.
It’s also nice to see the spirit of Biesla’s Chile lives on.
There is a clear progression of ideas from Michaels to Cruyff to van Gaal to Rijkaard to Guardiola, with influences of Lillo and Bielsa thrown in (as well as perhaps Sacchi.) Guardiola’s article in El Pais from a few years ago helps demonstrate these links: http://www.elpais.com/articulo/deportes/Sentirlo/elpepidep/20070302elpepidep_6/Tes. I would be interested to hear more from ZM about the influences of Lillo and Bielsa on Guardiola’s thinking. Who will carry the torch when Guardiola leaves? Will Luis Enrique be up to the task?
It’s also worth noting that this is a formation the Ajax sides of the 90s frequently played, and Cruyff certainly took it to Barca – this is where Guardiola is adapting the system from. I’m not sure how often Guardiola will use this system, but against sides playing 2 forwards up front it should be first choice (though that is unlikely to happen often against Barcelona this season). It’ll be interesting to see whether Guardiola sees it as an attacking shape for games against inferior opposition who pose little attacking threat – sometimes 4 defenders may be unnecessary to stop opposition counter attacks – 3 men could do the job much better and allow Fabregas into the side for that extra creativity, possession and attacking thrust.
That’s a very good point. Will add that.
Cheers for the mention. On second thoughts, I think you’re right to say that this 3-4-3 isn’t necessarily any more attacking than the 4-3-3, particularly when Alves is considered. (That said, I still think Alves might fit into a 3-4-3 at times as a shuttler on the right hand side of the diamond, a role that wouldn’t be too different from the job he sometimes did in the midfield of Dunga’s Brazil). My proposing it as Barcelona’s attacking formation for this season was based on the fact that that’s how Cruyff/Ajax played it – more men in midfield meaing more possession/more opportunities to attack, so his 3-4-3 was more offensive than his 4-3-3. However, a key difference between this Barca team and that Ajax team is that in the modern game full backs bomb forward much more, to the point where it’s misleading at times to describe a team as playing with 4 defenders.
Perhaps then, Guardiola’s choice of formation between the two will be based more on how wide the opposition play, with Villarreal being one of the narrowest sides around, as you mentioned. Should Milan play a 4-3-1-2 in the Champions League against Barca, for example, I think this shape might well blow them away, but I wonder if it might also work against someone like Man City or Dortmund if they persisted with a 4-2-3-1 that relies on the full backs for width and attempts to bring wide men into ‘the hole’ in midfield, or indeed, any shape that relies solely on the full backs for width. Barca can afford to make the attacking gamble due to their sheer potency – as you said, will opposition sides be brave enough to push their full backs forward and leave Pedro/Villa/Sanchez behind?
I like the asymmetric 3-4-3, with Alves wide right and Iniesta more narrow on the left. If that were the formation, I would play Villa on the right rather than the left, with either Pedro or Sanchez wide left. I think Villa is less comfortable hugging the touchline than Pedro and Sanchez, so he should be partnered with Alves and encouraged to cut inside. Villa also has a better left footed shot than the other two, helping him to cut inside.
pedro is ambidextrous i believe so he should have a better left footed shot then villa…
sanchez is comfortable on the right, villa on he left (they played there with spain, udinese) and pedro goes on the side required.
matt, what you propose, has already been done here: http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/11/01/barcelona-5-0-sevilla-tactics/
This system add one more player in forward pressing line and it’s easier to play offside trap with three defenders.
I think that this system is good for the pressing in forward lines, but if the pressing is breached then it requires lot of running and tactical awareness of players from forward lines to continue running back and help defence, particularly in wide areas. Barcelona did good on that. I don’t think that Guardiola will play this against 4 2 3 1 formations.
I was amazed with Thiago defensive work, he was stunning.
And, like you mentioned, it’s perfect against opponents with 2 forwards.
According to an interview with FIFA.com, http://tinyurl.com/3gxqckm, Van Gaal gives his Ajax formation as a 4-4-3.
Instead of 4 men, 3 men indeed might be enough, but it doesn’t mean you have to switch to 3-man-defence. You can simply push fullbacks forward and pull back DM.
An other article about the Ajax team of 95 by Tim Hill.
http://timhi.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/ajax-1995/
It becomes embarrassing, barcelona can crush a top 4 team of their league without puyol, pique, dani alves, xavi (not starting) and villa…
Kind of like Manchester United crushing Arsenal…
Except that Arsenal had sold without replacing their two best midfielders and had a host of injuries/suspensions to the squad. Take nothing away from United, terrific win and it says it all about the state of Arsenal and Wenger’s youth plan when United roll out a YOUNGER team and wallop them 8-2.
But back to the point – Villareal is a threatening team to the top sides, boasting a unique shape and some top class players. However, the technical quality and telepathic understanding of the Barcelona players is just, quite simply, on a completely different level.
The only real competition for Barca is Madrid, who showed in their 6-0 demolition of (substantially weaker) Zaragoza that Ronaldo, Ozil, Benzema and Di Maria are starting to develop a telepathic understanding on the attack, but it is my view that Di Maria is not in top form and does not fit into this attacking quartet as fluidly. Also Ozil’s fitness is a concern, he tires late and is usually replaced.
I think Coentrao is a quality addition to the chess match of el Clasico, but Madrid need to be ruthless and finish chances when they get them to stand a chance.
They really should have gotten a striker this summer. Tevez or Aguero would have been great.
Villareal is a great team, sadly they dont have a big budget to attract better players. Sadly, football is business and every [top] player wants to go to the team that have a higher % of winning trophies.
La Liga is still a 2 horse race, it’ll be for some years….
Villarreal just sold their best midfielder as well, Cazorla, and had half of their defensive line out with injury. The comparison is not that far off.
Well Man United arn’t even in Barca’s league as proven in recent years so the point is moot.
If Barca where in the Premier league it would be a 1 horse race without a doubt.
@MezzalaYou’re exactly right. The fact that Andre wrote to make excuses for it only strengthens your point too. I bet he and others like him would have an explanation for Man City thrashing Spurs too.
Do you think its worse to be beaten by superb long range efforts and free kicks or to be cut through almost at will with your full team out? Arsenal had obvious important players missing, and no doubt with their lack of confidence they still would have gotten battered at OT…but don’t know if United with finish like that again all season, it really was extraordinary. Villareal had a full team out, and just got so outplayed in a footballing sense, none of the goals were spectacular in that they were longer range less percentage shots, they sliced through the defense and passed passed (dribbled around) keeper.
Has to be said that Barca/RM pay roll is more than that of the whole rest of the league put together.
“…but don’t know if United with finish like that again all season, it really was extraordinary” All 8 goals you mean? Dear oh dear.
There are two clubs with access to huge pots of cash in La Liga (self generated by good business) and there are three in the Premier League (Man Utd by their excellent business, up until recently, and the two billionaire playthings). Both leagues are just as imbalanced as each other. Barca beat the ‘best-of-the-rest’ 5-0 just as City destroyed Spurs or United hammered Arsenal. The main difference between the leagues is that Real Madrid and Barcelona are better than any of the English sides so they pound the likes of Malaga, Betis, Everton or Villa much easier than the English teams – though it looks like Man City are about to change all that.
“There are two clubs with access to huge pots of cash in La Liga (self generated by good business)”
uhmm, I think you’re too keen to the spanish giants on this, both clubs are heavily supported by Madrid and Catalan banks – Real got 140m € loans in 2009, Barca 150m € in 2010, and without them they couldn’t have paid players’ salaries.
They also enjoy the particular situation of TV rights in Spain – individual negotiations and very polarized national fan bases – which allows them to have the richest deals in Europe.
Then sure they do great business with stadium, merchandise and sponsorships, but in the end they’re not much different from billionaires-backed teams in terms of easy and painless cash availability.
The Utd or City results were not normal… we only need to look back at last year for that. Why people have to constantly defend La Liga by saying ‘But but the EPL!!’ i don’t know. They take 50% of TV revenue for christ’s sake, how is that going to cause anything other than SPL style domination forever into the future? Last year the top Premiership teams lost plenty of games and had many many close calls… hell most of the time people were calling it a shit Utd side that was the worst in a long time.
The EPL certainly looks like it could get worse competitively, but to suggest it’s just as imbalanced is simply a lie.
I agree La Liga is becoming a joke. RM 6-0 and Barca 5-0 and nobody is really surprised.
big laugher after just one weekend.
I suspect RM and Barca would get similar results against any team outside of the top 2 or 3 in any top league in Europe (incl EPL)
You shouldn’t suspect that.You should be certain of it. Barcelona and Real Madrid are a step ahead of everyone in Europe at the moment. Also the Premier League is already an amazing league and the effort of some people to talk down La Liga, which is a fantastic league as well, in comparison to the former is just plain nonsense
I’d also like to note, particularly in the first half, there were moments where Cesc and Messi were switching positions. In some instances, Cesc was the highest player and Messi would link with the midfield, and other times it was Cesc who would drop and link with the midfield. There were many comments and tweets of both of them playing as the false 9.
Do you think this movement was to confuse defenders or a more tactical approach to keep the numerical advantage in the midfield containing the CBs on their line?
i reckon fabregas scored his goal when doing the messi role (and messi doing the fabregas role?)
i’ve read fabregas and alcantara played the messi role recently, against napoli i think.
Yes, against Napoli Fabregas is easily the highest player on the pitch.
haven´t recognized this, thought it happend only when fabregas filled the space messi left. Of course he didnt stand off when he didn´t recieve a through ball immediately, and then he just had to link up with his teammates.
But knowing that Guardiola already played tiago or fabregas as a false nine shows that they might be a false ten/nine at the same time ( Messi,Fabregas,Tiago; all able to play as a false nine or false ten).
Great idea.
I think when you look at the diagram, it’s because of fluidity. Often during the match it happens that because of eg. an exerted pressing, players find themselves in different places. Messi and Fabs play close to other, so as Messi is keen coming deep and Fabs has an attacking thrust, it is inevitable that they’ll often find themselves in each other roles for a moment.
great work ZM!
Just unbelievable to see barca play this system.
At first i couldn´t believe what happend on the pitch and was wondering whether Tiago will fit in at right back.
But their change of formation didn´t influenced their way of playing great football.
And I agree with ZM about Fabregas role. He isn´t there to replace Xavi in the next three years, eventhough the barca midfielders seem to play like identical twins, they do provide different qualities for the attack.
Xavi is looking to play the through ball or too keep posession cleverly by spreading the game or by adding some tempo to their passing. He hardly chooses to get in the box or to get a shot away.
Iniesta is playing with a little more risk. He can dribble around the defense and knwos how to score goals from outside the box, often by drifting inside because he has the pace and the skill to do so. Nevertheless he is great at creating chances for his teammates by playing the final pass or cross.
But Fabregas ads a more direct route to the attacking play. He´s used to a more direct way of attacking. He can make the vertical runs into space to score with just one touch and knows how to score a goal from distance. And of course he can play the deadly ball, even with a long pass.
I haven´t seen many games of Tiago, but he seems to bee able to combine the talents of them all.
After all, I don´t see barca playing with this system all season, because it doesn´t work that well against just one man upfront or three strikers like in their 4-3-3.
By the way, the pressing was superb, probably due to the change in formation with 6 players able to press high up the pitch.
It was almost like watching Cruyff’s “Dream Team” again, with Busquets as Ronald Koeman, Cesc as Michael Laudrup, Alexis as Hristo Stoichkov and Messi as Romário. I say “almost” because Chapi Ferrer and Sergi were a lot more adventurous – reckless, even – than Mascherano and Abidal were tonight, and Keita had an excellent match but he’s a very different kettle of fish from Guardiola when he played the base-of-the-diamond role. And Thiago and Iniesta’s creativity and vision make the efforts of Bakero and Amor – fine midfielders in their day – look decidedly ordinary. And Víctor Valdés acts as the base of move-launching triangulations in a way that Zubizarreta would never have dreamed of….
OK, so it was nothing like watching Cruyff’s “Dream Team” again. It was huge, huge fun, though.
Pep used this system vs Rubin last year…
At one point maybe we’ll realize the best way to play against barca is to play with two full backs and a Defensive midfielder in defence, and another DM able to fit in when messi actually is playing in a striker position
This barcelona false nine tactic is just making the classic central defenders pointless.
The classic caracteristics of the central defenders: big, tall, tough, etc. are like a handicap against barcelona.
It’s all about quick positioning and cohesion, not about duels and physical presence
Revolution in football tactics? Sure. If we consider that Pep brought 3-4-3 to daylight again, a system which actually haven’t been used from a club team since 1995 with Van Gaal’s Ajax.
Tonight’s fluidity was superb, it worked really well with 5 cental midfielders on the pitch. I’m sure we will see more surpises like this from Pep in the near future.
I think it’s interesting to see that when pep guardiola is pushing his philosophy to the next level he’s approaching to the ajax style, the 3133/3313
of course there is a direct link with cruyff and van gaal being linked to both ajax and barcelona, but isn’t this 343 style formation like the top of tactical football?
like the absolute formation…
i know tactical trends in football are trends so they come and go and come again, and barcelona’s/ajax’s total football is one way of playing football, but it’s like the purest way to play football, the closest to the essence of the sport…
and i don’t think all trends come and go, we won’t see WM soon ^^, so maybe this 3313 is more than a trend
maybe in 20 years all the teams will play like that, just like the majority of teams are playing 4231 right now…
actually wouldn’t the 4231 be the best way to counter the 343 diamond? lol
4 defenders vs 3 attackers ; 2 wide midfielders to take advantage of the lack of width of the diamond in midfield, but also going inside to make it 5 vs4 ; 1 attacker vs 3 defenders with the 2 winger making it 3 vs 3 when going forward.
if 4231 is the best way to counter the 343 diamond it means it won’t be barcelona’s number one formation as most teams plays 4231 (in spain too?).
but barcelona is not an ordinary team so maybe we’ll see this 343 even against real madrid’s 4231 ^^
but thats what the 4-3-3 is about, to counter the 4-2-3-1.
But the center forward plays a false 9 role behind the two holding midfielder, otherwise it’ll be countering the 4-4-2
Barcelona is not an ordinary team, so the opposition will have to employ something extra-ordinary to beat them (outplay, outscore, whatever your goal is). if we keep on thinking of football in terms of phone numbers, 1-2-3-2-3-4-6-1, we’ll never understand what’s really going on.
is Busquets a DM who drops into defence on a CB who can exit the defensice stage with the ball? same with Pique. one thing’s for sure, they can play with the ball at their feet with as few touches as possible
I doubt you’ll ever get the majority of teams playing this way because it fails to take advantage of classic center forwards and centerbacks. At the absolute highest level maybe, but a slightly worse teams is going to prefer to have a Vidic or Drogba in their team than the alternative. I see this as more of a way to accomodate Cesc in place of Puyol
So what was the best performance this week Manchester United 8-2, Manchester City 5-1, Real Madrid 6-0 or Barcelona 5-0?
Considering the opposition, this has to be. 8 goals against Arsenal is impressive, but we were without so many players due to injury and suspension. Villareal were at full strength (I think), but were completely overrun by Barca’s pressing and unable to deal with the movement of the attacking players. Amazing game.
As a ManU Fan, ManCity’s performance was better than ManU’s. Spurs put a better team on the pitch than the Gunners. That was just a horrible and weak Gunners side.
I look forward to watching this one tonight.
Except (not that I want to make excuses for the Spuds) that Harry just purely messed up his tactics. Modric and Krancjar in the middle against a fluid, attacking City side with Nasri, Silva and Toure? Pure suicide. So yah, a better team, but purely juvenile tactics. Whereas we had the juvenile team. Oh, also bad tactics. Ugh. It’s going to take a while to get over that loss.
Agreed. It was blatantly obvious that Spurs were overrun in the midfield having to go against Silva, Nasri, Yaya, Barry and i can throw in Aguero.
Of all these games, i saw ManU and Barca, and what i think won them and were dominant was their intense pressing and pushing the opponents to their own half. Plus, the fluid attacking force of each team.
Agreed that Harry messed up his tactics. What were Wenger’s tactics? Did they fit the talent he fielded? Did they fit the opponents? How well organized was Arsenal?
As bad as Harry’s tactics were, Wenger’s tactics were shambolic. Go back and read ZM’s piece on the game. Arsenal were so bad that he glossed over the tactics to a degree, but he did mention them. Then ponder the talent on both sides of the pitch and where Wenger chose correctly. He didn’t have a great deal of choice in lineup given the departures, suspensions, etc. So having (we assume) watched the tapes of 2.5 competative ManU games with this similar lineup and very likely similar tactics, are Arsenal’s tactics what you would have chosen to do?
Don’t think so.
wenger doesnt have any tactic. his team always plays the same way.
Well, Arsenal scored twice and missed a penalty, while Villarreal barely got a sniff of Barca’s half (Rossi had the only chance of note). Man U also scored 3 goals from set pieces, which reflect Rooney’s individual skill rather than team cohesion. Of Barcelona’s 5 goals, none were wonder strikes, and only Thiago’s was an individual goal. Just flawless understanding between players, and perfect timing of runs (not to say that Man U, City and Madrid didn’t have understanding, because they were all exceptional as well. It’s just that Barcelona take it to another level)
It’s not new, its the 3-4-3 Cruyff introduced at Ajax and transfered to Barcelona.
It works well against two man attacks and a team that plays a narrow midfield four; but, will struggle against a front three
Yeah, it’s puzzling why ZM hasn’t made a direct comparison with the 3-4-3 introduced by Cruyff. After all, Guardiola himself played a pivotal part in that formation. the link is so obvious that it really warrants a mention. Van Gaal’s Ajax used that system as well, but he copied it from Cruyff.
In general, i’ve noticed a tendency by British authors to underestimate Cruyff’s influence on the game as a coach. for example, Jonathan Wilson suggests in Inverting the Pyramid that the 4-3-3 played by Barcelona under Rijkaard was an outflow of 4-2-3-1. excuse me? it’s clearly the typical Dutch 4-3-3 that Rijkaard and Ten Cate brought over from Holland.
similarly, the 4-3-3 with Messi as a false striker, and with 2 wide forwards coming inside, is a carbon copy of the 4-3-3 Holland played in 1974, with Cruyff as a false striker, and Rep and Rensenbrink as wide forwards coming inside. Cruyff later occasionaly used the system at Barcelona as well, before the arrival of Romario.
Actually, if you think of Holland in 1974, didn’t Haan step out from the back leaving three at the back?
3-4-3 in 1974?
yeah. in fact, Haan played as a midfielder for most of his career. people were surprised when Michels used him as a central defender. it’s comparable to Busquets playing as central defender in a 4 man defense.
much of what Guardiola is doing has been done before by various teams involving Cruyff. and that’s no coincidence given the connection between Guardiola and Johan.
Mi equipo es el atletico de madrid, pero ahora tambien voy por barcelona, que le paso a mi equipo que no gana campeonatos?.
Well your team won the Europa League not too long ago.
3-4-3 on paper, but the movement was so extremely fluid, it’s impossible to say exactly what formation it was. When I said that I don’t believe a 3-4-3 will be good for Barcelona, I wasn’t taking into account Thiago, and Pedro and Sanchez playing so wide. Thiago, Cesc, Sanchez, and Messi all have very unique and intelligent off the ball movement that really helped this formation work offensively. I assumed it would be with Xavi and Villa, with Pedro and Villa a lot more inverted and central as usual. And I don’t think that would be as effective. But this formation was intense, and at time it almost looked like a 3-5-2 with Sanchez and Pedro as wing backs and Cesc and Messi both as false 9’s.
This will NOT be the set in stone formation for Barcelona, but I think it will be more of a plan B of sorts. Barcelona now have a powerful bench that gives them much more options and variations than in the past. I don’t think this formation would have worked as well with Gudjohnson and Hleb instead of Thiago and Cesc, and with Jeffren instead of Sanchez. Add Afellay into here, with his super pace and long shots, and Barcelona now seem to be able to attack from nearly all angles.
I believe Pep Guardiola is the best coach currently in Europe. He is improving dramatically with every season in charge, and he is now a tactical master. I think Mourinho is kind of overrated when it comes to tactics. If his initial system doesn’t work out, he freezes and isn’t able to change it. He isn’t innovative, and he often makes wrong choices in his selection.
Their just playing their own game aren’t they and they’ll tell you what the rules are along the way .The revolution has been televised
Pedro and Alexis, for me defined classical wing-play tonight.
By ‘classical’ I refer to playing right up against the full-backs as true outside-forwards and not as wide-midfielders galloping up and down the pitch before launching in crosses from anywhere (full-backs can fulfill that function nowadays).
This is the kind of stuff you would see in the old pyramid, diagonal, W-M, 4-2-4 and 4-3-3 formations decades ago.
The idea was that wingers were forwards who were stationed wide. They were not one dimensional players entrusted with delivery crosses but tricky attackers who enabled their team to go around the opposition’s defence and either head for goal or provide a ‘pass of death’ assist. They also served to stretch the backline for the benfit of attacking players
arriving from midfield.
As much as I agree with you observation re Pedro and Sanchez, I still feel that there is something lacking from them regarding their fulfillment of their responsibilities on the field. Basically a winger’s role is to strech the field and create one vs one situations on the wings and force opponents to double up on them thereby creating numerical advantage in the midfield. Pedro and Sanchez to a lesser extent lack the ability to beat defenders and this to me makes their “classical” winger description hollow.
Think of Henry, Overmars at Barca and how they were always doubled up, to me that is a classical winger.
Pedro and Sanchez lack the ability to beat defenders? That’s probably news to most defenders in La Liga and Serie A. The only reason they don’t draw double teams is that Messi is the primary concern for the defense and he merits the double. Pedro is excellent at going outside his man and delivering low crosses to Messi or an onrushing midfielder. Here’s a compilation of Sanchez torching defenders for Udinese and Chile.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joPUGTBkp-Y
To be honest, Pedro hardly ever beats his opponent when rushing towards the end line. If he beats him, it is when he cuts inside to shoot or to pass trickily to his partners.
However, Sanchez has already shown he can beat one or two opponents, for example against Real Madrid.
Firstly, excellent summary and comments. I wholeheartedly agree this formation was somewhat of a one-off: Guardiola knew he had a scarcity of options in defense and a wealth of them in attack. I also agree that the key battle in the first half was between Cani and Alcantara, and had one of Cani’s wide runs ended in a goal (as it almost did on one or two occasions with clever but mistimed balls to Rossi) this might have been a very different games.
Mike is right to mention that this might just work against Milan and, furthermore, when he notes that this could be sort of a “power style” against smaller clubs who will only rarely threaten on the counter.
There was a moment about a decade and a half ago when I thought that tactical evolution was over, that nothing interesting could be invented anymore, that defensive approach took it over and changed the game forever. I’m so glad I was wrong: Pep has shown that there is still true beauty in this game and there are ways of improving it tactically. So the game does evolve after all! I’ve been watching football for many years now, and I must confess, my friends, that I consider myself a lucky man that I see this miraculous team. They are pure joy to watch!!!
Didn’t see the whole of the game last night, only little parts. Certainly seemed like a 3-1-3-3 to me like ZM mentioned. Quite different to Friday night’s game against Porto where it was actually very close to a 4-2-2-2 for most of it.
The pressing seemed quicker and heavier this game. With the freedom of the three behind and having effectively 6 in attack with Masch and Abidal getting forward as well, it became easier to regain the ball when they lost it because of the amount of players in forward positions who were therefore closer to the ball. In their ‘normal’ system of 4-3-3, they generally, in terms of direct attacking, have about 4 or 5 players directly attacking or moving forward, occasionally 6. This system last night was not neccesarily more attacking but just more moving forward’s as a team. The pressing game therefore became easier.
In the second half, it actually was a 3-3-4 (or 3-1-2-4, or 3-5-2 like someone said), with both Messi and Cesc playing as “false 9″ and Alexis and Pedro on the wings. But anyway, trying to catch this system in a formula of numbers is just for geeks because you can’t do it and that’s just the whole point of Guardiola’s tactics, it’s movement all over, the opponent (and the analysts) don’t know how to get a grip on it.
I give 100% credit to Guardiola, brilliant. But let’s be honest, he isn’t exactly a mad scientist, just dabbling because of necessity. Pep is a a very calculated buyer of options, buying with a clear plan in mind.
For a while I was wondering why the obsession with Arsenal’s Cesc, and now I understand after watching him the last few games, he gives them options, key options that allow flexibility in tactics. Same with Mascherano, after all why would Barca of all teams need a better defensive midfielder than Busquets. They don’t but Mascherano can play in a 3-4-3 better than say a Zambrotta or an Alves or even Puyol. Same with Alexis, he was a key piece in a 3-4-3 as we all know. Brilliant. Most teams can’t afford 2 world class player at each position.
I guessed it’s what’s called an embarrassment of riches, thanks to hundreds of millions in purchases aided by loans, Pep has outsmarted everyone and got those last pieces to the puzzle to play any formation effectively and even deadly. They now can play, 3-4-3, 4-4-2, 3-5-2, 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3, 5-3-2 etc…you name it.
Lets be honest Playing 1 defender IS being a “mad scientist” irrespective of circumstances,
He had some room to paly it safe and still got with back 4 but he didn’t, ”coz sometimes he like to be a mad scientist
Fabregas’ telepathic understanding with messi stems from the fact that they played together for about three years from around 12-15 yrs of age. Trust me you’ll also like an analysis from http://www.theirtactics.com. Great post on how Barca moved in this game. I also think the 3-4-3 is a one off.
You could just say it’s your site mate.
Seriously, stop spamming every article on ZM with your website
I awaited this game with a kind of fear, for last season Villareal gave the toughest game for Barca in the league. Even Xavi admitted this in an interview. And here was Barca without Puyol, Pique, Alves and even Xavi at the bench???? But what a great game it was. Messi and Busquests are still no were near their 80% even, but it was a great game. 3-3-1-3 , 3-1-3-3, and all sorts of formations where there, but what was amazing was the fluidity in the movement. This is total football, but this is actually total movement, I would say. Except for Abidal, Barca in one way played with 9 perfect ball players or 6 out and out attacking players.
It is scary that Barca can only improve from here and I cant even imagine how well this team will play in a few months time.
I think Abidal is at least on par with mascherano in terms of ball playing. He is much calmer on the ball, and while he rarely looks for an attack-starting pass, he is very consistent at getting the ball out of danger and into the feet of our midfielders.
Ekhm, what do you want from Abidal? Have you seen how calmly he seeks for a “way out” pass to his teammates, even when the opposition is pressing hard? I agree, he plays below his form from before the diagnosis of cancer (back then he was a professor of football), but it’s visible that he is coming back to a good form already.
Cesc confirms he played as striker yesterday: http://www.fcbarcelona.cat/web/english/noticies/futbol/temporada11-12/08/29/n110829107907.html So let’s call it 3-3-4
First, I don’t expect Guardiola to play this formation often. The signings of Fabregas and Sanchez, in my view, were more about flexibility (more on that below) and relief (as Xavi and Iniesta couldn’t play every match last season, and Pedro, Messi and Villa will surely need resting at certain stages) than changing formation or looking to fit them all in the same team. This is an ideal formation to play against teams that play very narrow, play two centre forwards or are likely to pack the midfield or defence in an attempt to survive rather than win. But against teams who play high wingers (or plenty of width some other way), or pose a serious attacking threat, it would surely not be suitable.
Villareal’s tactical inflexibility was one of the disappointing aspects of the game for me. Surely it was worth trying playing with wingers ‘outside’ Mascherano and Abidal, if only to do something different to test Barca’s defensive set up. Surely it was worth pressing and playing at a higher pace against a team who’d played the UEFA Super Cup only three days earlier?
Second, this formation means that the two wide forwards must do the opposite of their usual tasks, and I’m not sure whether it works as well. While usually Villa and Pedro cut into the space between full backs and centre backs, and the space left by Messi’s deep forays, this time, there was no Alves or Adriano or Abidal to surge into the space they left, so they had to stay wide in order to stretch the game. I don’t want to get all mystical about tactics, but I suspect that it’s better to attack space than to occupy it, as the former is far harder for the defensive team to pick up. Also, I believe that the angles created by Pedro’s and Villa’s usual runs inside create better angles for through balls than do midfielders running from deep central positions.
Third, this match highlighted the genius of the signings of Sanchez and Fabregas. Everyone assumed that because Barca were having to play auxillary centre backs toward the end of last season — usually Mascherano, Busquets or Abidal — that they needed to buy a centre back. Further up the pitch, the argument went, there was such a galaxy of talent that any further signings were unnecessary. But both Macherano and Busquets are competent at centreback — especially in a league where forwards tend to be of the quicksilver intelligent sort. And doesn’t the fact that Guardiola was able to produce a credible backline with the kind of injury list that would have Wenger conceding eight show that there’s plenty of cover there?
No, the real need was to provide cover and variation further up the field. Last season, Barca were forced to rotate when Iniesta or Xavi needed to rest, and that made the other attacking threats easier to mark. Further, it was clear that in the run in, Barca were tiring badly. So, signing Fabregas, who can cover anywhere in midfield, and Sanchez, who can probably cover for Messi, Pedro or Villa, will improve matters based on that alone. But better than that, they add stylistic variation. Fabregas, for instance, looks for the killer ball or expansive ball far more often than other Barca players, and while that mean ball retention drops off, it will also mean Barca can be more direct, and switch the play faster, when necessary. Furthermore, Guardiola now has more tactical variation available. In addition to tonight’s formation, it’s possible to imagine, for example, him playing away from home in Europe, protecting a lead, with Iniesta on the left, Messi in his old position on the right, Villa through the middle, and Xavi, Fabregas and Busquets in midfield.
delete
Guardiola said in the press conference he will play 4-3-3 this season, this was an exception because of injuries/suspensions of lot of defenders.
It’s strange how often Barca’s players have been injured recently. I’m fairly certain that Barcelona have never lost a game when the La Masia core starts (Valdes, Pique, Puyol, Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta, Pedro, Messi) but I can’t remember the last time they even played together. I think it was that 2-0 win over Real in the CL first leg semi. Pep has coped really well, using a packed midfield corps in a resourceful manner. I was really, really impressed with this victory.
i thought i’d read some analyse from real and zaragoza match. maybe ZM is a big fan of barca.
The match analysed here was 1st versus 4th team of the league.
Real played against – excuse me – cucumbers.
Stoke vs Chelsea on august 14/2011???
Chelsea has a new coach, it was interesting to see, how he plays. Also, ZM seems to be giving some attention to Stoke, they are quite irregular team in terms of gameplay characteristics. There were some other articles about them.
I have never seen a team so reluctant or against using the ball in the air before as Barca. Its amazing to me, the way they play they make a case for the argument that aerial play is not needed in football. They rarely use crossfield lobs, longballs and such.
I actually wonder if it is possible for a team to dominate doing the complete opposite of Barca. Strict long passing and a heavy emphasis on keeping the ball off the ground and in the air. It would certainly be interesting to see a team try to play this way. If Barca’s key to their success is keeping the ball on the ground at all times and using mostly short range passing, I wonder how they would deal with a team constructed around keeping the ball in the air, off the ground, and constantly being shuffled in long passes. And I mean backwards long passes too, like from forwards passing back to the CBs. It would be interesting to see it in action.
Barca do play in the air,
Sanchez’s goal was assit ball over the top.
Messi’s recent pass to Cesc in UEFA Super Cup, etc,etc
Xavi’s trademark diagonal air ball out wide to Alves, this happens A LOT.
Barca play less air balls but there is enough of them to not get them labeled being averse to it.
AS for you 2nd premise of team utilizing aggressive aerial ball play, I think that could be the future.
I don’t that players physically and technically are yet ready to play that way effectively.
This reminds me of that futuristic football advert some time back where nearly all balls are played furiously in the air at super great speeds and players are jumping and making passes in the air.
It was sort of like that Foot-Volleyball game (forgot whats its called)
Well I’m not talking about it in a way that makes it a fantasy. But imagine players using a combination of lobs, headers, and lofted through balls to keep the ball in the air quite often. Imagine not taking time to settle down the tempo and just launching balls from side to side laterally, or front to back to be defensive.
For example, Barca’s Xavi and Iniesta often pass back to the CBs quite a lot to keep possession, I would be suggesting what if when a forward receives a ball, with his back to the goal, if he has no available options he just boots it back to the CBs or the GK even. I understand there are risks in this play, but think about it. The entire opponents midfield and strikers become like the monkey in the middle, they get tired running between your defence and attack as you lob passes back and forth down the field. Right now teams only seem focused on using longballs going forward, I want to see longballs used the way that Barca uses short quick passing, in every direction.
It is not necessary. Football styles are not fire and water, you don’t combat a particular style by doing the exact opposite. In fact, if you had the players, you could attempt to beat Barcelona at their own game. Any team at any given time will do both (and should). Barcelona’s short passing just stands out more in the final third, however many goals, assists and advantage positions have been gained by the long balls from Xavi, Iniesta and co.
It seems to me Mou has been the closest in cutting the Barcelona game flow, by relinquishing possession to gain control of space (with Inter). It is THE best way to deal with Barcelona, but to make this work you need the players to suit this system to be as good as, if not better, than the Barcelona players suited to their own game.
The other alternative is the constant high-pressure game like the new Real Madrid. To make this work however, YOU MUST take your chances. Because space will be left behind your lines that a little prodigy like Messi WILL take. The last couple of matches showed a superior Real Madrid side that simply got outdone by the individuality of Messi, but the tiki-taka had been mostly nullified.
“It seems to me Mou has been the closest in cutting the Barcelona game flow, by relinquishing possession to gain control of space (with Inter).”
Oh, cmon. They lost that game 0-1. And the match two weeks earlier was won by them, because they risked and played open cards with Barcelona, and it paid off that time (plus third goal from off-side) – nothing to do with “controlling the space”.
I disagree about the return leg in Barcelona, considering just how many shots on goal Barca actually had, and that they had roughly 85% possession, a 1 goal return on that type of shots on goal and possession statistics has to be seen as a failure.
You can defend nearly perfectly for 90 minutes in a football match, like Inter did that night with 10 men, yet you might lose that one goal (and they could very well lose two more goals: Bojan disallowed goal or Bojan’s missed header 10 minutes earlier) and you lose, because you can’t get back into the game, having been focused purely on destruction until conceding a goal. I don’t think it’s anywhere near to effective stopping Barcelona. Inter had a comfort of losing that game thanks to their fantastic comeback in Milan.
DUDE start playing some football and not just watching from your armchair
Once the ball in in the air, the chances of losing possession increases dramatically due to poor control, interception, or a just plain losing it.
The goal of playing this way isn’t to maintain possession. Barca’s short passing game is used to maintain possession. The use of the long passing aerial hybrid game would be to retain the space and control the space, the possession is useless in the system, or at least it isn’t the focal point. We wouldn’t want to hold the ball for a long time.
Here is how I would line up Real Madrid playing this way:
———–Higuain———–
—CR7———————–
——————-Ozil——
—————————–
——Marcelo—————-
——————-Khedira—
—————————–
————Alonso———–
—————————–
–Coentrao——————-
——-Pepe–Varane—-Ramos-
It is somewhat like a staggered 4-4-2 diamond. Higuain would be the only problem, as this way of playing would require a traditional target man who can hold the ball up. Zlatan Ibrahimovic or Mario Gomez would be my ideal candidates for the CF.
I would pick Varane over Carvahlo because Varane is 6′5″. This system has a strong focus on aerial domination and long passing even backwards, so we need CBs that can win headers and dominate in the air.
Although Marcelo is short, he is an incredibly acorbatic and athletic player. He can jump extremely high for his size, and I have selected him in midfield because he is a pretty good tackler today, while he retains his explosive offensive abilities.
Alonso is the key man in the team. It will be primarily his responsibility to switch player from side to side with lateral long balls, to hit balls into the opponents left and right corner areas for CR7 and Ozil (very fast tricky players) to reach.
Khedira is included mainly for his aerial ability to win headers and balls in midfield. Although with this system, the focus is on playing most of the game either in the opponents penalty area, or our own penalty area.
We want to ideally catch the other team off guard and use pace and aerial ability to overload their penalty zone and surrounding left and right corners. If there is no viable passing options, the forwards would be required to pass back into our own half, to the CBs who will be kept quite deep. Khedira may also be kept quite deep for cover. At times, Coentrao will move up to attack as well, with Ramos slotting into a 3rd CB position, making it a 3 man defence, but Pepe, Ramos and Varane are all 6′0″ or taller, and all three are excellent headers of the ball. Ramos especially is extremely athletic and acrobatic.
The ultimate goal of this set up in short would be to completely dominate the pitch by forcing the game to be played either in their penalty area, or in our own. But in our own penalty area, we would always prioritize kicking the ball away to trying to hold onto possession. We want to provide as little space and time as possible for the opponent to use the middle of the pitch.
Why long passing backwards, if your goal is not to retain possession? Why risking a dangerous situation for the opposition? It’s better to try and shoot on opponent’s goal.
Charles Reep and Charles Hughes would be a good place to start for answering that question — although I suspect that their apologists (fans) would bristle at the suggestion that they advocated a wholly long ball approach.
Both men influenced plenty of managers and teams, mostly in England. They focused on getting the ball as fast as possible into the final third, into wide areas and then/or into the box. Reep and Hughes both argued that as most goals (from their un-academically small survey smaples) come from three or fewer passes, teams should try to shoot, or get the ball in scoring positions, in as few passes as possible — or even, in some warped and unlettered thinking, restrict themselves to, say, X percentage of three pass movements, X % of two pass moves, or aiming for a certain number of corners and free-kicks won per match.
This inevitably led to large numbers of long balls played up to a front man or wingers, often bypassing the midfield. Often, these long balls were aimless punts.
I would say that managers such as Jack Charlton at the Ireland national team, Bobby Gould and Dave Bassett at Wimbledon, Graham Taylor at Watford and Egil Olsen for the Norway national team were all influenced by Reep and Hughes. In fact, I’m sure I remember reading somewhere, perhaps in Jonathan Wilson’s book, that Taylor paid either Reep or Hughes a retainer for statistical analysis during his Watford days.
I guess these managers played as close to the anti-tiki taka you’re looking for. Sadly, with this style, they all had plenty of success, given the teams they were coaching.
One of the key points I stressed is that I would want this style not to be simply booting longballs down the field. I want long passing in ALL DIRECTIONS, when a midfielder is passing back to defence, put it in the air, when a left winger is passing backwards for lack of better options, put it in the air to the RB, pass across field but backwards. I want to see lots of lateral passing too.
I’m not talking about Terry sending a lob downfield for Drogba to tap in or head in. I’m talking about Terry sending a pass to Drogba who is turned back to goal, he holds it for a second, no options to his right or left, lobs it backwards down to Ashley Cole, or Terry, or Ivanovic. I want to see that, but I want to see it practiced to such a degree that it works and doesn’t just sound ridiculous.
But, um, why would you want to do that?
And why on earth do you think it would be remotely possible?
Because I believe the key to breaking Guardiola’s Barca, and the tactical answer to tiki-taka and the way they play is by controlling the space of the pitch.
A team cannot do both at the same time, you often have to sacrifice one to do the other well. Barca is the best in the world at keeping the ball, but they often sacrifice their space. They make up for it by having all of their players, even their GK and CBs trained to be expert passers of the ball. The system hinges on the fact that all 11 players are capable of playing the way they need to.
I know this, no system has ever been unbeatable. A tactical change will occur, probably in the next 2-3 years that will be able to not just beat this Barca every once in a while, but beat them more often. Im not saying Barca will ever be bad, but just that will be like they were 5-6 years ago, great but not dominating everything.
Mourinho was on to something with Inter, sacrificing the ball to control the space is the key to beating them. The problem with what Mou did is that he only took it as far as a defensive approach, he limited it to their own penalty box. I want to see the team play with the approach of controlling the space ALL OVER THE PITCH.
You know how Barca is trying to put ball-playing players in all 11 positions? I want to see Mou or someone else try to put aerial playing, fast paced, acrobatic and athletic players in all 10 outfield positions.
But Jordan, while sacrificing possession in order to keep shape is an interesting tactic to examine — and it’s certainly been discussed plenty, and interestingly — how does this relate to your idea of only ever playing the ball in the air?
Playing the ball on the ground demands movement off the ball from every player surrounding the one in possession. It’s Barcelona and Spain’s defining characteristic.
Playing the ball in the air only demands movement from the forward who is receiving the ball and the forward/midfielder looking for the knockdown. That’s why Stoke’s defense and central midfield is so disciplined, because they never have to move off the ball to offer a passing option
Carbo,
I think part of the tactic of sacrificing possession to gain the stronghold of position is being able to enforce your position on the pitch. Mou’s Inter did it successfully (consider the frustration of Barca players to break through) although they only were able to do it in a defensive area of the pitch. I want to see the same thing applied to the forwards and the opponents third.
Here is one situation –
Madrid v Barca –
—————Valdes—————
————————————
———-Puyol——-Pique———
————–Higuain——–Abidal-
–Alves—————————–
—CR7——————————
————————Ozil——–
The key thing here would be for Ozil to attempt a long pass in the air to CR& streaking past Alves, while Higuain also runs toward the left corner and challenges for the ball.
Basically we have Ozil delivering a ball to CR7 who is primarily guarded by Alves, and back up guarded by Puyol. Puyol can move over to double CR7 if he wants because Pique is there to guard Higuain. Abidal would be trying to guard Ozil, so he is irrelevant.
If Higuain drifts to the left almost to the point of interfering with CR7/Alves match up, he drags Puyol left with him, because now Alves would be facing 2v1. The key to the play is to overload one side of the penalty box while leaving the other side empty. Why do we need to use the right side of the pitch at all? Lets just leave it alone, we don’t have to worry about Abidal at all.
If CR7 wins the header, he can knock it down to Higuain who can than lob back to Ozil in the center outside the penalty box who can shoot, or he can lob it backwards to Coentrao who would have moved up Left Midfield and can now use his options.
I want to basically divide the pitch into segments, or quadrants, and force the game to be played in two ways. I want there to be an overarching grand cross field passing game, but than I want their to be segmented game where certain areas of the pitch, certain positions are completely made irrelevant in that specific moment in time, as the situation demands it.
It is very difficult for me to explain what I am thinking in my head, I may have to create a map or video to help show.
Which brings us back to what I said about Reep and Hughes. What you seem to be advocating is exactly what they advocated.
What happens when Barcelona play their very high line and pressure the player with the ball? The long pass will not be accurate most of the time and when it is, it won’t be received in a dangerous area. What happens when Real Madrid play 1v1 against against every player on the pitch like they did recently against Barca? The space will not be won, but the possession WILL be sacrificed. Barcelona will keep the possession all day, and unless the “long ball” team’s forwards don’t drop back, they will be destroyed. But if they do drop back, where will the long ball go?
There have been a few pieces on this site about the re-emergence of the passing midfielder, or as it has been described, the advent of “Guardiolaism”. When I look at this formation here, that’s all I see.
He has 7(!) players that play something akin to his role. And if Guardiola so desired, he could have 8, with Iniesta taking a Pedro/Sanchez spot, and introducing Xavi (Of course, Guardiola likely left it the way it was because having true wingers was important in this otherwise narrow system).
Seriously though: Messi, Fabregas, Iniesta, Thiago, Keita, Busquets, Mascherano. Incredible. Soon it will be the goalie and 10 central midfielder hybrids.
To be fair Bielsa has been playing this for a while now. With Chile he sometimes used only one ‘real’ central defender. The others were defensive midfielders disguised as defenders (Vidal, Medel, Estrada).
imagine xavi in the guardiola role with this formation… if only in the second-half
Doesn’t Busquets already play the Guardiola role?
yes, but xavi is the best passing player in the world
and with puyol and pique injuries are playing mostly as a center-back for some time now…
The ever wonderfull Allas with his video
http://youtu.be/YyDx8SH81rc
ZM should use the video platform, its much more powerful medium for such a type of blog and its content.
Allas used to mention “Fair Use policy” in his videos,
Isn’t that correct, for critique and analysis and academic and learning purposes,
videos of matches can be used.
Hope ZM gives this a though, ‘coz video is better than text/imagery and provides wider audience access and thus helps more people understand this side of the game, in an easier way.
as somebody who lives in China, and works in the UK at a location that filters youtube, I would be EXTREMELY disappointed if ZM were to switch to purely video content
I love Allas’ work, but I appreciate the greater depth provided by ZM’s written analysis. Why should we have to choose?
Video + deeper textual analysis > just video
Cruijff once openly thought about playing without a goalkeeper. Guardiola is on his way to really play that way. Last season, most team discussions about Barcelona were about who would play in central defence, with Puyol and Pique not always available. Pep’s solution: buy an attacker and an attacking midfielder. And play them, together with the already o so fluent rest. To keep it at 11 players, the defenders have to leave the pitch.
Next step: no goalie. Already this season, or do we have to wait a full year?
With the modern GK’s today having the ability to shoot the length of the pitch I don’t think thats ever going to happen, someone is going to be stuck at-least near the Penalty Spot for the whole of the match.
Valdes already counts as a field player. He takes part of the tiki taka game with the defenders.
One of my biggest pet peeves about dissecting Barcelona tactics is all the sanctimonious lineage talk and all the Messi fan boys. I digress….
The fact of the matter is Barca’s tactical brilliance is more about Guardiola than people give him credit for!
Every once in a while there is a confluence of factors, Guardiola is just on a different level right, and with all the right tools at his disposal.
Many people may not know this but Guardiola played the last season of his career in Mexico. This had a profound influence on him as well.
One of the things that most surprised him was the “3 man defense” revolution in Mexico at the time, nearly every team used it in some way.
if guardiola truly is a great manager he will eventually leave barca to prove his critics wrong.
I don’t think he has to prove anything to anyone
. If/when he eventually leaves, he’ll do it for himself. ^^
only managing the best team thats ever been? Wow, massive achievement. He definitely does need to prove himself he wants to be put in the same calibre of managers as say Mourinho.
Is Mourinho really different? Porto, Chelsea, Inter, Madrid – they all are top and rich teams with dozens of football talents and stars, he could even buy himself few players he wanted. Also, he has never stayed in the same club for long, and when he did, he got sacked. My point is not to degrade Mourinho, but to show Guardiola in proper light.
Also, you have quite not understood my previous comment. I think he is a type of person that doesn’t care about his critics, he knows what he does and that he is good in it. Also, there are enough people that share that view.
3rnaldo0, let me guess– u are a RM supporter? what exactly did this barca core win before pep took over? ‘04 CL doesnt count; that team was very different than the one we see now.
PEP is the one who instilled this tiki-taka to the extent that we see now and are taking for granted more and more as time passes(no pun intended).
PEP is the one who demanded his players (even superstars like messi iniesta etc, not just a handful of players(like say a park ji-sung) put in the team solely to be workhorses) press so high up the pitch.
PEP is the one who had faith and called up youth rank players to not only be reserves, but play pivotal roles on the team.
PEP is the one who is responsible for this total football evolution/movement that we are seeing happen in front of our eyes.
Quite funny that u think he still has to prove himself. take off your RM tinted shades and see the light.
Pep assembled this team. He is a terrific manager, easily one of the best in the world. That is unarguable. Why does he have to prove that somewhere else? He has proved it with Barca, taking a broken team, throwing out legends like Ronaldinho and Deco, and going on to win two CL titles, constantly improving. This argument about “he’s only good because he is with a great team” is ridiculous. They are the same people who say that Messi is only good because he gets great service from Xavi, that he needs to go somewhere else to prove himself. Yet those are the same people that say that Xavi only seems great now because he gets to feed a great forward like Messi. Wtf? Also the same people who say that Valdes, Pique, and Busquets only seem like good players because they are never truly tested in Barcelona. Well, then what the hell is the secret? Barcelona is an amazing team because of everyone. Pep has a huge part to play in that success. No coach would have had the same success as Pep has had with Barcelona. If Ronaldo played for Barcelona, he would not be better than Messi. If prime Pirlo or some other CM played for Barcelona, they would not do better than Xavi. If Vidic was in Barcelona, he would not do better than Pique. No DM in the world can do Busquets’ job in Barcelona, same with Valdes. Pep decides how the team plays, and he has been brilliant. And it isn’t exactly like Mourinho has won with small teams. He coaches teams with unlimited resources. His plan is just to buy and increase the quality of the team with amazing players to the point where it is impossible NOT to win.
definitely not a RM supporter, im a neutral with no favourite club. I respect the fact Mourinho won the champions league with mostly average players on a very very low budget at Porto, and so has earned his way to top teams because of that success. Guardiola definitely deserves a lot of credit to the success of barca, but could he do it with much less equipped players? I’m not saying he couldnt at all, im saying he hasnt proved that he can take a less talented club and do equally as well. Also I believe that barca is one of the easiest jobs in the world, IT ISNT EASY but is one of the easiest. This is because the youth system is so fantastic that players like messi, iniesta, pedro, xavi’s press and work rate has already been installed, as the tactics are identical to the youth team because of the clubs philosophy….because of this i think barca could share nearly equal success under a different manager than Pep.
Pep did not bring tiki-taka to Spanish football!!!
Spain was playing tiki-taka in the Euro2008 qualifiers under Luis Aragones during 2007 and during the actual tournament itself in June2008. Guardiola’s first season at Barca only started in August 08. He wasn’t even the coach of Barca when players like Xavi, Iniesta, Xabi Alonso, and David Silva were playing tiki taka for Spain. If anything, Guardiola copied the way the national team had been playing, and tweaked it to his liking by adding the pressing.
Well, actually, Pep was a coach of Barca B back then. And please don’t try to suggest that a Spain’s tiki-taka from 2008 is the same as the one from 2010. Completely different dynamics and purpose.
He’s definitely leaving Barcelona within the next few years. After that, I think he goes to the UAE or Qatar for a massive pay packet and a lower stress job (like he did as a player). He’s earned it.
As a player he went voluntarily to Brescia, Roma, Qatar and Dorados of Sinaloa, I don’t think he has a problem taking on new adventures. He’ll coach somewhere else, count on it.
Sir Alex never left United. Is he not a great manager?
hes won things with aberdeen which is an accomplishment, but the fact hes never left during an era where tactics are everything, if he did go to a smaller team i dont think he’d stand out like he has at united as his signings have been an important factor in his success (Cantona, Rooney, Ronaldo) and won’t have these funds elsewhere.
Not to forget about Lavolpe, who was coaching Atlas at the time, featuring a very young Rafael Márquez, of whom Guardiola has spoken more than once, who built his team around a three-man defense, attack-minded system, wich avoided clearing the ball and instead tried to build up play by passing the ball side to side from deep positions.
I was thinking along the same lines. Pep’s 3-4-3 is like Lavolpe 2.0 or even 3.0 or 4.0.
That Atlas team was revolutionary, of course nobody will ever mention it, because it was all Cruyff or the Dream Team. Pep has mentioned Lavolpe on more than one occasion and I think they keep a dialogue still.
It’s interesting that Barca was using exactly the system that many suggested last season as the best way to try and beat them. That said, this 3-4-3 and the false nine 4-3-3/4-4-2 diamond they played so often last season naturally cancel each other out, kind of like a 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3. The only natural space is at centerback, so it becomes a game of “switching” shape at the right times, either by moving a CB/DM or adjusting the position of the wingers and false nine.
Seeing this made me think about the potential of Barca facing the current Man U.
Anyone notes that Busquets’ role is actually quite similar to Beckenbauer’s or Mattheus’s?
It needs an exceptionally gifted, smart (not to mention shrewd in diving abilities
), and all-rounder player to play that role!
Busquets is far more defensive than Beckenbauer.
Beckenbauer is closer to Pique, ‘coz they brign the ball far more forward while Busquets controls space at just a specific area of the pitch.
Rafael Marquez makes Piquet look like Kalid Boulharouz by comparison. He’s the true Kaiser of Michoacan and was tailor made for Barca. In his prime he was pretty close to a perfect player for a center back with distribution to die for, Guardiola is on record as saying the same thing.
As mentioned before, this video illustrates many points very nicely:
http://youtu.be/YyDx8SH81rc
To tie this back to another ZM post, I believe what Musacchio is doing on the 3-0 and 4-0 is “doing a Vermaelen”:
http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/04/09/thomas-vermaelen-arsenal-positional-errors/
And to tie this back with AVB (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/8699902/Chelsea-manager-Andre-Villas-Boass-footballing-philosophy.html):
“You have to provoke them with the ball, which is something most teams can’t do. I cannot understand it. It’s an essential factor in the game.
At this time of ultra-low defensive block teams, you will have to learn how to provoke them with the ball. It’s the ball they want, so you have to defy them using the ball as a carrot.
Louis Van Gaal’s idea is one of continuous circulation, one side to the other, until the moment that, when you change direction, an space opens up inside and you go through it.
So, he provokes the opponent with horizontal circulation of the ball, until the moment that the opponent will start to pressure out of despair. What I believe in is to challenge the rival by driving the ball into him.
That’s something Pep Guardiola believes is decisive. And that’s something that Henk ten Cate also took to Avram Grant’s Chelsea. He took it with him form Frank Rijkaard’s Barcelona. We did it differently at Chelsea under Mourinho.”
This was a very tactically sound performance by a side that hardly ever gets it wrong. If Pep ever wrote a book on football it would be a best seller and Arsene Wenger would have his pre-ordered on Amazon! No but seriously, Pep Guardiola, or “Guards” as I like to call him and hope that he will come to be known, is a very very good manager of a football team. When those players in the famous ‘Blaugrana’ take their first step onto the ‘Nou Camp’ or ‘Camp Nou’ as some people sometimes call it, you can be sure that he has drilled his ideas into their heads.
But really, the Barca ideals or “Barcathink” is something that is engrained in the young boys young bodies at their famous ‘La Masia’ training facility. They don’t just play football together, they eat their food together, they talk of games won and lost in the famous ‘game talking’ room, they share their sandwiches, they learn at school together, learn the birds and the bees together. When Cesc plays an inch perfect pass to Messi to win the game, he’s not just doing it because of what happened on the training ground earlier in the week – these guys have know each other since they were children. They went through puberty together and had many adventures. Messi probably had his first taste of alcohol from Cesc’s father’s wine cabinet and then stayed up all night talking about how much they loved each other. They same goes for all the Barca cantera. When Cesc was at Arsenal he could play very well but he couldn’t tap into their Arsenalthink because there is no such thing, only Barcathink. They are like honey-bees or the Borg from Battlestar Gallactica, they are a higher form of life. We can’t understand it fully, yet. An in-depth discussion of these issues raised above and also a hilarious gallery section where contributors contribute captions to a picture of Cesc and Messi in bed together is available at the excellent website http://www.theirtactics.com (winner of new website of the month May 2009 and July 2011).
watch out, SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAM above
Camp Nou isn’t what “some people call it,” but its actual name!
Jason said: This argument about “he’s only good because he is with a great team” is ridiculous. They are the same people who say that Messi is only good because he gets great service from Xavi, that he needs to go somewhere else to prove himself. Yet those are the same people that say that Xavi only seems great now because he gets to feed a great forward like Messi. Wtf? Also the same people who say that Valdes, Pique, and Busquets only seem like good players because they are never truly tested in Barcelona. …
well put.
must say, the above is one of my favorite(or least favorite, i guess..u know what i mean) excuses the barca ‘haters’ make. the lack of logic is quite stupefying.
I hate that argument too. Zidane spent his career feeding the likes of Inzaghi, Trezuguet, Del Piero, Ronaldo, Raul, and Henry. He spent his career being covered for by the likes of Makalele, Viera, Deschamps, and Davids. Does this make him overrated? Absolutely not. Zidane was a brilliant player. But people throw the exact same argument at Messi to claim that he’s overrated. It’s just insane.
Yes but it’s clear to see that Messi is not as good for Argentina whereas, say, Ronaldo was just as good for Man Utd. I think it’s fair to say Messi gives more to the team than Ronaldo, that his game is more about the collective than Ronaldo’s – so doesn’t it then follow that his game would suffer more if the quality of his teammates were lessened than Ronaldo’s?
It’s not a criticism of Messi’s game, just an observation. If he stays at Barca his whole career and they continue with their current philosophy then who cares how he may have faired in Milan? If I were made the coach of Barca I would want Messi in my team above all others. If I were made the coach of any other team, I would choose Ronaldo.
Agree with you. I think it’s safe to say that you are only the best if you play with the best.
Messi is the best because of Xavi-Iniesta.
Xavi and Iniesta are the best because of Messi.
and
Zidane was the best because everyone mentioned above.
But it’s also clear that Ronaldo isn’t as good for Portugal.
Given how well small and clever players (Silva, Aguero, Mata) are doing in the Premier League, it isn’t a stretch to imagine Messi tearing it up in England.
KnobGoblin, why did you use Argentina example on Messi, but did not use Portugal example on Cristiano? It’s either stupidity or fanboyism.
sibelkacem, I know it’s hard to hear criticism of someone you love but if you calmed down you might see that you are saying the same thing as me. Ronaldo isn’t as good for Portugal as he was for Man Utd or is for Real Madrid. That was exactly the point that was being made. I would say Cristiano Ronaldo is better equipped to maintain a high level of performance in any team than Messi is, but all players suffer by the quality of their teammates or coach. The differance in performance of Messi for Barca and Argentina is much bigger than Ronaldo for Portuagl but probably just as big for any of the Barca players if they played on their own. Del Bosque recognised this which is why he took as many Barca players to the World Cup as he could.
What is stupidity is to think that the performance of the Barca players is independant of their teammates. If Pedro came from the youth system of Stoke do you think he would’ve played in the World Cup?
I think Messi is much better equipped to succeed at any team than Ronaldo is. The fact that Ronaldo has played at more clubs doesn’t necessarily prove that he is more capable of adapting. Comparing Messi’s performance with Argentina to Ronaldo’s with Man Utd is extremely flawed. Put Ronaldo in this Argentina team, and I guarantee you he would fail. Everyone on that team fails, besides Messi. Messi is the only one capable of attacking in Argentina. Messi actually had a few terrific matches in the Copa America. While Ronaldo played in a fantastic team in Man Utd.
Messi is more of a team player, but that doesn’t mean he has to rely on his teammates more than Ronaldo does. At Real Madrid, Ronaldo receives more service than any player anywhere. Messi is more capable of playing a game on his own. But he chooses not to. Put Messi in, I don’t know, Stoke City or something like that, and he would still take the EPL by the neck, and dominate every team he plays. I don’t think Ronaldo would be capable of that.
KnobGoblin, judging by your response, it seems it’s you who has to calm down and accept that people have justified claims against your methodology. No, I don’t love Messi. Actually, you can’t have any idea about my point of view on this subject, because the only thing I said, was questioning your methodology. Yet, you fired back with a tirade of accusations – it kinda proves, how desperate you are. No, you didn’t say these things in your previous post. You said “Messi is not as good for Argentina [as for Barcelona] whereas, say, Ronaldo was just as good for Man Utd [as for Madrid]“. You clearly compared Messi’s club-country and Ronaldo’s club-club. I repeat, not seeing that such a comparison is flawed, is either manipulation or ignorance. It’s quite okay to be wrong from time to time, but now you try to look as if you meant that from the beginning…
Now, in response to your second post, I quite can’t see how is the amplitude of Messi’s performance between club and country bigger than Ronaldo’s. Do you simply look at the number of goals scored for their country by both players? Or would you actually look at the influence on team that both players generate? I think Messi’s still great in Argentina, the only difference is that he has stupid teammates there. I’d like to add that I agree with the first paragraph of Iason, above me.
Both players are great, but they play quite differently. We can’t know how Messi would play if not the collective style of play Barca teaches. Perhaps as selfish as Ronaldo, who had to travel to different clubs and prove himself there (so you see, I’m not saying “selfish” as something wrong).
And I honestly think Pedro made it to the Mundial because of 1. his great performance for Barcelona in spring 2010, 2. his characteristics desired by Del Bosque (ability to stick to the sideline instead of coming inside, like Iniesta and Silva like to do). Youth system doesn’t have anything to do with it. Why did Bojan not go? Who would you take instead of Pedro? Let’s go further. Tell me one Barcelona name, who shouldn’t go to South Africa.
Oh geez sibelkacem, you’re obviously one of these amateur debating internet dweebs (probably American, maybe 14) who keep coming back nit-picking over and over until you declare yourself the winner of the argument because of how we define the word “great”.
Listen, there are lots of great players who played well for both club and country. I could’ve chosen Zidane, Cruyff, Brazilian Ronaldo, whatever. Ronaldo is a good example because he is the best player for the only club comparable to Barca and we have seen him play well for Man Utd and indeed Portugal for many years. Messi plays for a country that can realistically think itself a favourite for any competition its in, Ronaldo doesn’t. I don’t know if your old enough to appreciate the difference between Argentina and Portugal but believe me it’s huge.
The first two guys said they didn’t like the argument that Messi plays brilliantly for Barca because he is surrounded by brilliant players. I think most reasonable people would say that playing with great players would have some positive impact on your game but you can choose to believe whatever makes you happy and prevents a temper tantrum.
As for Pedro – a lot of Spaniards thought Senna should’ve gone over Busquets and were shocked at Pedro’s inclusion (previously uncapped I think). Navas could’ve hogged the touchline, Del Bosque saw the benefit of a Barca led team and he was right. As for Bojan, yes, a lot of people were calling for him to be capped, initially to prevent him for declaring for Serbia, I think, and then afterwards because he is a great player. He isn’t, though. Just like Giovani when he was sold to Spurs in a shockingly cheap deal. It looked cheap at the time because he looked better than he was. Messi is great. If I could give him two pieces of advice I ‘d say “never leave Barca” and “build yourself a time machine and declare for Spain”.
Messi draws another blank for the Argies at the weekend while Ronaldo scored two and set up another for Portugal. 1-0 to KnodGoblin, I’d say!
Interestingly, Messi said after the game “I score every which way with Barca – without even trying. But with Argentina I try to score goals but I can’t. Maybe it is because I am not calm.” So obviously he doesn’t think he needs his bum chums either lol.
KnobGoblin, I totally loved your first paragraph, I aprreciate you agree with me on my point about your flawed analogy. That’s pretty much all I wanted from this discussion. But as you produced some more comments, I’ll try to respond to them.
How naive can one be about Argentina? Every four years when the time comes to play a World Cup, Argentina has a squad that on paper should win the tournament easily, yet they fail time after time. Do you really think it could possibly be a fault of one player underperforming? Argentina’s senior squad has some mental problems, and so they stopped being any kind of favourite in tournaments long time ago. Common people can’t understand it. Last time they won Mundial? 1986. Last time they won Copa America? 1993. On the other hand, Messi won U20 World Cup in 2005 and Olympics in 2008 with Argentina.
Although I could think of a bad side of playing amongst stars (it’s easier to shine amongst mediocre players, it’s harder when you play with other stars), I generally agree with you that Xavi’s and Iniesta’s help is mostly appreciated in regard of scoring goals. But does that mean, you have just implied that Argentina’s players are not so good, and so winning with them is harder than with Barcelona? Then it is somehow justified that Messi is not achieving much with Argies? I said ‘achieving’, because from what I see in Messi’s play, he plays just as good for Argentina, as for Barcelona, he does all the crazy things, he provides assists, shortly: it’s the same player. The problem is, he is asked to play different role in Argentina (he plays deeper, he’s a half playmaker there), and his teammates are weak finishers. I also disagree on your conclusion from the original post. The fact that Messi plays more collectively doesn’t mean he would be worse in eg. Milan than Cristiano. (You said that as a coach of every other team than Barcelona you would prefer Cristiano over Messi).
Senna was fantastic in 2008, he dealt with DM duties alone – he simply played as two players, or at least one and a half. But everyone reasonable, including Del Bosque, saw that Senna in 2010 was out of form, and so this tactic couldn’t be repeated in 2010. This is perfect example of how to differ a good coach from a great one. Lippi used the same formula on Mundial 2010 as in 2006 and he failed. Del Bosque understood he has to adapt, and succeded. He decided to play two DMs instead of 2 – Alonso + Busquets. They were the best in Spain at that time, and so these demands should rather sound like “A lot of Spaniards thought Senna should’ve gone over Busquets + Alonso”. Again, common people can’t understand what really happend. Also, I asked you to list me the players that SHOULDN’T go to South Africa, not those who AT THAT TIME were questioned by brainless fans, but happened to be playing brilliantly during the tournament.
Pedro’s inclusion was a shock only because he wasn’t capped previously. After inclusion, he managed to play two friendlies before Mundial. He even scored a goal against my half-nation. As I said Pedro was playing great for Barcelona in spring, and proved helpful in South Africa. Navas could only hog the right touchline, Pedro could do that with both. Also I forgot to mention one more reason to include him – his defensive workrate on pitch, which is always most welcome by coaches.
As for Bojan, perhaps he has skills, but he doesn’t have mentality needed to be great player, and so that he can’t be one. It took Barca 5 years to finally get rid of him. And actually, he had already senior Spain in 2008, so the danger you are talking about, was not valid.
Great article as always, but any chance you can describe how ALL the Barca players worked/shaped when they lost the ball in their attacking half or in their defensive half?
Be also useful for future articles if you can provide this info with the different formations that teams do when attacking and defending!
OFF TOPIC: I think we should stop calling Messi’s role a “false nine”. he’s an offensive libero…today’s game vs Venezuela cemenetd the idea in my mind. “Offensive Libero”, you heard it here first!!
ZM – i wonder if you would consider an article about the way Barca’s constraint led play is wiping the floor with the aggressive transitional approach of Man U and Real?
All sides are using systems where playmaking is devolved.
But Barca’s is the only truely intelligent system where the players are using pattern recognition to make smarter decisions.
You’ve misspelled truly there.
a day of rose in the part will do that
Ronaldo is the zenith of the transitional player
As such he will always be inferior to Messi et al who are the first generation of constraint led players.
Ronaldo is a finely tuned part of a non-intelligent system.
Messi is a finely tuned part of a truly intelligent system.
Gross & poor generalization on all counts.