Football 2011-2012

[kaosmark2]

Well UEFA are tits. Counting them double is a completely arbitrary thing to do. You could just as rightly say every away goal counts as 1+tortoise, if the number of goals is equal at the end then you count who has the most tortoises.

[kaosmark2]

I personally don't like the media circle jerks around Barca in particular - they never dive, they're so honest, they never play bad, all the players are amazing etc.

Its not true. Half the team who finished yesterday for Barca wouldn't get into a lot of the top 6 teams in the Premiership.

[kaosmark2]

Im not saying they're shit. Far from it. I still think they're the two best teams in the world and the two best teams to watch. But they're not invincible. Chelski's goals proved that and Barca were sloppy in key areas at time last night. Chelsea arent great remember, despite their last few weeks of form.

I think Di Matteo was very lucky last night. Tactics weren't "spot on" as people have said. They should've been hammered and it was only the superb performance of the back four and a bit of wasteful football in the last third from Barca that got them a win..

That and Drogba going down all over the place to give the defence a breather.

What annoys me about the media/Barca w*nk off love in is that nobody (apart from Red Nev on MNF) really does any analysis of Barca's football. Maybe the best club side ever and not a jot about why they are the best, the style they play, tactics, strengths, weaknesses etc. Such a missed opportunity to talk about actual football. All you get is a load of superlatives and exclamations about Messi, how many goals hes scored, "and hes still only 24", rhetorical "how do you stop this man" questions and the like.

ITV last night had a great opportunity to do some analysis and we just didnt get it. We were just shown replays of what we've already seen with "Barca were unlucky there" or "He should've done better".

[strummer77]

This. If you're at home, you'd rather get 0-0 than 1-1, or 1-0 than 4-3, it absolutely encourages negativity from the home team, as has been said, particularly if it gets to extra time in the 2nd leg.

Edited April 19, 2012 by strummer77

[kaosmark2]

Does it make it more boring though? Take last night for example.

I don't think if away goals was removed last night Chelsea would have really pushed one from 1-0. They would have sat and played like that all game, they just wanted a lead. However without away goals Barca also probably would have sat and taken that. Losing 1-0 away from home would have been a good result and something they would at least expect to be able to take to ET at home. However, with away goals it isn't such a good result. Hence why Barca pushed on.

Oh and as for rather a 0-0 at home... Dangerous game to play. Very. Nobody goes for that and tries to get a win away. The home leg is one where you're forced to try and get a goal by the very nature of it, away goal or not. You don't want to be level heading into the return leg.

[strummer77]

Not always, but it definitely does sometimes. There have been some dire Liverpool/Chelsea 1st legs.

0-0 at home, 1-1 away = qualify. Better to play the defensive, cautious game at home. Particularly as if it stays 0-0 away, any goal in extra time is almost an instant win.

[The Nal]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4uQtzcfhBM

[kaosmark2]

Yeah but Chelsea v Liverpool weren't dire because of away goals, they were dire because the two sides were managed by Mourinho and Benitez and were both brilliant defensively! Those ties would never have been free flowing attack fests.

Though in the last minute of 2005 Gudjohnsen had a shot that could have sent Chelsea through. If there was no away goals it would merely have sent it to another half hour of the same park your bus football... In 2008 (I think) Liverpool scored an away goal in ET but still went out because Chelsea got two, no doubt the home advantage helping also.

I'm a staunch advocate of the away goals rule, though maybe its implementation in ET should go to accomodate it. Or even just get rid of ET...

[strummer77]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4uQtzcfhBM

Edited April 19, 2012 by strummer77

[thetime]

And the reason half the team wouldn't get into a lot of teams in the prem is they wouldn't be able to play in the Prem style. They need other players who can play that 1/2-touch football around them.

Of course, Xavi was playing and controlling the pace of games before the rest of these players left La Masia. Ridiculously good.

[eFestivals]

If your a class player you can play in any country!

that's not true, just like it's not true that a class player can perform to the same standard in any team.

The two have to fit (with styles, temperament, whatever) to work well together.

[kaosmark2]

If your a class player you can play in any country!

Premier league style? Whats that then?

[pink_triangle]

Thought Chelski defended brilliantly last night. The back four played out of their skins. The defending for Chelskis goal on the other hand - you wouldnt see that down in Molineux. Honestly.

So Barca and Madrid - both lost, away granted, but take out Messi and Ronaldo and how good are they? Are we overrating them? I think so.

I personally don't like the media circle jerks around Barca in particular - they never dive, they're so honest, they never play bad, all the players are amazing etc.

Its not true. Half the team who finished yesterday for Barca wouldn't get into a lot of the top 6 teams in the Premiership.

[pink_triangle]

Yup the best sides have always been beatable. It doesn't mean they aren't as good as people make out etc., just that some teams have their off days.

[kaosmark2]

On the other hand If the top 6 premiership sides transfer listed their entire squads how many players would bacelona seriously look at. RVP, Agureo, Silva, Mata, kompany, vidiv maybe a few of the left backs, it woudl certinaly be a small amount.

[thetime]

Barcelona are a team thats why they have had so much sucess in the last 3 or 4 years. Theres plenty of teams who have tried to buy the best players in the world and not done alot like real madrid(galaticos era), man city etc etc. You got to have players that compliment each other, would they be succesful with 11 messis of ocurse not.

For every paul schole you have a nicky butt, for every japp stam you have a david may.

[kaosmark2]

Mascherano and Fabregas have played in the premiership and were fine, to be honest I think most of the barcelona side would do perfectly well in the premiership. They may not fit in at a side like stoke but they wouldnt sign for that type of team anyway.

[kaosmark2]

Barcelona are a team thats why they have had so much sucess in the last 3 or 4 years. Theres plenty of teams who have tried to buy the best players in the world and not done alot like real madrid(galaticos era), man city etc etc. You got to have players that compliment each other, would they be succesful with 11 messis of ocurse not.

For every paul schole you have a nicky butt, for every japp stam you have a david may.

[pink_triangle]

Reyes didn't do brilliantly. And there have been a fair few Spanish/Italian players signed by lower Prem clubs that have flopped. I'm trying to think of some names but disappointing cheap players don't tend to be particularly memorable.

I agree about those particular English players, my point was more that there are differences between the leagues that mean a less talented player who's been brought up to that type of play (and the culture surrounding it) can do as well as a more talented player brought up elsewhere. If that weren't the case then there would be more movement between the leagues as clubs would feel they could do better from trying foreign talent.

[kaosmark2]

I think in general a top spanish/italian player can adapt to the premiership fine, although the more average players can struggle.

[pink_triangle]

I guess we just rate busquets differently then!

[The Nal]

Busquets is an average player. A "Carrick" as someone said earlier.

Hes only a Barca regular because he came through La Masia and knows the philosophy.

[pink_triangle]

Listening to some discussion about the Olympic football team. I can guarantee Beckham will end up being selected. However am I the only one who thinks if selected purely on merit, there is no chance he is in the top 3 British over 23 players, even excluding the England euro squad, its debatable if he is even in the top 3 over 23 players at la galaxy!

[eFestivals]

Listening to some discussion about the Olympic football team. I can guarantee Beckham will end up being selected. However am I the only one who thinks if selected purely on merit, there is no chance he is in the top 3 British over 23 players, even excluding the England euro squad, its debatable if he is even in the top 3 over 23 players at la galaxy!

Yup. Ridiculous, innit?

Are we in the Olympics for competition or to try and sell Britain?

And gawd help us if Beckham is the best that Britain has to sell.

[Jaybles]

Busquets is an average player. A "Carrick" as someone said earlier.

Hes only a Barca regular because he came through La Masia and knows the philosophy.