Manager draft

MJJ said:
I think he was at his absolute peak under heynckes as that system suited him perfectly while pep's possession based system doesnt get the best out of him imo. Still a v.good player and one of the best out there but think his game was on another level under heynckes. Note: This is mostly based on CL games, Bundesliga highlights and dortmund games as I dont catch a lot of football outside united so might very well be wrong.
Click to expand...

Balu said:
Robben has been at his best for Bayern under van Gaal and Pep in my opinion, at least if you look consistent performances throughout full seasons. He was also great in the run-in of the treble winning season, but those few months definitely don't stand out in his Bayern career.

/edit: fecking Reus :mad:
Click to expand...

Also, Robben only started in the last couple of months in that treble season. Injuries didn't help him then but I remember Jupp preferring Muller to Robben during many matches that season.
 
And, I find it absolutely hilarious MJJ is already criticizing Robben, Ribery, Henry etc when he has Ronaldo who played only eight games under Lippi and scored three goals, out of which two were penalties. :lol:
 
Annahnomoss said:
Messi is such a unique player, he wants to be the main playmaker of the team but at the same time the big superstar goalscorer as well and a reduced role isn't something he would accept. Considering the wingers in Barcelona primary role is to work hard defensively and run for through balls offensively, I would have Muller as my first choice if I had to use Messi in his peak. Then the question would be who would complement them the best and I would probably go for Pedro on the left considering Henry's dip in form when Messi/Ibra played as false-9s with him on the wing.

"Henry who had combined with Lionel Messi and Samuel Eto'o to score 100 goals between them that season.[43] The trio was also the most prolific trio in Spanish league history, scoring 72 goals and surpassing the 66 goals of Real Madrid's Ferenc Puskás,Alfredo Di Stéfano and Luis del Sol of the 1960–61 season"

I would have stuck with that 08-09 trio, but then thrown in Ribery in the mix. I would probably start with Ribery-Henry/Eto'o-Messi and then if I went a goal up I would sub Ribery out and keep Henry-Eto'o-Messi who were scary together when they got a little space to work on. I would start Eto'o probably so Henry could come on with fresh legs after the team went a goal up as he stated he was tired after all the pressing for Barcelona I believe.
Click to expand...
Müller on the right is more a question of Lahm or Alves. If you play Alves at rightback, then I'd go with Müller who plays more central and opens that space out wide for Alves to become the right winger, basically Müller becomes an upgrade on Pedro. If you play Lahm rightback, you get the fullback/midfield hybrid and win defensive stability and even more control in midfield, but you miss out on Alves' insane attacking contribution and then I'd rather have a right winger who can carry the ball forward himself.

Ribery on the left gets in the way of Iniesta's best role in my opinion. Both offer to a large degree the same, even though they do it in a different style. Both offer creativity and dribbling, both stay a bit deeper than the other forwards and love to play between the left wing and the AM role. A wide forward on the left makes more sense with that Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta midfield.
 
VivaJanuzaj said:
And drop the midfield trio? That would be insane. I reckon together they are just as significant as prime Messi to a team.
Click to expand...

I just think on paper that front 4 is unstoppable against any type of defence etc. Barca's side always has it's detractors against a tough counter-attacking set up.. whereas can you imagine a prime Messi supplying that trio?
 
Balu said:
Müller on the right is more a question of Lahm or Alves. If you play Alves at rightback, then I'd go with Müller who plays more central and opens that space out wide for Alves to become the right winger, basically Müller becomes an upgrade on Pedro. If you play Lahm rightback, you get the fullback/midfield hybrid and win defensive stability and even more control in midfield, but you miss out on Alves' insane attacking contribution and then I'd rather have a right winger who can carry the ball forward himself.

Ribery on the left gets in the way of Iniesta's best role in my opinion. Both offer to a large degree the same, even though they do it in a different style. Both offer creativity and dribbling, both stay a bit deeper than the other forwards and love to play between the left wing and the AM role. A wide forward on the left makes more sense with that Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta midfield.
Click to expand...

Disagree. Iniesta already shares the playmaking duties with Busquets+Xavi+Messi, and with Messi as a 08-09 winger, and Etoo/Henry up front - Messi's playmaking would be changed for Ribery's. Iniesta thrived with another playmaker centrally, in Messi, and I think the only weakness of the 08-09 side was that they were on geared. They didn't have the ability to dominate possession like they later had when Messi centrally meant another body/playmaker there.

I think Ribery would add that, while still having the dribbling to provide width all game. Iniesta has arguably even performed better for Spain and been their key player and there he shares the central playmaking with Alonso, Busquets, Silva, Xavi and sometimes Cesc as a false-9 and Mata as a rotation for the wings. Iniesta I would say played better with Messi dropping deep, I'd say Xavi was he no longer used his longer range passing which was incredible too.
 
Raees said:
I just think on paper that front 4 is unstoppable against any type of defence etc. Barca's side always has it's detractors against a tough counter-attacking set up.. whereas can you imagine a prime Messi supplying that trio?
Click to expand...
Why would you? A prime Messi's strength was not being a play-maker but scoring (all kinds of goals) and also creating. Take off the former from his game and you definitely don't get prime Messi.
 
crappycraperson said:
Why would you? A prime Messi's strength was not being a play-maker but scoring (all kinds of goals) and also creating. Take off the former from his game and you definitely don't get prime Messi.
Click to expand...

Messi has had question marks over him against very tight organised defences in that false 9 position. Eto'o doesn't.. a prime Messi could easily play as a 10 and still score bucketloads, but more importantly in my opinion.. he'd be harder to pick up in big games, especially if he is feeding that trio. No one has ever seen Messi in a counter-attacking/direct side, but I personally think he'd be even more lethal in a side that puts slightly less emphasis on possession, a little more on penetration.
 
Raees said:
No one has ever seen Messi in a counter-attacking/direct side, but I personally think he'd be even more lethal in a side that puts slightly less emphasis on possession, a little more on penetration.
Click to expand...
Argentina?
 
Raees said:
Messi has had question marks over him against very tight organised defences in that false 9 position. Eto'o doesn't
Click to expand...
Really? You can name me a defense that is more likely to keep Messi from scoring than Eto'o? I can't think of one to be honest. The whole Messi struggles against tight organised defences thing always sounds like that's a specific problem for him, when it's clearly a general problem for all attackers.
 
harms said:
Argentina?
Click to expand...

Mhmm, and he has been a lot worse for Argentina in his life than Barcelona.
Balu said:
Müller on the right is more a question of Lahm or Alves. If you play Alves at rightback, then I'd go with Müller who plays more central and opens that space out wide for Alves to become the right winger, basically Müller becomes an upgrade on Pedro. If you play Lahm rightback, you get the fullback/midfield hybrid and win defensive stability and even more control in midfield, but you miss out on Alves' insane attacking contribution and then I'd rather have a right winger who can carry the ball forward himself.
Click to expand...

Very true. For me excluding either Lahm or Alves is blasphemy though when it comes to Pep. Messi and Alves has a telepathic understanding and adding Muller there would be insanely well balanced and good. Alves through balls, off the ball runs and crosses are severely underrated as match winners in these drafts, like for all offensive full backs. Lahm doing the hybrid role on the left, with Henry up front would be pretty perfect in terms of having a peak Messi.

Again, I'd just stick with the proven Henry-Eto'o-Messi with a substitute for Henry who went out and said he sometimes fatigued due to the high press.
 
Balu said:
Really? You can name me a defense that is more likely to keep Messi from scoring than Eto'o? I can't think of one to be honest. The whole Messi struggles against tight organised defences thing always sounds like that's a specific problem for him, when it's clearly a general problem for all attackers.
Click to expand...
This.
 
Balu said:
Really? You can name me a defense that is more likely to keep Messi from scoring than Eto'o? I can't think of one to be honest. The whole Messi struggles against tight organised defences thing always sounds like that's a specific problem for him, when it's clearly a general problem for all attackers.
Click to expand...

Of course it is a general problem for attackers as that is considered the main way to deal with talented attackers. All I'm saying is that I'd back a Batistuta or a Muller v a tight defence than a Messi. Certain types of attackers can still nick a goal against tough defences or when their team isn't on top. Eto'o can go either way, and is decent in the air too.. he's harder to contain with a specific tactic, nor does he struggle v a specific playing style. At the end of the day, this is the type of characteristic which is so key in determining these draft matches during the end stages as every team has world class defences and tough midfields to break down. It comes down to the individual posters perception of certain attackers abilities to break these walls down... and the service they have around them.

harms said:
Argentina?
Click to expand...

He has struggled with the argies but the other players around him haven't helped at all. I rarely see Aguero for instance have a great game for his NT.. I remember him in world cup 2010 v Germany for instance and he was creating chances, looking dangerous but everyone around him was so poor.. he isn't Maradona, he does need quality around him.
 
Last edited:
Raees said:
Eto'o can go either way, and is decent in the air too.. he's harder to contain with a specific tactic, nor does he struggle v a specific playing style.
Click to expand...
Again, I don't see how Messi struggles against a specific style more than other attackers. I remember Eto'o being awful, completely useless against Chelsea in 2009. In the final minute, it was Messi who drew 3 Chelsea defender on him inside the box, kept the ball well and played a clever pass to Iniesta, who scored that magical last minute equaliser.

In 2010 Ibrahimovic started in the loss away against Inter and was more or less the reason, why, without Messi in the middle, Barca never got control of the game until they finally subbed Ibra off. They won the return leg with Messi back in the false 9 role.

To quote zonalmarking:

Playing Ibrahimovic backfired for three reasons:

1) It meant Barcelona changed their passing style and played longer than usual, meaning they were less fluid and suited Inter defensively.

2) It meant that Messi had less space to work in – against Real Madrid at the Bernabeu he thrived by playing infront of the Real Madrid centre-backs and on three separate occasions he reached through balls played by Xavi. Tonight, with Ibrahimovic taking up his space, he couldn’t play this role.

3) It meant that Barcelona were less secure defensively on their left-hand side. They were completely caught out for Inter’s third because Keita was playing relatively centrally and failed to track Maicon’s run. Had Eric Abidal been playing left-back with Maxwell infront, it’s doubtful that would have happened.

Barcelona’s switch to the system in the preview (and in doing so, taking a off striker (Ibrahimovic) for a left-back (Abidal)) when 3-1 down was surely an admission from Guardiola that his initial shape was wrong.
Click to expand...

I remember how Messi was criticised in that awful 2-0 loss at Milan in 2013 and how everyone started to claim that he can't do it against an organised defense just to watch him put up a true masterclass in the return leg against the same defense. Tell me that an organised defense is more suited to defend against that first goal than against a poacher like Gerd Müller? And I love Gerd Müller, he was actually much more than a poacher, but more difficult to defend against than Messi? Nope.



Now I'm not saying it's impossible to defend against Messi, but it's damn hard. And whatever style you choose, it's still tougher against Messi than against Eto'o. I can't think of 5 strikers in the history of the game that are worth pushing Messi out wide and not one of them is worth it in a Guardiola side with Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta behind him. It makes even less sense, when you have Henry, Villa, Ribery, Robben and Müller available to play out wide.

It's great to have a wellworking plan B. But if plan B is worse than plan A, then using it for the sake of doing something different is just wrong.
 
Last edited:
Balu said:
Again, I don't see how Messi struggles against a specific style more than other attackers. I remember Eto'o being awful, completely useless against Chelsea in 2009. In the final minute, it was Messi who drew 3 Chelsea defender on him inside the box, kept the ball well and played a clever pass to Iniesta, who scored that magical last minute equaliser.

In 2010 Ibrahimovic started in the loss away against Inter and was more or less the reason, why, without Messi in the middle, Barca never got control of the game until they finally subbed Ibra off. They won the return leg with Messi back in the false 9 role.

To quote zonalmarking:



I remember how Messi was criticised in that awful 2-0 loss at Milan in 2013 and how everyone started to claim that he can't do it against an organised defense just to watch him put up a true masterclass in the return leg against the same defense. Tell me that an organised defense is more suited to defend against that first goal than against a poacher like Gerd Müller? And I love Gerd Müller, he was actually much more than a poacher, but more difficult to defend against than Messi? Nope.



Now I'm not saying it's impossible to defend against Messi, but it's damn hard. And whatever style you choose, it's still tougher against Messi than against Eto'o. I can't think of 5 strikers in the history of the game that are worth pushing Messi out wide and not one of them is worth it in a Guardiola side with Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta behind him. It makes even less sense, when you have Henry, Villa, Ribery, Robben and Müller available to play out wide.

It's great to have a wellworking plan B. But if plan B is worse than plan A, then using it for the sake of doing something different is just wrong.
Click to expand...


On the Eto'o point, I remember United also managing to keep a clean sheet against him during 07/08 semi-finals, so in two back to back seasons.. he did struggle to score against two defences in which were super organised and tight in the business end of the Champions League, as did Messi - so your point here is valid, I agree. Also at no stage did I say Messi should play out wide? I said as a number 10.. he absolutely should be utilised in central areas. Our opinions differ in that I'm saying I think he could be dangerous as a 10 at his prime behind a fluid highly mobile number 9 (only against certain opponents mind you - 99% of time I'd rather he be used as a false 9), whereas you're saying the number 9 is not needed as Messi himself is good enough as a false 9 to break a elite defence himself which you're more than entitled to do and I don't doubt he is capable, I'm just saying I think he could influence the biggest games more as a 10 both in terms of creativity and goal-scoring (draw less attention if surrounded by other goalscorers/dribblers in a very tough encounter).

Is Messi best played as a false 9? of course, but I'm saying that in 1% of matches.. i.e. against a greatest of all time defence for example, he'd be more of a threat starting from the 10 position. Muller for me is the type of striker who can find and put goals away in these types of ugly encounters where space is at a premium and chances are hard to come by. Is it possible to completely nullify Messi in a game, where he doesn't create one goalscoring moment of note.. of course not, my point is that if he had Eto'o, Ribery and Robben around him, you couldn't afford to just focus on Messi as the others are matchwinners in their own right.
 
Fair enough, but not too long ago we had discussions like 'Iniesta is already better than Zidane' on the Caf. What to do with him in that case? Is Messi a better AM than Iniesta was at his best? Has Messi as an AM behind a striker already surpassed Iniesta playing behind Messi? Of course, if we take Iniesta out of the equation you have a point.
 
I don't think Messi struggles against a low defense as an individual it is just a side-effect of the Barcelona set up. Busquets, Iniesta and Xavi were all incredible players and their specialty was breaking down opponents centrally with their tiki taka. Messi is at his best in tight areas and against a low line I would say, it is just the fact that the perfect tactic doesn't exist. They've tried adding incredible dribbling wingers in Sanchez and Neymar, but they can't express themselves to their maximum there. They end up playing the Pedro/Villa role, and honestly I don't think they did it better either. As soon as Neymar puts on the Brazil shirt and Sanchez the Arsenal one it is like they can finally play to their strengths the way their performance level improves.

People always bring up the Inter match when discussing how Zlatan faired at Barcelona. At that point Guardiola had frozen him out of the team and not spoken to him for two months. It had already been decided that he'd be shipped away, so Zlatan being Zlatan had no desire to put any effort in at all.

Ibrahimovic scored 21 goals in 35 starts which is not bad at all considering what type of player he was at the time and the year before he scored 29 but in 47 starts, which was his best ever in his career at that stage. If people take any random game from the first half of the season, where he was wanted and treated as such, then it is very clear that he did quite good at his stint there.

The issues were not on the pitch, it was between Messi and Zlatan as Messi wanted Zlatan's position, and Guardiola didn't have the balls to stick with his original plans of using Zlatan as a false-9. Eto'o in his peak and 46 millions is what Guardiola spent on Zlatan(still far from his peak), yet he tossed him aside and gave the role to Messi instead which meant 76 millions or something wasted.
 
Last edited:
Balu said:
Fair enough, but not too long ago we had discussions like 'Iniesta is already better than Zidane' on the Caf. What to do with him in that case? Is Messi a better AM than Iniesta was at his best? Has Messi as an AM behind a striker already surpassed Iniesta playing behind Messi? Of course, if we take Iniesta out of the equation you have a point.
Click to expand...

It is tough, I don't think anyone can profess to have the right answer here.. do you stick to the tried and tested Barcelona formula and play it safe, or do you take a risk and incorporate prime Messi into a more 'current' way of playing the game i.e. post Barcelona more Bayern style of playing the game. I think it is hard with the midfielders at his disposal to risk not picking Iniesta (he doesn't have ideal midfielders to play 4-2-3-1) and therefore after all that, it probably is best to play Messi as the false 9 and flank him with Robben/Ribery either side. Although as Annah has mentioned, it is not necessarily Messi's fault that he has struggled but more the Barcelona set up which is probably the issue.. their tiki taka plays into the hands of strong counter-attacking sides with a low defence, kind of like how Arsenal struggle against most top sides but obviously not to the same degree.

Do you go for control here, if so Iniesta as AM, Messi as false 9 is the best option here.. or play slightly on the counter/more direct, in which case take out Iniesta and play Messi as a 10 (Messi is more direct on the ball and always looking to penetrate).
 
Balu said:
Fair enough, but not too long ago we had discussions like 'Iniesta is already better than Zidane' on the Caf. What to do with him in that case? Is Messi a better AM than Iniesta was at his best? Has Messi as an AM behind a striker already surpassed Iniesta playing behind Messi? Of course, if we take Iniesta out of the equation you have a point.
Click to expand...

Iniesta isn't an attacking midfielder, they are both playmakers, but that doesn't mean Iniesta is an attacking midfielder. Look at Di Maria for us, he's pretty much our most attacking player from his central midfield position. But because he defends like as a central midfielder, he's considered playing as a central midfielder.

The same goes for Iniesta. Yes he is free to attack but he defends as a central midfielder and therefore is a central midfielder. So the question is more stylistic rather than anything else. Otherwise we should start calling Alves for a right winger, because he's attacking as one - which shows how stupid that would become.
 
Annahnomoss said:
Iniesta isn't an attacking midfielder, they are both playmakers, but that doesn't mean Iniesta is an attacking midfielder. Look at Di Maria for us, he's pretty much our most attacking player from his central midfield position. But because he defends like as a central midfielder, he's considered playing as a central midfielder.

The same goes for Iniesta. Yes he is free to attack but he defends as a central midfielder and therefore is a central midfielder. So the question is more stylistic rather than anything else. Otherwise we should start calling Alves for a right winger, because he's attacking as one - which shows how stupid that would become.
Click to expand...
I don't care what you want to call Iniesta. If you play play Messi behind Eto'o with Robben and Ribery out wide, you need to leave one of the other players out of the team. So the question remains, would you leave Iniesta out of the team to play Messi in an AM role?

The only way around it would be to play 3 at the back, but I'm not sure if Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta, Messi would be the right choice for a midfield diamond in a 3-4-3. And that's based on the comment, Messi should play a central role. I know that you prefer him on the wing.
 
Balu said:
Again, I don't see how Messi struggles against a specific style more than other attackers. I remember Eto'o being awful, completely useless against Chelsea in 2009. In the final minute, it was Messi who drew 3 Chelsea defender on him inside the box, kept the ball well and played a clever pass to Iniesta, who scored that magical last minute equaliser.

In 2010 Ibrahimovic started in the loss away against Inter and was more or less the reason, why, without Messi in the middle, Barca never got control of the game until they finally subbed Ibra off. They won the return leg with Messi back in the false 9 role.

To quote zonalmarking:



I remember how Messi was criticised in that awful 2-0 loss at Milan in 2013 and how everyone started to claim that he can't do it against an organised defense just to watch him put up a true masterclass in the return leg against the same defense. Tell me that an organised defense is more suited to defend against that first goal than against a poacher like Gerd Müller? And I love Gerd Müller, he was actually much more than a poacher, but more difficult to defend against than Messi? Nope.



Now I'm not saying it's impossible to defend against Messi, but it's damn hard. And whatever style you choose, it's still tougher against Messi than against Eto'o. I can't think of 5 strikers in the history of the game that are worth pushing Messi out wide and not one of them is worth it in a Guardiola side with Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta behind him. It makes even less sense, when you have Henry, Villa, Ribery, Robben and Müller available to play out wide.

It's great to have a wellworking plan B. But if plan B is worse than plan A, then using it for the sake of doing something different is just wrong.
Click to expand...


What's all this? The bum TRV's side thread? What are you guys playing at? You only just had about 80% of people posting Barca as the best club of all time :lol:

Of course Messi has to start as false 9, it's a no-brainer.
 
antohan said:
Of course Messi has to start as false 9, it's a no-brainer.
Click to expand...
Tell that to Annah and Raees ;).

And to be fair, it's better to have that discussion here as in the match thread, where it would be really unfair against MJJ. I'm also sure that MJJ will get more than enough love for playing pre-injury Ronaldo against a high defensive line to make up for it.
 
Balu said:
I don't care what you want to call Iniesta. If you play play Messi behind Eto'o with Robben and Ribery out wide, you need to leave one of the other players out of the team. So the question remains, would you leave Iniesta out of the team to play Messi in an AM role?

The only way around it would be to play 3 at the back, but I'm not sure if Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta, Messi would be the right choice for a midfield diamond in a 3-4-3. And that's based on the comment, Messi should play a central role. I know that you prefer him on the wing.
Click to expand...

That is the sour part with a player of the ilk of Ibrahimovic and Messi who wants to be the main goalscorers and still the offensive playmakers of their team. You remove the goalscoring from Messi or Ibrahimovic then you lose their goalscoring which alone is incredible. But you don't want to lose their playmaking either as it is absolute world class as well. (Not comparing their skill, just their style).

You can't have an AM behind them nor a striker in front of them if you want them to play their best football. So then it comes down to how you rate their personalities, would they accept a role which is clearly worse for themselves - to see the team prosper. Personally I don't see any reason to why anybody would consider Messi - tactically flexible.

He's probably the least tactically flexible player I've ever seen. He's played the same role now for 5 years in nearly every single game and when he has been tested in anything else, for Argentina, he's looked half the player. Even in the same set up with different players for Argentina he looks a lot worse.
 
With two players like Robben and Ribery/Henry on both sides, it really is a no brainer to have Messi as a false 9.
A couple of drafts ago I played him RiF because I wanted to build a counter attacking around him, and I thought I did it really well(and lost :D).
But now that you've got the midfield trio of Busquets(or Xabi)-Xavi-Iniesta and especially with Lahm there too you've got yourself a classic possession team so you can't play Messi out of position.
 
Very funny how Vilanova broke Pep's goalscoring and point tally record in his year there.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Ribery-Et'o-Messi > Ribery-Messi-Robben ?
Click to expand...

The second wouldn't play very well at all in my mind. Messi can't share the playmaking with Ribery and Robben isn't the type of winger who has proven they thrive with Messi. Stoichkov-Messi-Boniek would be better than Ronaldinho-Messi-Cristiano.
 
PedroMendez said:
Disagree. Messi was fantastic coming from the right side.
Click to expand...

More than himself being fantastic from that role, he was a great team player who worked hard defensively and was happy to share to glory and time on the ball as well. It meant Barcelona had the counter-attacking threat of Henry/Eto'o, the wide dribblers in Messi and Henry, the goalscoring from all three of them and Xavi especially was allowed to utilize his passing range to full effect. He wasn't limited to the short passing style which he was when Messi started playing as a false 9.

"Xavi was La Liga's highest assisting player with 20 assists.[21] He was also the highest assisting player in the Champions League with 7 assists. Xavi earned 29 assists overall that season."

In the 6–2 El Clásico victory vs Real Madrid on 2 May he assisted 4 out of 6 goals.
 
Last edited:
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Ribery-Et'o-Messi > Ribery-Messi-Robben ?
Click to expand...

I rate Eto´s extremely high; in his peak seasons he was on a level with the very best forwards ever played. Sadly his peak didnt last very long. So it really depends on how you take peak vs lenght into consideration.

It also depends on quite a few other things. What does the rest of the lineup look like? What kind of style do you want to play? Can you argue, that Messi would do the same defensive work, that he did, while playing wide, when you use him as false9? The last point is eventually the deciding matter.
I take the hard working relentless pressing Messi over the current one in a heartbeat.
The idea that Messi cant share time on the ball with other dominant offensive players is absurd. I dont mind people who prefer Messi as false9 and main goalscorer, but he was already the best player in the world playing on the right side. Messi´s style/contribution changed quite a bit.

Anyway. I dont think there is a clear cut answer, but using Messi as attacking player from the right side is valid and doesnt diminish his class.
 
Last edited:
PedroMendez said:
Can you argue, that Messi would do the same defensive work, that he did, while playing wide, when you use him as false9. The last point is eventually the deciding matter.
I take the hard working relentless pressing Messi over the current one in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...
Was there any difference between the 10/11 false 9 Messi and the earlier winger in terms of workrate? I don't think his workrate dropped at first when he moved to the middle and he wasn't the ultimate goalscoring machine he became from 2012 onwards either. You just need to watch the 5-0 thrashing of Real Madrid to see him work hard and create for others. It's in my opinion the peak of Guardiola's Barca side because they didn't need Messi to score to destroy opponents. Messi was part of a well working attacking unit and did his share of pressing and tracking just like he did in 08/09, he was just individually better and more influential in the team.

Only in 11/12 when Villa got injured, Pedro's form dropped significantly and Sanchez struggled to adapt, Barca started to mainly rely on Messi for scoring and it changed him and his attitude a lot. He broke goalscoring records but wasn't as brilliant as before. It got even worse after Guardiola left and his defensive contribution was gone completely.

I'd say you can't have the 91 goals in one year forward (he wasn't really a false 9 anymore anyway) and at the same time claim he's part of that relentless pressing unit at the same time. That's fair enough, but that wasn't his peak as a false 9 anyway.
 
He was good on the right, but I think he can influence the game much more from the middle, but I think it depends on rest of the team. The key to play against that Barca side was to control the space in front of your own box. It's much more on space management, than ball control. 2 conservative full backs who play tucked into a compact back 4 with one pacey CB moving forward to deny Messi the space. Messi is a master of moving/passing between the defenders, esp between the FB and CB and a compact defence playing a deeper line would negate the attacking threat to a big extent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.