COPA DEL REY EL CLASICO FIRST LEG: Real Madrid vs FC BARCELONA

What's that image supposed to mean?

Also, I'm fed up that we play Pinto in the Cup. Why is he played? Can someone explain to me? We bring in the best team possible... but play Pinto?

If the cup is a second string tournament and we want to use it to keep players happy, then be consequent and rotate players, even if it's vs. Madrid.
If you don't want to do that with the field players, you shouldn't do that with GK, more so, as GK don't tire.

Not saying Pinto was bad, cause he wasn't, but the goal was definitely stoppable.

Please don't blame Pinto, Valdez would have also conceded that goal, he too was beaten on his near post by Ronaldo.

http://www.marca.com/2013/01/31/en/football/barcelona/1359588434.html

puyol

Watched the game last night and it was the best Classico I have seen in years,even better than the last one which was very good.The game had a great tempo about it,great technical quality and for a change great defending from most teams!

MOTM for me was Iniesta,thought Alves and Pique played really well as well.

I agree we would be much better going back to basics with Villa and playing Iniesta in midfield,if you watch you will see Iniesta had to move back into midfield for long periods to relieve pressure when Real Madrid pressed us as he is much better than Fabregas at keeping possession under pressure.When Iniesta moved into midfield our hold team moved 10 yards up the pitch because of this.

I am very disappointed by Messi,tbh the last 5 or so Classicos he has been rather ordinary apart from the odd piece of magic.I know he doesn't hardly ever pressure off the ball now but even when we had possession of the ball he looked disinterested yesterday.I noticed a couple of times him just standing there in the middle of the pitch not even trying to get into space,that is unforgivable in a match like this.But at the same time it was made easy for Madrids defense to mark Messi when there was hardly any threat in behind,we used to have both Pedro and Villa on either side making those runs between FB's and CB's that meant the oppositions defense couldn't concentrate on just stopping Messi so much.

We had the chances to win this game but Xavi was unlucky that the ball hit Varane on the line and both Messi and Pedro should have scored their chances.Overall we were the slightly better team but we could have played better if we got our tactics right.

I agree about Messi.

But in defence of him, we made him useless by giving him no passing options in a forward position.

It doesnt excuse the fact he only runs off the ball unless he is going through to goal but as you touched on, there was no danger of players running in behind so we force him to become a dribbler, guy who drops off the front and passes sideways or back or a casual bystander.

I agree with free about Pinto too. We are sending out the wrong message too I believe.

Playing Pinto to me means, we want go give you a chance because you wont play otherwise, this is the least important thing so here is your gametime.

Why cant we do that with various other positions too?

The answer is, its Madrid/Malaga last round and we might lose...so then why play Pinto?

It's worth noting that since Iniesta drifts to the center Messi has less space to exploit and thus it's no surprise that he sits in deeper.

In any event I don't think anyone disagrees that Villa needs to be played. Iniesta can be unplayable but if he's not going to stretch the play then there is no use for him on the wing. If it means Iniesta must be benched then so be it.

Our tactics in this match
Starting Iniesta on the left was a bad move and it became evident once the match started.To put it into perspective,essien bossed that flank and was going up and down that flank all game long.We didnt test him even once.
Terrible coaching by Roura who should have changed things in the first half itself and brought on Villa.But he did nothing throughout the game.Basic schoolboy stuff and have to question how good Roura is tactically.
I think Iniesta has to take some blame too.Very poor game from him tactically.Should have been smart enough to realize that Essien was having a free ride and should have stuck to that side.Instead kept coming to midfield and allowed Essien all the freedom.As a rule our wide forward is supposed to track the opposition fullback and Iniesta was nowhere to be seen doing that.This allowed Essien too much room and poor Alba was overloaded on that flank.
Iniesta coming into midfield created another problem.Our midfield lost structure and Madrid found it easier to contain our midfield.No movement and structure from our midfield,no passing options,combined with another lethargic performance from Messi meant we couldnt dominate as much as usual.
But its understandable since Iniesta is a CM and its useless to stick him out on the wing.He will come lloking for the ball in midfield majority of the time.
All this sacrifice to accomodate one player in Fab
The Laudrup pass from Iniesta did leave me speechless for a moment.Its an insanely difficult skill particularly at the level of control he displayed.A supreme piece of skill from a supreme player.
I thought Messi had a poor game.Poor decision making throughout the game.Tried to dribble too much and misplaced simple passes.Pretty lethargic throughout even when we were on the ball.Always wanting the ball at feet and never making runs.
Yesterday's game was a sorry reminder of how poor our pressing game has become.Madrid are a far better pressing side than us.Two years ago we were the best pressing side in the world.Now dont think we are top 20.
Our defense I thought did a good job.Puyol was good and Pique put in a beastly performance.
But the star of the night and without a shadow of a doubt the MOTM was Alves.A beast of a performance in defense and stopped many attacks. Completely and utterly owned CR7 and got forward well.Its not a coincidence that CR7 enjoyed his best spell against us when Alves was out injured and the likes of Montoya and Adriano were starting.Alves is on form and CR7 is back to being in his pocket.Any idiots who still think Alves cant defend should watch yesterday's match.
Alves

I dont blame Roura, he isnt a head coach tbh. Its a weakness for us.

Dont you think Iniesta had to come middle to help us escape Madrid pressing? I felt he had to, which in turn left him out of position to get to Essien.

We really struggled the first 15 minutes because yet again, we were surprised by Madrid high intensity.

Busquets didnt form a back 3, our fullbacks then couldnt take their flank player out of the equation...instead we allowed it to be clogged up and made it easier for them to press. We only escaped it when we went almost free lancing and Iniesta mostly dropped into different areas to relieve pressure. But this came at a cost, when the ball was turned over, as I said, Essien had 20-30 yards of space in 2 directions.

By the way, I have no doubt that by the end of the day Villa will be an Arsenal player.
Unwanted/unneeded here by the coaches, I think he wasn’t played only to secure the deal

Goddamn billy, if that happens we can kiss our CL good bye, yesterday showed why we need him.

Dani you don't think Roura has the power to change the game tactically? Maybe Tito sets up the team, but I doubt he tells Roura to stick to a plan that isn't working during the game. If it's clear to all of us that Villa should be subbed in (if not outright start), then why not change the game?

Dont think so.To me the idea seems fine.That to relieve pressure Iniesta came into the middle.But its counterproductive.If anything it makes their job easier.The midfield gets completely clogged up,our midfield loses its structure and they have effectively compressed us into a small space in the middle of the pitch making it easier for them to press.As has been mentioned by others we had no passing option on the left.Had Iniesta been there we would have had a passing option and Essien would have been forced back.It would have had another positive effect.It would have allowed Alba to get forward a bit more than he could do.That would have pushed back Callejon a bit and helped to relieve some pressure.Also I think we were at our most effective in the second half when Iniesta stuck a bit to that left flank and started to work Essien a bit.
I do agree with you that Busquets could have dropped to form a back 3 in possession.I think he didnt for one simple reason.Madrid were determined to press high and dont think their flank players would have moved back to cover our advancing fullbacks.I might be wrong but I did see Busquets try it once.But you are right that he could have tried it more.Perhaps he had Oezil too in mind.That with him in the back 3,if we lost the ball due to Madrid's high pressing,it would leave him out of position to deal with Oezil.

Dont think Roura escapes criticism.He is a qualified coach with years of football experience.If we can see the problem and suggest solutions,surely he too should be expected to do the same.

Alf, thing is that I don’t see tactics changing no matter what.
Even if Villa stays I am willing to bet good money that in Tito’s mind our best 11 includes Iniesta and Fabregas in the familiar manner

billy_gr wrote:By the way, I have no doubt that by the end of the day Villa will be an Arsenal player.
Unwanted/unneeded here by the coaches, I think he wasn’t played only to secure the deal

If this happens, im going to be furious with Rosell, Zubi and Tito. Misuse of our best forward not named Messi and the first two' lies about keeping him.

I hear 12m...dont care if he is 31, thats not enough.

Let's see deadline is close but I have a feeling that a deal is close saddly

billy_gr wrote:By the way, I have no doubt that by the end of the day Villa will be an Arsenal player.
Unwanted/unneeded here by the coaches, I think he wasn’t played only to secure the deal

Dont say that man.
But the shoddy way he has been treated,probably would be best for him to leave.Undeservedly kept out of the team.Its now evident that all the quotes about Villa being a winter signing for us was a load of nonsense.

If he should go somewhere i prefer Arsenal. And if I were him, I would have left too. I was so happy when we got him, and I think Tito, Rosel and co. are not treating him as he should. Whether he goes or stays I wish him all the luck in the world. To me he will be a Barca Legend

Almost forgot.Arbeloa once again showed that he is a disgusting pig of a player.And he didnt even get a yellow card.

Arbeloa is on my top 10 list of guys I hate. Filthy, dirty and just barely an average player.

He's laughable. He pushes Dani Alves, then when Busquets comes over he goes on like he is was playing peace maker

Well guys, the game was asking for Villa. Asking out loud IMO. We needed someone dangerous there, and that someone isn't Alexis. Not playing at all, even as a sub, only makes me think that a deal is being “protected”.

If that happens, I will be mad at our officials yet again…

billy_gr wrote:Well guys, the game was asking for Villa. Asking out loud IMO. We needed someone dangerous there, and that someone isn't Alexis. Not playing at all, even as a sub, only makes me think that a deal is being “protected”.

If that happens, I will be mad at our officials yet again…

I dont know, man. Why Villa is obviously the better player and a million times a better finisher, Alexis makes more alot of great off the ball runs, even more so than Villa I would say, and Alexis didnt even have one chance. So I honestly doubt that Villa would make that much of a difference today..

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Goddamn billy, if that happens we can kiss our CL good bye, yesterday showed why we need him.

Dani you don't think Roura has the power to change the game tactically? Maybe Tito sets up the team, but I doubt he tells Roura to stick to a plan that isn't working during the game. If it's clear to all of us that Villa should be subbed in (if not outright start), then why not change the game?

No he probably does have that power, but I dont blame him because he is in a position he is not qualified to do.

alexjanosik wrote:Dont think so.To me the idea seems fine.That to relieve pressure Iniesta came into the middle.But its counterproductive.If anything it makes their job easier.The midfield gets completely clogged up,our midfield loses its structure and they have effectively compressed us into a small space in the middle of the pitch making it easier for them to press.As has been mentioned by others we had no passing option on the left.Had Iniesta been there we would have had a passing option and Essien would have been forced back.It would have had another positive effect.It would have allowed Alba to get forward a bit more than he could do.That would have pushed back Callejon a bit and helped to relieve some pressure.Also I think we were at our most effective in the second half when Iniesta stuck a bit to that left flank and started to work Essien a bit.
I do agree with you that Busquets could have dropped to form a back 3 in possession.I think he didnt for one simple reason.Madrid were determined to press high and dont think their flank players would have moved back to cover our advancing fullbacks.I might be wrong but I did see Busquets try it once.But you are right that he could have tried it more.Perhaps he had Oezil too in mind.That with him in the back 3,if we lost the ball due to Madrid's high pressing,it would leave him out of position to deal with Oezil.

Dont think Roura escapes criticism.He is a qualified coach with years of football experience.If we can see the problem and suggest solutions,surely he too should be expected to do the same.

I think against any other team, even one with a good player in the middle like Ozil, Busquets would of formed the back 3. I dont believe Callejon and Cristiano would of stayed either, its far too risky for them to leave a fullback and Pedro/Iniesta 2 v 1 with Essien and Arbeloa. When they did push on, Alba got 2 chances and Dani Alves got behind too. Either way, I think we would of escaped it easily.

I agree Iniesta coming in only clogged up space further, but we was struggling so he did the right thing in taking it upon himself to relieve pressure and when we did play out it was with this method. Yes, its counterproductive when the move builds up later on, but I prefer that than not being able to escape our defensive third at all.

Of course this is all solved by just having a threat out there so Iniesta doesnt ruin the composition of the midfield, but alas, we fall into the same error year after year after year. This is the biggest flaw of this legendary side in my opinion, getting carried away and playing too many midfielders.

billy_gr wrote:Well guys, the game was asking for Villa. Asking out loud IMO. We needed someone dangerous there, and that someone isn't Alexis. Not playing at all, even as a sub, only makes me think that a deal is being “protected”.

If that happens, I will be mad at our officials yet again…

Sincerely hope you're wrong. Also hanging on to hope that Tito will realize the error of his ways

BarrileteCosmico wrote:It's worth noting that since Iniesta drifts to the center Messi has less space to exploit and thus it's no surprise that he sits in deeper.

In any event I don't think anyone disagrees that Villa needs to be played. Iniesta can be unplayable but if he's not going to stretch the play then there is no use for him on the wing. If it means Iniesta must be benched then so be it.

Obviously Iniesta wouldn't be benched,he's easily better than Fabregas so it would be Cesc who would have to make way.But then I am sure we would hear reports of Cesc been unhappy like last time he was benched.

It's only since we bought Cesc since we have had this problem,the problem of trying to fit him into the team and like I said from the beginning the only way is for him to be a sub for Iniesta or Xavi.Trying to squeeze Cesc in has ruined the balance of the team,we get away with it against the smaller teams but when playing Madrid it just doesn't work as well as our old 4 - 3 - 3 with two inside forwards to run in behind the defense and the best midfield trio of all time playing on a consistent basis.

I don't think we should have ever signed Cesc,his arrival has brought more problems than solutions imo.If he weren't Catalan and never trained at La Masia I don't think we would have ever bought him.