AC Milan vs FC Barcelona (1st leg CL)

BarrileteCosmico wrote:What do you guys think about using Song instead of Busquets to take advantage of his height and his great vertical jump? We played in many crosses that led nowhere yesterday, having an aerial presence could be useful.

Busi is taller than Song. I dont see why our Defensive Mid should be that far up ahead anyway, especially with an away goal for them being so killer to us. We need our defense to actually defend. Our 2 mids and forwards should be able to get it done this time. Too much at risk to have everyone attacking like usual, we would be 1 counter attack away from being merked

I would go actually try something new to see if it made a difference...

---------Valdes
Alves--Puyol--Pique--Alba
----------Busi
-----Thiago
--------------Iniesta
Messi------------Tello
---------Villa

This would totally throw off there defense. They are obviously terrified of Messi (rightfully so), that when they go out wide to double/triple team him that it should help open up the middle and left flank for Iniesta/Tello/Villa.

Xavi on for Thiago, Pedro or Alexis on for Villa if he gets tired and then we slide Messi back to the middle. All depends on how the game is going. Even Cex for Iniesta late if we need goal since Cex is a better goal threat but obviously not as good as a playmaker as Iniesta. But given we havn't had Messi out right for years, that the second the balls is kicked the entire Milan team is going to think...."oh shit, wait...we didn't practice for this....."

Even just the simple rotation between Villa and Messi throughout the match could be enough to disrupt there defense enough to get us at least an honest shot at scoring

That one simple move would throw off there defense, and also boost our bench power

To be fair, I think Xavi was out of it because he just came back from injury, by the time of the second leg he should be fully fit unless he gets another knock and should rightfully start.
I agree maybe we should tinker with the formation but that's a huge doubt.
And tello rarely ever starts he is more of a super sub and Tito/Jordi wouldn't even dare leave Pedro in the bench for him which is stupid but yeah.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

The Franchise wrote:This is why defending is frankly easier than attacking..thats why the lesser teams go to it.

Easy there, loaded words at GL

What an outrageous comment.

Ironically, Barcelona's defence is rubbish. I think this is really just a cop out for that.

If defending were actually so much easier than attacking, Barcelona would find themselves struggling to score on a regular basis, even against La Liga cellar-dwellers. Since when has a team in the whole of football history been successful without both defending and attacking to some extent? The better team wins the tie regardless of whether they attacked or defended for most of the time.

windkick wrote:Tbh I don't think Milan will even bother to counter like they did at home. They are probably just going to park 24/7 with zero counter or attacker up front. Would be no point in them trying to counter and risking opening up a hole for us to score.

I think the only way they start to attack is if we manage score 2, maybe even after 1 we get they might think it's time to go out for the killer away goal that would end us. But we have to score first. If we score 2, then things will get interesting, because then they won't be able to park at all anymore and then things would finally open up for us. But it's not gonna happen. I expect the next match to end 1-1 or something like that

I wouldn't be so sure. For Milan conceding a goal at the Nou Camp isn't as big a deal as conceding at the San Siro. However Milan scoring an away goal would be huge for them, it pretty much puts them into the next round. So I think they might actually try to set up more counters considering the benefits. After they score 1 though I imagine they'll just focus on defence.

Why park the bus when we can play on the counter? The tactics in the last game were perfect. Why change them?

Forza Rossoneri wrote:

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

The Franchise wrote:This is why defending is frankly easier than attacking..thats why the lesser teams go to it.

Easy there, loaded words at GL

What an outrageous comment.

Ironically, Barcelona's defence is rubbish. I think this is really just a cop out for that.

If defending were actually so much easier than attacking, Barcelona would find themselves struggling to score on a regular basis, even against La Liga cellar-dwellers. Since when has a team in the whole of football history been successful without both defending and attacking to some extent? The better team wins the tie regardless of whether they attacked or defended for most of the time.

Nothing to do with Barca, I have held this opinion when Barca had a great defence..its irrelevant.

Why dont Barca defend well if defending is easier...because we take the risks in attack to score goals, we pile men forward..if you dont do this, then you can defend better.

You talk as if they are two non-linked aspects of the game, they are both completely linked to each other.


The more numbers you get in front of the ball, logically the less there is behind it.

Therefore the other team has more space to use if they can get the ball into a scoring area of the pitch.

Why do you think all the lesser teams do it? Why do you think all the lesser teams leave 1 man in front and everyone else back? So they can deny space and make defending easier for the individuals and more about the team structure.

Defending is quite obviously easier than attacking, destruction is always easier than construction.

Counters?

In the first half, there was like 1 counter attack chance for Milan, maybe 2.

Only after we allowed that handball goal did they begin to counter consistently as we played with no composure and gave the ball away easily.

The Franchise wrote:

Forza Rossoneri wrote:

BarrileteCosmico wrote:
Easy there, loaded words at GL

What an outrageous comment.

Ironically, Barcelona's defence is rubbish. I think this is really just a cop out for that.

If defending were actually so much easier than attacking, Barcelona would find themselves struggling to score on a regular basis, even against La Liga cellar-dwellers. Since when has a team in the whole of football history been successful without both defending and attacking to some extent? The better team wins the tie regardless of whether they attacked or defended for most of the time.

Nothing to do with Barca, I have held this opinion when Barca had a great defence..its irrelevant.

Why dont Barca defend well if defending is easier...because we take the risks in attack to score goals, we pile men forward..if you dont do this, then you can defend better.

You talk as if they are two non-linked aspects of the game, they are both completely linked to each other.


The more numbers you get in front of the ball, logically the less there is behind it.

Therefore the other team has more space to use if they can get the ball into a scoring area of the pitch.

Why do you think all the lesser teams do it? Why do you think all the lesser teams leave 1 man in front and everyone else back? So they can deny space and make defending easier for the individuals and more about the team structure.

Defending is quite obviously easier than attacking, destruction is always easier than construction.

OK, I agree with what you're saying there, but I don't see how that is relevant to the original statement.

All my original statement was, was defending is easier than attacking...I am not sure what else is there with any controversy.

As a defender, i can tell you that defending is not at all easier than attacking. It's reactive mostly as opposed to the attack that is proactive... it's always easier to act the way you plan to as opposed to trying to counteract someone else's actions.

Both are equally as hard. One requires more ball technique while the other is more reliant on physical ability.

PTB reinforces the defense... so yes it makes it easier on individual defenders. It forces that attackers to think and, tbh, the dumbest people on my football teams were usually the forwards lol. If you made them have to use the egg between their shoulders, you had won the battle.

I disagree, defending is easier than attacking. Now Ive played majority as a forward, but being played as a defender or doing defensive duties are always done collectivly. Maybe it was the philosophy, but thats how we were thought.

The Franchise wrote:Counters?

In the first half, there was like 1 counter attack chance for Milan, maybe 2.

Only after we allowed that handball goal did they begin to counter consistently as we played with no composure and gave the ball away easily.

I rewatched the game and Milan had like 5 counter attacks in the first half mate.Alves is excellent 1 on 1 but for some reason he sometimes loses focus.Alba is shite defensively and always out of position and Pique has been overrated this season.His best game was the last one against Madrid.Puyol has been dealing with constant injuries so I cant really blame him even though he put his heart and soul on that night.

Fact is Milan are the perfect counter attacking team.Yes,their defence is shite even though they have Abate who is criminally underrated and is one of the best in the world in his position when focused and Mexes who is kinda underrated but their defence is still shit.Then you have the midfield With 2 players with excellent workrate(Montolivo and Muntari)And Ambrosini who surprisingly who played very well.


Then you have Boateng who is basically Milan's Ronaldo against us.Upfront you have El Shaarawy(Another player with excellent workrate)who is exactly the kind of player our defence struggles to defend;fast and skillful.Pazzini didnt really do much on Wednesday but he has terrific heading ability which they could in the return leg.

Attacking is supposed to be done collectively too... but most forwards are ego-driven and want to show their stuff and ignore the collective. Defenders don't have that option. If we fail to be disciplined, it usually leads a dangerous opportunity or goal. Forwards can just try again.

The consequences of a mistake or a bad play is dire for a defender. Forwards don't pay a heavy price for failure. That's the big difference.

Attacking is sexier because it's more skillful. Defending is harder.

The Franchise wrote:Counters?

In the first half, there was like 1 counter attack chance for Milan, maybe 2.

Only after we allowed that handball goal did they begin to counter consistently as we played with no composure and gave the ball away easily.

The thing is, good counters usually lead to high percentage chances. You don't even need that many to score 1 goal and after that the state of the game changes.

Like I said Milan didn't want to concede at home, but they'll probably be OK with it at the Nou Camp if it means they'll score at least one from a high percentage counter attack.

The Franchise wrote:All my original statement was, was defending is easier than attacking...I am not sure what else is there with any controversy.

There's no substance connecting what you said to the earlier statement. All you said in that reply was:
1) structurally, a team must sacrifice attack to improve defence (and vice-versa), and
2) that if a team gets more players behind the ball, it's easier to defend.

These are obviously true statements and I agree with them. However, neither point contributes to making defending easier than attacking.

I.e. I'm looking for a more technical discussion about the features of defending that would make it easier than attacking. Sports has already put up a good alternative argument.

What I am really worried about is Alegri being able to cancel every element of individual brilliance in the first game. Yes the defended massively, yes he blocked all passing corridors but even then our players are vastly better one on one and yet this quality was never shown on the pitch. I expect them to have an easy work to do with 2 goal advantage

Score an early goal and everything will change.

Milan would park a tank if they do not concede a goal in the first half then we (Barcelona) will get desperate and push much higher then we should then Milan will start doing counters that even allow Fernando Torres on his worst form to score.

in otherwords if we do not score in the first half without conceding a goal then we have almost no chance on winning.

You have to press them right from when the whistle is blown a la Madrid at Camp Nou copa last year. It will be difficult, of course seeing you haven't pressed well for months. Line-up? Take Xavi/Busquets out and bring Thiago. Fábregas to make way for Alexis/Villa. You need to absolutely overwhelm Milan with your pressing. Believe me, scoring a goal in the first 15 minutes will be a massive psychological factor for both teams, so there is not time to save energy for later. The more you leave it the more frustration will come and that'll mean Chelsea all over again.

I don't agree that you need to sell Pedro. He is given too many instructions at Barcelona. Why does he play so well for Spain? Because he is allowed to play more free, make runs behind the defence and have a shot. Right now he's been degraded to a passing pivot.

Forza Rossoneri wrote:

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

The Franchise wrote:This is why defending is frankly easier than attacking..thats why the lesser teams go to it.

Easy there, loaded words at GL

What an outrageous comment.

Ironically, Barcelona's defence is rubbish. I think this is really just a cop out for that.

If defending were actually so much easier than attacking, Barcelona would find themselves struggling to score on a regular basis, even against La Liga cellar-dwellers. Since when has a team in the whole of football history been successful without both defending and attacking to some extent? The better team wins the tie regardless of whether they attacked or defended for most of the time.

You might want to read the original post before commenting that quote...

I agree that we ened to press but we haven't done that the entire season, doubt we will become a pressing machine in one game.