Xavi Complains

Valkyrja wrote:He specified Di Matteo and Mourinho, the guys who eliminated his team in 2010 and 12.   btw, it's a big difference between Klopp's way of saying and Xavi's. the latter was and will always be a douche   

And what else do they have in common? That they play defensive football..

izzy wrote:

harhar11 wrote:Well, i have notice those who say that find defensive football entertaining, complain about tiki taka because they make a million sideways passes. I thought that they would be used to it considering that the only reason teams have to make a million sideway passes is because a team have parked the bus, i.e used their favorite style of football.

What I want to say with that is that I think that alot of those who say that they like defensive football, are only saying that because their teams play that way. Not all, but alot of them.

And he has never said that entertaining football can be archieved only one way. For example, people consider dortmund and Bayern entertaining and they play 2 different way.

And I have no idea how you came up with the fact that he didnt mention Bayern is  big indicment of his stupidity. If anything its the opposite. If Xavi did indeed criticize bayern, then you could say that Xavi is criticizing those teams just because they defeated Barca.

Again, so what?
Some like defensive football, some like tiki taka. That's football, difference in styles and approaches to the game, that's why people love it. If people like Xavi have a problem with that then he can literally fck off. No one has time for elitist thinking.

Ridiculous comment. Defensive football is not just loved by those who have teams who use that style. Saying something like that is just asinine and I'm not even going to elaborate further on that.

Whatever, one way, the right way, same thing, different phrases.

It is an indictment on his stupidity because because it highlights that he is SOLELY criticizing Mou's legacy because of the style of football Mou used. That's the whole point. It's not about liking a style or anything else. It has solely to do with Mou.
Milan have used similar tactics against him. No criticism there.
Rubin Kazan used similar tactics against him. No criticism there.
FC Kobehaven used similar tactics against him. No criticism there.

Legacy? Oh please.

Exactly! Not everyone likes the same style. Just like Klopp had the right to say that he doesnt like a certain style, xavi has that same right aswell..

And notice how I didnt say that everyone who likes defensive football liles it just because their team plays that way?

harhar11 wrote:Exactly! Not everyone likes the same style. Just like Klopp had the right to say that he doesnt like a certain style, xavi has that same right aswell..

And notice how I didnt say that everyone who likes defensive football liles it just because their team plays that way?

What part are you not getting?
He is USING the style of football as a way to insult Mou's legacy. Xavi has been criticising defensive styles of football with his pompous elitist bitch ass. What makes this time more pathetic, is that he is trying to use it as a way to cover up his dig a Mou's legacy.

Klopp didn't say Barca's style of football is detriment to their legacy, Xavi did say that involving Mou.

You can dislike a style, but when you try and use it to take a shot at someone's legacy, that's pathetic and it shows that you are a bitch.

The legacy quotes are the problem and the fact he tried to use 'style of football' to justify his statement makes it even more shameful.

harhar11 wrote:

izzy wrote:

harhar11 wrote:See how he doesnt mention Bayern? Thats because they defeated us while playing a spectacular style of football. But if Xavi was complaining just because they defeated barca, then he would have mention them aswell.

What he is saying is pretty accurate. Teams who are remembered more are those teams who brought something new to football, and, more often than not, also played an entertaining brand of football and at the same time win titles.

The only thing that I dont agree with is the part where he said that Mou didnt leave a legacy, although I 100% with his di matteo statement..

The fact he doesn't mention Bayern is more of an indictment on his stupidity.
So, Bayern beat him by playing a style of football he accepts and doesn't question their legacy? But Mou and Di Matteo beat him using a different style and it's a detriment to their legacy?

Fck outta here!

What he's saying is inaccurate. Nothing in football is really new. Most stuff used nowadays are rehashed and used from past teams, coaches and systems. It's just that many of today never saw them and others don't remember them.

Entertaining football? Really?
Italy is remembered for their great defensive structure and set-up throughout their national team.
Xavi (the idiot he is) may not find that entertaining, but I quite sure others among the world do seeing as they are PRAISED for it.
Entertainment is completely subjective and Xavi is an IDIOT for thinking that entertaining football can only be achieved one way. Fck outta here with that elitist crap.

I'll repeat again; fck Xavi. The little bitch and his elitist mentality can fck right off.
Mou's legacy is fine, you don't like it, whatever, but to bitch about his legacy?

Someone stick a dummy in this babies mouth.

Well, i have notice those who say that find defensive football entertaining, complain about tiki taka because they make a million sideways passes. I thought that they would be used to it considering that the only reason teams have to make a million sideway passes is because a team have parked the bus, i.e used their favorite style of football.

What I want to say with that is that I think that alot of those who say that they like defensive football, are only saying that because their teams play that way. Not all, but alot of them.

And he has never said that entertaining football can be archieved only one way. For example, people consider dortmund and Bayern entertaining and they play 2 different way.

And I have no idea how you came up with the fact that he didnt mention Bayern is  big indicment of his stupidity. If anything its the opposite. If Xavi did indeed criticize bayern, then you could say that Xavi is criticizing those teams just because they defeated Barca.

I am not calling you out or anything, but just using your post to air out a few problems I have with football fans generalizations.

First, what is "defensive" football:
Can't Barca's possession based style considered "defensive" because:
-It tries to always control the ball.
-It gives more value to simple passes that are less risky to risky passes that might lose the ball.
-It has a very efficient pressing system.

Barca need to do very little actual defending because they attempt to take the ball most of the time, this means that they rarely go the direct rule because then they would lose the ball and would have to exhaust themselves with pressing.

Does "defensive" football means only "parking the bus"?
Italy 2006 were a "defensive" team but they also had more dangerous chances per match than all other teams they faced (with the exception of France who had the same number of dangerous chances).

I have been a football fan for a long time and never heard the term "parking" before 2010.

Second, entertainment is subjective, but it is also very clear what is entertaining:

-Goals are always entertaining (unless against you).
-Crazy good tackles are entertaining (although being forced to make one was probably a mistake on part of the team).
-Winning is cool for the fans.
-Cool risky moves that are pulled off are entertaining.

Really, when my team faces a very strong team like Barca, where the values of the players are lightyears in difference, I would rather my team plays ti their strength in defense and organization than trying to go and play Barca's style and get demolished.

Finally, there is a difference between saying:
-Tactics and teams and persons A are not "football".
and saying:
-I don't like the style teams and persons A employ.

The first one disrespects the football professional people toiled over, it is like saying Indian food suck.
The second one is states the opinion that you don't like the end product of the hard work of those footballers, and comes off like saying you don't like Indian food.

People won't like hearing it but Xavi is right about Chelsea and Inter...

No one remembers them apart from their own fans....

Even when Inter won it, people still said Barca were the best team in the world and continued doing so until Bayern thrashed them.

This whole history remembers the winners is as much BS as no one remembers the style of football.... it just isn't true.

Even Chelsea, it was forgotten about 3 months later when they got knocked out of the group stages.... yet people still talked about Barca i wonder why that is?

But Xavi isn't right to have a go at specific managers and he is acting like a bitch but at the end of the day as far as Inter and Chelsea is concerned he's 100% correct.

Nothing wrong with what Xavi's saying. He's just saying he didn't like the way certain teams played, nothing wrong with that. Mourinho focuses on results and that's true. He's not insulting anyone.

Good ol, lad Xavi.

People need to define what 'remember' means.

Does nobody remember Inter coming from behind to beat Barca 3-1? Or the defensive masterclass with 10 men at the Camp Nou? Messi's missed penalty against Chelsea or Torres last minute goal?

My point is that people will remember underdog victories as well as anything. Barcelona under Guardiola were absolutely phenomenal and really deserve the legendary legacy they achieved for their style of football.

At the same time, Mou & Di Matteo left their legacy at their CLUBS by being massive underdogs and overcoming arguably the greatest club team of all time. Luck was involved for sure but they're the only managers to stop what looked like an unbeatable team at times.

Plenty of people will 'remember' that.

You're clearly talking out of your arse here, that Chelsea team is the epitome of endurance. They faced so much adversity that year but beat the odds to win the damn thing in remarkable fashion. The Barca-Chelsea 2-2 game is probably the most memorable CL match in recent history since the 05 CL final.

How can anyone claim Inter weren't memorable by the way? Because Rafa destroyed what Mourinho built in a matter of months? They won the damn treble that year with relative ease.

Gil wrote:You're clearly talking out of your arse here, that Chelsea team is the epitome of endurance. They faced so much adversity that year but beat the odds to win the damn thing in remarkable fashion. The Barca-Chelsea 2-2 game is probably the most memorable CL match in recent history since the 05 CL final.

How can anyone claim Inter weren't memorable by the way? Because Rafa destroyed what Mourinho built in a matter of months? They won the damn treble that year with relative ease.

Also taking into account that they beat the English, German and Spanish champions to win CL.

Only ones who would disagree are Barca fans tbh.

Saying he doesn't like a particular style or prefers a specific one over other/s is of little controversy. It's everything he else he adds to it that isn't. When you insinuate, as he more or less did, that the style a team plays is in some way determinant of that team's integrity, that a certain style of football is somehow morally superior to any, or even all, others, or that the legitimacy of the accomplishments of a team that played 'his' way is higher than or superior to that of a team playing any other way (ex. 'my team's CL win > Inter's CL win because we played preeetty and they didn't', etc.), that's when he comes off as a bitter and arrogant brat.

Recycled quotes?

Typical Vagi. Ovrebo and Wolfgang Stark's beautiful brand of football is the right way of winning indeed

I don't know why people are comparing his comments to Klopp's. Klopp said he prefers his 'heavy metal' football to Arsenal's style. Did he say the way he plays is right and the way Wenger plays is wrong? No, he just stated what is his personal preference.

Izzy shows no mercy. Not to Benzema, not to Xavi. Anyway, while it seems recycled and I really question the validity of Xavi actually saying these things, those quotes are still the rantings of a man talking out of his ass.

Why not just come out and say you don't like Mourinho because he is a dick instead of hiding behind the facade of this "anti-football" nonsense.

Lord Spencer wrote:I am not calling you out or anything, but just using your post to air out a few problems I have with football fans generalizations.

First, what is "defensive" football:
Can't Barca's possession based style considered "defensive" because:
-It tries to always control the ball.
-It gives more value to simple passes that are less risky to risky passes that might lose the ball.
-It has a very efficient pressing system.

Barca need to do very little actual defending because they attempt to take the ball most of the time, this means that they rarely go the direct rule because then they would lose the ball and would have to exhaust themselves with pressing.

Does "defensive" football means only "parking the bus"?
Italy 2006 were a "defensive" team but they also had more dangerous chances per match than all other teams they faced (with the exception of France who had the same number of dangerous chances).

I have been a football fan for a long time and never heard the term "parking" before 2010.

Second, entertainment is subjective, but it is also very clear what is entertaining:

-Goals are always entertaining (unless against you).
-Crazy good tackles are entertaining (although being forced to make one was probably a mistake on part of the team).
-Winning is cool for the fans.
-Cool risky moves that are pulled off are entertaining.

Really, when my team faces a very strong team like Barca, where the values of the players are lightyears in difference, I would rather my team plays ti their strength in defense and organization than trying to go and play Barca's style and get demolished.

Finally, there is a difference between saying:
-Tactics and teams and persons A are not "football".
and saying:
-I don't like the style teams and persons A employ.

The first one disrespects the football professional people toiled over, it is like saying Indian food suck.
The second one is states the opinion that you don't like the end product of the hard work of those footballers, and comes off like saying you don't like Indian food.

True, but that's not what I am saying. My whole point was that Xavi, like Mou and Klopp, has the right to say what style that HE likes.

What people consider defensive football is a whole other point.

M99 wrote:Typical Vagi. Ovrebo and Wolfgang Stark's beautiful brand of football is the right way of winning indeed

I don't know why people are comparing his comments to Klopp's. Klopp said he prefers his 'heavy metal' football to Arsenal's style. Did he say the way he plays is right and the way Wenger plays is wrong? No, he just stated what is his personal preference.

Xavi isn't either saying that it's wrong to play a certain brand of football, unless you think that saying that Mou hasn't left a legacy = its wrong to play that way of style. All that he has said is that he does not like his style i.e pretty much he same what Klopp said(apart from the legacy thing).

The only part that Xavi is wrong about is saying that Mou hasn't left a legacy. Everything else is pretty spot on.

izzy wrote:

What part are you not getting?
He is USING the style of football as a way to insult Mou's legacy. Xavi has been criticising defensive styles of football with his pompous elitist bitch ass. What makes this time more pathetic, is that he is trying to use it as a way to cover up his dig a Mou's legacy.

Klopp didn't say Barca's style of football is detriment to their legacy, Xavi did say that involving Mou.

You can dislike a style, but when you try and use it to take a shot at someone's legacy, that's pathetic and it shows that you are a bitch.

The legacy quotes are the problem and the fact he tried to use 'style of football' to justify his statement makes it even more shameful.

That's just one part of what he said. You can say that Xavi is wrong with the legacy thing with Mou, although pretty spot on regarding Di Matteo(not even he knows how Chelsea won the CL that year), and I agree, but the rest of his comment is basically the samething that Klopp said. He just voiced his opinion on a certain style.

And even then, saying that Mou hasn't left a legacy isn't being a crybaby or a bitch, it's just being wrong. And you know, you can be wrong without being a bitch and a crybaby. Like when Klopp said that Barca's football is just "serenity" football and not "fighting" football.

Xavi is obsessed from this because he has lost a unique opportunity , winning the Champions League to Bernabeu Stadium.
And infact he contradicts. He says " who reminds Inter .... " when it will be the 1000th time he says this

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:People won't like hearing it but Xavi is right about Chelsea and Inter...

No one remembers them apart from their own fans....

Even when Inter won it, people still said Barca were the best team in the world and continued doing so until Bayern thrashed them.

This whole history remembers the winners is as much BS as no one remembers the style of football.... it just isn't true.

Even Chelsea, it was forgotten about 3 months later when they got knocked out of the group stages.... yet people still talked about Barca i wonder why that is?

But Xavi isn't right to have a go at specific managers and he is acting like a bitch but at the end of the day as far as Inter and Chelsea is concerned he's 100% correct.

I call BS Mole, that Inter team will be remembered for generations to come, especially if Inter stay in their current lull.

Everyone in their starting line-up is a recognizable household name with the exception of Chivu and Diego Millito. You had Julio Ceasar at GK, and the walls Lucio and Samuel at CB. Maicon was at his best in RB and so was Chivu. Then you have a midfield with Cambiasso and the legendary Zanetti as well as Sneijder in his best year. Round that with Eto, Pandev, and an on-fire Millito and you get a team that could beat and did beat every team they faced.

What you had is Inter masterfully beating Chelsea and Barca in the final. I don't care about them "parking the bus" in their second leg with Barca while a man down.

That is not to say that Inter and Chelsea would be memorable in the same level as Barca. However, that is not because of their style of play as much as it is because Barca were THE dominant team from 2006-2012.

I hate to say it but that Inter side is one of the greatest Italian teams of all time. It's up there with Herrera's Inter, Rocco's Milan, Liedholm's Roma, Trappatoni's Juve etc.

And I would say the first and so far only Italian treble is a pretty big legacy.

I love Xavi, but I am growing tired and weary of this crock of shit that he continues to bring up as his frequent jibes are not justified by any tangible inference.

Where I come from, a brimstone pot of footballing culture; we all remember the Champions League wins of Mourinho's Inter and even Roberto Di Matteo's Chelsea.

-We remember how poor Inter were in the group stages followed by the unconcealed chortles on the thought of them usurping Barca after narrowly scraping through Ancelotti's Chelsea.

David vs Goliath

-We remember the absolute tactical masterclass that was the 1st leg vs Barca in the San Siro, thoroughly and comprehensively outwitting a prime Guardiola team 3-1 and bringing them to their knees.

David vs Goliath

-We remember a 10 man Inter in Camp Nou (result of a poor call) surviving in one of the most disciplined and organized phalanx's ever conjured after an onslaught of possession tiki-taka to which proved a miracle in the end as Mourinho and the Interisti players could not fathom that they survived such an aggressive incursion. It was a miracle.

David vs Goliath

-We remember one of the finest tactical displays in Champions League Final history when Mourinho thoroughly and utterly dismantled an arrogant LvG's Bayern to which was quite literally the perfect match from Inter, Milito's brilliant brace a mere compliment to the tactical finesse on display.


Chelsea?

-Who does not remember this 7th place Chelsea going down 10 men in Camp Nou, raising further convictions that a victory would be merely impossible within that moment? We remember Messi's failed penalty, Chelsea surviving all odds and Torres' shocking round-up goal vs Valdes to seal Barca's fate. It was polarities on expectations to the finest degree. 11 men conquered a 100k+ Cules

David vs Goliath

-Who does not remember Bayern's advantage of their team, form and playing the Champions League Final in their own home? Followed by Didier Drogba's flash in the pan header to power through the Bavarian momentum in the final minutes of the clock?

David vs Goliath

Who remembers when the mental odds stacked against Chelsea when the English were known to falter in penalties while the Germans known to succeed in them, let alone the record of English teams vs Germans? Who remembers Chelsea outclassing the Bavarians right in front of their raucous fans?  

I certainly do.

Football is not only remembered on the basis of aesthetics and dimensions of subjective play, yet based on the moments achieved against the grain, the inertia of odds and expectations that weigh down David as the philistines laugh at his audacity.

Xavi will never realize that until he experiences what the Chelsea and Inter unison faced nor will he understand what has brought the Blue and Nerrazzuri fans together; through the mutual emotions experienced in such an unforeseeable victory over such improbability.

He does not know it.

They do.

Hence why this is effectively a redundant debate.

No one's really going to remember Inter/Chelsea winning the CL because they won it playing generic football. However people are going to remember Barcelona winning it due to the spectacular football they played and because they were one of the best teams in history.

Yohan Modric wrote:No one's really going to remember Inter/Chelsea winning the CL because they won it playing generic football. However people are going to remember Barcelona winning it due to the spectacular football they played and because they were one of the best teams in history.

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/stg.ign.com/2014/01/tumblr_mz0mbb881Q1qcluu2o2_250.gif

M99 wrote:I hate to say it but that Inter side is one of the greatest Italian teams of all time. It's up there with Herrera's Inter, Rocco's Milan, Liedholm's Roma, Trappatoni's Juve etc.

And I would say the first and so far only Italian treble is a pretty big legacy.

Agreed but they are not remembered as such.... maybe to GL and fans of similar hardcore support they are but in the grand scheme of things they aint....

Also its funny you mention Herrera because in the grand scheme of things he's not either.... heck i didn't even know who he was till i joined GL.

How is Inter's treble winning team not a memorable team?

Not to mention that the 3-1 match vs Barca were one of the most enjoyable matches of recent years.

No Champion League winner doesn't leave a legacy after him. I can still remember all CL winners of recent 10 years... For me they will always have a legacy.

Yohan Modric wrote:No one's really going to remember Inter/Chelsea winning the CL because they won it playing generic football. However people are going to remember Barcelona winning it due to the spectacular football they played and because they were one of the best teams in history.

What people usually "remember" first are teams that defined decades of football. This is the case for this Barca team.

However, people still remember teams that won the CL 25 years ago if they are football fans. Certainly if they are fans of the team and/or the league.

Case in point MUnited vs. Bayern, which would be something someone cries about because of "anti-football" but will be remembered as one of the most dramatic victories in the CL.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:

M99 wrote:I hate to say it but that Inter side is one of the greatest Italian teams of all time. It's up there with Herrera's Inter, Rocco's Milan, Liedholm's Roma, Trappatoni's Juve etc.

And I would say the first and so far only Italian treble is a pretty big legacy.

Agreed but they are not remembered as such.... maybe to GL and fans of similar hardcore support they are but in the grand scheme of things they aint....

Also its funny you mention Herrera because in the grand scheme of things he's not either.... heck i didn't even know who he was till i joined GL.

Shucks, I bet you non-football fans don't know any ancient footballer beyond Pele, and don't know anything about football beyond the current trend in the game and David Beckham. Even after Beckham retires people would still think he still plays.

Hell, if you are going to take what the masses think is great then you are in for a lot of surprise in a lot of fields.