xXKonan
Senior Member
Clearly you haven't watched him this season then.
Arthur
- Thread starter Jair Ventura
- Start date
you have no idea about football
xXKonan
Senior Member
Oh I do, you have to be pretty blind not to see how Arthur is very much like a modern controller and very well has the characteristics to succeed here.
But hey we should have missed on Arthur so we can blow our budget on Thiago a guy who is approaching his 30s and has his own injury history.
Gnidrologist
Senior Member
You barely acknowledge your own existence rocking back and fort while playing with your marbles.
He isn't. His positioning is usually detrimental to the progression of the ball since he often stays too close to his teammates. This actually makes it easier for the opponent to press us. Also, he barely takes up more advanced positions and when he does, it's not in spaces where he can receive the ball. And when he has the ball, his vision is usually very "short-sighted", only picking passes in close proximity and ignoring stragetically superior options. Having a lot of touches is not the same as controlling the game. Thiago is much better.
serghei
Senior Member
You have no idea what are you talking about. And it is well exposed when you give Thiago as an example. Man has done nothing of note at the top for Bayern.
If Arthur ends up like Thiago at Bayern he's going to be a failure for us. We have higher hopes for him.
Last edited:
Which of the things that I said are wrong?
serghei
Senior Member
Well, first one would be that off the ball movement is not an obstacle, but a quality. Arthur doesn't stay too close to his teammates, he just moves more when he sees that a passing option is not available by default.
I must be blind then. Moving more is not always a good thing, in fact it is often detrimental when not done in tandem with your teammates.
Gnidrologist
Senior Member
I agree that swarming around one place occurs with Arthur participating in the buildup, but that is mostly fault our other players, especially Bus ansd Rak, who can barely move both on and off the ball now days and simply jog around in small radius in their preferred sector of the field. Arthur is FORCED to come closer to be a passing option, because with static team there are rarely any passing lanes besides dumbed down hoofing the ball to one of the flanks.
serghei
Senior Member
We have a problem with keeping the ball circulating in midfield when Arthur is not on precisely because there is very low movement off the ball. Without players moving around and breaking their markings, the ball is inevitably drifted wide, or passed back in defense. This means two zones where Messi is not activating in.
It's true that so far Arthur doesn't do through balls as often as needed (he is improving in this aspect), but even the fact that the ball is circulating better in our midfield when he plays is a very important. Why? Because we have a certain Messi, usually playing near our midfield. And if the ball is kept in play there, he'll appear in a pocket of space, get in possession in a good spot and will take care of the rest.
We have two ways to get Messi and our other forwards on the ball.
a) Play Arthur and keep the ball better, and while the possession and passing percentages go up, there are more chances for Messi to receive the ball. Basically, better possession and high number of completed passes usually translates to more time for Messi on the ball.
b) Play Vidal, who is a ball winner, which means even if the possession is not great and we lose fluidity and some progression in possession, the ball is recovered from the opponent and quickly released in space to our deadly forwards. We lose some control, but gain in the counter attacking phase with quick transition.
Arthur is the best we have atm for plan a). Vidal is the best we have for plan b). Both of them are more or less effective at getting our forwards on the ball in space, depending on the teams we face.
Last edited:
How is Arthur entering Busquets and Rakitic spaces a good thing and how does that create new passing lanes?
serghei
Senior Member
Arthur doesn't get into their lanes. He provides support when they are unable to make a pass without that support. Completely different things. If you watched Xavi on youtube you'd see that when he sees a teammate is crowded by an opponent or his pass option is cut, he'll make a move and position himself so that he can still receive the ball. Xavi could have stayed in his place, but if he stays in his place and doesn't help his teammates there is no progression. Only sterile possession, because against good teams the good passing options are cut by the positioning of the opponents. And in this situation you have to move more to still make the passes happen.
The difference between sterile possession and possession with progression is exactly that. Possession doesn't lead to progression in positional play when players fail to move off the ball to a good enough degree that they can pass and receive between them when pressured and marked.
So, he doesn't get into their lanes. He makes adjustments in his positioning so he can ensure the ball travels as it should and there are no blockages.
Last edited:
Thats exacty the misconception i am talking about. Arthur is not great at progressing the ball because of the reasons i named. And even though Vidal is not better with the ball at his feet, he helps more in posession because of his movement which opens up space for Messi.
Xavi is a great example because his movement is the complete opposite of Arthurs. Xavi used to constantly look for spaces inside the opponents formation without getting too close to his teammates. Arthur mostly moves around the opponents formation while often taking up his teammates spaces. You don't see these things on Youtube. The only thing they have in common is that they move lot.
Home of Barca Fans
