CL | 1/8 Finals: FC Barcelona - Chelsea 4-1 agg.

[Ghostmaster]

Ah yes the “muh tiki taka styul” excuse. Never mind that we haven’t been playing tiki taka since Pep left.

Watch what Pep’s Man City do to Chelsea next weekend and then come talk to me about “muh styul.”

Never said tikitaka, but we are not playing the way bayern or RM does.

City has already played at Stamford Bridge, so we already can compare the results: they won 0-1, we had 1-1 draw, so the difference is that we conceded one goal and they didn't.

Only way to inject more pace into the team with the same 4-4-2 is to drop Rakitic for Roberto, move Semedo to RB and Dembele to RM. You'll get that recovery pace at RB and Semedo is decent at making runs off the ball even though our players never play the ball to him, except for the one game vs Real Madrid where he almost scored. You'll have Roberto who's more agile and quicker on the ball than Rakitic in the center of the field, able to go on runs to destabilize the other team and obviously some dribbling ability and pace with Dembele, able to stretch the field more being a natural winger capable of playing outside and inside.

Problem though is that we'll lose our backup RB that way, Rakitic has performed well and doesn't really deserve to get benched and well, how would you play the GOATs Paulinho and Gomes that way? Also, there's obviously question marks about Roberto doing well in the midfield.

ter Stegen

Semedo - Pique - Umtiti- Alba

Dembele - Roberto - Busquets - Iniesta

Messi - Suarez


At least it won't be as dull and slow and you retain some of your defensive shape

I heard Vidal wants to move in the summer, we could have a workhorse who is good at passing. Alhough I heard he is an alcoholic and likes to party... But I guess drunk Vidal is better than sober Paulinho

 

[Stoichkov1]

Only way to inject more pace into the team with the same 4-4-2 is to drop Rakitic for Roberto, move Semedo to RB and Dembele to RM. You'll get that recovery pace at RB and Semedo is decent at making runs off the ball even though our players never play the ball to him, except for the one game vs Real Madrid where he almost scored. You'll have Roberto who's more agile and quicker on the ball than Rakitic in the center of the field, able to go on runs to destabilize the other team and obviously some dribbling ability and pace with Dembele, able to stretch the field more being a natural winger capable of playing outside and inside.

Problem though is that we'll lose our backup RB that way, Rakitic has performed well and doesn't really deserve to get benched and well, how would you play the GOATs Paulinho and Gomes that way? Also, there's obviously question marks about Roberto doing well in the midfield.

ter Stegen

Semedo - Pique - Umtiti- Alba

Dembele - Roberto - Busquets - Iniesta

Messi - Suarez


At least it won't be as dull and slow and you retain some of your defensive shape

Rakitic is better than Roberto in midfield. Roberto is more agile but he loses too many balls and we would be open to counterattacks.

I think Dembele would be enough to inject more pace in the team without destabilizing the whole system.

 

[Horatio]

I hope we get Liverpool or Man City in the next round so there are no MUH BUS MUH ITALIAN TACTIX excuses if we do poorly. Though honestly those excuses should have disappeared when Bayern destroyed us in 2013 wih us hardly ever getting out of our own half.

Muh parked bus italian tactix isn’t a super secret special formula to beat us in the CL. We just suck in the competition. Bayern didnt park the bus when they beat us 7-0, QSG didnt when they beat us 4-0. Inb4 muh poseshun

You're just mad because no Code Geass season 3.

 

[FC B]

How barca was lucky? What should valverde do about willian and long range shoots? Where was their most dangerous player hazard, maybe he was kept silent? Chelsea didnt have clear chance at home and thats a fact, they had 2 counter attacks from individual mistakes, but they didnt outplayed barca

If two shots hiting the post isn't luck in such a tie where absolutely every goal can and usualy is crucial what's luck then?

EV should have gave priority to CL at least a bit, just like Conte did vs. Hull, rotating and resting key players since it's freaking CL. Should also not have started the same lineup as vs. Eibar thus players having only 2 full days of rest. Football is not about chances but about goals, they could've easily scored two or three yet we barely had fortunate onne, ofc they didn't outplayed Barca but could've easilt outscore it.

 

[Donatello]

For those, who are saying that we were lucky against Chelsea, I would like to point out that you can not win a major tournament like UCL without luck. Real madrid have won UCL back to back and boy they were lucky on both occasions.

In 15/16 UCL, they were lucky to get the easier draws till the final. And even in the easier draws, they were in such a dire situation that, at one point they were nearly going to be knocked out by a measly Wolfsburg team. In the finals, they won it on penalties, because Griezmann missed a pen.

In 16/17 UCL, they were so good that they finished second to Dortmund in group stages and got Napoli in round of 16, if its not luck then what??....And if you think the luck ends here, you are wrong. In the Quarter final, they were nearly going to be knocked out by the Bayern team. In the 1st leg, Bayern missed a penalty through Vidal, while in the 2nd leg, Bayern were dominating RM and were looking destined for a comeback win, but due to unfair refereeing and some luck, Casemiro escaped a second yellow and instead Vidal was booked and sent off. As a result, Bayern were left with 10 men and then Madrid prevailed due to a man advantage and scored late goals.

I am, by no means saying that Real madrid won them just because of sheer luck, they did delivered when it was needed by putting in performance after performance. But my point is that they needed luck in order to win back to back UCL.

Because at the end of the day, what matters is the Result and we got a desirable one in the first leg against Chelsea.

 

[Ursegor]

Ah yes the “muh tiki taka styul” excuse. Never mind that we haven’t been playing tiki taka since Pep left.

Watch what Pep’s Man City do to Chelsea next weekend and then come talk to me about “muh styul.”

If you weren't 13, I would be really worried about you.

 

[PhilS]

Losing this game 1-0 would have been good enough. I'm not surprised that a team with this much talent, playing parked bus at home, could contain Barca to a scoring draw.

Barca was obviously trying to keep Hazard from beating them. Mission accomplished, good job. Leaving Willian so open so often was not great, need to improve on this before the Camp Nou game.

Not a good game for Sergi Roberto, and both Suarez and Paulinho did not shoot enough. I though this game was an improvement for Paulinho, he was getting in good scoring position quite a few times, though squandering all the chances. Sure as hell no one else other than Suarez or Messi seemed to even trying to get in scoring positions, like usual.

Iniesta deserves a lot more credit than Messi for this very good result, he lost 5 years to come up with that loose ball and make the decisive pass.

Sure, Dembele and Semedo should be the answers, but that is just potential, not the current reality. Neither has been good enough to date, Valverde is correct to not trust them yet.

Good thing that Chelsea just is not up to top CL standards in finishing, way below Barca level in that regard. And that terrible pass in the box by Christenson to give up the goal, that was unforgiveable. Even when Barca does mess up in the back, the Barca defense this year almost always still prevents the goal. You have to come through in the clutch, this Barca team consistently comes through at both ends of the pitch, this Chelsea team, not so much.

 

[FC B]

For those, who are saying that we were lucky against Chelsea, I would like to point out that you can not win a major tournament like UCL without luck. Real madrid have won UCL back to back and boy they were lucky on both occasions.

In 15/16 UCL, they were lucky to get the easier draws till the final. And even in the easier draws, they were in such a dire situation that, at one point they were nearly going to be knocked out by a measly Wolfsburg team. In the finals, they won it on penalties, because Griezmann missed a pen.

In 16/17 UCL, they were so good that they finished second to Dortmund in group stages and got Napoli in round of 16, if its not luck then what??....And if you think the luck ends here, you are wrong. In the Quarter final, they were nearly going to be knocked out by the Bayern team. In the 1st leg, Bayern missed a penalty through Vidal, while in the 2nd leg, Bayern were dominating RM and were looking destined for a comeback win, but due to unfair refereeing and some luck, Casemiro escaped a second yellow and instead Vidal was booked and sent off. As a result, Bayern were left with 10 men and then Madrid prevailed due to a man advantage and scored late goals.

I am, by no means saying that Real madrid won them just because of sheer luck, they did delivered when it was needed by putting in performance after performance. But my point is that they needed luck in order to win back to back UCL.

Because at the end of the day, what matters is the Result and we got a desirable one in the first leg against Chelsea.

Exactly and I really hope this year's luck, draws and refereeing errors will favor Barca to win the CL final!

 

[Lelouch vi Britannia]

If you weren't 13, I would be really worried about you.

And there’s the “13 yearz old” argument

Are you going to insult my mom next?

 

[Ken_rosseneri]

City has already played at Stamford Bridge, so we already can compare the results: they won 0-1, we had 1-1 draw, so the difference is that we conceded one goal and they didn't.

That wasn't the only difference.. Man city outplayed Chelsea very well.. possessions, chances also.. we didn't have a chance until the mistake from their defender no that was it.. that's all we did the entire game... let's not be biased

 

[Ken_rosseneri]

I heard Vidal wants to move in the summer, we could have a workhorse who is good at passing. Alhough I heard he is an alcoholic and likes to party... But I guess drunk Vidal is better than sober Paulinho

Worse horse this worse horse that.. this notion of having a work horse is stupid AF... who's the workhorse in Madrid? Man city?PSG? who was the work horse wen pep coached us?? All players should fucking run and do their job.. don't need no workhorse.. ridiculous

 

[serghei]

That wasn't the only difference.. Man city outplayed Chelsea very well.. possessions, chances also.. we didn't have a chance until the mistake from their defender no that was it.. that's all we did the entire game... let's not be biased

City had very few quality chances too though. Their goal was a personal achievement by De Bruyne. And only won 1-0. United lost 1-0. Chelsea won away to Tottenham 2-1. Drew away with Liverpool 1-1. Their problem was motivation against poorer teams. In derbies they were strong and very hard to beat and showed a very good defense.

 

[henias]

I heard Vidal wants to move in the summer, we could have a workhorse who is good at passing. Alhough I heard he is an alcoholic and likes to party... But I guess drunk Vidal is better than sober Paulinho

Problem is accomodating both Rakitic and Paulinho, if we can get a player that has both their attributes, decent long passing and good physicality. Rakitic for one is terribly slow but if we are to break the bus, I prefer Rakitic for his control. We still really need an upgrade from Rakitic because he hardly offers anything other than passing.

 

[Joan]

Some matches are not comparable. Chelsea was prepared, studied our game well, they were fresh and they went for it.

Conclusions like 'Chelsea lost to City at Stamford Bridge, imagine what City would do to us' are childish and pointless.
Not saying City wouldn't beat us, to be clear. I don't have a clue.

 

[LeeRomeno]

Subjective opinion? How about you then leaving me alone for thinking that lucho is average? AFAI remeber yu were the one who quoted me and started this lucho isn't average crap. Here is something you should know. I consider lucho average, most barca fans consider him average and most football fans consider him average too. And that is a fact.

Yes average coaches deliver trophies. Scolari is a shit coach and everyone knows that and he won brazil the WC. Because that brazil team was once in a generation kind. Same as our barca under lucho. Stop boring me now specially when you consider that subjective opinions are a thing.

OMG, your original quote was this "Who would have said after the treble season that lucho was an average manager?"
Which should ring every alarm bell in every thinking person. Coaches just dont go from great to average in a matter of season lol. What kind of kindergarten logic is this: win treble - great manager, not win treble next season - average. Which is why subjective forum troll opinion means shit really.