Ivan Rakitić

[mc_lovin]

It's different. That team with Xavi and Iniesta had two things this team doesn't have:

1. they pressed like crazy when they lost the ball together with attackers
2. that team had ball possession and control this team can only dream about

Because of that Arthur defending flaws are much more problematic and obvious than those of Xavi or Iniesta.

I just dont get what your (or BBZs for that matter) endgame is. Defensive workhorses (or bigger guys like Rakitic) wont fix our problems. Never have, never will. Remember our glorious, defensive 4-4-2 against Roma? Or Rakitic-Vidal against Liverpool? We simply cant compensate Messi, Busquets and Suarez. Not with two Frenkies and Kante at DM. So, just stick to our talents and build with them in the near future.

I would rather have Arthur post Messi than someone like Vidal or Rakitic in their prime. Trust the talent.

 

[ini4ever]

BBz's posts length increase every day god damn what is this black magic and its growing stronger. I like how DonAndres debunks BBz posts off an on tho.

 

[tacticvarium]

David Villa: "It's better to leave football before football leaves me"

Suárez, Rakitić, Busquets, Piqué should all learn from this legend and his dignity.

 

[vegitot]

I'll reply here.
Well, of course that there are 100s of factors.
But still:
1. even if Frenkie and Arthur were perfect=people here would have defended them, since remember: a psychological urge to have "hopes" for a better future and Frenkie-Arthur are pillars of those dreams currently
2. on the other hand, if Arthur-Frenkie were way below expectations, what do you think that people here would say? Do you think that they would give up from them easily?
I mean, look at it this way: if those two are meh or not as good as expected, then what is there to look forward to in our team?
Our core is old and done.
La Masia kids are very average.
And the only lights of hope are Frenkie and Arthur.

Exactly the same happened with Dembele for 2 years.
Regardless if he played world class of horrible, replies were the same.
UNTIL people (in the same moment) gave up from him and built new pillars in Arthur and Frenkie.

So, Serghei says that it is hard to talk with me since I am not listening.
But on the other hand, try to look at it from my perspective: whatever happens, people will say the same things and they will maybe lower their guard ONLY if Arthur/Frenkie will flop as horribly as Dembele/Coutinho.
And since that won't happen, and they will probably float somewhere in between: awesome, average or weaker than expected, that opens doors for 100s of alibies.

Since we are arguing here, no problem, let's take it to the next level.
My personal eye test says that our team and midfield is in the worst state since Lucho's 3rd season.

I'll use numbers. And they are my estimation, so don't take them as fact or something to troll about, since they are just my estimation.
So, imo:
Midfield from last season, even Busi-Vidal-Raki:
Offense: 5/10
Possession: 6/10
Defense: 7/10
Ability to avoid pressure: 3/10

A new midfield, consisted of Frenkie-Arthur-someone:
Offense: 5/10
Possession: 6/10
Defense: 4/10
Ability to avoid pressure: 8/10

So, basically, we gained a lot ONLY in press resistance.
But our defending in midfield is shakier, possession is more or less the same (Frenkie-Arthur are better in keeping possession than guys from the last season, but since they are bad at defending, they lose a lot of energy and time to get the ball back, plus we are allowing more shots, of course).
In attack, they are way weaker than everything what I have seen since Fabio Rochemback.

Now, someone will reply: but Xavi and Iniesta weren't that great in attack.
I'll use stats from 2009/10 La Liga, since this is the 1st season on Whoscored:
Check this:
Key passes:
3,2 Xavi 2010
1,4 Iniesta 2010
1,0 Arthur
1,0 Frenkie
= total:
Xavi+Iniesta=4,6 key passes per match
Frenkie+Arthur=2,0 key passes per match

Defending:
Tackles:
1,7 Frenkie
1,5 Iniesta 2010
1,2 Xavi 2010
0,9 Arthur

Interceptions:
1,4 Xavi 2010
1,2 Iniesta 2010
0,8 Frenkie
0,4 Arthur

Total, tackles+interceptions per match:
Xavi+Iniesta=2,7 tackles+2,6 interceptions=5,3 in total per match
Frenkie+Arthur=2,6 tackles+1,2 interceptions=3,8 in total per match

So, Xavi+Iniesta weren't CRAZY creators, but still they were creating way more than today.
Also, Xavi and Iniesta were a duo without a true CAM, and we usually always had CAMs in the past.
So, people won't like to hear this, but this is the most sterile midfield duo since around 2003'.
And on top of that, if they were at least awesome in keeping possession and defending, but not.
Frenkie has quite low numbers for a defensive midfielder.
And Arthur's defensive numbers are quite horrible.

And now, you guys say: Frenkie should be a pivot.
But he is quite light in this moment and weaker than our other pivots over years.
Whether he will improve defensively, we will see.
So, if Frenkie is a pivot, then our defense is shaky and then you need someone to cover him.
And who will cover him? A slow Arthur who has very bad defensive stats?

Then, if Frenkie is too light currently for a pivot, the only option is to bench him or play him as a CM.
And if you play him as a CM, what to do with Arthur?
Arthur is even worse as a lone pivot.
So, Arthur has to be a ANOTHER Cm.
But then we come to a new problem=those two are some sort of hybrids between a pivot and a CM, and if you play them both as a CMs, they aren't too creative in attack, what we can see in our matches lately.
Then the only option is to put finished Busi as a pivot, and he is dead on every counter.
So, in this moment, when Frenkie-Arthur have to play, no matter what you do, defense will be shaky and attack will be sterile.

Then people say: we need an attacking guy next to him.
Fine, that could solve our creative problems.
But then, what will be with defense?
Frenkie is light in defense for now, and he ventures into attack all the time.
Arthur is meh to bad in defending.

Now, let's go back to my first part of the post when I posted numbers about our midfield from the last season:
Raki-Vidal-Busi wasn't creative.
But it was somewhat equal to Arthur-Frenkie, since both Vidal and Raki played as CAMs for years.
While the defending in midfield was way better.

These are stats from Rakitic-Vidal from last season (La Liga) compared with the best midfield duo from this season (Frenkie-Arthur):
Key passes:
1,0 Frenkie 2020
1,0 Arthur 2020
0,7 Vidal 2019
0,5 Rakitic 2019
= total:
Frenkie+Arthur 2020=2,0 key passes per match
Rakitic+Vidal 2019=1,2 key passes per match

Defending:
Tackles:
2,4 Vidal 2019
1,7 Frenkie
0,9 Rakitic 2019
0,9 Arthur

Interceptions:
1,5 Rakitic 2019
0,9 Vidal 2019
0,8 Frenkie
0,4 Arthur

Clearances (headers):
0,8 Rakitic 2019
0,6 Vidal 2019
0,3 Frenkie
0,3 Arthur

Defending per match, total:
Rakitic+Vidal 2019=3,3 tackles+2,4 interceptions+1,4 clearances=7,1 successful defensive actions per match
Frenkie+Arthur 2020=2,6 tackles+1,2 interceptions+0,6 clearances=4,4 successful defensive actions per match

So, in this moment, stats say:
= that we traded an improvement of 0,8 key passes per match for a loss of -2,7 defensive actions per match.
Also, even though Frenkie+Arthur brought a slight improvement in key passes:
Vidal scored 24 league goals in the last 5 years.
Rakitic scored 24 league goals in the last 5 years.
Rakitic added 24 assists and Vidal 20.
That means that Rakitic had on average 5 league goals and 5 assists in La Liga.
And Vidal offered 5 goals and 4 assists.
Combined, Rakitic and Vidal offered roughly 10 league goals and 9 assists.
This season, we played 12 matches, which is around 1/3rd of all la liga matches.
They have 3 goals and 4 assists for now, but let's see whether they will reach a total of 10 goals combined until the end of a season (since Arthur had 0 goals in the last season in 2200 minutes, so we have to see whether he will maintain his scoring numbers).

So, as numbers say in this moment:
1. we gained +0,8 key passes per game
2. we have probably lost some goals since Arthur-Frenkie combined aren't scorers in this moment
3. we have lost 2,7 defensive contributions per match without Rakitic-Vidal

On the eye test: we probably play somewhat nicer with these two new CMs and we are surely better in press resistance.
But then, since 90% of teams aren't attacking us at Camp Nou, what is a use of press resistance at all?
On away La Liga games, we survived in the last 2 seasons even without press resistance, and we were murdered in a CL.
So, there is not too much use of our new skill: press resistance EXCEPT on Anfield.

So, when we sum it all:
1. we gained little or almost nothing in key passes
2. we gained nothing in terms of scoring or lost some goals with a new midfield pair
3. we lost quite a lot in terms of defending (2,7 balls per match)
4. we probably lost chemistry and automatism in defending
We gained:
1. Frenkie's kilometers
2. press resistance
3. nice ball movement on home matches and nothing on away matches since we are destroyed in defense and all over a place

Now, when you sum it all, are you guys 100% sure that Frenkie-Arthur aren't guilty at all for our team being all over the place in this season?
Ok, there are bigger problems in a team, but this change for now hasn't improved a team at all.
Yet, people here are writing songs about the best duo in the world.

Now, let's go back to Rakitic and my first post.
He said that he is not sure why he isn't playing anymore.
Then Edmond and guys started to make fun out of him.
I replied: your post sounds as if our midfield plays good this season.
Then you have 10 other guys making fun and writing 100s of random excuses.
And then you have my numbers which should raise some questions.

So, even Raki's question why he is not playing isn't THAT CRAZY considering that a new midfield plays worse than the old midfield.

Now, before replying, take a breath.
Look at Arthur's and Frenkie's attacking and defensive numbers.
And try to think about them for a while without offering crazy alibies: 6 attackers aren't moving (but Raki-Vidal played with the same attackers only 5 Months ago).
Or a midfield is crap because Messi-Suarez aren't defending (but Raki-Vidal played with the same players only 5 Months ago and had way better defensive numbers).
Or: EV is a reason, how can you NOT see that? (And again: EV was here even 5 Months ago, and Raki-Vidal STILL had way better defensive numbers).

So, yeah, I'll be the first one to point some fingers into our 2 sacred cows
Now, insert 100s of random insults, as always

** Edit: Vidal's numbers in defense are probably way higher, since Whoscored counts tackles per match and he often played only 10-30 minutes.
So, the difference lost is probably higher than 2,7 won ball per match, and probably around 3,0 or 3,5 per match.
Over 10 league matches, that is already 30-35 more actions around our box and probably 15-20 more shots towards Mats.
Or 50-ish additional shots on our goal per league season.
Those are not small numbers...

iniesta was injured through 2009-2010 season though.
he should have had higher stats if he had been healthy

 

[Messigician]

Looking at any numbers in this case just tells nothing. There are moments when the stats tell something hidden, but this is not that case.

1. Users (most of the normal ones) are optimistic about FDJ and Arthur, because they look for future possibilities.
2. Rakitic is the past, he became slower and a bit clumsier than he ever was. No need to disguise your fading love and related Rakitic-disappointment taking on the entire midfield.
3. So far the entire team plays relatively bad and disappointing, no use to quote numbers to illustrate it, because it's not the midfield, it's the entire team.
4. No use of the repeated bashing on Dembele, when you are supposedly talking about something else.
5. Raketa10 is right, the midfield problem will improve when Busquests is on the bench and there's a new defensive MF.
6. In a tactically absolutely fucked up system, there's no use to analyze the things you subjectively try to, because the main poison is the lack of a useful system at present.
7. You again CREATE some numbers (Offense: 5/10, Possession: 6/10, etc.) then you argle-bargle with your new creations. It's something horrible and laughable.



You seemingly don't mind that, as a matter of fact, you count on it, so you could come up with the same things again.

Finally: You actually write these arguments for the 2-3 people who will rush to like it, just because it gives you at least a handful of people who seemingly agree.
NO, they don't. They have their own agendas, and use your time and texts to show counteractions to anything that is pragmatic or factual, see-able and obvious.
These are the weakest, cognitively worst, most biased, least rational users in this forum, and it is a shame on you that you've been actually seeking THEIR benediction, instead of occasionally listening to others, others who seemingly have a much broader view, compared to your own biased and ever repeated notions.

I prefer BBZs analysis to most of the unrealistic dreamers on here

 

[KingLeo10]

Lol @ comparing Iniesta and Xavi's creativity/attacking output to Arthur and FDJ's.

1) Xavi and Iniesta are 2 of the top 5 midfielders of all time. All we're saying is that FDJ and Arthur are good and potentially world class with the right manager. No one's out there saying they'll be Xavi Iniesta. WE KNOW for certain that Rakitic is finished and along with Busquets was the main culprit for Roma and Anfield.

2) Xavi and Iniesta had a prime Messi, Eto'o, Henry, Villa at the end of their passes and Alves to supplement them. FDJ and Arthur have the carcass of Suarez, a hit or mostly miss Dembele, misfit Griezo, and an aged Messi

3) Xavi and Iniesta had one of the greatest attacking minds of all time unleashing them (Pep). FDJ and Arthur have to deal with the mid table Italian eunuch that is EV.

 

[KingLeo10]

I prefer BBZs analysis to most of the unrealistic dreamers on here

if you call THAT analysis, you're likely unemployed.

 

[te amo barca]

I prefer BBZs analysis to most of the unrealistic dreamers on here

you fawn over every BBZ post. Really didn't have to say that, we all know this already.

 

[Andresito]

Calling it - BBZ and Messigician are the same person.

The guy behind these accounts is very smart (very high IQ as some would say) and very dedicated (like a workhorse) to playing the villain role of the forum, making one of the accounts dumb and the other a troll.
When getting called out on their bullshit, one of them acts aggressively and the other very calmly.

This elaborate social experiement will end up getting the Nobel Prize

 

[Raketa10]

David Villa: "It's better to leave football before football leaves me"

Suárez, Rakitić, Busquets, Piqué should all learn from this legend and his dignity.

David Villa is 38y old and was playing in MLS.

 

[JohnN]

No amount of words per second will make rakitic of last year better than Arthur of this year. How anyone could say that our players are better, the midfield is worse, but the manager is not at fault is amazing. I have already answered this though, on the Arthur thread.

 

[tacticvarium]

David Villa is 38y old and was playing in MLS.

Hi Raki fanboy, but isn't he playing like 38 yo though?

 

[BBZ8800]

I'll reply tomorrow because I'm tired lol but I feel like you've took my response personally as opposed to just reading it as some healthy debate. I understand why because there is this whole BBZ vs the world on here but I've never had a debate with you on here so there's no need for the sarcastic comments ("Isn't THAT CRAZY", "before replying, take a breath") no need for that stuff, just comes across as rude.

Rory, you were the least rude, so this is why I have replied to you.
I didn't want to sound round towards you.
My reply was a general reply to a higher amount of users.

Sorry if it sounded harsh.
More about everything after KingLeo's post:

Lol @ comparing Iniesta and Xavi's creativity/attacking output to Arthur and FDJ's.

Look, guys.
I will be completely honest here.
Even though a lot of you are rude and trolling often (not you, Rory), I still consider as you "friends", since we are psychologically in the same tribe (Barca vs the world).
Even though we don't agree on a lot of views, we are still closer than with any other football fan out there.

Now, seriously, again, no offense, but:
1. I have often told you that a lot of you, younger guys who are either in teens or in early 20s, have really skewed views on Barca, our history and on a lot of players/La Masia due to Xavi/Iniesta/Messi.
Further, during our winning Pep'sm era, a lot of urban myths were created on internet (some even from our club) and people started to believe in them and those changed the view how you look at Barca or football.

Some examples. I will post a current popular opinion and my personal opinion:
1. the myth how La Masia is special and better than the other youth academies.
Ok, since me and some guys were trying to debunk this for 5 years, people slowly started to accept that La Masia is a normal academy.
For years, people believed (due to Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Busi) that La Masia is producing a pure gold.
But as I have asked you: even if we were the best, over time, some coaches, scouts, directors, players would have changed the clubs and they would tell our secrets to their new employees.
And eventually, other teams (even if we were golden, which we weren't): would start to copy us and close the gap.

Now, my answer: in reality, La Masia was good, but usually meh (except in 00s when we had a lucky generation).
And a question again: if La Masia is bad for 25 years (90s, 00s and 10s) and good for 5 years=which is more likely:
1) that it is good, and that people in charge are dumb today?
2) or that it is average, but we had a lucky streak for a few years?
On top of that, don't forget that we were the biggest cheaters: since we were buying the best underage kids from all over the world, which was not allowed.
And we had a monopoly over Spanish talents.
When you remove luck and cheating and how other clubs also have similar academies, you get a current La Maisa=it is what it is.
My point: forget about new Xavi and Iniestas, they will happen once in 30-50-100 years.

2. another myth which I see lately on forums is that Barca is the most successfull club and a project since Crujff.
I mean fine. But since 1988 to 2008, before Pep and prime Messi:
Barca has 8 La Liga titles
Real has 8 La Liga titles
Other teams have 4 La Liga titles

And THEN, since PRIME Messi (after 2008, we have):
Barca: 8 La Ligas
Real: 2 La Ligas
Other clubs: 1 La Liga

So, my point: BEFORE Messi, Crujff has elevated this club from being bad into a top2 clubs in Real, and we were tied with Real on top (8:8 La Ligas), but we still won "only" 8 La Ligas in 20 years, which is 2 out of 5 or 4 out of 10.
And then, after prime Messi, we turned into a 8 out 11 winners.
So: when people say that we are by far the best, our project blah blah... well Messi improved us insanely.
Without Messi, we would have probably stayed on a level of 4 La Ligas in 10 years, even with prime Xavi-Iniesta and Pep.

So, my point: we are not as good as these urban myths claim. And our project is not AS MAGICAL.
A huge part of our success since 2008 is on Messi.
So, the reality is: when Messi will be gone, we surely won't win 8 out of 11 La Ligas anymore.
But again, some younger fans are maybe believing in this hype and urban myths.

3. let's move forward: another problem (for me) is this "Messi thing".
Not only that he has improved our team a lot.
But also, he masked a lot of problems.
You guys know my opinion about classical Barca's DNA style.
In short, it is: it is the most beautiful style of play, but in terms of results, it usually isn't good enough on the highest level especially in CL KO matches.
A few weeks ago, I posted some numbers about Barca's CL's history since 1990':

*********************************************************
Percentage of wins at home:
76% Barca (200
73% Barca (1991-)
73% Pep
71% Crujff
67% Bayern (200
64% Real (200
57% Juve (200

Percentage of wins away:
46% Real (200
43% Juve (200
41% Bayern (200
28% Barca (200
23% Pep
22% Barca (1991-)
14% Crujff

Defeats at home:
3% Barca (200
10% Barca (1991-)
12% Pep
14% Crujff
21% Real (200
21% Juve (200
22% Bayern (200

Defeats away:
57% Crujff
46% Barca (1991-)
41% Barca (200
38% Pep
37% Bayern (200
36% Real (200
29% Juve (200

Goals scored per match at home:
3,23 Pep
2,83 Barca (2008)
2,66 Barca (1991)
2,67 Bayern
2,29 Crujff
2,18 Real
1,64 Juve

Goals scored per match away:
1,70 Bayern
1,57 Real
1,36 Juve
1,15 Pep
1,00 Barca (2008)
0,95 Barca (1991)
0,86 Crujff

Goals conceded per match at home:
0,72 Barca (2008)
0,83 Barca (1991)
0,86 Crujff
1,07 Real
1,11 Bayern
1,14 Juve
1,23 Pep

Goals conceded per match away:
1,59 Barca (1991-)
1,57 Crujff
1,52 Barca (2008)
1,35 Pep
1,33 Bayern
1,21 Real
0,93 Juve

Percentage of wins at home vs away:
71:14% Crujff (57 points difference)
73:22% Barca 1991 (51 points difference)
73:23% Pep (50 points difference)
76:28% Barca 2008 (48 points difference)
67:41% Bayern (26 points difference)
64:43% Juve (21 points difference)
64:46% Real (18 points difference)

Even now, with more stats and different eras and clubs, it is obvious:
1. Barca since 1991, Barca since 2008 and Pep=are GOATs of home matches and league matches
2. but BOTH Barca since 1991, Barca since 2008 and Pep=are worse than BOTH Real, Juve and Bayern in every single department regarding AWAY Champions league KO matches:
Less wins, more defeats, more goals conceded, less goals scored, the most likely to get hammered 3:0 etc.

And then, on one hand, you have revisionism and urban myths how we are insanely successful and good, while in reality, since 90s (when we have actually improved), we are REALLY, REALLY bad on every away CL KO match.
And now, the problem is that (imo), someone who watched Barca longer is maybe more realistic and can say:
1) we aren't THAT good. We are good, but more like Top 4-5-6 teams in Europe good.
And our play was usually the most eye-pleasing, nut the most often: tactically and defensively naive and thus we were usually losing season after season in the same fashion against everyone in Europe.
And here comes a problem: younger fans and Pep's era.
My opinion is that: Barca's DNA football in general is the most beautiful in the world, and that it is good for La Liga.
But in Europe, it is just too attacking and too naive.
Look at fathers Crujff and Pep: Crujff has only 14% of wins on away CL KO matches and mighty Pep only 23% in his whole career (even though he had Xavi-Messi-Iniesta for 4 years).
Then, you need to ask yourself: are we that good at all? And is our legendary system THAT good at all?
My answer is: it is not as good as it is hyped.
And now, not only that our system is nowhere near as good as hyped, you also have another problem: Pep's 4 years which skewed the opinion even more.
He turned one otherwise not so successful system into a winning system for 4 years and people now accepted that era as a norm.
While, for me, Pep's era was not a norm but an anomaly in otherwise 30 years of disappointing results, considering how much money we have invested and how beautiful we play.
Also, when you look at Pep's years:
1) not only that they are anomaly and by far the best result in our history
2) but also, our mortal nemesis, Italian clubs Juve and Milan were dead. Historically, in 90% of seasons, Barca is losing to the same few teams: Italians Juve and Milan, English teams who can run like crazy and play physical (Chelsea and Liverpool), and a german physical-technical-tactical team Bayern. We almost never lose to lighter teams in Europe.
Now, when Pep came, Italians were dead, so that means: from our 5 mortal enemies, we could have played with only 3 of them.
And even then, when we faced those rare mortal enemies (Chelsea in 2009, Inter in 2010, Chelsea in 2012), we again lost 2 out of 3 times (Inter 2010, Chelsea 2012) and we should have been knocked out by Chelsea due to refs in 2009 also.
So, when you look at it from this perspective, are we really THAT good in Europe?
And was Pep's era really AS GOOD?
Not to mention that Pep had the best player ever, Messi, paired with Xavi-Iniesta.
Now, when you sum it all:
1) we aren't that good in Europe as modern urban myths and revisionism story claim
2) even in our greatest era, Pep's era=we didn't have to play against Italians, and when we faced other physical teams, we lost almost all KO matches, AS ALWAYS from 90s till today
3) further, Pep had Messi, which we will have never again.
4) Pep had Xavi-Iniesta which will happen never again.

Now, here is the problem:
When I read our forum, my feeling is always as we have unwritten rules and opinions here who say: We are the best. Our style is the best. We should do everything to go back to that style and be the best again.
So, imo, there are 2 realities and 2 point of views here:
1. one reality, especially among younger fans who started to follow Barca since Pep=who believe that our style is the best, how it is a way to go, how it is a winning style etc.
2. then, imo a true reality, where Barca since 90s can win 1 out of 5 CL KO away matches. And where we almost always lose to more cautious, physical and pragmatic teams in a CL. And where our only successful era was Xavi-Iniesta-Messi era. paired with a fall of Italians due to their bankruptcy around 2005 and Juve getting relegated due to cheating.

And here comes the main problem, now you can add 2 views on Barca, our future, where we should go etc:
1. one view, like mine is=we are good and our roots is Barca's DNA football. But history has shown (except when you have Messi-Xavi-Iniesta), that our type of football most often isn't good enough in Europe. So, that means that we need to upgrade our Barca's football with more physique, running, mental strength, captains, different attacking weapons (like some headers against parked buses).
2. on the other hand, imo, an average fan aged 18-25 who started to follow football since Pep and Messi, believes=Barca is the best. Pep's football is the best (and if executed properly, it is unbeatable, lol), we should continue that way and go BACK to that era.

And that is a main problem.
My opinion is that our style needs upgrading.
While majority of fans believe that it is awesome, perfect and that we should actually GO BACK to those famous years.

Now add into maths players, movement, defending and everything, and people will measure everything with Pep's era and how we should do everything like back then.
And then, a problem of "Arthur".
It is quite obvious that people here like him because he resembles on Xavi in some aspects.
And if we had Arthur and his twin brother, people would probably say: let's play Arthur and his twin brother together, that is a way to go! We will return to our glorious era!
But really?
Was that a glorious era and a norm?
Or an anomally created by 100s of (lucky) coincidences in that era? I mean, a father Pep couldn't win a CL for 6 years with Bayern and City. He plays the same as back here. At Barca he was winning, at Bayern/City he is horrible.
Isn't it logical to ask a question=was it about a system, or more like: a system, Messi, Xavi-Iniesta, some luck, no Italians, TikiTaka hadn't been figured out then, luckier draw (not too many physical opponents) etc.

And then you get a main problem:
1. is our system a cure for everything?
2. or is our system a problem?

And then, regarding my post about Frenkie-Arthur=are those two an answer for all of our problems?
Or are they a return to our past where we had 10s of similar players (who were actually better in lots of aspects) and where we mostly sucked (since we didn't have Messi to save us)?

Btw, I am not saying that Frenkie-Arthur and similar isn't the way to go.
But our style NEEDS some modern era improvements.
And for me, Arthur looks like a player from late 90s or early 00s: slow, dwelling on a ball, meh in defense, meh physical etc.
Frenkie looks like a modern midfielder, but he is shit in the attacking 3rd and he is light in defense.
And now again, when you pair these 2 in this moment, you really get a meh attack and meh defending.

****************************************
So, anyway, in this moment there are really 2 options:
1. Frenkie and Arthur aren't that good in reality (when paired together)
2. and the other opinion, when you mix my previous posts:
1) people think that Barca's system is the best
2) people think that Pep's era is an unbeatable machine
3) people think that we should go back to the exact copy of that machine
4) people not realizing how flawed our system is since always, and it was saved by Messi for a short period of time, but otherwise=it is again extremely flawed, naive and shaky in defense (just like Barca at Rome, Anfield or Pep on any away match ever)
5) now add a psychological need for creating pillars of a brighter future, and those pillars are usually shiny, young players (who remind of our legendary players)
= and you get a recipe for a total delusion where people (especially younger fans) have 10s of reasons to create a scenario in their heads how Frenkie-Arthur HAVE to be the best combination no matter what, and how everything else must be flawed, and not them.

Now, once again, if some of you guys even SLIGHTLY open a door to a possibility that Barca's DNA system was always nice to watch and defensively shaky.
Are you 100% sure that a midfield consisted of Arthur who has really criminally low defensive numbers and Frenkie, who is quite light as a pivot for now=aren't guilty at all for our team going all over the place in this season?

I mean:
1. results, an objective team's factor=the worst since EV came
2. eye test=except on some moments on home matches, we look horrible, lost, all over the place, sterile and confused in the attacking 3rd and very poor in the defensive 3rd
3. individual objective factor, stats=Arthur and Frenkie have very bad defensive stats in this season, and their attacking record has always been way below Barca's level

Also, when some of you guys mention Anfield and similar, and a proof how Raki or Vidal were shit.
Just wait for Arthur-Frenkie and their KO matches this season.
What is worse, lately I have some fears that we will get knocked out in a group stage for the first time since 1999' and Van Gaal.
I mean, imagine if such a disaster happens.
Raki and Vidal were at least shit in CL's semis.
While today, we have a realistic chance to get KOd in a group stage.
And remember: Arthur-Frenkie created 0 chances in Dortmund.
We were eaten alive by Slavia in Prague and survived by luck.
At home vs Inter, it should have been 0:3 or 0:4 by the half time.

Guys, try to remove your dreams about a mighty Arthur-Frenkie duo and ask yourself: do they really have 0% guilt in our truly horrible performances this season?

 

[BBZ8800]

No amount of words per second will make rakitic of last year better than Arthur of this year. How anyone could say that our players are better, the midfield is worse, but the manager is not at fault is amazing. I have already answered this though, on the Arthur thread.

It is not about Rakitic.
You changed 2 players.
Our players who played the most in the 2nd part of the last season were: Busi-Rakitic-Vidal.

This season, we have: Busi-Frenkie-Arthur midfield.
As said before: you didn't get much (if any) in attack with the two new players.
You gained some press resistance and moving in midfield.
You lost a lot in defending and in the air.
You lost chemistry and automatism between defense, fullbacks and midfielders where they knew instinctively where to move and where their teammates are behind their backs.

This change is more of a hope, dreams and let's hope it will work out in the future than the actual improvement on a field in this moment.

I don't know, maybe it will start to click better in the future.
For now it is quite a disappointment.

 

[Rory]

I'll reply here.
Well, of course that there are 100s of factors.
But still:
1. even if Frenkie and Arthur were perfect=people here would have defended them, since remember: a psychological urge to have "hopes" for a better future and Frenkie-Arthur are pillars of those dreams currently
2. on the other hand, if Arthur-Frenkie were way below expectations, what do you think that people here would say? Do you think that they would give up from them easily?
I mean, look at it this way: if those two are meh or not as good as expected, then what is there to look forward to in our team?
Our core is old and done.
La Masia kids are very average.
And the only lights of hope are Frenkie and Arthur.

Exactly the same happened with Dembele for 2 years.
Regardless if he played world class of horrible, replies were the same.
UNTIL people (in the same moment) gave up from him and built new pillars in Arthur and Frenkie.

So, Serghei says that it is hard to talk with me since I am not listening.
But on the other hand, try to look at it from my perspective: whatever happens, people will say the same things and they will maybe lower their guard ONLY if Arthur/Frenkie will flop as horribly as Dembele/Coutinho.
And since that won't happen, and they will probably float somewhere in between: awesome, average or weaker than expected, that opens doors for 100s of alibies.

Since we are arguing here, no problem, let's take it to the next level.
My personal eye test says that our team and midfield is in the worst state since Lucho's 3rd season.

I'll use numbers. And they are my estimation, so don't take them as fact or something to troll about, since they are just my estimation.
So, imo:
Midfield from last season, even Busi-Vidal-Raki:
Offense: 5/10
Possession: 6/10
Defense: 7/10
Ability to avoid pressure: 3/10

A new midfield, consisted of Frenkie-Arthur-someone:
Offense: 5/10
Possession: 6/10
Defense: 4/10
Ability to avoid pressure: 8/10

So, basically, we gained a lot ONLY in press resistance.
But our defending in midfield is shakier, possession is more or less the same (Frenkie-Arthur are better in keeping possession than guys from the last season, but since they are bad at defending, they lose a lot of energy and time to get the ball back, plus we are allowing more shots, of course).
In attack, they are way weaker than everything what I have seen since Fabio Rochemback.

Now, someone will reply: but Xavi and Iniesta weren't that great in attack.
I'll use stats from 2009/10 La Liga, since this is the 1st season on Whoscored:
Check this:
Key passes:
3,2 Xavi 2010
1,4 Iniesta 2010
1,0 Arthur
1,0 Frenkie
= total:
Xavi+Iniesta=4,6 key passes per match
Frenkie+Arthur=2,0 key passes per match

Defending:
Tackles:
1,7 Frenkie
1,5 Iniesta 2010
1,2 Xavi 2010
0,9 Arthur

Interceptions:
1,4 Xavi 2010
1,2 Iniesta 2010
0,8 Frenkie
0,4 Arthur

Total, tackles+interceptions per match:
Xavi+Iniesta=2,7 tackles+2,6 interceptions=5,3 in total per match
Frenkie+Arthur=2,6 tackles+1,2 interceptions=3,8 in total per match

So, Xavi+Iniesta weren't CRAZY creators, but still they were creating way more than today.
Also, Xavi and Iniesta were a duo without a true CAM, and we usually always had CAMs in the past.
So, people won't like to hear this, but this is the most sterile midfield duo since around 2003'.
And on top of that, if they were at least awesome in keeping possession and defending, but not.
Frenkie has quite low numbers for a defensive midfielder.
And Arthur's defensive numbers are quite horrible.

And now, you guys say: Frenkie should be a pivot.
But he is quite light in this moment and weaker than our other pivots over years.
Whether he will improve defensively, we will see.
So, if Frenkie is a pivot, then our defense is shaky and then you need someone to cover him.
And who will cover him? A slow Arthur who has very bad defensive stats?

Then, if Frenkie is too light currently for a pivot, the only option is to bench him or play him as a CM.
And if you play him as a CM, what to do with Arthur?
Arthur is even worse as a lone pivot.
So, Arthur has to be a ANOTHER Cm.
But then we come to a new problem=those two are some sort of hybrids between a pivot and a CM, and if you play them both as a CMs, they aren't too creative in attack, what we can see in our matches lately.
Then the only option is to put finished Busi as a pivot, and he is dead on every counter.
So, in this moment, when Frenkie-Arthur have to play, no matter what you do, defense will be shaky and attack will be sterile.

Then people say: we need an attacking guy next to him.
Fine, that could solve our creative problems.
But then, what will be with defense?
Frenkie is light in defense for now, and he ventures into attack all the time.
Arthur is meh to bad in defending.

Now, let's go back to my first part of the post when I posted numbers about our midfield from the last season:
Raki-Vidal-Busi wasn't creative.
But it was somewhat equal to Arthur-Frenkie, since both Vidal and Raki played as CAMs for years.
While the defending in midfield was way better.

These are stats from Rakitic-Vidal from last season (La Liga) compared with the best midfield duo from this season (Frenkie-Arthur):
Key passes:
1,0 Frenkie 2020
1,0 Arthur 2020
0,7 Vidal 2019
0,5 Rakitic 2019
= total:
Frenkie+Arthur 2020=2,0 key passes per match
Rakitic+Vidal 2019=1,2 key passes per match

Defending:
Tackles:
2,4 Vidal 2019
1,7 Frenkie
0,9 Rakitic 2019
0,9 Arthur

Interceptions:
1,5 Rakitic 2019
0,9 Vidal 2019
0,8 Frenkie
0,4 Arthur

Clearances (headers):
0,8 Rakitic 2019
0,6 Vidal 2019
0,3 Frenkie
0,3 Arthur

Defending per match, total:
Rakitic+Vidal 2019=3,3 tackles+2,4 interceptions+1,4 clearances=7,1 successful defensive actions per match
Frenkie+Arthur 2020=2,6 tackles+1,2 interceptions+0,6 clearances=4,4 successful defensive actions per match

So, in this moment, stats say:
= that we traded an improvement of 0,8 key passes per match for a loss of -2,7 defensive actions per match.
Also, even though Frenkie+Arthur brought a slight improvement in key passes:
Vidal scored 24 league goals in the last 5 years.
Rakitic scored 24 league goals in the last 5 years.
Rakitic added 24 assists and Vidal 20.
That means that Rakitic had on average 5 league goals and 5 assists in La Liga.
And Vidal offered 5 goals and 4 assists.
Combined, Rakitic and Vidal offered roughly 10 league goals and 9 assists.
This season, we played 12 matches, which is around 1/3rd of all la liga matches.
They have 3 goals and 4 assists for now, but let's see whether they will reach a total of 10 goals combined until the end of a season (since Arthur had 0 goals in the last season in 2200 minutes, so we have to see whether he will maintain his scoring numbers).

So, as numbers say in this moment:
1. we gained +0,8 key passes per game
2. we have probably lost some goals since Arthur-Frenkie combined aren't scorers in this moment
3. we have lost 2,7 defensive contributions per match without Rakitic-Vidal

On the eye test: we probably play somewhat nicer with these two new CMs and we are surely better in press resistance.
But then, since 90% of teams aren't attacking us at Camp Nou, what is a use of press resistance at all?
On away La Liga games, we survived in the last 2 seasons even without press resistance, and we were murdered in a CL.
So, there is not too much use of our new skill: press resistance EXCEPT on Anfield.

So, when we sum it all:
1. we gained little or almost nothing in key passes
2. we gained nothing in terms of scoring or lost some goals with a new midfield pair
3. we lost quite a lot in terms of defending (2,7 balls per match)
4. we probably lost chemistry and automatism in defending
We gained:
1. Frenkie's kilometers
2. press resistance
3. nice ball movement on home matches and nothing on away matches since we are destroyed in defense and all over a place

Now, when you sum it all, are you guys 100% sure that Frenkie-Arthur aren't guilty at all for our team being all over the place in this season?
Ok, there are bigger problems in a team, but this change for now hasn't improved a team at all.
Yet, people here are writing songs about the best duo in the world.

Now, let's go back to Rakitic and my first post.
He said that he is not sure why he isn't playing anymore.
Then Edmond and guys started to make fun out of him.
I replied: your post sounds as if our midfield plays good this season.
Then you have 10 other guys making fun and writing 100s of random excuses.
And then you have my numbers which should raise some questions.

So, even Raki's question why he is not playing isn't THAT CRAZY considering that a new midfield plays worse than the old midfield.

Now, before replying, take a breath.
Look at Arthur's and Frenkie's attacking and defensive numbers.
And try to think about them for a while without offering crazy alibies: 6 attackers aren't moving (but Raki-Vidal played with the same attackers only 5 Months ago).
Or a midfield is crap because Messi-Suarez aren't defending (but Raki-Vidal played with the same players only 5 Months ago and had way better defensive numbers).
Or: EV is a reason, how can you NOT see that? (And again: EV was here even 5 Months ago, and Raki-Vidal STILL had way better defensive numbers).

So, yeah, I'll be the first one to point some fingers into our 2 sacred cows
Now, insert 100s of random insults, as always

** Edit: Vidal's numbers in defense are probably way higher, since Whoscored counts tackles per match and he often played only 10-30 minutes.
So, the difference lost is probably higher than 2,7 won ball per match, and probably around 3,0 or 3,5 per match.
Over 10 league matches, that is already 30-35 more actions around our box and probably 15-20 more shots towards Mats.
Or 50-ish additional shots on our goal per league season.
Those are not small numbers...

Thought I'd reply to this post but thank you for apologising and agreed I disagree with half of what you say but appreciate that you're obviously a devoted fan and so we are all of course friends. If we were ruling the world as we were in the pep era I could imagine conversations would be much more friendly amongst posters (or maybe not I wasn't on the forum then lol).

Just a few statistics I wanted to look at which I thought were contrary to what you were saying:

2018/2019 la liga season according to Whoscored Rakitic was dribbled past 0.7 times per game, Arthur this season is 0.1 per game. I would say this should also be lumped in with the defensive stats because if you are dribbled past in the midfield then chances are the team is attacking with a chance for a goal. Of course statistics are all a bit meh because an interception could be something like a player totally cocking up a pass but I feel like you trust statistics quite a lot so I will do them the same justice for the sake of the discussion.

2018/2019 la liga season Rakitic passes blocked 0.7, Arthur this season 0.8. Only very slight advantage but when you add up the differences between these two stats and then apply them to the 0.8 key passes in exchange for -2.7 defensive contributions it becomes 0.8 key passes for -2.0 defensive contributions. Still a bit of a trade off but less so now.

However, what we do need to factor in even if it sounds like protecting forum darlings which yes it does happen here. Frenkie is brand new and has only just arrived, he didn't get to do a pre season with Arthur, Vidal was also at the copa america. Messi was injured which like it or not did alter our football/intensity etc.

But focusing on Frenkie being new alone, for a new midfield to have formed this year with such little time with a deficit to previous midfields of -2.0 defensive contributions but increased key passes and able to keep hold of the ball a lot better I would argue that the midfield is certainly not able to be classed as "Better" this year (statistically speaking anyway) but it is by no means "worse".

Also what has to be factored in is that Vidal is a cdm and Arthur a cm. When arthur has been playing with Busquets and Frenkie which has been the case for a few games this year he doesn't have the priority of defending as much. A midfield three of Arthur, Frenkie and Vidal seems best with the squad we have and this would surely take away any defensive deficit coming from the midfield this year and even add to offensive? That's why I just don't agree it's worse this year, statistically the evidence is kind of inconclusive when factoring in a midfield 3.

Just want to point out also when Arthur came on in the second half to score for 2-1, that similarly to Vidal has been missed by statistics counting it as any other game so it's not just one way here.

I think it's probably wise to just see what happens this season before we extrapolate statistics achieved so far. Otherwise arthur will be on 10 goals for the entire season, which I don't think will happen.

So to summarise the midfield is about as good/bad as it has been the last couple of years but this year we have the addition of a new player who's preseason with the current two best options for a midfield 3 (in my opinion) consisted of first team games. And yet the statistical performance of this midfield hasn't been largely worse defensively and has been slightly better offensively. I think it will only improve and is worth being somewhat excited over.