Lucho himself claims that there has been no tactical changes since the defeat against Anoeta.
The team started to perform better due to our two most imminent individuals (Messi especially and Neymar). Not due to some revolutionary tactically changes from Lucho. Anyway my premise from the start was that the 11-game winning steak is not the real level of the team this season. I very much hope that I will be wrong but I doubt it.
We didn't just get 3 wins against Atletico, have the likes of Pique, Messi, Neymar, etc. go on peak form, and tie Pep's best win record immediately after our absolute worst state as a club without any changes. That's just naive. There's more to see than just 'Messi is scoring and assisting, Neymar is scoring=good team". Our passing transition improved (a good reason as to why we've been able to adjust the pace of our verticality at will), Alves' offensive role changed, Rakitic's support role became much more deliberate and effective in helping Messi. We tactically outclassed Atleti in the league and CDR, hitting them fast and on the break when we wanted to. We displayed great tactical maturity against an extremely in form Villarreal team as well. The quality of our overall play improving is NOT just because Neymar upped his conversion rate and Messi decided to play better. The improvement of the system helped them as much as they've helped us. It's just lazy to say that Messi and Neymar orchestrated a team-wide improvement just by being on form.
Is Lucho revolutionary? No, these changes aren't miraculous or paradigm-shifting. They are, however, an example of him doing the right thing. Playing to our strengths and getting the team to perform.
There was close to no other options. Pushing Alves and Alba upfront as permanent wingers would have guaranteed a presence on the wings at least. There was zero room in front of the penalty box. A lucky deflection or a precise flat cross was the team's best option of scoring today. That or a free kick.
He should have subbed Pedro on right after the half-time. There was no need to wait. Rafinha was invincible. The team needed firepower up front.
You omitted the unexplainable substitution of Mascherano? What was he actually going to contribute with offensively speaking? He had Xavi on the bench.
We had plenty of presence on the wings. Alves/Alba/Messi were often attacking on the wings with direct balls to the middle. Pushing the fullbacks up permanently would've just made it a more static presence instead of their usual late runs. 'Presence on the wings' offers no explanation as to how playing Alves/Alba higher would have changed the game (they'd be giving the same output more or less).
Rakitic was subbed for Rafinha, not Pedro. Pedro for Iniesta could've been done at the same time as the Raki sub but you really can't have expected that to change much. It didn't change much later on as Pedro couldn't provide a new avenue for penetration. You bring up Xavi again yet I'm puzzled as to how you think Xavi could possibly help the team? His history against parked buses speaks for itself, we would've been more stale if anything. He's not a better set piece taker than Rakitic or better with offensive runs/shooting so he couldn't have provided a lone, spontaneous moment of fortune either. Mascherano's sub was to play a 3-4-3, which ultimately proved to be a lateral change and not one that really helped/hurt us. Xavi wouldn't have been any better.
As for the whole "has not changed the course of a match with tactical changes" criticism, I find that to be a pretty bullshit criteria but even that can be deemed false considering the Almeria win where he subbed Suarez on after HT (playing Messi deep and Suarez up top helped us create chances, namely Suarez assisting 2 for the comeback win). I'd classify that match as one of Lucho's low points where he was fortunate to walk away with all 3 points but it technically is an example of him 'changing a match' with subs and adjustments.
Málaga were not lucky at all nor brutal. Gracia outclassed Lucho tactically (one again mind you) and unlike FCB they played with real desire and were committed to running their asses of. None of that was visible from Lucho's team despite FCB having much, much more to play for and despite playing at home.
They were lucky, there were a number of bad refereeing decisions. They were lucky to have a goal early on due to Alves's error. They were lucky that this caused the team's momentum to die out as time went by and they had the luxury to just sit back and defend (we were building some good attacks in the first half).
Tactically, they did play the right system to win. Park the bus in the box, leave the wings with literally no markers, and crowd Messi whenever he gets the ball. We kind of fell for it and decided that crossing was our best chance of winning, which is pretty unreliable. As I said, we would have been better off using the same approach we did against Atletico: play without patience and hit them on the counter. This game was a bad game but not evidence of a systemic failure. Lucho may not be "the one" but I won't blame this match on him and I'll continue to give him the benefit of the doubt for the near future as he's done practically all he can to deserve it.
