Luis Enrique

[M3ls]

1. Stop treating it as real news. It's annoying the things that you say as if they were facts

2. Mbappe is not Messi. Pressing Coaches like Pep and Klopp mention Messi is the very few exception who doesn't need to defend. Knowing Lucho, he will fall in that category too.

3. Research better. It's not hard to find the reason of the spat.

I mention this because I am well aware that what I say is 100% true. I'm very good at making cause and effect connections.

As for Klopp and Pep, I know exactly why they say that.

Now forget what Klopp says in public and watch how they (Klopp and his team) have been preparing behind the scenes for this match and taking advantage of Leo's (and Suarez's) shortcomings in playing without the ball.

18:21

And you're going to tell me about Klopp's valid belief that Messi can be completely free of defensive work. I swear, that's bullshit. It goes against the principles of both Guardiola and Klopp.

Yes, they may be politically correct in public, but neither Pep nor Klopp would want a player in the team who is completely ineffective without the ball, no matter how much of a genius on the ball he is.

 

[M3ls]

Don't teach me football. I understand it a thousand times better than you do. I see football differently than you do, because I also have experience as an analyst and have read a lot of papers and watched a lot of coaches' lectures. You're just a fan who counts goals and assists.

 

[soul24rage]

I mention this because I am well aware that what I say is 100% true. I'm very good at making cause and effect connections.

As for Klopp and Pep, I know exactly why they say that.

Now watch how they have been preparing behind the scenes for this match and taking advantage of Leo's (and Suarez's) shortcomings in playing without the ball.

18:21

What does that video have to with the discussion that we are talking about? Do please tell me why Klopp and Pep said that then, especially with Klopp who is not involved with Barca or Messi whatsoever.

You can't even find me a good source of why Enrique and Messi spat and you are basing things based on feelings and emotions like you are known for and not with hard cold facts.

Messi is living rent free in your head, let it go.

 

[soul24rage]

Don't teach me football. I understand it a thousand times better than you do. I see football differently than you do, because I also have experience as an analyst and have read a lot of papers and watched a lot of coaches' lectures. You're just a fan who counts goals and assists.

You should do a lot more reading and watching lectures because every analysis that you made about Messi is incorrect

 

[TheStig]

We haven't seen a 2nd stint for Barca coach since LVG over 21 years ago. I won't be so sure of it.

Lucho said Laporta aproached him to replace Xavi but he couldn't give him any guarantees in the middle of the season that Lucho wanted so it didn't happen. He also said he would like to return to Barca one day when he's out of contract and Barca are looking for a manager.

Luis Enrique reveals he could have returned to Barcelona before Xavi’s exit

Former Barcelona manager Luis Enrique, who currently manages Paris Saint-Germain, has made a revelation that he could have returned to Blaugrana, even before Xavi had left his position at the club. T...

sports.yahoo.com

We all know Xavi's love for Barca and it's probably the only top club that he could coach, could see him return one day.

I'm 100% sure one of them will be a Barca manager at some point in the next 5 years.

 

[M3ls]

What does that video have to with the discussion that we are talking about? Do please tell me why Klopp and Pep said that then, especially with Klopp who is not involved with Barca or Messi whatsoever.

You can't even find me a good source of why Enrique and Messi spat and you are basing things based on feelings and emotions like you are known for and not with hard cold facts.

Messi is living rent free in your head, let it go.

It has a direct correlation.

You say what Klopp said about Leo being able to afford not to work without the ball. Yes, he said it in public, but behind the scenes in the Barcelona match he exploited that flaw in Leo Messi's play against us. And I provided the video fact.

And you're telling me now that Klopp actually believes that any player can be relieved without the ball? That's nonsense. His words were just political correctness.

As for Enrique. Earlier I cited a video where Enrique clearly defines his playing principles - it doesn't matter to him how many goals you make and score - when the team is without the ball, you have to work. In his opinion, that's what a true leader is.

Leo Messi is the worst player in the world when it comes to defensive work (admittedly, when he overcomes his laziness and goes into pressing, pressing, tackling, he does it very successfully), and Enrique is a man with the principles he voiced in the video, and he is not ready to sacrifice his football principles and style of play (which is based on dominance, possession, pressing) for the sake of compromise.

So, what could Messi and Enrique's conflict be about? Let's take a guess, shall we?


Barcelona had a coach - Valverde. In my opinion - a very cool coach, a great tactician, even before he came to Barcelona his Bilbao were one of the most (if not the most) pressing teams in La Liga. But what happened when he came to Barcelona? He realized that you can't defend effectively without the ball and press when you have Leo (and Suarez) in your team. And that's when we saw the 4-4-2 with the low block, etc, etc. We saw Vidal, Paulinho in the BARCELONA midfield. Why did Barcelona get these guys? They are players not in the format of this team. It's simple - they took them to compensate for Leo's (and Suarez's) terrible play without the ball. Fans berated Valverde for boring football, but Valverde was hostage to Leo's (and his friend Suarez, who followed suit) unwillingness to work without the ball.

Valverde made compromises in everything, which is why the amigos loved him.

The difference between Enrique and Valverde is that Enrique is a tougher and more principled man who was not willing to sacrifice his footballprinciples to compromise with Leo Messi.

 

[soul24rage]

It has a direct correlation.

You say what Klopp said about Leo being able to afford not to work without the ball. Yes, he said it in public, but behind the scenes in the Barcelona match he exploited that flaw in Leo Messi's play against us. And I provided the video fact.

And you're telling me now that Klopp actually believes that any player can be relieved without the ball? That's nonsense. His words were just political correctness.

As for Enrique. Earlier I cited a video where Enrique clearly defines his playing principles - it doesn't matter to him how many goals you make and score - when the team is without the ball, you have to work. In his opinion, that's what a true leader is.

Leo Messi is the worst player in the world when it comes to defensive work (admittedly, when he overcomes his laziness and goes into pressing, pressing, tackling, he does it very successfully), and Enrique is a man with the principles he voiced in the video, and he is not ready to sacrifice his soccer principles and style of play (which is based on dominance, possession, pressing) for the sake of compromise.

So, what could Messi and Enrique's conflict be about? Let's take a guess, shall we?


Barcelona had a coach, Valverde. In my opinion - a very cool coach, a great tactician, even before he came to Barcelona his Bilbao were one of the most (if not the most) pressing teams in La Liga. But what happened when he came to Barcelona? He realized that you can't defend effectively without the ball and press when you have Leo (and Suarez) in your team. And that's when we saw the 4-4-2 with the low block, etc, etc. We saw Vidal, Paulinho in the BARCELONA midfield. Why did Barcelona get these guys? They are players not in the format of this team. It's simple - they took them to compensate for Leo's (and Suarez's) terrible play without the ball. Fans berated Valverde for boring soccer, but Valverde was hostage to Leo's (and his friend Suarez, who followed suit) unwillingness to work without the ball.

Valverde made compromises in everything, which is why the amigos loved him.

The difference between Enrique and Valverde is that Enrique is a tougher and more principled man who was not willing to sacrifice his soccer principles to compromise with Leo Messi.

A lot of words and fluffs, but no real meaning like usual

Klopp - he simps for Messi (you can find a lot of evidence online if you know how to research). No reason at all to bring the topic in public of Messi not defending if he doesn't believe in it.

Lucho - Again, research online about the spat. It's there.

EV - Paulinho and Vidal are squad players (Vidal and Messi were the only 2 players who showed up in Anfield). Pep had Keita in his Barcelona midfield, which is the most formal version of the tiki taka ever seen. Why don't you question Pep then too?

Messi is living rent free in your head, I suggest you let it go for your own mental health.

 

[M3ls]

A lot of words and fluffs, but no real meaning like usual

Klopp - he simps for Messi (you can find a lot of evidence online if you know how to research). No reason at all to bring the topic in public of Messi not defending if he doesn't believe in it.

Lucho - Again, research online about the spat. It's there.

EV - Paulinho and Vidal are squad players (Vidal and Messi were the only 2 players who showed up in Anfield). Pep had Keita in his Barcelona midfield, which is the most formal version of the tiki taka ever seen. Why don't you question Pep then too?

Messi is living rent free in your head, I suggest you let it go for your own mental health.

The public will judge which one of us is right. They are not fools and can also make cause-and-effect connections. I've given them all the inputs for that.

As for Keita - are you really comparing Keita to Paulinho and Vidal? Keita was a thousand times more Barcelona-format player than those two. You have the wrong associations with the player Keita is. Go re-watch some of his matches.

 

[soul24rage]

The public will judge which one of us is right. They are not fools and can also make cause-and-effect connections. I've given them all the inputs for that.

As for Keita - are you really comparing Keita to Paulinho and Vidal? Keita was a thousand times more Barcelona-format player than those two. You have the wrong associations with the player Keita is. Go re-watch some of his matches.

Judging by your history and "analysis", seems like I will win with ease.

Again. Keita, Vidal, Paulinho, they are all squad players who offer different characteristics to the team. That's the role that they were brought in.

 

[M3ls]

Judging by your history and "analysis", seems like I will win with ease.

Again. Keita, Vidal, Paulinho, they are all squad players who offer different characteristics to the team. That's the role that they were brought in.

You have little intelligence and anatylactic thinking to be my equal. Don't take offense to that, people are different, genetics are different, education is different. Keita is a different player than Vidal and Paulinho. Keita was a great passer and handled the ball elegantly. As for Vidal and Paulinho, we know what their strengths are.

There is nothing surprising about Keita playing for Barcelona, but the fact that Vidal and Paulinho ended up at Barcelona (and were far from the last role) was a surprise. And anyone who understands football understands perfectly well, for leveling whose shortcomings in work without the ball they were bought.

Just like everyone who knows football understands why Barcelona got Rakitic and not Kroos.

 

[soul24rage]

You have little intelligence and anatylactic thinking to be my equal. Don't take offense to that, people are different, genetics are different, education is different. Keita is a different player than Vidal and Paulinho. Keita was a great passer and handled the ball elegantly. As for Vidal and Paulinho, we know what their strengths are.

There is nothing surprising about Keita playing for Barcelona, but the fact that Vidal and Paulinho ended up at Barcelona (and were far from the last role) was a surprise. And anyone who understands football understands perfectly well, for leveling whose shortcomings in work without the ball they were bought.

Just like everyone who knows football understands why Barcelona got Rakitic and not Kroos.

For someone who was proven wrong the majority of the times, it's baffling to see you talk about education and intelligence

Keita was an anomaly for the Barca midfield at the time, similar to how Vidal and Paulinho are anomaly for that midfield at the time. They were squad players who brought different characteristics that suited to their respective team at the time. It's not hard to understand.

 

[Joan]

I thought this was yesterday’s news. As good as Messi was, impossible to deny he cost the team (together with Suarez) against opponents that had means to (and did) punish us. Doesn’t mean we were better without them, but serious objectives were out of reach. And indeed, we did not reach any. Pressing and defending are crucial, pretty limited options with two old guys upfront walking and talking.

 

[soul24rage]

I thought this was yesterday’s news. As good as Messi was, impossible to deny he cost the team (together with Suarez) against opponents that had means to (and did) punish us. Doesn’t mean we were better without them, but serious objectives were out of reach. And indeed, we did not reach any. Pressing and defending are crucial, pretty limited options with two old guys upfront walking and talking.

Pressing is important, but the lack of pace from both of them was the most important issue.

Can carry one of them, but not 2 of them at the same time. I wanted Suarez, at the very most, as a bench player because of this.

Before M3ls comes in and say it was Messi who kept Suarez at Barca and decided the lineup, Bartomeu had no problem selling Suarez to ATM. Bartomeu was just weak and should have bought a young striker.

 

[khaled_a_d]

Bartou brought young striker, that was Paco.
The guy had a chance to bring Mpabbe, and choose Dembele over him.

 

[soul24rage]

Bartou brought young striker, that was Paco.
The guy had a chance to bring Mpabbe, and choose Dembele over him.

Paco was never going to be a player who leads the line for Barca. Plus the amount of money spent on him lol.

In hindsight, Mbappe was better but Dembele had also shown incredible talent.