Marc Bartra

[JamDav1982]

What? Never argued Mathieu is more regular than Bartra, you came up with that. Your logic is flawed. You're trying too hard to compare two completely different situations.

Busi plays almost every game so there's the biggest possibility we'll lose with him on the pitch, foolish of you to use it against him... Mathieu and Bartra both play once in a few occassions and here's where you can compare.

Using it against Busi??

I said the exact opposite! It means nothing and Busi still the better player.

You try and find patterns to suit Mathieu playing in defeats but don't likeir being applied to other players.

Mathieu had played more and against more of the top teams so both Busi and Mathieu situations are not as different as you make out.

 

[Vlom]

Just read on marca that Bartra would be favourite to start against City .. it's worth nothing but there's a general opinion, about 90% of the comments pushing for Bartra too.

Those defending Matthieu are probably french just joking guys, I see we'll get nowhere with this.



I can't find any game highlight of mathieu on youtube, no one has cared enough to do them ... there's only his goal against elche.

 

[linetty]

Using it against Busi??

I said the exact opposite! It means nothing and Busi still the better player.

You try and find patterns to suit Mathieu playing in defeats but don't likeir being applied to other players.

Mathieu had played more and against more of the top teams so both Busi and Mathieu situations are not as different as you make out.

Patterns aside, stats, everything aside. Football is not about that. I feel much safer with Bartra, I know he'll give his all and he's in good form. He saved our asses against PSG denying Cavani an open net goal, he's been awesome. Mathieu has never been that great, if anything his flaws were covered by his partners. Bartra is superior technically and fits better into the team, he's played for Barca since a kiddo. I'm sure Lucho would prefer to start Bartra but it's generally taken as a gamble and he'd be crucified if things didn't go well.

Mathieu shouldn't even be here in the first place. Desperate signing by a donkey who knows nothing about football.

 

[Vlom]

Mathieu shouldn't even be here in the first place. Desperate signing by a donkey who knows nothing about football.

The donkey being zubi ?

 

[linetty]

The donkey being zubi ?

Yeah.

 

[Vlom]

Yeah.

 

[BBZ8800]

A conicidence all the games we've lost (and drawn too I think) this season were with Mathieu in the line up? There is far more probability to concede with Mathieu imo.

Of course that we lost matches when he was on the field when he played in 16 tougher matches.
If you play in 16 bigger matches, of course that it is more likely that you will be on the field during 5 loses, than a guy like Bartra who played against Elche and Granada all the time and played in 3-5 bigger matches this Season.

If you want to play with stats, look at this:
1. Mathieu played in these 5 defeats:
-- Psg 2:3
-- Real 1:3
-- Celta 0:1
-- Sociedad 0:1
-- Malaga 0:1

So, we should remove Mathieu from big matches because all 5 defeats happened with him on the field?

Ok, but be careful what you will answer.

Do you know which 2 players also played in all 5 defeats?
= Messi and Neymar, lol

Also, Barca has 5 defeats this Season and 2 matches where we couldn't score in goalless draws, Malaga 0:0 and Getafe 0:0.
-- do you know who is the only player who played in all 7 matches?
= Messi, Busquets

-- Neymar didn't play against Sociedad only (so he played in 6 out 7 worst matches this Season)
-- Iniesta has 6 appearances, Mathieu 6, Rakitic 6, Alba 6, Alves 6, Bravo 6

So, according to logic=how we have all 5 defeats with Mathieu in our team, we could reply:
1. when Messi plays, we have the highest chance to lose a match or to play a goalless 0:0 draw
2. also, when Messi and Neymar are together on the field, we have the highest chance to lose a match or to not score any Goals
(because, by that logic, they were the attacking players who played in the highest number of matches where we lost or couldn't score)
-- according to that logic, when Pedro and Munir play, we are less likely to lose or not to score than when Messi and Neymar are on the field

But again, that is NOT because Messi and Neymar are poor players, but because they are playing in ALL toughest matches.
So, the maths shouldn't be:
1. Mathieu played in all 5 defeats
2. or Messi played in all 5 defeats
But:
1. With Messi on the field, we lost 5 out of 30 (tougher) matches
2. With Mathieu on the field, we lost 5 out of 20 (tougher) matches
3. With Bartra on the field, we won 2 out of 2 tougher matches

Bartra hasn't played enough of tougher matches.
He is good against Eibar and Cordoba.
He is 50:50 against tougher teams.

 

[Vlom]

When was bartra's last bad game for you ?

When was mat's ?



We're talking about getting consistency and improving overtime which he is ..
I just watched Barca - Rayo, AGAIN , ball goes past Matthieu that trottles behind it with his non-chalent style , how can you not see it !

 

[JamDav1982]

When was bartra's last bad game for you ?

When was mat's ?



We're talking about getting consistency and improving overtime which he is ..
I just watched Barca - Rayo, AGAIN , ball goes past Matthieu that trottles behind it with his non-chalent style , how can you not see it !

Mathieu had a very good game against Rayo.

You are looking for things that are not there.

 

[Vlom]

Mathieu had a very good game against Rayo.

You are looking for things that are not there.

He was OK, still did nothing to stop the action that led to the pen except watch, def not as good as bartra's last demonstrations, no leadership in the defense, his first touch is clumsy at best ..

Anyway, as I said we're gonna go in circles here, all I know is i'll be pissed if Bartra is started in neither City or RM game.

 

[JamDav1982]

He was OK, still did nothing to stop the action that led to the pen except watch, def not as good as bartra's last demonstrations, no leadership in the defense, his first touch is clumsy at best ..

Anyway, as I said we're gonna go in circles here, all I know is i'll be pissed if Bartra is started in neither City or RM game.

That move for the penalty was not on Mathieu in anyway.

You lessen any genuine points you have when start to try and lay blame for the likes of that pen and the goal against Malaga.

 

[Martin]

Of course that we lost matches when he was on the field when he played in 16 tougher matches.

Out of curiosity, would you mind if you can mention all of those 16 thougher matchers that you're referring to?

Cheers!

 

[zanela]

BBZ, I don't really agree with your refutation.

There will always be questions over a new signing (who btw has shown no consistency) when associated with a losing pattern, over the likes of Messi, Busi,etc who are established stars, and 've nothing to prove anyone. Their positives faaar outweigh their negatives, and are well known for what they can bring at the highest level.
I don't think Bartra is the ideal solution, but neither is Mathieu who's experience neither has any calming influence on the defence nor immune to errors.
But if I had to choose between the two, I'd go with Bartra for the reasons Instinct listed earlier, and because his performances indicate a gradual growth in the player, whilst his relative readiness would better serve the team this time ard.

 

[Zangash]

I'd rather play Masch as CB and use Rakatic as DM than have to sit in fear and watch Mathieu go up against Aguero. We'd be the laughing stock of Europe if we let City come into the Camp nou and knock us out of the cup.

 

[Vlom]

I'd rather play Masch as CB and use Rakatic as DM than have to sit in fear and watch Mathieu go up against Aguero. We'd be the laughing stock of Europe if we let City come into the Camp nou and knock us out of the cup.

So no bartra nor mathieu ?
Just send them the message in front of the entire world that we don't trust them to defend .. lol