The backline a problem?

[JamDav1982]

Because Pep is a real coach actually...Tito doesnt know what he is doing

Possibly but that means nothing to this debate as they both acted in the same way to Bartra.

A real coach like Pep still played players out of position ahead of him.

Yes, except Pep is smart, and used all of the youngsters as additions from the B team, while Tito promoted all of them and left some of them rotting on the bench. You're unbelievable.

He didnt look to use Batra as an addition to the first team though did he?

Pep did not trust him or make much attempt to develop him, you cant deny that.

 

[spark]

I remember the situation with Tello and Cuenca, especially that Clasico. And I know Bartra debuted earlier, but I still think Tello was not under the same pressure as Bartra has been this season or even in the few games he played last season. Pep still had Pedro and Sanchez, and even Iniesta/Fabregas to count on in the absence of Villa, while recently Bartra was literally the only remaining defender, which is why he played.

It was a different kind of pressure. Tello basically had bad decision making shouted out of him by Messi. Most of the time it was off the bench so he didnt have much time to grow into the games. It was 15 minutes and dont make the wrong pass or shot. Alexis was injuring himself a lot at that time too so it was only Cesc and Pedro who were both out of scoring form.

 

[Stric]

He didnt look to use Batra as an addition to the first team though did he?

Pep did not trust him or make much attempt to develop him, you cant deny that.

Yes and...? There's nothing wrong with that. Maybe Pep thought Bartra wasn't first team material (yet, or at all) and left him to play in the B team. No shame in playing for Barca B. At least Pep didn't block his career or further development like Tito did. If Tito thought Bartra wasn't good enough to play when a CB was needed, then he shouldn't have promoted him. Or if it was an obligatory promotion and he thought the kid doesn't have it in him, he should have bought a CB and sold/loaned Bartra. But he literally refused to do that. Instead he kept Bartra in the first team and didn't play him at all, even when he totally could have. Pep had no "obligations" towards Bartra, none whatsoever. Bartra was playing for another team. Now tell me again how Pep and Tito acted the same way to Bartra.

 

[spark]

For the last time... because at that time Bartra was playing in Barca B, where he played 23 games that season in addition to the 2 he played for the first team. He was only used as an addition, and it didn't matter as much to him, because he was playing regularly. Tito promoted him fully, thus disabling him from ever playing f or Barca B again, yet keeping him on the bench until the last two months of the season. How anyone can argue that Pep and Tito are doing the same here is beyond me. Tito STOPPED Bartra's progress, Pep did nothing. He let him play more for the B team.

You also have to remember that Bartra was promoted as a result of a contract clause. Players like Fontas and Dos Santos had similar types of promotion but they got even less time than Bartra in other years. If Muniesa didnt hurt himself he would have been a contract promotion too. Sergi Roberto was also one but he was more flexible and accepted another year registered with the B team.

Yes and...? There's nothing wrong with that. Maybe Pep thought Bartra wasn't first team material (yet, or at all) and left him to play in the B team. No shame in playing for Barca B. At least Pep didn't block his career or further development like Tito did. If Tito thought Bartra wasn't good enough to play when a CB was needed, then he shouldn't have promoted him. Or if it was an obligatory promotion and he thought the kid doesn't have it in him, he should have bought a CB and sold/loaned Bartra. But he literally refused to do that. Instead he kept Bartra in the first team and didn't play him at all, even when he totally could have. Pep had no "obligations" towards Bartra, none whatsoever. Bartra was playing for another team. Now tell me again how Pep and Tito acted the same way to Bartra.

I think we've talked about this in the Barca B thread but a lot of players have obligatory promotion by a certain year in their contracts.

 

[Stric]

You also have to remember that Bartra was promoted as a result of a contract clause. Players like Fontas and Dos Santos had similar types of promotion but they got even less time than Bartra in other years. If Muniesa didnt hurt himself he would have been a contract promotion too. Sergi Roberto was also one but he was more flexible and accepted another year registered with the B team.

I've heard that it was a contract clause (and I adressed that situation in the post above), but there are also claims that he was personally called up by Vilanova. He even said it himself after the game against Celtic. "Vilanova: ''Bartra is at first team because I wanted it. We had the money to sign centre back last summer, I told the club to save it.''"

 

[JamDav1982]

Yes and...? There's nothing wrong with that. Maybe Pep thought Bartra wasn't first team material and left him to play in the B team. No shame in playing for Barca B. At least Pep didn't block his career or further development like Tito did. If Tito thought Bartra wasn't good enough to play when a CB was needed, then he shouldn't have promoted him. Or if it was an obligatory promotion and he thought the kid doesn't have it in him, he should have bought a CB and sold/loaned Bartra. But he literally refused to do that. Instead he kept Bartra in the first team and didn't play him at all, even when he totally could have. Pep had no "obligations" towards Bartra, none whatsoever. Bartra was playing for another team. Now tell me again how Pep and Tito acted the same way to Bartra.

Bartra had started 5 games and came off the bench in a further 7 before the first Bayern game.

Pep on the other hand showed no trust in him at all and did not make any attempt to use him when there was defensive injuries and played players out of position to cover.

Pep had no obligations towards Bartra - clearly he though that also and gave him little chances.

If Barca had the same injuries as this season they to could have been left with no choice but to play him.

Dont fool yourself with the 'he was in the b team' talk.

Players that the coaches think need developing and can rely on are very much part of both squads when the manager sees fit.

 

[Stric]

Dont fool yourself with the 'he was in the b team' talk.

Great argument, pal. You've outdone yourself.

 

[JamDav1982]

Great argument, pal. You've outdone yourself.

In the b team - does not mean they stick exclusively to that team.

Most of the players at the age Bartra was last season go between the two squads in the managers feel they can use/develop them.

Pep did not do that with Bartra.

Great argument, pal. You've outdone yourself.

Simple question -

Why did Pep not use/develop Bartra more last season?

PLEASE dont use the 'b team' argument that has been proved time again to be false.

 

[Stric]

Go bore someone else to death with questions that have been answered at least twice already. Welcome to my ignore list.

 

[JamDav1982]

Go bore someone else to death with questions that have been answered at least twice already.

With the great 'b team' response that makes no sense.

Well played.

Yes, except Pep is smart, and used all of the youngsters as additions from the B team, while Tito promoted all of them and left some of them rotting on the bench. You're unbelievable.

Please tell me how Pep treated Fonats any better when he got promoted?

He never at all and barely played him.

Pep left him 'rotting on the bench' did he?

 

[Flavia]

Guys, please use the multi-quote tool (just after the "reply with quote" button, the icon with a +), or edit your post, instead of posting 2 or more posts in a row. Thanks.

 

[Pete]

Agger, Luiz and Kompany should be 3 targets for our defence.