Thiago Translantara
- Thread starter IraqiCulé
- Start date
JamDav1982
Senior Member
What was the question about single handedly dominating games about?
serghei
Senior Member
That was directed at me, because I said he didn't really shine in Bayern's midfield in any serious hard game so far in his 4-5 years there.
DonAK
President of FC Barcelona
Whether that is the determining factor about being World Class or not. If it, then I assume neither is Coutinho.
serghei
Senior Member
But Coutinho did dominate games at a higher level than Thiago for Liverpool, in a harder league, against better teams, and did it with Brazil too in the qualifiers.
DonAndres
Wild Man of Borneo
Injuries are part of the life of the player. What is this bullshit about 'if he wasn't injured all the time, he would've been x or y'. The guy can't stay fit a whole season, and has never had a marquee performance at the highest level. World class based on what? Oh, because he has technique, does fancy tricks and can pull off fancy passes?Had absolutely awful performances on Camp Nou (0-4) and Calderon (0-1) against top class teams in CL.
Isco, Iniesta, Modric, Kroos, Coutinho, Pogba, De Bruyne, David Silva, Verratti are all better midfielders than Thiago.
You're underselling him way too much man. Pogba and Verratti have literally never accomplished anything better than Thiago, CL or otherwise. Neither has Silva either tbh, none of those 3 has any argument (skills, achievements, production) to be rated higher than Thiago based on the last few years.
De Bruyne hasn't really won anything either but I rate him higher because I know he's a potentially transcendent player. Iniesta too hasn't been close to Thiago in recent years, you have to have completely forgotten a LOT of our terrible big CL games in the past few years to say that. He does produce more big games than Thiago but also I could name more poor performances as well, in general he's just played a much bigger volume of 'big games'. And consistency is a crucial thing too, a player isn't defined by the sum of all his most iconic performances. Unless you think Ronaldo really was much better than Messi this past year.
Yannik
Senior Member
You can generally assume most people DO watch the PL, given that it's the most watched league in the world, and surprise even I keep track with everything going on. On the other hand I'm for example damn useless for Ligue Un and Serie A. Even La Liga at most times, I would generally not challenge any Barca fans opinion here about their own players because I watch about 40-50% of the games which is certainly not enough. But what I do watch is before most anything the BuLi (like even the shit matches) and then 80% of all the top flight games in the PL, besides Chelsea tbh.
To me it is pretty easy to tell who watches the BuLi and who does not. And the devestating rule of thumb here really is: 90% of the forum does NOT watch the BuLi besides that one time when Bayern plays Dortmund and the TV program is otherwise boring. There are users like Luftstalag for example, whom I can have insightful discussions about BuLi topics and even when I disagree with something he says, he still always shows that he has at least rough idea what he's talking about. And then there's guys like you, who I feel like lack even a remote idea of it and aren't greatly interested in it either, because they see it as a tinpot league and all players of it are playing against inbred farmers anyway until they are actually proven in England where the football is divine and the tuesdays in Stoke are cold and rainy.
JamDav1982
Senior Member
No I assume you dont.
DonAndres
Wild Man of Borneo
How can you really say that though? Have you not noticed that the 2 most dominant teams of this entire millenium (Pep's Barca and Zidane's RM) have had some of the GOAT controlling midfielders?? Heynckes Bayern didn't have an outright Xavi-esque player, but they still had Schweinsteiger/Kroos and a tactical plan to control games well even if not dominate possession.
The only CL winners in the past years that didn't have any elite controlling players are Chelsea and Inter (though they did have Sneijder, which is something). They are both ugly winners who lucked out in their success, and are NOTHING compared to the aforementioned 3 teams.
How can you be a Barca fan, have watched the system that brought us to the top of the world, seen the very same midfield problems that have plagued us for some years during our decline, AND noticed that RM's rise directly correlated with them having built an elite controlling midfield, and then say that the ability to control a football match is unnecessary? Cause Paulinho scored some goals? Look at the big picture dude.
Last edited:
JamDav1982
Senior Member
Cant use Heynckes team as an example of side that dominated possession through midfield.
The most recent winners/finalists of the CL have probably been the best counter attacking sides more than anything. Not possession styled sides.
Any can work but pointing to that Bayern side who were the best counter attacking side going and then CL dominated by best counter attacking sides. Some of those sides could do both but none were fixated on possession.
DonAndres
Wild Man of Borneo
RM utterly dominated Atleti 2x and Juve in the finals when they won their 3 CL's. It wasn't counterattacking that won them those games, but total suffocating control of the game and relentlessly attacking them. See RM's 2nd half vs Juve as the momentum shift in midfield that won them the game. Bayern too controlled the games vs Juventus in the QF and Dortmund in the final, only against us did they cede possession and fixate mostly on the counter.
The only matches where any of these teams played a real counterattacking style were RM vs Bayern in 13/14 semis (Ancelotti 4-4-2) and Bayern vs us in 12/13 semis.
Barca controlled all games in 14/15 except the Bayern semi which both sides traded control. RM were the controlling side vs everyone past 2 years except arguably Bayern in 16/17, where they did control the game but mostly after the red cards. Heynckes Bayern were controlling the games against everyone except us (counterattack) and Arsenal (controlled one game, not the other).
Good points, I agree with what you said. Still those Bayern and Madrid eams were capable of adapting to a different style and thas why I value players like Paulinho
JamDav1982
Senior Member
Atletico were maybe the best counter attacking side along with Real those seasons. So yes the best counter attacking teams were the ones making the finals and winning it more than others.
As were Barca the year they won it and many of the important goals came from lightening counter attacks.
Some could do both.
Teams obsessed with possession have struggled.
You can control a game and still win it as you are the better counter attacking side. That is fairly simple to understand.
Last edited:
DonAndres
Wild Man of Borneo
Even Barca 14/15 were very adaptable and that was part of why we smacked Bayern at Camp Nou. I agree having other options is great and all those teams were great on the counter too. Paulinho can/will be useful in this regard in the CL for us this season, and hopefully even moreso next season with a better squad.
Just that the basis of their dominance almost always began with the ability to control a game and the outcome. To inflict their will on the opponent and not have to play reactively to secure the win. Counterattacking was a powerful weapon but like 80% of the time those teams could just submit teams based on their unrelenting superiority and control.
Home of Barca Fans
