UEFA Champions League 2010-11

[Closed Account 2]

Thats a very Man U centric match review. Most of the worthwhile action came from Barca and van de Sar

Well it's just where I think the game was won and lost, in midfield.

Spot on Edmundo
Think its now time that Fergie stopped his silly game of trying to prove that Carrick was worth all the money he gave (and got) by playing him constantly. He is useless, a big hole in the centre of the pitch.
Good game last night, and one can see the difference a good referee can make - no messing from the barca players this time cause they knew it wouldnt be accepted.
And it still isnt the best team i have seen in the CL - Ajax, Ac Milan and the other Barca team (the one with the good defence!)

Carrick is one of these players who can look good against average players, but against top opposition I just don't think he's good enough. He can't adapt his game to win possession, he isn't really a ball winner and there were no ball winners in that team the other night. I would have been tempted to play someone like Anderson or, even if he wasn't 100%, Darren Feltcher. Giggs as a central midfielder was a strange one too, I think he would have been more effective out wide, even if he'd just played a 50-60 mins. If Hargreaves hadnt got injured, he could have been the sort of central midfielder they could have used to shackle Barca's midfield. I think if Man City played barca, with the likes of De Jong in midfield, would be able to snuff out much of Barca's threat, in the same way Motta and Cambiasso squeezed them in the semi final in April 2010.

[Shilts]

A lot of talk in the papers was about how Fergie will regroup over the summer and make new signings and challange Barca next time out.
However, in 2009 they were wiped out also and this time he came out with the exact same plan.

The definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different end result.



Is Fergie too proud to park the bus?
If so, then his reputation as a tactician must be seriously in question.

[old git]

A lot of talk in the papers was about how Fergie will regroup over the summer and make new signings and challange Barca next time out.
However, in 2009 they were wiped out also and this time he came out with the exact same plan.

The definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different end result.



Is Fergie too proud to park the bus?
If so, then his reputation as a tactician must be seriously in question.

i dont think utd have enough defensively minded players to park the bus & dont think it is an option fergie would consider. in fairness he seems to always want his teams to play in an attacking way and i would rather see that than parking the bus even if it should be parked for certain games.

[DeLorean]

United parked the bus at the Nou Camp in the 2008 semi final. They were sitting pretty deep in the return leg also. They tried to pack the midfield in the 2009 final also, with Carrick, Giggs and Anderson all playing central roles and Rooney on the left with Park on the right, I think. They certainly started with a 5 man midfield anyway with Ronaldo very much up front on his own. It's this year that he tried a more attacking approach, which with the players at his disposal looked the only way to go in my opinion. If he hadn't started Hernandez, for example, he would have been casting aside the system that basically ignited their season and would be suffering even more critisism right now. On reflection though, Anderson instead of Giggs was probably a no brainer.

[Closed Account 2]

Assuming Fletcher wasn't ever in contention, I would have played Valencia on one wing, Nani on the other wing, and Park and Anderson in the center. Once it became obvious Valencia was having an off day I'd have put Giggs on for him and swapped wingers (around 60 mins). If either Park or Anderson was looking spent or on a yellow I'd have brought on Scholes, but only done this after 75 mins.

I wouldn't have Carrick anywhere near a team in a Champions League final.

[DeLorean]

I wouldn't either, but the abuse he got/gets from United fans I know is ridiculous I feel. Anybody would have thought he was the deciding factor the last night, the way some people were carrying on about him. He's been at United five seasons, they've won four league titles and been in three Champions League Finals. Before he arrived they hadn't won the league in three seasons and were a million miles from a Champions League Final, getting elimated in a p!ss poor group the year before he arrived. I'm not saying he's the reason for this transformation, but I just don't believe a team could achieve that much with a complete dud in central midfield. There'll always be a scapegoat though.

[Closed Account 2]

I'll admit I havent looked at the stats at all, but I'm guessing Hargreaves was in that team in 2008 on a regular basis, when they were at their zenith. I think Carrick might be ok against a great midfield if there is a world class ball winner next to him, but he doesn't have that at Old Trafford. If Fletcher is fit and playing next to him Carrick can just about get enough possession to have a limited impact, but without him he's lost and in a central role with Giggs (who also deosnt really win the ball) alongside him it's a recipe for their entire midfield being bypassed by a stronger one.

I can understand Man Utd fans worrying about his name on the teamsheet, especially against a team where the primary strength is midfield. You need someone in there like Park (in the center) to close down their midfielders, or someone like Fletcher / Anderson who will attempt a tackle. Defensively carrick is a drifter, he can't win possession and without the ball he can't contribute anything. It would be like us playing with Andy Reid, McCarthy, Duff and McGeady, there wouldnt be a ball winner and in central areas we'd just get over-run against a passing team.

And it might be harsh to say it, but with a fully fit Hargreaves in that team instead of Carrick I think Man Utd would have had a much better chance, even with Anderson or a half fit Feltcher they would have made more of a game of it.

[geysir]

Well it's just where I think the game was won and lost, in midfield.

The game was won hands down by Barca.
When a team like Barca win a game like that, it isn't because the other team lost it to them

[Closed Account 2]

Yes, yes and a thousand other journalistic clichés, indeed no one should even bother to play Barca because since Sid Low, Henry Winter and Graham Hunter say they are invincible, we might as well award the next decade of Champions Leagues to them.

"When Barcelona want to win they win", well Inter Milan, Rubin Kazan and Arsenal have all beaten them over 90 mins in the last 18 months or so. Estudiantes, a good but not exactly overly-talented team, had them as good as beaten in Abu Dhabi. They are a beatable team, if you contain their midfield you can expose their weaknesses, especially with that goalkeeper.

[Dodge]

They've a better goalkeeper than Man Utd do now

And to be fair, Sid Lowe is quick enough to criticize them.

I agree with your sentiments re Carrick though. 2009's final showed his limitations. Fletcher would be the ideal workhorse in there but he seems doomed to injury after injury.

I'm a huge Barcelona fan. i adore most of their players, but there's no doubting Ferguson's selection and tactics made it easy for them last Saturday

[DeLorean]

I'll admit I havent looked at the stats at all, but I'm guessing Hargreaves was in that team in 2008 on a regular basis, when they were at their zenith

Kind of, but not in the centre of midfield. As a huge Hargreaves fan, I found it particularly gauling that Ferguson used always have Carrick ahead of him for the second central midfield spot, alongside Scholes. In fact, Hargreaves worked his way into the teamsheet for the important games that season through his versatility to play right back at times, but more regularly on the right side of midfield, where he started the Champions League Final against Chelsea.

[Stuttgart88]

Yes, yes and a thousand other journalistic clichés, indeed no one should even bother to play Barca because since Sid Low, Henry Winter and Graham Hunter say they are invincible, we might as well award the next decade of Champions Leagues to them.

"When Barcelona want to win they win", well Inter Milan, Rubin Kazan and Arsenal have all beaten them over 90 mins in the last 18 months or so. Estudiantes, a good but not exactly overly-talented team, had them as good as beaten in Abu Dhabi. They are a beatable team, if you contain their midfield you can expose their weaknesses, especially with that goalkeeper.

They were a Niclas Bendtner gilt-edged chance away from losing outright to Arsenal. Admittedly, Valdes and the referee both had a shocker in London and Barcelona equalised on Arsenal's behalf, but football is mad sometimes. Sometimes things conspire against you and it just doesn't happen.

They may not be invincible but they are a joy to watch. I know the semi was a disgrace, but it also showed a street-wiseness that countered Mourinho's "the ref is always against us and for them" pre-amble to the game.

[Roo69]

Ultimately, Man.U. were lucky to even get the one.

Why were United lucky to get one? It was a tight enough first half, wasn't a whole lot in it, Barca had more possession but were'nt a million miles better (unlike they were in the 2nd half).

[Dodge]

I think they were Roo. Far superior in the first half

Nothing lucky about the goal though. Superb move and finish

[geysir]

Yes, yes and a thousand other journalistic clichés, indeed no one should even bother to play Barca because since Sid Low, Henry Winter and Graham Hunter say they are invincible, we might as well award the next decade of Champions Leagues to them.

"When Barcelona want to win they win", well Inter Milan, Rubin Kazan and Arsenal have all beaten them over 90 mins in the last 18 months or so. Estudiantes, a good but not exactly overly-talented team, had them as good as beaten in Abu Dhabi. They are a beatable team, if you contain their midfield you can expose their weaknesses, especially with that goalkeeper.

I have been hearing about Barca's supposed weaknesses for years.
You are scraping the barrel with a few stats to claim that Barca are beatable - if just the other team knew how to do it.
Arsenal came close this year, but it would have been an absolute travesty if they fluked it. Sometimes it's possible.
What have you got against Barca? they are just amazing
Man U were played off the park, twice in the finals by them in the last 3 seasons.
Bizarre to be talking how Man U lost the game - therefore Barca won.

[DeLorean]

You are scraping the barrel with a few stats to claim that Barca are beatable - if just the other team knew how to do it

I don't really think it's is scraping the bottom of the barrel though. Inter Milan did it last year and Chelsea were within a few seconds or even a more favourable refereeing decision of doing it the year before. Even Real Madrid's plan, until Pepe's sending off, was working to a point in the semi final. United's tactics/team selection fell a long way short on two occasions now, more so than all of the other big teams that Barca played in the last couple of seasons. It's surely worth examining what they could have done differently at least. Barcelona are sheer class and deserve all the praise they get, but they're not flawless or invincible, even if they did look it on Saturday night.

[Closed Account 2]

I have been hearing about Barca's supposed weaknesses for years.
You are scraping the barrel with a few stats to claim that Barca are beatable - if just the other team knew how to do it.
Arsenal came close this year, but it would have been an absolute travesty if they fluked it. Sometimes it's possible.
What have you got against Barca? they are just amazing
Man U were played off the park, twice in the finals by them in the last 3 seasons.
Bizarre to be talking how Man U lost the game - therefore Barca won.

I'm fairly certain your wumming here but none the less I'll try and spell it out for you:

ARE BARCA BEATABLE?:

I say yes (and cite examples of said defeats - not merely "stats" - over the last 18 months)
You seem to say no (going on your second line).

No team in the world is unbeatable, but you seem to think otherwise.

[Stuttgart88]

I don't really think it's is scraping the bottom of the barrel though. Inter Milan did it last year and Chelsea were within a few seconds or even a more favourable refereeing decision of doing it the year before. Even Real Madrid's plan, until Pepe's sending off, was working to a point in the semi final. United's tactics/team selection fell a long way short on two occasions now, more so than all of the other big teams that Barca played in the last couple of seasons. It's surely worth examining what they could have done differently at least. Barcelona are sheer class and deserve all the praise they get, but they're not flawless or invincible, even if they did look it on Saturday night.

No team is unbeatable.

The Inter result last year was a travesty. The ref got two match changing calls totally wrong and a third arguably wrong - all against Barcelona. Barca got lucky against Chelsea alright but that was two years ago. The team has grown since then. I agree with Souness - they are the best teanm I have ever seen. It remains to be seen if it turns into a dynastly like Real, Ajax, Liverpool and Milan (to alesser extent) but in absolute terms they're the best ever imho.

[bennocelt]

All depends on your viewpoint
Im the kind of guy who loves quality defending - That Ac Milan team had Franco Baresi, Maldini and Costacurta, Rijkard, Gullit and van basten with his scissor kicks from outside the box - quality. That barca team have a huge hole in defence and a wobbly goalie. (I have yet to see a defender as good as Baresi)

[Dodge]

BTW when everyone's fit barca don't have a 'huge' hole in defence. Valdes is one of the top 10 keepers in the world, Pique and Puyol are the best partnership. Abidal is a great left back (now...) and Alves does his defensive work ok too.

I'm not saying they're better than that Milan team (best I've seen) but they're certainly not the shambles some make them out to be