A snaphot of the game in generalAccording to most, this game was decided three weeks ago. Man United were imperious against Arsenal, Barcelona were impotent (and extremely fortunate) against Chelsea. I did think United with triumph, but not because of anything that happened in the semi-finals. People don't seem to understand that once United got that first, lucky goal against Arsenal the Gunners were a shambles, or "shoddy" to use Ferguson's word of the week. It may sound like I'm taking away from United's performance, and indeed I am. They haven't looked that good all year, and so the game against Arsenal must be seen as an aberration. Consider their poor record against big-four opposition - 5 points from a possible 18. People talked about Barcelona struggling against English opposition, but the reality of this season is that United have struggled against English teams too - the good ones at least.
Then there's Barcelona - flat-track bullies, big game bottlers, overrated. People were making sweeping judgments on them based on two games, one of which they could have one 2-0. Hopefully hindsight has made people realise that Chelsea were impeccable in implementing their game plan against Barcelona. That's not to excuse the Catalans, but one must appreciate the difficulty of playing against a well-drilled, hard-working outfit content to sit back and hit on the counter.
Unfortunately, much of what passed for pre-match analysis was a glance at United's semi-final, a glance at Barcelona's, and then the seemingly obvious conclusion that Man Utd would trounce them. Incidentally, I wonder what the jingoistic Sunday Supplement guest is thinking now.
To say the game hinged on the 10th minute goal would not be out of order, though of course it takes much more than a goal to completely dominate a game. We aren't to know how things would have panned out had United took the lead, nor are we to know what would have happened had Cesc Fabregas's deflected shot crept in when Arsenal were on the front foot against United three weeks ago. To speculate about such things is pointless really. The bottom line is that United only needed a goal to draw level. Someone said "the game was over" once Barcelona scored. It did look that way at times, but saying that only takes away from Barcelona's ability to make a tight game look like a walk in the park. There were still 80 minutes of football to play, but from that point on only one team really played it.
It wasn't a vintage Barcelona performance, but under the circumstances it was extremely good. The back four did look a little shaky at times, but as always the midfield duo of Xavi and Iniesta played their part in making sure United could never really get at them. It doesn't get any better in football than those two. Xavi has always been a very good player, but in the last year he has just exploded, what with Spain's triumph and a wonderful season with Barcelona. Iniesta is someone I've known since my Championship Manager days. I bought him from Barcelona as a 16/17 year old kid, and while his ratings were average he performances were brilliant. Since then I've always had a soft spot for him, and so I've almost felt like a proud father watching rise up through the ranks, and it was quite startling -- yet wholly justified -- to see him crowned last night by Wayne Rooney as the best in the world (I wonder how Ronaldo will feel about that statement by the way). Iniesta really is that good. No longer can he be dubbed underrated. He may be an anti-galactico, he may be bad for the media, he may be the whitest person in the world, but he is also one of the best players in the world. The best? Let's just say he would be a shoe-in for my World XI.
Another certainty would be Lionel Messi. The Argentine wasn't at his best, but it was he who aided Xavi and Iniesta in weaving their magic, and this was the biggest difference between the semi-final and the final. Unlike Chelsea, United couldn't handle Messi in the centre. This was a simple yet astute piece of tactical nous from Guardiola, who must have watched Liverpool beat United 4-1 with Gerrard in a similar position. Messi found space time and again, with neither Ferdinand nor the United midfield quite sure who's job it was to pick him up. It was certainly Ferdinand's job when Xavi foated that inch-perfect cross into the box, leaving Messi to score his first goal against English opposition. Ironically, he scored it with the part of his body that was adjudged to be the decisive factor for Ronaldo's superiority to Messi. Of course I'm not now saying that Messi is as good as Ronaldo in the air, but it felt sweet to see Messi answer his critics in such fashion - a stunning headed goal against English opposition to cap a fine display.
In fairness to Ronaldo, he was easily United's most threatening player. He held the ball up well, and of course his shots were always cause for concern. But as the game wore on and United became a shambles he was left without a defining role, and suffered as a result of overcrowding in Barcelona's half. Ferguson must take some of the balme for this. For starters, United's problems were in midfield. Carrick, Giggs and Anderson were unable to stamp any kind of authority on the game. You can't wave a magic wand and turn them into great players, but I think the most sensible thing to do at half time would have been to replace Giggs with Scholes. Instead, Fergie replaced Anderson with Tevez, leaving Giggs and Carrick to marshall Xavi and Iniesta. Read that sentence again and see if that's not as dreadful a decision as taking of Riquelme at 1-0 up/failing to bring an 18 year old Messi off the bench. Bringing on Berbatov only made matters worse, but in fariness to Ferguson he didn't really have a choice. All of this played into Barcelona's hands, because once they got the ball to either Iniesta or Xavi (those two again) they could do whatever they wanted with it. It's rare you see a Manchester United team go out with such a whimper, yet even with arguably four strikers on the pitch they couldn't muster up one of those onsloughts they are rightfully famous for. Ferguson addressed the symptoms -- they were losing badly and needed a goal -- but he didn't address the cause -- they just couldn't get hold of/keep the ball.
Some slight changes could have been made to help in this department (and no doubt United missed the industry of Flecther and the bite of Hargreaves), but for me the rather harsh reality is that this Manchester United midfield is just not good enough; not when it comes to this level of football. They're good enough to take three points against the bottom 10 Premier League clubs, but they have failed to convince me over the course of the season. Changes will need to be made. For me, that means Carrick out, Anderson out, Giggs retired. Any suggestions as to who they can bring in?
For Barcelona, this has been a season to savour. I have watched most of their games and so it feels like I have been a participant in this historic season. I will probably never watch as many games of football in one year for the remainder of my life, but I probably couldn't have picked a better time to peak. The question is, can they push on from here? The shocking/mouth-watering truth is that there are numerous positions where they can improve, but the undeniable truth is that in Messi, Iniesta and Xavi they have 3 of the top 5 players in world football, and as long as their alive Barcelona will be a force to be reckoned with.
Then there's Barcelona - flat-track bullies, big game bottlers, overrated. People were making sweeping judgments on them based on two games, one of which they could have one 2-0. Hopefully hindsight has made people realise that Chelsea were impeccable in implementing their game plan against Barcelona. That's not to excuse the Catalans, but one must appreciate the difficulty of playing against a well-drilled, hard-working outfit content to sit back and hit on the counter.
Unfortunately, much of what passed for pre-match analysis was a glance at United's semi-final, a glance at Barcelona's, and then the seemingly obvious conclusion that Man Utd would trounce them. Incidentally, I wonder what the jingoistic Sunday Supplement guest is thinking now.
To say the game hinged on the 10th minute goal would not be out of order, though of course it takes much more than a goal to completely dominate a game. We aren't to know how things would have panned out had United took the lead, nor are we to know what would have happened had Cesc Fabregas's deflected shot crept in when Arsenal were on the front foot against United three weeks ago. To speculate about such things is pointless really. The bottom line is that United only needed a goal to draw level. Someone said "the game was over" once Barcelona scored. It did look that way at times, but saying that only takes away from Barcelona's ability to make a tight game look like a walk in the park. There were still 80 minutes of football to play, but from that point on only one team really played it.
It wasn't a vintage Barcelona performance, but under the circumstances it was extremely good. The back four did look a little shaky at times, but as always the midfield duo of Xavi and Iniesta played their part in making sure United could never really get at them. It doesn't get any better in football than those two. Xavi has always been a very good player, but in the last year he has just exploded, what with Spain's triumph and a wonderful season with Barcelona. Iniesta is someone I've known since my Championship Manager days. I bought him from Barcelona as a 16/17 year old kid, and while his ratings were average he performances were brilliant. Since then I've always had a soft spot for him, and so I've almost felt like a proud father watching rise up through the ranks, and it was quite startling -- yet wholly justified -- to see him crowned last night by Wayne Rooney as the best in the world (I wonder how Ronaldo will feel about that statement by the way). Iniesta really is that good. No longer can he be dubbed underrated. He may be an anti-galactico, he may be bad for the media, he may be the whitest person in the world, but he is also one of the best players in the world. The best? Let's just say he would be a shoe-in for my World XI.
Another certainty would be Lionel Messi. The Argentine wasn't at his best, but it was he who aided Xavi and Iniesta in weaving their magic, and this was the biggest difference between the semi-final and the final. Unlike Chelsea, United couldn't handle Messi in the centre. This was a simple yet astute piece of tactical nous from Guardiola, who must have watched Liverpool beat United 4-1 with Gerrard in a similar position. Messi found space time and again, with neither Ferdinand nor the United midfield quite sure who's job it was to pick him up. It was certainly Ferdinand's job when Xavi foated that inch-perfect cross into the box, leaving Messi to score his first goal against English opposition. Ironically, he scored it with the part of his body that was adjudged to be the decisive factor for Ronaldo's superiority to Messi. Of course I'm not now saying that Messi is as good as Ronaldo in the air, but it felt sweet to see Messi answer his critics in such fashion - a stunning headed goal against English opposition to cap a fine display.
In fairness to Ronaldo, he was easily United's most threatening player. He held the ball up well, and of course his shots were always cause for concern. But as the game wore on and United became a shambles he was left without a defining role, and suffered as a result of overcrowding in Barcelona's half. Ferguson must take some of the balme for this. For starters, United's problems were in midfield. Carrick, Giggs and Anderson were unable to stamp any kind of authority on the game. You can't wave a magic wand and turn them into great players, but I think the most sensible thing to do at half time would have been to replace Giggs with Scholes. Instead, Fergie replaced Anderson with Tevez, leaving Giggs and Carrick to marshall Xavi and Iniesta. Read that sentence again and see if that's not as dreadful a decision as taking of Riquelme at 1-0 up/failing to bring an 18 year old Messi off the bench. Bringing on Berbatov only made matters worse, but in fariness to Ferguson he didn't really have a choice. All of this played into Barcelona's hands, because once they got the ball to either Iniesta or Xavi (those two again) they could do whatever they wanted with it. It's rare you see a Manchester United team go out with such a whimper, yet even with arguably four strikers on the pitch they couldn't muster up one of those onsloughts they are rightfully famous for. Ferguson addressed the symptoms -- they were losing badly and needed a goal -- but he didn't address the cause -- they just couldn't get hold of/keep the ball.
Some slight changes could have been made to help in this department (and no doubt United missed the industry of Flecther and the bite of Hargreaves), but for me the rather harsh reality is that this Manchester United midfield is just not good enough; not when it comes to this level of football. They're good enough to take three points against the bottom 10 Premier League clubs, but they have failed to convince me over the course of the season. Changes will need to be made. For me, that means Carrick out, Anderson out, Giggs retired. Any suggestions as to who they can bring in?
For Barcelona, this has been a season to savour. I have watched most of their games and so it feels like I have been a participant in this historic season. I will probably never watch as many games of football in one year for the remainder of my life, but I probably couldn't have picked a better time to peak. The question is, can they push on from here? The shocking/mouth-watering truth is that there are numerous positions where they can improve, but the undeniable truth is that in Messi, Iniesta and Xavi they have 3 of the top 5 players in world football, and as long as their alive Barcelona will be a force to be reckoned with.
3 comments:
you're saying that barcelona made the game tight... i'm not sure about that.. dont get me wrong they were brilliant. but united were terrible when they werent in possession....nobody was chasin the ball...united seemed quite happy to let barca pass the ball... i don't have many memories of united players chasing the ball down..i have one or two of o'shea and park and then rooney against messi but that was it... the rest of the time they seemed quite happy to stand stationary and watch barca pass the ball.... And then when united had the ball, if i was rio ferdinand i would be raging.. none of the united players were willing to move into positions to recieve the ball... barca were quite the opposite. i knew the game was over 5 minutes after half time. united were playing exactly the same way as they did for the last 35minutes of the first half... they hadnt changed there style at all... so for the second half i just enjoyed barcelona...
Not sure I said Barca made it tight. My point is that 1-0 is hardly a game-ending scoreline in the same way that United being 1-0 up on Arsenal was(what with the Gunners needing 3). Therefore in a game where United only needed 1 goal it was quite impressive for Barcelona to deny United the chance to even look like scoring.
As for United simply needing to run around more, I disagree. Tevez runs around a lot, but he made no impact whatsoever. You're right about the lack of options for Ferdinand, which is why I would have brought Scholes on instead of Giggs at half time.
tevez wasnt tevez if you know what i mean....i didnt want him to start the game because i thought he would make a better impact on the game if he was to come off the bench... think i was worng...
about barca denying man united my point was united denied themselves more than barca denied them in my own opinion...
at the end of the day united were truely humbled by an amazing barcelona and i, as disappointed as i am with man untied change of attitude after the goal i have to to say i'm not actually feeling too bad about it...maybe just maybe fergie may have realised that is midfield is rubbish and hopefully he'll do something about it!
Post a Comment