a blinder at he back

who’s first time pass

Van Persie; In turn

slightly isolated); It was

Arshavin; The Russian

…

A touch more proofreading would serve you (and the site) well. KUTGW.

I take both of your points, I really do – my rationale for stating ’3-4-3′ was really to highlight some of the observations you make; i.e. that Barca’s formation – especially on the night – is far from a simple 4-2-3-1, and with the roles of Messi, Villa and Busquets in particular, they really are hard to pin down.

If you look at my diagram I actually represent a variation of 4-3-3 like you describe, and I had specifically placed Alves further ahead of Maxwell. On Busquets it was notable for me how he started the game, and then later finished the game. He certainly started in a deeper role to the two ahead of him and Fabregas was pushing on whenever he had possession of the ball – - when Busquets pressed higher up the pitch in the second half, Fabregas duly came deeper in search of the ball – often deeper than Wilshere as the images suggest.

Ironically, it was this subtle switch that reinvigorated Arsenal in the second half as Fabregas exerted greater control of the game, and Busquets’ influence was reduced. Sorry I couldnt be more specific in the article, but sometimes you have to cut nearly half of the observations made to ensure some fluency! :)

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2011/02/17/arsenal-2-1-barcelona-tactics/

Although I’d also have minor quibbles with that too. For me, Maxwell didn’t really venture forward that much so that’s why I liked the arrow just being on Alves.

I also liked the way they represented the front three…although I’d perhaps have gone with an inverted triangle, Villa at the tip with Messi on the left (with arrows everywhere!) and Pedro on the right with a diagnol run forward to the box…because I felt like Pedro did most of his good work arriving into the box from the left and not being tracked by Djourou – if he could finish then the tie would be over, they worked him into good shooting positions many times in the first half!

Another point I’d pick up on is Busquets being the “holding” player. For me that isn’t true, because you could see RVP dropping off into the pocket of space to collect the ball & also Arsenal runners darting through that area and not being tracked. Especially if you look at their second goal, it’s telling that Wilshere & Fabregas both go down the middle before Fabregas spreads it out to Nasri on the right…even then, he’s hardly hugging the touchline!

What he was really doing was playing in almost a diagnol with Xavi and Iniesta. Whereby he was more to the right in order to cover for Alves…I saw him pop up high on the right on more than one ocassion & was thinking to myself “he needs to show more discipline”.

That was one of the things that surprised me, that when Guardiola put on Keita he also didn’t think about replacing Busquets with Mascherano who is a much more disiciplined, ball winning central midfielder.

Representing Busquets as the ‘holding midfielder’ and saying he operated ‘like a third CB’ is really just a lazy analysis because he didn’t do anything of the sort…he was more a central midfielder pulling across to a right wing back position when Alves was high up the pitch. But even then he would wander and not really maintain his discipline.

Thanks for your comment. Im presuming you are being ironic? And that perhaps you did read on ahead where I explain that such a starting formation would typically be described as 4-2-3-1?

Just to clarify, my point with the ’3-4-3′ observation was simply that Maxwell and Alves pushed on and Busquets dropped in – and with Messi slightly further ahead of Xavi and Iniesta….well you can guess the rest …

Hi Thomas

You make some excellent comments on the subjectivity of formations, and the difference between the ‘teamsheet’ and concomitant difference displayed in the ‘rhythm of the game. I too thought Messi was more deeper than a false 9 (a false, false 9? :), and performed a role similar to that he did v Greece where Papastathopoulos did a splendid job of tracking him all over the pitch.

One observation I have made with Messi is that he is often more effective when given a defined role, i.e. false 9/inverted winger – aside from perhaps the CL final in 2009, I dont think Messi has looked devastating in such a free-ranging role, and is certainly better ahead of Xavi/Iniesta. A topic that could be explored in a lot more depth in my opinion is his decision making when he plays in such a deep role; Playing further ahead relies much more on his instinct/natural inclination in attacking positions; and it is here where I think he is ‘phenomenal’.

Cheers

But equally you could say it was a 4-1-3-1-2 as Messi playing as the 1 behind the strikers.

But I can see the argument in the 3-4-3 Basquets often drops back to help the two centre backs. Although I don’t think he had to do much of that against Arsenal, especially as the main threats came on the wings.

Maxwell did get forward and played as a typical wingback but obviously not as attacking as Dani Alves who bombs forward as much as possible.

Inesita played a pretty deep role and helped Maxwell track Walcott himself playing very deep too.

Pedro and Villa were very obviously wide forwards. While I presume that you’d want to say that Messi was playing the false nine role as he has been playing this role pretty well and it can be a hard thing to distinguish somtimes about the false nine and an attacking midfielder. Especially when Arsenal played such a highline and were very good pressing the middle of the park.

I for one would go for he was more of a playmaker in this game.

Although I don’t think he was playing the false 9 role against Barcelona. He was more playmaker, Trequistra.

Guardiola got in wrong in the match, Wenger got it right. Taking Villa off did take some of the pressure off Arsenal and it seemed that Arsenal faired much better with the pace of the game, in the end Barcelona looked tired and lapse in concentration and tactics. At 1-1 why did Barcelona feel that they needed to win this one? They could have easily held out for the draw and then went for it at the Nou Camp.

Both sides had chances in the 1st half – Barcelona looked far more composed though.

I’m not sure what you meant by “Messi was now playing a more orthodox false 9 role” – a typo perhaps?