Skip to content

Looking back at Chelsea-Barcelona, and pondering Champions League soccer as the game at its best

Apr 25, 2012, 8:35 AM EDT

20 Comments
Barcelona's Argentinian forward Lionel M

Champions League soccer typically represents the game’s best version.

Yes, better that World Cup soccer; superior team cohesion and a higher level of player balance creates this sharper brand, not to mention an overall approach that generally leans more assertive, less cautious.

I tell people this all the time. Only yesterday’s eventful semifinal, full of brilliant talking points as it was, hardly made the case.

I still can’t quite figure out how to feel about Tuesday’s incredible night. Yes, Chelsea deserves credit for fortitude and finding a way, and praise rains effusive today across UK media stops. English soccer has long been hopelessly enamored with the blood-stained, desperate stand.

Only “blood-stained, desperate stand” is hardly how I prefer to see my Champions League semifinal play out. If we’re talking about Bolton needing a point to stave off relegation to a lower tier, bravely drawing its lines against mighty Manchester United or the like on a season’s final match day, then fine. But a moneyed team of Chelsea’s alleged quality?

In terms of what this means to the UEFA final in Munich, it’s like being presented with cough medicine or ice cream, knowing that either one will ease a sore throat – and choosing the cough medicine.

Yes, I understand the Blues were a man down on the road. And yet, building a line of six across the back, with two forwards stationed on the outside, is hardly the bright stuff of Champions League dreams.

All that said, it’s hard to reckon that Barcelona deserved to go through either. For all of the fabulous talent assembled at the Nou Camp, the Blaugrana simply failed in too many ways Tuesday to be considered among the most worthy finalists, either.

Shall we count the blue and deep red ways?

The goalkeeping wasn’t good enough. (By contrast, Chelsea’s Petr Cech wasn’t tested repeatedly Tuesday but certainly rose in the moments that mattered.)

Barcelona’s defending simply wasn’t good enough.

The tactics were wrong. Pep Guardiola’s over-thought 3-3-4 served only to stack more bodies along the black wall of death, a crowd of congested cleats drawn with anti-soccer purpose 20 yards from Chelsea goal.

But those were failures of the day; misdemeanor offenses compared to the felony crimes of a larger level.

Diversity of attack was sorely lacking Tuesday. True that its Barcelona’s beautiful style that makes Pep Guardiola’s side something special. It made Barca such a worthy and memorable champion a year ago. But it shouldn’t be carried like a burden, a precious cargo to be towed no matter the cost.

And yet, the ball went in, the ball went out.  Again and again.  With a curious, almost bizarre lack of bigger purpose. Hard-headed Barca was so dead-set determined to score the Barca way – and now they’ll have plenty of time to ponder the sorry consequences.

Shoot from beyond the 18? Not the Barca way, apparently. A few more speculative crosses, hoping to catch the visitors as they reorganized after the clearance? Nah.

Along those lines, at a bigger level, where in the world was Plan B? Going forward, Pep Guardiola simply must find one target player capable of changing the look periodically, or must otherwise find a way to be less systematically rigid when Plan A, stylish and pleasing to the eye as it can be, isn’t working.

So five things went wrong Tuesday from Barcelona’s side, undercutting the wealth of skill and smarts developed and gathered majestically at the Catalan home of soccer:

Goalkeeping not good enough; defending not good enough; over-cooked tactics; lack of diversity of attack; lack of a plan B.

But there was one more missing element (again, giving Chelsea proper credit for fiercely navigating the difficult night – even if they’ll be fighting in the Munich final with the shortest of sticks due to injury and suspensions):

Leo Messi picked an awful night to have a stinker.

That’s not Barcelona’s fault, and it’s probably not Messi’s fault, either. That just happens in the game from time to time. The timing in this semifinal case was just tremendously, notoriously ironic.

Skip to Comments (20)
More ProSoccerTalk
Back to Homepage
  1. footballer4ever - Apr 25, 2012 at 8:59 AM

    For all the mighty high priced Chelsea players, it’s a shame that bunkering in defense for the entire game was the best they could do. Credit to Chelsea is given, but not the admiration or respect. That respect and admiration still goes to Barca. One of the things Barca must implement in their system is to have a Plan B and even plan C in the event their most effective tiki taka system does not work because other teams play in the coward way. Football is beautiful when it’s played head to head. Barca , you are still the best, but it’s obvious adjustments to your system is needed, not an overhaul, just a readjustment to go back on top as you deserve.

    • quadassio - Apr 25, 2012 at 10:00 AM

      Dude shut the hell up! It’s called strategy.

      • Steve Davis - Apr 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM

        Love that you are commenting … but please maintain decorum. Disagree at will, but please do so without dipping into zones better left to other blogs.

      • quadassio - Apr 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

        I’m sorry.

  2. wjmooner - Apr 25, 2012 at 9:37 AM

    Plan B is the answer. Prior Barcelona teams could at least change things up with an Eto’o or Ibrahimovic. Even David Villa would have helped. Even without the height he’s more of a threat in teh air and up top than Barcelona’s other attackers.

  3. ocon171 - Apr 25, 2012 at 9:54 AM

    Cowardly way of playing? Although it may not be exciting to watch it was a great tactical move (especially playing a man down over half the game ). Barcelona was out coached. Give credit where credit is due…don’t make excuses.

  4. footballer4ever - Apr 25, 2012 at 10:56 AM

    It seems a few lack reading comprehension, credit was given to Chelsea. What was not gained by the win is respect or admiration on how they “earned” it. Stragety is one thing, style is another. While their strategy was efficient, their playing style, or lackthere of, is not sufficient to be proud of.
    To the few disrespectful ones here, one does not have to agree, but keep the decency to express your “counter-attack” opinion and don’t “bunker” , ala Chelsea, by shutting people up. :D

  5. slxc - Apr 25, 2012 at 11:22 AM

    It is a shame for Barcelona, was removed yesterday because good football, art, magic, the color of the sport. And won the boredom and mediocrity covardia. rest in peace good football ..

  6. footballer4ever - Apr 25, 2012 at 12:10 PM

    @ Steve Davis- thank you. I personally enjoy reading other people’s post, even if i disagree at times, but let’s be better and smarter football fans in how we express our opinions or defend our opinions as well. Long live football, the beautiful game…

  7. footballer4ever - Apr 25, 2012 at 12:46 PM

    @ quadassio- it’s all good….welcome back to the football family and don’t you ever shut up from participating in here :smile:

  8. footballer4ever - Apr 25, 2012 at 12:53 PM

    The last part of my last message was a friendly welcome back smile to the football fans family into NBC sportstalk (smile)

  9. danny136200 - Apr 25, 2012 at 12:57 PM

    I know this is not most popular opinion, but I say Chelsea did that they had to do to win, and I will give them respect and admiration for that. They knew that Barcelona were going to be attacking them all night and pressuring them as soon as they got the ball. Some people might call it negative football and what not, but what was positive about Barcelona’s second half strategy? They couldn’t score and were unwilling to change tactics, cause, you know, that is not the Barcelona way. They had over three quarters of possession for 180 minutes and have two goals to show for it. If that was Arsenal, people would be wanting Wenger’s head and the team would get criticized up and down for trying to pass their way into the net.

    • Steve Davis - Apr 25, 2012 at 1:10 PM

      And you know, I don’t 100 percent disagree with you. In fact, I agree to a point. Hence, I STILL don’t know exactly how to feel about the whole thing. Sometimes journalists feel like they have to take a hard stance on one side or another. I disagree. Sometimes it’s OK to write about conflicted feelings. … And I do keep saying, credit to Chelsea for finding a way.

      • soccerknowitall - Apr 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM

        prefection! and with the torres goal at the end, poetic!

      • schmutzdeck - Apr 28, 2012 at 8:42 AM

        Mr. Davis,

        The first thing I should say is I am one of those people who appreciate the art of great defense. I actually love pitcher’s duels for example.

        The great thing about this particular game is that it highltights one of soccer’s most fascinating characteristics.

        More than any other sport I know, as long as there is not a giant, unreasonable gap between the two teams (like RSL playing my high school for example), if one side is fiercely committed and reasonably disciplined, they can keep the other team from scoring. and when you can do that, well, anything can happen.

        Greece in the Euros in 2004 is just one example of a team with unbreakable will and discipline achieving a great thing by doing just that..

        It’s a cliche but scoring goals when you have to is never easy. Soccer is one of those sports where it is possible to be completely dominant in every way for 99 % of the game and still lose.

        And for me, rooting for the under dog, in this case Chelsea, is just natural.

        One more thing , only a fool tries to beat Barca by playing their game. Chelsea made Barca play their game.

        If Barca were truly great, they would have adjusted and made Chelsea play Barca’s game or beat Chelsea at their own game. But it seems, on the evidence, that Barca are currently jus a good, not a great team.

  10. footballer4ever - Apr 25, 2012 at 1:24 PM

    I’m a Barca and Manchester United fan. I credit Chelsea for finding a way, as ugly as it was accomplished. This loss will actually make Guardiola stick around to bring this team back to glory than to move to another club which has been rumored to happen.

  11. enov86 - Apr 26, 2012 at 11:33 PM

    I disagree with you. I think this opinion depends on the premises that choosing a defensive strategy is not as good soccer as a strong offensive strategy. But I disagree. Sure, a team focusing heavily on the defense is usually not going to provide the glamorous, sexy thriller a team pushing offensive strategy can have. But I don’t think that that makes it any less “good” soccer. Chelsea in this game got the better run of what Barca could do, and they adapted themselves better to that style of play. That’s what good soccer is to me – being adaptable when you need to be and showing yourself capable and skillful enough to force the win, even in gritty situations. Respect, credit, and all the rest to Chelsea.

  12. footballer4ever - Apr 26, 2012 at 11:52 PM

    @ enov86- that’s your take and i respect your opinion. Nevetheless, read my lips when i say this, ” Chelsea will lose to Bayern Munich. What worked for them against Barca will backfire them with Bayern Munich. It’s only fair and hope the football Gods make chelsea pay for their anti-football ways.

    • enov86 - Apr 27, 2012 at 12:56 AM

      I don’t understand your argument, I don’t think. Chelsea knew that Barca was going to bring a heavy-fire offense. They knew that they didn’t have to win, just maintain. So they chose to focus on defense, which is just as important a part of soccer as offense is. How is that anti-football at all? It’s just focusing on perfecting a different side of the game. Just because you’ve got a strong, flashy offense doesn’t necessarily mean you’re the better club on any given day. And who is to say they’ll choose the same strategy when they play Munich? I don’t know if Chelsea will win or lose, but I definitely wouldn’t count them out so easily.

    • schmutzdeck - Apr 28, 2012 at 8:12 AM

      Anti- football and coward way of playing are misleading and rather condescending terms.

      In baseball if you give a great fastball hitter nothing but breaking balls they say you are an intelligent pitcher.

      In the NFL if you run the ball as long as possible to keep it out of Manning or Brady’s hands they say you are an intelligent team.

      In basketball if you play a half court game to slow down a team that is great on transition they say you are a good game time coach.

      If Chelsea refuses to play Barca’s game and gets them to play the way Chelsea want to play you call them cowards. It takes quite a lot of discipline, nerve and courage to do what Chelsea did. I get that you don’t like it but you should know that there are many, such as myself who appreciate what Chelsea did. I am rather tired of Barca’s boring slowdown ball control offense. It would be a a much more boring game if everyone tried to emulate them.

      I’m not a Chelsea fan but there is no reason to think they can’t do as well against Bayern. After all they just beat the best team in the world, so your prediction rings hollow.

      My guess is 0-0 at full time and it will be decided on penalties. II suspect Robben will miss one.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

More ProSoccerTalk
Back to Homepage
Top 10 Player Searches
  1. R. Gronkowski (NFL)
  2. C. Woodson (NFL)
  3. J. Odorizzi (MLB)
  4. M. Goodson (NFL)
  5. M. Garza (MLB)
  1. B. Harper (MLB)
  2. J. Profar (MLB)
  3. G. Hill (NBA)
  4. D. Wade (NBA)
  5. B. Beachy (MLB)
Search player news