just yesterday moratti himself claimed the deal is good business for both clubs, why?

“It seems to me an intelligent move by Barcelona to begin new paths,” he added. “And for Inter, we’re talking about a positive deal also in the financial sense. You have to bear in mind that Eto’o's value as a player is not that of his low transfer value. It was great business for both. I can’t recall a deal of this level between European clubs”

brilliant comment GD, hopefully that email from the admin is to ask you to begin an editorial called “GD’s tactical breakdown”

That said, I reserve judgment on how much Ibra is really worth to FC Barcelona.

More important, I think, is the claim that Ibra is completely contradictory to Barca’s style of play.

“Ibra is simply not a Barca-type striker… All the people involved with Barca said they won’t change the philosophy, but with Ibra they HAVE TO, because he just doesn’t fit the description (as David Villa would for example).”

If I understand your argument correctly, it basically reads that Ibra’s style will force Barca to change their fundamental approach to the game: namely, their fluid passing, off-the-ball movement, and bent toward cleverly maintaining possession to force the opposing defense into difficult situations. The refutation of this argument relies on the demonstration that :

a) Ibra requires a change in Barca’s *tactics,* rather than their *philosophy,* those being distinct aspects of the game; and

b) this tactical change is, in fact, complimentary to Barca’s underlying philosophy on the game.

These two points being accepted, we must also accept that Ibrahimovic will *increase* the overall effectiveness of FC Barcelona’s strategy.

a.

Barcelona’s philosophy primarily relies on pulling defenders out of position (if slightly) and then using speed and technical ability to exploit the resulting gaps. However, this is the philosophy employed by *all* good offensive units. What makes some more effective than others are the *tactics* they are able to employ.

Take Lio Messi and Eto’o as one example. When Messi burns his defender, it forces another defender to come to him, leaving a hole where that defender left. Eto’o regularly exploited that hole so that a simple pass from Messi set up an open shot on goal. The defense was pulled out by dribbling infield. This requires extreme speed and skill, and so is a tactic employed only by correspondingly quick and skillful players.

As the alternative, take Ronaldinho and Inzaghi. Ronaldinho, having not yet recovered is pace, has played recently as a playmaker who is able to slow down and maintain possession of the ball. Meanwhile, Inzaghi feints one dangerous run and then pulls off his marker’s shoulder to open up a shot on goal. Ronaldinho supplies the ball. The same underlying objective and philosophy are the same: distort the defensive shape by forcing the defense’s hand and then exploiting them with short passes. Yet the tactics – juke vs. psych – could not be more different.

By example, we can thus see that changing skill sets does NOT alter the ultimate philosophy of the team as a whole. The objectives, and the means, are the same. Only the immediate tactics are different. This is true of the above examples. As with all good footballers and teams, it will be true also of Ibra and Barca.

b.

You personally outlined the differences in Ibra and Eto’o's styles of play. Using this comparison, I hope to demonstrate a way that Barca can exploit the change through minor tactical modifications.

“Ibra is tall, good with head, has presence in the box, great stamina (hard to wrestle) and good technique. Eto’o is very fast, agile, has an amazing work rate, always pressuring the defenses (the only striker that defends), averagely good with head and strong.”

1. To take only the slightest liberty on your assessment, Ibra is the proverbial “fox in the box” type of player, while Eto’o is much more balanced in an attacking midfield perspective. The difference here is offensively negligible – Messi and Henry become the go-to-ers for through balls requiring speed, and they have a more reliable player to lay it off to in the center. Defensively (and defense is my particular specialty) the forwards’ work rate isn’t especially important. The occasional pressurization keeps centerbacks honest, but generally a CF simply needs to stand between on CB and the other to cut out the passing lane. Ibra is far more than equal to that task. The result is that Messi will have to track back against fullbacks more often, as they won’t be checking to the pressured CBs. This is, in fact, a good thing, because it means that Messi will be recovering slightly deeper than last year, allowing Ibra to receive, turn, and then either shoot or pick out Messi’s run from midfield.

2. As we both have touched on, Ibra has good technique and is “hard to wrestle.” Unlike Eto’o's speed, this makes the CF position much more of a pivot point which collects and then makes the play. The result is that Ibra will take over some of Messi’s transitional responsibilities (which is size is much better suited for) while Messi and Henry supply the pacy runs to get in behind. I think Messi is better in such a role, so the team will benefit on the whole from that. Defensively, his stamina and technique means that Ibra will practically never surrender possession during the transition game, especially in Spain where having the ball makes you more or less immune to hard contact. By holding up play while giving a virtual guarantee of movement, he will allow Alves to easily move into the attack and generally allow the defense more breathing room.

3. Finally for this list, Alves is important. One of Barca’s greatest weapons is to force the defense to play tight against the talented forwards, then just drop it out to Alves for crosses into the box. Ibra, aside from forcing this tight marking due to the above two points, is far better at receiving crosses than Eto’o, and thus makes Barca’s ace-in-the-hole that much more deadly.

Surely more points can be made on both sides, but I hope this limited list helps you to understand how a clever coach like Pep will be able to exploit the *tactical* benefits of Ibra to *enhance the philosophical aims* of the team. Whether or not the ones and zeroes are ideal I cannot fairly judge, but never let it be said that Zlatan Ibrahimovic will ruin the great synergy of the world’s greatest football team.

It is also clear that Valencia (Villa) and Athletico Madrid (Forlan) didn’t want Eto’o as part of the deal. And he was one person that Pep wanted out of the Barca locker room. So we obviously went for a deal in which the priority was to let go off a striker than sign one.

“Inter had to choose whether to say: ‘We’re not selling you’ to Ibrahimovic, or get Eto’o plus Hleb free for a year, plus 50 million euros (£43.2m),” he said.

“This seems an extraordinary deal to me, a 100m (£86.5m) euro deal, the deal of the summer. For me it’s worth 100m (£86.5m) because Eto’o is not worth a euro less than Ibra’”.

Sums the scandal all up. Let’s see how Ibra justifies this money.

Salut!

19 goals on average is good for low scoring Serie A, as you noticed, no one in Inter came close to him.

No shit? Ibra won’t benefit from the ‘supporting cast’ of Barca because they don’t play a long balls game like Rangers FC. His style doesn’t suit Barca’s at all. How has Ibra worked magic, averaging 19 goals in his 3 seasons with Inter? I must admit your bar on magic is quite low my friend.

Ibra on the other hand, has basically worked him magic by himself with a weak midfield in Inter.