Does FC Barcelona need a right back?

It has been assumed by most of the football media in Spain that Barça are very keen to sign a right full back. It is certainly true that the club has not had a top class, reliable attacking right full back since Dani Alves left in 2016. It may not be just a coincidence that since then the club has won nothing in Europe. So signing a top class, reliable right back would seem to make excellent sense.

However, there are a couple of major problems with this. The first is that players that meet the requirement – top class, reliable etc – are in short supply and would cost a fortune. Money that Barça might be better spending on strengthening other positions – a replacement for Busquets for example. The second issue is that, no doubt in part at least, to the lack of a reliable right back Xavi did change the format of the team for most of this year. At least until the league was won, when injury and a rest period for Pedri, made this new system unviable. This new approach was to play with a back three, four midfielders and three attackers, one of whom was Alejandro Balde. This system worked well and was in my view, crucial In winning the league.

So, if Xavi continues with this approach there is no need for a right back at all. You would only need a new right back if you revert to the old, traditional system with two centre backs, one pivot, two creative midfielders, supported by the two attacking or overlapping full backs and three attackers. However doing this would have some serious implications for others in the team and in particular Frankie de Jong.

Barça, pretty much always, like to play with two central creative midfielders – interiors as they are known in Spain. Pedri and Gavi have been the first choice for these positions and they are really the only players for this role. However, with the arrival of İlkay Gündoğan, this has changed, very much to the benefit of the team. İlkay Gündoğan is masterful player for this position and with his experience at Man City will quickly become a first choice. Both Pedri and Gavi will learn a lot from İlkay Gündoğan and will now get the rest that they need at their age.

So far so good, however this raises the question of where will Frankie de Jong fit into this. With three top class creative midfielders, he is most unlikely to play in that position. He has to then play as either the sole pivot, replacing Busquets in that role, or as a partner to a new pivot. The sole pivot role is not de Jong’s best role. He is better suited to a freer role, where he can move about the pitch as and where needed. This is what worked well for the team when Busquets and de Jong played together behind and supporting the two creative midfielders. Much as John Stones does at City alongside Rodri.

Finding a top class, reliable pivot to replace Busquets will not be easy and most important is most unlikely to be cheap. Which brings me back to the original question – does Barça need a right back? For me the answer is no. The team needs a really good pivot, to provide the positional security in front of the back three, and to get the best out of Frankie De Jong. Better to spend good money on this than on a right back. Time will tell.

FC Barcelona – Changes in how they line-up

In this post I want to outline some of the key changes in the way the team line-ups on the pitch. In doing this I will discard the traditional way of describing a team’s line-up, which is either written as 4-3-3 or 4-4-2. In both cases this just describes how a team defends and tells us nothing about how the team attacks and operates when they have the ball.  Which is what most interests fans and probably players as well. 

With this in mind I will start with the traditional or classic on field line-up. This formation has been the mainstay of FC Barcelona since at least the time of Johan Cruyff as manager. This has two central defenders, a defensive midfielder or perhaps more accurately a pivot, two creative/attacking midfielder, the nominally full backs play forward around the same line as the two creative midfielder, two wingers/wide players and a centre forward. I describe this formation as 2-1-4-3. 

As an example of this formation, here is the line-up for 2015 Champions League final. This was the last time Barça won this trophy:

Piqué and Mascherano were the two central defenders, Busquets was the pivot, with Rakitiç and Iniesta as the two creative midfielders. Alves and Alba were the two attacking/overlapping full backs. Messi and Neymar were the two wide players with Suaréz as the centre forward.

Xavi started this season with this formation, but since the turn of the year has switched to a radically different line-up. In doing this he was perhaps motivated by the lack of a reliable attacking right back and the lack of a reliable winger/wide player on the left. Ansu or Ferran can play on the left, but both tend to play inside. The lengthy absence of Dembélé due to injury was possibly another factor in Xavi’s decision to change the team’s formation.

The current line-up now has three defenders across the back. There are two pivots instead of just one. The two creative midfielders remain as do the two wingers/wide players and the centre forward. I describe this formation as 3-2-2-3.

With the current squad this translates into the following line-up:

Christensen, Araújo and Koundé as the three defenders. Busquets and De Jong are the two pivots, with De Jong having a freer role. Pedri and Gavi are the two creative midfielders. In attack, Raphinha plays on the right with Lewandowski as the centre forward. The biggest surprise is that Baldé, nominally a full back plays as the left winger.

Remember, this is Barça’s formation when they have the ball and are attacking. The advantages of this system are 1) there is a more solid defensive line with three defenders who tend to stay back instead of just two; 2) with two pivots and the two creative midfielders the team now has four players in midfield, which will often give them a numerical advantage. The main downside is that the two wide players need to stay wide most of the time and they need to be able and willing to track back when possession is lost. Baldé and Raphinha are good at this, while Dembélé, now fit again, may be less reliable in this aspect of his game. 

With the league now won, it will be interesting to see if Xavi sticks with this formation for the remaining four games. The current squad is a bit short on top quality replacements for some of the key players, For example the only creative midfielder, apart from Pedri and Gavi is Pablo Torrre, another youngster who has hardly played at all. Ansu and Ferran could play there and have come on in that position in recent games. Sergio Roberto and Kessie will presumably also get some more game time. We might learn a lot about the depth of the squad from these four games.

Barça’s Signing Priorities

With a new head coach, Xavi, and the winter break for new signings approaching, lots is being written about who Barcelona are about to sign. For what it is worth here is my tuppence worth on this. No names, just where the priorities lie in my view.

I identify two priority positions that the team need to fill – centre forward and a winger/wide player. By centre forward I mean a proven regular goal scorer who plays primarily in the centre of the attack. Much of Barcelona’s recent successes have come with such a player – Luis Suarez and Samuel Eto’oo for example. At the moment, due to serious injuries, the club are short of this type of player. Ansu Fati is the great hope for the future, but he is only now recovering from almost a year out with injuries. Nobody really knows if he will fully recover his fitness and form of before. He and the team need another reliable centre forward. Sergio Aguero was to fill this role, but with his tragic injury he may never play again. Martin Braithwaite is another on the injury list. Though he can play as a centre forward, much like Memphis his best position is starting from one of the wings.

All this means that the team need a top class, reliable centre forward. Someone who will both challenge Ansu Fati and provide some respite for the youngster.

The other priority position is that of winger/ wide player. By this I mean someone who plays or at least starts out wide on the wing. As with a centre forward, Barcelona has always found success with two players who can play out wide. This can be a classic, traditional winger – one who has great ball control and can dribble successfully. Messi, Neymar and Ronaldinho for example come into this category. The other type of wide player is more of a direct, pacy striker, for example like Henry, Villa or Pedro. At the moment, again due to a range of serious injuries, the team has only one fully fit player who plays wide – Memphis. Dembélé  is the other wide player, but he is so often injured, as of now. The club can only pray and hope that this time he not only fully recovers, but remains fully fit for the rest of the season. There are a few teenagers who can play on the wing, but none has as yet demonstrated enough to be a reliable choice.

Which means that the club need another reliable and experienced wide player, whether a winger or a striker who can play wide. Such a player would offer competition to both Memphis and Dembélé and some respite to both. In addition, Martin Braithwaite can also play on the wing. Though unlikely to ever be a first choice player, Braithwaite is a very good squad player and very useful to have available. 

These are for me the two key priorities for new signings. The only other position that might come under review is that of left back. Jordi Alba is very good and still has a good couple of years in him. At present the other left back is Alejandro Balde, another teenager. So far he has looked good and done well when asked to play. However Xavi may feel that he wants a more experienced cover for Alba. The rest of the defence seems to me to be well covered, at least in the short term. With the re-signing of Dani Alves alongside Dest and Mingueza, there are plenty of options for the right back slot. The team now has five central defenders, six if you include Mingueza, who can play there. Just how fit Umtiti really is remains a bit of a mystery. However that still leaves four players for two positions – Eric, Araujo, Piqué and Lenglet. It would only become an issue if Xavi wanted to play three defenders at the back, though with Mingueza also available, probably not too much of a problem.

It looks that there will be exciting times ahead for Barcelona’s midfield. With the breakthrough of Pedri, Gavi and Nico the future of this line looks very promising. In addition the club still have the three older, more experienced players available – Busquets, De Jong and Sergi Roberto. Plenty of options for Xavi to choose from. So, I would be surprised if the club were to try and sign yet another midfielder. The big problem for Xavi will be what to do with Coutinho and Riqui Puig. Neither has fully convinced and with three exciting teenagers around – two of whom are full internationals – not sure either has much of a future with the club.

The biggest challenge facing the club would seem to be the lack of money to sign very good players. Top class centre forwards and wingers do not usually come cheap. Moving on some of the current squad may be an essential part of raising enough money for new signings. Welcome aboard Xavi!

FC Barcelona – Looking ahead to next season

Now that we are out of the Champions League and we have a new President – welcome back Joan Laporta, it is as good a time as any to start looking ahead to next season. Though the team is still in with a shout for the League and has reached the final of the Copa, most fans realise that the current squad is not strong enough to reach the next level – success in Europe.

There is more than enough quality in the current squad to be optimistic, but some serious changes need to be made. This post looks at what these changes might be. Many names have already been mentioned in the media, but usually without any context re. how they would fit into the team.

A starting point for any discussion about incomings and outgoings needs to be how will the team be organised on the pitch. No-one really knows and adding to this uncertainty is whether Koeman himself will still be the coach for next season.

Still a choice has to be made and for the purpose of this post I am going to assume that Barça will continue to play in the formation they are currently using. This has a back line of three centre backs, a defensive midfielder and two attacking midfielders. Instead of wingers this system uses two attacking wing backs. Up front there is only one out and out striker. The picture is completed with Messi in a free role.

On the whole this formation has worked well when used. It has one plus and a couple of minuses. The plus is the greater security defensively. This comes in large part from using full backs as wing backs – Dest and Alba to be precise. They are more reliable at tracking back and helping the defence.

The disadvantages are twofold – a reliance on Messi and a reduced goal threat.  This was clearly evident in the match against PSG.  Messi has a unique role in the team, he can play more or less wherever he wants and is the principal playmaker and also the main goal scorer. Dembélé is an amazing player, his ability to run at and through the defence can cause havoc and panic in the opposition. With him as the sole striker the team gains in pace, but loses out on goal scoring effectiveness, as he is most definitely not a reliable finisher.

The rest of the positions are, barring injuries, well covered at least in terms of first choice.  Ter Stegen remains one of the world’s best goalies. Araujo, Piqué and Lenglet make up a reliable back three. The problems come when they are unavailable.  Mingueza is fine, but Umtiti is no longer good enough for this level.  The anticipated arrival of García will help. If the club can offload Umtiti, there will be space for someone like Alaba to strengthen the defence.

It is pretty similar when it comes to the midfield three – Busquets, De Jong and Pedri make up a well balanced midfield. However there is little in the way of reliable cover. Pjaniç has so far failed to convince as the alternative to Busquets. De Jong may be the long term replacement, but for the moment is needed more as one of the attacking players. Alternatives to De Jong in this role are also thin on the ground. Sergi Roberto can play in that position, but is more of a back up than a serious challenger to De Jong. Ilaix Moriba from the B team has recently burst on the scene and has done well and has the characteristics – pace, physique and control to become a first choice player. However he is only 18 years old and may have to be content to come on as a substitute. Pedri has in his first season become indispensable for Koeman, whatever system he uses. He fits in perfectly to the current formation. However there does not seem to be anyone else in the squad who can replace him, let alone challenge him for first choice. Riqui Puig would seem to be the natural alternative, but Koeman clearly does not rate him highly enough. Interestingly Ilaix has come on for Pedri instead of Riqui. Even though Ilaix is a different type of player. 

With Ilaix and Sergio Roberto the position of De Jong is reasonably covered.  That of Pedri is not. Not sure if there is anyone available with the kind of skill set that Pedri has. At least not for a transfer fee that Barça could afford.  There may be someone in the B team who could step up, much as Ilaix has done.

Dest and Alba are very good in their new, wing back role. Once again there is not too much in the way of cover. Mingueza can play in this role instead of Dest, but is less skilful in attack. He is also more likely to be used in defence. On the other side there is also no cover for Alba as a wing back. Junior Firpo should be a good fit for this role, but like Riqui Puig, does not seem to have the confidence of Koeman.  Of course, an alternative is not to use full backs in this role. A more natural attacking player, a winger for example, can also play in this position, if they can be relied upon to track back and help the defence.

As regards the sole striker, this is where Barça is in the greatest need of renewal. No-one in the current squad has the combination of pace, control and goal scoring reliability to successfully play this role. Dembélé is not a pure finisher, while Griezman lacks the pace for this role. Ansu Fati, if he fully recovers, could fit in here, but the jury is still out on whether her has the reliable goal scoring touch. He is also better used elsewhere in the team. For these reasons it is easy to see why so many fans would love to see Erling Haaland as the club’s major signing. He does have the combination of skills necessary for this role. Haaland could play in just about any formation, so his signing makes eminent sense. Can the club afford to buy him? Given the huge debt the club has, this will prove to be Laporta’s biggest challenge.

Then we come to Messi, another challenge for Laporta. Will he go, will he stay? A bit like last year, with the key difference that this time he can go and if he does, he will go for free.  Messi it has to be said is irreplaceable. It will be a long time before someone with his skill set comes along again. If he stays then the current formation, with the arrival of Haaland or someone similar, could be very successful. 

If, on the other hand, Messi decides to go, then it becomes a different ball game. Barça do have a couple of players who can play in that advanced free to roam position. None of course has the range of skills that Messi has. Pedri has the close control, passing and vision, but is no goal scorer at all. Someone would then have to fill Pedri’s current position. So, possible, but unlikely. The player most suited for this position is Griezmann as it is his natural position. He has good control, passing and vision and is a good, reliable goal scorer. He lacks pace though. But still for me would be the best option is Messi leaves.

Whether Messi goes or stays, the big problem for the team is the lack of goals. Messi plus Haaland would help, but would the two of them alone be enough. Here it is worth looking back at the more successful of Barça teams. One of the most noticeable features of these teams is that they all had three reliable goal scorers, two of whom played wide, either as wingers or starting from a wide position.  Think of Messi, Suarez and Neymar, the last time Barça won the Champions League. Or go back to Pedro, Messi and Henry, or even further back to Figo, Kluivert and Rivaldo.

Of course, just have three goal scorers, even three as prolific as Messi, Suarez and Neymar does not in itself guarantee success. Otherwise Barça would have won the Champions League at least two or three more times. Which brings me back to wing backs. If Barça are to stick with this line up, then I feel at least one of the wing backs should be a natural attacking winger. The current squad has three to chose from – Dembélé, Trincão and Ansu Fati.  They all bring different skills and some goal threat. Ansu Fati is probably the most reliable in that regard. A lot will depend on his recovery from injury.  Such an approach would give the team much greater flexibility than at present.

So, to recap, as regards new signings, the priority has to be an out and out central striker. Haaland or Lukaku would be wonderful, if either could be persuaded or afforded. If neither can come there doesn’t seem to be any other reliable options. Someone like Depay may be more affordable, but he seems to me to more like Griezmann in the way he plays.

If García is already pretty much signed and sealed, another central defender would be good, but only if he can play on the left. The club would probably first have to persuade Umtiti to move on. But given his injuries who would pay his elevated salary.  As regards wing backs/full backs much will depend on whether the coach will always want to use a full back in this role. If so, will he persevere with Firpo, try and sign someone else or promote someone from the B team?

Given the lack of money I do not foresee many other changes. Any other signings would depend in the first instance on moving on some of the current squad. Umtiti has already been mentioned  and it is pretty much assumed that Neto and Coutinho will also leave the club. Braithwaite is likely to join them and Junior Firpo may also leave. His name is frequently mentioned as one to move on. Riqui Puig was expected to be the next Barça star, but for whatever reason this has not happened and his future at the club is very marginal. He doesn’t want to leave, but staying on will do little for his game. Sergi Roberto and Pjaniç are another two to watch. Neither is assured a starting place and the club may reckon they could manage well without one of them.

Up front it is more confusing. If the coach sticks with wing backs and using the full backs in that role, a few players suddenly become redundant. Especially if the club does succeed in signing someone like Haaland. I think the club would want to keep Ansu Fati, if he fully recovers, which would leave the future of Trincão and Dembélé in the air. Whether Messi goes or stays, i think it likely that Griezmann will stay.  Either to replace Messi or as cover for him if he stays.

We may get a better idea of Koeman’s thinking over the next few weeks. And if he goes, then everything is up in the air again. A long summer awaits us all.

FC Barcelona – Progress Report

These are difficult times for Barça and fans. An, at best, stuttering start to the season, culminating in an unexpected 3-0 loss at home to Juventus in the Champions League. What has gone wrong? Let’s look at some of the possible explanations.

At the institutional level there has been turmoil, uncertainty and much criticism for some time. President Bartomeu had been under pretty much incessant attack for over a year or more. He finally succumbed to this pressure and resigned. The club is now under an interim junta, unable to take long term or costly measures. At least seven candidates are planning to stand for election which will be early in January.

Until then no-one really knows what the immediate, let alone, long term future of the club will be.  This uncertainty at boardroom level may have negatively impacted on some players and even on the current coach, Ronald Koeman. Clearly he does not know how long he will be in charge of the team.

I don’t think this is a major factor in the team’s erratic performances. All are professionals and their own future is also at stake. Not giving 100% not only damages the team, but would also decrease a player’s chances  of securing an enhanced deal, either at Barça or another club. So, I think we need to look elsewhere for explanations of these poor performances.

To some extent the poor results, as opposed to performances, are more to do with individual errors. These can happen to any team, but there have been too many recently and they have cost the club dearly in terms of lost points. Difficult to know why this is happening. This is not mainly about a collective defensive failure, as many of the most costly errors have been individual.

Injuries to key players have undoubtedly had a detrimental effect on the team’s performances. The long term loss of Piqué and Ansu Fati in particular has been significant. Injuries to other key players have come at inopportune moments, Dembélé the latest. Still a club as big as Barça should not be so badly affected by these injuries.

A number of commentators have insisted that the team’s new formation – 4-2-3-1 is at the root of the problems. The argument is that the more traditional 4-3-3 formation is better suited and more effective for the team. I have to disagree with this view. Firstly there is actually very little difference between the two systems. In the case of Barça and all attack minded teams, both formations rely on two wide players and a centre forward. The wide players are either wingers, think of Neymar, Dembélé  or Ronaldinho, or forwards who can play on the wing, think of David Villa, Henry or Fati. A top class centre forward completes the attacking trio, think of Suárez or Etoo.

The only difference lies in midfield. With 4-3-3, there is one central/holding/defensive player, think of Busquets, with two creative, attacking players, think of Xavi and Iniesta. With 4-2-3-1, there are two central players, think of Busquets, De Jong, and only one attacking, link player, think of Griezman, Coutinho.

The difficulty for the coach, whoever he is, is that the current squad has too many players whose preferred and best position is more or less the same. This is as the attacking/link player in a 4-2-3-1 formation. Griezman, Coutinho, Pedri and Messi, all prefer to play in this role. And of course, only one can do so. There is only one genuine centre forward – Braithwaite, who good though he is, is perhaps not quite the top class striker needed for this position with Barça.

As regards wingers/genuine wide players, the club started the season with three contenders – Fati, Dembélé and new signing Trincâo. Fati is out long term, Dembélé is still injury prone, while Trincâo has not been used regularly. Faced with this prospect of only one genuine winger, Koeman has regular played one of Griezman, Coutinho, Pedri and Messi as a nominal wide player. Sometimes two of them play wide. I say nominal, because none of them stay wide very much. They all tend to come inside. This can, and often does, lead to a great deal of overcrowding in the centre of the attack. Lots of attempts at intricate passing, but little in the way of goal scoring chances.

What all this means is that to play players in their preferred, most effective positions, a good number of very good players have to be left on the bench. If Braithwaite plays as the centre forward and Dembélé and Trincâo play on the wings, there is space for only one of Griezman, Coutinho, Pedri and Messi. So, it is easy to understand why Koeman has to try and juggle his players into an effective attacking unit.

Messi, it will be noticed, doesn’t for me easily fit into a 4-2-3-1 formation. He is not disciplined enough for me to be played either wide right or as the attacking link player. He doesn’t fully defend and is a bit too self indulgent in possession. The one place where he can still use his brilliance is in the centre forward role, or false nine, as it is sometimes known. He has successfully played there before. It would give him lots of freedom for movement and to link with Griezman.

When it comes to a 4-3-3 formation, the above comments on the front three still stand. You play two wingers and either Messi or Braithwaite in the centre.  With two creative, attacking midfielders, you now have more options there. For these positions the club has Coutinho, Pedri, Aleñá, Puig, De Jong andSergi Roberto. For the one central midfield role, the coach has Busquets, De Jong and Pjaniç. De Jong as noted can also play as an attacking midfielder.

The big loser with this formation is Griezman, as his preferred role has disappeared. There is the same problem with the other formation, namely that the squad has only two genuine wide players, Dembélé and Trincâo. One of whom is injury prone and the other is still adapting to playing for Barça.

To sum all this up, I do not think the main issue for the club is the formation. The root problem is that Koeman has inherited an unbalanced squad, which has been made worse by serious injuries to key players. Looking ahead, there are a number of decisions the new board and coach really need to take. Depending on which formation they want they need to sell either Coutinho or Griezman. They don’t play well together, and Griezman is much the better player in a 4-2-3-1 formation. If they opt for a 4-3-3 system then Griezman doesn’t fit in at all.

Whichever formation they plump for, Barça are traditionally most effective when playing with two genuine wide players. Hopefully Fati will return fully recovered and Trincâo will have started to fulfil his potential. If Dembélé can remain fully fit, he could become a star for the team. Can the club rely on his fitness though? Konrad de la Fuente from the B team may be another star in the making. If not, the club should sign a top class wide player.

As regards the centre forward position, the club do need a top class, reliable goal scorer. Braithwaite is a very good reserve, but the team needs someone else as first choice. Messi can play there, but he probably doesn’t want to and is unlikely to be a long term solution. Perish the thought, but I tend to agree with those who think it would have been better for all concerned if the club had kept Luis Suárez and sold Messi in the summer. The squad would be slightly better balanced and the club would be in a bit less of financial trouble.

Implementing Independence

Now that opinion polls are showing a clear majority of people in Scotland are in favour of independence we need to start looking seriously at how this majority can be made a reality. The starting point for this post is that there has been a majority vote in Scotland in favour of independence. A Democratic Event as Craig Dalzell of The Common Green would call it. Craig has written a very clear post outlining the various options for such a Democratic Event. My starting point is that such an event has happened resulting in a clear majority in favour of independence.

What happens next? This is to my mind the key question. Again I am assuming that the UK government will continue to reject the result of such a Democratic Event and refuse to even contemplate negotiations. This is of course just an assumption, but one we need to make and take seriously.

We need to consider carefully what steps the Scottish government and Parliament can take in response to a continuing No from the UK government. If independence is to become a reality then the Scottish government needs to very quickly demonstrate that it is in control of the country and its economy. Only by exercising the powers of independence will independence be deemed to be legitimate. Crucially other countries will only recognise our independence if the Scottish government is seen to be in control.

The first act of the Scottish government and Parliament would need to be a Declaration of Independence. Just to be clear here, I am not advocating this as my preferred route. However this post is about what can be done in the event of a continuing refusal to negotiate on the part of the UK government.

What will this – a Declaration of Independence – mean in practice? I can think of two key areas that will determine if the Scottish government is in control or not. The first is money or more precisely the ability to raise taxes. The other would be matters to do with law and order.

Money first. Governments need to raise money through taxes. Borrowing is also important but taxes are key. Not just because of the money raised, but because the power of taxation is one of the key elements of legitimacy. Income tax is already devolved, so should not present any problems. The challenge will come with VAT, corporation tax, excise duty etc. How quickly can the Scottish government get in place a system to allow companies to pay their taxes to a new Scottish Revenue? Secondly what happens if some, all, most companies decide to continue to make payments through the UK revenue systems? This is a serious challenge. It would help if work on this has already begun. No idea if it has or not.

Setting up a Central Bank is another necessity. Common Weal has already done work on this. However if independence is contested, then this will need to be done much quicker and in different circumstances to those envisioned by Common Weal.

The other key issue is what I have called law and order. I leave out the army and RAF here. Not because they are unimportant. But because I feel the UK would be most reluctant to use any kind of military force, at least in the beginning.

What will matter is the action or inaction of the police, the law courts and the law profession in general. This has been already alluded to in relation to taxes. For independence to work and be seen as legitimate, then the mast majority of people, companies, organisations need to adhere to the decisions and laws as set out by the Scottish government and Parliament.

Related to this will be what happens to the BBC in the immediate aftermath of a Declaration of Independence? Will an early act of the Scottish Parliament set up a Scottish Broadcasting network? If people and organisations are to be encouraged to accept independence it would help if not all of the media was opposed.

My overarching point in all of this is that we need to be prepared for what happens after a positive Democratic Event. If the UK government relents and begins negotiations then everything will be worked out more or less harmoniously. However if the UK government refuses to even begin negotiations, what then?

If we do nothing and just wait and hope and pray that the UK government changes tack, then what was the point of a positive Democratic Event? If independence is conditional on approval by the UK government, then this is not independence. Being ready and prepared to act unilaterally may be the only way to persuade the UK government to come to the table.

The future for FA Barcelona’s youth academy

This post has been prompted by a couple of talking points in the media. The first relates to the Spanish under 21 team’s victory in the recent European Championship. The remarkable fact is that this very talented squad contained not a single player from Barcelona. Almost unheard of in the past.

 

The second point is a bit more long standing and is about the lack of young players from the B team getting promoted to the first team squad. The youth academy, the famous La Masía, was once the pride and joy of Barça, with an apparently never ending production line of some of the best players in the world. Think of Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets etc. What, if anything, has gone wrong?

 

As a starting point I have looked at the figures for B team players moving to the first team squad. The period I have chosen for this analysis is from the 2003/04 season to last season, 2018/19. A period of 16 seasons. I chose to start in 2003/04 as this was the beginning of the new Joan Laporta reign in charge of the club and the first season with Frank Rijkaard as coach. during this  period a total of 21 players from the B team were promoted to the first team squad.

 

The following key points emerged:

1. Only a tiny number of B team players make it to the first team. The average worked out at just over one player per season.

2. An even smaller number of B team players go on to become first team regulars. I define this as someone who plays around 65% of matches for more than two seasons. Over the 16 year cycle only five of the B team players promoted to the first team became regular players for more than two seasons.

3. Apart from Thiago Motta and Thiago Alcántara, no other potential first team regulars have left the club. This refers to players who went directly from the B team to the first team.

4. None of the other former B team players has gone on to play for a team of similar standing to FC Barcelona.

5. There has been a very noticeable drop in the number of B team players who have gone on to become first team regulars. Since the arrival of Pedro and Busquets in 2008, only one other B team player has become a first team regular. This is Sergi Roberto who was promoted to the first team back in 2013, and became a regular in the 2015/16 season.

The last point is probably the most relevant as to why there are serious questions about the youth academy (La Masía) and B team at Barcelona. One success in 10 years is poor reward. So what may have caused this lack of success?

1. In 2014 FIFA imposed a two period transfer ban on Barcelona, preventing them from signing new players. This was in response to the club being found guilty of breaching FIFA’s rules on the transfer of players aged under 18. As a result of this decision Barcelona lost a significant number of talented juvenile players. Some of whom may have gone on to reach the first team squad.

1. The FIFA ban may also have had an adverse effect on the club’s scouting system. Certainly for a spell afterwards Barcelona did not manage to sign any of the up and coming talent in Spain or elsewhere. Which perhaps explains why not a single Barça player made the recent under 21 squad.

Looking Ahead

Last season one player from the B team did get promoted to the first team – Carles Aleñá. He missed the first half of the season through injury, but has played well when required, and will continue with the first team for this season. Will he make it to a third?

 

Will anyone get promoted for the coming season? The most likely is Riqui Puig, who is regarded as probably the most gifted youngest to emerge for many a year. He has already played a few times for the first team, and his class is there to see. An attacking, creative midfielder, he faces stiff competition to secure a place. As does Aleñá, who is also an attacking creative midfielder.

 

Another name that has been mentioned is centre forward Abel Ruiz. He may be the natural successor to Luis Suárez, if the club decide not to buy in a replacement. May have to wait a year yet.

 

Abel Ruiz is one of no less than six Barça players who are in the Spanish under 19 squad for the upcoming European Championship. A further two players in the squad are former Barcelona players who recently left the club to sign for Manchester City and Dortmund respectively.  This may be a clear sign that La Masía has begun to recapture its former glory.

 

The one major cloud on the horizon is the risk of losing players when still juveniles. The last two seasons has seen five teenagers leave the club to try and improve their chances of first team football elsewhere. In part this is a reflection of how difficult it is to break into the Barça first team squad, let alone become a regular first team player. Only time will tell if those who have left succeed.

In Defence of Murdo Fraser

I must point out that this post is not about Murdo Fraser as a person. I have never had the good or misfortune to have met the man personally. So I have nothing to say about him. Nor am I about to defend his political positions as I oppose just about everything he and other conservatives stand for.

No, this post is a defence of Mr Fraser’s right to be a MSP. I regularly on twitter come across comments to the effect that Mr Fraser has never “won” an election, has repeatedly been “rejected” by the voters and therefore has no right to be in Parliament at all.

I find this argument not just unconvincing, but a serious misrepresentation and attack on the voting system we have for elections to Holyrood. It is also potentially dangerous as it could lead to a change is this system.

Our electoral system for the Scottish Parliament is a hybrid one, a mixture of First Past the Post(FPTP)  and Proportional Representation(PR). It is similar to the system used in Germany. There are 73 constituencies, each of which elects one MSP by FPTP. The other 56 MSPs are elected  in eight regional constituencies, each of which elects seven MSPs. These Additional Members are elected using a form of PR.

The system is deliberately designed to ensure that the total representation from each of the eight regions, including those MSPs elected by FPTP, corresponds more closely to the share of the votes cast for each political party in that region.

The key word here is representation. The system as a whole is not about winning, but about ensuring fair representation in Parliament for the parties that the electors have voted for.

In this sense Mr Fraser has as much right to be in Parliament as any other MSP, irrespective of whether elected by FPTP or PR.  Mr Fraser was elected by the voters in the Mid-Scotland Fife regional constituency. Or more precisely, by the 25% of the voters in the region who voted Conservative in the 2016 election.

These conservative voters have the same right to be fairly represented in Parliament as do the 6% who voted for the Green party, or the 7% who voted for the LibDems, or the 18% who voted Labour, or the 41% who voted SNP.  All these voters are entitled to be as fairly as possible represented in Parliament.

The hybrid system we use in Scotland is not a fully proportional system. This is due to the larger number of MSPs elected by FPTP. In Germany their version of the Additional Member System is fully proportional. This means that there can always be some small anomalies.

As happened in the 2016 election in Mid-Scotland and Fife region. However the anomaly did not affect the number of MSPs elected for the Greens, the LidDems, nor for the Conservatives. It did though affect the number of MSPs elected for the SNP and Labour. The SNP vote share of 41% should have resulted in seven MSPs. However as the SNP won eight of the single member constituencies, elected by FPTP, they were able to retain all of these eight MSPs. To the detriment of Labour, whose 18% share of the vote should have given them three MSPs instead of the two they were allocated.

So, if anybody wants to reconsider the justness of the results in 2016 in Mid-Scotland it would not be about the Conservatives, but about how an unfair system resulted in the SNP winning a seat that should have gone to Labour. Any takers?

As a complement to the above, I did a bit of research into the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections, using the House of Commons Briefing Paper CBP7599. This Briefing Papers gives all the details about that election. I was particularly interested in the share of the vote for the “winning” candidates in the 73 single member constituencies.

It transpires that only 29 of the “winning” candidates won over 50% of the votes in their constituency. This represents just 40% of the 73 constituency MSPs. Or just over 22% of all 129 MSPs. Or to put is another way,  44 constituency MSPs were rejected by a majority of the voters in their constituency. This amounts to 60% of all constituency MSPs.

In this context it is worth noting that eight constituency MSPs “won” their seat with less than 40% of the votes cast. Quite how this is regarded as legitimate while Mr Fraser and the other regional MSPs can be held to be illegitimate is a bit beyond me.

Out of interest the MSP with the lowest “winning” share of the vote is none other than Ruth Davidson. She was elected in Edinburgh Central with just 30.4%  of the votes cast. Of these eight MSPs elected with less than 40% of the votes cast, four are Conservative, two are Labour and two are SNP.

None of the previous paragraph should be interpreted as denying these eight MSPs their right to be in Parliament. What it should do is to raise some serious questions about the legitimacy of retaining FPTP as part of our electoral system.

I would much prefer a fully PR system. Parliament is where our representatives sit. As such the terms winning and losing should be used much less often. What matters is fair representation for the way voters cast their votes.  For those interested in this I would recommend a look at the systems used in Denmark and Sweden.

 

UDI may be needed

Brexit still dominates the media, even though nothing of substance is likely to happen in the next few days or even weeks. So, a bit of space to reflect on one aspect of the other issue of major concern to us – Scottish Independence. I refer to the possibility of a Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI).

Some proponents of independence are in favour while others seem to want to rule it out completely. In this post I  look at the circumstances in which a UDI may be the only way forward.

I start with emphasising that Independence will only happen when a majority of people living in Scotland have voted for this outcome. So, to be clear, I am most definitely not talking about imposing independence on an unwilling public.

There is probably general agreement that a referendum is the most appropriate way to determine if there is a majority in favour of independence. If the UK government were to agree to another independence referendum, as in 2014, this would almost certainly obviate the need for a UDI.

However there is little sign that this or any UK government will agree to this. 2014 was not the overwhelming endorsement of the U.K. that Unionists were hoping for.

If the UK government continues to oppose a referendum then the pro-Indy movement needs an alternative. Otherwise we are allowing Westminster a permanent veto on independence.

The alternatives seem to be 1. a referendum without the consent of the UK government; 2. using a Scottish parliament election as a substitute referendum. Both pose their own difficulties, a legal challenge against a referendum for example. However it would be extremely difficult for a UK government to stop a parliamentary election.

It is my contention that one way or another voters in Scotland will be given another chance to vote for independence. If there is a clear majority in favour of independence, what next?

The hope is that faced with this clear democratic expression of public support for independence the UK government would begin negotiations in good faith. This may well happen. However we need to seriously consider and be prepared for a refusal on the part of the UK government to accept a positive vote in favour of independence.

It is in this situation that I believe that a UDI needs to remain an option. I am under no illusions that a UDI would be a difficult option. It would also pose serious problems for the UK government. The threat of a UDI may be enough to demonstrate that people in Scotland are serious about securing independence. However if the UK government refuses to recognise a democratic vote in favour of independence then what is the alternative?

This is my challenge to those who want to rule a UDI out, what is your alternative?

 

 

Brexit – saving May’s deal?

A New Year and time to put some thoughts to paper once again. Not that a lot has changed with pretty much the same story dominating the media. With Brexit we are still mired in the deep impasse that has existed more or less since the referendum. As the estimable David Allen Green reminds us: “In a matter of weeks, UK will leave EU by automatic operation of law, without a deal. This is the default unless deal is agreed, or there is an extension, or A50 is revoked. None of these three possibilities currently seem likely.”

The deal that David Allen Green refers to is in a Withdrawal Agreement. It is worth reminding ourselves of this. The deal is about how the UK formally leaves the EU. It provides for a transition period, more realistically a standstill period, which will last for two or possibly four years. This is to allow for the brand new, comprehensive trade deal between the UK and the EU that everyone says they want. Most trade experts reckon that even four years is a tad optimistic for negotiating and implement such a new deal. But we can for the moment safely kick this particular can down the road.  More immediate and pressing issues are at hand.

The key one is can Theresa May get her deal through parliament? For a second time the UK parliament is about to start debating this Withdrawal Agreement (WA). A vote is expected to take place next week. According to most informed observers the WA is almost certain to fail. For one reason or another most Brexiteers dislike the WA, even though it does achieve what they want – leaving the EU. However, many Brexiteers fear that, in part because of the Northern Ireland backstop, any future trade deal with the EU will leave the UK so closely aligned with the EU that the UK becomes a rule taker. The infamous BINO outcome – Brexit in name only.

A majority of the rest of the MPs also oppose the WA, either because they oppose Brexit altogether, or as Labour claim, they insist they can get a better WA. So the best guess, note guess, not a prediction, is that the WA will fail.

However all is not lost for Theresa May and her WA. She and the government are trying to frighten enough MPs to vote for the WA on the grounds that the alternative is a No deal Brexit. Something that would be so damaging to the economy that nobody in their right mind would allow it to happen.

The difficulty for May is that the majority of Brexiteers prefer a No deal outcome to the WA. Indeed for many, possibly most of them No deal is their preferred outcome. The prospect of No deal is most unlikely to win over this group of Brexiteers. Quite the opposite.

On the other hand those who oppose Brexit or hope for a better WA don’t seem to believe that the government would actually, when push comes to shove, go through with a No deal outcome. Some of the recent moves in parliament are designed to avoid a No deal.

An alternative approach for Mrs May would be to threaten recalcitrant Brexiteers not with a No deal, but with No Brexit. The prospect of revoking article 50 and remaining in the hated EU might well concentrate the minds of all but a few Brexiteers.

The difficulty for Mrs May with this approach is that neither she nor the government can seriously push for this – remaining in EU. If she did make this a realistic option, then while she might win back Brexiteers, she runs the risk of losing as many pro Remain MPs. I am thinking of the likes of Ken Clarke and Anna Soubry for example.

So, somehow the government has to make revoking article 50 genuinely possible, but not definite and not with government support. The most recent amendments in parliament, which in principle return power to MPs, may well paradoxically work in favour of May’s deal. Not at the moment though. Jacob Rees-Mogg for one doesn’t appear to be worried.

However, as someone once said, a week is a long time in politics. So, to recap, the WA is still unlikely to pass in parliament, but it cannot be completely ruled out. MPs work and vote in mysterious ways.

Further speculation can await the result of the vote on the WA next week.