The Two Faces of Messi: Argentina vs Barcelona

By: Ade C. | October 14th, 2009

The criticism of Leo Messi’s form with the Argentina NT, particularly when compared to what he does for Barcelona, has been so unrelenting lately that even Víctor Valdés, a man who’s been closest to a national team call-up when he has been sticking pins in an Iker Casillas doll, has had to come to his defence.

Let’s face it, when playing with the albiceleste, Messi is not the same marvel than he is when playing in blaugrana. He has scored just four goals in the qualification phase, and none of them have been particularly crucial; he assists less, plays less and generally shines much less when sharing the field with Tévez, Agüero & Co. than at the Camp Nou.

Which one is the Evil Twin? You get three guesses and the first two don’t count…

The Argentinean press, sensible and unrushed as always (yes, I’m rolling my eyes here), has made loud calls to bench Leo in the match against Uruguay, with the most benevolent of them agreeing to let Messi play a few minutes in the second half; apparently, over 60% of Argentineans polled agreed with this, while the culés watching from Europe can’t understand why anyone would leave Leo in the bench when he was itching to play (although we’re grateful for it, too; the less he plays, the less chances he has to get injured, and also the angrier he’ll be on his return to Barcelona, which means he’ll make all that much more of an effort… yes, call me selfish, but don’t you remember his excellent form after losing with Argentina against Brazil in September?).

The bright minds over at Clarín, Sport and The Spoiler , to name but a few, have all tried to pitch in with reasons for these Dr-Jekyll-and-Mr-Hyde performances, and I figured I should do my own bit of analysis (remember, it’s not plagiarism if it’s culled from many sources, then it’s called “research”).

1) Maradona is not Pep: I’m going to say Diego was a better *player* than Guardiola (although you’re free to disagree), but when it comes to managing, the mere threat of comparison is unfair. Pep has an idea, a style (and I’m not just talking about his cardigans and the infamous leather tie) and a way to communicate this to his players; Maradona has plenty of ideas, but they all seem contradictory, and his players often look like lost little lambs being shooed onto the pitch with no instructions.

2) Agüero and Tévez (or Palermo, or Higüaín) are not Henry and Eto’o (or Ibrahimovic): sometimes it seems as if Messi enjoys giving assists more than he enjoys scoring beautiful goals; Samuel, Thierry, Bojan, Pedrito, Xavi, Andrés, Zlatan and a long list of etceteras would certainly agree with me. Problem is, his partners in the Argentinean strike-force are not used to this generosity; you see no selfless assists in Real Madrid or in either of the Manchester teams, and El Kun often has a similar mentality towards Forlán for Atlético. If there is no one to take advantage of Leo’s passing, there’s no much point in his doing it, is it?

3) Mascherano and Aimar (or Verón) are not Xavi and Iniesta: I shouldn’t have to say this, but I will. We have one of the best midfields of the world, if not the best. We have two men who make the kind of clinical, magical passes that you want to watch again and again, even if they don’t lead to goals. We have a force perfectly attuned to providing our strikers with passing, opportunities and, if it comes down to it, resolving a run themselves. Argentina doesn’t; if Messi has to battle the defenders all the way to the midfield to find the ball, and then battle his way with it all the way to the goal to score, he’s obviously going to be less effective than when he gets served with delicious passes.

4) 4-3-3 or 4-4-2? OK, I’ll admit this might be a personal preference. But the fact is that Messi’s style of play is more suited to the wider spaces he gets when his team plays 4-3-3, than when he has to battle the concerted efforts of a defences focused on him and a sole partner (and if this partner is the equally tiny Agüero, and their opponents are some of the legendarily rough South American center-backs, even more so).

5) South American football is different: trust me, I grew up watching South American football; watching a Liga or even Premier match after that is enough to make you wonder if they’re really the same sport. Leo Messi is a child of La Masía and its style of play, and just as we make allowances for South American players recently arrived to European football, we should make allowances for the return journey.

6) Club is not country: and I mean this in the best way possible. For one thing, club means months and months of training, travelling, eating and living with your team; national team duty is a hasty few days after flying from all corners of the world, playing with a group of people who are never the same from one call-up to the next. Also, Leo grew up as a blaugrana, going through all the categories, from are-you-sure-he’s-big-enough-to-play to of-course-he’s-the-best-player-in-the-world-thanks-for-asking. In Argentina, he made his debut already with the pressure of filling Maradona’s empty shoes and with the press and the whole country breathing down his neck; I don’t imagine things are any better now he’s wearing the iconic “10” shirt under the eyes of the man who, for many, will be its only owner. Yes, he thrives under pressure, but so much?

Say it with me, “AW-KWARD!”

Some people (asides from Valdés) have come to Messi’s defence (most notably Argentinean legends César Menotti and “El Cholo” Simeone, and Maradona refuses to listen to any criticism thrown in Leo’s direction (I bet Kun Agüero would love that to happen to him). It’s not enough. I’m hoping tonight, in the match against Uruguay, Leo will score a couple of goals and silence those that were criticising him; if not, then I’ll be contented with having him back in Barcelona, safe, uninjured and itching to prove his worth against Valencia (like Ibra said, “If Argentina don’t want Messi, we’ll (Sweden) take him”.)

So, what do you think?