'Chelsea effect' ruining the game

One of only a few men to don the jerseys of Spain's big three - Barcelona, Real Madrid and Atletico Madrid - Schuster has courted controversy as a player, manager and commentator.

Last week he was at it again after watching Barcelona struggle to beat ultra-defensive Celtic in a group match of the UEFA Champions League.

Star-studded Barca dominated the Scottish champion from start to finish but only won 2-1 thanks to an injury-time goal from Jordi Alba.

”I am fed up with such games. There should not be teams like Celtic in the Champions League,” Schuster told Spanish sports daily Marca.

”We saw it last season with Chelsea. It was a very bad example for football and it is regrettable that they became European champions.

"Chelsea have generated a school for teams like Celtic to study. It would have been unjust if a team that defended with 10 men had taken one point in the home of the best team in the world.”

Schuster's comment about Celtic's right to be in the competition predictably drew a sharp response from the Celtic camp. And rightly so.

The man they used to call the “blond angel” is wrong here because Celtic played fairly and broke no rules.

Its players did not engage in gamesmanship or hack any opponent in sight but showed great spirit and fought bravely against formidable odds.

And in the end every neutral fan would have sympathised with Celtic for the heart-breaking way it lost the match, even though Barcelona was by far the better team on the night.

Yet Schuster's critics largely missed his point: which is that Chelsea's highly debatable methods to dispose of Barcelona and Bayern Munich in the latter stages of last season's Champions League threw the game back to its dark ages when catenaccio ruled the roost.

Schuster's was no specific attack on Celtic, which at best is a modest team that plays to its means, since it cannot possibly take on a stellar side like Barca with an open frame of mind.

This was an attack on a rich organisation's negative methods employed by manager Roberto di Matteo in securing the biggest prize of world club football.

More importantly, this was a stern warning that the money-laden Londoners' success could spawn another era of defensive football that marred the game in the 1960s and 1970s.

Had Celtic managed to come away with a point from the Camp Nou it would have encouraged more managers around the world to adopt similar tactics when they came up against more gifted teams.

Hopefully, the lesson to be learnt from midweek is that if you choose not to play and defend too deep you get punished sooner or later.

Celtic's fearful approach contrasted sharply with that of brave Ajax.

The young and inexperienced ensemble from Amsterdam had no qualms about having a go against moneybags Manchester City and was rewarded with a 3-1 win against the English champion.

Chelsea and Celtic, however, showed in no uncertain terms that there can be a way of stopping the Barcelona juggernaut, albeit with a bit of good fortune.

Putting it simply, Barcelona's offensive efficiency is greatly diminished when its ball-playing forwards do not have enough time and space to weave their intricate patterns.

So, if you can't beat them, you can try frustrating them with 10 men behind the ball.

It's not pretty but it can be pretty successful.

I am not sure if such measures would be in the best interests of the game that is enjoying unprecedented worldwide popularity.

Frustrating Barcelona is one thing ... boring the rest of the world is quite another.