Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Jyuan83

World Cup 2018 Tactical Interpretations

Recommended Posts

Taking a crack at Iceland's tactic, based on the Spielverlagerung analysis curious as to what others think.

I just rewatched the entire game. Wow Iceland were amazing. It really was something to see. All 10 were defending behind the ball for most of the game. Hell it might be a 4-4-1-1-0. I'm only maybe exaggerating a little. Announcer  mentioned there were 5 yards between the back line and the midfielders.

This isn't that far-fetched:

660917004_ScreenShot2018-06-19at1_30_06AM.thumb.png.8c26a927459d6da38f483024a051be77.png  855158790_ScreenShot2018-06-19at1_30_25AM.thumb.png.52b7b1a18ec2620ca5eaba425d4a35f6.png

But let's be a little more realistic I guess. Here's my try. Please point out my mistakes.

First, play all the tall players. One 5'10" CM, everyone else on the field was at least 6' tall for Iceland. And it would help to have a great long throw guy like Aron Gunnarsson.

I am thinking defensively it was a 4-5-1-0.

603984824_ScreenShot2018-06-19at1_10_43AM.thumb.png.35cfb6790e3ad3a8e163820eadc5148d.png

Team Instructions: Stay on Feet, Much Deeper Defensive Line, Much Higher Tempo, Close Down Much Less, Float Crosses

1029504991_ScreenShot2018-06-19at1_15_13AM.thumb.png.ad8cb80c16a785a14dd0fdfe49d7c03a.png

They opened up with a high press, but that didn't last forever. Most of the game they just dropped 10 behind the ball and Gylfi and Finnbogason closed down.

I don't think I need narrower team instruction as defend very fluid is already very narrow as you can see above, and Iceland definitely pushed up the wings.

Much Higher Tempo (which isn't that high on defend). When they got the ball they didn't mess around and went about their business quickly and decisively.

Drop much deeper, of course. At one point they had 9 in the box.

Stay on Feet

If they crossed at all I'd say float crosses. But they didn't really cross much. Although the goal came on a great series where Gylfi had two nice crosses that were floated.

Player Instructions

Defensive CB-D who both close down much less.

The FBs mark tight on the AML/AMR, sit narrower and close down much less.

The three CM's all close down much more, but since the team is closing down much less it's not that much closing down:

636011713_ScreenShot2018-06-19at12_52_33AM.thumb.png.bae76687e5da5d0d5a3ff44406e88f73.png

I thought about making Gunnarson (MCR) a BWM, but he only had one foul in the whole game. Hallfredsson (CML) only had one foul as well. There weren't any cards in the game either.

Gylfi, the middle CMa also moves into channels. He has gets further forward by default.

The Shadow Striker closes down even more.

I could be convinced to move them up. Make Finnbogason a DFd and Gylfi a Shadow Striker? Or perhaps DFd, AMa? I'm open to ideas here. But they both defended behind the ball, and pushed forward when they had the ball. Tough for me to figure out how to recreate that in FM. Finnbogason was holding up the ball too, and Shadow Strikers can't choose that option. 

The wide midfielders sit narrower, get further forward and cut inside with the ball. Attacking they were more of a 4-2-4 and the Spielverlagerung diagram shows the wingers getting very forward in possession. I could be convinced to drop cut inside, but the heat maps show they did.

Like I said earlier, open to ideas for how to make this more accurate. It was fun putting it together.
 

Edited by Joey Numbaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the look of it, Iceland were playing on Structured, not everyone was involved in transitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I felt like very fluid would be the only way to get the compactness of the two banks correct. But rereading the shape section of lines and diamonds I think you are correct.

But maybe that compactness could be accomplished with structured but a 4-4-1-1-0 or 4-2DM-3(WM-CM-WM)-1-0? With support, get forward for the wide midfielders?

Edited by Joey Numbaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joey Numbaz said:

I felt like very fluid would be the only way to get the compactness of the two banks correct. But rereading the shape section of lines and diamonds I think you are correct.

But maybe that compactness could be accomplished with structured but a 4-4-1-1-0 or 4-2DM-3(WM-CM-WM)-1-0? With support, get forward for the wide midfielders?

I have used the defensive 4-2(DM)-3-1 myself (with West Brom), and it worked quite well. Very solid in defence, and you can still get bodies forward when needed. I think you're onto something with two DM's and WM's on support.

Watching the game right now, and can't really understand the roles of Bjarnason and Gudmundson. Same with Saevarsson and Magnusson. Full backs on support? Still pretty defensive if you go with a low team mentality. Wingers are WM with cut inside PI?

Edited by golden-goose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So after watching England last night I was wondering could we copy Englands formation and tactics and as I love a back 3 and wing backs I thought I would have a go on on fm18 

Now this is all guess work and haven't tested it yet so no idea if it works and any feed back would be great 

So looking at England last my take on it would be 

SW GK defend

3x cb on defend

2x CWB ATTACK 

1 DLP DEFEND shielding the back 3

now the front 4 is where I'm not sure at the moment I have gone with 

1AM SUPPORT and 1 TREQ with 

1 FALSE 9 and A POACHER 

Team instruction again not sure was thinking standard and flexible with short passing, close down more and higher tempo and playing out from the back 

like I said at the moment it's a very much work in progress but would like people's views

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Joey Numbaz said:

I felt like very fluid would be the only way to get the compactness of the two banks correct. But rereading the shape section of lines and diamonds I think you are correct.

But maybe that compactness could be accomplished with structured but a 4-4-1-1-0 or 4-2DM-3(WM-CM-WM)-1-0? With support, get forward for the wide midfielders?

I would advise you to start with a basic formation like 4-4-1-1 and change things from there. In my experience, going with a strikerless formation, especially if you don't understand how it works, can lead to more issues.

Edited by Armistice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ciderarmy I'd agree mostly with @D_LO_

GK: SW-D Pickford

DCR: BPD-D (Walker / Stones)

DC: CD-D (Stones / Walker swapped a bit).  the central DC seemed to pass to Henderson or the outside backs rather than longer passes.

DCL: BPD-D (Maguire) Maybe a Stopper duty, Maguire was quite eager to step up but that might be the player rather than instructed, same as his Brings Ball Out Of Defence / Runs With Ball

WBR: WB-S (Trippier)

DMC: DLP-S (Henderson)

WBL: WB-S (Young) Both left and right stuck to touchlines but didn't push high or really run at defenders.

MCR: CM-A (Lingard) 

MCL: MEZ-S (Alli) Definitely a CM pair with pressing instructions rather than AM pair, Alli ran channel more often than Lingard and was a bit of roaming/swapping with Alli sometimes advance of Lingard

AMCR: AM-S (Sterling) Could be a F9-S, did look more like a forward pair than offset but TBH I can't remember Sterling doing much

STCL: CF-S (Kane)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my take on England's tactic against Tunisia.

The game was alright today. It's encouraging to see England play more creatively and fluidly today. However, we should have won at least 3-1 thou, Kane was fouled multiple times and Sterling missed quite a few good chances. Maguire and Trippier did really stand out today IMHO.

 

image.thumb.png.b027095aad5004404a035e204c09b050.png

Team Instructions: Retain Possession (optional, was used especially in the 2nd half), Play out of Defence, Work ball into box, Much Higher Defensive Line

image.thumb.png.61bac94ce88b7dac0df032ec8676f466.png

PIs:

LCB (Maguire): Dribble more

DM (Henderson): More risky passes

CM (Alli): Move into channels, Roam from position

I'm very much in the progress into this tactic, and am open to feedback! In addition, this serves as useful preparation for my next tactical thread which may cover Southgate's tactical revolution at the Three Lions!

 

Edited by goqs06

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an interesting pattern in England’s game after 80th minute I believe, when they were pushing for a win, Walker was often pushing forward from his RCB position, somewhere in the right halfspace, with Trippier staying wide and I think it was Loftus-Cheek who drifted there too. Not sure if that was an instruction from Southgate, but I thought it helped England become more dangerous and if I’m not mistaken that’s how they’ve got the corner that led to Kane’s second.

Edited by Armistice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, goqs06 said:

Here's my take on England's tactic against Tunisia.

The game was alright today. It's encouraging to see England play more creatively and fluidly today. However, we should have won at least 3-1 thou, Kane was fouled multiple times and Sterling missed quite a few good chances. Maguire and Trippier did really stand out today IMHO.

 

image.thumb.png.b027095aad5004404a035e204c09b050.png

Team Instructions: Retain Possession (optional, was used especially in the 2nd half), Play out of Defence, Work ball into box, Much Higher Defensive Line

image.thumb.png.61bac94ce88b7dac0df032ec8676f466.png

PIs:

LCB (Maguire): Dribble more

DM (Henderson): More risky passes

CM (Alli): Move into channels, Roam from position

I'm very much in the progress into this tactic, and am open to feedback! In addition, this serves as useful preparation for my next tactical thread which may cover Southgate's tactical revolution at the Three Lions!

 

 

 

1523714046_ScreenShot2018-06-19at8_58_58PM.thumb.png.c3346ce7a2c2838b83c331de9ada988e.png

Yeah a lot of us come with up with similar ones I will be doing a show with England playing the same system for a few games, and there are some PIs on the CM(A) and some of the other players to get the effect Gareth Southgate envisaged when he set up to create the system. Whats really funny is when I played the game, I had to take Sterling off for Rashford and Rashford scored as well. I couldn't stop laughing.

The only thing we probably won't be able to do is create the swarm effect that Southgate gets when they go camping. And I opted to go PI to get the boys to attack the channels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, goqs06 said:

Here's my take on England's tactic against Tunisia.

...

I don't agree with Work Ball Into Box, I think the standard WB-S levels of crossing are right, Young and Trippier were happy to cross it in final third rather than passing it inside/back.

The team looked more stretched out (depth+width) than I think a Fluid team shape would create.  I think the "fluidity" was more due to the attacking nature and freedom of Alli + Lingards roles rather than the team shape.  With the back 3, WBs and Henderson sticking to there jobs forming a base + width allowing that freedom for Alli, Lingard and Sterling to roam around of a more static Kane.  Alli/Lingard stayed quite high with Henderson/CBs playing more direct balls to them, especially early on, i'd of expected more support if they were on fluid side of team shape.

I think the pressing would be most accurately recreated through OIs on the GK + backline and PIs on the front 4.  Once the ball was moved forwards we dropped into that 5122/532 formation with the CM pair helping the WBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

 

 

1523714046_ScreenShot2018-06-19at8_58_58PM.thumb.png.c3346ce7a2c2838b83c331de9ada988e.png

Yeah a lot of us come with up with similar ones I will be doing a show with England playing the same system for a few games, and there are some PIs on the CM(A) and some of the other players to get the effect Gareth Southgate envisaged when he set up to create the system. Whats really funny is when I played the game, I had to take Sterling off for Rashford and Rashford scored as well. I couldn't stop laughing.

The only thing we probably won't be able to do is create the swarm effect that Southgate gets when they go camping. And I opted to go PI to get the boys to attack the channels.

https://spielverlagerung.com/2018/06/18/world-cup-preview-england/

This article is good in telling us more about England's transitions and build up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, D_LO_ said:

OIs are a good shout and you have a point re. the width of the team but that is a separate instruction altogether than fluidity(?).

I also agree in the first half, when at their most dangerous unsurprisingly it was more of a structure shape, we know that is what really suits those attacking players but...

when you have centre-backs getting involved in play just outside of the opposition penalty area, arguably a CMa tracking back to help out on the edge of his own area and was it a couple of times Tunisia were caught offside literally a yard into England's half, suggesting a relatively compact 'depth' to England, I have to say fluid has to be relevant too, certainly second half, arguably earlier. 

Yeah just mentioned width whilst describing the layout.

England definitely pushed up, don't think team shape has much to do with that in this case. 

I think the CBs getting so high was a result of bringing ball out of defence so a trait in FM rather than a more compact shape.  Same with CM helping defend, even if told to take risks they'll still track back. like when alli chased back he was already engaged with player at half way line and young got fooled and let the guy run so would expect any player to keep chasing regardless of instructions, if he gave up it would of been due to attributes.

I prefer to think of the fluid side of shape as "compact", fluid I think makes people think more about movement between lines and roaming which is more role based.  Probably would just use flexible, minor really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, goqs06 said:

https://spielverlagerung.com/2018/06/18/world-cup-preview-england/

This article is good in telling us more about England's transitions and build up.

Yeah that however is a preview, it was rather weak in predicting how they would play. Englands use of the central defenders is really inspired by how Conte used Azpilicueta last season, hence the way the two other CDs kept pushing out.  It's a decent article, but hardly the defining standard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Egypt on a 4-3-3.

Edited by goqs06

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I first saw Tunisia's arrangement of 3-4-3 I thought .. oh they're looking to exploit the ME

 

 

Was interesting to see England use a 532 to counter it .. unless that's going to be there default formation for the competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RodentofDoom said:

When I first saw Tunisia's arrangement of 3-4-3 I thought .. oh they're looking to exploit the ME

 

 

Was interesting to see England use a 532 to counter it .. unless that's going to be there default formation for the competition.

Every piece of evidence points to that being England's default for the entire tournament - the only question is how the shape looks in offence depending on Sterling keeping his place as Kane's strike partner or not - if we're real underdogs (so if we get out of the group) I could see Vardy's more reliable finishing on the break being used which would change how the attack and midfield links completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Portugal playing striker less at the world cup :-) against Morocco, and the England system i am using works nicely with BBMs, rendering that show today so that it can go out. I will link it later. I actually played it against Belgium in the World cup to see how it could do.

907600836_ScreenShot2018-06-20at8_52_28PM.thumb.png.b92180be536001e0bc66da9a5cb80352.png

This is how my final England one will look like on FM...and Portugal really strange that I am seeing this...

656854786_ScreenShot2018-06-20at8_29_07PM.thumb.png.bde818deef0349a0ebf84ce7eb9d68d7.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RashidiYou are not alone in seeing portugal more or less play like a hybrid 442/433 system. It reminds me of ancelotti’s hybrid 442 he used during the 2013/2014 real madrid season. Only difference is that portugal is practically playing a strikerless variation of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rashidi said:

Portugal playing striker less at the world cup :-) against Morocco, and the England system i am using works nicely with BBMs, rendering that show today so that it can go out. I will link it later. I actually played it against Belgium in the World cup to see how it could do.

907600836_ScreenShot2018-06-20at8_52_28PM.thumb.png.b92180be536001e0bc66da9a5cb80352.png

This is how my final England one will look like on FM...and Portugal really strange that I am seeing this...

656854786_ScreenShot2018-06-20at8_29_07PM.thumb.png.bde818deef0349a0ebf84ce7eb9d68d7.png

I don't think CR7 was a treq in that game and I don't think Bernanrdo was a Winger on Support. CR7 was maybe a DLF (a). He came deep at times but he had an eye for goal and didn't really get involved at all defensively. Bernardo was always a WP for Monaco/ManC and I would say he still retained that role for the national team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rashidi said:

Portugal playing striker less at the world cup :-) against Morocco, and the England system i am using works nicely with BBMs, rendering that show today so that it can go out. I will link it later. I actually played it against Belgium in the World cup to see how it could do.

907600836_ScreenShot2018-06-20at8_52_28PM.thumb.png.b92180be536001e0bc66da9a5cb80352.png

This is how my final England one will look like on FM...and Portugal really strange that I am seeing this...

656854786_ScreenShot2018-06-20at8_29_07PM.thumb.png.bde818deef0349a0ebf84ce7eb9d68d7.png

 



 

Can you set tactics like this for Russians? If it's not a problem.

Edited by JohnShepard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Portugal fan, I've to disagree a bit with @Rashidi

We started the game with our typical strategy: defend in a 4-4-2 and attack in some sort of a 4-3-3. The idea is to compensate the fact that Ronaldo doens't track back and it usually works quite well when Ronaldo is paired with André Silva, but, as it seems, not so much with Guedes. Joao Mario was the one picked today (Bruno Fernandes played against Spain) to play in the left flank and come inside to help retain possession. The plan failed, yet again, as we can't seem to find the right player to fill that role (in the Euro'16 it was Andre Gomes!). With this, our manager switched Joao Mario with Guedes (around 30min in I think), recreating a more typical 4-2-3-1, which let Ronaldo alone in the front and we all know how that ends! This also left our midfield way too exposed with our fullbacks unfortunately very tame when going forward, making our game just nonexistent. It's a rough start for us, luckily results are coming our way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FMWolf said:

As a Portugal fan, I've to disagree a bit with @Rashidi

We started the game with our typical strategy: defend in a 4-4-2 and attack in some sort of a 4-3-3. The idea is to compensate the fact that Ronaldo doens't track back and it usually works quite well when Ronaldo is paired with André Silva, but, as it seems, not so much with Guedes. Joao Mario was the one picked today (Bruno Fernandes played against Spain) to play in the left flank and come inside to help retain possession. The plan failed, yet again, as we can't seem to find the right player to fill that role (in the Euro'16 it was Andre Gomes!). With this, our manager switched Joao Mario with Guedes (around 30min in I think), recreating a more typical 4-2-3-1, which let Ronaldo alone in the front and we all know how that ends! This also left our midfield way too exposed with our fullbacks unfortunately very tame when going forward, making our game just nonexistent. It's a rough start for us, luckily results are coming our way.

I agree with your observation of guedes being moved deeper to replace joao mario. His heat map on whoscored showed him more on the left flank as opposed to his previous heat map against spain which was more in the inside right channel. Once you put ronaldo upfront alone, you end up nowhere because he needs someone to feed off and for him to do it alone upfront yields nothing. I feel guedes needs more time to get used to his new position because he does have good link-up play at times. I thought bruno did a good job against spain so was surprised to see his omission.

Edited by Jyuan83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, FMWolf said:

As a Portugal fan, I've to disagree a bit with @Rashidi

We started the game with our typical strategy: defend in a 4-4-2 and attack in some sort of a 4-3-3. The idea is to compensate the fact that Ronaldo doens't track back and it usually works quite well when Ronaldo is paired with André Silva, but, as it seems, not so much with Guedes. Joao Mario was the one picked today (Bruno Fernandes played against Spain) to play in the left flank and come inside to help retain possession. The plan failed, yet again, as we can't seem to find the right player to fill that role (in the Euro'16 it was Andre Gomes!). With this, our manager switched Joao Mario with Guedes (around 30min in I think), recreating a more typical 4-2-3-1, which let Ronaldo alone in the front and we all know how that ends! This also left our midfield way too exposed with our fullbacks unfortunately very tame when going forward, making our game just nonexistent. It's a rough start for us, luckily results are coming our way.

Thats the beauty of football, different interpretations of what you see. All I remember seeing in the first half  - no out and out striker for Portugal.  Of course things changed in the latter half of the game as Portugal  changed things around. Few football games end up with a team playing one way for 90 mins. They morph over time depending on the conditions, like Uruguay start with a 442, with 2 deep DMs, then during the course of the game they start shifting the 2 central mids higher as Cavani and Suarez cut miserable pictures of men starved of service. And don't forget, mine is only done as a snapshot to capture a starting system on FM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

Thats the beauty of football, different interpretations of what you see. All I remember seeing in the first half  - no out and out striker for Portugal.  Of course things changed in the latter half of the game as Portugal  changed things around. Few football games end up with a team playing one way for 90 mins.

Oh definitely! I was not saying you're wrong or anything, just trying to give some insight on some of the things you pointed out, since I'm pretty used to see this team playing :) And yeah, with Guedes and Ronaldo, there really isn't a "pure" striker. It's just off the ball we try to go for that 4-4-2 shape to defend, but when on the ball the two "forwards" had a lot of movement freedom.

 

10 hours ago, Jyuan83 said:

I feel guedes needs more time to get used to his new position because he does have good link-up play at times.

Yeah, he does have some good moments. But I think that Andre Silva and Ronaldo work so good together and the team is so used to those two that there isn't really a need to wait for Guedes to get used to it, since that wait could've costed some points already (unless there's some unreported physical condition with Andre). Guedes would problably shine more coming in later, to really try and exploit his speed.

 

10 hours ago, Jyuan83 said:

I thought bruno did a good job against spain so was surprised to see his omission.

I prefer him to Joao Mario in that position since he's more aggressive and has a bit more work rate in him, but to be honest, IMO, none of them as really put the performance needed to fill that role. Which is normal, since none of them normally does that at their clubs. If it wasn't Ronaldo's "dependency" on a partner upfront, Fernando Santos would've problably ditch the 4-4-2 by now since it's giving him way to many headaches :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎19‎/‎06‎/‎2018 at 15:48, goqs06 said:

https://spielverlagerung.com/2018/06/18/world-cup-preview-england/

This article is good in telling us more about England's transitions and build up.

I liked that article.  Nice to see that site give England a break.  I agree with the author though that it is refreshing to not only see England turn up to a tournament with a very clear idea on how they'll set up but further for that system to be something other than a rigid 442 or 4411.  It would be good in so many ways for England to just have at least some small success (hopefully more) just to encourage the manager present and future that we can play progressive football and that's what the fans want to see, along with good old endeavour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about the Japan tactics?

4231, Control, Flexible ,Short Passing , Lower Tempo?

FB(S) CB(D) CB(D) WB(S) 

CM(D) DLP (D)

W(S) AP(S) IS(S)

        AF(A)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't really understand Sampaoli's Argentina side. Like, for one side, you go all crazy with two very attacking minded "wingbacks" that never do that role for their clubs, leaving huge gaps on the defensive flanks. And then you go all conservative in the middle, with two defensive/working central midfielders. Is Messi supposed to do it all for the side? Or, and I confess my lack of knowledge of some of the Argentianian players, is it just that some players aren't playing to their true potential? (like Meza p.e) It just seems like a weird set-up where you're relying on Messi to be the key, but at the same time, you don't really build the team/plan to really get the max of him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a nutshell Sampaoli took Bielsa’s principles and shat all over them. A system that was meant to use lateral volantes with the two wide strikers meant to provide width was turned upside down.

Meza and Messi ended up narrow forcing the two side midfielders up the pitch to provide width. Sampaoli either screwed up big time or the players didn’t listen to him.

Either case he was an idiot. Willy Cab is useless under pressure, not the first time this has happened in his career, and while Mascherano was supposed to be the DM he ended up having to drop deep to pick up the ball, when it should have been Otamendi bringing the ball up. So a huge gap would open up in central midfield.

The Croats used the Portuguese 433 which has two holding mids, and with only 1 player in central midfield, this effectively forced Argentina to use their wide mids more. Isolation became the norm. 

I captured the tactical setup at the start and shared it with friends went off to pour myself some whiskey cos I expected a hard drink was needed to swallow the total destruction of Bielsa’s principles.

What went wrong:

1. The central defender needed to be more comfortable bringing the ball up and be given passing options that included the two side mids - didn’t happen. Instead Mascherano dropped deeper and their midfield was split.

2. The 2 side midfielder are meant to patrol the flanks and support not provide width in attack.

3. Width was supposed to come from the two wide attacking players.  Didn’t happen they sat narrow, effectively turning the 3313 into a 3421.

4. Wrong player selection. Messi needed to be upfront in a false 9 with Dybala and Aguero out wide. Tagaflicio should have acted as a lateral volante instead we had wingers there.

5. Mike Basset should have been Argentina’s manager.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

417155666_ScreenShot2018-06-22at4_58_36PM.thumb.png.455732182ed679e672885cd4929c83cd.png

How Argentina was supposed to play if he had been following Bielsa's principles and perhaps with the players he had.

2049900458_ScreenShot2018-06-22at4_59_30PM.thumb.png.11411680ab3cddd3e419c9f17f4abceb.png

How they really ended up playing which forced Salvio and Acuna down the flanks, as natural wingers, leaving the flanks exposed, and without proper central midfield control with Mascherano playing the wrong role...you ended up playing into the hands of the devlishly good Portuguese 433. I was about to do a video explaining this, and realised I was getting too worked up at Sampaoli's stupidity. So either the players failed to listen to him or he wasn't good enough.

He was responsible for player selection...so why go with a backline which has a highest jumping reach of 14 and lowest of 12?
Why go with 2 lateral volantes who are only wingers when you have Ansaldi and Mercado who can play there?
Why leave Banega on the bench when he is clearly one of the best playmakers in the side?
Why use Meza when you have Dybala who is clearly a better choice from wider positions?
Why use Aguero in the middle when he is lethal on both feet, and makes a better IF?

Why Why Why? This has to be the worst Argentinian performance in 60 years.

I thought Maradona was a crazy manager, Jorge Sampaoli will probably never be allowed to speak to Marcelo Biesla ever again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

417155666_ScreenShot2018-06-22at4_58_36PM.thumb.png.455732182ed679e672885cd4929c83cd.png

How Argentina was supposed to play if he had been following Bielsa's principles and perhaps with the players he had.

 2049900458_ScreenShot2018-06-22at4_59_30PM.thumb.png.11411680ab3cddd3e419c9f17f4abceb.png

How they really ended up playing which forced Salvio and Acuna down the flanks, as natural wingers, leaving the flanks exposed, and without proper central midfield control with Mascherano playing the wrong role...you ended up playing into the hands of the devlishly good Portuguese 433. I was about to do a video explaining this, and realised I was getting too worked up at Sampaoli's stupidity. So either the players failed to listen to him or he wasn't good enough.

 He was responsible for player selection...so why go with a backline which has a highest jumping reach of 14 and lowest of 12?
Why go with 2 lateral volantes who are only wingers when you have Ansaldi and Mercado who can play there?
Why leave Banega on the bench when he is clearly one of the best playmakers in the side?
Why use Meza when you have Dybala who is clearly a better choice from wider positions?
Why use Aguero in the middle when he is lethal on both feet, and makes a better IF?

Why Why Why? This has to be the worst Argentinian performance in 60 years.

I thought Maradona was a crazy manager, Jorge Sampaoli will probably never be allowed to speak to Marcelo Biesla ever again.

obviously its easier to say this in hindsight but i completely agree with you re. how the team should have lined up. the team and system you have come up with based upon bielsa is not only more suited to their best player but also tactically a system which brings out the best of the other players other than maybe aguero and dybala.

only issue i have is that i dont think sampaoli was trying to replicate this 3-3-1-3 system bielsa uses. i think he was trying to play the 3-4-2-1 formation he played i just think it was completely wrong. he used it for sevilla mutliple times (with players much more suited to it). 

i enjoy your interpretation on each team even if i dont agree :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, argenmik said:

obviously its easier to say this in hindsight but i completely agree with you re. how the team should have lined up. the team and system you have come up with based upon bielsa is not only more suited to their best player but also tactically a system which brings out the best of the other players other than maybe aguero and dybala.

only issue i have is that i dont think sampaoli was trying to replicate this 3-3-1-3 system bielsa uses. i think he was trying to play the 3-4-2-1 formation he played i just think it was completely wrong. he used it for sevilla mutliple times (with players much more suited to it). 

i enjoy your interpretation on each team even if i dont agree :)

I agree with you here. I also wrote about his 3421 a while back on FM 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

Mike Basset should have been Argentina’s manager.

4-4-****ING-2!

But to be serious, Valverde did show that Messi can do well as a good hook between midfield and Attack as an Enganche in a 4-4-2 without affecting his Attack ig contributions to his side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, argenmik said:

obviously its easier to say this in hindsight but i completely agree with you re. how the team should have lined up. the team and system you have come up with based upon bielsa is not only more suited to their best player but also tactically a system which brings out the best of the other players other than maybe aguero and dybala.

only issue i have is that i dont think sampaoli was trying to replicate this 3-3-1-3 system bielsa uses. i think he was trying to play the 3-4-2-1 formation he played i just think it was completely wrong. he used it for sevilla mutliple times (with players much more suited to it). 

i enjoy your interpretation on each team even if i dont agree :)

I think I may have been misinterpreted. I think he may have wanted to play the 3313, but ended up playing the 3421. So if he intended to play the 3421, he was an idiot, and if it was the 3313 and it wasn't followed then he was the idiot too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cleon said:

I agree with you here. I also wrote about his 3421 a while back on FM 

i appreciate the link cleon but i dont need it as ive read it about 10 times!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting how mbappe was used against peru. The french were set up in a 4231/4411 which sought to overload the left side in an attempt to isolate mbappe on the right with the opposition’s fullback and give him plenty of space to attack. I think deschamps may have found the right formula to play mbappe. I have always felt that his pace and burning acceleration was wasted playing upfront in congested central areas. He was staying wide and hugging the touchline against peru and was really dangerous in tormenting his fullback. Kudos to deschamps for figuring out the right system for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/06/2018 at 05:49, D_LO_ said:

De Bruyne is completely wasted in that system. I don't think they can fit all 3 in, at least not effectively. Mertens needs to come out for a more orthodox centre midfielder for me so De Bruyne isn't so deep.

Against top teams De Bruyne is going to be a defensive liability also as part of a 2 man central midfield pairing. It's going to be hard enough as they will likely be out-numbered in there as it is, let alone add into the mix someone not completely comfortable nor defensively sound. I don't see Mertens or Hazard contributing to the midfield battle a lot if the going gets tough. 

Nainggolan's absence is criminal.

 

 

I agree about the Nainggolan part (he should be in this squad) but not with the De Bruyne / Hazard part. De Bruyne is doing a great job in this system . Our biggest problem is our defence.. with Kompany and Vermaelen fit , we are able to play with a different back three of change is to four ( Verthongen - Vermaelen - Kompany - Toby)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, D_LO_ said:

De Bruyne was so much more dangerous when moved higher up the pitch. 

Yes but then our squad had problem with the build up (dembele is injured a lot and witsel is a different kind of player) .

He enjoys himself (that is what he said in an interview) in his new role

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Olivierlandman said:

I agree about the Nainggolan part (he should be in this squad) but not with the De Bruyne / Hazard part. De Bruyne is doing a great job in this system . Our biggest problem is our defence.. with Kompany and Vermaelen fit , we are able to play with a different back three of change is to four ( Verthongen - Vermaelen - Kompany - Toby)

But is that backline fast enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

But is that backline fast enough?

No it is not, no other options , playing with three centerbacks and Meunier and Carrasco on the 'wingbacks' is a real gamble against bigger teams with fast wingers .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...