Arsenal 2-2 Barcelona: Wenger’s side utterly outclassed, but rescue a draw
A crazy game of football to watch, a difficult one to analyse. Two open, attacking sides produced a wonderful game for the neutral, but one that will probably leave both managers absolutely fuming – Wenger because his side were awful and conceded poor goals, Guardiola because his side threw away a 0-2 lead.
Wenger went with his standard line-up, but with Arshavin deployed on the right, Nasri on the left – presumably because Nasri is slightly better defensively and therefore better against the Alves-Messi combination down Barcelona’s right.
Barcelona played Keita ahead of the more defensive option of Yaya Toure, meaning they had the flexibility to switch to the 4-2-4ish shape they’ve played in recent matches. Indeed, the shape they played was probably a mixture between that and their more established 4-3-3. Ibrahimovic was the centre-forward, Messi just off him, Pedro certainly wide-right – but then Keita seemed to shuttle between a central midfield position and a left-wing position, similar to how Ramires plays for Brazil. Keita played a more defensive role than Iniesta did against Stuttgart (a) as he is a naturally more defensive player and (b) Stuttgart fielded two central midfielders, so it was 2 v 2 in the middle, whereas Arsenal play with three, meaning Keita had to make sure Barcelona were not outnumbered in the middle.
Have you ever seen a side start a big game as well as Barcelona started tonight’s match? Within the first quarter of an hour they had already forced Manuel Almunia into five saves, and had a couple more shots blocked. How Arsenal went in 0-0 at half-time, it’s difficult to understand.
The most astonishing thing about the opening exchanges was quite how intense Barcelona’s integrated pressing was. The fact they played with a system that effectively featured four forwards meant that Arsenal’s defenders were all faced with a yellow shirt pressing them immediately, and the key was that Barcelona pressed as a unit, rather than as individuals. They may be renowned for their skilful attacking play, but Barcelona defend from the front better than any other side in Europe.
The often-cited problem with pressing like this is that you can’t sustain it for a whole game, and perhaps this was apparent again, for Barcelona blatantly fell away towards the end of the game. But they were certainly able to keep it up for the first half – simply because the pressing itself was so effective and won the ball so many times. They had 70% of possession in the first half, and therefore they spent much of the half passing the ball around casually rather than pressing.
Arsenal were guilty of leaving too big a gap between their ‘lines’ (Qique Sanchez Flores, whose Atletico team beat Barcelona two months ago, advised that ‘making it hard for Barcelona to find players between the lines’ was the way to beat them) – they should have been squeezing the play in front of their defence, but a lot of the time when they didn’t have the ball, Arsenal’s midfield was closer to the forwards than to the defence. They simply gave too much space to Barcelona in the opening period.
Another stark contrast was whilst Barcelona were defending with effectively nine and half outfield players (Ibrahimovic isn’t a great presser), Arsenal were defending with more like seven. Bendtner wandered around aimlessly when the ball wasn’t near him, Arshavin never looks bothered about protecting his full-back – and Nasri and Fabregas contributed a ‘half’ each – both putting in a couple of decent tackles but simply not pressing as intently at their opposite numbers were.
The problem with switching between a 4-3-3 and a 4-2-3-1 is that the roles of the wide players changes only slightly in terms of position, but hugely in terms of actual role. In a 4-3-3 the wide players are essentially forwards – their main job is to pressure the full-backs and track them if necessary. For those players in a 4-2-3-1, there is one fewer player behind them, and therefore significantly more defensive work from them is needed. They are a second line of midfield rather than a line of forwards. Nasri has the desire but not the defensive ability – as for Arshavin, the fact he was fielded on the right surely points to the fact that even Arsene Wenger doesn’t think he’s up to it defensively.
In a sense, Arshavin going off injured was the best thing that could have happened for Arsenal. He was replaced by the energetic Eboue – and whilst the Ivorian didn’t have a great game, he did provide the running, the determination and the work rate that Arsenal desperately needed when they were being thrashed in the first half.
As mentioned earlier, Arsenal’s main problem was that they left too big a gap infront of their defence – Jens Lehmann said at half-time that their defence needed to push up in the second half. And that’s essentially what they did. Sadly, this left them open to the threat of Barceona playing balls over the top, and sure enough Ibrahimovic scored twice in almost identical circumstances – a long ball chipped into Arsenal’s left-hand channel, and Ibrahimovic finished twice.
Did the Arsenal plan of pushing their defence forward fail? On one hand, of course it did – they conceded two goals by doing it. But bizarrely, it was probably still the right move – those were amongst the only opportunities Barcelona had in the second half. Ibrahimovic’s excellent finishing was the reason Barcelona scored in the second half – the chances weren’t any more blatant than the countless ones they missed in the first half. The goals also came as a result of individual errors by Almunia and Vermaelen – whereas the chances in the first half came because Arsenal were all over the place as a team. (Incidentally, both the goals also game as a result of a lack of pressure from Arsenal on the player in possession – for the second, in particular, they simply allow Xavi all the time in the world to pick out a pass).
But pushing the defence up also squeezed Barcelona in the final third and broke up their attacks more easily, meaning Arsenal saw more of the ball themselves. OK, the first half was a draw and the second half was too – but in terms of dominance, Arsenal were ten times better off in the second period.
Wenger’s decision to send for Theo Walcott was a brave – and inspired – move. Despite how it may have looked, Maxwell is not a slow player – just Walcott is supremely quick. He constantly got in behind the Brazilian both with and without the ball, and he lifted both the crowd and his fellow Arsenal players. There will be inevitable calls for Wenger to play him from the start against Barcelona, but it might well be that this is the best role for him – coming out later on in games. Assuming a vaguely similar pattern of play in the second leg, Arsenal will need to weather the storm early on (perhaps meaning Sagna and Eboue on the right) before unleashing Walcott once Barcelona’s (makeshift) defence tire.
Credit to Wenger for rescuing the situation, but on another day Barcelona would have won the tie by half-time. Arsenal need to learn their lessons from this game if they are to progress: they need to defend from the front as a unit, they need to hold a higher defensive line, and they must field one more defensive-minded player. If they play like they did today at the Nou Camp, they will suffer the demolition job they were fortunate to avoid tonight.
Want more Arsenal v Barcelona analysis? Check out these passing statistics.
Arsenal 2-2 Barcelona: Wenger’s side utterly outclassed, but rescue a draw




Im pretty new to soccer tactics, but I
understand human emotions a bit. Why
put in Henri? He loves Arsenal more
than anything, Im surprised he didnt shoot
one at the barca goal…
Peps subs in general seemed strange to me..
Perhaps Guardiola saw Walcott’s impact as a pacey wide player and wanted Henry to do the same, although Henry wasn’t as fast as he used to be. The second sub was simply because Barca had Puyol sent off and were under pressure, so put on a replacement centre-back
I think it was a curtain call for Henry more than a tactical sub. Just my two cents though.
Perhaps partly curtain call, but I never really buy into the idea that managers do this for players.
I think Ibra was tiring and with the second half high defensive line of Arsenal, the fragile defence (Song isn’t really a CB?), plus the defence was tiring, a fresh Henry could not only use his experience to hold up the ball and retain possession, but his pace could really threaten behind Sagna and Song. Also remember song was on a yellow and pushing his luck a little, so a tired late lunge on Henry would be just the ticket..
He needed to push Arsenal back and deeper on the left flank as Maxwell was being destroyed by Walcott and needed to drop deeper.
I think that Guardiola has had to change tacticks from 4-3-3 into 4-4-2 because the great entrance from Wallcot changed the game. As Ibra was tired he has to change him for Bojan instead of Henry. Also I had change Pedro for Yaya Toure to make the midfield stronger.
[...] Arsenal 2-2 Barcelona: Wenger’s side utterly outclassed, but somehow rescue a point | Zonal Ma… Thoughts? __________________ [...]
What a fantastic game! Unbelievably exciting for a neutral.
Once Walcott came on, there was a clear plan of action: play through balls into space behind Maxwell for Walcott to dash onto. This happened twice in a few minutes, the second time Walcott scored.
Once he scored, the whole Arsenal team was lifted and had a new lease of life when attacking – which meant Fabregas could win the penalty.
I just hope the second leg is as exciting.
Agree.
The second leg should be exciting because the Camp Nou is such a huge pitch… it makes defensive work very hard. Could be a very open game again.
What are the dimensions ?
The pitches shouldn’t be much different. Wikipedia (so it could be wrong) has the Emirates as the bigger pitch.
[...] Arsenal 2-2 Barcelona: Wenger’s side utterly outclassed, but somehow rescue a point | Zonal Ma… __________________ [...]
I think Wenger go it wrong in this game. Attacking outside backs is essential to Barca’s style of play and Wenger wasn’t ready for it. Like you mentioned in a previous article, Barca become a 4-2-4 in attack, with Maxwell and Alves running freely up and down the flanks on attack (especially in the first half), and can be covered by the more then capable Pedro and Keita. When in possession, the Barca center-backs really stretched the pitch, allowing both outside backs to simultaneously move up and sometimes overlap the midfield on the flanks. Arsenal’s line of confrontation was to high, so Arsenal’s midfield was completely overrun by yellow shirts. Smart and lucky substition though… you never know what you’re going to get with Theo
I agree that Wenger got it very wrong tactically in the first twenty minutes, and Nasri’s lack of following Alves defensively was poor. However, to say that you don’t know what you are going to get with Theo is stupid. He brings pace, width, will run at players and can either cut in or get to the by line, perfect for a tired defense. I imagine you may have been commenting on his final ball, which has been significantly better this season (when playing.)
I’m making a comment about his consistency in general. At times brilliant, like today, and other times awful, like his last outing with england. Of course, i shouldn’t be giving in to the media machine proclaiming him to be “the next henry,” but instead just let the lad grow
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by Zonal_Marking: Arsenal 2-2 Barcelona, tactical analysis: http://bit.ly/aBWG2t What a game! A million things to discuss, so let the comments begin……
For the second leg, I’d start with:
Almunia
Sagna – Campbell – Vermaelen – Clichy
Song – Denilson
Nasri
Eboue – Bendtner – Rosicky
Diaby was woeful and Rosicky is excellent at defending as a wide player.
Bendtner is awful,Eduardo would be a better choice
Eduardo can’t hold the line up front, he doesn’t have the touch or strength to do so.
Bendtner won many long/high balls during the game and it was he who provided the final ball for Walcott and setup Fabregas for the penalty (With a header Eduardo would never have got).
Eduardo was tired at the CF spot but was terrible and Arshavin got given the role instead.
Looks like your formation, based on its personel, would revert to a 4-4-1-1 shape. Which might be ideal since a flat bank of four in midfield (okay, with the exception of Rosicky, who might be slightly more advanced) would reduce the space for Barcelona between the lines.
Some excellent points made in this article – particularly with respect to Arsenal pushing up to compress the space between the midfield and defensive lines.
I do think Campbell should have been brought on when Gallas got injured. Granted, he is not as quick as Song, but his positioning is certainly much better. When you are playing such a high defensive line – as Arsenal were – it is imperative for the two centre-backs to be in sync when playing the offside trap. For both Barca goals, Vermaelen pushed up to play Ibra offside, but Song did not; a crucial error in both instances.
Are you sure Vermallen was trying to play Ibrahmovic offside? Certainly for the first goal it looked to me as if Messi was walking away from the goal and Vermallen simply followed him leaving the space behind for the ball over the top. A classic case of a clever player drawing a defender out perhaps?
Fair point, Rob. It appeared to me that there was a breakdown in communication between Vermaelen and Song; Vermaelen was ostensibly pushing up when the ball over the top was played. Song ran straight back, instead of diagonally – which he should have done in order to narrow the angle on Ibrahimovic. It appeared that Almunia was bewildered by Song’s reaction as well – hence his decision to come out and cut Ibrahimovic off.
At first I thought Vermaelen was calling for the defensive line to push up but when they replayed the goal after the game I think he was telling Song to get tight to Ibra.
Looked to me like the Arsenal defenders were keeping tight to the closest player:
Clichy had Pedro
Vermaelen had Messi
Song “had” Ibra
Song wasn’t tight enough and didn’t react quick enough to the ball over the top and without the pace to rescue him he was always behind him.
@ drwtw “Song wasn’t tight enough and didn’t react quick enough to the ball over the top and without the pace to rescue him he was always behind him”.
Agreed – hence my argument about Campbell probably having the positional sense to get tighter on “Ibra”.
To be fair, Denilson acquitted himself well in midfield by keeping possession, but he simply doesn’t close down as effectively as Song does in that position.
Good points all round. I suspect you are right, Kais, Campbell, with all his experience, probably would have been tighter to Ibrahamovic and therefore wouldn’t have been caught out in the same way as Song.
Cheers, Rob. In any event, it looks like Wenger will be compelled to play Campbell in the 2nd leg, given Gallas’ injury. I would be very surprised if Song didn’t start in midfield.
Good analysis but I’d say Arsenal started with a 4-3-3 with a front three of Nasri/Bendtner/Fabregas and a middle three of Diaby/Song/Arshavin(who looked awful again and was clearly deeper than Fabregas).
Here’s my thoughts;
http://bit.ly/c4PJKc
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ashley Curtis and Nazry Iskandar, Wayne Thomas. Wayne Thomas said: From @Zonal_Marking: Arsenal 2-2 Barcelona: Wenger’s side utterly outclassed, but somehow rescue a point http://bit.ly/8Yn0tQ [...]
Having survived this, I think Arsenal can go on to win.
1. Barca will be without Puyol and Pique in the next game. Milito and Marquez, while better than, say, Campbell and Silvestre, are a far less imposing pair.
2. Arsenal know how to play Barca now (if they learn from what ZM has observed before and in this game, that is): play Eboue and Rosicky on the flanks with instructions for them to close down the Barca fullbacks and never let them run (a la Park); Nasri replaces Fabregas as the creative force in midfield, with Denilson and Diaby behind. Song drops to CB with Vermaelen. If Nasri works harder to close down Barca (or waltzes through people like he did vs. Porto) we’re all set. Bring Walcott on once Barca gets tired to get in behind.
It can work!
The problem, Josef, is that Nasri is not really a distributor. Arsenal need someone in that deep midfield band to orchestrate movements, and Nasri is more of an offensive midfielder who is at his best up around the box. Unless you are suggesting that Arsenal pressure really high up the pitch. Problem with that is the lack of defensive discpline that is absolutely essential – they will need to complement that high pressure with a high defensive line, and of course, compress the midfield. But this game has shown a susceptibility to the long ball over the top. With better CB’s, this wouldn’t be a problem, but the CBs Arsenal do have with pace also lack the positional awareness required.
Although I do agree with “play Eboue and Rosicky on the flanks with instructions for them to close down the Barca fullbacks and never let them run (a la Park).”
You speak truth in several aspects of your response. I am indeed suggesting that Arsenal pressure really high up the pitch (a good idea is worth stealing, after all). I know that is a risk with their defensive personnel, but I don’t think the alternative worked so well for them in the first half and I do think that Ibra and Barca would be hard-pressed to replicate the success they had with over the top balls again if Arsene tells TV to stay the hell at the back for one game.
alternatively, as several other commenter have pointed out, Arsenal could throw Sol in alongside Vermaelen for his tactical nous, drop diaby or denilson, and push Song back into midfield. Sol playing a high line is dangerous as well because he is slow, but his anticipation may obviate that concern.
As for Nasri, I have observed that he does have the capacity to be a distributor, though dribbling is indeed his forte. But if that capacity is unlikely to be utilized, perhaps Arsenal could switch Nasri and Rosicky, as the Czech certainly has an eye for the right pass.
I agree with your overall gameplan for the second leg. Arsenal need to go 4-4-1-1 or, failing that, certainly no more offensive than 4-2-3-1.
The problem with the shape in this first leg, was the position of Fabregas. I actually think he was too advanced to influence the game from deep. Xavi alluded to this in mid-week saying that “Cesc prefers to have the vision of the entire field in front of him”. Had he played deeper, which I know would have been a risk, practically alongside a holding midfielder- Arsenal could have retained possession for longer periods in the first half.
This, about Cesc’s positioning, goes back to a point I made in “The Arsenal Column” earlier this season: there’s a big difference between a midfielder having licence to go forward a join in attacks as per a 4-3-3 and the situaiton of a player who is ’stationed’ between the 3/4 lines as can be seen in a 4-2-3-1, 4-3-1-2 or 4-3-1-2 and so forth.
When Lampard was playing left-of-centre mid in Mourinho’s 4-3-3, a lot of pundits mistakenly attributed his prolific goalscoring to some mythical ‘free role’, when in fact he was simply playing a box-to-box game, advancing to capitalise on rebounds.
In the case of playmakers like Cesc, Denilson, Xavi and Iniesta, they start the attacks from midfield and then can move forward, but are never infiltrated behind enemy lines (of midfield) so to speak, threading other oncoming players through (or ‘hooking’ them, if we are to follow the Argentine terminology of ‘enganche’).
I think Nasri, while capable of performing both roles, was born a 3/4 player and thus would be ideally suited to the advanced position in the 4-2-3-1 (whether wide or central).
Fabregas’ brain, you are right, is better suited to deeper, or an interior role, even in the defensive phases. Playing Cesc and Diaby to the right and left of Song respectively would have been better to counteract Barca’s passing by essentially matching up and providing direct confrontation. Would have been difficult but still a more organised and effcient unit of defence. Bendtner could have dropped back a bit and stopped Xavi from dispersing the ball and as Diaby showed, when he nipped the ball from Busquets, it;s a clever ploy.
that was an excellent analysis. If Arsenal play their defense higher up in Camp Nou, they might give Barca more space to exploit behind their defense but it surely will give them more chances to score too.
Abidal coming back might help them a bit with Arsenal’s speed but Marquez in his current form, oh dear!
Yous are all idiots you don’t know what your talking about.Yaya Toure and milito will start in defence NOT marquez.Milito in puyols posistion and Yaya in Piques,this is close in terms of quality and style to the Puyol- Pique partnership.Milito is in brilliant form and is just as good as puyol,meanwhile Yaya can deal with bentders height and strength.If you doubt Yaya can play CB go and watch last years champions league final again.Also Abidal is back who will render Walcott useless due to his pace and defending capabilities,and iniesta is likely to be back.
Yous are so biased it is unbelievable,yous are acting like Arsenal have a 50/50 chance of going through when in reality they have a 10/90 chance.
Probable line ups:
——–Valdes——–
alves–Yaya–milito–abidal
——–Busquets——
—–xavi————-
————Iniesta—
messi—————-pedro
——-Ibrahimovic—-
———–almunia————-
Sagna-campbell-Vermarlin-clichy
————-Song———-
——–diaby—————–
Eboue——-Nasri——-Rosicky
———–Bendtner———–
Lol no contest,especially with it being played at the Nou Camp.
Arsenal are just a poor mans Barcelona.
Excellent analysis as always.
The one point I’d add is the amount of space Barcalona’s fullbacks had going forward, given Nasri, Arshavin, and later (and rather surprisingly) Eboue’s lack of desire to get back and cover.
Whilst Dani Alves saw plenty of ball on the right, Maxwell spent most of the first half, and plenty of the second, with a minimum of 20 yards of empty space to carry the ball in to when he went forward. Which was most of the time.
Had Xavi’s radar been a bit better tuned, and if fewer attacking moves went through the slightly off-colour Messi, I’d wager Maxwell would’ve had quite a few opportunites to get crosses in, thereafter it being up to Ibrahimovic to remember how good he is a few more times.
I said in a comment on the preview that this tie would come down to finishing chances (don’t they all?) since both sides had an equal ability to beat the full-backs on the flanks and cut the ball inside (via dribbling or cross), thus providing chances for the strikers.
Sadly, Arsenal have Bendtner, who is slow, a poor header of the ball (esp. with his height advantage), and easily outmuscled by everyone he challenged/was challenged by. Add that to the fact that it’s been clear for some time that he is not at all clinical. I really do not see what Wenger sees in him.
I also mentioned defensive discipline. ZM, you already mentioned the lack of defensive pressure in the midfield – which I believe to be a problem of execution rather than tactics as I will give Wenger the benefit of the doubt in understanding the need to shut Xavi down. Additionally, neither sets of CB’s are in the class of Maldini or Nesta, and Barca’s in particular are prone to pace. Perhaps if Arsenal was able to see more of the ball they would created as much havoc at some point as Barca did in the first 20 minutes – but the fact remains that as much of a hardman that Vermaelan is, we saw some pretty poor positional play from Arsenal’s back two that was only saved by some pretty poor finishing (shots directly at Almunia making the slightly above average GK look good).
Another random thought – Puyol’s red card is not a disadvantage for Barca. Assuming Toure can be fit for the return leg, we’ve already seen how competently he can fill the CB spot (and personally, I think he plays the position better than Puyol, especially considering who he’ll be up against). The missing of Puyol vs the missing of Fabregas slants strongly in Barca’s favor as now Arsenal don’t have any strong playmakers who can direct play from the center. Guardiola surely knows that a single goal will force Arsenal forward, and without a central playmaker, Arsenals wide playmakers can be isolated on the flanks.
This is primarly because – and again this is execution – Arsenal looked second best on the ball. They may pride themselves on slick passing, but they simply could not hold onto the ball in the midfield, and could not hold onto the ball under defensive pressure. My guess is that Arsenal will look to play balls over the top to release their speedy wide players and create one v one matchups in Barca’s defensive third. They’ll need to score at least twice to have a chance. I would say they need to get physical like never before to really interrupt Barca’s rhythm, but that’s just not going to happen.
Nasri can play the role Fabregas usually plays, and Bendtner regularly turns up with headed goals, I agree with you generally though.
Well I called it. In the preview post I commented that:
1) Despite the musings of us tactical aficionados Wenger would stick with his attacking 4-3-3
2) Arsenal would be ripped to shreds for failing to modify their game plan to handle the likelihood that they’d have less possession than Barcelona.
3) The key to any attacking success for Arsenal would be the pace of Walcott.
Pretty good calls, if I say so myself.
Now, with all due respect, I have to disagree with ZN’s analysis. You say Arsenal had the better of the second half because they pushed their line up but Barcelona exploited that high line with a minute. Once they had that away goal I don’t think anyone would begrudge them for not showing the same intensity as the first half (and they got a second goal despite Arsenal’s ‘domination’). The high line wasn’t the change that got Arsenal back into the game; the introduction of Theo was. They need to keep it tight at the Nou Camp and you want them to start with the same high line that resulted in a goal conceded a minute later? That’s ridiculous. Arsenal also need to score goals and you want them to leave Walcott on the bench in hopes he might be an impact sub (assuming the tie is not already out of reach by then)?! I’m sorry but you’ll have to explain your reasoning one more time because I’m not getting it.
I’m also surprised you didn’t castigate Pep for his horrible substitution of Ibrahimovic the same way you lambasted Fergie yesterday. But that’s a debate for another time…
You make a good point Chump.
But I think your divergence with ZM on this one demonstrates what Sun Tzu defines as a dilemma – a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario.
I also think you’d be chanting a different tune had Barca not been intent on making Almunia look good in the first 20 minutes. Either way, they HAVE to put pressure in all phases, and cannot allow gaps between the bands. How can they do this without a high defensive line?
1) But the high line in the second half resulted in two or three chances for Barcelona. The deep line in the first half resulted in about seven or eight. The difference was simply better finishing / poor goalkeeping.
2) Walcott’s just better in these games as an impact sub. Think of tonight, think of Anfield two seasons ago. He rarely plays well against really top sides from the start, in my view. If I was Wenger I’d be looking to keep it tight early on. Barca will really come at Arsenal in the opening period again, I don’t think Walcott is the right man to do that. Yes, his pace and runs might force Barca back, but despite his pace he’s not great when Arsenal play on the counter, he’d better when they have a grip on the game.
Whilst I agree with the analysis, I felt that Wenger got his subs wrong, and this contributed to Barca’s goals. Yes, eboue might have run more, but he lost possession lots. I didn’t get Song in defence. He played amazingly in the first half until pushed back after gallas went off. Once in defence he lost Ibra for the two goals. For the first he left him when he dropped slightly deep, then played him onside. The fact that Almunia had no clue what Song was doing seemed to push him into making the wrong decision. The second… I think he just lost him. And another thing. Yes, Barcelona pressed. But Wenger knew that. They all knew that. Why did they cope so badly?
got his subs wrong? His first two subs were forced injury replacements. I doubt any manager goes into a game with Plans B thru Z for injury scenarios.
I’m still a newbie when it comes to analyzing this kind of stuff, but it seemed to me that the lack of pressing in the midfield was almost intentional by Arsenal, as they were more concerned with properly switching and keeping shape/not allowing free runs. While the effort can certainly be questioned, it seemed a tactical decision based on pragmatism; it didn’t appear Wegner had the faith in his mids to properly read situations, and had them instead concentrate on not getting caught out. And, as someone who has watched every minute of televised Arsenal action this season, I have to say that it was likely the correct move. Two long balls over the top may have resulted from the space afforded to the Barca mids, but I’d rather them play route one then get on the break because Diaby didn’t realize it was a poor time to leave his spot. IMO, Arsenal hasn’t pressed effectively since the first four matches of the season, and it would have been suicide to expect better of them against this kind of opposition.
Thanks for this forum and the work you guys do. Even if I’m totally wrong here, I can honestly say I wasn’t thinking about the game this way a year ago. Cheers!
At the risk of sounding pedantic, may I point out that Arsenal didn’t “rescue a point”, as this is the knockout stage; they salvaged a draw.
Yeah just realised that, facepalm for me.
Haha, not to worry – it is easy to make an oversight like that after watching such a compelling game. You are absolutely correct when you say it was a “difficult game to analyse”, tactically and otherwise. So many dynamics to consider, but you’re doing a fantastic job -as always – of fomenting intelligent debate.
Keep up the good work!
ZM – i agree that pushing the defensive line forward was a necessary move, but the weakness i saw in the first half was that the two deep midfielders for arsenal were playing much too close to their defensive line. this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but both of them tended to make terrible decisions as to when to step forward to press the barcelona midfield as they advanced, often leaving it too late.
credit to ibra and messi though – they timed their shuttling between the lines perfectly. every time song and diaby stepped forward to press, they followed and helped create confusion in the marking.
“For those players in a 4-2-3-1, there is one fewer player behind them, and therefore significantly more defensive work from them is needed.”
I wouldn’t say this is necessarily true. The game is about space and mobility more than it is about numbers. In a 4-2-3-1, it is quite plausible and sometimes the case that the two DM’s can shift across to the ballside when the ball is coming down the wings. The opposite side winger then drops back to the level of the DM’s and pinches in. This alters the formation to a temporary 4-3-3 of sorts. But there is more to the situation than just 4-2-3-1 v 4-3-3 and the positions players are in. Understanding space and mobility and how to manipulate these factors are what make great teams great. Barcelona’s pressing game is a case in point.
“The opposite side winger then drops back to the level of the DM’s and pinches in”
But surely that is proving the point that the wingers need to be more defensively aware in a 4-2-3-1, as they wouldn’t be doing that in a 4-3-3?
They may have to be more defensively aware, yes. But that wasn’t what I was referring to. I understood your statement to mean that in a 4-3-3, if a winger is pressing the fullback, they would have the outside mid and their own fullback behind them; in a 4-2-3-1, if the winger is pressing the ball, there is only the fullback behind them. That was the point I thought you were making. Is that correct?
Ah, no, perhaps it was poorly-worded from me. I meant the total number of players behind them. So, for example, if I’m playing wide-right in a 4-3-3, I know there are seven players (4 + 3) ‘guaranteed’ to be behind me. If I’m playing wide-right in a 4-2-3-1, there are only 6 (4 + 2) with an additional player on the same level as me. So the two wide players often (thought not always) need to play a little deeper and a little more disciplined than they do in a 4-3-3.
Ah I understand now. Yes, the 4-2-3-1 can be like that. Good teams though, will “tilt” their formations when the ball is wide, so players are covering the next player to the ball in their positional line. But there aren’t many good teams that do that, lol. Most teams play “flat”. And that’s why they’re not Barcelona
“this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but both of them tended to make terrible decisions ”
Both in possession and in defense, Barcelona consistently made the best decisions at the ball and near the ball in the first half of this game. Arsenal played like a West Brom under Mowbray in comparison. Tried to play attacking football, but they weren’t thinking ahead about what was going on in the game.
“I wouldn’t say this is necessarily true. The game is about space and mobility more than it is about numbers. In a 4-2-3-1, it is quite plausible and sometimes the case that the two DM’s can shift across to the ballside when the ball is coming down the wings. The opposite side winger then drops back to the level of the DM’s and pinches in. This alters the formation to a temporary 4-3-3 of sorts. But there is more to the situation than just 4-2-3-1 v 4-3-3 and the positions players are in. Understanding space and mobility and how to manipulate these factors are what make great teams great. Barcelona’s pressing game is a case in point.”
this is in fact what liverpool does when they play with maschareno and lucas. it also buys the ballside forward time to drop back and get into a 2 on 1 pressing situation.
hi
i have jsut discovered this fantastic page and i want to aport my opinion of a catalan barça fan
first of all sorry about my poor english
i think that your analisis i’ts so good but i thnik there are some another keys about this match:
- there isn’t any team actually in europe who can win barça playing face to face: in the last year the only teams who can won at barça were manu and chelsea or rubin kazan playing at barsa all the team behind and searching quick exits when recovered the ball to the goal using the big spaces behind the defense and midfield—– firts wenger’s mistake
- 2nd wenger’s big big mistake barca’s brain is xavi hernandez and if he can play free barça is a football machine with never stop.today with iniesta injured it was clear that all the barça game goes on his feet.if i had been in wenger skin i ordered a special atention at xavi for penalized the barça ataking game ( in sapnish league in a similar case playing barça vs almeria , hugo sanchez, almeria’s manager done it and the final result was 1-0 in a pedro’s goal at 90 min with a poor game of the team )
- arsenal without a cesc fabregas in 100% conditions loses a lot of options and at this game cesc it wasn’t in total confidence to play an important match like it and all the arsenal’s game has been afected.
- for all this facts barça has been the only team on the pitch at the first half… 5 o 6 clear chances with a great almunia saving all to 1 chance to arsenal ( nasri kick )
-at the 2n half another mistake of wenger… if you want to put the defensive line 5 metres up for reduce the spaces at the midfield first of all you have to pressure the man who have the ball and more if this man is xavi.if you don’t pressure at xavi and he have time to think succes that 2 good assists at the back of the defensive line and good definition of ibra ( not like the 1s half )
- the point that put on the game arsenal was the enter of walcot at the pitch ( he’s a very good 2n half player at the moment, and if the injuries respect him one of the most valous english players in the future ) but at the same time is the busquets mistake at the midfield that begins the goal. its not the first time that a similar mistake of this player but he have the confidence of guardiola…i think that he needs a advice because his mistakes can be so expensive in the future
- with the goal arsenal goes confidence to turn back the score in the last minutes. how you could see in the game the barça’s aquiles ankle in the defensive line is the left side with maxwell ( i hope the return of abidal in good conditions ) and walcott turn mad him with his speed.for this reason at the initial game guardiola puts keita, a defensive midfielder, at the left side to help maxwell for stops arshavin but at the last minutes they were more tired than a fresh walcott and they couldnt stop him and arsenal made the draw in the final minutes.
-for the barcelona match for arsenal the cesc fabregas absence is a bad new because they have to win the game or make a 3-3 or more draw but for barça there will be two absences in the central defence: puyol-pique and that is the team position with few players : only marquez ( in very bad form ) and toure yaya ( i’ts good for an emergency like last year in the final with manu ) or abidal ( but he have never played in this position with guardiola but yet in the national french team ) so if barça thinks that everything is done like the 2n half of today they could have a bad surprise!!
pd: next saturday, 10th of april will be the match against madrid that could decided the spanish leader and the barça players could focus their atention at this match and not at the arsenal.
The lack of pressure on Xavi was very very poor. I literally don’t know why that happened, I can only think that the reason was that the natural player to pressure him would have been Fabregas, who was concerned with Busquets and who wasn’t 100% fit, but he was just afforded too much time on the ball.
With all due respect you don’t have to pressure Xavi (or Pique for the first goal) they can do what they want with the ball on the half way line, as they are not dangerous, as long as you mark every player in front of the man on the ball. This is were Arsenal fell down it was man for man in both situations except for Song failing to pick up Ibra. I would disagree with your blaming of Vermaleen for the second goal he ’stepped’ on to Messi and assumed that his centre back partner would pick up Ibra as would be expected of a normal centre half, but there lack of a partnership showed. Hopefully the reverese next week will be the trump card for Arsenal.
I thought it strange that despite all Barcelona’s obvious quality it was two simple defensive errors that were capitalised on for the goals.
I disagree. You don’t have to hassle him every time he gets the ball, but if you look at Diaby’s standing-off on the second goal, it’s pretty poor play.
My point i was trying to make is that the fault of the goal is not the level of pressure (or lack of) on the player with the ball its the marking of the off the ball runners who are in dangerous positions.
I wasn’t aware Diaby (or whoever) was standing off, but i assume he was standing off for a reason i.e marking a player in a more dangerous position.(Although I must hasten to add i do not wish to defend Diaby at all on the basis of that performance, he was poor.)
i desagree with you because if you make a high backline tactic like arsenal in the second half the forwards and the midfielders have to pressure the other team exit of the ball ( like make barça in his home matches with the 3 forwards and 3 midfielders).if the pressure is good your defenders don’t worry about their own marks and their back spaces because the forwrads can’t receive balls in good conditions.
in the two barça goals it’s more mistake the lack of pressure to pique and xavi of the forwards and midfielders than the mistake of mark of the defenders.
i’ts a specially big mistake because if you have shown any barça previous match all the teams make big pressure at the exit of the ball when the ball is in pique or xavi feet and when the ball is in puyol or busquets this pressure is lower because they don’t have the precision of pass than xavi and pique have.
I agree, not pressuring Xavi -on the half-way line or not- is insane.
We can glean a lot from a tactical analysis, but I think everyone needs to be cognizant of the mental side of this first leg and how it dramatically affected play. Barcelona came out firing on all cylinders. They coolly demonstrated their class, and forced a handful of saves out of Almunia within the first 15 minutes. Arsenal looked petrified, to be honest – for most of them, this is the biggest game they’ve ever played, and after losing four times to United/Chelsea this year, they haven’t done well at all this year in big games. Diaby had no confidence in the sublime touch he has demonstrated throughout the last couple months, etc. It was only after a remarkable effort from Walcott, who had nothing to lose, that the Gunners began to assert themselves in the game.
No matter what changes Wenger makes, this young offensive side with a makeshift CB pairing and muppet for a GK will not move to the semifinals unless they assert themselves in the second leg. They cannot fail so miserably in stringing passes together and give Barca 68% possession. The subpar performances from Bendtner (apart from the goals), Diaby, Eboue, etc. who have been so important this season, are more down to confidence in one’s own ability than anything tactical that can be changed. They need to be less intimidated and more confident.
By the way, Fabregas should not have been on the field. Arsenal were playing with ten men. Clearly unfit. Next time he needs to listen to his body and help the team. Things would have been much better with Eboue at LW and Nasri at AM.
The “muppet for a goalkeeper” single-handedly kept his side in the game, as you yourself noted. Internal consistency?
You’re probably right about Fabregas’ fitness, though.
Spot on with the analysis.
The most damaging part of the entire contest was the lack of pressing from the Arsenal players. Barcelona played a brilliant pressing game and this is the thing that Pep has instilled into this team.
Arsenal’s Achilles heal has always been a strong pressing game, giving very little time on the ball.
If Arsenal hope to get anything from the second leg, they need to be 100% better without the ball because Xavi was able to pick out passes at will.
Hi KB,
“…lack of pressing from the Arsenal players”
But this had always been a trait of classic Wenger Arsenal teams, or at least it was up until this season. The preference for those sides from 2002 to 2008 upon losing the ball was to fall back into mass ranks, invite the other team to move forward and then murder them on the counter-attack. Arsenal always defended well, only they chose to do so differently than that with which they have been experimenting this season.
The switch to 4-3-3 this season was to be accompanied by a higher pressing game up the pitch, Wenger admitted as much back in September. In time they should get better at it.
Fantastic site ZM please keep it up.
I think you give to much weight to FORMATION though, and perhaps not enough is put upon the natural qualities of the players who are filling those NUMBERS (4-3-3 4-4-2).
I could give many examples but one that springs to mind and couldnt be more appropriate is Sergio Busquets. This kid had played as “defensive midfielder” only a handful of times before jumping from the 3rd division to starting a CL Final in less than a year. Nearly a year on and he´s still green (understandable) but Guardiola has seen something in him. Busquets understands the game!
Experts love to talk about positional sense as a “defensive midfielder” and really what they are talking about most of the time is a player who is so limited in his understanding of the game that he rarely moves from his SET POSITION in front of the back four.
Busquets is dynamic, one touch, move, he cleans the central midfield so Xavi can drop in and receive facing the opponents goal, and then Barça start to tick.
Of course Messi does much the same thing for Xavi except this time from the front. Xavi is an excellent player in the right context, but it´s nearly always other players who create that context for him as he is unable to create it for himself. He suffers when Touré plays behind for instance because Touré is much less dynamic in the offensive transision. He eats space instead of gifting it to Xavi. But of course Touré is an animal compared to Busquets defending in his own half.
4-3-3? 4-4-2? 4-3-1-2? I understand they can be a useful tool to quickly guide the readers but football can be much richer than that. Iniesta whether he plays wide left or at right back will always be a midfielder. That´s his nature. I doubt Guardiola has ever said, “I want you on the left side of a 4-2-3-1 today”. Iniesta is Iniesta (having a very poor season by the way). And yes you could play him up front but he wouldnt be a “false nine” he´d be a “10″ as is his nature. And Iniesta is one of the most versatile players in the modern game.
In fairness you alluded to it in one of your recent articles about Liverpool. Gerrard playing as a second striker! You were right, it´s criminal. I dont care if he scores a thousand goals, Gerrard will always be a midfielder. Gerrard for my liking has never been deployed in his “ideal position” on the right or left of a central midfield three. Shame really but Benitez knows best.
Suggestions for future articles:
“Be wide to go deep?”
“The loneliness of the long distance striker”
“Specialists or Universal Soldiers”
I hope you don´t think me too presumtuous.
p.s. You know the site was referenced on the front page of Marca today?
i agree with you but if you have seen the yesterday’s match the firts goal of arsenal begins in a big mistake of busquets.
for me he will be a great player in the future but sometime looses his mind in some matches.the problem is when he think that it’s better of he is and caught more risk in some decisions in a key position of the team.when it goes good no problem but when it goes bad succed how yesterday and it’s no t the first time in this season.he’s young to correct this mistakes but i hope that guardiola will have a little talk with him.
in another order one of the diferences of this season in the barça is that last year always plays in a 4-3-3 and this year have played in a 4-3-3, in a 4-2-3-1, in a 4-1-4-1 …and it’s more dificult for the oponent to defend.one of this exemples is iniesta that can play in more sides of the pitch but another one is keita, pedro, …
I reckon you are overrating too much both Arsenal and Wenger. During the first half it was a childhood against a men team. They were just lucky (Almunia was great too) Barcelona didn’t score twice or three times. Otherwise Walcott did great, but in my eyes the whole game changed from the goal not since Walcott got in. And the goal came from a rare failure of Sergio Busquets. Without that present probably Arsenal would have lost the game 0-2…
So, in my eyes, it was not that big success of Wenger but luck on that concrete time of the game (Busquets’ mistake). Anyway without Walcott in nothing of this would have happened so, yes, getting Walcott in was a right move, but the key for Arsenal was given by chance, not by Wenger.
I thought Barca visibly relaxed after the second goal. So much energy was expended trying to score in the first half they wore themselves out. That pace is not a pace Barca typically plays at. Normally Barca plays the whole field and the opposition runs around and gets worn out the second half. In the first half there was so much space Barca pressed relentlessly.
You cannot play a possession game if you cannot win the ball. In the second half of the second half Barca had lost their legs.
Tactically I think it is suicide to play a high backline against barca. That is why no one tries it.
Good point–can’t think of another match where this Barca was the side that lost their legs at the end. Did they attempt an especially English pace? Whatever else you can say about Arsenal’s beautiful game, it’s always had a specifically English pace to it.
The relentless pressing in the first half is a gamble that should have worked – the tie should have been over before Arsenal knew what hit them. The first 20 minutes was almost unbelievable to watch, I can’t remember a side dominating another side like that at the highest level.
If England end up playing Spain at the World Cup, I think we may end up being severely embarassed.
Yeah, the plan was clearly to come out at a relentless pace and kill the tie off before half time, knock Arsenal’s confidence hard and quick and then just play keep ball in the second half.
It mostly worked too, Arsenal were rattled and if not for Almunia it would have been 3-0 in no time.
Now Barcelona have the tricky decision on how many players to rest at the weekend, too few and they’ll be too tired to do it again, too many and they could drop points in the title race with the El Classico coming up that’d be a disaster.
The difference here is that England are capable of playing the physical game to break up the Spanish passing rhythm, whereas Arsenal have shown themselves to be simply Barcelona-lite
The worst mentality ever, and why english people keep breaking the legs of Arsenal players. Can be paraphrased as “Hey, these guys are way too good for us to play against unless we beat the shit out of them.” “Physical” is a euphemism for “foul” when the english discuss football.
“If England end up playing Spain at the World Cup, I think we may end up being severely embarassed.”
truth.
Fantastic review, I completely agree the way you said Wenger putting in Walcott to attack from the right side is the turning point of the match.
I think, Wenger showed TWICE that he is capable to counter-tactics the attacking strategies from Barcelona. The first half, when Barca’s midfield is pressing, he putting more men in the midfield and use counter attacking football. I just love the way he let Fabregas marked Xavi when Wenger saw there was no use to let Fabregas attacking as Arsenal’s midfield was constantly outplayed and pressed. Asenal rarely attacked, but they read Barcelona’s attack and put quick counter on them.
But in the second half, Xavi was put in a more defensive position. This let Arsenal’s midfield, mainly Fabregas out of mark and this let Xavi controlled the game from a deep midfield. Quick second half goal (Arsenal’s midfield looks like losing their way after they finished the first half brilliantly) and second goal where almost same with the first goal’ strategy. But Wenger put a brave move, by telling Fabregas to get more attacking and giving him more options on the wide, by putting Walcott. After Walcott’s goal, Arsenal’s morale was lifted and they managed to even score another goal, putting Puyol in the dressing room so early.
It is interesting how Arsenal managed to progress, as I think it was a Barcelona’s win. 2 away goals against one of the most brilliant side in England. It is can be considered a win, for Barcelona. I think their biggest regret is by simply letting 2 goals after they’re up. Well, we’ll see what will happen in Nou Camp, then.
arsenal are not a brilliant side,they are nothing compared to barcelona.
I mean in England, they are 3rd placed while still have a chance to became champions. Okay, they are nothing to Barcelona. That is why it is interesting if Arsenal can progress to the next round. Barcelona is on the upper hand in this half time, but yes, this is football. Anything happens.
I think Pep was right to bring on Henry, but it should have been for Messi.
He then should have put Henry wide left and gone to a conventional 4-3-3.
Finally, Keita should have come off for Toure. That way, Maxwell had (a) support on the flank when he went forward (previously offered by Keita, now by Henry) and (b) cover behind him with Toure tracking Walcott. Walcott was the reason Arsenal turned the game around, and if Pep had done this he would have covered his left flank without losing any attacking flair.
I noticed how the Barca players were always offering themselves for a pass when their player had the ball. Conversely, when on the defense, they would harass the Arsenal player (with multiple Barca players closing down on the player with the ball). Not only that, but other Barca players closed down the closest passing options. It was interesting how Barca controlled where the ball was passed by closing down players whom they didn’t want to get possession.
Arsenal must retain the ball more by trying to provide the player with the ball with more passing options. If there are multiple Barca players closing down, then there has to be at least some Arsenal players who are free! Push into the space vacated by those who are closing down, maybe that would make them hesitant to double or triple-team us. I think Denilson excelled in shifting the ball in our midfield. Not sure why Diaby and Song seem to struggle with that. Usually in the EPL, they are the ones who can hold off challenges through their strength and move the ball.
And Arsenal has just got to press the Barca players harder. Players like Xavi should not be allowed so much time on the ball or space! Arsenal seemed to be playing an EPL match…jogging towards the player with the ball and standing a few metres away essentially asking them to move the ball to another player – which is what they plan to do in any case! They should be closed down before they have a chance to review their options and pick their passes. It will be difficult to maintain such a high pace for long, but we can pick the areas that we need to close down early. For example, we don’t have to be as aggressive in the wide areas unless it is a crossing position. Like what Chelsea did against us, we can force their players out wide to cross.
Really hope that Wenger figures out an appropriate strategy for the second leg. I’m not sure if Arsenal play anything other than the usual formation and tactics though (please point them out if they do).
Barcelona’s natural tactics were the reason for the first half onslaught. Every team who visits the Emirates plays an intense pressing game; the difference is that Barca retain the ball better than any other side in history. Against a very good passing side like Arsenal this is perfect. A lot of sides manage to knock Arsenal off their rhythm; Barca didn’t even allow them to play the first note.
Leaving personnel aside (we all know Arsenal don’t have a Messi) Arsenal and Barca play very similar football but with one key difference: Arsenal don’t press like Barca do. While this was the reason Barca were so dominant in the first half it’s also the reason Arsenal got back in to it. Any team that presses so relentlessly will suffer fatigue and that’s exactly what happened. Once a few players’ levels dropped spaces started to appear and Arsenal exploited them well; Arsenal score a lot of late goals, so there are clearly benefits to not pressing quite so fervently.
Guardiola could have avoided this result by making two substitions straight after the second goal, maybe Bojan and Henry for Pedro and Messi. Wenger knew Barca were tiring so brought on Walcott, who is incredibly effective from the bench. Still Guardiola did nothing. He could even have sacrificed a forward for Yaya Toure and shut up shop.
Credit to both teams though: Barca for the producing the most incredible football I’ve ever seen and Arsenal for not giving up and sticking to their principles. Barca should be too strong in the second leg, but after this game I’m not predicting anything.
Chris,
I don’t think visiting Premiership teams press so high up the pitch at the Emirates, nor do they keep such a high line as did Barcelona on Wednesday.
Very true. Most Premiership teams are happy to let Arsenal pass it around the defence but then press as soon as the ball reaches midfield. By pressing the defence Barca forced less competent ball players in to panic long balls, which pretty much always ended up back with a Barca player. I think the point I was trying to make was that most teams only stall Arsenal’s game when they press, but Barca pressed and passed so well (and so high up the pitch) that it simply stopped Arsenal playing at all.
“Barcelona defend from the front better than any other side in Europe”
If there was one thing I took from the game last night it was that. Going forward, sure, it was impressive. But what really took me aback from minute one was how unbelievably good Barca were at pressing. I can’t think of a time i’ve seen a team press as hard as them last night.
What would have been starling, would have been to see Arsenal press in the same way. It reminded me of the times when Arsenal struggle against so called physical sides who press them for the full 90 minutes. It’s fascinating to see a side like Barca do the same.
Guardiola has gone up in my estimations on the back of that performance. (Which is hard considering the man has won everything going)
[...] Arsenal 2-2 Barcelona: Wenger’s side utterly outclassed, but somehow rescue a draw “A crazy game of football to watch, a difficult one to analyse. Two open, attacking sides produced a wonderful game for the neutral, but one that will probably leave both managers absolutely fuming – Wenger because his side were awful and conceded poor goals, Guardiola because his side threw away a 0-2 lead.” (Zonal Marking) [...]
BARCA DEFENSE I THINKING NOT STRONG ENOUGH AND MUST ATTACK HER MORE FISICALE PLAYERS LIKE SOL CAMPPBEL!!!
On Barcelona’s game tonight (Saturday) vs Athletic, I just wanted to comment:
- this season Guardiola appears to be more of a tinkerman (in a non-disparaging sense)compared to last season when his only variation on his standard 4-3-3 was Messi as false striker and Henry and Etoo starting from the wings. Now witness the array of formation changes he has wielded this season: 4-2-3-1, 4-2-4, 4-3-1-2. Against Athletic, the most significant change was the inclusion of Maxwell in a wide-midfield position on the left ahead of Abidal. Was this a 4-4-2, 4-3-3 or an assymetric 4-2-4? How about 4-2-3-1 if you consider that Messi would drop off towards midfield centrally? Jeffren tended to play higher up than Maxwell on the other flank (as per Pedro vs Keita during the Arsenal game) who was more of a third midfielder.
Puyol, Pique, Chigrinskyi, Abidal.
Jeffren, Busquets, Toure, Maxwell.
Messi and Bojan.
Unfortunately that game wasn’t on a channel I get here in the U.S. – but reading the lineup you have above I would expect it to play like a 4-2-3-1 just by virtue of how those players would tend to behave, although somewhat asymmetric and weighted to the right in the attacking lines.
That said, you mention that Jeffren played higher, and with Messi playing rightish center, that puts a lot of Barcelona bodies in the same areas of the pitch on attack. Do you think this recent 4-2-3-1/4-2-4 arrangement of Pep’s that has spurred so much attention and debate lately is specifically designed to flood the areas Messi inhabits in order to make tightly man-marking him a very dangerous proposition (like the goals against Arsenal). Or is it simply that he is choosing the players he wants on the pitch that coincidentally fill this area because of how they play?
Abidal overlapped Maxwell so much that he was almost playing ahead of him!
Right, you noticed then how Maxwell would often hold his position in the middle third while Abidal streamed ahead of him.
Hence why I choose to represent him almost in the Keita role (whenever Barca are playing those assymetric formations like on Wednesday at the Emirates)in the following diagram
Space Ghost that’s an interesting theory.
Certainly against Arsenal, Barcelona left the entire left flank only for Maxwell with some assistance from Keita; it’s a wonder Arsenal didn’t try to exploit it earlier.
Maybe Guardiola feels that by concentrating so many attackers down one flank he can blitz teams who will be so stunned that they will be too preoccupied to focus on switching play effectively to the other side. By which time, of course, Barca had already regrouped and shored up that vulnerable left flank.
[...] Arsenal 2-2 Barcelona: Wenger’s side utterly outclassed, but rescue a draw | Zonal Marking __________________ Thank you HCFC Clark for the sig Xbox 360 Gamertag: ahlycotc [...]
I recommend going with four four two in the second leg.
http://www.cerebralfootballer.com/2010/04/barcelona-vs-arsenal-preview/
It is an impressive remark from Messi a bout arsenal in Europe. That is why we support this club. It has a future and well managed. We hope it will make it to the finals in champions
No smoke without fire.
nice
Interesting debate. Having watched the videos again, I still think that it was as much Vermaelen’s fault as it was Song’s. Certainly Song should have been in a better position to cover, but in the second goal in particular, Vermaelen simply comes too high up the pitch. This has happened a few times now – will do a piece on it if I can find the right videos…
@ZM, you’re quite correct about the 2nd goal. I just watched the highlights and I’d have to say Vermaelen and Song are equally culpable. Vermaelen pushes up too much, and Song allows Ibra to do this preposterous “bending feint”; he essentially runs in a semi-circle to beat the offside trap – like a car turning a sharp corner – and then sets off.
I can see why Song doesn’t follow Ibra as he shuffles deeper – this would expose space for Messi to exploit behind him – but he really should have tracked Ibra’s run when he changed direction. Unfortunately, Song’s anticipation was woeful in this case.
I have to look at it again, but if Diaby was the nearest man to the ball, he should have been pressuring, as long as there was a covering defender behind them, which I’m sure he was. Which puts him at fault for the goal, actually. Goals are almost always conceded by a defensive player not pressuring properly and giving the attacker on the ball space and time to make a decision.
Ideally, pressure is always applied to the player with the ball. But, sometimes that doesn’t work out. The Cardinal rule of playing a high line is this – if the man with the ball isn’t pressured drop off to fill the space between the CB’s and the Keeper. If you don’t, well just watch the video.
http://www.101greatgoals.com/videodisplay/5221988/
Here’s the second again – Diaby isn’t doing anything there, he should have been quicker onto him IMO
I’ll only go on what Marcos Lopez says (he of the futbolitis website in Spain) since he is a certified coach and was once a prospective player at Valencia’s youth academy: in a modern 4-3-3, yes, the winger must first press and then track his full-back but only so far as the halfway line, by which time he “passes on” the advancing full-back to the wide-of-centre midfielder, who then has the insurance policy of his own full-back behind him. The outside-forward is then expected to fall into a relatively advanced line of 3 or 4 men (as per 4-2-3-1 or 4-1-4-1) with one or two central mids bridging the gap between this advanced line and the back-four. So really, the movment of the wide-of-centre mids is crucial here; one helping out the defensive mid, and then both pushing up to form that high line along with the wingers.
With 4-2-3-1, as Rafa Benitez said, you have the option of maintaining the two midfield banks (defensive mids plus offensive mids)or else you can contract into one bank of four (as per 4-4-1-1) depending on the characteristics of your wide-men.
But certainly in the 4-3-3, I fail to see the point of one winger on the dormant side of the pitch tracking all the way back in line with his defensive midfielder.
In a 4-3-3 it creates consolidation. It limits the spaces that the possession team can play in. This is not as accurate as needed, but it might give a hint as to what I’m talking about, and it only applies to the ball on the wings. The formation is a straight 4-3-3, and the formation is tilted (“o” is the ball”):
(NB – The lines are deeper than I intend because of the formatting. There is no more than 30 yards between last defender and furthest forward, and 10-15 yards between each player
—————————
-o————————-
-LW————————-
——CF——————-
-LM———RW————-
——CM——————-
-LB———RM————-
—–CB——–(RB)———-
———CB—————-
————–(RB)———–
The RB will have two possible positions based on coaching preference, the speed of the opposition left winger, and the potential for counterattack.
The whole formation tilts to the ball dependent on the position of the ball and the formational line that is pressing, as well as what area of the field and which player is doing the pressing. This reduced the spaces that the other team can play in immensely, it keeps defensive players close together in order to track runs, and it keeps the team in a good shape for any counterattack when the ball is won.
That was criminal defending from Diaby. In his own half, that ball should have been pressured so that the attacker couldn’t see his options clearly. There was no need for him to mark anyone else as he was the 1st defender.
Yeah a lot of standing around in there.. Unforgivable against Barca..
Correct SG, except Diaby didn’t even give his defenders a chance to think that one out, lol. Mesmerized as he was by Barca lol
McGie,
nice analysis of the mechanisms of basculation. But even so, I think that, like ZM says, formation does affect the pressing strategy. This kind of basculation (think of it as compensatory movement) that you describe is ideal, indeed absolutely necessary in the (i) 4-3-2-1 or (ii) 4-3-1-2 formations, since both by their relatively widthless nature require intricate and timely compensatory movement when shifting across the field to press on the wings. A perfect example would be France ‘98 for (i) and Chelsea in the earlier part of this season for (ii).
But formations like 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 (in their seperate ways) can capitalise on their innate width through forcing the advancing opponent to masticate the ball even further across their backline before really penetrating your midfield.
So in your illustration above for instance, our team is slave to the opponents’ utilising of our left flank and risk incurring a very quick change of play across to our other (right) flank, which will simulateneously result in them having advanced at least 15 years. When we begin to hinge across in that direction, we accordingly (assuming we didn’t succeed in robbing the ball) will have been shifted back a further 15 yards…and all because our more advanced players weren’t shutting down angles for lateral passes during the first phase of attack.
@ Roberticus
Not sure what “basculation” means, but actually one way of playing the 4-3-3 (or 4-2-3-1) does require the winger on the side opposite the ball to drop off to midfielder depth. It provides some important advantages defensively, compared to keeping the winger in the “forward” line.
Granted, Mcgie’s drawing doesn’t really show the shape that well, as he himself says because of formatting problems, but I think the idea behind it is sound (although the CF should be a little higher to cutoff passes to the CB’s). The defending team will leave some space open, somewhere, so where do you want it to be? If the winger stays high, then the space is between the winger and the fullback. If the winger drops off then the space is in front of the winger. So, as you say the attacking team could execute a quick change of play across to the right flank. If the space is in front of the winger then the winger can close the space while the ball is in flight to the leftback. He will be in a better position to see both the ball and the person who will probably receive it prior to the switch, and will be goal side of the man with the ball and able to position himself in the path of passing angles into the midfield.
If the winger is playing in a line with the CF, then the open space is behind him. So, he will have more difficulty seeing the ball and the opposing left back, his close proximity to the leftback combined with space behind him facilitates the leftback making a fast break into that space, and if the leftback or an opposing midfielder does receive the ball in this space, then he is always on the chase and the defense will be reliant on either a midfielder shifting over (opens up the middle) or the right back coming out to close down the man with the ball (overload on the flank 2 vs. 1).
Personally, I prefer option 1, especially if the sides are reversed and its Dani Alvez breaking into the space. Granted though, a wing forward shouldn’t be dropping as deep as a side mid in say a 4-4-1-1, as that would have knock-on affects for counter attacks.
Agree with you on that, Diaby didn’t do his job and probably should sit for the next leg.
With regards to Henry, from what I’ve read & heard he’s more-or-less signed for RBNY for next season.
Does this all pose a problem for the defenders, who presumably are told to man mark the likes of Messi and Ibra? If the defenders stay tight to the man when they drop deep they leave gaps behind them; but if they don’t then some very skilful opponents can simply pick up the ball unmarked in the area between the defence and midfield. I think ZM describes Wayne Rooney sitting in this area in his excellent “False Nine” article.
I’m currently reading David Winner’s Brilliant Orange Book about Dutch football, so I’m thinking maybe some “Total Football” style interchanging of positions is needed when defenders get dragged out of position by intelligent forwards dropping deep?