France 0-1 Belarus: A compact Belarus side with a classic smash and grab

The starting line-ups
A disastrous start for Laurent Blanc, in his first competitive game as France manager.
Blanc had severe selection problems before the match. He was without Nicolas Anelka, Patrice Evra, Jeremy Toulalan, Franck Ribery, Yoann Gourcuff, Samir Nasri, Hatem Ben Arfa, Karim Benzema and Lassana Diarra due to injury or suspension. His starting line-up was a system that was broadly 4-4-2, with Yann M’Vila very deep ahead of the back four, and Loic Reomy dropping off Guillaume Hoarau upfront.
Bernd Stange chose a 4-2-3-1 for his Belarus side, that was rigid defensively and fluid further forward. An average position diagram would probably end up looking more like 4-2-4, because the front four players were allowed to switch around and interchange as moves progressed, with the players returning to defend the nearest zone when moves broke down, rather than the position they started from. So the Hleb brothers would often switch, or Vitali Rodionov would often end up on the flank.
As you might expect, the home side were dominant during the opening period of the game, keeping possession well despite (in theory) their numerical disadvantage in the centre of midfield. The two France (and Arsenal) full-backs got into advanced positions, allowing France’s wide players to move inside into the centre of the pitch, although they also dropped deep to come and get the ball, the further into the match France were at 0-0. Remy dropped to the right sometimes when defending, and he and Menez seemed to have the freedom to change positions in the opening period.
Little creativity from France
France played well up until about 25 yards from goal, when the attacks broke down because of a lack of creativity, and a lack of understanding between players not remotely used to playing with each other. Hoarau was given a bit of a battering in L’Equipe with a 3/10 rating, but he won a decent amount of balls in the air – the problem was surely that he wasn’t receiving enough support from onrushing midfielders.
The ’story’ is that France were awful, unable to beat a side that has never qualified for a major international tournament. But the truth is that Belarus were more ‘good’ than France were ‘bad’. They were organised, compact, disciplined and patient in their build-up play.
What was most notable about the away side’s defensive shape (in addition to the front four taking it in turns to drop in as the wide players when defending) was how deep the striker, and the link player (between the midfield four and the striker) dropped when Belarus didn’t have the ball. There was little attempt at closing down the France centre-backs when they had the ball, and sometimes, when M’Vila got the ball, he found ten Belarus outfield players between him and goal.

France reshaped after Remy's injury
In addition, however, they didn’t play a particularly deep defensive line, which helped them keep it tight between the lines. And when they won the ball, the fact the forward four were so close together meant that could combine and build up play gradually, gently easing their whole side up the pitch. Compact sides were generally successful at the World Cup, according to FIFA’s Technical Report.
Their counter-attacks were direct when France were out of position at the back, but more often they focussed on keeping the ball and seeing what unfolded, rather than haring towards goal and losing possession straight away.
Injury problems for Blanc
In fairness to Blanc, his plans were completely undermined by an injury to Remy after half an hour. Remy was replaced with Mathieu Valbuena, who played on the right-hand side, meaning Jeremy Menez went into the centre, creating something more like a 4-2-3-1.
Menez, however, had a very poor game and is not suited to a central role in a 4-2-3-1 – not merely because of his playing style, but because he is extremely frustrating and incredibly inconsistent – putting him in the centre of the pitch and relying on him for creativity is unlikely to yield results.
Many of France’s better chances in the game came from Clichy and Sagna long throws towards Hoarau in the penalty area, and from open play Valbuena had a good impact on the right, combining energetic running with a directness that was lacking from the rest of the side. The best moments came from him – notably two dipping shots from the right-hand side, and a very good cross that Malouda was about to convert, but for the intervention of Igor Shitov.
France introduced a second striker, Louis Saha, for Jeremy Menez in order to provide more of a goal threat, but he only lasted ten minutes before becoming injured, so Blanc had to turn to Kévin Gameiro. By this stage France’s attacks were looking increasingly desperate and less likely to work.
Belarus’ winner came very late – Vyacheslav Hleb pulled the ball back for substitute Sergey Kislyak to sidefoot into the top corner. It was far from a beautiful goal – Clichy was caught in possession and then couldn’t get a tackle in on Hleb – but credit must go to Belarus for getting five players into the box in the final five minutes of a game they would have been delighted to take a draw from.
Conclusion
An underwhelming performance from France – robbed of their most talented attackers, they lacked any kind of cutting edge, and the fact that the starting line-up only boasted four total career international goals (all from Malouda) was all too evident.
Belarus’ side was extremely compact, with the front four interchanging, and the two furthest forward players always coming short and making themselves available for short passes into feet. They built up play well, defended excellently, and whilst they were slightly flattered by the victory, they gave themselves every chance by working as a unit.
France 0-1 Belarus: A compact Belarus side with a classic smash and grab




PS
The three Belarus players behind Kutuzov could have been placed in any positions, they rotated throughout. Alex Hleb might well have spent more time in the centre.
“Belarus’ equaliser came very late”. Don’t you mean winner?..
I didn’t watch the game but for me a lot of France’s problems over the last 2 years have stemmed from the fact that the 2 deep midfielders don’t make enough forward runs, consequently attacks often consist of the front 4 playing the ball between themselves without any real penetration. Too much rigidity and not enough creativity (not that France are lacking creative players on paper).
To add to that, a side that only employs 4 attackers would normally make up for it by defending deep and adopting a counter-attacking strategy (e.g. Inter). France seem to play a high defensive line and try to focus on possession without really offering enough bodies. It’s strange and they’re one of the most disjointed groups of star players I’ve seen over the past decade.
Don’t Spain play with only four attacking players (in front of, for examples, Busquets and Alonso)? They play a fairly high defensive line, and focus on possession. I think the answer lies more in your last sentence: cohesion. The French players who regularly play at Arsenal (Diaby, Sagna, Clichy, Nasri, etc) are consistently among the best performers on the team, even though they aren’t really all that good as individuals. Maybe the FFA needs to start sponsoring corporate retreats.
I did not watch the match, but the problem seems to be the midfield. Diaby is a poor passer of ball, Toulalan is not very great at it and so is Diarra. They need a proper deep lying playmaker like Pirlo. Vieira and Makelele played in mf and Vieira was much better passer of ball than any of current generation.
Now Zidane role is taken by Gourcuff and Nasri. Both of them are young but don’t show quality to lay claim. Both have fantastic first touch but passing and timing of pass remains doubtful, and they both like to play at slow tempo.
Add to it Wingers Malouda, Ribery who just dribble and dribble. They don’t seem to pass to another team mate in time.
So France end up playing fast tempo on wing, slow tempo in mf.
You really need to watch the match.
You put so many names but how many of those were actually on the pitch?
Diaby wasn’t the problem. It was, as ZM explained, the distance between M’vila and the front five and the Belorussian ability to play 10 men behind the ball. This means that when any of the France defensive five tried to pass to an attacker, the attacker was double-teamed, so the French defense knocked around back and forth and on occasion tried something more ambitious, which resulted in Belarus rushing forward with the ball, similar to how Russian and Ukraine like to run counter-attacks.
The defending for the goal was terrible. Clichy is already suspect enough, but the rest of the defense just stood by and watched. Ugh.
Watch before you post, even if you’re just here to troll Arsenal fans about their players.
Where Prem makes a point is that the long celebrated French youth system is going straight to the dogs.
Remember the late 90’s and early 2000’s ? There was a plethora of creative (yet hard-working for some) French players, such as Zidane of course, but also Micoud (played a decent bit at Werder and Bordeaux), Carrière (the organiser of Olympique Lyonnais), Monterrubio, Leroy, etc. Today, there are very, very few French players who can actually create. Gourcuff, Nasri, Cheyrou or even Pedretti are the most prominent ones, but Cheyrou isn’t as consistent, and Pedretti is much more defensive than creative. The only notable playmaker to have come out of a French youth academy is Lyon’s Clément Grenier.
However, what France does NOT lack of is strong, physical defensive midfielders…Clearly the policy of youth academies in France is going the wrong way.
don’t forget about Ribery… I think your point is invalid because of the list of older players you mention, only Zidane was ever a key player for France. Carriere only played 10 games for France, while neither Monterrubio or Leroy made a single appearance for them…
I think Gourcuff, Ribery, and Nasri are all good enough individually to play attacking midfielder for a top international team. the problem is that Gourcuff seems to have problems within the French squad, Ribery plays better on the left (where you would think Malouda is an automatic starter), and Nasri is injured, not to mention he also seems to have problems within the squad.
I doubt it’s a problem of the academies. I would put the blame on French coaches, most of whom play defensive 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2 with a double pivot – so naturally you’re going to create tons of defensive midfielders. the only real progressive coaches are Christian Gourcuff, Didier Deschamps, and Laurent Blanc. Claude Puel at least plays an attacking formation, but he also does stupid things like play Bodmer (who could be a box-to-box midfielder for France) at central defence, not to mention half his team aren’t French.
today, the suspensions and injuries (including those suffered during the match) played a major role throughout the team, so I don’t think you can put too much stock in this result. Toulalan, despite people’s claims that he “can’t pass”, is one of the best defensive midfielders in the world in my opinion – if he had been available, it would give the 3 other midfielders more confidence to go forward, especially Diaby who plays best for Arsenal when he is given attacking license… he might be big and strong, but he’s no defensive midfielder.
Any chance of a Germany/Belgium article?
Finding it a bit difficult to get footage of the game. If I can by tomorrow afternoon, will do it.
if you live in the US you can watch it on ESPN3. I’m interested to hear your thoughts on Belgium’s defence….
thanks ZM, i owe you one
its hard not to feel sorry for France, who along with Spain have one of Europe’s (and the world’s) finest youth development systems. Its just that at the highest level, when it really matters, there seem to be generational gaps that are very frustrating, as they don’t reflect the quality of individuals, but provide clear examples of group failings.
Having said that, do people remember the France ‘87 generation at U-17 level, talked of as being the next world cup winners, and all being starters in 2014? Basically, the hype was all over Menez, Nasri, Ben Arfa and Benzema. Let’s wait till 2014 to judge. Same goes with M’vila, who has been fantastic at all France youth levels, especially (for me) at U-21, where he completely dominates games from a deep position as France play a 4-2-3-1 / 4-4-2 not too different to Blanc’s current setup.
For me, France basically had no real solutions in the final third. Gone are the days when in desperate need Zidane can create something, and France needs to realise that. I’ve read of Blanc lamenting Gourcuff’s suspension, citing the latter as his main playmaker, his 10. Now, I love 10’s and the romantic football of old, but is this what France needs right now? is this the solution to their deficincies? probably, but maybe not. They did lack someone to set the tempo, as M’vila inexperience and Diaby’s over-elaboration showed at times. Also, France may be envied for its wealth in the left-back position (Evra suspended, Tremoulinas benched, Cissokho not selected), but Sagna does not convince me at right-back. He’s very athletic and a fine dfender, but his crossing is as horrific as Dani Alves’ last season.
Blanc took a bold step by dropping the World Cup squad. He made a statement by mixing promising youth with veterans of the wrong horoscope (couldn’t miss out on this one), so it would be interesting to see what the future may hold if things don’t go as planned in Bosnia.
thanks again ZM
Not to stray from the point but Dani Alves is one of the best crossers in the world from the fullback position.
indeed he is, that’s why i only talked about last season
I know I’m being a bit of an arse here but even last season his crossing was good, I think he’s hit double figures for assists for the last 5 seasons running. I honestly think this myth about his poor crossing has popped up because of that one game against Chelsea.
Seems odd to be that Toulalan is only suspended for this one game, but isn’t on the squad to play on Tuesday…
To be honest, I’ve no idea what France need at the moment. There were so many players out (and further issues involving team spirit, morale and discipline) that I don’t know where to start in terms of picking an XI. I think Blanc has a very tough job.
For Toulalan, apparently, Blanc won’t take him as he doesn’t play in midfield with Lyon anymore, but as a centre-back (and not very efficiently at that).
yeah, that’s what I heard. it’s stupid on his part as well as Puel’s – why the hell doesn’t he just sign a real centre back? Cris is getting old and he apparently doesn’t trust Lovren, so really they only have 2 good centre backs including Toulalan… it’s really strange. last season they gave Bodmer and Boumsong regular minutes so anyone would be an improvement! hell they could have signed Mikael Silvestre…
They have signed Pape Diakhaté from Kyev.
Toulalan should get back in midfield.
Whatever the case, it seems that Blanc dislike him…
A Diarra should be play the next game with M’Vila instead of Diaby who was bad.
Sorry for my english…
Gourcuff would have made a great No10 a decade ago, but now that position, if it continues to exist is best occupied by somebody more mobile, more of a dribbler; Nasri, for instance. You just can’t afford to stay static between the lines these days – there isn’t enough time or space anymore.
I hope Claude Puel at Lyon positions Gourcuff deeper in midfield (as recommended by Yoann’s father)to be more of a regista.
are you saying Gourcuff isn’t a dribbler? as an Arsenal fan, I think that’s one of the ways he’s a better player than Nasri… see this goal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdVzzvMEG08
in fact both Wenger and Domenech were going to convert Nasri into a defensive midfielder because his best quality is his intelligence. he’s a good dribbler, but nothing special in that department…
He’s certainly nimble, and can manage himself in tight spaces,, but I still see him as better suited to playing behind the line of the ball. His physique brings defensive presence, can shield the ball.
yeah, I think the main reason Wenger stopped the DM experiment was because of Rosicky’s injury. he didn’t have the money to buy another attacking midfielder, so he played Nasri on the left and Denilson in the centre. it’ll be interesting to see where Nasri plays this season in Wenger’s 4-2-3-1 – I could see him playing next to Song as part of the “2″. certainly I think he’s a better option than Diaby, and more mature than Wilshere.
sorry ignore me, I see you’re referring to Gourcuff. I understand your point, and I think in many ways they’re similar players.
Yes, clearly, Sagna may have crossed for goals in his last two club matches, and people are talking about him as the next French captain, but since he doesn’t convince you I’m sure they’ll bench him immediately.
Is this the same Sagna whose crosses have resulted in 2 goals in Arsenal’s last 2 matches?
you should have seen the game
The assister for the Belarus goal got some help in muscling off the french defender from his team mate who was in an offside position, didn’t he?
A 5-3-2 formation for France would of seen them win comfortably.
Are there any players from Frances U19 squad that could come and improve the team as it is now?
Kakuta is very creative, but Blanc already called up many uncapped young players (e.g., Gameiro). It seems that France needs experience rather than youth at this point. I would’ve preferred to see Trezeguet on the bench for Belarus and Bosnia.
Marsabia http://11111jj.com delia 222222 [url=http://33333jj.com]333333[/url] Arcarctius
Tiffany jewelry
Tiffany
Tiffany and co
Tiffany Bracelets
tiffany co jewelry
Tiffany jewellery
Tiffany Necklaces
Tiffany Rings
Tiffany Watches
Tiffany jewelry
Tiffany jewelry
Spain Travel Guide
Spain Travel