Manchester United 3-2 Liverpool: Berbatov x 3
The starting line-ups
Manchester United threw away another two-goal lead – but a Dimitar Berbatov hattrick saved them.
Sir Alex Ferguson went with a 4-4-2 – the first time he has done this in a ‘big’ game since Liverpool’s 2-0 victory over United last season. John O’Shea moved to right-back to replace Gary Neville.
Roy Hodgson went for Fernando Torres upfront alone at the top of a compact side. Raul Meireles was the link player, with Steven Gerrard deeper in midfield. Joe Cole made his return on the left side of midfield.
The home side started extremely strongly, getting the ball quickly forward to their front four players and pinning Liverpool back inside their own third. Liverpool defended with two banks of four, and Meireles got goalside of Paul Scholes and attempted to close him down, to stop him dictating play. Liverpool defended reasonably well when the ball came into the box early on, but they weren’t able to find out-balls to get the ball up the pitch and stop United coming back again and again. Fernando Torres only completed three passes in the opening half, and was barely involved in play.
Contrast in styles
The battle down United’s right-hand side looked like it was going to play a big part in the game. Nani had recorded four assists from four right-wing crosses in his previous four games, and Paul Konchesky started the game by trying to get as tight as possible. The Portuguese winger created relatively little though, and the biggest threat down that side came when John O’Shea motored forward and he and Nani caught Joe Cole 2 v 1 (with Konchesky having moved too central), reminiscent of the situation Darren Fletcher and Gary Neville created to create Park Ji-Sung’s winner in the same fixture last season.
Liverpool’s football was more based around short passes and keeping possession. Indeed, they completed more passes than United in the first half (220 to 176), despite being second best for almost the entire 45 minutes. They had the right idea, however – they were working the ball slowly across the midfield, using their numerical advantage to narrow United’s midfield and working the ball out to the flanks into crossing positions. Unfortunately, the crosses themselves were dreadful – a sliced effort into the stands from Konchesky and an overhit punt from Christian Poulsen the most obvious examples.
Crosses
Aside from a break where Wayne Rooney and Berbatov combined brilliantly and moved the ball out to Nani who wasted a good position, United were mostly faced with trying to break down two banks of four solidly behind the ball. With 2 v 3 in the midfield, and Scholes and Darren Fletcher unable to find much room, United were looking to get crosses in. Jamie Carragher and Martin Skrtel dealt with this well, but Torres did not when marking Berbatov at a corner, and the Bulgarian headed in. It was the only shot on target United had in the first half. It was also the second goal Liverpool have conceded from a corner this season (the first being against Manchester City).
Hodgson changed nothing major at half-time, although Joe Cole looked to be coming into the centre of the pitch more often. United still hit the ball forward and wide quickly. Fletcher did this with a wonderful 60-yard ball to Nani, who cut inside onto his left foot, and crossed for Berbatov who finished acrobatically. United looked out of sight.
Hodgson moved to a 4-4-2 when 2-0 down
Liverpool change formation
Liverpool switched to 4-4-2 with the addition of David N’Gog for Maxi Rodriguez, with Meireles coming out to the right. And immediately they got a goal back – Jonny Evans got himself into a poor position and make an equally poor challenge on Torres. Gerrard converted the penalty. The threat of an additional striker clearly caused United problems straight away, although in truth it was an individual mistake from Evans rather than a well-crafted goal.
Despite Torres’ notorious success against Nemanja Vidic in previous contests, following his unsuccessful first-half against the Serbia international he made a deliberate effort to make runs off the back of Evans and O’Shea instead. It was O’Shea’s clumsy tackle on him created the free-kick for Gerrard’s second – and here we can attribute the goal to the presence of a second striker – Ngog’s run to the right flank dragged Evans out of position and created the gap for Meireles through ball. But again, it was a needless tackle as Edwin van der Sar would have been favourite to get to the ball (presumably why Howard Webb showed O’Shea a yellow card and not a red).
The shift from 4-4-1-1 to 4-4-2 got Liverpool back into the game – but it also cost them defensively. Paul Scholes became completely free in the centre of midfield, and he had time to knock the ball out O’Shea, who crossed for Berbatov’s third. Three crosses, three goals. Ferguson brought on both Darron Gibson and Anderson to shut up shop with a 4-5-1.
Conclusion
Each side only had one successful method of creating chances. United got crosses in towards Berbatov, Liverpool played the ball into space behind the defence for Torres. Those two approaches created all five goals.
It was a minor surprise that United started with 4-4-2, but they showed they know how to play this way – they get the ball quickly into advanced wide positions and put the ball into the box. It’s a simple formation, and sides that use it successfully generally do so with a very simple approach.
Hodgson’s tactical shift got him back into the game. It’s slightly easier to move from 4-5-1 to 4-4-2 when facing a 4-4-2 than when facing a 4-5-1, as you’re merely conceding your own midfield advantage rather than giving the opposition an extra man in that zone. Ultimately, however, the match game down to the fact that Liverpool couldn’t defend from crosses, and Berbatov took advantage.
Great article, as always.
Only a small thing regarding this: “Ferguson brought on both Darron Gibson and Anderson to shut up shop with a 4-5-1.”
I think the 4-4-2 remained. First Macheda replaced Giggs, moving Rooney to play wide left (United scored 2 minutes later playing with 3 nominal strikers). Then Gibson and Anderson came on for Nani and Berbatov, leaving United with two nominal strikers.
Nope. If i’m not mistaken, Anderson was tucked behind Macheda. And Rooney remained on the left. So in a way, you could argue that it was a 4-4-1-1 but looks more like a 4-5-1 since Macheda was quite far from Ando. Definitely not 442 though .
Yep definitely not a 4-4-2. Rooney left with Anderson in the middle and Gibson on the right.
Gibson came on in Nani’s place and played on the right side, Anderson replayed Berbatov and played in central midfield, and Rooney stayed wide left, leaving Macheda alone upfront. It’s pretty simple, and that’s why ZM said “Ferguson brought on both Darron Gibson and Anderson to shut up shop with a 4-5-1.”
It made sense to have Anderson play the more advanced in midfield as he was fresh and had the energy to link up with Macheda whenever Man Utd broke forward. More importantly, however, was that it meant Scholes and Fletcher could press their zones with more discipline and not get dragged out of position for counters nor get over run easily (like in Man Utd previous two games) because Anderson would always get back in time (case in point was one rebound towards the centre that would have fallen easily for Poulson I believe but Anderson, despite not getting to the ball, did enough to put him off a shooting or passing).
thanks for your excellent website.
now that hodgson is going back to man-marking, i’m going to miss the “post hoc ergo propter hoc” crowd who complained about zonal-marking endlessly.
Interesting to note that Torres was pretty much isolated for most of the game or I saw wrong?
United review, again?
Key today was how poor Liverpool were defensively on the left. Two goals came from that side and a load of trouble. Konchesky isn’t a player of a Liverpool standard. Roy eventually switched it completetly with Agger & Jovanovic, arguably too late and they weren’t too effective either. No idea why they loaned out Insua, he would have been the best of a bad bunch of left backs. Joe Cole running all over the place out of position didn’t help his left back either.
United Liverpool isn’t worth reviewing?
Don’t ask me, I don’t write them, but I think any two PL games out of the 10 each week could be worth reviewing as opposed to United every week.
It’s an individual run blog. He doesn’t make you pay to read it. He writes what he finds interesting and has watched. If you don’t like to read about United, don’t read it. Simples.
Er ok, and this is also a free comments section where you’re allowed to make suggestions. If you don’t like the suggestions, don’t read them. Simples.
Just goes to show what a tough bunch of games United have had to start with. And people are already tipping Chelsea to with the EPL after thrashing trash for the past few weeks.
Chelsea nearly finished in second position last season as they didn’t thrash ‘trash’ enough times. Hence why it’s a marked improvement.
Insua is worse than Konchesky really. Not sure what makes you think otherwise.
Insua’s performances last season were good enough, can’t remember him getting exposed for as average Konchesky looked today. Woy had to bring on a flipping centre back at the end for defensive security.
Interesting, but I was thinking the same of the right. I’m not sure if I’m just keying in on a few isolated cases, but it seemed to me that Johnson was getting burnt time and time again. And not just today. Also, does anyone else think the absence of Kuyt was felt today? Yes, he is sometime gaffe-prone (mainly lack of sharpness when passing), but he does provide some width, which was missing today.
Don’t think Giggs had a great game today, actually he rarely does at all nowadays. By and large I thought Glen Johnson had things well covered, although he rarely ventured forward. Evra was all over Maxi though, so would say they missed Kuyt in that aspect too.
Yeah, the decision to buy Konchesky and loan out Insua baffled me; I’d also start Aurelio over Konchesky in a heartbeat.
Also, there are several good reasons for a Liverpool/Man U review this week (and I say this as someone who does not like either of the teams concerned here):
1. matchup of upper-echelon teams
2. interesting tactical shifts from ferguson regularly expected
3. Hodgson still trying to find his way with the ‘pool.
TBH I didn’t expect Liverpool to get a result at Old Trafford. Both Liverpool’s goals were quite fortunate. A fair result.
It would be interesting to see how will Hodgson accommodate all midfielders in the XI. With today’s tactics LFC lacked width – IMO both Cole and Maxi will have to stretch the defence in the upcoming games.
I’m surprised the shift-about following Macheda replacing Giggs didn’t make it into the write-up, as I thought that was significant. Meireles was looking too much for Giggs to cope with after Liverpool shifted to 4-4-2.
Hi ZM thanks for the analysis.
Have been wondering ever since Birmingham’s game.
Why is it that Hodgson plays Meireles up front with Torres instead of the proven Gerrard – Torres combination?
No doubt Meireles is a good player but some articles i’ve read is that he’s a similar player to Alonso though bombards forward more.
If that’s the case, shouldn’t Meireles be playing in the withdrawn role and Gerrard linking up with Torres up front?
I do know that both players are good enough to play either in the hole or in CM.
But am clueless since the Birmingham game as I thought it was a one-off when Meireles came on. But was surprised Roy stuck with that today.
i agree and also think that Carragher should be playing fewer games this year.. Let skrtel, agger play together some games..
My guess is that playing Meireles higher up the pitch allows him to pick up Scholes, who is United’s main distributor of the ball? It then gives Gerrard (who’s regarded as a better passer than Miereles) more space to spray passes to the wings and over the back line for Torres. It kind of seems like Hodgson’s attempting the same thing that City did to him with Yaya Toure playing the most advanced position of the midfield 3 (and Gareth Barry in the Gerrard role).
I see then.
No wonder Scholes kinda seem ineffective for me in the first half barring glimpses of his usual out-of-this-world long range passing.
With that said, it would be interesting to see if Roy sticks with Meireles behind Torres for games that doesn’t really require him to manmark a player.
In my opinion, if that happens again, then it seems fishy as many would agree that the Gerrard Torres partnership should not be tinker with unless necessary.
Liverpool’s inability to deal with crosses, both from open play and from set pieces, is looking like costing them a lot of points unless they sort it out. Against Birmingham it happened at least 5 or 6 times, and once more today. Carragher and Skrtel do not seem to be able to play together, how long before one of them is sacrificed for agger?
Also, not much of a tactical observation, but the amount of times nani went to ground today was ludicrous, and imo, webb should have just let play go on, as its the only way he (and other such play acters) will learn.
interesting/bizarre decision from hodgson to play meireles behind torres…
I came to the conclusion that he did so in order to effectively man-mark Scholes. Meireles is far more suited to that job than Gerrard.
It was a bit like when Ferguson played Park in that role against Milan.
Agree. But wasn’t quite successful as Park did against Pirlo. Still united controlled the game and Scholes showed several decent passes. And Liverpool’s inability to keep possession or (counter-)attack quickly made man-marking scholes nothing.
I thought it was kind of interesting. Meireles is tasked more with marking Scholes than making any offensive runs. With Poulsen picking up Fletcher, it should leave Gerrard as the free midfielder open for the “out” pass or able to run up and support Torres on the counter. Scholes sits deep, so Meireles stays with him. Gerrard being the “free” central player should have had time and space to dictate play more so than anyone else in his side.
Is it just me or did Gerrard really looked off for most of the game? I know people will point to the 2 goals, but he was anonymous for most of the game.
Liverpool tactical change was crucial to united win, I believe.
Again, Scholes found himself free between Liverpool midfield&attack after the tactical shift. As ZM explained the third goal of united began from Scholes’ pass to O’shea.
Two goals of Liverpool were much from Torres’ individual clever movements and united defenders losing concentration after Berbatov’s fantastic second goal.
Evans’ performance is very disappointing throughout this season. He constantly makes clumsy tackles and poor positioning.
I don’t understand why Ngog couldn’t have been tasked with man-marking Scholes after the equalizer. Not Ngog’s specialty, for sure, but being a fresh sub his workrate alone could have put Scholes off.
Ngog could also have moved wide, with Meireles coming centrally to pick up Scholes again. Ngog would still have had to mark Evra, but guarding the wings can be a bit easier for players unaccustomed to defending.
Well Meireles wasn’t quite successful with his task he should have done not only man-marking scholes but supporting Torres by connecting Liverpool midfield, especially Gerrad, with him. But Scholes still was able to control the game and Liverpool’s attacking was, as we all have seen, disastrous.
I think Hodgson expected sth similar to what Fulham did against Manchester United. Two strikers pressing each of central defenders so make them unable to supply enough balls to Scholes. Fulham was quite successful with that strategy.
Was always likely United’s best chances were gonna be from crosses when they set out 4-4-2. When it’s 3v2 in the middle you’ve gotta get the ball out wide quickly when you’re not outnumbered.
Spot on. Two things shone through for me – first up, how vulnerable both teams looked at the back. In United’s case it was a sense of recklessness in defending, almost as if they were daring Webb to hand out sanctions. In Liverpool’s case, it was a real weakness defending in the air from crosses. Although Nani didn’t do himself any favours in the world’s estimation, and he should have had a card for those pathetic examples of simulation, he dominated the right hand side. I think that’s a natural consequence of leaving Agger out in the first place, but I don’t blame Hodgson for settling himself into the season and trying out new combos in the big games.
The second was how Liverpool just looked unable to push forward with any real conviction. It’s no coincidence that both goals came from United mistakes – there’s no real attacking link in midfield. Gerrard was practically absent and never really looked dangerous in open play, Maxi was… Maxi, Meireles and Cole looked lively but couldn’t quite make the connection. Needs a lot more work, and although I was cursing Hodgson at half-time, I liked his response enough to say that he should be using his time to show he can respond, even if he can’t win right now.
Zonal Marking is pro man u or what??
Why no Chelsea analysis yet??
How many tactically interesting games have Chelsea played yet?
They may not have played any tough opponents yet, but they have been quite exciting tactically so far. Anelka’s role in particular, nominally a right-sided forward but regularly playing as a deep playmaker, with 4 or 5 players in front of him. Look forward to Bosingwa using the space he makes, a bit like Ramos behind Iniesta in the world cup.
I have a feeling Chelsea/Man City will be covered here.
Who’s to say that will be any more tactically interesting though?
I felt tht Pool lost cos Roy Hodgson bungled in the tactics. Pool played too deep and weren’t pressuring the ball off United. Pool gave United 3/4 of the pitch which is the most foolish thing to do. I’m not sure if Roy Hodgson did his homework cos if he did he would have known tht teams tht give Man U 3/4 of the pitch are doomed to certain defeat. Man U is not Barca who will stroke the ball about the pitch to look for a weakness to exploit. Man U is a team tht will exploit the airspace of other teams or brute force to open other teams and Hodgson shld have been aware of tht. I’m sure if Hodgson had watched Pool’s last two victories against Man U, especially the famous 4-1 victory at Old Trafford was brought abt by aggresive pressing of United’s midfield. Credit to Roy Hodgson nonetheless for bringing on N’gog for Maxi Rodriguez which gave Pool more attcking bite but I felt tht Joe cole shld have started alongside Torres which would have given Pool more options in attack with Jovanovic on the right. O’shea shld have been sent off for professional foul against Torres. He was fortunate tht the ref was Howard Webb, who doesn’t like dishing red cards instead of Steve Bennett or Phil Dowd
Thanks for the write up.
Although I enjoyed the game more during the six minutes that Liverpool spent attacking their negative attitude is a worry for future games.
The whole of the first half they passed sideways and back. Then the change came and they started passing forwards, scored two goals then immediately they started passing sideways and backwards again. I dont believe that they came for three points today even when it looked like a possibility when the momentum was with them. My real concern is that they will play this way against lesser clubs like Rafa did last season, like a 1-0 or a Draw is the best they can hope for.
Liverpool need a winger or two, as they have for the last 3 seasons. Joe cole came in field way too deep and always had his back to goal and only started turning round in the second half. As has been said before Maxi offers them nothing and also likes to come way inside.
The most entertaining Livepool game I have seen this season was the 4-1 in the Europa League mainly because they had a positive attacking desire and the new young players didnt seem to have been infected with this negative play that has become LFC’s starting mindset in the league.
Yes but one have to cut one’s suit according to one’s cloth. A draw at Old Trafford would have been more than acceptable.
I think Liverpool did ok in the first half limiting Man U to that 1 chance (a bit of luck or better defending would have left it 0-0 at the break). There were some positives too, we held the ball a lot better than we have been doing.
Remember the people who said Carlos Tevez was a better player than Berba !,In reality, though I admire Tevez for his commitment and work-rate his lack of technique is something that is a total turn off in fact he missed a couple of tap-ins for city recently puting the ball high over the crossbar while trying to side-foot the ball in ,those were open chances that he missed,what I want to say that he is not worth the amount of money that city paid for him.
However his performance regarding ‘doing a job’ tactically can’t be doubted the way he played against Barca in the semi finals of 2008 alone upfront was stupendous !
You know, you may have a point to a certain degree, but just like the media you’re comment implies the notion that for one of them to be good, the other has to be bad.
I understand that, because of how events played out at Old Trafford, the two will almost always be mentioned in the same breath but the truth is that aside from club history that’s where the comparison ends. I won’t go into the details of it, but, fundamentally, both offer very different services, almost polar differences, and I still maintain that at the time it was the right choice to opt for Berba over Tevez given the team at the time.
Now you can argue that Berbatov represents a Man Utd purchase at a time, and for a time that doesn’t exist anymore, and I might agree, but ultimately only time will tell if that’s the case.
“Remember the people who said Carlos Tevez was a better player than Berba!”
Ah yes, and one game where Berbs has a hat trick means he must be better than Tevez? Carlitos has 24 goals in his last 28 league appearances ([http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/sep/19/wigan-athletic-manchester-city-premier-league) whereas Berbs has 17 by my count including that hat trick.
Also, it’s amusing when people commenting online wiffle on about a “lack of technique” on the part of some of the best payers in the world. These peopls, including Tevez, can all trap and manipulate the ball on a level normal people can’t approach.
Most players who have played for Man Utd. “can all trap and manipulate the ball on a level normal people can’t approach.” but what I wanted to say that Tevez is not quite in the league of a Torres or a Rooney in terms of technique.
a few years ago i analysed goalkeeping stats, (mainly to help me pick a decent keeper for my fantasy team ! ) . interesting to note van der sar made 0 saves in this game. his overall goals against/saves ratio for the season is 7/14 = 0.5 fairly average/bad. last season his ratio was much better at 0.22. didn’t see all of the game so not want to comment on his performance for this game alone, but he’s certainly not excelling with those stats.
got to comment on the massively over-rated reina too. good keeper but by no means this all-time great he’s made out to be by the media. his current ratio is 7/10=0.70 pretty awful.
cech currently has 1/12= 0.08 ; joe hart 2/17 =0.12 ( faced 2 more shots than reina, but let in 5 fewer goals in ) . friedel who is consistently good has almost faced twice as many shots as reina and yet has only let 2 more in i.e 9/22 = 0.41.
i appreciate some shots are easier than others but these diff’s should even out over the longer term. forget flashy saves that grab peoples attention like the ones he did vs brum last week, Reina does not make enough saves over the long term.
3 consecutive golden gloves and the same amount of clean sheets as last year’s winner, Cech, whilst playing for a team in their worst season for years says you’re wrong.
golden gloves & the zamora trophy in spain aren’t the best way to rate keepers.
goals against/saves ratio over the long run IS. factoring out playing behind good defences & for big teams ( who dominate possesion and therefore concede fewer chances ) .
people like Jussi have no chance of winning golden gloves. liv’pool may be having a poor run but they’ve been accused thru’out that of being too cautious 2 def mids at home to weaker sides etc. reina also benefits in golden gloves from not being rested . we’ve seen hilario and foster get several games.
van der sar only played 21 lge games in 09/10 – his ratio was 0.22 (13/58 ).
hart got 42/136= 0.31. friedel 39/126 = 0.31. gomes 26/92 =0.28. reina 35/101=0.35 and cech was even worse last yr on 24/64=0.375 . to just compare clean sheets is wrong. gomes got 12 , compared to cech’s 17, but gomes has a signif better saves ratio. ( btw the stats are from yahoo fantasy football..which uses opta stats – soccernet uses the same ones in their gamecasts )
“goals against/saves ratio over the long run IS.”
What’s the evidence for that?
what’s your argument against it- ? i’ve already explained the arguments against clean sheets & the zamora trophy in spain. obviously it makes more sense to use a range of variables/evidence to rate keepers ( including clean sheets & a zamora ( not bobby !) type ratio. but as a single stat or benchmark, the g.a./saves ratio takes some beating. it’s theoretically possible to keep lots of clean sheets and be a rubbish g/k , but it would be very difficult to have a great ratio in the long term & be an average/poor keeper.
wouldn’t saves/goal attempts be a more accurate predictor?
i still think van der sar is the league’s best keeper.
people talk about joe hart, cech, pepe reina, freidel and the rest but when was the last time you saw van der sar make a mistake??
he doesn’t make a lot of mistakes, that’s true, but you also have to consider which of these keepers is a better shot-stopper. if you lose 3 goals because of bad mistakes, but you make 5 saves that most other keepers wouldn’t make, then you’re still coming out on top.
I really enjoyed this game, despite my team losing. I think the doom surrounding Liverpool’s performance is partly false. Liverpool did work the ball into good crossing positions on numerous occasions, but the crosses were either terrible pr well defended by Man Utd. That was the difference between the teams on the day in my opinion. Delivery from wide positions and defending from them.
I’m pleased with how Meireles has started, he looks to have composure on the ball and a good eye for a pass. It’ll be a while before he adapts to the pace and physicality of the Prem, but the signs, for me, are positive.
The weekend EPL line-ups according to the Telegraph:-
5: 4-3-3 Chelsea, ManU, WH, Blackburn, Wigan
4: 4-2-3-1 Newcastle, Arsenal, Liverpool, Birmingham
4: 4-4-2 Bolton, Spurs, Stoke, WBA
3: 4-1-4-1 Wolves, Blackpool, Man City
2: 4-4-1-1 Everton,Villa
1: 4-5-1 Sunderland
1: 4-1-3-2 Fulham
September 13, 2010
5: 4-2-3-1 Bolton, Liverpool, Man C, Man U, W Brom
5: 4-4-1-1 Brum, Newcastle, Spurs, (Villa), W Ham
4: 4-4-2 Blackpool, Fulham, (Stoke), Wolves
3: 4-5-1 Everton, Sunderland, Wigan
2: 4-3-3 Arsenal, Chelsea
1: 4-1-4-1 Blackburn
Disgraceful dive by Torres before Liverpool’s second goal. Learning from the Germans shouldn’t mean copying Marko Marin’s style of falling into the opponent and forcing the contact.
Poor sportsmanship.
well, to be fair, forcing contact and falling over isn’t a “dive”, by definition.
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
@ JEDIRAGE, it’s the same ratio really expressed differently. if you add up goals against & saves made you get “shots faced” ( i.e those on target ) . so if you then say saves/shots faced, you’ll get the same rankings with either ratio but just a diff %.
it is really weird how g/k stats are not more well publicised. they are easy to calculate. nobody would think twice about calculating goals per game ratios for strikers. obviously stats for defenders & midfielders can be slightly more flawed. although even the weaknesses of ” assists ” as a measure still picks out great players like fabregas who gets bucket-loads of them year in, year out. just looked at wikipedia – Jussi has goals scored columns in his career stats. how mad is that !? but reina does have some clean sheet stats.