Manchester United 2-0 Tottenham: Redknapp’s fears about set-pieces turn out to prove crucial
The starting line-ups
Spurs played good football in the first half, but a sloppy goal put them on the back foot, and they never recovered.
Sir Alex Ferguson went with a 4-4-2 / 4-2-2-2 shape. Michael Carrick was in the side ahead of Paul Scholes, Park Ji-Sung started on the left, and Rafael da Silva was chosen to marshal Gareth Bale, presumably because of his pace.
Harry Redknapp left out Peter Crouch with Wednesday’s game against Inter in mind, acknowledging before the game that United were strong in the air, and Spurs would instead need to play along the ground. Instead, Robbie Keane was deployed as a lone frontman. Tom Huddlestone was also absent, with Jermaine Jenas in a deep midfield role.
No holders
Neither side had anything like a true defensive midfielder or ‘destroyer’ in the centre of the pitch. Jermaine Jenas is not really a holding player, he’s someone who does a bit of everything. Luka Modric is a playmaker. Michael Carrick is a deep-lying regista. Darren Fletcher certainly has the attributes to play in a holding role, but he was used as a box-to-box player, ahead of Carrick for most of the game.
This links back to the question of what a central midfielder does in modern football. It also created an open, attractive game with both sides looking to play through midfield. There was not much of a midfield ’scrap’ – few challenges took place in that area, and the only two players who were booked for fouls throughout the game where William Gallas and Younes Kaboul, both for mistimed tackles when following their striker into deep zones.
Long shots
As a result, neither side was very good at defending in midfield areas – the closing down was not quick enough, and this resulted in a very high number of shots from 20-30 yards in the opening half hour – ten between the two sides. The closest to scoring were Park and Rafael van der Vaart, who both hit the post in the opening ten minutes, from very similar range.
Manchester United were playing very narrow, with Park taking up something like a permanent central position, and Nani looking to drift inside as well. In this sense, United became 4-2-2-2 with the ball, packing the centre of the pitch and making Tottenham’s two wide players almost useless in the defensive phase of play. Rafael and Patrice Evra attempted a couple of forward runs, but nothing like the frequency with which they generally get into the opposition third in home matches. The Chalkboard below shows that United never looked to play the ball into attacking wide zones in the first half – the only passes completed in those areas are from a throw-in in the 44th minute.
Set-pieces
It’s not often a manager explicitly states his side’s weakness before a match, but Redknapp was happy to do so.
“It’s an attacking team, it’s a small team – our biggest problem might come from dealing with set plays – apart from Kaboul and Gallas we’re not over-blessed with height…”
Midway through the first half, this came into play in a big way. Nani’s free-kick was fizzed in relatively low, and Nemanja Vidic glance a trademark header perfectly into the far corner. Height was not necessarily the issue as much as players not comfortable in the air (and poor marking) – but it’s no coincidence that Redknapp correctly predicted where his team would be vulnerable.
Tottenham were bright and responded reasonably well. United were outnumbered in the centre of the pitch and van der Vaart was one of the key players when Tottenham had the ball – always finding space and making a couple of excellent runs into the penalty box. They seemed to lack an end product, however – and with Spurs accustomed to playing a ‘big man’ upfront, the presence of Keane forced them to change their gameplan. Keane’s link-up play was good, but Bale and Aaron Lennon seemed slightly unsure of what to do when they had the ball in wide areas. In this zone Spurs needed better support from their full-backs – United’s wingers taking up narrow positions should have invited Benoit Assou-Ekotto and Alan Hutton forward more. Hutton tried to provide an attacking presence, but his touch on the ball was poor.
Second half
United were far from home and dry, and in open play they created few clear-cut chances. They appeared to have problems getting the ball to their front two, and both Dimitar Berbatov and Javier Hernandez had little impact upon the game.
The withdrawal of Berbatov for Paul Scholes was an acknowledgement both that the Bulgarian was off-form, and that United risked being overrun in the centre of the pitch, and letting van der Vaart go free. They switched to 4-1-4-1, with Carrick the deepest player, Scholes to the left and Fletcher to the right, and they closed the game down very well.
United kept it tighter between the lines and their wingers stayed in wider positions, keeping their shape and denying Tottenham space to pass the ball. Only an excellent run from Bale in an inside-right position caused United significant problems – the Welshman running with the ball to provide a direct goalscoring threat was a better tactic for Spurs than him crossing the ball: the Chalkboard below shows that his crossing was unsuccessful throughout the game (not helped by Spurs’ lack of height).
Peter Crouch replaced van der Vaart after the Dutchman’s injury, but United looked comfortable late on. Nani’s bizarre goal sealed the win.
Conclusion
A few interesting factors – the lack of holding players, United’s narrowness in the first half, Tottenham’s lack of height – eventually the game came down to the simple concept of defending free-kicks. Tottenham arguably played the better football in open play but had no direct route of attack, whilst they conceded a very simple goal with no-one picking up Vidic.
Manchester United 2-0 Tottenham: Redknapp’s fears about set-pieces turn out to prove crucial
Nice analysis!! Please post one for Hercules 1 – 3 Real Madrid.. It was a great game. The genius in Mourinho changed the game after half time.
I’d like to see that too, but I guess ZM has to choose games to cover in advance.
hope to see Milan vs Juventus post
In that case, I would recommend for the madrid derby coming week-end now itself. It shd be a cracker..
It’s true that United’s wingers played so narrowly and full backs didn’t make forward moves, but I think another reason United didn’t(or couldn’t) play in the wide attacking zones was Carrick’s inability to pass long balls to the players in the wide zones like Scholes.
And I’m glad to see Park back in form. His tireless nature made Lennon anonymous in most of the game and helped United midfield not be overwhelmed by Spurs’ three central midfielders.
alot of united fans want park out of their team. to them he is a waste of space really. but he is shrewd when he comes in field.
What are there reasons to want him out of Man Utd? What don’t they like in Ji-Sung Park?
The same things Liverpool fans don’t like about Dirk Kuyt. They’re both players without a lot of obvious attacking talent or flair who don’t fit into the conventional roles of an advanced midfielder or forward.
Park is a useful but limited player. He’s useful because he can be trusted to specific tasks (like stopping a fullback getting forward or denying a deep lying playmaker time on the ball).
He rarely provides much going forward, largely because he lacks the pace, strength or trickery to beat or commit players. In games when United are dominating and trying to break down a team Park doesn’t provide very much. It can be very frustrating.
His appeal among Asian viewers (read: merchandise purchasers) has dropped because Koreans stay up late to watch Manchester United games, only to realize as the teams line up that their hero won’t be playing. Strange but true.
I’d have to say it’s probably a minority of fans that want him actually sold.
Not a game-changer, and probably not good enough to get in the first 11 (apart from away games in Europe) but he’s a great squad player and i’m sure most united fans recognise that.
He has had an awful start to the season though. Much improved against Spurs and Bursaspor though
I find it hard to believe that Carrick is unable to pass long balls to the wings!? I thought park was good, but I wouldn’t say Lennon was anonymous, at least not in the first half. I think spurs will take a lot out of that game, despite the scoreline. Even without Defoe, huddlestone, king, woodgate, or dawson, they were generally a match for united, and as the article states they were perhaps the better side in open play (except in the final third i would argue). If I was Redknapp I’d be nursing that sense of injustice in the team (over the nani goal) for all it was worth.
Edit: Woops, meant to post this as a reply to David 11:58am
redknapp has got it all wrong. Saying your vulnerable from set pieces in public must diminish any confidence your team has at defending set pieces, which told, and could have been avoided as it wasnt a lack of height. Also to say man utd were strong in the air, and then pick robbie keane upfront and put in crosses into him and and even play long at times up to him….then wonder why you can’t penetrate….poor redknapp!
I think another reason that Ferguson switched to 4-5-1 was because he knew that Redknapp was going to bring on two tall strikers and shift into the a basic 4-4-2 and swing in crosses. He was concerned about the pace of Bale and Lennon. Thus, by shifting into a 4-5-1, he challenged Redknapp to switch to 4-4-2 and give United the advantage at the centre of the pitch. Redknapp did shift(due to Van Der Vaart’s injury) but that effectively ended the game. To hand numerical advantage to United in the centre of the pitch, with great passers like Scholes and Carrick(who’s coming back to form), was the biggest mistake Redknapp made. United easily passed the ball, and spurs didn’t make a chance of note since.
What a wonderful analysis, barely 5 words on Nani’s goal. On other reports it would take up over half the page.
many thanks for the fine, thoughtful analysis ZM. Two questions.
First, “The withdrawal of Berbatov for Paul Scholes was an acknowledgement both that the Bulgarian was off-form” – do you think this is temporary or longer lasting? Is it a resut of Berba needing Rooner to enable him to be creative as he is not a natural target man?
Second, what did you really think of the Nani goal? I appreciate you not letting it dominate the match report, but ……
Was more that he didn’t get enough of the ball to be an influence. Not related to Rooney at all. The play went through the midfield and wingers and a few times he was overlooked when in good positions.
I honestly wasn’t impressed with Ferguson’s tactics. Tottenham’s two obvious threats of Van der Vaart and Bale both had tactical openings to win the game, but the finishing wasn’t there. Scholes should have started for one of the strikers and they should have begun with a midfield trio in the middle that they finished with. then they could double up on Bale/Lennon because Park/Nani didn’t need to come into the middle. Its shocking that Lennon couldn’t do more with all the space he was afforded in the wide areas. He’s really losing the battle to Theo Walcott now for England’s Euro 2012 team.
Bale had a difficult shot off his weaker foot while running away from goal – far from a clear-cut chance.
Van der Vaart was not given that much space, but proved very good at turning his man and buying himself a couple of seconds – but I don’t recall him getting a shot off from inside the area. All he had was that one great effort early on, and allowing a great player to get one good shot off is hardly a tactical failure.
Utd didn’t look like they needed an extra man in midfield – they looked pretty comfortable. Bale reminds me of Valencia, in that he has a great turn of pace, but not much trickery, and doesn’t trust his weaker foot: it makes him very playable at times. Lennon was anonymous. Keane offers no positive attributes (no pace, no aerial threat, no creative play, no hold-up play…). Van der Vaart was the only threat (given how deep Modric was playing a lot of the time).
Nani hit the post twice, Park once. Hernandez wasted a decent chance, as did Berba. Utd looked far more likely to grab a goal than Tottenham did: Utd had 10 attempts on target, twice as many as Tottenham.
Redknapp speaks about his teams lack of height at set pieces (stupid thing to say in my opinion), but then starts Keane instead of Crouch? Alot of Spurs play is based around the direct play of Bale and Lennon getting crosses in the box for Crouch, Keane isn’t going to be getting on the end of things with Vidic and Ferdinand up against him, whereas Crouch is a different story.
Still think the league will be between United/Chelsea, keeping Vidic and Ferdinand fit is absolutely vital for United, arguably the best centre defensive partnership in the world, and United have a good mix and balance of pretty much everything. Good to see Carrick getting a start as well, very underated player.
Also, just a quick note on Kevin Nolan, great form, hat-trick today, if Capello’s ‘picking players on form’ then Nolan gets in the squad, and I’d gladly see him play against the French. Shame Capello’s so full of shit.
Euro 2012 is not for quite a while mate.
You have to say one thing for Ferguson: he understands how matches like this are won. It’s basically down to making fewer mistakes than your opponent. How often have we seen games where Manchester United look to be technically inferior but refuse to concede and eventually find a way through at the other end? Tottenham are an improving team and can be a real force over the coming seasons if they learn this crucial lesson about concentration.
i just don’t understand whyt do you give your analysis of every manu game.
This is the first Manchester United Prem game in five weeks that has been covered.
It was also quite clearly the game of the round, last season’s 2nd v 4th.
ar far as the game of the week i agree.
you haven’t covered Real madrid’s games. i remember only one in which they won 1-0 at home in la liga.
great site, great work, best of luck and keep it up
Spurs improve year on year, despite the evidence against Man Utd at Old Trafford. The improvement this season could be seen in the way there was near equal possession (52%-48%) and near equal pass success (371-359) – Spurs generally matched Man U. As noted by others above, the difference is in who makes fewer mistakes. Year after year Spurs lose concentration in defence and concede simple goals.
Personally though, I think Harry has been focussing on setting up the team to try and win on Tuesday. For financial reasons, reaching the knock out phase of the Champions League is the number 1 target for the season, followed by trying to retain 4th spot.
Quite an interesting choice to leave out Crouch if you are worried about not coping in the air. I believe Crouch is quite useful in set-pieces at _both_ ends of the pitch.
David Pleat had an interesting analysis in the Guardian about how ManU played narrow to counter threat of Bale.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/nov/01/manchester-united-tottenham-hotspur-david-pleat
Disagree with your assertion that Tottenham matched, or even bettered united in open play. Tottenhams support play in the final third was non-existant, after about 20 minutes united had them figured out and they didn’t even look close to scoring.
I was actually dissapointed in Tottenham, although their defense was good. Van der Vaart got a lot of space at first but he had no one to pass to. He was also the only available target for Jenas and Modric. Compare that to United. Nani and Park, mixed up their games, moved towards the ball when necessary and provided a platform to build attacks. I’m surprised you didn’t pick up on this, the contrast looked apparent and I actually think it must be a big problem for Tottenham. Bale and Lennon seemed clueless as to how to support Van der Vaart or influence the flow of an attack from an inside position, and Keane doesn’t really provide a great centrepoint for an attack. None of the other strikers do either, they only seem to be able to threaten through their wingplay. I’ve only seen about 4 of their matches but going by those, and their results, even against small teams they run out of ideas and struggle to attack in a sustained manner.
For all their very good players they still look like a big work in process, and their wingers definitly need to add to thier games if their style is to work. Bale is definitly talented enough to do this but I’m not so sure Redknapp’s the best man to bring tis out in him.
I’m a little confused by the analysis of the 4-2-2-2 shape, regarding Tottenham’s opposing full-backs.
During the World Cup, this site correctly demonstrated how USA’s 4-2-2-2 hampered England’s (4-4-2) attacking full-backs (obvs Glen Johnson and Ashley Cole) because the two attacking midfielders pulled them inside and didn’t allow overlaps comfortably. Here you assert that “United’s wingers taking up narrow positions should have invited Benoit Assou-Ekotto and Alan Hutton forward more”.
Certainly, England’s best result was against a team that played two banks of 4 in a 4-4-2 allowing the full-backs forward: in games against 4-2-2-2 or with 3 up front (Algeria & Germany) the full-backs were ineffectual.
Surely if Hutton and Assou-Ekotto supported as much as required, they would risk leaving Park and/or Nani free in a more advanced position, with the two centre-halves occupied by Hernandez & Berbatov?
There was rarely anyone to pass to when Bale and Lennon got to the edge of the area.
Keane was swamped amongst the Utd. defence and no-one was making runs to the near post.
Van de Vaart who is excellent was mostly too far away from Keane and he and Modric were playing too deep to support Keane.
Did Kaboul forget that we were playing zonal marking , he started to go with Vidic.
Were we in fact playing ZM as some suggest?
i’m football lover great post!