Milan 1-2 Juventus: Allegri’s side dominate early on, but weakness in wide areas costs them again
The starting line-ups
Milan had more chances, but Juventus were more clinical and took three points away from the San Siro.
Milan kept the same team that beat Napoli 2-1 in the previous Serie A round, in a fairly traditional 4-3-1-2 shape. Robinho started as a trequartista but drifted to the left. Luca Antonini was back at left-back, and got forward well early on.
Gigi Delneri went for a modification of his favoured 4-4-2 system. Claudio Marchisio was tucked in on the right, with Jorge Martinez higher up the pitch on the left. Neither Alessandro Del Piero nor Fabio Quagliarella stayed upfront all the time, both drifted into deeper positions. Nicola Leggrottaglie was a late change, coming in for the injured Giorgio Chiellini.
Milan started the brighter, and pinned Juve back in the opening minutes. They were using their numerical advantage in the centre of midfield well, and Juve were having problems getting to grips with them; Alberto Aquilani was slow at closing down, whilst Felipe Melo seemed unsure of what his role was.
Pirlo problems
Juventus’ problems here essentially started with Andrea Pirlo going free. Here, he had the ability to dictate the play from the centre of the pitch, and when he was closed down by Aquilani or Melo, this left one of Milan’s other midfielders (or Robinho) free in a more dangerous position.
Their tendency to be dragged up the pitch created too much space between the lines, and Milan’s forward three all worked this space to good effect – Zlatan Ibrahimovic came closest to scoring when his curling effort from 25 yards out hit the angle of crossbar and post.
Forwards’ solution
The away side started to compete when Delneri instructed one of the forwards, generally Fabio Quagliarella, to drop back when not in possession, and pick up Pirlo. With him occupied, Aquilani and Melo could focus on cancelling out Milan’s other midfielders – Aquilani was generally on Rino Gattuso, Melo dropped deeper and kept an eye on Robinho, whilst Marchisio tracked Kevin-Prince Boateng.
Elsewhere, Alessandro del Piero was moving to the left when Juventus lost the ball, making Daniele Bonera – a reluctant full-back at the best of times – unable to come forward and join the attack. On the other side, the lack of a Juventus striker on that flank, plus Marchisio tucking in, meant that Antonini got forward more often.
Milan vulnerable from crosses
Full-backs turned out to be crucial – but it was a Juventus full-back that made the difference, and created the opening goal. Paolo de Ceglie was left free on Juventus’ left with no pressure whatsoever, and his cross met Quagliarella, who headed home excellently.
This is turning into a familiar pattern for Milan, constantly conceding goals and having difficulties with balls played in from wide areas. Regardless of whether they are 4-3-1-2 or 4-3-3, the forwards don’t track back and the full-backs are exposed once the carrileros either side of midfield are drawn into the centre of the pitch. Just as Cesena showed with a shock victory and Real Madrid demonstrated by pushing Marcelo and Alvaro Arbeloa forward, Milan are vulnerable to attacking full-backs. Even Parma and Napoli caused danger in this respect despite losing, and it will increasingly be a deliberate tactic for opponents to get the ball into crossing positions when the full-backs move forward.
With this goal the game changed significantly – Milan were stunned at going behind despite making the early running, and Juventus had fewer problems between the lines, as the midfield sat deeper.
Second half
Allegri switched to a 4-3-3 system at the start of the second half, moving Robinho to the left and Pato to the right. This smacked somewhat of desperation, and a decision to change things for the sake of it in the easiest way possible – Milan had dominated the game with the 4-3-1-2, only lacking finishing quality and perhaps a bit of luck.
The new shape did little to get Milan back into the game – whereas in the first half Robinho acted as the link between the midfield and the attack, Milan found it more difficult to make the connection after the break, and Juventus sat deeper, forming eight men in two solid banks between the Milan midfield and Marco Storari.
Milan’s problem when they are chasing a game is that they’re forced higher up the pitch, and the resulting high defensive line doesn’t suit their back four. They were exposed for a comical second goal, where substitute Momo Sissoko contrived to miss a one-on-one, before fortunately finding that Del Piero was behind him, and laying the ball back for Del Piero to smash in a landmark goal.
Juve solid
Juventus defended very well at 2-0 up, especially considering they were forced to bring on two players out of position due to injury problems – first Simone Pepe at left-back and then Sissoko on the right of midfield. As Adam Digby, writer of this excellent Juventus blog points out, the shape of Juventus was fantastic without the ball yesterday, resulting in this average position diagram which is a coach’s dream.
Juventus were even well-stocked at the back when they conceded – Robinho and Antonini somehow managed to create a crossing opportunity against four Juventus players, and Ibrahimovic towered above Pepe to head home. That goal was conceded due to individual mistakes rather than poor tactics, and overall Delneri’s defensive strategy worked excellently.
Milan rallied late and substitute Ignzaio Abate flashed a brilliant ball across the six-yard box in the final moments, but this merely outlined that Milan missed an attacking right-back from the start. Massimo Oddo, hero in the win over Napoli, was sorely missed.
Conclusion
It’s difficult to analyse a game tactically when the winners scored both their goals against the run of play. Milan were by far the better side in the opening period of the game but Juventus adjusted well, shutting down Pirlo and then getting their full-backs forward, creating the first goal.
The game showed us little we didn’t know before in terms of shape – Milan are vulnerable in wide areas, Juventus defend well with two banks of four. The overall lesson, however, was that finishing chances will always be crucial inconverting overall dominance into an actual victory – Milan had 17 shots, 7 on target, and 1 goal, whilst Juventus had just 9 shots, but 6 on target and 2 goals.
Milan 1-2 Juventus: Allegri’s side dominate early on, but weakness in wide areas costs them again
It’s really interesting the point about Pirlo’s movement. I got the impression from watching the game that he was a bit disappointing but that was mainly due to the fact he gave the ball away a couple of times or failed to play the ball in to the strikers
Milan have the attributes to be one of the best sides in Europe in dictating a game when things are in their favour. When they have to chase a game though, the defence doesn’t look natural playing a high line, as ZM says.
I wonder whether for the Madrid game (and for the sake of expediency) Allegri will consider shoring up the midfield and playing a less adventurous formation.
Something like the following: a flat midfield four featuring carrileros like Boateng and Zambrotta that can both get tight and double-up to give protection to their attacking full-backs (Oddo and Antonini); the one spark of creativity being Pirlo accompanied by Gattuso in central midfield.
Then have two from Ibra, Pato and Robinho upfront. It would be something of a counter-attacking set-up for a game in San Siro, I know, but perhaps a necessary one if Allegri is to buy himself time.
Good write up. I came to similar conclusons myself here: http://talkingtactics.blogspot.com/2010/10/milan-v-juventus.html shameless plug.
I think perhaps you have overplayed Milan’s dominance. After they conceded they looked shell-shocked in both halves. Even in the opening 20 their dominance came as much from excellent transition play as it did from sustained pressure.
Great writeup though. The lack of protection offered Bonera was shocking. Juve targeted this area and had De Ceglie, Del Piero and Martinez all up against him. If Krasic had played you feel a similar situation would have developed down the right. Milan had to take players away from the centre towards the right and this created space for Quagliarella and Marchisio in the centre.
Inter’s 4-2-3-1 last year provided ample protection for the fullbacks. Milan looked extremely narrow without the ball and Pato did a particularly poor job of containing De Ceglie for the 40 minutes he was on the pitch. Decisive.
I’ve grown increasingly frustrated by this Milan team, but I’m having difficulty knowing exactly who to blame for the way that they play. It’s hard to pinpoint, but I sense that this team DEPENDS on having better players than the other team to get results. This may sound stupid, but let me explain–the forward line and midfield are full of players who are vastly experienced and/or technically gifted. They can afford to play their way deliberately up the pitch because of their ability to make multiple passes out of tight spaces. In some sense, they remind me of Barcelona at half speed. Yet because their technical football is not allied with a pressing style a la Barca, they are repeatedly caught with few men behind the ball, and those that are in position lack pace, as has been repeated ad nauseam. The result is that their opponents may not have many chances, but they tend to be high quality ones–the Napoli game comes to mind, with Lavezzi often taking on two or three defenders on his own and getting a goal for his troubles. All this to say that the quality of Milan’s players is obvious, apart from the fullbacks, yet the value of the parts is greater than the whole, which is why I am beginning to doubt whether Allegri has the respect of this group of players. The manager’s job is to fashion a cohesive unit capable of achieving things beyond the individuals themselves, and when those individuals have an off night (how many chances went begging for Ibra alone, though Juve gave him an opportunity he couldn’t miss), this team has no answer.
I don’t know if the problem is the coach. a few years ago it was Ancelotti’s fault so he left. then Leonardo came in and couldn’t turn them around in a year so he left. now Allegri is having problems. at some point I think it’s not the coach anymore.
when you look at Barcelona, they have very mobile, hard-working midfielders. Busquets, Xavi, Mascherano, Keita, Iniesta… they all work hard and have limitless stamina. Gattuso, Seedorf, and Ambrosini fell into this category when they were younger, but nowadays they’re quite old. the problem is that Boateng, Flamini, and the other young guys who *can* run all day aren’t playing in the big games. maybe that’s Allegri’s fault, maybe they’re not good enough – or maybe it’s the directors’ fault for not simply phasing out the old guard and completely rebuilding through youth. if you’re going to carry players like Ronaldinho and Robinho who don’t track back, you need the other players – especially the deep-lying midfielders – to do even more work.
The frustration with Milan has everything to do with, as you said, the value of the parts is greater than the whole.
However, every Milan game I’ve watched they have been better. They were unfortunate to lose this game, in my opinion, because they looked better. To me, that means that the coach is doing enough to keep his job. I won’t assume it’s because of what he’s doing or because the team is a little older, experienced, and star-studded and, therefore, is motivated to win regardless of what the coach says.
You are right regarding the attacking players. But if any team’s attacking players — you know, the ones whose job it is to score goals — has an off night, there’s no answer.
Milan, I believe, will be in the thick of it come the end of the year.
Milan will win squat with the three forwards doing nothing on defence and with the quality of fullback they have at the club now.
The Robinho money would have been better spent on a LB and a RB.
I’d like to see some numbers on the fullbacks — tackling, passing, interceptions, all that.
I’d also like to see what the perceived problems with the fullbacks is for once. Do they get caught out? Do they play too conservatively? I don’t think I’ve heard an actual reason other than Milan should have purchased some new fullbacks.
Until then, I refuse to believe Milan’s fullbacks aren’t good enough.
To me, Milan’s problems will endure until the attacking players really gel and finish their chances.
Anecdotal evidence I know, but there is a mountain of it for anybody who cares to dig through:
– You only need to look as far as the winning goal to see Antonini’s defensive frailties, failing to deal with a routine ball that he should have been first to, allowing Sissoko a free run on goal.
- Abate is like some kind of 100-metre runner turned footballer, with pace to burn but unable to produe an attacking threat. Again, have a look at a cross of his towards the end of the first half, where under no pressure he managed to put a cross out for a goal kick with the inside of his foot.
You can Prozone it all you like, but in the 10 years I’ve been going to the San Siro, Milan has never been so weak at full-back.
With 4 defensively weak players on the pitch (front three + Pirlo), the two remaining midfielders have to pick the spot to win their battles, and that spot is in the middle of the park, leaving the fullbacks pretty exposed, and reliant on a helping hand from the likes of Robinho and Ronaldinho most of the time. In a harder-working defensive formation the fullbacks might have an easier time, but with the three up front, there’s nowhere to hide.
I’ll give you the second goal.
One bad cross means nothing. Those happen frequently. It would be like accusing a player who hits one over the goal that he can’t shoot and is, therefore, a poor attacking player. Provide some statistics on his crossing ability or your point is meaningless. I am ready to concede this point if you provide some statistics.
What about his tackling? What about interceptions? Assists? Numbers of crosses achieved? Again, ready to agree with your assessment when you provide something other than observations from going to the San Siro for the past ten years.
So your argument that the fullbacks are weak boils down to:
1) One bad goal given up
2) One bad cross
Those two points constitute a mountain of evidence, evidently.
That’s why I called it anecdotal evidence. Maybe you should read the post properly.
By all means have a look at Abate’s stats for last night’s match against Madrid. 22/37 passes completed, 6/12 successful in the attacking third. Only Ronaldinho and Pato were worse.
If there’s a Serie A stats site around, I have no doubt you’ll find the same level in his league outings.
OK, so he should improve his passing. How about blocks, interceptions, etc.? I don’t know where you’re getting these stats from — perhaps you can point me to them.
I thought he did a great job shutting down one of the best players in the world last night, Ronaldo. Do you agree with that?
And, really, if Milan had converted their chances, we wouldn’t even be talking about this.
PiMLI3 http://cje6CgslLk0ds3Nnto7djJaor.com