Napoli 1-0 Palermo: two similar systems, the home side more fluent and fluid
The starting line-ups
It took a 94th minute goal to win it, but Napoli were far the better side throughout.
Walter Mazzarri made two changes to Napoli’s defence, bringing in Gianluca Grava and Salvatore Aronica. The rest of the side remained the same, in the 3-4-2-1 / 3-4-3 formation they’ve used throughout this campaign.
Delio Rossi surprisingly switched to a back three for this game, a curious decision since it was the first time this season he’d strayed from a four-man defence. Only one change in personnel was made – Armin Bacinovic, the central midfielder, departed, and made way for Nicolae Dorin, the centre-back. The two full-backs pushed on accordingly.
The game was 0-0 until the 94th minute, but this tells only part of the story. Napoli were on top for almost the whole game – the statistics show they had 18 shots compared to Palermo’s 8, 9 on target compared to Palermo’s 1, 16 corners compared to Palermo’s 2 – it was a thrashing in every respect apart from the scoreline. Therefore, it’s fair to look at why Napoli dominated, and there were three main reasons.
More natural wing-backs
It was plain to see that Napoli were more comfortable in their shape as a whole, best demonstrated by the performances of the two sets of wing-backs. Christian Maggio and Andrea Dossena moved very high up the pitch to the point where both became goalscoring threats (Maggio netted the late winner, Dossena flashed a good chance wide), and also provided dangerous crosses into the box. Their natural game was to play alongside the midfield and look to push forward – if they lost the ball, they would retreat towards their own goal, but with Palermo’s lack of natural width high up the pitch, their only direct opponent was the opposing wing-backs, and therefore they could afford to be reasonably attack-minded.
Palermo’s wing-backs looked exactly what they are – full-backs pushed forward for the day. Both Mattia Cassani and Federico Balzaretti are attack-minded enough to be regarded as ‘attacking full-backs’, but they were far too conservative as wing-backs and rarely got themselves into attacking positions. Wing-back is a difficult position to master – stamina is the main attribute needed, but it is one of the more difficult roles to play in terms of positioning too, and Napoli’s were simply more well-versed at it.
Napoli central midfield functions better
These two sides had similar ideas about how to operate in the centre of midfield, deploying one central midfielder ahead of the other, rather than using two ‘flat’ players. Again, however, the positioning of Napoli’s midfielders was better. One of Michele Pazienza and Walter Gargano would generally be in a position to get goalside of Javier Pastore, but not of Josip Ilinic, who was instead treated as more of a striker when he made forward runs. This meant that Napoli effectively had 3 v 2 at the back against Fabrizio Miccoli and Ilinic, whilst Pastore was picked up by a holding player, and the other central midfielder would play higher up the pitch and track either of the Palermo central midfielders if they broke from deep.
Palermo’s central midfielders had more of a problem about who to pick up, which links onto the next point…
Napoli more fluid in attack
When Marek Hamsik found himself tracked by Antonio Nocerino or Giulio Migliaccio, he would move into wide positions and drag them out of position, or (more often) simply find himself in space. There, he could link up with the wing-backs and create 2 v 1 situations, or simply pick up the ball with more time than his (broad) opposite number, Pastore.
The same was true of the two players ahead of Hamsik – Edinson Cavani and Ezequiel Lavezzi. It was difficult to assign any of them set positions – they drifted across the pitch fluidly and offered far more attacking options. There were various benefits here – (a) the Palermo centre-backs didn’t know who to pick up, with one of the three often becoming redundant, (b) the Napoli forwards drifts into wide areas made Palermo’s wing-backs less inclined to attack, as discussed previously, and (c) the Napoli central midfielders did not have such a clear marking job.
Conclusion
The third factor – fluidity at the top end of the pitch – was the main difference between the sides, and was probably the catalyst for the other two factors. Napoli were able to dominate possession, which meant that they were able to get their wing-backs forward more, become less of a ‘broken team’, and offer more attacking options without being left vulnerable at the back.
The Palermo wing-backs looked particularly uncomfortable, not used to the position (although Palermo did play that way last season on occasion) and there must be some level of blame attributed to Rossi for choosing to move away from the system that had been so successful in the previous game against Roma.
It is significant that Rossi had to remove a central midfielder for a centre-back to make the switch in formation, meaning he was unable to move back to a four-man defence had he considered it appropriate. If he possessed a modern sweeper, he wouldn’t have had to – and this Palermo performance was a great advert for having a player able to move between centre-back and central midfield, with the full-backs shuttling up and down in turn.
Napoli 1-0 Palermo: two similar systems, the home side more fluent and fluid
Not a tactics question, but I’m wondering how much you rate Pastore, now that you’ve done a good few Palermo games? I think he’ll become one of the 5 best attacking players in the world. I can’t think of another player who looked such a natural on the pitch, and he shoots the ball extremely well. He does things which suggest his game isn’t fully formed yet, but when it gets there, he’ll be incredible.
Pastore looks like he could definitely be, as you said, one of teh five best attacking players in the game for sure. He is amazing on Football Manager 2011 lol ^_^
And what about the attacking trio of Napoli: Hamsik, Cavani and Lavezzi? Pure class. (Compare Lavezzi to a player like Zarate – it’s a whole ‘nother level in my opinion.)
Napoli is to me the most exciting team in Europe this season so far, along with Villarreal, when you look at the combination of formation/tactics, players and performance.
I don’t see neither Armin Bacinovic nor Nicolae Dorin (both mentioned in the third paragraph) on the charts, am I missing something?
Bacinovic was suspended, while Dorin = Dorin Goian, the central defender.
That explains it, because I quite rate Bacinovic. With Palermo’s 4321 system, he is the distributor while Migliaccio and Nocerino are more functional. As good as Pastore is (and I love watching him), I feel Bacinovic makes Palermo’s system function– or else Ilicic and Pastore struggle to get the ball in space. Bacinovic is no Pirlo, but he is a skillful distributor.
Definitely agree. Palermo missed Bacinovic a lot on Sunday. With only Nocerino and Migliaccio in there, the transition from defence to attack was very poor indeed, never really got going. The two central midfielders and the two fantasistas (Pastore and Ilicic) were playing as if they’d never met before.
Sure he is. And I still think Palermo could have played better if they stuck to the system they are familiar with.
You can’t realistically improvise a complex system such as 3-4-2-1.
This game must serve as example about the three-man defence working only when the two wingbacks can provide 90 minutes of dynamic and offensive play.
I think Napoli is the only team in major european leagues deploying a 3 centre-backs “pure” system, without the wingbacks necessarily serving as additional defenders.
What do you mean by “pure” system? I’m not disagreeing… just curious your definition of “pure”.
Do Napoli’s wingbacks man-mark the opponents outer most players or what……. would like to hear a bit more on their roles/responsibilities.
This Napoli team is really turning me into a supporter.
I think he means that the wide players aren’t obligated to drop even with the centerbacks and none of the three centerbacks step forward at any given time.
So, no – they don’t really do a whole lot of man-marking
I mean wingbacks do not regularly drop both on the centre-backs line. And no, they don’t do any man-marking. Mazzarri has always been a supporter of pure zonal marking, except for one of the three CBs who can be deployed on man marking against precise and definite threats.
I like defining this system a 3-man defence “pure” system because you can often see BOTH the wingbacks attacking depth, while the two centre-mids patrol the central area.
will you comment the formation that Barcelona put it vs Rubin Kazan? It was such a 3-3-3-1
_____________Pinto___________
___Piqué_____Busi____Fontàs__
_Jonathan____Masche__Maxwell_
__Jeffren__ Thiago__ Adriano_
_____________Bojan___________
Didn’t see the game, I’m afraid – but the first half formation here – http://www.uefa.com/newsfiles/ucl/2011/2002911_tl.pdf suggests you were right, or perhaps 3-1-3-3 based upon that
3-1-3-3 is more precise than 3-3-3-1, or perhabs best described as a 3-diamond-3.
Prior to this match, I thought that Delio Rossi would have stayed with the 4-3-2-1 that has been working so far this season, the only change being Liverani for the suspended Bacinovic. Liverani can be seen as a (extremely) poor man’s Pirlo – he occasionally plays nice passes sitting from deep, but defensively he is a liability. Bacinovic, while not an elite passer, has been extremely good at spreading out play to both the fullbacks and the 2 trequartistas. Furthermore, he maintains his defensive responsibilities very well.
I actually liked the idea behind the 3-4-2-1 for this match in the absence of Bacinovic. Prior to Rossi’s arrival a year ago, Palermo was using a 3 CB formation under Walter Zenga, so in theory Cassani and Balzaretti should have a bit of understanding of the WB positions. This obviously wasn’t the case, and more often than not, both Cassani and Balzaretti sat back and morphed the formation into a 5-2-2-1. Additionally, the 2 deeper midfielders (Migliaccio & Nocerino) didn’t seem to change their roles at all in the absence of Bacinovic. In the 4-3-2-1, they are essentially destroyers, also filling in for the attacking FBs when they run upfield. For this match, neither took the initiative to link up the defense and the attack, and for much of this match, the team looked disjointed, with the back 7 essentially hoofing the ball up the pitch and expecting the front 3 to create the attack on their own. Hence, there was little to no build-up from Palermo, and the only times they looked threatening were on the counter.
It should also be noted that the Pastore-Ilicic-Miccoli trident looked a bit off form for this match. All in all, I have to say that this defeat was warranted for Palermo, considering how badly they were outplayed. Although, I can’t help but wonder if Palermo’s futility could have been mitigated by one of Balzaretti, Nocerino, Migliaccio or Cassani taking a more authoritative role in helping build up the attack a bit.