Inter 3-2 Palermo: a game of two halves
The starting line-ups
2-0 down at half-time, Leonardo gave Giampaolo Pazzini his Inter debut and the game changed dramatically.
Leonardo made various changes to his side, but kept the 4-3-1-2 shape he’s used since taking over as manager. Diego Milito returned upfront, Coutinho started as a trequartista.
Delio Rossi used his usual 4-3-2-1 system with his expected eleven players – there can’t be many more consistent starting XIs in Europe than Palermo’s.
In terms of possession and territory, Inter dominated the whole game. As in other games where Palermo have come up against a similar system, Rossi instructed his side to sit back and play on the counter-attack, and for45 minutes, this worked excellently.
Width from full-backs
The battle in terms of formations was fairly predictable, with both sides flooding the centre of the pitch, and the only width coming from full-back. It was the two right-backs who got forward the most – Maicon got down the flank, covered by Javier Zanetti, to threaten on a couple of occasions, but it was Mattia Cassani who made the decisive impact.
He constantly overlapped down the right (with support from the left coming from Antonio Nocerino, the most attack-minded of the three central midfielders) to provide Palermo’s attack with width, stretching the opposition defence. He found himself next to the byline for both of Palermo’s opening goals, scored by Fabrizio Miccoli and Nocerino.
Contrast in shapes
The away side’s formation was working much better – they had two playmakers rather than one, which made it easier for them to find direct forward passes. It also meant life was much more difficult for Inter’s centre-backs – they were forced to keep guessing as Javier Pastore and Josop Ilicic took it in turns to support Miccoli.
On the other hand, Palermo’s centre-backs had a clear responsbility – 2 v 2 at the back, with Coutinho picked up by Armin Bacinovic. Thiago Motta was Inter’s equivalent there – he spent most of the game in the centre of the three with Esteban Cambiasso on the left – Motta helped Inter’s passing rhythm, but often looked fragile defensively.
Half time changes
Second half formations
Leonardo changed things around completely at half time. Davide Santon (who had an awful first half) went off, with Javier Zanetti moved back into the defence. Coutinho was also sacrificed, and on came two new signings – Houssine Kharja, who attacked from the right of midfield, and Giampaolo Pazzini, who became part of a front three with Milito and Samuel Eto’o – Pazzini generally played in the centre of the pitch, but the three were reasonably fluid. Kharja’s attacking instincts, meanwhile, meant Nocerino was forced deeper.
The obvious effect here was to pin back the Palermo full-backs. Eto’o (for large parts of last season) and Milito (against Barcelona) have shown they’re capable of doing decent jobs in wide positions in the past, and this was very important as Inter switched to a completely new system. Eto’o had the bigger job up against the first half’s key man, Cassani, and Leonardo was particularly complimentary about the Cameroon striker after the game – “The work Samuel Eto’o did in the second half was crazy.”
Pazzini
That basically put a stop to Palermo’s counter-attacking threat (although they did win a penalty, missed by Pastore), but Inter’s transformation into a dangerous side in the box owed little to the change in system, and a lot to the brilliance of Pazzini. His two goals were the two classic things you would associate with a “number nine” – the first, he received the ball with his back to goal, before turning and firing into the far corner. The second, he made a dart to the near post to meet a free-kick, and headed in powerfully. Pazzini is a tremendous signing for Inter, and has the potential to be the best out-and-out striker in Europe.
By this time, Palermo had taken off Miccoli (who looked less than pleased) and Pajtim Kasami, a midfielder, came on. They kept broadly the same shape, but Pastore moved up as Palermo’s highest player up the pitch – something he wasn’t suited to. Palermo couldn’t retain the ball, and Inter kept coming back at them. This was bad news, because Palermo simply couldn’t deal with Pazzini in the box, and this resulted in them losing the game – Ezequiel Munoz pulled him back, Eto’o converted the penalty, and Inter had turned 0-2 into 3-2.
Conclusion
Was Leonardo’s switch a moment of tactical genius? It’s hard to say – he mentioned tactics little in his post-game comments, and it’s entirely possible he simply wanted to bring on Pazzini, with the formation change a knock-on effect. Whether intentional or not, however, it’s impossible to deny that the move was very important in the outcome of the game.
The shift was identical to Claudio Ranieri’s move at half-time in the game against Bayern. 2-0 down at half time, shift from 4-3-1-2 to 4-3-3, and win the game 3-2 with a late penalty.
Palermo’s shape worked very well in the first half, and Rossi may feel he was too cautious when removing Miccoli in the second half – he invited constant pressure, and ultimately his defence couldn’t cope.
Inter 3-2 Palermo: a game of two halves
Pazzini, what a great buy, but I’m surprise Sampdoria was willing to let 2 of their best forwards go mid-season, and for so cheap as well.
it was kinda cowded in the center……Pazzini was wonderful to watch..i was waiting for this post.Thank YOU
pazzini to be the best striker in europe . even though you are showing maicon going down the flanks but for me he also was too much central and whenever he used to come forward he also attacked the box rather than hugging the line and crossing . for the first half inter did shabby defending and in the second half palermo did and that’s caused them the game . i dont know why eto is used wide instead he is much bigger threat in the middle where on he can twist and turn and milito can run the channels since he has that dogged energy to do that . for me the inter formation was 4-1-4-1 rather than 4-3-1-2 . eto was too wide to be called a central striker.
I disagree. Eto’o has played better wide, this season at least.
Milan fan here, but happy for Pazzini. Big, big fan of his, and hopefully this move to a big club will make him an even better striker and give him the confidence needed to be great for Italy over the next few years.
Would you attribute the second half formation as a 4-3-3 considering it was three strikers upfront, or a 4-5-1 on the basis that Eto and Milito played much wider (almost as inside forwards rather than strikers)?
I have this confusion on the two systems based on the type of players on the field. I realise it might be naive of me to consider the second half formation of Inter as 4-5-1, but the way in which Eto and Milito played, it wouldn’t that fit the bill more?
I think you’re really getting confused about semantics. It doesn’t matter which you call it and there is no correct definition. What’s important is an understanding of their underlying roles.
Milito and Eto’o were both instructed to pin back the fullbacks and be involved principally in the final third. Whilst they had defensive responsibilities, they were aggressive roles high up the pitch (with little tracking back into midfield) so it is fair to call it a 4-3-3.
Was was both 4-3-3 (when in possession) and 4-5-1 (when defending or “wasting time”).
It was even 3-3-4 when Maicon joined in.
Formations are not static.
Question: Since I have little exposure to Serie A in Denmark, I wonder: Is Sneijder injured? I mean he spectacular last year, and it seems curious to dump him i favor of Coutinho.
In relation: do you guys know a good site for injury reports? I always find myself scrambling to answer questions like the above.
Yes, he’s been injured for (I think) 2 months. He’s back to full training now, so within the next few games, we might see him.
And Goal.com is as good a site as I can think of for injury news, as well as ridiculous transfer rumours if that interests you.
What about Osasuna-R.Madrid?
Here’s my main problem with the way Inter played yesterday (and I mentioned this on the Inter-Udinese game’s comment section), Milito. Not his scoring touch, which, as long as Eto’o remains in form, I don’t really care about, but his interplay with Eto’o. Milito is probably the ideal strike partner for Eto’o, they understand each other really well, and they give each other space. Normally, when Eto’o has the ball out on the wing, Milito moves closer to him, a) this gives Eto’o someone to play off so he doesn’t have to dribble as much, and b) this occupies the nearest centre-back to Eto’o, meaning he’s less heavily marked.
Yesterday, Milito would go away from Eto’o, and this isolated the two of them.
Someone above said Eto’o is more dangerous in the centre, there’s some validity to that statement, he’s certainly not a winger, he’s lethal in the middle. However, his best games this season have been at inside forward when he has Milito to play off. Pazzini showed glimpses of good interplay ability, but not as much as Milito, and Pazzini is cup-tied this season, so it’s more important for Milito to get back to form (for the Champion’s League).
I’m fine with the 4-3-1-2 if that happens, Eto’o keeps width well enough on the left, while Maicon and Zanetti keep width on the right. The midfield 3 should, in theory, be strong defensively, but I don’t know what’s going on there, Motta is playing a more defensive role than Cambiasso (I rate Motta higher than ZM does in defence apparently, he’s a great tackler, but he’s no Cambiasso), the midfield 3 are not staying close enough together to stop attacks. I would prefer that one of them leaves his position at a time, leaving 2 stationed centrally to block a counter-attack.
It does remind me of Dunga’s Brazil, it just needs some tuning up to work.
Champions League requires wingers to pin down attacking fullbacks and/or backtrack.
The 4-3-1-2/4-1-2-1-2 will have to be mostly used it Italy, or until Sneijder returns.
4-2-3-1, 4-3-3/4-5-1 and whatever system Barca is using, are needed for european progress.
I do agree, but the way Inter are playing this 4-3-1-2, it could work. Eto’o stations himself out on the left, so he pins back the opposing right-back. On the other side, while there is no one to pin the opposing left-back, Zanetti is more than capable of tracking him once he reaches a dangerous area. This is not a typical, central 4-3-1-2, if Leonardo gets it working right, it can have the advantages of a 4-2-3-1 while maintaining the 4-3-1-2’s midfield superiority.
The problem is that if the wingers/wide players connect, then the 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3/4-5-1 formations have 5 midfielders vs. 4 midfielders.
4-3-1-2/ 4-1-2-1-2 is simply a limited formation.
This was the typical Mourinho Chelsea 4-3-3/4-5-1/4-2-1-3 formation that Leonardo used.
In that case, Eto’o drops in midfield and makes it a 5v5.
Like I said earlier, I think this formation parallels Brazil under Dunga quite a bit. It can’t be classified as a standard 4-3-1-2, but it’s not a 4-3-2-1 either, it’s a 4-3-1-Eto’o-1. He plays a more defensively aware role than Robinho did under Dunga, but the positioning in attack is similar.
And I wouldn’t go as far as dismissing 4-3-1-2. The standard, central 4-3-1-2 is easy enough to play against, but as with any formation, it’s more about how the players play within it than it is about how we can categorize their starting positions.
The Dunga formation was hybrid between a 4-2-3-1 and a diamond 4-3-1-2.
But it had 2 problems.
It had only Dani Alves/left winger backtracking, so defensively it had only 7 behind the ball.
And Kaka was quite fixed in position (and limited as playmaker), witch coupled with the lack of a deep-lying playmaker, resulted in a lack of midfield creativity.
For Sneijder to work well he needs to be given freedom, since he’s basically a midfield libero and not a classical trequartista (and not a regista either).
You’d need deep-lying playmaker that can defend like a destroyer, and push forward once in a while (like Schweinsteiger) for Dunga’s system to work.
Neither Gilberto or Melo were sparkling with creativity.
Maybe Kharja is the new Schweinsteiger ?!
The main difference in the formations really is that Zanetti plays deeper than Ramires/Elano.
Inter wouldn’t have the backtracking problem, Eto’o and Sneijder both do their jobs defensively, though Sneijder prefers pressing up the pitch, he will track back.
As for the deep lying playmaker, that’s why Motta is there. He’s not so much a playmaker as he is a ball distributor, but he helps keep possession and he’s not bad at defending (outside the box). Though he really needs to switch with Cambiasso, whose defensive ability is kind of being wasted in this drifting midfielder role he has nowadays.
I was going to make a tactical comment earlier today when wham HOLY CRAP ANDY CARROLL IS NOT WORTH $56 MILLION
Tell me about it, I can’t believe Liverpool are stupid enough to buy him for that amount.
Wow. That 12m EUROS + Biabiany for Pazzini is sounding like an even better deal now
Apparently whoever runs Samp doesn’t know how to bargain.
No he isn’t. But all round he’s the best imo Liverpool could have got.
How many of you have actually watched the game? If so, why is Andy Carroll being brought up here…
The game was fantastic. Palermo’s defensive organization for three-quarters of the game was a showcase on how to defend. Fantastic intensity despite a tremendous amount of pressure. Ezequiel Muñoz made some great plays, and some mistakes, though he is just 20 years old!
I disagree about Leonardo being a “tactical genius” (a phrase that is used far too often on this site). The first half, Inter was playing superbly but Palermo’s defensive organization was brilliant… although it was a matter of time before the Rosanero were going to concede as the counter-attack’s efficiency was slowing down. Pastore was useless and only served as a decoy – should have been taken off – which only demonstrates that for all his “creativity” and “talent,” he is still not a consistent big-game player.
Miccoli should have played about 10 minutes more, but his effectiveness was quickly going downhill. Too bad Mauricio Pinilla was injured. Kharja was a good player for Genoa, though I wonder if he is big-club material.
I never see Leonardo is attributed by word “tactical genius” in ZM site
wat
I don’t think Inter had a right winger from their three strikers. Milito and Pazzini tended to stick in the center, while Eto’o was out wide left. Maicon was almost playing in midfield most of the time after the substitution.
Was anyone else surprised by how bad Santon played? I really thought he could be a Maicon type RB but his play was awful. Maybe it’s just because he hasn’t played much but man that was ugly.
I have a theory about Santon, if he starts a league game, he doesn’t play well. If he makes a substitute appearance/starts a low key game, he has a godly performance. Evidence from this and last season seem to back that up.
Lack of playing time, lack of focus, he got too famous too quickly and it got to his head, now he needs to get himself back on track.