Man City 1-0 Man United: Toure dominates the game in midfield and scores the winning goal
The starting line-ups
Manchester City won the derby to progress to the FA Cup final next month.
Roberto Mancini chose to leave out Edin Dzeko despite Carlos Tevez’s absence – he went with Mario Balotelli upfront, supported by Yaya Toure, with Adam Johnson and David Silva on the flanks.
Sir Alex Ferguson left out Ryan Giggs and Javier Hernandez. He used three ‘wingers’ – though Park Ji-Sung played in the centre. Dimitar Berbatov started alone upfront.
The start of the game saw very obvious battles across the pitch – with similar systems, there was a 3 v 3 battle in the centre of midfield, and both sides found it difficult in the centre of the park early on.
Early stages
Unlike the notoriously boring 0-0 between the sides earlier in the season, however, the start to this game was frantic. City were closing down all over the pitch in the early stages, meaning the tempo of the game was high and neither side settled quickly. There were no chances in the opening ten minutes.
It was very interesting – especially after how keen United were to play at a slow tempo in the recent contests against Chelsea – that as soon as the tempo of the game dropped, around the 10-15 minute mark, United had their best two chances of the first half. Both fell to Dimitar Berbatov – one produced a fine save from Joe Hart, the other was somehow sliced over the bar from barely five yards out.
Both midfield trios rotated throughout the match – at points it was possible to find Nigel de Jong and Paul Scholes as the most advanced midfielders, and this movement in the centre of the pitch also created a more dynamic game than the cagey battle many may have expected.
Wide areas
The most interesting individual battles were on the flanks. David Silva came into central positions, John O’Shea followed, and Aleksandr Kolarov tried to get down the line and provide an overlap – Valencia usually tracked him well, but switched off very obviously at one point. On the other flank, Johnson played narrower than usual – as always, he came inside with the ball, but was not a great threat.
Nani seemed to have the beating of Pablo Zabaleta, but his path to come inside was often blocked – the Portuguese winger is slightly more predictable on the left – though he’s two-footed, this quality seems better used from the right where he’s happy to go either way – when on the left he’s intent on coming inside and shooting, for some reason. Valencia was quiet.
Mancini was seen waving his side higher up the pitch, and around the half hour mark City really started to put pressure on United. They dominated the latter stages of the opening period, pinning United into their own third of the pitch. The lack of pace upfront for United made this high line possible, and City’s forward players – Silva and Balotelli in particular – favoured the positivity City played with at this point.
Second half
City’s high tempo continued in the second half, and much like in United’s league game at Stamford Bridge recently, their calm, patient style was simply overpowered at times, particularly by Toure, who was the game’s finest performer. It was symbolic that he intercepted a pass between Carrick and Scholes for the goal – those two players epitomise United’s passing approach, but Toure’s drive and energy defeated them throughout the 90 minutes. When out of possession he remained close to Scholes, who had been a key figure in recent meetings between these two with his diagonal passes. Those weren’t successful today, and City simply executed their gameplan better in this contest.
Hernandez came on for Valencia and United went 4-4-2, but then Scholes’ dismissal gave Ferguson a real problem – after all, it was that area of the pitch where they were losing the battle. Ferguson (via his assistants) brought on Anderson to provide some energy in the midfield, but sacrificed Berbatov. It was the logical move at the time – Berbatov had endured a difficult afternoon and missed United’s best two chances – but it was a blow for United upfront.
11 v 10
With Hernandez upfront alone, City were able to drop deep and defend very narrow (see Patrick Vieira on for Silva). United were a bit of given time on the flanks, and switched the ball from Park on the left out to Nani on the right, but with Hernandez upfront, they had no aerial route. United had the wrong striker on at the wrong time here, with the hold-up qualities of the tall Berbatov when City were playing a high line, and then the pace of the tiny Hernandez when City dropped deep. That, of course, was also clever strategy from Mancini.
After the red card, United looked very flat – and City were relatively comfortable.
Conclusion
Another game involving Manchester United where the game was all about tempo – when the game looked like it had settled down they took charge, but City upped the speed and dominated the majority of the match.
Credit should go to Mancini in that regard – his City side have often looked to sit very deep against the bigger sides and have played exclusively on the counter-attack (see the games against Chelsea and Arsenal), but here Mancini knew that United were prone to being ‘bullied’ (in a legal way) in midfield, and the sheer strength of Toure, Balotelli, de Jong and Kompany was City’s standout quality today.
Ferguson will rue Berbatov’s missed chances, Carrick’s terrible error and Scholes’ moment of madness. Overall, however, his side simply didn’t stamp their authority upon the game – aside from a brief spell in the first half, the nature of the game played into City’s hands, and the win was deserved.
Man City 1-0 Man United: Toure dominates the game in midfield and scores the winning goal
Why a seasoned veteran wasn’t even included on the bench is beyond me? Having someone so experienced would surely have helped United retain the ball. Whenever the ball passed the half way line they seemed incapapable of stringing together more than 3 passes, especially in the second half. Like Leeds last year United end up gifting a probable victory to a hated rival. Horrifying.
*seasoned veteran like Giggs. Sorry- I have drowned my sorrows too much.
need to earn a lot of money. by investment or other means.
to prepare myself for the fines by fas. because i’m gonna abuse referees. by accusing them…
amateur teams there’s no thing such as money so there’s no such thing as motivation or really trying and giving your best. the best technical team win or the best tactical. other than schools rivalry…that’s different.
motivation tool – try your best. if you dont try your best, you go home and will be insecure and will have thoughts about your performance. it’s better to try your best, listen to instructions and have a nice and secure sleep.
i dont know why but recently i always have a fantasy of having a hot russian wife. and also, now i read that french girls like exotic asian men. and the dutch too. aha! i got an idea why! because france is an elitist society. they want to be original…they like alternatives. i think dutch go that route too owing to their famed creativity. british, germans…hmm i dont think so. spanish i havent got a clue.
dude?
LOLWUT?
Best. Comment. Ever.
A hot wife’ll do me – Nationality isn’t an issue……
Chance this is actually Balotelli: 10, maybe 15%?
for the first time I’ve watched MU play without a drive to win. Usually it’s Rooney who can inspire his teammates. I agree with you, MU look flat. The better team won today.
city deserve the win. no doubt.
Interisting match that promissed more than it delivered… for several reasons.
First, City haven’t got a well established link up between attack and defense. This means they always struggle in possession, and the team never seems to deal very well with Silva’s tendency to move inside, and at the same time rarely take advantage of his unpredictable movement. When Tevez is present, he is the one who normally links up with Silva…. without him… they look very sluggish.
Second, United without Rooney are nowhere near the same team. Rooney’s ability to pull the strings high up the pitch is unmatched. Being with his runs, his passing or simply his control of the tempo. It was very noticeable in the unability to speed up in the final third, and Manchester, unlike what is usual in them, were never a threat on the counter.
Park in the middle was also a failed bet, as he didn’t offer any link up with Berbatov nor could he pull the strings and feed Nani and Valencia.
In the end, it was a mistake by Carrick that decided a game that owed more to hard work than to any kind of inspiration (from both sides).
As this season has progressed we have now found Rooney’s best role – playing off of another striker whilst linking up play between the midfield and the wingers/striker, and also helping the midfield out when Man Utd lose posession. He sort of plays a cross between an attacking-midfielder and a regular Number 10 – he should ALWAYS be played in this role for the rest of his career (or at least until the end of his peak).
Ji Sung Park is very good at working hard, winning the ball back, and keeping moves going/linking play (as long as a fairly obvious pass is available), but his creativity and vision is quite poor. Therefore, if he is played as the link between the midfield and the attack (the attack being the wingers and the striker) as he was today, then you are gonna be in trouble (as you pointed out above, Kramxel). I think Fergie is missing a trick in not allowing Scholes to play this type of role (the most important area of the pitch, creatively speaking, is “in the hole” – the central area of the pitch between the midfield and the attack – it is imperative that whoever has that role is very creative).
The above is also true of Man City (as you also pointed out, Kramxel), where Yaya Toure is used as the link up player, but his creativity is also quite poor (his main strength are his surging runs with the ball at his feet – my idea for him would be to play him outside – either on the left or the right, a bit like Gareth Bale….). They definitely need to make better use of Silva’s creativity.
I thought Balotelli had a good game today – he didn’t do anything special, but his workrate and teamwork were excellent, and he didn’t look like he was about to self-destruct at any point either. This game may be the beginning of him turning the corner…..we’ll have to wait and see…..
Considering the ridiculous ammounts of money City have spent, don’t know if winning the FA Cup can actually be considered a successful return?
You make it sound like the squad will pack its bags and leave at the end of the season.
Of course it would be. Don’t you realize how difficult it is to win anything with a squad that, for the most part, hasn’t even played a full season together yet? Or to instill a winning mentality in a team which has had multiple decades of a trophy drought? And combine that with well established teams, including a bitter rival, whom have all taken full advantage over the years of the positive feedback loop that is winning the premiership? Money certainly helps, look at all of the top teams, but with how incredibly difficult it is to turn a middle of the road team to a title winning team, essentially overnight, winning the FA Cup is HUGE.
When Mourinho took over Chelsea in 2004 there was a huge expectation on him, and the Chelsea squad, to win the championship. Mourinho took over a squad who, although came runners-up the season before, were not a team with that illusive quality that all knock-off pundits will tell you a title challenger requires – they were not “used to winning”. Mourinho brought in a couple of players from his Champions League winning Porto team and was gifted the likes of Ranieri’s signing Claude Makelele who had more winning experience than most of the league put together (outside Man Utd).
Mourinho put a huge amount into the League Cup that season and was rewarded with a trophy just 6 months into his Chelsea career, turning a team who hadn’t experienced a trophy since the FA cup win of 2000, into a team with quantified success and a medal each. A win over a big team in the final was helpful too.
I believe that the League Cup win helped Chelsea secure their spot at the top of the table going into the second half of Mourinho’s first season in charge and I think that Mourinho himself would cite it as an important part of his immediate success (although I have no source to justify this, sorry!).
The FA Cup could be a massive reference point for the Man City players, Vieira stated in the press today that he would love to have a 5th FA Cup medal.
Once Man City get into a winning mentality they might become formidable, with the resources in player numbers and the wages to both attract stars and keep them “happy” on the bench, they could go on to win a lot more.
Before the kick off, I supposed that Ferguson had decided that the strong part of City’s defence is its centre – Kompany & chum, plus De Jong and Barry in front. So he’d pick two wingers and attack the weaker full back positions. To give those wingers space behind the full backs, he’d invite a high City defensive line by fielding Berbatov rather than Hernandez. But since Mancini kept urging his defensive line higher, maybe I was wrong – or I was right about Sir Odious’s strategy, but it was wrong.
As for City, it’s very odd to see Mancini pick Johnson, but have him facing the better of the two ManU full backs, and have him drifting infield to face the strongest part of the ManU team – Vidic and Ferdinand. You’d have thought that setting Johnson to go outside O’Shea might have been more productive.
Anyway, Park – whom I like – had a stinker, Carrick reverted to his now customary form, and Scholes yet again proved he’s a dirty wee bugger. So City’s midfield proved the better and the victory was deserved. But it was an interesting game rather than a good one.
Its better than winning nothing.
Why on Earth did Ferguson try to play the same 4-4-1-1 formation with Park replacing Rooney in the most important role on the pitch. Thats like replacing a Rolls Royce with a hatchback. No wonder they lost the game
Sometimes managers, even genius legends like SAF get it wrong.
For me Berbatov isn’t enough by himself up top at least in big matches. And if your only going to be play 1 forward up top, you better have a stout midfield and they weren’t today.
MUTD’s lack of an offensive attacking center-midfielder (besides Rooney) finally caught up with them.
Having said that, how many times have they played solid but unspectacular and pulled these kind of matches out.
Also, if Berbatov had converted his second huge chance in the first half, then right now we could easily be discussing the genius of Sir Alex again. It could have been very different.
The sheer panic in the Man U backline – combined with a team actually having the balls to surge forward onto them – after the goal is something i’ll cherish for a long long time.
Interesting comments from Van Der Sar after the game. He suggested that United didn’t play at a high enough tempo. Which is, perhaps, the other side of the same coin from your suggestion that United prefer a slower tempo.
Brilliant article. Completely agree with this:
“United had the wrong striker on at the wrong time here, with the hold-up qualities of the tall Berbatov when City were playing a high line, and then the pace of the tiny Hernandez when City dropped deep. That, of course, was also clever strategy from Mancini.”
Interesting that Utd always beat Arsenal by hitting on the counter and using their physical strength (as well as the ridiculous energy of Park, who always seems to score/assist etc. against us) especially in Fletcher to “bully” more technical, but weaker players like Fabregas. Here, though – the strength of City’s back four (They’re all tanks!) along with De Jong and the athleticism of Toure driving into the hole from a deeper starting position when City got the ball (deeper position when tracking Scholes) and Utd’s midfield couldn’t cope.
I was slightly surprised at the 4-2-3-1 from Ferguson.. Surely it made more sense to have Carrick sitting behind Scholes and Park going box-to-box? There was a huge gap between Utd’s defence and midfield – Silva was absolutely everywhere and had a completely free role so he exploited it, and Yaya Toure kept getting into a good position while Balotelli dropped back and had some long-shots (one of which tested VDS well).
City wanted it more – they really came out of the blocks in the second half and the goal was a slice of luck (literally!) considering Joe Hart had made a similar mistake to VDS 5 minutes previously and Carrick – well, what CAN you say? But they made their own luck and Toure’s cheeky interception epitomised his energy in pressing the ball.
Boring first half – I think both sides were a little scared/nervous, but the second is what you want from such a big game (a semi-final as well as a Manc. derby) and the atmosphere at Wembley seemed electric even from in front of a TV screen…
For some reason Fergie likes to play Scholesy and Carrick against physical teams…he did this against Chelsea in the league and it was the same story. Played well in the first half and ran out of gas in the second. Playing Sparky there to compensate is not enough and i thought one of the reasons why Valencia wasn’t effective was cos it became a physical fight on the flanks. Mancini did to us what we do to Arsenal all the time. most people with whom i watched the game with couldn’t understand why we brought Anderson on after loosing Scholesy but it was pretty apparent that while we offered no threat we began to come to grips with the game more. Scholesy while he has great skills cant react or move fast enough these days and Carrick sits too deep because of it and there is no way he is going to win a footrace.
since not everyone is on nickname terms with the players, who the heck is sparky?
City overpowered MUFC; that was main story I guess. Fighting all three fronts in premiership which is packed with decent teams overall is almost mission impossible.
City players are far fleshier than Utd players combined with big mistake from Berbatov, Carrik and Scholes bury Utd.
Hola,
Esto es posible y es necesario:) discutir infinitamente
Ilias