Chile 1-1 Uruguay: in-game changes dictate the pattern of play
The starting line-ups
Goals from Alvaro Pereira and Alexis Sanchez meant another Copa draw.
Both managers made changes. Claudio Borghi dropped Mati Fernandez and brought in Luis Jiminez behind the front two, but kept the same shape as in the opening day win over Mexico.
Oscar Tabarez made two changes from the draw against Peru. Nicolas Loderio dropped out and was replaced by Alvaro Pereira, whilst at the back Sebastian Coates came in for Mauricio Victorino, as Uruguay switched to a three-man defence.
The game took a similar pattern to Chile’s game against Mexico – they were the stronger side in possession but couldn’t break down the opposition until late in the game.
Uruguay defence
Tabarez has switched to a three-man backline before – he did so against France in the opening game of the World Cup, when he was (perhaps too modestly, in hindsight) playing for a 0-0, having experimented with the shape in the pre-tournament friendlies. This three-man defence was more about creating a spare man at the back against the pace and power of Humberto Suazo and Alexis Sanchez, and the youngster Coates had a very good game as the sweeper, constantly covering for the other two centre-backs and getting in the way when Suazo thought he was clear.
The three-man defence was less successful as a whole, however. Sanchez is a very intelligent player and understands the tactical nuances of the game very quickly, and recognised that there was little point in him remaining high up against the centre-backs. Instead of moving to the right, as he did against Mexico, he dropped into the midfield more, as he did at Udinese throughout 2010/11 – see the game against Inter, for example. This meant Uruguay had a surplus of defenders, and Chile dominated the midfield ground.
The other interesting element of the midfield battle was that, with Lodeiro not in the side and an extra man at the back, the Perez-Arevalo duo had more freedom, with Arevalo venturing forward more.
Chile defence
The main battles were at either end, though, and Chile had to put up with a dangerous 3 v 3 situation at the back. Borghi’s predecessor Marcelo Bielsa always wanted a spare man, of course, and would have instantly changed to a back four – but Borghi stuck with his three, with the small caveat that Gary Medel dropped back and helped out.
The difference in the numbers in defence meant the two sides played with very different styles in their build-up play. Chile had midfield superiority and had to try and overload the Uruguayan defence, so played slowly and patiently in order to get midfield runners forward. On the other hand, Uruguay tried to play more direct to take advantage of the 3 v 3 situation. Their best two chances (a Luis Suarez shot and a Diego Forlan volley) came after long balls.
The 3 v 3 also meant they could press Chile at goal kicks easily, and Borghi’s side struggled to pass out from the back.
Uruguay three becomes a four
Tabarez and Uruguay realised that with Sanchez dropping into midfield, they didn’t really need three centre-backs, and so as the game progressed, they increasingly looked more like a four at the back. This was a simple switch – Maxi Pereira played deeper, Alvaro Pereira pushed on, and Martin Caceres moved back out to become more of a left-back. It was a 4-4-2ish system. The half-time change – forward Edinson Cavani off and midfielder Alvaro Gonzalez on down the right – was another sign that Tabarez had changed system.
A byproduct of this change was actually crucial in the goal, because Alvaro Pereira found himself in the box and swept home the opening goal – it’s difficult to imagine that he would have been in that position as a wing-back, rather than a winger.
Borghi makes attacking change
Typically, Chile became even more attacking after going behind. Unlike against Mexico, Borghi’s substitution didn’t change the shape of the side, but it was an even more offensive move – Arturo Vidal became the left-sided centre-back, Gonzalo Jara was taken off, and Jorge Valdivia, the number ten, came on to provide clever passes from the centre of midfield.
This had an immediate impact – four minutes later, Valdivia’s incisive pass to the left played in Jean Beausejour, who cut the ball back to Sanchez, who finished.
Chile then had the momentum, although bringing on Carlos Carmona for Beausejour seemed to kill this slightly.
Tabarez tried to go for the second goal with Lodeiro on for Arevalo, but it finished 1-1.
Conclusion
This was an interesting match, with Tabarez switching to three at the back to deal with Chile, and then reverting to a back four when he realised that Sanchez was increasingly dropping off the front. The change to a 4-4-2ish shape meant both sides ended up with a spare man at the back, rather than the situation at the start when Uruguay had two spare men, and Chile had none.
Chile 1-1 Uruguay: in-game changes dictate the pattern of play
One thing here, Cavani is not winger/attacker, he is true no 9. What is he doing on the wing?
Forlan is good in link up play but I think they would function better in other shape. Maybe Cavani in the middle, Suarez to the left an Forlan deeper, like trequartista.
Or-
Suarez has good movement off the ball, maybe he can play off the Cavani and Forlan. They can switch positons.
cavani’s work rate and willingness to track back is very underrated these days, which makes him very useful as a winger because he can cover a lot of ground
he’s not really being used as a winger because he cuts inside. think david villa for spain, or vucinic for roma. neither of them are wingers, but they start wide, and cut inside. same for cavani/suarez in this case. out of the uruguayan trio, forlan is the oldest and slowest, but he’s also very intelligent, which makes him the best of the 3 to play in the middle as a false 9, opening space for suarez/cavani to cut in
fyi, cavani started his career as a defensive dirk kuyt-type winger
For the first twenty minutes or so, both teams were pressing high up the pitch. However, as the first half went on, Uruguay stopped pressing too high and only started pressing when the ball was in their half. Chile, of course, kept to the same pressing pattern all game. Was Uruguay’s change because of Chile being better at it than them, or a result of lack of hold over the midfield, or a tactical shift which they do often?
@Cruijff: I think the problem lies more with them not having someone capable of playing smart balls from the defensive midfield region. Their forward 3 formation is among the best, however too much initiative rests with Forlan to make things happen.
Yeah Cavani wide right is an odd decision. It reminds me of when Ancelotti played Drogba on the right wing against Tottenham late last season…
I wonder if Tabarez couldn’t do better with a 4-2-3-1 Maxi,Lugano,Godin,Alvaro/Perez,Arevalo/Lodeiro,Forlan,Suarez/Cavani. Use Cavani’s skill as a no. 9, let Suarez cut in and play almost like the Robinho role from the last world cup, give Forlan a free-ish role in the center as the creator, and let Lodeiro be the link man between the two defensive midfields and the 3 forwards. It could also be interpreted as a 4-3-2-1 if Forlan pushes up, Suarez drifts in, and Lodeiro moves into the center of midfield, almost a Chelsea-esque system when Malouda and Anelka drift into the center. Tabarez’s problem is that Forlan and Suarez play similar roles (I still think Forlan is a better Trequartista than out-and-out striker) and Cavani doesn’t really belong on the wing.
Forlan is acting like playmaker here, but I would put Cavani in the middle. In the box. Suarez can play wide role good. But I think they need support from midfield also.
——————–Cavani
Suarez—————-Forlan
Something like this. With Forlan more in the centre of the pitch but off Cavani.
Nice write up as always. Interesting game to watch. No matter how much Chile I get, I’m always hungry for more.
Great game. I thought both teams looked very good. Cavani was right sided, but the front three tend to be very tight, although sometimes one of the forwards (mostly Cavani) would act as a winger on the opposite side of the other two in an attempt to spread out the defense. At Napoli they play something very similar. This game, Suarez showed he is very good at holding up the ball, going against two center backs, and acting as the furthest striker at points, so I wouldn’t change that. It was overall a good game, played by two cohesive sides (at least cohesive for international play standards).
[23h00] 6. Maelo Ruiz || 7. Alvaro Pereira || 8. Phineas & Ferb || 9. Roberto Hernández Montoya || 10. Betty Ford
I think Uruguay’s questions are: do we prefer to have cavani and suarez defend on the wings or have forlan (really) defend in midfield?
The coach answered by trying to ease on the old forlan.
second question: how does the rest of the team help in offense? 1# wingruns 2# offensive midfielder
answer 1 means 5 at the back, answer to means extra player in midfield
Of course they also have to cope with the opponent and adapt to him if necessary as they did yesterday.
But I agree with what has been said previously: maybe they should try to have a striker clearly upfront of forlan more often, because having suarez and cavani doing the same outside/inside late run at the same time is not really useful, one doing this run and the other giving different options upfront at the same time would nearly double forlan’s choice options.
But having one tresquarista, one central striker and one winger means having a weak side, some teams can exploit it greatly, others can’t so this offensively better tactical choice depends on the opponent.
For example if they face argentina with tevez and zanetti on argentina’s left side then it’s okay to have no winger on uruguay’s right side in my opinion.
It could be a key of this matchup with the midfield / forlan/messi relation for each team.
(If it happens i’ll be here to remind it to everybody don’t worry XD)
Tabarez changes formation to often. At the WC he used 5 diffrent formations and now at Copa America he started with a 4-3-3 vs Peru and used both a 3-4-3 and a 4-4-2 against Chile. I think they should be better off if they stick to one system and try to make it work instead of switching constantly.
Sanchez goal, was the the typical goal that came from Borghi’s teams:
Tipically a lob pass or quick between 2 defenses from the middle wide and kind of deep… One of the carrileros take the advanced position and either shoots (Watch this Gonzalo Fierro goal, pass from Mati Fernandez: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpFp38PPV2I&t=043 ) or take an advanced position to pass the ball to a scorer at the back of the defense (watch suazo’s goal on 2007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTb6imIaF7A ). It was Borghi’s signature all over it!
I think that Uruguay defense played very well. The switched method worked, but with Valdivia on the field, they failed to put an extra man in the midfield just for him..
Hope to have a good match between Chile and Peru today.