Uruguay 1-1 Argentina (AET): Uruguay progress after disciplined defending and superb penalties
The starting line-ups
The hosts are out of the Copa America after an engaging 1-1 draw.
Oscar Tabarez kept faith with the same narrow 4-4-1-1 system as against Mexico, although there was one change – Martin Cacares came in for Cristian Rodriguez, with Alvaro Pereira moving forward to the left of midfield.
Sergio Batista named an unchanged XI in broadly the same system as in Argentina’s final group game against Costa Rica.
The game started frantically and then slowed down but remained enjoyable – the two red cards opened up the game, but didn’t produce any more goals.
High tempo
Many Copa America games have been played at a slow pace, but from an Argentina v Uruguay match, you can always count on closing down, tackles and rapid passing early on. Argentina dominated the ball, and like against Mexico, Uruguay tried to press – although the mismatch in systems made it more difficult here. Diego Perez played much higher up than Egidio Arevalo, trying to get into the face of Angel Di Maria, Argentina’s most advanced central midfielder.
Tabarez could afford to play his narrow 4-4-1-1 because of the relative lack of attacking thrust from Argentina’s full-backs. Alvaro Pereira came inside and hassled Gago on the ball, happy to let Pablo Zabaleta receive a pass. Behind Pereira, Martin Caceres generally did a good job on his old Barcelona team-mate Lionel Messi, starting narrow and tracking him inside – it was a good decision by Tabarez to play a converted centre-back there, rather than Pereira. That said, Messi did find space for Gonzalo Higuain’s goal – a drifted left-footed cross after he cut in from the right, in almost identical fashion to a chance which produced a shocking miss from Higuain against Costa Rica.
Perez involved
There were two other factors in the first half – both involved free-kicks and dead ball situations. First, Argentina defended set-pieces abysmally, and Gabriel Milito and Nicolas Burdisso showed no understanding of this situation by constantly giving away cheap free-kicks. Perez had poked in the opener from one of these situations.
Second, Perez himself was charging around the pitch and conceding an amazing number of fouls. He could have been sent-off on at least two occasions before his red card, and Tabarez must have considered replacing him before the inevitable happened. Having been forced to bring on Andres Scotti for Mauricio Victorino at the back because of injury, he probably didn’t want to use up a further sub before half time.
11 v 10
A common complain on ZM is that managers who find their side with a numerical advantage don’t adjust their side. The tactics you think will beat eleven opponents will not necessarily be the tactics that will beat ten – there will be more space on the pitch somewhere, the opposition will be more vulnerable in a certain way, and less dangerous in another.
After Uruguay went down to ten
This was a particularly frustrating example, because the best way to play against ten men is with width – especially, as it happens, because Uruguay here were playing a 4-3-2 formation, and asking their three central midfielders to shift across the pitch constantly (rather than a 4-4-1, for example, which covers the pitch with two banks of four). Tabarez felt he could afford to play this way, again, because of the lack of attacking threat from Argentina’s full-backs.
Indeed, Tabarez didn’t feel the need to make any further substitutions until the second half of extra time, which both demonstrates that Uruguay’s players performed extremely well, but also that Batista and Argentina made life easy for them.
With Messi immediately coming inside into the centre of the pitch with the ball, and Aguero staying wider but hardly a natural winger, Argentina lacked width and played through the middle too much, playing into Uruguay’s hands. The amazing thing was, Argentina had a winger, Di Maria, playing in the centre, drifting inside from the left. They could have afforded to play Fernando Gago and Javier Mascherano as the double pivot (there was little threat from Uruguay coming forward from central midfield), and put Di Maria on either flank to stretch the play and to force Uruguay to work harder. Instead, Argentina remained slow and predictable on the ball, and were far too narrow.
Uruguay’s only hope of a goal was from a set-piece. Luis Suarez put in one of the best performances you’ll ever see at getting opponents booked – both Burdisso and Milito were carded within three second half minutes, and later Mascherano got a second yellow for another foul on Suarez. Forlan’s delivery was often disappointing.
Batista waited until 72 minutes for the first change – Javier Pastore on for Di Maria. Pastore played a couple of great one-twos with Messi, but it’s arguable that he’s not the man to break down a packed defence sitting deep – he’s more dangerous on the counter. Ezequiel Lavezzi, despite his poor form in this tournament, would have been an interesting option, and the introduction of Carlos Tevez for Aguero late on didn’t really make any sense – Tevez continues to show no understanding of the football Argentina are trying to play – his positioning and movement from the wide-left position is very poor.
10 v 10
Mascherano’s red card opened the game up further, and Argentina looked nervous until Lucas Biglia came on as a true holding player – a Gago-Pastore duo was not very secure, and Forlan found space until the change was made. Uruguay were tired by this stage, although with their 4-3-2 formation looking more secure and solid than Argentina’s 4-2-3ish shape, Tabarez was the man who got things right in the extra time period – although they needed an astonishing Fernando Muslera double save to stay in it.
Muslera was also the hero in the shoot-out – and it was almost inevitable that Tevez would be the villain.
Conclusion
Argentina played for 48 minutes with an extra man, and despite the best attacking squad in the world, Batista’s side didn’t score. In fact, they didn’t even look like scoring, and even as the game was in progress, it seemed that Argentina would live to regret not taking advantage in this period.
Four Copa games played on home soil, and Argentina’s only victory was against a Costa Rican U23 side.
Tabarez should be commended for his tactics, however – the starting formation was correct, the way he adapted to going down to ten was correct, and his use of substitutions was brave but successful.
Correction: Lavezzi was actually suspended, so wasn’t an option (thanks Aditya Challa below)
Uruguay 1-1 Argentina (AET): Uruguay progress after disciplined defending and superb penalties
Great wrap of the game ZM! Was a brilliant battle between to rich footballing nations. However I feel Argentina have been a complete disappointment in this tournament and no doubt Batista will be sacked. I’m sure Argentines will be happy with this because the man is a joke! Playing Di Maria in the centre, what was he thinking? Should of had Messi directly in behind Higuain with a free roaming role and Di Maria on the wing. Aguero saw none of the ball and therefore meant Argentina were going nowhere because he has been their major goal threat all Copa. Tevez is a joke, don’t know why Batista put him on and Pastore was used incorrectly all tournament, which is disappointing because he is a star .
Congratulations to Uruguay but, they have done enough in every match and they look more ominous every match they play. Suarez is an absolute champion, no other striker in the world has as much fight and passion as him he is maturing into a real world class player. He will score soon no doubt.
“However I feel Argentina have been a complete disappointment in this tournament and no doubt Batista will be sacked.” I’d rather say “Batista should be sacked.” Our shameful coach will be there at least until we loose against lets say… Bolivia, Perú and Paraguay during the easiest WC Qualifiers ever.
But even there Batista might still be able keep his position: four and a half South Americans out of nine will go to the WC in a Qualifier without Brazil. So we could be 5th after Uruguay, Paraguay, Colombia and Venezuela and still be able to go to Brazil 2014. So, my guess is: we have Batista for at least a year and a half.
ZM, I may have completely missed the section as I’m reading this rather early in the morning, but I don’t think I see a section on Tabarez’s substitutions other than the early injury of Victorino and then the positional switch after going down to 10 men. Are those the “brave but successful” substitutions you talk about in the last sentence?
That’s what I meant (maybe poorly worded) – he didn’t use a tactical sub despite being one man down for 50 mins!
He didn’t say the subsitutions themselves were brave. The use of substitutes, i.e. not bringing on fresh legs until the last 10 minutes of extra time, was brave.
Ah hah, that explains it. Thanks!
Just cause it’s simple doesn’t mean it’s not super helfupl.
I really nedeed to find this info, thank God!
Great analysis as always!
You’ve got to feel for those Argentine players, and in particular Messi who will be lambasted by the Argentine press for not picking up the ball, dribbling past everyone and scoring like Maradona against England. The poor lad will be haunted for life by those comparisons.
As you mentioned, Batista’s refusal to play Di Maria on the wing and his inept substitutions were part of what cost Argentina the game, and I imagine that he will not be given any other opportunitites to muck up an international tournament- he will see the sack within a week.
It must be absolue bedlum in Argentina right now, first River go down, and then the national team get knocked out at the quarter finals of the Copa America. Wouldn’t want to be an Argentine footballer right now…
TBH, looking at the main Argentinian newspapers, Messi is not being criticized, you can hardly say he played poorly this past two games. Olé gave him a 7/10, team highest alongside Gonzalo Higuaín. The only other Argentinian player with a good review was the keeper, Sergio Romero (6/10).
They are complaining about the constant improvisation and weird tactical choices of Batista, the lack of quality central defenders, and the complete hopelessness of the whole defense on set pieces.
About River, i think the biggest pressure will be on the directors, past and present.
Honestly, when’s the last time Argentina have played well in a tournament? They remind me a great deal of England, down to the ossified back line that needs new blood and the weird insistence of Cambiasso (their Lampard) and other dinosaurs in the squad. As great as Messi is (and he is the best player in the world, the best the world has seen in a while) you need to build from the back to win, even in South America. Other teams have risen to the top in South America because they are committed to winning matches, not political games (Argentina), or philosophical purity (Brasil- though putting Maicon back on the field helps with the winning bit).
That doesn’t necessarily mean playing defensively, but it does mean having defenders who are willing to provide width and move up the pitch. No one in Argentina’s defensive line looked a threat, in contrast with Uruguay’s defense who consistently had the best chances on goal (Lugano was very, very good). I was impressed with how they played Messi- they tracked him very high up the pitch, but there was space for a wing back (Alves, for instance) to exploit once the winger or defender committed to Messi. If you can’t count on width in the wing backs and want to build up play, you kind of have to entrust it to wingers and go the way of Chile, or drop a man to the middle of your own half to pick up the ball from a distributing center back (Venezuela? certainly Uruguay).
Honestly, Argentina need to realize that there’s a lot more parity in South America than there used to be and they can’t count of superior quality anymore. If they don’t, even WC qualifying is in danger.
You nailed it.
Great summary, as usual. I was also disappointed with performance of Batista’s side.
However, I’m surprise to see that you present them as a 4-3-3, it seemed to me that Argentina’s formation looked more like a 4-2-2-2, simalarly to their previous game against Costa Rica. Messi took very often central positions (before receiving the ball) and Di Maria drifted to the left…
Or maybe should we talk about an asymmetric diamond midfield (Dunga’s Brazil way)..?
Messi started right and cut left for the most part, drawing a defender into him. He was man marked very tightly- I think Tabarez told his team that one would man mark Messi very high up the pitch and everyone else would go zonal with a man dropping into the empty zone. That leaves space, but Argentina never really threatened it- one interesting thing is that Messi often found himself double teamed in the high third, which is a mistake on the part of the defensive players because one of them isn’t guarding the flank, and Messi’s really good at switching on the wrong foot, in this case his right. See the sort of odd Lugano foul on Messi in Argentina’s half in the extra time.
Uruguay backed way off Messi when he got the ball on the left, when he got it on the left (I saw remember it twice, but it was probably more than that), and he managed to create some opportunities off the touchline because of that, though Muslera did his job.
First of all, so impressed with Uruguay, they were the better TEAM and looked like they were playing for there manager, which is all ways a sign of a great team. I beleive they will go on to win this, maybe playing chile in the final (if thats possible?). This uruguay seem very suited to beating the top teams, tho they do seem to struggle when asked to break down a “smaller” team.
Right moving on to Argentina, I have said this throughout this tournament, the coach has to go! He is not brave enough with his decisions and doesnt seem to have much tactical sense. Seems to go with the crowd for most decisions and plays player in there safe positions, When most successful sides have some sort of surprise e.g. Uruguay playing forlan deeper than usual.
I think most would agree the problem was the defence, the two cb’s were too slow and made numerous mistakes which was all ways gonna cost argentina a goal. And the full backs had no attacking capibilites which were sorely needed when uruguay went down to ten men, To try and overload the attack.
I actually think the midfield and attack was okay and balanced, and that Uruguay actually just did a really good job defending, But the lack of width when perez was sent off was down to the full backs, as Zabaleta had so much space but was never gonna cause any damage.
Just to add, i agree tevez was a poor player to bring onto the left of attack, why not play di maria as attacking left back and play tevez/aguero more inside where they could do damage.
The reason is because when Uruguay plays against better teams they nullify the gap in talent with very cynical play. They are currently the masters at this art. They’re very good at leveling the playing field but their overall football is not really that great so they struggle to actually do much against weaker teams.
Thats a bit unfair on Uruguay, they have a very talented team. They can be a bit conservative, especially with there two deep CM’s, who dont get forward. But they have talented attacking players, and regularly field cavani, forlan and suarez.
I rate Uruguay- I think they and Germany could have an out and out over third in the world. On what planet was this a great upset? Uruguay routinely play well in tournaments- this is what, their sixth straight copa america semifinal?
pshaw. keep the sour grapes to yourself. Uruguay have been consistently on point and they have great players.
Everyone talks about Argentina’s defense but they only gave up 2 goals in 4 matches. They have the best attacking squad in the world and couldn’t score more than 1 against 10 man Uruguay. Seems the problem is the offense.
The two poor CB’s restricted how attacking the team could be though, with mascherano and gago having to restrict their forward movement. And the poor fullbacks meant they couldn’t provide the overlap for the forwards that were playing out wide, this meant they couldnt cut inside as easily, a key part of argentina’s attack. This espicially effected aguero, not used to a wide role, and he especially needed help from the left back.
But to be fair to argentina, the three games they struggled have against teams that have sat back and defended the whole game and actually been good at defending.
I’m starting to agree with this sentence more and more as the days pass by. Everybody says Argentina’s failures come from their weak defence. And despite I agree they sometimes look disorganised and they are not superstars individually, they still manage not to lose goals.
I’d rather search for the problem in the offence. Having Messi, Higuain, Aguero, Di Maria, Pastore, etc. and hardly ever scoring means something is not correct there. I’d give the following reasons for that: (a) they don’t play 100 percent. It’s not the club, (b) they are too big stars to cooperate with each other correctly (infamous problem of having too much wealth at once), (c) because of a general tactical chaos in the squad, Batista is relying too much on the indiviudal performances, mainly Messi. If not for Muslera, they could still get away with it. In this context, I don’t mean his double save, but the later performance, after which Messi had to lie down, face to the ground, trying to understand how he could have not scored a goal after a pass from Tevez.
Trying to say that their offence doesn’t work because of their defence, like Kane Prior (below) is trying to suggest is a cheap hiding the fact that Argentina’s offence is simply OVERRATED. Or at least when taken as a group (because, obviously, individually they are superb).
Dont get me wrong, the attack hasnt scored enough goals and there is a lack of cohesiveness, but that would come with time and most international teams lack this. Most of these player dont play with the same club team which would help (look at spain and germany to an extent).
But i do think the midfield would have pushed up more and made the team more compact if there wasnt a fear that the CB’s would lose any battles with the strikers. And the CB’s cant push up too much as they are both very slow, so would lose out to pace (suarez). This leaves a big space between midfield and attack and that will all ways restict the attack.
I have to say I was dissapointed with di maria, who didnt push up enough for me and make runs out wide left.
A reason for the lack of goals conceded is both pure luck coupled with good goalkeeping in the first match especially. AND more importantly that every team argentina have faced has been very defensive and havnt really had a go at argentina, even uruguay didnt.
So i would argue the attack has been poor because of the defence… The poor choice of CB’s mean the midfield has to be more defensive. The quality in attack has meant the coach has tried to balance the team by relying on only a few attackers to score goals. Saying this i dont agree and believe they should have just played attacking football (midfield included) and try to outscore the opponent.
Why not? If the opposition in not that eager to go forward, you (Batista) should not look that much at your back, but instead focus more on the way you attack, on the number of players you deploy for offensive reasons. The exception would be Uruguay, because they are deadly on the counter-attack, and generally they are a very good team. On a sidenote, Argentina had 2 true midfielders yesterday. Di Maria was Unidentified Running Object not really knowing what is his task
.
I agree that unlocking solid defences is not that easy. I also understand that Batista didn’t want to make the same mistake as Maradona did (leaving all the defensive tasks in midfield on Mascherano). Perhaps you are right to some extent. But I would still put the main pressure on the lack of cohesion in attack. Lack of time, players coming from different clubs – these are just excuses. Look at Uruguay – their defence is solid, their attacking plan is clear and effective. Everything composed well, everything trained and executed. And they are also coming from different clubs and had as much time as Argentina.
Heck yeah bay-bee keep them cnoimg!
What a neat aitcrle. I had no inkling.
Argentina have a great full back with attacking capability in Zavier Zanetti, it’s Zabaleta who doesn’t have much threat in him. Zanetti did not go forward much because Di Maria and Aguero were pretty much active on that side and no one was on the right side which means Zabaleta who is the weaker one had most chances with the ball which he didn’t use effectively, duh!
As you kind of point out, when Uruguay went down to 10, it would have been the time to play Messi in a false enganche role with Aguero coming from the right and Di Maria from the left stretching the field. Caceres then would have been wrong footed, Higuain the work force that he is would have opened up space for both attackers and if Zabaleta once in a while would have joined in the attack, it could have been a constant 5 vs 5 situation and when you are even in numbers and have Messi in your side, in 8 out of 10 cases you should win.
But etc. and so on..
Would be a shame to see yet another talented generation of Argentinian players underachieve.
In some ways, I am glad Argentina is out. Hope this will pack Argentina and hopefully even Grondona, so that somebody wise will take charge of Argentina.
It was a real shocker that Uruguay played better with 10 players and Argentina didnt know at all how to make the best out of this advantage. Batista’s substitutions and tactical stupidities, lost them their match, together with the two big fools in the defence, Milito and Burdisso. I dont think any other prominent football team will have such a stupid defence who will give free kicks away so cheaply and didnt know how to defend the set pieces. The susbtitution of Tevez and using him in a more central role, even behind Messi was a real disaster. When somebody has the best player in the world, but keep him at the right side mostly and try to push the ball mostly through the left side, it is quite clear, there is something wrong.
Without a good coach, Argentina will remain the biggest underacievers in the history of football and until Messi retires, he will be blamed for it. What a pity.
I’d say Netherlands have that title.
I’d say they had it up until 2000s, when Argentina took it from them.
I think this current Holland Squad is kind of overachieving. They created more chances against Spain than anybody else did, and their road to the WC finals was very, very tough. That Brasil team was good.
The current Netherlands team is the best they had in the last two decades. I would rate them second best in the world right now. And I am from Germany
.
For Argentina: They seem not to be able to perform as a team. Do not know if ego, mentality, fitness or tactics are the problem but they seem to have big problems as a group.
There’s a terrific aoumnt of knowledge in this article!
Great analysis ZM. As an Argentinian myself, I found it very obvious from the beginning of the Copa América that we would not win it.
Batista is a total inept and can’t get a single decision right, everybody knows that Tévez can’t play alongside Messi at all but still insisted in playing them together. As you also pointed out, the team played far too narrow after having numerical advantage, to the point where you couldn’t tell Uruguay was down to ten men. The advantage wasn’t reflected on the actual gameplay.
And the defence is the worst in almost 30 years: both centre backs are a joke, and the full backs neither defend well nor attack when in possession.
All I hope is that Batista gets sacked and we will start a good campaign for the WC qualifiers. Grondona has to go too, but he won’t go as usual.
Congratulations to Uruguay and Óscar Tabárez, he is an excellent manager.
Come on Zanetti was brilliant at defending last night.
But, the center backs were not brilliant. Milito lacked discipline when tackling and ZM mentions above the numerous resulting attacking free kicks for URU, down one man. This COPA, Burdisso had turnovers in front of his goal that were simply unforgivable. This is best CB pair that Argentina can start and that is sad. Let’s not expect trophies for another generation of Argentine footballers because they are not able to defend at a championship level.
(Another better than expected performance by Gago, who surprised me this tourney.)
Actually the best CB pair Argentina can start is Samuel-Garay.
they need to go young for the WC quals. Have them seasoned as a unit by the time the next World Cup rolls around. I’m sure they’re out there, but I don’t really know who Argentina’s bright young stars in defense are.
I would ease in the young players, not jam them together from the start. Use the best squad available, get in a strong position, then start working in the youngsters. Start with Samuel-Garay, then ease Ezequiel Munoz into the lineup when he’s ready.
They also have Otamendi and Galeano as good young defenders.
Alternatively, if there’s a good pair that plays together at club level, that should be used ahead of the more talented defenders. Argentina lacked understanding in all areas.
For the love of God, keep wrtiing these articles.
God, I feel like I sohlud be takin notes! Great work
As always a great analysis. But to those who are thinking (rightly) Batista is going to get sacked; He said he will continue with the ‘project’, the defence didn’t played bad. And Grondona never sacks a coach. Being an Argentina fan, I am totally hopeless.
but there’s always Maradona. Snicker. Go for Bielsa! His 3-4-3 capitalizes on Argentina’s strengths and reduces the need for attacking fullbacks.
That’s way more celevr than I was expecting. Thanks!
I see, I suoppse that would have to be the case.
Surely Uruguay now have to be considered the best side in South America. Even if they dont end up winning this tournament, their performances coupled with last year’s WC semi final place suggests this. They are so much more coherent and tactically astute than Brazil and Argentina, and for such a small country have produced an incredible amount of genuinely top class players.
Great Analysis. Just wanted to point out that Lavezzi was not available for this match in reference to this comment – “Ezequiel Lavezzi, despite his poor form in this tournament, would have been an interesting option”
Oops – thanks for that. Will correct.
We can talk about formations all we want, and who to play where. However, when you are going against a ten men team and are playing four fantastic players up front, and you still can’t score, there’s one main thing to blame: the lack of cohesive attacking play. Argentina have immense attacking talent, but it doesn’t mean too much when there seems to be a lack of understanding in dangerous movements and combination play. In seriousness, Argentina needs to get a manager who understands the importance of practicing patterns of play (which looks like they did very little of, although I don’t know). Especially in a game where the opposing team is forced to sit back and play real tight and narrow, Argentina should have been more prepared to break it down. As seen in the game against Bolivia, their attack did not look convincing, even if they have some of the best players in the world up front right now.
Uruguay had a very good understanding of how Argentina’s flow worked in the attacking half, and did a very good job disrupting it. You’re right though- Argentina’s play in the middle third was too similar and didn’t adapt to how Uruguay was choosing to mark Messi (and the play almost never went through someone else)
That’s a mold-braeekr. Great thinking!
GvANQ5 odvbswxbkadj
A tactical classic I should say. But Uruguay seem to have one big problem – lack of a player played in a natural centre forward position. Diego Forlan played too deep – not sure if he is played as a centre forward at all. With Suarez marked out and lack of a player played as a natural centre forward, they will have problems against more disciplined teams. Compare that to Argentina who had Gonzalo Higuain in a natural centre forward role.He was able to “get Argentina out of jail”, especially when they weren’t playing well.
A good game and the better team won, on penalties though.
Easy solution. Drop Forlan (he really offers nothing but set pieces these days), and play Suarez behind Cavani, the best target man in Europe last season.
Drop Forlan? Hmm, I would not do that, Forlan is good in link up, in my opinion, better than Suarez in that area.
Physically he also can do things nobody else can do, like that cross on the volley, and he does it a couple times a game.
A rolnlig stone is worth two in the bush, thanks to this article.
Jesus, did you watch the game? Forlan did a fantastic work yesterday. He is perfect for receiving the ball in deep (as for him) positions during a counter-attack and then pass it to the wing.
Yes I did watch the game. I’m not criticizing Forlan’s performance. I’m just saying that Uruguay would have a problem without putting someone in a natural centre forward role and I doubted Forlan was playing in that role.
Um, didn’t the WC semi-finalists just eliminate Argentina. — Keep those boys on the pitch.
I agree abt Cavani. Was he on the bench yesterday(I missed the opening 10 seconds)? Uruguay had problems penetrating Argentina’s final third , except through set pieces. Pretty risky for Tabarez to gamble on penalties.
cavani may indeed have played well in serie a last season, but was awful in this year’s copa matches. i dont recall him playimg particularly well in the 2010 world cup, either.
Great analysis as usual, not a worry I retweeted many of your comments last night during the match.
It’s impressive how good Tabárez displays his tactics almost every game. He was very comfortable in not losing the midfield battle while giving space in wide areas. Uruguay never looked like losing the game yesterday.
I feel bad for Messi, who has to do almost all the action by himself in a so uncoherent side, not to mention Argentinian people and press usually putting everything on his back.
Tevez was infuriating last night.
As you stated, Argentina had a dire lack of width, and width wold have surely broken Uruguay down. However, the full-backs cannot be blamed. Zabaletta was constantly charging down, and Zanetti wanted to, but the team wasn’t working with him.
Zanetti was getting involved in his typical way, going up, passing the ball off, then keeping a good position to give his teammates options. This normally created half-chances. However, since Tevez’s introduction, every time Zanetti charged up the field, Tevez would look at him then turn the other wat and try to dribble through the middle. Eventually, Zanetti gave up on trying to attack. The one time Tevez did pass to Zanetti, I believe Higuain hit the post from the resulting chance.
I was puzzled,
Did you, ZM, or all the readers here, see the massively intense pressing that Uruguay employ to the Argentina players (even after Uruguay played with ten men)? So how did Uruguay players do that for 120 minutes? It takes great deal of stamina to press all over the pitch like that, let alone with ten men.
What they did was inexplicable. For example, if you play Football Manager 2011 and you implement the pressing strategy of “press more”, your players would be more likely to get exhausted before your opponents do (except if your team comprises of the likes of Park Ji-Sung who has stamina and work rate attribute of 20). Eventually, this would cause your team, expectedly, to concede late goals in the last 30 minutes. Hence when the match went to extra time I was thinking that this crazy pressing of Uruguay would backfire them late in the match, but, impressively, it never happened.
Uruguay did this for the whole 120 minutes. Oh I haven’t even mentioned the great number of hard plays that they did throughout the match; it should (in reality) also drained their stamina. But they coped with it well. Did they use some kind of doping or what?
From what I saw, (granted I had to leave the game right before the 90 minute mark), Uruguay did press impressively, but they weren’t intent on pressing up high, especially after going down to ten men. They more or less invited Argentina to enter their half, and then pressed them in there. Also, as ZM notes, Argentina lacked width, which means the Uruguayan midfielders had less ground to cover when they were defending. It would probably be the case that the Uruguayan players are pretty fit, but I think the combination of those things accounted for the impressive Uruguayan display in pressuring.
Hilarious.
Cafe Veloz
JAJAJAJAJA
JAJAJAJAJA
Also one thing I noticed was Argentina lacked steel in midfield. Against Bolivia when Bolivia started to up the physical intensity of the game and press higher up the pitch, the Argentina midfield couldn’t cope with the pressing and had problems building up play. Against Uruguay when Uruguay played the physical game, Argentina couldn’t cope. And that is despite having Javier Mascherano in midfield.
The funny thing was that Higuain’s goal came when Messi was very wide on the right hand side (and then drifted inside on the ball) to cross for Gonzalo’s header.
I also thought he was most dangerous when receiving the ball out wide and then cutting inside – in contrast to the situations when he picked the ball in the centre and then produced little or even lost the ball.
Gabby Milito is a liability at the highest level – and it showed in this game. How many times did Luis Suarez force him into a reckless ninja kick?
Overall, this Argentine side reminded me of the Brazil disaster from WC 2006 when Parreira attempted a 4-2-4 (probably more correctly a 4-2-2-2) that basically forced two midfielders to link up 4 defenders with 4 forwards. So imbalanced, so disastrous.
Argentina, after being spoiled by Pablito Aimar-Veron-Riquelme, now lacks a true enganche to provide necessary balance. Messi is neither a trequartista no a regista – he’s a dazzling winger. He needs more creativity than Gago or Masch to set him up.
The way Uruguay played last night, any enganche would have been swamped by Perez and Arevalo. What was needed last night was width
Hey, kliler job on that one you guys!
And I thought I was the sesnible one. Thanks for setting me straight.
They have enganches but Batista didn’t want to play them.
ZM, you are binding the decision to go 4-3-2 by Tabarez with the lack of width in Argentina’s play, and that he could aford that. I’d rather say it was because you just can’t tell Forlan nor Suarez to play in midfield, and it would be wrong to withdraw either of them.
i think the problem is the midfield of argentina. Using Messi as the playmaker (when his best position is attack) is not utilising his full potential. Lets face it, since Riquelme left the national team, Argentina have gone downhill. Same with Brazil in 2006WC, lack of quality midfielders. Until both nations start to produce central midfielders who can pick the pass as well as tackle, neither team will win anything. I really wanted this Argentina team to fulfill its potential, for Messi’s sake, so disappointing..
im english and i hate 4-4-2 but with peckerman argentina had one bad ass 4-4-2 and in messi dimaria pastore zabaletta kun and higuain WIDTH would destroy teams iv said it a 1000 times line up 4-4-2 and interchange
zab-otem-gary-rojo-
—–masch-gago—-
—messi————dimaria–
————-kun————–
————hig—————–
or messi as SS free role in a 4-4-1-1 and pastore and dimaria on the wings 4-4-2 seems the answer…
“one bad ass (thing)” is that phrase adopted from american English? Or, did we Americans get it from you? I love that phrase, and seeing related to a 442 is just the best.
I would definitely go for this.
Óscar Tabárez should be on every national newspaper for his brilliant management against Argentina.
That game is a film study on “How to Defend as a Team” using organization, discipline and resilience. It’s really amazing to me how such team players like Arévalo Ríos have not made the jump to bigger teams.
Tabárez followed up a sensational World Cup with another classic game.
Argentinian and South American media in general kept talking about Argentina’s problems in attack, about their star forwards not combining, about Messi not playing barca level, and about playing like barca.
It’s almost laughble since Argentina’s attack, and Messi aren’t nearly helf the problem as their weak defensive line/system. Every set piece Uruguay took looked goal-threatening, not to mention how Forlan and Suarez all alone made a party out of their back four.
Don’t talk about having the best squad name by name, or playing barca, when your country has not produced a decent centerback, or fullback since Roberto Ayala, and Javier Zanetti. To play barce you kinda need guys called Puyol, Pique, and Alvez, not only messi, and a talented bunch of forwards.
Honestly, this Argentina team made me realize that players who play together at club level (and are at least reasonably good) should be played ahead of any individual superstars. Understanding is key.
For example, though Zanetti is Argentina’s best full-back, he and Cambiasso are midfielders at club level, and have the telepathic understanding Argentina’s midfield was lacking. Burdisso and G. Milito have little experience with one another, but Burdisso and Samuel played together for a few years, while Milito and Garay at least play(ed) in the same league so would be slightly more familliar with one another.
Messi and Aguero do have an understanding, while Higuain and Di Maria play together at club level (as do D. Milito and Alvarez now, so there’s an option). Tevez looked completely out of touch with the team, that should come into consideration for future team building.
exactly right, such a ignorant comment the coach made about playing like barca, when they literally only have the forwards for it (not even the midfield, let alone the defence).
They don’t even have the forwards for it, none of Tevez, Aguero, Lavezzi, Higuain etc press the ball the way Villa and Pedro do. The fact they have Messi is the only reason this comparison isn’t totally ridiculous.
One person recommended this 4-4-2ish formation:
*goalie*
*defence*
Mascherano (DM)
Banega (CM) Cambiasso (Box to Box)
Pastore (AM number 10 role)
Tevez (Striker playing off the right) Messi (False 9)
With an attacking LB. I don’t know how good it would be, but the person who recommended it (Ramzi) has really good tactical insight, so what do you guys think?
I think Argentina would struggle without a proper focal point in the attack, look how much better they played with Higuain leading the line. Maybe Higuain instead of Tevez?
Just to keep up my spamming (though I’m apparently sharing a nickname with someone else in this comment section), I think Argentina would have done better with this lineup:
—————Romero————–
Zabaleta-Mascherano-Milito-Di Maria
———Cambiasso-Zanetti———
————–Pastore————–
–Messi——–Milito——Aguero–
In one of my comments above, I gave my reasons for Zanetti-Cambiasso. They have a perfect understanding, they can control possession very well, and neither is foreign to attacking from deep. Zanetti is on the left side to cover for Di Maria’s attacking runs.
I had a struggle to not put Messi as an attacking midfielder, given how many incredible chances he can create. However, he and Pastore could switch positions often. D. Milito is better off the ball than Higuain, and his linkup is more effective.
Mascherano and G. Milito play together at club level, so they are at least familliar with one another. Mascherano offers pace, which neither Burdisso nor Milito have. Di Maria would have won Argentina the game had he been a left-back, Argentina needed width and the attacking runs Zanetti did make were constantly ignored.
Of course, hindsight is 20/20
WAYYYY TOO UNABALANCED!
How? Cambiasso-Zanetti in midfield mean Argentina win that battle, and Zanetti’s presence there allows him to cover for Di Maria. It’s totally fine as long as it’s played correctly.
Hows it unbalanced,because Di Marias left back.I said from the start that mascherano should be CB and Cambiasso DM.
Props to Uruguay for the consistent defense, but this is more a loss of Argentina than anything else. As many have said, Argentina is lacking width and the full backs are not providing it. Unless Argentina begins to open up the pitch, it will always have hard times with organized defenses, since no team attacks Argentina (they generally wait and counterattack).
Argentina’s central defenders clearly did not have their best match but still, how many goal opportunities did the Uruguayan attack have other than set pieces? Argentina’s main problem is the lack of organized offense, not defense.
easily three or four
Batista got his tactics all wrong, he wanted to emulated Barca but drafted a bunch of goalscorers ala Ibrahimovic instead of a bunch of playmaking midfielders ala Iniesta/Xavi. The good news is Argentina used to be, and I still believe is, full of little unpredictable, playmaking geniuses. For this kind of player, AFA needs to look no further than Pastore who made Argentina come alive after getting on the pitch. To be fair, Pastore is not the best example of the Barca mode playmaker I’m referring to; more precisely I’m referring to De’ Alessandro, Cesar Delgado, Romanioli of the recent past. Anyways as a Argentina fan, I’m not too down, tactical errors can be fixed and talent is not an issue with our team eventually someone will get the tactics right, hopefully. Above all what I’m most frustrated with Argentine NT is why over-emphasize tactics in the European fashion when the essence of Argentine football – passion, creativity, collectivity – , when in full bloom, can contend in any competitive arena?
angeleri-garay-otemendi-zabaltta————–mascharano——–
—banega—————pastore-
————–messi————-
———-hig———-dimar–
or kun for dimaria above is maradonas 4-1-2-1-2 done correctly and can change into 433
Just cause it’s simple doesn’t mean it’s not super helfpul.