Eight points on Manchester City 1-1 Napoli
The starting line-ups
Walter Mazzarri’s tactics should be commended after a disciplined Napoli side deserved their point at Manchester City.
1. The battle when wing-backs come up against interiores (wide players that come into the middle of the pitch) is always interesting. In theory, the wing-backs should be very uncomfortable coming inside into the centre of the pitch – they’re meant to be covering the flanks, after all – but the situation is different in a 3-5-2 to with the system that Napoli play, which has two wide forwards.
In the 3-5-2, if the wing-back comes inside, he opens up space on the flank for the opposition full-back motoring forward unchecked. However, because Napoli’s front three made sure they were occupying Pablo Zabaleta and Aleksandr Kolarov, Cristian Maggio and Juan Zuniga could afford to come inside and track Samir Nasri and David Silva. Neither City player had a good game. In fact, Napoli’s goal came when Nasri moved into the centre of the pitch, and Maggio intercepted the ball from Gareth Barry’s backheel, started a break, and Edinson Cavani scored. Another factor is that one of Silva’s favoured moves – to go to the flank, then move back towards his own goal to drag the opposition full-back out (Bolton’s Paul Robinson couldn’t handle this a couple of weeks ago) doesn’t affect the opposition so much – a wing-back is relatively happy to move forward in advance of his midfield line.
2. Equally, the wing-backs have quite a promising situation when it comes to attacking – and again, the fact Maggio created the goal backs this up. The closest Napoli came to scoring apart from that, through Ezequiel Lavezzi, was when the other wing-back, Zuniga, broke forward untracked. Nasri and Silva often end up in central positions when moves come to an end, which means that they’re not in a great position to cover the flanks. In addition, they’re not naturally good defensive players – they often switch off for a couple of seconds before regaining their position. Napoli were broadly defensive-minded for a lot of the game and played on the counter, but in the return fixture we might see the two wing-backs attacking much more.
3. Napoli’s counter came from a mistake from Barry, who was used as the holding player. Widely expected to be a casualty of City’s squad improvement, Barry has started the season well – but this was an unforgivable mistake. The primary role of a holding player when playing at home against a counter-attacking side is basically to stop breaks (as well as passing the ball well, of course) – not only was Barry unable to stop a lot of Napoli’s counters, he actually caused the most crucial one. Nigel de Jong is a very important player for City.
4. Predictably, Napoli were vulnerable to Sergio Aguero’s movement, particularly when he moved wide. Napoli’s centre-backs didn’t mind coming out from the back to meet him (they had 3 v 2 and a spare man covering), but as Nasri and Silva moved inside, Aguero worked the channels. He created City’s best chance in the first half from there (when Yaya Toure hit the bar) and also caused two Napoli defenders to be booked when he moved to the left.
5. Napoli were completely happy to let City’s centre-backs have the ball, which pinpointed a slight weakness in City’s side – that their centre-backs aren’t very imaginative in possession. The lack of pressure (and the lack of incisiveness) meant that the most frequent passing combination in the game was Joleon Lescott to Vincent Kompany, 20 times.
6. City were too narrow for much of the game, and the introduction of Adam Johnson for Nasri late on gave them more options. Silva and Nasri moving inside was one problem, but also…
7. …Mancini chose the two full-backs with less technical quality in each position. Pablo Zabaleta is a terrific defender and a willing runner, but lacks the athleticism of Micah Richards. Aleksandr Kolarov has a great left foot (as showed for the free-kick) but Gael Clichy is a better passer. Even within a very positive performance overall, it was quite a defensive selection from Mancini in those positions – although understandable, given the threat of Napoli’s front three.
8. Another issue when discussing the City full-backs going forward is the slight lack of mobility of the centre-backs, who look uncomfortable in wide areas. Lescott, despite often playing left-back over the years, always looks reluctant to leave his centre-back position. Kompany, a fine tackler and brilliant in the box, can look problematic when forced to cover 20 yards or so, and his late error by the touchline demonstrated a touch of clumsiness. If the centre-backs don’t want to cover the wide positions, the full-backs will get forward less. Again, this is something de Jong can help with.
Eight points on Manchester City 1-1 Napoli
I think you got it in one with the lack of attacking from the fullback position from city. The emphasis was on city to take control here, and they did do that well, but they didnt get players forward enough. Zabaleta in particular didnt get forward enough, and micah richards would have been the better choice. Barry should have played deeper maybe to let this happen and make sure the two wide players didnt get alot of space in the middle (lavezzi effort). Toure also could have made some more funs forward, as there was a lack of forward runs from the napoli CM’s to track, and toure showed by hitting the bar he could be dangerous. Apart from that city played well, and really were just up against a back 5 with two DM’s, so were allways gonna have a hard time. Napoli were very defensive with 5 at the back even with the wingbacks getting forward, and they could have had more of an attacking threat if they took out one the CB’s and put in a attacking midfielder to link up the attack with the midfield. But at the end of the day good result for Napoli so cant criticize too much.
1. Zabaleta was almost always attacking.
2. Barry was almost always playing deeper in the middle.
3. Yaya was almost always playing farther up the field.
4. Hamsik was frequently the link between defenders and attackers in the middle. He is certainly not a wide player.
1. I dont think he did, he didnt produce enough overlapping runs past silva, and was a bit too wary of lavezzi. I think richards would could have made a big difference.
2. Barry played deep, but not deep enough i dont think, there was a lot of space in front of the defense for lavezzi and hamsik to play in, and barry should have been positioning himself there.
3. Yaya toure did have a good game, and maybe im being harsh on him, i just thought with no forward runs from gargano or inhler, then he could have got forward more is all, like making runs past dzeko into the penslty area.
4. Hamsik is more a inside forward like lavezzi, and has great playmaking skills, but he wasnt played centrally, he floated between wide role and central, and had a really good game, but i think another player in attacking midfield could have linked with and napoli could have actually had a good chance of winning the match, as there front three is really impressive.
1. He was in the Napoli end nearly the entire game. There’s no way you can call Zabaleta’s playing as not attacking.
2. I had no problem with Barry’s positioning. If you watch the Napoli goal, it was poor 1v1 defending by Barry that cost them, not his positioning. Further, if a forward drops into midfield, it’s the job of a defender to follow him in.
3. I suppose he could have done more of that. Not sure if that was their game plan. I had no problem with Yaya.
4. Hamsik rarely played wider than the penalty area. Can’t really call that wide play.
I wish UEFA still had their heat maps. Maybe they do, but I can’t find them.
“I wish UEFA still had their heat maps. Maybe they do, but I can’t find them.”
I’m pretty sure they do, didn’t ZM use one in the Porto-Shaktar analysis? I dunno, maybe I’m mistaken though, but I’m sure ZM will be more than happy to share with you where he can find them.
1 ha we obviously wont agree, i just think he could have done more.
2. But many other times, he left a lot of space between midfield and defense (would have been helped with a three man midfield more), and he should have dropped deeper, as there was more threat from the 3 three forwards dropping into that space centrally, than from higher up the pitch, so he should have been more wary of this.
3. I think we agree
4. But that what i meant as an inside forward, he wasnt in the cntre of the pitch, but usually played narrowly wide, which is a good dangerous position, so a player in attacking midfield could have linked with him and the other two forwards, and was chance napoli could have took, with man citys two striker not really working at all, i dont think having one less defender today would have made a big difference, it just seemed to me they allways had one too many players defending…
Actually Yaya was playing deeper than usual. On the couple of occasions he did venture further forward he was a real threat and it seems as though he’s got a good understanding with Silva.
“Napoli were very defensive with 5 at the back even with the wingbacks getting forward, and they could have had more of an attacking threat if they took out one the CB’s and put in a attacking midfielder to link up the attack with the midfield. But at the end of the day good result for Napoli so cant criticize too much.”
It’s easy to say do this, do that. But if they do remove a CB for an attacking mid, their wingbacks then have to play as full-backs, taking away their advanced width…. which allows Lavezzi and Hamsik to come inside without looking too narrow as a team.
Napoli have stuck to their 3-4-3/ 5-2-3 for 2 seasons now and it’s worked. They’re comfortable playing most shapes(and especially 4-4-2’s). Switching around systems sounds great on paper and retrospect, but it creates confusion and unfamiliarity within teams. Napoli have more cohesion with this.
A 1-1 draw away to a side with “bigger” names and talent is a good result. Especially for a first time ever in the Champions League.
I do see your point, but the wingbacks didnt get that forward anyway, they played like a back five rather than a back three. I just think if you remove one of the CB’s, Dzeko still could have been kept quiet, and aguero would have done similar stuff, go wide and look for space (which he did, but it didnt really create chances a lot of the time). The two defensive mids kept silva and nasri quiet too. So then a attacking central midfielder could have been played and this would have had three effects: 1. give more of an attacking threat and link the defense with attack more 2. occupy yaya more, so he didnt make runs forward, and put strain on the 2 man midfield 3. let the two defensive mids drop deeper to compensate and squeeze the space even more for nasri, silva and aguero.
Now im not saying start with this, but it was a viable option in the second half. And napoli could have actually won, i think they were a bit too scared of the man city reputation rather than the actual team.
Why throw in an extra attacking midfielder when their game plan was to catch city on the counter-attack? Just defeats the purpose. Napoli knew City were going to see a lot of the ball and it was just a matter of exploiting the space in between City’s midfield and defence which they did on a few occasions in the second half. City were exposed on the counter attack and if I remember correctly Napoli found themselves in 4 v 3 and 3 v 2 situations on the counter attack on a couple of occasions including the goal.
It will be very interesting when de Jong and Toure are fit. I haven’t seen much of Savic, does he provide more on the ball then City’s other center backs?
Good write-up. Overall I thought it was a satisfactory performance by City. Started very brightly in the first 20 minutes and had enough chances to go in one up. That being said I was slightly disappointed by two things:
1) The Napoli goal. When you play two pivot holding midfielders it is inexcusable that your defence should be caught 3v2. You rightly point out the importance of De Jong. I’m not sure Yaya is as good sitting deeper. Barry is a competent player, but he remains a relatively weak link
2) Mancini’s reluctance to bring on Adam Johnson – or at least order one of Nasri or Silva to really hug the touchline and stretch Napoli’s back three. I’m a huge fan of both Silva & Nasri, but I’d like to see a more direct runner in one of the “floating 3″ positions. I rate Johnson very highly…someone like him or Lavezzi (whom I thought had a great game before he went off) gets behind the defence with their pace.
All credit to Napoli. Their front three are very impressive. They were no 19/2 shots to win the match.
Toure in my opinion is the best player city currently have and he doesn’t play as a holding midfielder. He is more of a deep lying playmaker and most of the time is around the centre line. He also broke napoli’s counter attacks brilliantly at times which i wanted barry to do more of.
It will be a very interesting return leg, this was a debut on the big european stage for both teams and I expect the teams will only grow more and more accustomed to the pressure and tempo of these matches.
What matches will ZM be doing this weekend?
the most important point for me is that you cannot play nasri and silva on the wings..
They always cut inside and you get exposed down the flanks..
Unless you do that on purpose in a tactical plan
My two gripes with City were:
1. Zabaleta instead of Richards and Kolarov instead of Clichy. Against a back three, Richards ability to beat his man with a combination of power and pace would surely have been more effective than Zabaleta’s tendency to try and ‘pass his way’ into good positions. Things improved with Johnson on the pitch, trying to take on his man rather than pass through a congested area (If not for Dzeko’s poor choice in opting to shoot instead of teeing up Silva for an almost certain goal, Johnson may well have ended up with the credit for swinging the game in City’s favour). On the left side, Clichy has in the past few weeks shown himself to be more adept than Kolarov in pushing up both with and without the ball, and Aguero could have done with more support when he was out on the left, as Silva seems far more interested in bringing the ball back into the middle than getting around the back when holding the ball in wide positions.
2. The woeful indiscipline that had Barry as the last man before the back four well past halfway for the opening goal.
An unrelated question but one I am always curious about – do you know the score of the second game you watch when you watch it, or do you avoid it and watch it without knowing the result?
City s cb are not mobile and were lacking incisiveness on the ball
did t get the second point is that meant they should have played long balls over the top
Used to be a big fan of Yaya Toure but haven’t been very impressed with him recently, he looks very cumbersome on the ball and his passes are rushed. Is this due to playing in a midfield 2 instead of 3?
My personal opinion is that his fitness is not up to par. He has looked a little weighed down all season.
Good article.
Really I didn’t watch the match, but got a general idea how they played.
ManCity’s case with wide players are bizarre to me. ZM told that in a recent game that Nasri’s and Silva’s tendency to drift inside towards the center of the pitch caused concerns for their opposition teams, but here, it was the negative factor. I really thought that Mancini was a good tactician, but still, I expected him to play with a single striker as it would create a 3 vs 1 situation at the back.
I think if ManCity play De Jong, they should go for Clichy as he seems more attack minded. I don’t think that playing 2 defensive fullbacks + utterly defensive De Jong would be much of use in Europe.
“I expected him to play with a single striker as it would create a 3 vs 1 situation at the back”.
Napoli’s ability to play the same system, or atleast the same players whether a side plays 2 or 1 striker is what makes their system work. Their Outside CB’s are comfortable playing a defensive outside back role when up against a single striker.
At the same time, their wingbacks are usually paired in a manner that one is a defensive minded outside mid, and the other is an attack minded fullback. When a side plays 2 forwards, the leave it 3 vs 2 at the back. When a side plays 1 striker, the one wingback drops back into a natural fullback role and the other wingback can push higher into a more outside mid-role.
I’ve heard the praise for their fluid attacking three, which I completely agree with, but it’s also their flexibility on defense that makes it possible.
Nasri and Silva cannot play together as they are the same kind of player and cause a lot of bunching up as they both look for the same ball when the ball is advanced from the back.
@JerseyNo10 Respectfully, I don’t think that’s entirely true. They played together against Spurs and we won 5-1. The key is where they pick up the ball. Against Spurs Nasri predominantly stayed left. They’re both wonderful footballers and should, as such, with the right tactics be able to play with each other.
Personally, I’d have a go with Aguero up front and a flexible three behind of Johnson-Nasri-Silva (from left to right)
I think Nasri needs someone to be working with him wide on the left. Against spurs Nasri and Silva worked because Nasri had a good understanding with Clichy. Kolarov wasn’t in that space space that Clichy occupies but when Aguero went wide on the left City looked better.
Thanks ZM
what a breath of fresh air this game is(for me, since I haven’t watched Serie A for a long time)! This formation is nothing new but the way how the wing backs attacks is completely new for me. I’ve never seen wing backs move in center that much and not overlapping. Would love to see how to counter this strategy..
Just another thought..I was also thinking maybe Mancini of last year would have done better.
He would then have 3 disciplined central midfielders (2 holders + yaya) in transition to protect the defence. In attack, the sheer physical strength of Yaya may trouble the Italian defence (even Man Utd had problems with him). Man City will also be able to avoid having Nasri + Silva doing the same thing..
Nasri flatters to deceive so yesterday is no surprise.
And finally you found Clichy a talent, he can pass. Good, because he cant score and he cant defend (mentally weak as well) so its nice to have at least one positive quality.
Napoli has a much better front three than people give them credit so the defensive choices were appropriate.
i guess Im not the first to say that Nasri and Silva have the same skills sets and are a bit redundant together.
Yeah – Clichy is not a good attacking fb. He looks like one, but he is useless when he gets within 30 yards of the goal. He is a good defender most of the time, but is prone to making important errors.
Nasri is quite overrated, IMO. On his day, he is a great player but is not consistent. He had only about one consistently good spell at Arsenal – from August to December 2010. It is this spell that most are currently judging him by – but I don’t think that is the real player. Finally, Nasri can’t play in the ‘10′ role behind the striker – his best games always come playing at inside forward. He lacks the ability to pick out passes to play as a more central creative passer.
Peter Hill-wood should be laughing to the banks, so does AW.
Arsenal fans – the new bitters.
Thanks, my observations also, see above. You can’t have two trequartistas in your team.
your reasons for not being able to play two trequartistas in the same team is?
If Mancini insists on playing two defensive fullbacks with Silva and Nasri then he’s going to face a lack of width. But if he were really set on that, why not play Aguero and Tevez together up top? Both would go wide from the middle, leaving Silva and Nasri room to cut in from wide positions. It would seem to me like it would drag the defense out of it’s shape. I don’t know though, just throwing out an idea
Barry’s lack of mobility & intelligence means you can’t expect City fullbacks to attack. No deJong then means width has to come from real wings, so why keep Dzeko and Kun both on the pitch? Johnson instead, and Nasri or Silva can stay in the center, or Redman’s “Mancini of last year” would have made space in either the middle or the flanks. Also, Zabaleta is still a better holding midfielder than Barry, so Mancini’s problem isn’t just tactical.
I thought Tevez on for Dzeko at 80 mins could’ve started in a wider position (e.g. near or behind the opposing fullback) and cut in or play 2v1 with Adam Johnson, instead of replicating Dzeko’s role in the middle. Couple this hypothetical fluid movement with Aguero’s, and you could’ve created more chances for a 2-1 win. As you mentioned, Aguero’s movement, which was usually went from middle to outside, caused problems for Napoli.
Instead it looked like Napoli was content to let Adam Johnson have 1v1s on their left (MCY’s right) while they defended their goal area solidly. And also Tevez doing a suicidal 1v4 charging through the middle by himself wasn’t in all likelihood going to get a goal.
I think your diagram reflects Napoli’s shape while defending. I noticed Hamsik playing far more centrally while not defending.
Napoli’s front three are so incredibly fluid. I always enjoy watching their team. I feel like they will struggle if any of those three are injured or leaves the team.
I don’t see Silva and Nasri coming in as a problem at all. Silva came in more frequently because Zabaleta provided width. Nasri played along the line more because Kolarov didn’t come forward as often.
I also like seeing a front two of Aguero and Dzeko. Dzeko certainly looks like a new player with Aguero as his strike partner.
I hate it when people say you can’t play two or more number tens together when there are so many examples which prove that it can work succesfully. As mentioned the problem was that it needs attacking fullbacks, and better chemistry than Nasri and Silva had. The chemistry will develope in time (although I don’t think Nasri’s awareness or reading of his teammates will ever be that great) but Mancini needed to bring on Clichy earlier.
Great game overall anyway and a fair result, this is definitely the group to watch
But Clichy isn’t an effective attacking full back. You are mistaking style for substance. Look at his career offensive statistics. He’s a poor crosser and scored something like one goal in 6 years for Arsenal.
Nasri isn’t really a 10 either. More of a wide forward.
You must have watched a different game. Nasri spent all game floating in the middle trying to link play and Clichy was far more attacking than Kolorov, which is why he was brought on.
I’m an arsenal fan and actually fully agree with your opinion on both of them, just a shame its got nothing to do the system city used during the game, which was the point of my post.
Again this is a game where Napoli learned a lot about their opponent and also got some experience playing in Europe. However the thing that worries me is Napoli lack of impact players on their bench. Trust me Pandev is a not a big time player.
HI ZM Great analysis as always talking about city s centre backs
do u think they should have played long balls over the top or ambitious balls through or at least cover the space left by zabaleta cause his s movement upfront was promising for city
My recollection watching the game was that someone (Toure) urged Barry forward, he went, got the ball, then did that stupid backheel and … goal. I bet he’s really pissed that he got (and followed) that instruction. I’m sure his natural instinct, plus his orders, were to sit behind the ball for the whole match.
When they interview Barry about the new signings, I feel sorry for him. On one hand I guess he’s happy the club are investing for big things, but on the other, he must realise he’s destined for the bench.
I just realized, after watching this Napoli team for many years, the tactical importance of Napoli’s centre right defence. Campagnaro is very willing to step up and cover for Christian Maggio on the right flank. This allows the speedy and high endurace Maggio to spend a lot of time moving around – either well up the flank, where he becomes more advanced than Hamsik, or into the middle as we saw with Napoli’s goal. On the goal Maggio really shouldn’t have been in the middle, but because Campagnaro was ready to defend Nasri – with the other fullbacks, Cannavaro and Aronica marking Aguero and Dzeko – Maggio was in a good position to take advantage of Barry’s blunder.
Napoli doesn’t have this option on the left hand side. Aronica doesn’t offer the same coverage as Campagnaro on the right, and Dossena is definitely no Maggio. Zuniga is closer to Maggio in terms of overall fitness but he doesn’t have the same set of attacking skills.
Interestingly Mancini’s switched to a 5-2-3 himself a couple of times this year at the end of games when City’s leading. He brings on Savic in place of a forward and Richards and Clichy pushed almost as far as the halfway line.
As you pointed out though he picked defenders not wing backs today which is strange because with Nasri and Silva coming inwards he could have done some damage with some overlaps.
Not to mention on sheer quality of final ball, if City had gone 5-2-3/5-3-2 Im certain they’d have been able to outdo Napoli through the middle. To be fair though, he still could have nicked it with this system.
so how do Man City and Napoli adjust to Bayern and Villarreal’s formations and tactics?
Will City’s formation match or crumble under Bayern’s 4-2-3-1? Will Napoli now get the better of Villarreal? Against Bayern, they were disconnected and lacked a player who can provide the passes for Nilmar and Rossi while occupying one of bayern’s two defensive mids.
I think the result of this group will go down to whoever wins the next two games. If Bayern stay perfect in the first 3 games (a home game vs. City, winnable away game vs. Napoli), then its Man City and Napoli for 2nd spot.
Mazzari has every right to be exceedingly proud of each and every one of his players after that performance. I can not stress enough how thoroughly impressed I was with them and their system this week.
ZM, sometime would it be possible (probably during a football break) to do a series on the advantages one formation has over another. For example, maybe right about the advantages a 4-4-2 has over a 4-3-1-2 and vice versa. I know it’d take a lot of time since there are numerous formations and slight variances of formations but could you maybe just compare the 5 most common formations against each other? I’d love a series on this (like the tactical changes and best teams articles) and I’m sure many other readers would as well. Thanks you.
Excellently written article, UGG Boots if only all bloggers offered the same content as you, the internet would be a much better place. UGG SalePlease keep it up! Cheers.
How nice of you to say so
Why is Barry still around ?!
He’s not a proper DM like De Jong, nor a defensive regista (and trequartista) like Toure (at Barcelona everyone defends, attacks and passes) .