No longer underdogs, Ghana need to become a more complete attacking force
Ghana line-up in friendly v Nigeria
When you’re an unfancied side, playing reactive football is natural.
It’s how successful underdogs at international level have set out over the past decade, with Greece in 2004 the obvious example. In aesthetic terms they were mundane, but their strategy of defending solidly and breaking quickly was clearly extremely useful. Their key goals came from set-pieces, but they did have an emphasis upon direct football in open play. Venezuela and Paraguay both overachieved at this summer’s Copa America with a not dissimilar style of play, and for various reasons, it makes sense for the underdogs to play this way.
Ghana impressed with a similarly counter-attacking style of play at last year’s Africa Cup of Nations, reaching the final by sitting deep, then launching the ball forward for Asamoah Gyan on the break. Their showing at the World Cup was also extremely impressive – they were placed in probably the toughest group of the tournament, but progressed to the quarter-final – and it would have been further were it not for Luis Suarez’s controversial late handball. No African team has ever got further in the World Cup, and Milovan Rajevac was arguably the best tactician in the tournament.
Rajevac has gone, and Ghana’s style of football needs to change. They are no longer unfancied outsiders after strong showings at two consecutive tournaments, plus the natural boost in reputation that comes with having successful players at club level like Kevin-Prince Boateng, Andre Ayew and Sulley Muntari. They are now a true international force.
Contenders
There’s a change in mentality that comes with the progression from underdogs to an established force, but also a tactical change too, particularly if you’re a counter-attacking side. Ghana are experiencing this problem now – whilst they’ve easily qualified from their weak African Cup of Nations group, they’ve scored just twice in their past five games against (with respect to Swaziland, Sudan and Congo) serious opponents, albeit in friendlies. Brazil, England and South Korea were tough opponents, but 0-0s against Saudi Arabia and Nigeria, both games where Ghana were the favourites, confirms their struggle to become a proactive side.
The main problem is obvious – if you rely on breaking quickly and exploiting space in the opposition when they’re high up the pitch, you need the opposition to come onto you. If they don’t, your gameplan is null and void, and you need more creativity and guile to unlock the opposition’s packed defence. You reach a point where the opposition respects you, they see you as the favourites, neither side takes command and the game is a stand-off (as demonstrated by the Venezuela v Paraguay game linked above). When the favourites bow out early and underdogs dominate the latter stage of a competition, you get pitifully low-scoring games, as the 2002 World Cup and the 2011 Copa America showed.
Provoking
So, what can be done? First, the side has to be clever with the ball in deep positions. As Andre Villas-Boas puts it, against a side sitting deep and controlling space in behind, you have to ‘provoke’ the opposition with the ball. “It’s the ball they want, so you have to defy them using the ball as a carrot.” Ghana are not good enough at doing this. Their holding midfielders are decent on the ball, but they lack the technical quality or imagination to cause the opposition problems. In a counter-attacking side they simply break up play, or play direct forward passes. There is no thought of having to help unlock defences themselves.
Through balls to Gyan are much more difficult, with the pass in behind having to be very accurate
Playmaking
There’s also the need for a central playmaker. Ghana essentially have three options in the attacking midfield role in their 4-2-3-1 system – Kevin-Prince Boateng (who was unavailable for the Nigeria game), Sulley Muntari and Kwadwo Asamoah. None are true playmakers – Muntari is an all-round, primarily physical, combative midfielder. Boateng is often used as a number ten for Milan, but his role there is to simply connect the midfield and the attack through energy and force, to prevent a broken team. Asamoah is arguably the closest thing to a playmaker, but considering the required change in nature of Ghana’s play, he couldn’t play for a worse club side – Udinese are extremely counter-attacking and Asamoah plays a role suited to the Ghana of underdogs.
Gyan
Considering how crucial he was to the success in 2010, the role of Gyan is the most important feature of Ghana’s play. With space in behind (right, 1) he was excellent – he runs the channels and can either burst in behind for through ball, or get the ball to feet and knock the ball past the opposition defence himself. Against Nigeria, he was making these movements against a deep defence (right, 2) with the result that the pass either crossed the goalline, or he ran out of room when he had the ball himself. And even if he did manage to get possession, he was doing so in an acute angle not conducive to goalscoring.
Gyan actually started the match on the bench, with Prince Tagoe starting instead. He is taller, stronger, better at shielding the ball with his back to goal, more adept at holding it up and waiting for midfield runners. In pure stylistic terms, Tagoe is the better bet for Ghana against a deep defence, though Gyan’s raw natural ability means he is likely to be first choice upfront. He will have to vary his game – and in fairness, he showed an ability to drop off the front, receive the ball to feet and look for midfield runners, though the pass always has to be very precise.
But these are individual situations – the reality is that a move from counter-attacking to proactive football concerns the whole side. Centre-backs have to be cleverer on the ball, full-backs have to stretch the play and deliver crosses. Passing has to be more patient, more angled and slicker.
It’s difficult to judge how well they’re progressing at the moment – qualification games have been against weak sides, friendlies are, well, friendlies. But the idea of the transition is interesting in itself, and it’s a journey that other ‘emerging’ sides based around a solid defence and quick attacks – Uruguay, Montenegro, Paraguay, arguably even Germany – will have to make. The more you rely on counter-attacking, the less opponents will allow you to do it.
No longer underdogs, Ghana need to become a more complete attacking force
If i was ghana i wouldnt change much, they have a good strategy and are very hard to beat, and are the type of side to excel at a tournament, if they can keep there squad together.
The problems ghana have are that they lack a quality keeper, so need to play defensive and not have tested too much. There midfield is the best in africa, i especially like annan, as he distibutes well from deep midfield, but without him ghana can look sloppy in possession. I also think they need Asamoah, as he is probably there most creative midfielder, he needs to play or kevin prince boateng, as they both can create moves well. And gyan is a quality striker, who obviously enjoys playing for his country, but he needs to work on his build up play to get other ghana players involved. Where they really lack quality is out wide, and this is why they fail to break down teams, when your up against a defensive team, you need good dribblers who can get past a man, and ghana doesnt have that.
So overall, i think they will continue to do well, they maybe just lack a great threat up front, as it seems if you stop gyan making runs in behind then you stop ghana scoring, as they lack great support for gyan. But in tournament football, you dont need to score a lot of goals to succeed, just look at paraguay.
@Kane Prior strictly speaking, Paraguay didn’t succeed. Their defensive football worked up to a point, but it failed to shut out a team that transitioned from being underdogs to favorites very effectively (by having and using their exciting attacking players) when it most counted. Brazil weren’t able to beat them because of Villar and some tremendous choking, Venezuela failed to beat them because their luck ran out a little earlier than Paraguay’s. You can’t rely on your keeper to be that amazing in every game, and that’s why Uruguay beat them 3-0. You may not need to score a lot of goals to succeed in tournaments, but if in the quarterfinal, semifinal and final, you score zero goals, you won’t succeed. I feel like the whole of ZM’s analysis refutes your points, in that their quality midfield isn’t enough, and they need to change things because being hard to beat does not mean you will win.
I think they dont have the players to play a pro-active game, and i think a good midfield can get them far. There could use the ayew brothers out wide with gyan and improve there counter-attacking game. But they just dont have the fullbacks to stretch play, the intelligent CB’s or a really creative midfield. They also lack a great squad, so cant vary there approach too much.
I think we should look at Stoke city here, they havnt changed there philosophy in the last few seasons, instead they have just brought in better players, and improved there current players. I think ghana should concentrate on improving there current strategy. They could do this by improving gyans all round ability and invloving more attacking wingers (the ayew brothers) .
Very interesting analysis Michael/ZM, any idea why Ghana seem to have produced so many good but functional players? Essien, Muntari, Asamoah, Boateng, Annan…Those are quality players, but I find it interesting that they always play next to more creative players at club level. I don’t know if they have the personnel, but what if they would play more of a 4-3-3, and push Ayew up higher on the left, with an equivalent player on the right? That’s the role Ayew plays for Marseille, and in theory that 4-3-3, as opposed to the 4-1-4-1, would do two things: add goal threats from wide positions, and reduce the burden on the central midfield for creativity. Ayew is quality, and can dribble, and if they would play their wide players a lá Chelsea they could be the main creators off the main, focal-point, striker.
It’s because European coaches don’t seem to trust them. K.asamoah could have been a great number 10. Essiens creativity was destroyed by mourinho, mikel the same.
I think you’re striking the core point of it here, although it is an interesting one to make.
4-2-3-1 currently dominates international football, with Spain, the Netherlands and Germany the best teams around all running it. However, in the 4-2-3-1 the central playmaker is of absolute vital importance when attempting to break down a defense. Spain has Xavi and Iniesta for creative outlets, the Netherlands have Sneijder, but for a side like Ghana that lack a true playmaker, perhaps a formation change is warranted when they are the favorites and need to break down opposing sides, as opposed to defending from the front with their midfielders and playing on the counter.
I’ll be honest in saying I don’t know enough about Ghana’s personnel to have a fully educated opinion on a substitute formation, but one that comes to mind from the ZM analysis is the 4-2-2-2, with Tagoe and Gyan upfront. If Tagoe is strong and adept at hold up play, perhaps having Gyan and energetic midfield runners like Boateng play off of him could help the Ghanians break down opponents that drop deep.
Thanks ZM – a very interesting article! I did not follow the latest development of the Ghanese/Ghanaen team, but in your last paragraph you include Germany in your list of countries due for transition. Spot on. This is what they (Loew) are currently experimenting with, shifting from 4231 to something like a 4141 (check the recent qualifiers against Turkey and Belgium). Since the friendly against Brazil they do that, usually Schweinsteiger as sole holding midfielder. Given the personnel, Germany look a lot like Bayern these days, trying some possession-oriented football they picked up under van Gaal, plus their typically German attributes (running, stamina, …). As far as I can judge, they are trying to emulate the Spanish tiki-taka of 2008, albeit having a technically slightly less gifted squad…. Might work brilliantly, or fail completely.
In that sense, Germany do not really (want to) play 4231 anymore, neither seem to do Spain, who without Torres went 433.
Interesting insight to German team, thank you.
Re Spain: as you say 4-3-3. Against Scotland this week, Torres was on the bench and Silva played as a false 9 with Pedro and Villa wide.
You are right in every aspect. They operate with a 4231 base formation in defense and switch to the 4141 for the offense formation. Good observation!
Considering that 7-9 starters for Germany are Bayern players the foundation for a switch to possession-oriented football is already there since Bayern has to play that style every week in Bundesliga (and add Götze who can play that style totally).
Here in Germany everybody knows that Spain is the blueprint of Löw’s vision of football. The downfall to this is that he does not seem to have a clue how to break them. But who does?
He would need to know the failures of what he considers to be the perfect football.
Since Klose and Gomez at the moment both run riot for Germany he considered even going back to a 442 to bring them both on the pitch. But Kloses injuries in last month stopped that plan.
With all due respect, how about: “progressed to the quarter-final – and it would have been further were it not for Asamoah Gyan’s missed late penalty”? Surely that’s what cost Ghana a semifinal spot? I’d like to read an article about Ghana and not hear about Luiz Suarez costing them a spot etc.Surely he was adequately punished for his foul?
And never mentioned is the fact that there was an offside which should have been given immediately prior to the handball.
Suarez was NOT adequately punished for his deliberate handball. He was given a one-match ban, the absolute minimum after any red card. Imho, it was a shame Suarez was allowed to play again at WC2010 (which was in the game for 3rd place), especially considering his taunting and arrogant commentary afterwards.
Of course, you must blame Gyan for not scoring that penalty, unforgivable.
I would say it’s absolutely right that he received the minimum punishment for a red card, additional suspensions should only be for violence (see Wayne Rooney). While not all handballs are created equal, I think it would be hard justify banning him for as long as someone who actually attacks somebody. Furthermore, the fact that he played in the 3rd place match just made it a little worse for him: 1) the third place match is not the final, which they missed out on in the match he wasn’t allowed to play in, and 2) He had to play one more match in front of a crowd that would heavily be against him personally, and booed him at every opportunity. It’s unlikely he will get that treatment again in his career. I know it was distasteful, and it seems like he’s getting off with little punishment, but if Gyan had scored that penalty, we wouldn’t be debating it, so I find it hard to make the whole thing Suarez’s fault. He played a part to be sure, but Gyan had an even bigger part, and subsequently put a blot on both those player’s careers.
This problem has been and will continue to be a constant source of intrigue. In the club game, Napoli have been forced to alter their style of play against weaker opponents, with their counter attacking brand of football ineffective against deep lying, negative opponents.
As a Ghanaian, it would be very difficult to change our playing style. From childhood kick-about games, we are instinctively trained to focus on hard tackling and defensive duties and then breaking at pace in numbers on the opposition’s goal with a full five to cover the defense in case of it breaking down. That’s why our best players have always been defenders and box to box midfielders. Zonal Marking is right in the sense that we do need a playmaker in the mould of Ozil/Kaka and a very good striker as Gyan is more of miss than hit. However, like i said, it would be very hard to produce players of that nature based on the footballing culture.
What we can do in the interim is to convert Asamoah or Ayew into a playmaking role but their pass completion and decision will have to be topnotch. The former can adequately take care of that but the Ayew is a bit suspect and detracts from our wing play. Should we have all players back we play something akin to this as our spine:
Painstil———Mensah——–Vorsah——-Sarpei
——————–Annan—————
————Essein———-Kevin-Prince Boateng
—————- Asamoah—Ayew
—————- Gyan/Adijah (Balotelli or Welbeck would have been a dream)
very interesting
Interesting insight into football culture in Ghana…thank you.
Its always great to hear from a person who knows first hand what a footballing nation’s culture is like. It seems to me like the thought process in Ghana is similar to that of Italy: defense first. Interesting then that the formation you suggested is a 4-3-2-1, which is utilized mostly in Italy.
Very interesting. I would prefer Arsenal’s Frimpong and KP Boateng in midfield, with Ayew and Abeyie on the wings.
Interesting article although I personally don’t think we have the personnel. While Tagoe mave have decent skills, he is far from a prolific striker. We have always had problems with strikers (much like the US) but Gyan is really the only striker I would trust upfront. If anything, we have Ayew on the wing, a little better than mMntari on in my opinion. I was thinking perhaps a lopsided 4-2-2-2 ala Liverpool, with Ayew and Gyan upfront. WE hace a lot of wealth in midfield so I’m not worried about that but that would also require an attacking fullback of which we have a few, I believe.
The reason I find this article so interesting is the fact that the United States, having hired Juergen Klinsmann to replace Bob Bradley after their disappointing loss in the Gold Cup final, is looking to do the exact same thing that Ghana are – be more proactive, take control of the game, and deal with being the favorites.
They used a 4-1-4-1/4-2-3-1 similar to what Ghana are using here. The coach is focusing on keeping possession, and defences sitting deeper has forced Altidore, similar to Gyan, to work on his hold up play, AND, also similar to Gyan, he has actually started to do so. For now, the USA have settled into a 4-4-1-1/4-2-3-1 with Clint Dempsey underneath Altidore, two wingers( likely Brek Shea on the left and Landon Donovan on the right) two central midfielders who form a double pivot on defense, but have one get forward on the attack, and two attacking fullbacks.
In the Round of 16 match between Ghana and the USA in 2010, both the USA and Ghana had spells of dominance/possession, and it ended with Ghana winning because of the USA playing higher up the field and conceding space in behind for Asamoah Gyan to run into in a play that was similar to what is illustrated in ZM’s analysis.
VERY interesting to see how these two will grow throughout this cycle and World Cup Qualifying.
Great article as usual.
I think both the USA and Ghana will find that part of being the favorited, proactive team is that you have to get used to making space with their movement as opposed to the opponent making space by commiting too many numbers. Barcelona do that with Lionel Messi’s false nine role, which is partly why they’re so dangerous; if the centerbacks follow Messi, there is a hole in the backline for Villa and Pedro to run into, and if they don’t they’ve just left the best player in the world compeltely unmarked, ready to sprint at them full speed – not good. The frequent problem with possession sides is that they have so many players dedicated to helping hold the ball, and not enough players creating and exploiting space. Barcelona have found a brilliant mix, and that’s why they’re the best team in the world ( partly ).
Interesting article, and finally one that captures the problem that counter-attacking teams have.
I remember Real Madrid having this problem against teams that either attacked and left gaps open, or sat deep. When the latter occurred, Real just made some substitutes without a well-thought out strategy.
I love the interesting articles you’re writing lately ZM, wonderful perspective on things that viewers wouldn’t always think about.
To me, Ghana’s most pressing problem is their lack of a playmaker and a regista, the 2 most crucial players to dictating the pace and creativity of a game. Boateng like you said isn’t a playmaker at all, he just has a heck lot of energy. With those two types of players in a squad, a squad is already stating its intent so much more without even stepping onto the pitch yet.
I don’t think they’ve passed away from their underdogs status so much already that they can face big teams very proactively yet. They have to still be patient and calm against the bigger sides, but against smaller sides they REALLY have to step it up and grab their opportunity to be proactive with two hands.
All the best to Ghana, I wish them well in the future!
Great article and a nice change of pace from match breakdowns.
What’s the legacy of the 2009 U-20 team? I look at the lineup and I only recognize a handful of the names. What was the setup of that team and can anything positive be transplanted to the senior team by the next world cup cycle?
ZM, it makes me laugh sometimes that you save some of your best content for the blog.
@Izzy: very astute observations re: USA/Ghana; that game felt a lot like one to be lost due to a mistake rather than won by a piece of brilliance because they both relied so much on defensive energy for their solidity.
@drexler: good insight on the footballing culture. I remember reading some article about Essien where the writer claimed that the small dirt pitches most kids play on lead to the best players being the ones who can burst through the midfield for shooting opportunities. Playing on a larger, quality pitch obviously would reward more intricacy in the final third.
Astute observations from you as well
If we had quality pitches, i am confident our style will change overnight. This is not a random prediction i am making. Most kids in Ghana are introduced to football with a popular game called “Small Poles”. This is usually a four to five a side game with no designated keeper or positions and very small goals. The posts are often about 5 feet apart. So we usually work as team in defending and attacking. There is also another deadly game we played, “Chas Kele”. This is not for the faint hearted! The set up is the same as “Small Poles” but the one glaring difference is NOT on scoring rather just scything down a opposing playing with the ball. Predictably, fights break out during and after the game, leading to rematches. Twisted right?
Curiously enough us Ghanaians love to dribble as well but that’s a hard thing to do when the ball is bubbling whilst running with it and thus hard to control. I speak from experience, as i loved playing one-touch-pass football but i inevitably kept losing the ball.
drexler I grew up playing in Istanbul, mostly playing in the streets instead of a pitch at all, but playing in small concrete areas still means reliable bounces of the ball (well, when we had a good ball
and dribbling + short passing to score on small goals. The local neighborhood club had a full-size pitch, but had no grass, and severe abrasions could be expected.
I was amazed when playing with some African guys, mostly Nigerians, in a gym one time, to see most of them take off their shoes to play on a hard surface with a hard football…didn’t seem to bother them, but as I recall I was too much of a sissy to join….
Anyway, more to the point, I always enjoyed watching Stephen Appiah play both for Juve and Fenerbahce, and thought he brought more technique to the usual power we are accustomed to see in Ghanaian players. I don’t know what he is doing now, strangely he was out of contract and still playing for Ghana for a while, but he possessed some of the attributes that we’ve been talking about.
This is a really excellent analysis. I’ve been reading ZM from the start, and I think this might be the best article yet. The combination of static tactical analysis with a historical and comparative scope really enlivens it.
Ok enough a**elicking. Well done.
No mention of Derek Boateng ? The guy has finally come into his own and was the pinnacle in Ghana’s midfield in recent months. Not a pure breed playmaker either but he has some decent vision and strategic abilities.
With either one of the Boatengs or Asamoah alongside Annan the distribution from deep is instantly a lot better than with the determined but even by Ghanaian standards way too functional Badu. Considering Asamoah after two major tournaments and years of trying still hasn’t been able to adjust to the no.10 role at all and the side having never been fully comfortable in the 4-2-3-1 anyway ( Rajevac’s predecessor Claude LeRoy started experimenting and it usually failed spectacularly ) I can’t see Ghana progress much using that formation.
Looking at the squad ( overabundance of quality central midfielders, energetic wingbacks, no striker really suited to the role lone up front ) going back to the 2006 4-4-2 diamond seems the most obvious choice. A flat 4-4-2 with four central midfielders, think of Germany in 2006, would also be possible, and if Jordan Ayew develops nicely even a 4-1-2-2-1/4-3-3 could be on the cards. Of course a formation change doesn’t necessarily imply a more proactive approach and all of the options come with their unique set of weaknesses, but the side needs more balance as a first step.
I notice you write both “Africa Cup of Nations” and “African Cup of Nations”. Is there one correct or official name or are these used in free variation?
It’s translated from the official French name – I think Africa is the more correct one.
will you be covering the ACON
Hopefully some of it
Thanks for the thoughtful analysis!