Spain continue to dominate possession but need more penetration
A criticism of Spain days after an unfortunate 1-0 defeat to England is always likely to come across as a wild knee-jerk reaction, but Spain’s problems against decent sides have been evident for over a year now.
They were handed an extremely easy qualification group for Euro 2012 where they had few problems, but in friendlies with larger nations they’ve struggled. Since the World Cup, they’ve drawn 1-1 with Mexico, lost 4-1 to Argentina, lost 4-0 to Portugal, lost 2-1 to Italy and lost 1-0 to England. They went 2-0 down to Chile and came back to win 3-2 in the 91st minute. Granted, they’ve beaten the USA, Colombia and Venezuela (and won their qualification group at a canter), but the graph below shows how poor their results have been against sides in the top 40 according to the FIFA rankings, the type of side they’re likely to encounter at Euro 2012.
The relative strength of Spain's opponents since the World Cup - the higher the bar, the higher their world ranking (as of now). Green bars indicate a Spain victory, red indicates a defeat, orange indicates a draw. The countries above the dotted line indicates they're in the top 40 in the FIFA rankings.
Using this (admittedly arbitrary) cut-off point, their record is P7 W2 D1 L4 F7 A14. This, for the World Champions and a side some consider one of the best of all-time, is an awful run. Spain take friendlies seriously and Vicente Del Bosque has hardly been putting out weakened sides – he’s rotated here and there, tried some new options, but Spain have so much strength in depth that even their second XI would contain world class players.
The starting line-ups for the England game. The midfield three was fluid - Busquets often ended up ahead of Alonso.
Selection
Del Bosque’s selection for the England game was concerning. He started with David Villa upfront, Andres Iniesta on the left and David Silva on the right. Using two wide players who like to come into the centre of the pitch has often looked bad for Spain under Del Bosque – they come inside, flood the centre of the pitch and make Spain too predictable, too narrow, and ultimately too easy to defend against.
That was the situation in the opening day defeat to Switzerland at the World Cup, when Spain were dreadful because of the sheer lack of width. This photo summed it up – the four attacking players all within a ten-yard square, no attacking threat at all from the flanks, and Switzerland able to defend very narrow and keep a clean sheet.
A slight change of shape was crucial to Spain’s World Cup win. Del Bosque realised he needed width, and after Jesus Navas had a good impact against the Swiss, Silva didn’t play another minute in the competition, with Iniesta the only wide player coming inside’ and a more direct player on the other flank – either Navas, Villa (played wide-left when Fernando Torres was upfront) or Pedro Rodriguez, who came in for the final two games. Spain now had more variety in their attack – one wide player contributed to the midfield dominance, the other provided forward runs and penetration, and stretched the opposition defence, creating gaps for the other players to play through.
Silva was the unfortunate victim of that Switzerland game. “When I was the only casualty of the defeat against Switzerland I thought it might be a state of fitness, but after criticism of my performances (it seems) the coach does not trust me,” he said recently. “Before that game I felt confident. I played regularly and had a place in the team, but after losing to Switzerland everything began to change. I was a victim of the poor debut that we had in the World Cup.”
His sudden disappearance was harsh on him individually, but it made sense for the sake of the side. Considering that the other man Del Bosque could have dropped, Iniesta, went onto have a key impact throughout the tournament, it’s hard to say that the manager’s decision was incorrect.
The first few minutes of the game against England saw the expected pattern – Silva and Iniesta coming inside, and England able to contain them comfortably by defending narrow.
Silva false nine
Midway through the first half, David Silva became a false nine
Midway through the first half, Del Bosque switched system and pushed Silva forward to be a false nine, Villa to the left and Iniesta to the right. Clearly, there’s a desire to try to create an appropriate replacement for Lionel Messi in a very Barcelona-centric national team, but false nines have yet to have success at international level.
Argentina tried Messi in that role at the Copa America but fell back on the safety of a traditional nine later on, whilst Brazil wanted Pato (maybe not a false nine, but certainly not a traditional nine) as a lone striker but then turned to Fred when things went badly.
In theory, Silva as a false nine and a forward, Villa, on the left should have eased Spain’s problems with the two wide players coming into the middle, but in some ways it made it worse. With England sitting deep, Villa didn’t feel comfortable going in behind the right-back and instead cut into the middle of the pitch quickly. Iniesta also drifted in, and Silva naturally dropped deep.
Therefore, instead of having a striker looking for balls over the top and two wide players coming in, you had the striker and the wide players all drifting into a similar position. Spain had complete dominance of possession against England but barely created a chance in the first half.
Need for width
On the subject of a lack of width, two side points. First, the need for a more naturally wide player is even more paramount than at the World Cup, because there is less attacking threat from full-back. The left-back position is up for grabs – Jordi Alba fared well here but has a long way to go before becoming the force that the underrated Joan Capdevilla was, a player who could cross the ball very well.
On the other flank, Carles Puyol’s fitness concerns means that Sergio Ramos is often having to play as a centre-back, as he did here, which means Alvaro Arbeloa – a decent functional full-back rather than a buccaneering one – plays at right-back.
Pedro's theoretical role for Spain
Second, Pedro Rodriguez was injured and not with the squad, which is a big problem for Spain. His importance to Spain’s system has been completely overlooked – as the only natural top-class wide forward Spain have, there is no real replacement when he’s out, a major issue considering he was the man who came in and completed the side during the World Cup. If Del Bosque wants to try to replicate a Barcelona-style system, Pedro is crucial. No other player understands Pep Guardiola’s system better than Pedro. “When I didn’t know which positions to take up last season,” Villa said, “I just watched Pedro and copied him.”
The qualities of other players can be replaced through injury – even far better players like Iniesta or Xavi – but Pedro’s attributes are largely unique within the Spain squad.
Fabregas
The other ‘outsider’ who turned out to be crucial at the World Cup was Cesc Fabregas, despite the fact he didn’t start a game. He brought driving runs from the centre of midfield which proved crucial in the quarter-final win over Paraguay and the final win against Holland. This is another quality that Spain lack elsewhere, and another potential answer to the problem of no penetration.
Fabregas has started his Barcelona career superbly, often playing just off the ‘false nine’ Messi. Their relationship is brilliant, and Fabregas has perfected what Tom Williams outlined as the ‘false ten’ role after last summer’s World Cup – providing the direct runs to exploit the space created by a false nine.
His appearance for the second half made sense, then – until you realised that he was replacing Silva and being asked to play the false nine role himself. There, Del Bosque appears to have completely missed what Fabregas brings to Spain – playing as a false nine you’re generally starting high up and coming towards the ball, when Spain need Fabregas going towards goal.
Fabregas' natural role
He can play as a false nine, but it’s not his best role, and he was at his most threatening when he dropped deeper and could then drive towards goal. In the final two minutes he had two shots - one after a cut-back from Torres that deflected into the arms of Joe Hart, the other from a low cross from Villa that Fabregas dragged past the far post when he should have scored. It was a terrible finish, but no other Spain player would have got into the position to miss it.
After Pedro and Fabregas, the third and final crucial player who ‘gives Spain something different’ is Fernando Llorente, who didn’t appear. When Spain wanted to go more direct, they introduced Torres – but the answer is surely Llorente, who was excellent against Portugal in the World Cup by providing an aerial threat upfront, and has done the same thing since – most obviously against Scotland.
Sid Lowe has (at the World Cup) very reasonably defended Torres’ place in the Spain side by saying he often plays ‘the Heskey role’ but Torres has been out of form for two years, and if you’re looking for a Heskey figure, it’s Llorente rather than Torres.
Conclusion
Football in 2011 is largely based around possession play in the midfield, and Spain have the best selection of midfielders in the world and also the most blatant commitment to passing football. That will not change based upon the results of a few friendlies. “We know that’s our way of playing, regardless of the score,” says Xabi Alonso, probably their most intelligent and articulate footballer. ”It’s very well defined, we have the right players and the right mentality…success convinced us that it is the right way forward. The past doesn’t count in terms of results but in terms of approach it does. It doesn’t mean we’ll win in the future but we know how we’ll try to win.”
Yet such a fierce commitment to a footballing ideology can hamper efficiency, and Del Bosque needs variety in the attacking positions. No-one is calling for Spain to abandon their philosophy and play like Stoke, but passing quality must be combined with penetration and direct running. That’s why they won the World Cup – because they had great quality in build-up play and combined it with some immediacy in the final third with the use of Pedro, Fabregas or Llorente.
Del Bosque can’t have forgotten the Switzerland game, and it’s not unreasonable to suggest that he simply has too many great passers that he feels deserve a chance. If Xavi Hernandez, Xabi Alonso and Sergio Busquets are the first choice three in the middle, it leaves other ‘passers’ Silva, Iniesta, Juan Mata and Santi Cazorla battling for the three places ahead. But in stylistic terms, as outlined above, it should probably only be one place they’re battling for…the other two spots must be freed up for more direct players. The more pure ‘passers’ they play, the more the opposition will sit deep and narrow, and the more Spain will need (a) driving midfield runs, (b) wing play or (c) a strong centre-forward to get the breakthrough.
Spain continue to dominate possession but need more penetration
Stick Llorente up front and fire some nice diagonals at him from centre-back.
http://bit.ly/v2VlcK
Shouldn’t that be Bielsa?
Llorente’s game has evolved, after all.
Cesc getting on to the knockdowns. Pace and power. Crouchy.
No need to do anything, they can just buy the referees again…
Exactly. That red card to De Jong early in the WC final after Alonso dived is clear evidence that Spain can only win when they have bribed the officials.
Or you could be talking complete nonsense…
Stewie, stop this nonsense, please. It’s a disgrace to intelligent debate about football.
I think people are finding Spain out – too dependent on Barca. They have an inferiority complex regarding Messi – not enough penetration like ZM pointed out. The Barca paradigm is as much a gift as a curse. Spain literally have no Plan B, and with Navas/Pedro missing; two poor but arguably effective players, they keep resorting to playing 1 touches in the congested final third.
Indeed it was telling at times, when Iniesta/Villa/Xavi would pick up the ball in danger zones, the weight of their through passes was for Messi. So accustomed are they to his talents, pace, change in direction and preference for shooting angles, they struggle to find another way. Then when a traditional nine comes on, he is almost treated like a guest. Even he ponders upon coming deep, and running with ball, diverting angles, attracting defenders etc – lost.
One thing they have got going for them though is the defensive side of their possession. If Spain take the lead, kiss the game goodbye. As demonstrated by the unimpressive world cup showing, in terms of goals scored, they defend leads well. Why? Because the incentive to score, and risk possession in the final third disappears, and hence circulation is more leisurely, and natural. Iniesta doesn’t need to look for Messi, he can simply play kiss n tell with Xavi.
Ps. Do not ever say Pedro is world class. He is the most overrated piece of garbage ever. A Guardiola tool used for polishing Messi’s anus. Nothing more than that.
You lose all credibility with your idiotic hyperbolic comments.
Villa, top striker for spain and one of the best strikers in the world said that when he’s not sure what to do when playing in Barcelona, he looks at and copies what Pedro does…
I wouldn’t say Pedro is world class; but he surely isn’t garbage.
garbage players wouldn’t even make it into Barca B. Don’t forget Barcelona’s football academy which created the likes of, well I don’t need to tell you those names again…
you’re speaking of Barcelona’s players as if they’ve completely forgotten how to play traditional football with a target man. Though Ibrahimovic isn’t the best player for Barca, he is the most recent target man styled striker they’ve had. He didn’t do that bad for Barca; he just didn’t fit Guardiola’s tactics nor was he hardworking enough to.
As for Eng v Esp, I think Del Bosque was experimenting with a Barca like model. As these guys have very nicely pointed out, they lacked width. At Barca, they compensate inward cutting wingers with overlapping full backs; Dani Alves and Abidal both often make overlapping runs.
As stated here, Arbeloa was put as RB instead of Ramos, who is much less talented as an attacking fullback.
The only width came from Jordi Alba who as they said once again, lacks the attacking capabilities of underrated Capdevilla.
yes ok I accept slightly hyperbolic, but not entirely idiotic
I do feel that the architecture of the Barca system is entirely furnished to Messi’s talents. So much so that we have had midfielders play CB – renown CB’s forced out the door. Eto’o, Ronaldinho and Zlatan forced out. Guardiola has forced an elaborate hybrid of a team and a one man team, if that makes sense.
Regarding Pedro, it follows from above. He is a tool, or a ancillary device used to make space for Messi. The fact he is from the academy, makes the arrangement, easier. Hence I as a reaction to the ridiculous hyperbolic praise he receives, mainly instrumental from Messi’s output, I called him garbage. In the name of pc and readers who are called Peter I should have called him average.
I thought you brought up good points about Pedro. I believe it would be difficult to find people who think he’s world class. He’s not a bad player but he’s not a great player either. Pedro definitely benefits from the system that Barcelona and Spain plays.
My retort to your argument had nothing to do with the valid arguments you mentioned. It isn’t a matter of political correctness or not. It has to do with calling Pedro “a tool Guardiola used for polishing Messi’s anus.” Save these comments for espnsoccernet or hilarious banter among friends, not ZM. I’m not a comment board police, but obviously there is a level of decorum people on this website abide by.
I’d probably have Llorente up front, Villa attacking from the left, Iniesta moving inside from the right, Fabregas moving from deep, Xavi and Busquets in midfield … would be terrifying. Expecially if he found another centre half that meant Ramos could bomb forward on the right.
But Del Bosque knows better than us. Or at least better than me.
Hi ZM,
In future could Mata not cover for that position? Not his natural game, but he has the youth and the legs to play wider in that team.
Also what has happened to Navas? Seemed to be conquering his fears, but I haven’t heard anything since the World Cup.
It’s telling that their plan B relies on qualities players have learnt largely outside of Spain – Fabregas, “bombing on”, the ‘Heskey Role’ etc (never thought that would actually be a role) – all very minor aspects of Spains game, yet crucuial in providing thrust to their otherwise rythmic play.
Can’t wait for the supercup next near!
You mean Mata wide? Yeah arguably, although this season he’ll get used to coming inside from wide with Chelsea. But I’d still say Pedro is more suited.
Didn’t see much of Navas last year – was in the squad here but has seemingly slipped down pecking order with Cazorla form (even if v different players)
Navas was injured and had ankle surgery, has only played like half of Sevilla games for a year or so now. He is slowly coming back.
Mental exercise – Mario Gomez picked Spain as the country he wanted to represent. Gogogo!
Spain would be far worse. Mario Gomez is a glorified poacher. Wouldn’t fit at all.
Ergo Llorente does not fit Spain at all – or how do we have to understand your comment?
Just a quick one: Spain would average like 4 goals per game. Just look what Gomez is doing for Bayern…
Just superb.
Off topic question for ZM, who in your opinion is the best tactician in the business?
Probably Jose…You know who I mean.
I’m biased, but I honestly think Vicente Del Bosque. Pep Guardiola as well. Maybe not yet, but when you take into consideration his improvement rate, I think he will be the best soon. There are lots of intelligent coaches out there, like Mourinho, but most of them are reactive tacticians, which I think is much easier and doesn’t require anything innovative.
Pep Guardiola.
ZM would say Bielsa(I think?).
I take issue with the “Spain take friendlies seriously…” statement, actually they don’t, its evident in the body language and tempo of the friendlies, only time they seriously changed this recently was in the 2nd half against Chile when Iniesta went crazy & ran the show.
About the England game, it was finishing that let Spain down and this has been their issue for some time now, Villa has hit some 20+ shots on goal posts in 18 or so months Spain+Barca combined and there was 1 in this match as well aside from the Cesc horror misses.
4 Friendly defeats, 2 competitive defeats, 3 draws, rest all victories in 4 YEARS.
I did a comparative analysis of Brazil 58-62, 70-72′, West Germany mid 70’s, France 98-2001, Statistically this Spain is better results wise, go to Fifa.com and look it up.
Great post.
Spain and Barca are the two best sides ever.
But this should not come as a surprise given the level of innovation Barca have achieved. It will be some time yet before other teams can produce enough players schooled in onfield problem solving.
Varun,
Spain has better results than France 1998-2001? France only lost 5 matches in that time period; Spain has already lost 4 in a little over a year…
ZM’s graph makes it look even worse: Out of Spain’s 7 matches since WC 2010 vs teams in FIFA’s top 40, they’ve only managed to win 2, lose 4 and draw 1. Claims that Spain don’t take friendlies seriously(or at least the ones they lose…) is a little too convenient(and predictable) of an excuse. What else are you going to say(as a Spain fan)…
What are you talking about, Spain since 2007 onwards is miles ahead of France 98-2001
Jan 98′ – Dec 00′
P 45 W 32 D 9 L 4
Friendlies (out of total played)
P 22 W 14 D 6 L 2
Spain
Jan 08′ – Dec 10′
P 49 W 44 D 1 L 4
Friendlies (out of total played)
P 18 W 15 D 1 L 2
Spain has 2 draws France had 9 with 1 equal defeats almost, Check Fifa.com for stats. This Spain squad is legendary in their own class.
I really like your notion of the false nine and false ten. However, I think you, like many others, give Spain too much credit for their World Cup victory. They won most of their games 1-0 and played exactly like they did on Saturday – a lot of possession but very little penetrative edge. I think international football is declining and one of the reasons Spain do so well is because they manage to carry the continuity that a team gets from playing together regularly to the national stage, thanks to the oligarchical nature of La Liga. Anyway, my point basically is, yes I agree, they lack the driving football. They play like a weakened Barcelona, while what they could theoretically play as is a Barcelona with the drive and power of Real Madrid. That said, let’s not forget that the best palyers from both Barca and Real are not Spanish. I think what Del Bosque needs to do is stop playing like Barcelona and start taking advantage of the brilliant Spanish players out there who don’t play in the big two. Silva can’t play as a false nine and shouldn’t be made to play Messi’s role. That said, he deserves to be there, in his natural role. This is something England and a lot of teams get wrong too – especially at the international level. To truly take advantage of a wealth of talent, you have to play your best players in their best positions, in order to utilise them to the best of their ability.
Too much credit for winning the WC?, if international football and the WC has declined i don’t see piss poor teams like England dominating it.
Spain might have won 1-0 but they dominated those games, except for some stretches against Chile and for 15 minutes or so against Paraguay. It takes two to tango and if you know football its not like 1 player can score against 11 players, an organized defense is incredible hard to break even if you were to put Messi,Maradona,Pele,Cryuff in attack in the same team.
Wake up kid, WC is THE toughest competition to win, it comes once every 4 years, a player is lucky if in his lifetime he gets to go to it twice in peak form and you can NEVER just be lucky enough only to win it because every other country is on equal footing and wants to win it as badly if not more.
Agreed no team has ever accidentally won the world cup, My old man was telling me during the worldcup that you need to be SPECIAL.
I dont know about that, Italy beat France on PKs.
Had France won the PK, Domenech would have been the WC winning coach.
And we have been constantly sold by the media that he was a buffoon.
You cant have it both ways, either Domenech was totally not responsible for going to the finals in 2006 in which case international coaching is highly overrated or he wasnt as bad as claimed. (dont forget tht the british press keep claiming that a coach like Capello doenst know anything about coaching)
Had France won the PK in 2006, many people would have claimed it was accidental because the coach couldnt manage a U11 team it seems (because so many people know more about football than a player who played for 20yrs in 1st div and coached for 15)
What the fuck is the ‘PK’ Lovejoy??? You’re an idiot by the way. Here’s a second opinion in case you don’t believe me: http://bit.ly/HR5dg
penalty kicks (duh).
I think spain’s problem is they always put the same players on, and those players are the ones playing all the big games in national football and club football: xavi, xabi alonso, iniesta, villa…
They don’t even need to play together to ameliorate they style of playing they need more rest than anything else.
If i were Del Bosque i would put 2 different teams for those 2 friendlys:
One with xabi alonso, xavi and substitutes, and one without them but with iniesta, villa etc.
Of course saying they have like 13 to 15 starters would be more correct…
My too teams would be:
second defense+xabi alonso+xavi+fabregas, pedro, torres and mata/cazorla/etc.
And the other:
starting defense+busquets+javi martinez+villa, iniesta, silva, llorente.
As i said fabregas, torres can’t be tagged as substitutes, they are world class material but that not enough to start in spain’s team…
In my too teams you have 4 passers, one runner (villa/pedro) and one central striker (llorente, torres)
I’d put my first team mostly in 433 and my second in 4231/442 with iniesta and villa taking the formation descisions (iniesta as captain would be nice).
You may find it a bit ridiculous to think so much about two friendly matches but hey i thought about it yesterday and ZM came with an article on it ^^
Also couldn’t this overpassing game cause barcelona problems too?
It seems to me both teams are not competing against opponents now they only want to see how monstruous they can be and are more focused about how to dominate one game as much as possible than how to dominate one competition as much as possible…
I feel like now spain plays only to see if they can be as good as barcelona and barcelona’s motivation goes through innovation because winning normaly bores them now ^^
Maybe that’s their next challenge: if nobody can beat you make sure you don’t beat yourself…
I only read the conlusion of ZM’s article for the moment so maybe it’s a little too much redondant i don’t know yet
Imo, Xabi Alonso is not really THAT good for Spain. They should have Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta in midfield, and Villa, Pedro, Silva/Llorente/Torres/Fabregas upfront, whatever is needed…
Surely part of the solution is to drop Xavi Alonso. I don’t see what he brings to a team when Busquets is there. Busquets has proven at Barcelona that he’s supremely intelligent and more than capable of playing the deep-lying midfielder role in a possession-dominant team. Further, he plays it simpler than Alonso and moves the ball on faster. What that does is allows Iniesta (or Fabregas) to come into midfield, rather than the front three, and frees up another front player.
I thought before the match that Spain’s best team would be Valdez, Alba, Pique, Puyol, Ramos, Busquets, Iniesta, Xavi, Villa, Silva (false 9), Pedro. However, they’re missing some thrust against determined and reasonably organized defence (although they really ought to have beaten England, given their chances), and while I can’t be certain, I think this might have something to do with the full backs — or, specifically, Dani Alves. Spain simply has nobody who can run so aggressively and often from deep, or who’s willing to spend so long in the opposition half. This means defenses are not as obliged to stay as stretched wide as those which face Barcelona, leaving less room for Villa and Pedro to exploit cutting into the space left by Messi/Silva popping out of the nine position (full backs can tuck right in if they’re not concerned about other width.)
It might be worth, therefore, Spain playing Navas and Llorentes with Pedro, despite the fact Silva and Villa are better. But what a choice to have!
This was said after Swiss loss at the WC as well, to drop Busquests or Alonso, that is not where the problem with Spain is, its in the finishing.
And the offensive penetration, which would be more accented by having two attacking players and Iniesta centrally. Alonso’s long balls are a welcome change of pace to this side but they are sometimes a bit pointless when Spain plays with a lack of width and primarily NOT on the counter.
Spain had enough offensive penetration by the end of the match, they ripped through England’s defense enough to win the match, Finishing let them down both Cesc and Villa’s post hit. Playing only one of Alonso or Busquets is last resort, a plan B or C so to speak. Safety first. WC vindicates Del’Bosque on this.
Yes, agreed, finishing let them down. Still doesn’t mean a change can’t be made or an evolution of international football can’t be pushed further. With an increasing number of sides sitting deep against them and playing off the counter, Spain will be as much fortunate to rattle off 1-0, 1-0, 1-0…victories in the Euro as they did in the WC.
“Safety first” – a motto itself vindicated by the Spanish attempt to replicate a Barcelona side with the best defensive record in Europe. It’s not as if Alonso’s removal suddenly opens the floodgates against a team who’s essentially playing in the other team’s half anyway.
That’s like saying that the problem with the side who has no attacking creativity doesn’t lie with the six central defenders playing in their team.
huh?
I responded to Alonso and Busquests playing together point and how its plan A from Del Bosque and when he’s desperate he takes one or both off, and Spain has had its issue with finishing this was true against England and against Italy as well.
It’s fair enough to point out that the finishing was off, but I don’t get your point about Alonso and Busquets playing together. It’s simply not needed. Busquets is more than capable of playing there by himself, and he moves the ball faster and simpler than Alonso, in general. Removing Alonso would also free up a place higher up the pitch. One could bring Fabregas into midfield, or bring Iniesta back into midfield and play another forward. That would surely help with penetration and variety in attack.
Whether or not Del Bosque takes one off when he’s desperate is immaterial given that we’re here specifically discuss what we’d do differently from Del Bosque.
Its absolutely not immaterial, playing both is central to Del Bosque, Busquets doesn’t quite play his Barca role for Spain, Alonso is heavily involved with Xavi, Xavi controls the tempo, Alonso the width in play, Busquets is decent at the moment with long direct balls but Alonso is better, even better on air long balls.
Del Bosque wants security first, why should he take off either of those and go gung-ho from the start with out-right attacking midfielder, It works winning the WC is not fluke, teams needs to have various options and Spain executes multiple plans within each game they play, and as long as Alonso is fit he starts.
If you wanted to remove one of the double pivots surely you keep Alonso over Busquets. Especially if the idea is the open up an option further up the pitch as alonso makes the defence respect that option more with his greater range and vision. If Alonso were born in Catalonia and not the Basque region I find it hard to believe we would ever have learned of Sergio as there wouldn’t be a need for him in the Barca team by the time Pep took over.
I really don’t understand your point, Varun. We’re having a debate about what could be done differently to how Del Bosque is doing things, and you’re insisting that we can’t discuss things that are different from the way Del Bosque likes to do things.
You’re missing the point of the debate.
Busquets could easily fill the deep lying midfielder role by himself. He does so brilliantly for Barca. Alonso has improved this season, but I still think he slows the game down a little taking one too many touches for the way Spain and Barca play. Busquets is all about one and two touch football. Receive the ball and ping it on to Xavi. Rat-tat-tat. That also frees space for a more penetrative player higher up. Either a straight swap of Alonso for Fabregas (a clear attacking move, and one that would maintain Barca’s utter numerical dominance in midfield (it’s unlikely that they’d get overwhelmed there with that lot)) or Alonso for Pedro, say.
It wasn’t just said after the Swiss loss. The Spanish press went on about it from months before the WC all the way up to the final. Only the eventual victory shut the mouths of the many, many people in Spain who thought playing with two “pivotes” was unnecessarily cautious, and stifled the attacking potential of the team.
The thing is, we don’t need to resort to counter-factual reasoning to compare the two systems. Luis Aragones won the Eurocup with essentially the same players minus Xabi Alonso in favor of a fourth attacking midfielder (and like-for-like swaps of Senna for Busquets, and Marchena for Pique). That team was far more entertaining and created chances against defensive sides with greater ease than the current one.
The rumors around Spain paint Del Bosque as a great coach whose most impressive talent, mediation of egos, is inextricably linked to his greatest weakness: his willingness to make selections for political reasons. His reintroduction of Silva immediately after the player’s father’s harping to the press is reminiscent of his plucking of Xabi Alonso from the international wilderness as soon as he signed for Madrid. Many of us feel that his political and tactical pragmatism is holding the team back, and that the ruthless philosophical adherence of, say, Pep Guardiola would better serve the team.
I’ve often wondered whether Xavi Alonso was there because of he played for Madrid. I also think that Valdez has been better than Casillas for some time (although the latter is still a brilliant keeper; I also think it would make sense to play Valdes because of his relationship with Pique and Puyol). But when you think about it, with De Maria, Ronaldo and Higuain or Benzema up front, and Khedira and Ozil in midfield, and the back four as it is, pretty much every Madrid player who could play for Spain, is. Maybe that’s why Alonso’s there?
somebody beat me to it^
Totally agree. 2008 Spain had Senna anchoring the midfield and look at their high-scoring games. Unfortunately I don’t think politics will let Del Bosque drop Alonso and leave just Busquets there.
in 2008 opposition actually thought they could whop Spain, now its psychological, they are scared of them, mentality has changed and thus the tactical approach of playing against them, teams are content sitting back.
All the more reason why either one of Busquets or Alonso should be dropped, and a more “penetrative player” should be included, that should balance the team better.
Just reading your post now: Totally agreed about Xabi Alonso. He’d fit more into a side that wants to defend and counter attack…
Great thoughts here.
I’ve also wondered if Alonso is sometimes a bit redundant in this side, and Spain might benefit copying Barcelona one step beyond what you’re suggesting: playing 1-2 in the midfield instead of 2-1. The benefit of two holders is more defensive stability but, for all of the side’s success, playing Xavi as the lone CAM has never really suited Spain too much and makes them “too functional,” I think.
This is basically what I saw happen in the aforementioned Chile game, where Alonso was taken off an Iniesta joined Xavi/Cazorla to run the show.
Doesn’t Alba provide a solution to the width problem? He should be ahead of Arbeloa in your diagrams.And also, it is interesting that Spain create a narrow ‘zone of possesion’ through which they seek to control the game.
Surely Alba as the sole outlet for width is insufficient?
And he only patrols one flank.
Yes, Alba does to a certain extent. But you also want to have natural width. Alba still has his defensive responsibilities, in the England game it was Walcott. I remember in the first half Alba made a great overlapping run, Villa recognized it and passed him the ball. Alba got to the byline and attempted a cross which was cut out. My eyes lit up because I thought Spain should attempt that again. David Villa coming inside and creating space for Alba on the overlap. But for some reason they kept ignoring that route and kept trying to play through the middle.
By the way, this article could also be used to describe Barcelona’s current state of play. Villa is off form, Pedro prior to injury was off form, and Alexis was injured. Without those players Barcelona lacks natural width. When Barcelona plays with width they can do what they did in the first Clasico last year.
Exactly what I recognised with Spain. As soon as England scored, I knew it’d end 1-0. I predicted 0-0 after the first 15 minutes, because I noticed Spain just played into England’s hands. No width. Sometimes I saw Xavi or Iniesta look to the wings and there was no Alves or Abidal. Occasionally when someone did provide width, they got in-behind England’s defence but they didn’t do it enough. They also tried passing it into the net way to many times again. They have so many opportunities to shoot, but they try too hard to get 1-on-1 with the goalkeeper. I mean.. they wouldn’t even be long shots, just normal distance.
Regardless of a below-par performance from Spain, England defended good, and got a typical English goal. Good advert for winning through playing the most ugly football known to man.
Great comment about ugly football. It didn’t work against Germany, a side that I feel has a great balance between ‘Keep the ball’ and ‘go for it’. I think Spain want to finesse the ball a little too much, as their players are simply used to running around inferior opposition. Problem against England as whilst their players aren’t very technical, they sure can run and tackle. I reckon Germany will win Euro 2012.
Nice stuff ZM,
Your three points (runs from midfield, attacking width,reference point in the goal area) sum up Spain’s problems very concisely.
I would also add a fourth: the oclusion of Xavi in this midfield.
Del Bosque is achieving the remarkable feat of fielding three of the world’s best midfielders and making them appear less comfortable in one another’s company and less effective than they should be!
It’s almost as if Xavi, Busquets and Alonso’s respective qualities should be distilled into just two berths since all three playing together leads to redundancy. Xavi almost becomes a parody of himself when he recycles too many passes back towards Alonso and Busquets (since there are fewer viable passing options open to Xavi further forward). Plus, Del Bosque appears to have asked him to play the furthest forward and closer to the opponents’ deepest midfielders, almost as a No.10 with his back to goal. As you have noted, Xavi often ended up dropping deeper (and Alonso progressing past him) but I wonder whether he was doing this to buy himself some space away from the likes of Parker and Lampard (again, this wouldn’t be such a problem if there were a more dynamic midifelder like Cesc who could rush into that space vacated by Xavi’s marker, which leads back to your point about lack of verticality from midfield).
In slight mitigation and to the credit of Del Bosque, at least we saw Alonso playing quite deep at Wembley initiating the build-up (whereas during the World Cup it was typically Busquets who dropped deepest). It’s notable with Real Madrid this season how Alonso has been instructed to execute the Busquets role when playing out from the back. Mourinho seems to have instructed Alonso to slot in between centre-backs Ramos(left) and Pepe (right) with Marcelo and Arbeloa pushing on into midfield. In fact, with Kheidra (or Coentrão) now fulfilling a more box-to-box role we can no longer say that Alonso is too vulnerable to screen the back of the midfield alone. He has probably been Madrid’s best player so far this season.
Of course, Spain fails to capitalise on Alonso’s passing range in this deep role by then failing to stretch the pitch.
Hopefully Del Bosque will correct this in time. But I’m not optimistic.
Didn’t see this when I wrote the comment below. I agree.
Great article.
Alot of people are mentioning dropping Alonso and playing one holder (Busquets). But remember that while Alonso is a very capable short passer, one of his greatest attributes is his ability to play penetrating diagonal passes to wide players. But, with wide players like Iniesta and Silva and no FB attacking width, this aspect of his game is totally shut off. Add Pedro for width, Llorente to challenge deep defending CB’s, and Fabregas to run out of midfield and suddenly Alonso’s passing style might be exactly what is needed.
But Pique already adds that skill set to the team, it’s not worth sacrificing another forward player for Alonso when Pique can also do those long cross field passes.
In that case SpaceGhost, why not contemplate keeping Alonso and dropping Busquets?
Alternatively if people prefer to keep the pair, then at least switch Xavi for a more progressive player like Fabregas (which I doubt would happen).
I think Busquets represents a minor problem in this context. If you can replicate the Barcelona midfield (and ideally the forward line too) then he is excellent. But Del Bosque rightly or wrongly has never opted for an all-Barcelona midfield trio.
As you point out, Alonso’s long range passing (Busquets is arguably stronger at the rapid-fire short-range stuff)is too good an asset for Spain to overlook.
But the present arrangement is somehow making all three of these excellent midfielders less than the sum of their parts.
I agree with your main point above, but I think the reason VdB likes Busquets is in no small part because of the amount of ground he can cover defensively. He is a much greater shield of the defense than Alonso, whose lack of speed has required a midfield partner to do the defensive duties on every team he has ever played for.
Additionally, I think his long passing range loses a bit of utility when surrounded by so many adept passers who can also play between the lines. Since the long diagonal’s primary function is to bypass a clogged midfield, and since Spain rarely need to resort to bypassing opposition midfields, I don’t think his superior passing range over, say Xavi’s or Fabregas’, brings much to the team at all.
In Alonso’s defense, I do think there is one aspect of his game that nobody else can quite replicate, and that is his ability to hit a 30-yard pass on the ground, accurately and at pace. He is somewhat reminiscent of Koeman in this respect. As such, he may be more useful dropping out of the midfield altogether when Spain are in possession. Should VdB continue using Alonso to create from within the back line, I hope he has the courage to push the full backs ahead of the ball.
There are some of us who associate Alonso with our frustration with the (premature?) demise of Aragones’ 4-1-4-1. Spain have yet to truly convince me since he returned to the team, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. I just hope that VdB’s tinkering with the system yields results.
Point taken, but this season Alonso has been the deepest lying midfielder in Madrid’s midfield. Positionally he has been immaculate. And this will be even more evident come January when Sahin returns; Mourinho plans to use Alonso and Sahin in the double-pivot, both passers of the ball.
I don’t get it why Xabi Alonso has an automatic starting spot in the team. With all that possession, Spain doesn’t need two defensive midfielders. Busquets can do that job alone (like at Barca) but Alonso needs another defensive player next to him (Mascherano, Khedira, Busquets). If they replace Alonso with Iniesta, they’d have the Xavi-Iniesta -midfield combination we all know, and that frees one of the attacking three positions so Spain could have natural width and goal scoring threat from there. Or they could bring in Fabregas for those magnificent forward runs and leave Iniesta on the left wing. Either way would be better than having Alonso on the pitch. His presence forces Xavi too high up as he’s at his best when naturally being more deeper and seeing the whole attacking zone and dictating the pace of the game. What do you guys think? Do you agree that Alonso should be dropped?
Yup. 100% agreed.
After the Swiss loss i was furious with Del Bosque and cursed him like crazy, but i had to eat my words and learned a few things as well, With Spain there is a “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t” scenario, there is no perfect system given the variety of players and depth it has, and Del Bosque having won the WC with this system and won a world record 20 odd competitive matches on the run I’d say Alonso is working all right, this discussion of dropping him always gets heated when Spain stumble.
Fact is that everyone sees this as a hindrance to the team. Alonso is magnificent player but, to me, it doesn’t fit well with the rest of the midfield and forwards. X. Alonso likes to seat deep and hit long passes or through balls, he needs space to knock those that is why he is so important for RM because the forward line is formed by pace and extremely fast counter-attacking players (Di Maria, Benzema, Ronaldo, etc.) Whereas in Spain, they had Silva, Iniesta, Xavi, Villa, Fabregas, Santi Cazorla who play at a much slower pace and like to do have more time with the build up.
The problem is that Xabi is playing a different “style” that he isn’t contributing, in that starting XI, more to what other players already do.
I think if Xabi is played with the likes of Llorente, Pedro, Navas, Villa then he’ll be more effective and commanding in the midfield, that is without Xavi playing by his side.
4-2-3-1 system while Cesc with number 10 role and D.Villa playing as a striker would be more rational in my opinion. I like Alba’s performance in this match. Also in Barcelona I’d like to see that kind of (attacking) full-back behind D.Villa. (for ex: Gareth Bale:)
the main issue for spain is that they don’t have a dani alves. the way he times his runs, and works with the right-winger who cuts inside, gives barca width and a real attacking option down the right.
sergio ramos can do this, albeit in a different way, so he needs to be shifted out to right back, with someone else playing centrally. spain would look like a different team coming forward.
Llorente needs to start as the CF. No false-9.
Villa on the LW, and Navas or Silva on the RW.
Arbeloa – Ramos – Pique – Alba
————-Alonso———–
——Busquets—————-
——————–Xavi——
—-Silva———————
————————Villa-
————-Llorente———
That team is exactly what was wrong with Spain against England. Xavi is not a ‘number 10′, and that team has no width. Also, a Spain team with no Iniesta, really?
I would bring on Iniesta for Busquets, and Fabregas for Xavi.
Navas could start in place of Silva if more width is needed.
A Spain team with no Xavi!? Unbelievable. The one that needs to be dropped is Alonso. Go with the Barca trio of Bus-Xavi-Iniesta. There is no need for both Busquets and Alonso in the Spain team.
http://this11.com/boards/abBz7N8acf.jpg
This seems to be the most logical formation to me. All players could use their qualities, width is created by Pedro on the right and Iniesta/Villa on the left, Fabregas gives them some penetration, Xavi can do what he does best, Iniesta can play his role differently against different opponents, sometimes adding width, sometimes helping Xavi and Xabi Alonso/Busquets with posession. The only question is wheter to play Xabi Alonso or Busquets and again this comes down to which opponent is faced
I agree.
Yup. Alternatively, Llorante for Villa and Silva for Pedro.
The main problem is Spain usually tries to find the last pass for a tap in, when they often might do better to just get a shot off at close range. With excellent dribblers like Silva, Iniesta, and Cesc, they need to just be more aggressive in the box. They could easily draw penalties, poach bad clearances, or score outright. Sometime later in the first period, Iniesta started being more aggressive, and then at the end of the game Cesc was getting plenty of chances.
The problem with narrow double bank defenses is that Spain’s dominant possession doesn’t wear them down that much; they really don’t move that much. So the safety of holding the ball is only temporary. Once an attacking player has the ball in the box, Spain should give them the freedom to pull the trigger.
The best weapon I’ve seen Barça wield against the parked bus is Iniesta making an off-ball diagonal run from deep, cutting through both banks. It’s very effective at dragging defenders and creating confusion in such static defenses. Spain has the passers to see and hit these runs, and the players have the touch to control the passes received.
Regarding playing Alonse, Xavi & Busquets.
I think the key thing people forget about Spain is they are, actually, a pretty defensive side (much more so than Barca who commentators seem to feel are the same team as Spain despite having a different manager + Messi, Alves & Maxwell). They conceded only 1 goal in the 2010 World Cup. Not that they are necessary defensive in a classic sense (men behind the ball, counter attack) but by playing 3 ostensibly deep lying midfield players who are brilliant short passers Spain pretty much ensure that their moves only break down further up the pitch (see how isolated Bent was for England) meaning that their opponents struggle to counter attack. They actually don’t create that many chances in big games but those they do are often very good goalscoring opportunities. I’m not saying they’re over-rated, they’re a really excellent team, but, despite their technical excellence and plethora of creative players, not as attacking as many people make out.
When Del Bosque first came in he carried on like Aragones with Xavi in his Barca position + one deeper midfield player. After they lost to the US in that pre world cup tournament in South Africa he changed the system brining in a third deep lying midfield player to shore things up (even in Spain’s case that meant more possession).
As a neutral, I agree with most people on here. It would be good to see them drop Alonso and play the Barca midfield trio (so using Iniesta in his club position) + Villa, Silva/Llorente, Pedro/Navas up front. They would be more entertaining to watch, but, they probably would concede more goals and despite the Barca/Spain parrallels people are so fond of, they would still not be able to overwhelm teams as Barca do without the attacking outlets that particularly Messi and Alves provide.
Excellently put. I am with you almost all the way. The one flaw in your reasoning is the fact that Barcelona has one of the best defensive records around, with Valdes nearly completing 10 consecutive clean sheets. Clearly they do not suffer from playing a single holding player. Nor do Barcelona simply overcome defensive problems with goals.
You are right in saying that Messi and Alves contribute to Barcelona’s all-round game more than many people are willing to admit, but that does not make adoption of some of Barcelona’s tactical ideas unworkable.
I think everyone reached the same conclusion that they seriously lacked width in this match, a Pedro or a Navas would’ve helped, so would a full-back that actually contributed with serious runs upfront opening up the pitch (I was expecting more from Jordi Alba who I believe is a former winger converted into a full-back?).
That being said, Spain with all their narrowness did create more goal chances than England, and were unlucky to lose. Plan B seemed to work reasonably well as Torres despite not doing anything particularly brilliant, opened up space for Fabregas’ increasingly famous runs. That slightly messed up England’s defensive line which had been brilliant up until then.
In England’s part, I was a bit baffled as to why Walcott was dropping so deep in the first half, okay he helped contain Alba hence stifling the only hope of width from Spain, yet surely his strong point is to be there ready upfront to use his pace in counter-attack? It was a great defensive performance from England but certainly Capello must realize that playing like this means very little created chances. It was a great strategy to contain Spain but not enough to be better than Spain without relying on luck.
I started to notice that when arbeloa had the ball he did’nt have the pace to drive on like ramos. there was a bit of space on that wing so they should switched ramos and arbeloa or remove arbeloa for a quicker full back.
Or they could have started navas high up the pitch very wide and then have iniesta coming inside of the left and station alba alot higher up the pitch then have ramos, puyol and arbeloa as effectively a back three.
I think it has to be X.Alonso that drops out. As talented a player as he is, Xavi plays a fairly similar role (though he isn’t quite a regista.)
If we take ZM’s ideal midfield trio of passer-creator-destroyer then one of Fabregas or Iniesta should come in. Having two passers that look to control the tempo rather than create chances means that there’s little in the way of penetration. Putting Iniesta in his favoured position – and keeping the Barcelona midfield together – is surely the solution. That means that Silva could continue on the left, with Pedro on the right.
Otherwise, Fabregas could come in, with Iniesta on the left and Pedro on the right.
I thought that Spain looked at their best during the world cup during extra time in the final, when Xavi dropped alongside Busquets, with Fabregas and Iniesta higher up the pitch supporting Villa. That would give them a superb balance between ball retention and creativity. X.Alonso and one of Fabregas or Silva would provide a very good option from the bench (with Torres, Navas, Carzola and LLorente other options.)
I am trying to repost this from the Turkey thread: More relevant here.
I do find it amusing the idea that Spain have ‘problems’
———
There have been two systemic revolutions in recent years.
Lets call them Jose Ball and Barca Ball for arguments sake.
Jose Ball is a management solution to on field problems which devastated the EPL and Arsenal’s best ever team in its first year. AVB calls it aggressive transitions. We could describe it as having a better way to play Chess (Strategy as opposed to tactics)
Barca Ball is a design solution to the problems of transitional football. Think of it as playing Chess with completely different pieces. Because it is an engineered solution it cannot easily be countered merely via on field tactics or strategy.
Football is actually quite late to a design solution to the challenge that creative teams face against highly organised defences.
In Rugby, the All Blacks were already adopting ’smart’ systems from the US in 2004 but the problem was the same one as football.
New Zealand, like Barca had the problem of having a creative philosophy and highly skilled players suited to possession based attacking. The problem is that this essentially ‘feeds the beast’ when confronted with an aggressive transitional defence.
The ‘constraint led’ approach was a designed in solution. Not just a tactical solution, or a management solution, but a solution to completely change how the game was played and the players required to do it.
The key innovation is that instead of playing to a system, players are educated as problem solvers. Problems are solved via experience. What have we seen before?
One reason Barca rotate the ball around is to seek a pattern for which there is a known solution.
The system is ’smart’ because the players must create the solution. Every player is a playmaker. This devolved intelligence makes it hard to stop.
But the constraints are the genius of the system. It is the constraints which limit poor decision making and manage risk.
History shows that this ‘design’ solution creates a lasting competitive advantage.
Both Jose and SAF were embarrassed by the discovery that there is not a tactical response to a design level solution.
This is exactly what we saw in Rugby – a 3 year period of unprecedented dominance before teams could retool.
In my view all serious teams will adopt in part the constraint led approach.
This does not mean all teams will play tika-taka – but they will be constraint led teams.
Man Utd is already bringing out the first of its ‘next gen’ players.
Multi-role smart drones like Jones.
And at Bayern you have the king of high tech’ drones, Müller an alleged 10 who can play 3 roles almost at the same time.
But if you really want to understand constraint led, then Rugby is a good place to look because the nature of the game makes it so stark.
Nominal positions and tasks don’t matter so much when you are focussing on the creation and solution to specific patterns.
Very interesting, though slightly weird, read (probably due to the translation). I really liked your point/idea about the ever lasting “(re)creation of patterns to which they (Barca) know the solution”. I guess that is quite spot on, just thinking about the thousands of situations i’ve seen in which Alves is receiving the ball out wide after the defenders have previously hoovered into midfield, just in time… But just to mention, Chess is exactly that: creating patterns that you know how to solve/win…
Interesting comparison to rugby. Of course, that 2004-07 All Blacks side is now just as well known for failing spectacularly at the 2007 RWC, with the players failing to adapt when they were unable to open up their first serious opposition at will. Their quarter final loss there would be akin to Spain losing both Xavi and whoever his substitute was to injury, and spending the rest of the game cluelessly playing tiki taka in the middle third with no one able to make the right decisions and no plan B. The 2007 All Blacks needed somebody to step up and say “kick for the corners” or “set up for a drop kick”, ie play rugby like Stoke plays football, when it was clear plan A was falling apart. Similarly, Spain need to have something else to fall back on.
It’s interesting to also look at the 2010-11 All Blacks side, after rebuilding. Arguably less talent and depth than the 07 side, but much more well rounded skills across the side, and with the ability to fall back on a defensive kicking game that ultimately won them the 2011 RWC, despite their creative game again falling apart.
Yes – all good points.
Now that it has been released, NZs debrief on RWC2007 identified the failure of onfield decision making as a key aspect in the loss.
Of course there is an extra factor in rugby in that the state of the rules in 2007 granted a huge advantage to the team without the ball.
This rather cut across the innovations of 2004 which were possession led.
“Yet such a fierce commitment to a footballing ideology can hamper efficiency”
I fear this misses the whole point of why Spain play the way they do. Tika Taka is as much about managing risk as it is about scoring.
I tend to agree with those who would drop Alonso or Busquets as Spain does not need to be as defensive a side as that implies. I think what is really frustrating is that it seems that Del Bosque is resting on the WC laurels. To an extent, that’s understandable–why switch up the side that broke spain’s dry spell?
However, what it doesn’t recognize is that the backline, with Ramos stuck in the center due to Puyol/Pique fitness concerns, is significantly less useful in providing attacking width. As much as I dislike Ramos, he does provide width if he’s @ RB, so that he and Alba could help the front line’s tendency to go narrow. If that’s the case, the width *needs* to come from either a 2-1 midfield that can roam or from the front three, as this article notes.
The frustrating thing, as a spain fan, is that Del Bosque’s unwilling or uninterested in experimenting like that–to test how to create space using a different midfield, to give Thiago time in that Xavi role, to see who matches well with Llorente, to move cesc to the midfield (to be fair, he’s played a decent amount of time as a false 9 @ barca and shown potential there), to bring villa back to a central role, etc.
The players take friendlies at an 80% tempo, but Del Bosque needs to be using them to test new players and new formations. he’s not.
Pedro offers vital qualities that few other player on the Spain squad do (Navas is more of a “classic winger” than Pedro and tends to get involved in intricate combination play less – Navas would make a good option if Llorente is chosen).
Unfortunately, Pedro has been in poor form this season. This makes Del Bosque’s decision making very complicated. Pedro’s work rate and defending have been excellent. But his touch and finishing have been severely off.
The Spanish player who offers significant dynamism from a wide position who has been in excellent form this season is Iker Munian. He has been outstanding for Athletic Bilbao. He offers similar qualities as Pedro – but is even more talented.
Munian’s drawback of course is experience and age. Likely a future stater for the Spanish NT. But what can he offer now or this summer?
That said – Munian’s skill set would greatly enrich Spain’s capabilities. He is very much the kind of player Spain need.
It would be nice to see Del Bosque be willing to experiment more. Jurgi Loew has committed to giving significant minutes to very young players like Goetze.
Del Bosque would do well to consider more experimentation on the whole. Not just with a player like Munian in friendlies. On the whole. Spain has issues which need to be addressed. Del Bosque however continues to largely extend his template outside of variations such as moving Silva nominally central (which is the space he tends to occupy even when he starts on the right or left). Try playing a midfield without the double pivot,with Fabregas, etc. Engage in trial and error.
Pedro has been injured for most of the season :/
great article ZM. though i admire and appreciate Spain’s passing, i do sometimes find it unexciting..dare i say..boring. there’s a certain lack of risk to it. contrast to Brazil 82.. ( drool ! ) lack of shots on goal also. totally agree with the last para. lowest scoring w cup winners ever. only 2 shots on target on sat’day. etc.
also i think i’m right in saying, spain didn’t come from behind to win any games at both euro 2008 or w cup 2010. it looks great when they are seeing games out when they are winning . they must do that better than anyone in history, and that deserves massive respect. Guillem B uses a great phrase to describe Spain..” they populate the midfield “. it makes passing so much easier when they are so many options for them. they treat it like a bullfight, gradually weaken the bull with no real intention of going for the kill by other means such as the a, b,c of ZM’S conclusion.
I actually think spain have a few problems.
Starting from the back, Casillas is a fantastic goalkeeper, and it showed that england scored when he went off. He has fantastic distribution and his positioning is one of the best around. He saves spain in those dangerous moments that everyteam has, and is one of the best goalkeepers in the world right now. Also a fantastic captain I think.
The back four has got worse since the world cup though. Ramos is a great player, and I think it was a good decision to move him to CB, he provides pace and mobility to a high line (very much needed) and is good in the air (i think englands goal was more about poor organisation). But his replacement at RB, Arbeloa is a poor replacement. He is not up to the samne standard, offers nothing going forward (needed to give spain width) and doesnt really offer defensive stability in a high line (lack of pace doesnt help). This disrupts spain going forward, as the right midfielder drifts in and needs someone to provide width. Pique is still a world class player, but needs to get used to playing without puyol. He does provide spain with a good ariel presense in defense and good disribution from the back. I like Alba though, Zm is right that he isnt up to capdevilla’s standard yet, but he does provide good width and can actually produce something when in a good position.
The midfield is unbalanced as well, Spain get away with it against weaker teams, but can be stifled agaisnt better teams. Playing all three of alonso, busquets and Xavi leaves spain devoid of attacking thrust from midfield. Alonso is needed i think, he provides accurate creative passes from deep and covers space well. Busquets also does a good job, playing the simple balls and keeping possession, whilst breaking up play when needed. I would say busquets doesnt make enough runs forward when spain have the ball, espicially when alonso is covering, this could help Spain break down teams more easily.
The big problem. believe it or not is Xavi as the attacking midfielder. Xavi excels playing deeper, with pitch in front of him, but as a attacking midfielder, he doesnt make enough runs foward into the penalty area. Arguably He should be played alongside alonso, this would make spain a lot better attacking wise. And Iniesta should be played as the attacking midfielder, his best position, as he fantastic at those invisible runs forward and is a good finisher. OR Fabregas could be played there, With very similar qualities. But the midfield does need to change, as the current one is way too cautious.
In attack i think pedro should start on the right, for the reasons ZM gave (well put), while villa should start on the left, and Llorente should start up front. This would give spain many options, with pedro and villa lethal finishers and llorente making space for those two (something he is very good at, ala heskey). I dont like villa as the striker, as he gets isloated up front, he looks much better out on the left.
the width problem is pretty much solved to be honest. VDB was seriously injust towards Silva by indirectly blaming him for Spain’s unfortunate game vs Switzerland. now, Busquets drops to create a back 3, protected by Alonso, with the Xavi-Iniesta-Silva hovering, Villa cutting in and the fulback providing the width.
still prefer Luis’ Spain. they were more tiki-taka, more swashbuckling, with Senna doing all he could to give Xavi time to think. and when Xavi thinks…Spain play!
as for friendlies, who honestly gives a damn? it’s not a test of who’s best. teams, proper teams, go out in friendlies to achieve 3-4 basic things:
-first half; sustain a style of play the players can absorb and apply when it matters (Spain played like Spain in the first half, England pressed excellently in the opeing stage)
-second half; give as many players a chance to test their nerves (typical Brazil-thing to do)
-create some fluidity and understanding between the players (Holland execute this best in my opinion, Sabella seems to be applying as well)
-try a new tactic/system/strategy (Germny experimented with a 3-man backline in their latest friendly which ended 3-3)
i’m just saying, I watch the first half of a friendly to see if the players understood what the coach wanted. scoring is a bonus
Even with Puyol, the spanish defence doesnt impress me (neither does Barca’s but the team pressing is simply phenomenal without the ball) but they could field a B team of midfielders and still have the best midfield in the world. But putting Iniesta AND Silva further up might work in the Barca style but their skill sets are too similar to the other players.
Once they hid a dead end, there is no plan B.
That said, 10mins into the game and I knew how this game was going to play out: one team would dominate the ball and the other team would play two banks of 5 and hope to score on a corner.
I can live with a 71% possesion rate, 21-3 in shots and that stat that said that Spain had 350 touches on Englands side in the first half as opposed to Englands 80 but I am starting to detest international football when teams dont even try to compete and the first priority is to minimize damage.
I hate watching club football when in a home-away competition a team goes on to win 2-0 on the road because its almost a guarantee that minimalist football will be played next game.
To be honest, had the english played any other way, chances are it would have ended badly. This was THE ONLY way they had a chance. But as far as football goes, if you go into a match with that attitude, why should people watch or care? I have no problems when a San Marino or Faroe does it because you feel pity for them if they didnt but if you consider yourself to be a world power, your mindset shouldnt be that of Faroe Islands.
Maybe its Spain’s fault for having an amazing midfield (but average defence and ok forwards… Argentina have better collection of forwards) and the fear it puts into other teams but to have an interesting match, you need for both teams to want to play.
À vaincre sans péril, on triomphe sans gloire goes the saying.
I disagree completely about dropping Alonso. If you take him out and add Cesc, you’re still left with a side with hardly any natural width and without any height or power up front. Alonso is capable of giving them an entirely different dimension with accurate long balls over the top and diagonally, but he has no one to take advantage of this.
Barca have Messi to help drag defenses out of shape, which allows them to basically pass it into goal. Spain does not have such a player. I’m not suggesting they start playing English-style hoofball over the top every time, but they clearly need some variation to help break defenses down. Dropping one of the attacking central midfielders and putting on a player that can take advantage of Alonso’s bread and butter will give them that variation.
ZM, England got Phil Jones into the space behind Spain’s midfield (where I would expect the DM to be permanently stationed) and in front of the Spain defence a couple of times in the first half, but he couldn’t make the most of the opportunities. If Busquets and Alonso both know what they were up to in Spain’s system, surely this wouldn’t have happened?
Santi Cazorla shoudl start. Drop Fabregas (if a contract doesn’t mean anything to the man, who can trust him?), play Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta in the middle, Pedro or Villa on one side, Cazorla on the other, and Llorente in the middle.
Oh for the days of Marcos Senna.
That is all.
Think it’s gotta be Alonso who drops out, try and replicate the Barcelona system, you can’t ignore the best midfield trio in the world in Busquets-Xavi-Iniesta, liking the idea of Silva as a false nine.
Totally agree about Pedro though, one of the most underated players in the world in my opinion despite playing for Barcelona. He provides width, his pressing from the front is fantastic, and his movement in behind is also great.
In addition to the width issue, I believe Del Bosque desperately needs to drop Busquets for Cesc and play Xavi deeper.
To everyone criticizing Alonso and the 2DM system for Spain, I think you should take a closer look at what won them the last world cup.
Spain had one of the most sparkling defensive records in history. They were the kings of the 1-0 win. And in my opinion, it came not from who we typically think as being responsible for such things (Casillas, the back 4) but from their incredibly stingy, careful in possession midfield.
Sure, you can drop Alonso and try to go closer to the Barcelona tactics of full on free flowing football, but I would question whether that system would have held up against Germany in the semifinal a few summers ago. In a national landscape where so many teams work based on the counter, including the aforementioned Germany, I think the spare defensive midfielder is not only a good idea, its borderline essential.
I will say that ZM probably hit the nail on the head with their recent troubles against top sides: lack of width. They have so many creators, but despite that have become 1 dimensional. The English defense knew the wingers were coming inside and would try to play through the defense. Sorely missing Pedro, and I’ll echo the sentiment that Navas really brought something to their attack as well.
Why not look at Barcelona’s midfield and how Valdes had not conceded a goal in 100s upon 100s of minutes? If that midfield can handle Real Madrid (the best counter attacking team nowadays) and Manchester United, it could handle Germany.
Didn’t a nearly identical Spain beat a nearly identical Germany with one holding player in the last Eurocup?
As I recall they did it with much less difficulty that time, and despite the low score, I remember Spain might have scored 5.
You argue your point well and you could be right about the defensive solidity, but then again so could we.
I personally thought Germany 2010 was a completely different team to 2008 – much more of a threat going forward in 2010, so perhaps the comparison isn’t fair.
However, I do agree that two holding players is overkill – they’re not even really there as tacklers – Busquets is the easy pass out, and Alonso is the…I guess he’s there for the crossfield diagonal, but I can’t think of anything else he offers that the team doesn’t already have.
Yes and no. Germany’s system was the same 4231, but completely different personnel in total. Rolfes-Hitzlsperger-Ballack compared to Schweinsteiger-Khedira-Ozil in midfield, for example. Either way, spain were much more convincing against Germany in 2008 than in 2010…
I don’t really know why Xavi is asked to play a “number 10″ role. I thought Senna with Xavi, and Fagregas as the “number 10″, was pretty awesome in Euro 2008.
It might be the case that they have too many good players! But like England, they have to decide on balance rather than ego or reputation. (I wouldn’t be scared of dropping Villa if it meant a balanced side.)
Great article, it’s something I’ve been thinking about for a long time. Another problem you didn’t outline here (but have elsewhere) is the “…overlap in responsibilities when Busquets, Alonso, Xavi and Iniesta are all fielded in the same side” (from the Spain vs. Chile article). A team of this quality is always going to keep the ball, to push the opposition into it’s own half. The problem is scoring goals, and Xabi Alonso(intelligent as he may be) is not the player to do that.
I think the team should play with sort of a double pivot in front of the defence (Busquets and either Xavi or Xabi), Pedro a right winger, a runner/creator in the hole (Iniesta or Fabregas), Villa as a left forward and a regular centre forward uptop. Llorrente is one but not the only alternative to Torres; Negredo has an impressive 5 goals in his first 7 games for Spain and Soldado has been very prolific for Valencia this season.
Also, I struggle to find a player in football history that could succesfully reacreate the current “messi role” so I doubt Del Bosque will find him within this squad.
While obviously it’s important not to get carried away about a result in a friendly, I think ZM is right to point out that Spain do take these games seriously. Spain will have been disappointed to lose – while not the force of old, England and Wembley still possess Mecca-like qualities in the eyes of many European nations. Even against a laboring and inconsistent unit, victory at Wembley is savored. Spain took Saturday’s match seriously, and I think it is appropriate to evaluate the team based on any information yielded.
Don’t understand the fuss. The game probably should have been a 0-0. Milner doesn’t dive to win a free kick nobody is talking about Spain’s “problems” instead everybody would be talking about how limited England were and how awful everybody but the back four were. You should be pointing out England’s problems not Spain’s. Even against a side like Spain, England were just awful in possession and didn’t have any ideas of what to do once they had the ball. Lampard was awful, Walcott was irrelevant and Bent was completely invisible apart from the header. I would be more concerned about England’s performance than Spain’s.
“You should be pointing out England’s problems not Spain’s”: but Spain’s are more interesting. Too much talent in parts of the pitch, not quite enough in others; the question of how best to pick an XI from all those stars, the question of what tactics to adopt.
Spain: All foreplay no penetration.Can be frustrating to watch at times!
Great work ZM, completely agreed with everything
I always felt the side could use a bit more fabregas, they gave him the ‘number ten’ You would think he was about to take over, but he is still not in the 11.
Random question, how many midfielders have to be injured to get Arteta a call up
xavi,martinez,alonso,busquets and then after them there are the more attack minded players like inesta,silva,mata,fabregas
Surely he is not too far behind
I like Arteta, but I can’t see him getting a spot. Especially now that he is getting a little order, what would be the point? The time it takes for him to find himself comfortable in Spain, they could have been integrating guys like Thiago, Canales, Sarabia, Ander Herrera, ect.
I was thinking maybe in garbage match friendly type of game. Alot of youngsters with him as the old head. Agreed about his age, he cant do a sctty parker and force himself in.
Maybe in the olympics?
I dont think the selectors would want him though
The double pivot is crucial to Spain, there’s no way VDB will/should change it. An extra attacking midfielder in the place of Alonso would add more attacking thrust. But that isn’t what Spain are lacking. Spain need width. And without the security of the double pivot, Spain lose the attack from the fullbacks. Barcelona use one DM, and one attacking attacking fullback. But Barcelona simply have better quality in certain areas than Spain, and they make up for the lack of width on the left in other ways. And they have Messi. ‘Nuff said.
Llorente needs to be a starter. No Silva/Cesc false 9, no Villa in the middle. Barcelona use Messi as a false 9, not really because of the benefits of the false 9, but because they don’t have anyone else who can play there. Again, Villa is not a 9. At least not for a team like Barca, where the forwards don’t get space. Messi needs to play false 9. He does brilliantly there, not really because it is necessarily his best position, but because Messi is brilliant. You can’t expect similar results from Silva, no matter how good he is. And there isn’t any reason VDB should be playing the false 9, because, unlike Barca, Spain have players capable of playing as Strikers. Llorente to be exact. And Llorente provides exactly what Spain need. Occupies CBs so that width can be created, terrific work rate and link up play, and the ability to hold up the ball near the penalty area (crucial to a team like Spain).
Double pivot, Llorente upfront, and already the issue of width is nearly eliminated. Double pivot is necessary because when the two fullbacks attack to create the width Spain need, it only leaves two at the back. That’s when one of the DMs drops back to form a stable back three. But even with that, the team still need another DM to play in front of the defense. One DM can’t be in two places at once. Barca do it a little differently. One attacking fullback, then Abidal tucks in to form a 3 man defense, and Busquets plays DM. Barca have less width that way, but they don’t need as much width as Spain do to succeed, because like mentioned earlier, they have other ways of compensating.
The only big worry I have about Spain is what they are going to do with their defense. As a Barca fan, I will be the first to admit that Pique is out of form, and has been for a while (even before his injuries). Currently, Sergio Ramos is just as secure as Pique at CB, if not more. However, the Ramos-Pique partnership was excellent, and it is surely the future of Spain’s cetral defense. However, the RB spot worries me. Arbeloa is decent, but he should NOT be a permanent in Spain’s lineup. Alba should be given the LB spot, the only way he will get better and give Spain more width is with confidence and experience. Arbeloa won’t get better though, and he simply doesn’t give Spain enough on the right. We shouldn’t expect him to do an Alves, but that’s what Spain need, or something similar. Iraola is an interesting option. He is secure defensively, and is energetic going forward. However, he hardly supplies more than Arbeloa offensively.
I think a big part of how successful Spain will be in the upcoming Euros is how Puyol can play. If he regains his best (he has definitely looked good recently), then it might be okay to place Ramos at RB for the tournament. My major worry then is the lack of pace. With Ramos at CB, I breath easier, because I know the highline is safe against speed. However, I guess you shouldn’t be playing a high line defense in the first place if you’re only planning on using speed as your main source to cover the high line. Speed is an extra plus, but the biggest quality you need to play a high line as a defender, is positioning and ball skills, and Puyol has that in abundance. The risk of being exposed for speed is just something that comes with the style Spain play.
Would I change Spain’s lineup? I would keep the same thing that VDB plays. I would change one or two players in the starting 11, and a few of the players on the bench, mainly to suit my personal preferences. I would definitely give Muniain a spot on the bench. I would try some of Spain’s promising CBs like Botia. I would probably succumb to my Barca sensations and make Valdes a starter. I would try to find a solution to the RB problem (Montoya from Barca’s B team and Spain’s U-21 team is the best option, but first Pep needs to promote him). I would defenitely start Llorente. And depending on Pedro’s form, I might even start him ahead of Villa. Based on this season’s and the second half of last season’s form, no way. But if Pedro can find his way again, and continue on developing the way a player his age should, then maybe.
Is it not one of the football’s beauties that its a holistic game, one where every strength is a potential weakness?
Even Spain’s youth training system cannot overcome the fact that if you prioritise posession to the point were risking it is discourged you end up with a generation of midfielders who know how to crowd in togther so they can impose their close passing game on the opposition; but, produce very few dribblers who will take risks to get past the opponent. You stop producing attacking fullbacks and wingers.
Barca have the option of importing fullbacks from brazil and in Messi, a product of the same dribbling culture that produced Maradonna
Spain has no such luxury. Don’t get me wrong. I’m English and recall how Charles Hughes impsed a coaching vision that dicatated 5 passes or less to create a chance (and boy does it still show) but the real joy of international football is it exposes every football culture’s achilles heal because you cannot import foreigners (well except for the coach) to paper over the cracks.
That said, I still make Spain favourites in Poland and the Ukraine. It’s just nice knowing everyone else is not completely wasting their time turning up.
Sooner or later, tika-take will pass and be replaced by someting more balanced (moderation is best in all things) because it will become a parody of itself.
One day Spain will enjoy 90% of posession but muster no shots on target.
excellent post. a welcome reminder in your first line of that old classic . very apt here.
stewart robson often says there is no defensive system that copes with dribbling. Bielsa showed recently if you man mark everyone, they have no-one to pass to. it’s almost a case of counter-intuitive defending..don’t watch the ball, watch the man ( or in a bullfight analogy..the bull should go for the man, not the cape ! ).
i don’t agree with the types of players the Charles Hughes system produced … big lumps who can’ t pass etc he was pro-dribbling as it is direct but his system never produced them !) but his basic assumptions about goals coming from direct play, less than 5 passes etc & “passing can often be defensive” do have a fair bit of truth in them
1 massive flaw in spain’s attack….several times spain had iniesta and silva in the hole but no player was looking to run inbehind england’s defence (to get on the end of a through ball) and so no chance came of these situations. Usually, villa and pedro play on the shoulder and are consistently being slipped through but even villa was dropping short.
I do not agree with the first formation diagram on the page. It shows Busquets to be the deepest midfielder protecting the center-halves. During the England game I observed Busquets often got involved with attacks and Alonso stayed the deepest, and almost played like a quarterback.
I think the difference is not necessarily the wingers. Spain’s narrowness is also caused by the wingbacks not getting forward enough – which they can easily do so with Busquets slotting in the space they leave behind. If you contrast with Barcelona then it is obvious that there is also nobody in the Spanish national team playing the Dani Alves role.
Perhaps Santi Cazorla or Cesc Fabregas can actually slot into rightback with Busquets helping out then it would be a great attacking threat.
To add to the discussion about Llorente.
I really doubt Llorente is the answer. He is a brilliant player and brings something different to the Spanish side but he doesn’t fit into the Spanish (Barcelona!) system. Much like Zlatan in Barcelona.
There was a lot of good arguments in favor of bringing Zlatan to Barcelona. I, for one, thought he would fit in perfectly; bring another dimension to the Barcelona team. In theory Zlatan was the missing link. However, in practice it didn’t work. He was simply to stationary, too slow, and got in the way of other players. Bringing in Zlatan as a plan B meant that plan A just didn’t work as well.
Guardiola saw this and since the beginning of last season he has been improving plan A instead. He’s improved the pressing game, improved running pattern and passing speed.
This is what Spain should do – perfect plan A rather than weakening it by introducing a plan B. You can’t add a different type of player, a second dimension, without having to remove a player, which will damage the first dimension.
Spain’s main problem is the two defensive midfielders. As mentioned in the article Spain need more penetration – especially against opponents who sits back in their own third. Del Bosque will have to make a choice between Alonso and Busquets.
The misconception is that Llorente will hamper Spain’s style. Llorente has the what is needed to be a plan B, SIMULTANEOUSLY improving what Spain already do. People look at Llorente and Zlatan and those type, and say “he is tall, that automatically means old style British football.” No. You think it is better to perfect what they already have? That’s what Pep Guardiola is attempting, but that is actually more out of fear of messing up, rather than hampering the style. Spain don’t need to improve what you said. Their pressing and passing is as good as ever. In order to improve their plan A, as you say, is actually to use a guy like Llorente. Spain need as much space as possible for their passing to work effeciently. Llorente gives more space. Spain need someone who can hold the ball up so that they can more forward as a team. Llorente can offer that. So yes, while Llorente gives Spain the plan B of aerial threat and bus breaking, he also improves their plan A of Tiki Taka. And why can’t he? He works as hard as any Striker Spain have, he is as fast as Villa, he has good technical skills, and he is very humble. Zlatan and Llorente are different players, with different skills and attributes. I still maintain that Zlatan would have been perfect for Barcelona, if it wasn’t for his personality, or if Pep was better at managing those type of attitudes.
I agree on Zlatan Ibrahomovic. He was doing very well for Barcelona until he fell off with Pep.
there is disadvantages with playing Llorente upfront as well as advantages.
DIS – isn’t fast and doesn’t look to run inbehind and so infact a defence may push slightly higher giving spain less space in the middle of the pitch.
ADV – now a threat from crosses.
There are two ways to play the #9 and for that you need to have two slightly different systems … it goes back to Cruijff’s way of playing …
1. You have a player like Llorente(less skill, more height and strength, good aerial ability etc.), you need to place him farthest up the pitch, closer to the opposition goal for holding up, running on to balls over the top, being in place for the crosses from the speedy wide players etc.
2. If a player like Messi/Fabregas/false nine(high skill, great first touch, speed on/off the ball etc.) would be there the highest players up the field in the system diagram should be the two wide wingers … this because the #9 can be a part of short link up play and has the ability to jink by opponents though the centre with individual skills … the balls would go through them and then possibly be be spread out wide for the wingers to run in to … key is that the wingers stay as wide as possible to give the technically gifted player in the centre as much room as possible!!
I haven’t read many posts above but saw some comments on the wing backs/wide defenders … in a system where you have wide wingers (ie #2) you actually DON’T want your full backs racing up the line, they crowd the winger’s space too much … sometime to help a player you need to go away from their position and not towards their position, this is the case with jinky wingers.
If you have wingers that have the tendency to come in (eg Villa) then yes, it would be good that on occasion the wing back makes deep runs down the line to keep the width of the field. But they should not continually do this as then game then becomes too one dimensional, the winger must always attempt runs on the outside either with or without the ball and when that happens you don’t want the wing backs anywhere near the winger’s position.
Last point … the cutting in of wingers is not only a problem when they are on the ball but also when that are OFF the ball … thus if the ball is out wide left and the right winger comes in too much because he is more comfortable in a more central position the width advantage is negated slightly. If the right winger stays near to the side line then he creates space for the central players to make runs into the box, he keeps the space open and the wide defender will have to choose to cut in to help absorb the central midfielder’s run or to stay near the winger for the possibility of a far cross or a ball that shoots through to them because nobody was able to touch it.
There are many more points that can be made, about how you can adjust/shift to a back 3 when in possession if you have one side that has a tendency to come in (the winger/wide forward that is) if you put a winger as one of the wide defenders … for this see 70s and 90s Ajax and how Bielsa moves players out of their normal positions currently at Bilbao and what he did with Chilli … not enough time or space to explain that here.
cheers,
b.
Great article.
I think width is important. From full backs or from wingers. Spain has so many creative midfielders and Del Bosque has to figure out which one he should put on the bench.
people talking about Iniesta, Villa, Silva, but maybe it’s more of a question Xavi or Xabi Alonso. No doubt, both are great players. but in some games, when Spain lacks penetration, they maybe need only one of the registas and bring in an extra winger or striker.
Spain has this luxury of great players. It’s natural to put some on the bench, and it’s doesn’t have to be allways the same players. Maybe against team A they play Xavi, Alonso, Iniesta, Villa, and Silva. Against team B they play Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas, Pedro, and Silva. And against team C Xavi, Alonso, Pedro, Iniesta, and Llorente.
Depending on the opponent.
Fantastic piece, it seems Spain are lacking the sort of intensity they use for more competitive fixtures. However, i think capello should take the plaudits for this win. Found another great tactical site; http://www.theirtactics.com
Spain is the ultimate masterbating team. They need to stop playing with themselves and start penetrating more!
It’s a bit of a conundrum is it not?
I think Spain should make a subtle shift in formation, i.e. back to the manner in which they played the Euro 2008.
A 4-1-4-1.
In the final of the 2008 Euro, they had Senna as the holding midfielder, Xavi as the string-puller, Iniesta and Silva on the wings, and Fabregas just off Villa.
Senna is obviously done now, so you have a choice between Alonso and Busquets. My solution? Play BOTH, but NOT together in midfield.
Another problem highlighted in the article was that full-backs are needed, and Sergio Ramos has been forced inward thanks to Puyol basically being out of the mix. Instead, put Busquets in central defence alongside Pique, and let Ramos stay out wide.
This has worked for Barcelona on multiple occassions, and it will give them an outlet on the right wing in Ramos.
Then, Xavi as the central midfielder. Playing wide on the left should be Iniesta. Wide on the right, Silva. This would work with two wingers who cut in because Ramos at right-back will be able to provide the necessary width. In the middle you can have Fabregas or Mata playing just off Villa or Torres.
__________Casillas___________
Ramos___Busquets-Pique______Alba
__________Alonso_____________
__________Xavi______________
Silva_____Fabregas________Iniesta
__________Villa/Torres__________
Excellent analysis ZM. As far as I am aware you are the first to point out the crucial role Pedro plays for Spain – his role for Barca is probably better appreciated though he has a similar function in both teams. I thought that playing Silva in the false 9 role is a good idea, provided that he has behind him in midfield the Barca trio of Xavi-Iniesta-Busi who are the only midfield in the top La Liga clubs playing behind a false 9 on a weekly basis. Breaking down that trio by introducing Alosno in a deep role next to Busi while pushing Iniesta to the AML position wreaks the team’s flow on several levels. To really understand that though, it is important to understand what Alonso can and cannot do.
Alonso is a brilliant medium to long range passer, excelling in sitting deep and launching counter attacks (as is his role in Real), or sitting deep just in front of the defense and looking for through passes to a number 10 (his role at the Pool). To be effective at that though he needs a destroyer next to him (Masche, Khedira) because he is slow, cannot tackle (see his Guardian interview for his views on tackling), and his defensive positioning is poor. Most importantly, he is not a good dribbler, and so needs that second DM even more as an offload channel. Therefore, his propensity for sitting deep next to another DM occupying the same space, and his other limitations leaves the team with only 4 attacking players. This is fine for a counter attacking team, but is immensely detrimental for a team like Spain.
As ZM points out, Spain need runners penetrating from midfield, and wide players stretching the defense to open up space for those runners. Leaving aside the wide players dilemma for a moment, an important element of the midfield question is how to play up front. If Silva is to play the Messi role, he has to have an Iniesta/Fabregas type player behind him who will keep bombing into the 9 space, a Busquets/Senna type player to shield the defense and anchor possession, and a Xavi/? player to orchestrate the attacking phases. Alonso cannot substitute Busquets simply because he has no defensive qualities – as all his club coaches have been noticing too. He cannot play in the Iniesta position for obvious reasons. The question is can he substitute Xavi? Xavi can dribble, shield the ball like the best of them, and his passing is legend. Alonso doesn’t have the first two qualities. Hence – Alonso is the odd man and should not play.
If he were to be dropped, then either of Iniesta/Fabregas slots in, and Spain immediately gain an additional dangerous dribbler/passer/runner from deep. Regarding the wide position, this is a function of who Spain employ as right and left backs. Considering Spain’s limitations in left/rightback positions, and the fact their best offensive right back is currently playing as a central defender it would make sense to employ wingers who stay wide and cut in only in the last phase – I think any of Villa/Pedro/Cazorla/Navas/Mata/Muniain can play that role.
Long post, but to close off, I think the really interesting question is not whether to drop Alonso, but whether to use Valdez instead of Casillas.
Thanks for this – fair to say you can’t have a false nine without runners….
Yesterday’s match against Costa Rica confirmed much of this analysis. Alonso really struggled in the first half playing as the sole DM without Busquets, only when Busquets took over in the second half did Spain look a decent team.
The other thing that was made clear is that Iniesta is by far their most important player. Fabregas doesn’t come close to him.
Spain actually has several good to potentially great left backs, VdB just won’t call them to the national team.
For all my lifetime Spain have struggled to find a number nine because most clubs in Spain prefered have a foreign striker as one of their allowed three. Lot’s of things have changed but that seems to still be the case. Torres has probably been the highest profile no. 9 Spain has had in that time and much of that was due to one great season for Liverpool. spaincrisis#
One thing that is constant in the world of football is change. No matter how good a team becomes, their time at the top as the dominant force is never lengthy as teams adapt to their tactics relatively quickly.
Spain has been the top team in the world now for almost 4 years which is a long time considering that they are European and their tactics are almost mirrored by Barcelona (or vice versa depending on how you view things). They have changed little from the pass and move style of play which has been so successful, but one aspect of their dominance is slowly becoming clear. It does not translate into goals and nor does it entertain.
My last comment about the entertainment factor started with me at the last World Cup. Initially, Spain were beautiful to watch and I loved to see how they kept possession and rotated their midfielders and defenders. Especially interesting to me was the way that they worked so hard when they didn’t have the ball, in direct contrast to say the Brazilian team of the 70’s who just waited for their opponents to give up the ball. Spain actually works hard to get the ball back which makes it hard for opponents to build any confidence.
However, slowly I started to lose interest in watching them to the point now where I won’t necessarily watch them unless I think they have a chance of getting beaten. I liken it to watching golf and tiger Woods. Great to see him hit those long drives and how he crushes his competition (things have changed a little there, of course), but seeing him win tournaments by 5, 7 even 9 shots slowly took the excitement factor out of the sport.
I think Spain have done the same. At least to me.
From where is that David Villa quote? When did he say that?
“When I didn’t know which positions to take up last season,” Villa said, “I just watched Pedro and copied him.”
Yes Spain need some natural width.
I know Busquets is really important, but they should try dropping him and seeing how Alonso fares alone
Arbeloa-Pique-Ramos-Alba
——–Alonso———-
—-Xavi—————-
———–Iniesta——-
-Pedro————Silva–
——–Villa————
or
try Euro2008 formation without Senna
Arbeloa-Pique-Ramos-Alba
——–Alonso———-
—-Xavi—————-
————–Iniesta—-
-Silva——————-
—–Villa—Negredo—–
VdB did drop Busquets and played Alonso on his own against Costa Rica recently. It wasn’t pretty. Alonso has always needed a partner in midfield. He isn’t a very good tackler and his positioning isn’t all that great. Spain played better after Busquests came on in the second half.
I am not sure X. Alonso is so bad when he is used as a a lone DM in front of the defense. I haven’t seen the game against Chile but I remember Mourinho used him in this way during certain games last season with Real Madrid, and he did not seem too lost. But I do believe Busquets is the best solution for that role, thanks to his relationship with the other Barça players and because of his height, an important asset for defensive set pieces, especially when LLorente isn’t part of the squad.
For the past two years, the only player that has seemed comfortable in the central attacking role for Spain is Llorente. Villa was more effective at the WC when playing on the left, Torres seemed lost as well without any space behind the defense; Silva and Fabregas are not good false 9s.
Therefore Llorente should be in the starting XI, and I think Soldado from Valencia could be an acceptable sub’ for him
Once you ponder on watering outings during Egypt, your mind probably shifts so that you can Sharm el Sheikh not to mention plunging inside the barrier reefs, however , it’s certainly not one desired destination about the Crimson Sea with regard to travelers who want to log off any shore and even in to the the water. Hurghada includes a lot of routines plus options available in its marine environments, with dive, snorkelling, windsurfing together with, what’s even better, windsurfing.
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
sanibel island resorts
Reading this article – the gift of your time