Portugal 6-2 Bosnia: Portugal better all over the pitch (and Bosnia’s complete reshuffle at half-time doesn’t help)
The starting line-ups
Paulo Bento’s side wobbled midway through the match, but overall deserved to progress to Euro 2012.
Bento made no changes from the first leg, persisting with a 4-3-3 formation with Helder Postiga upfront.
Safet Susic kept his midfield and attack in tact, but made suspension-related changes at the back. Sasa Papac was available again so started at left-back to replace Sejad Salihovic.
This was a completely different match from the first leg – much more open and also much quicker.
Portugal passing
With the benefit of a decent pitch, the passing quality from Portugal’s midfield trio was clear. Miguel Veloso sat in front of the back four and generally got time to spray passes to the full-backs, whilst Joao Moutinho circulated the ball well and Raul Meireles moved forward slightly.
The home side’s midfield was much more compact than Bosnia’s, which featured Zvjezdan Misimovic high up the pitch and consequently difficult for the other two midfielders to locate, whilst Haris Medunjanin dropped very deep, as usual, to get the ball from the centre-backs. As a result, Portugal kept the ball better.
Midfield battle
The midfield battle was interesting, because Merieles was much keener to close down Medunjanin than in the first leg, happy to leave Veloso and Moutinho further back protecting the defence. This meant Medunjanin didn’t get time to distribute the ball intelligently, he often misplaced passes, and therefore Bosnia’s play was slow and predictable when trying to build play fro the back.
The one problem with Portugal’s midfield being so tight in the first half was that there was, as usual, no real link between the midfield and the forward trio through the centre of the pitch, and therefore little creativity. Portugal still managed two goals in the first half, but these came from thumping long-range strikes from Ronaldo and Nani, rather than following any defence-splitting passes. The midfield won the possession battle, but didn’t win the actual game.
Nani
Incidentally, Nani’s positioning was more central than in Bosnia, which helps Portugal’s play. He can shoot with either foot which makes him very difficult to defend against, whereas in the first leg he was stationed wide on the touchline, never in a position to shoot and always likely to go down the line.
Elsewhere, the formation match-ups were very similar to the first half, although the one newcomer – Papac in at left-back – was perhaps the key individual. Bosnia created little in the first half, but the two chances they did fashion came from decent crosses from Papac. The first was headed onto the underside of the bar by Edin Dzeko, the second resulted in the penalty after Fabio Coentrao handled Senad Lulic’s header. On both occasions, Nani stood off Papac rather than getting tight, and turned his back and swung a hopeful right leg at the ball, rather than blocking the cross with his body.
Sweeping Bosnia changes
Susic's amazing half-time changes saw eight outfield players change positions. This shows the starting line-ups, and the arrows towards their position for the second half - only Pjanic and Dzeko stayed in the same role
The start of the second half saw the most complete overhaul of a side ever seen in a match covered by ZM – eight of the ten outfield players changed positions, effectively in a chain including the entire side with the exception of Dzeko and Miralem Pjanic. Medunjanin became the closest player to Dzeko, whilst Lulic was presumably supposed to give more thrust from left-back.
The changes didn’t work particularly well – an understandably uncomfortable backline was opened up easily for Ronaldo’s goal, Portugal’s third, and in the aftermath Lulic was sent off, meaning Susic had to change his side even further. Darko Maletic came on for Elvir Rahmic and went to left-back, with Medunjanin moving deeper again in a 4-4-1 system.
Having dominated possession at 11 v 11, Portugal were even more on top after the red card. Bosnia briefly got back into the game at 3-2 with a goal from a set piece, but Portugal were able to play around them. The away side needed a goal, and had to come out and press Portugal, but this left gaps at the back. Ruben Micael came on for Meireles and found space well, setting up Postiga with a rare through ball. At 4-2 the contest was over, and Veloso and Postiga added two more to make it a rout.
Conclusion
The red card (for dissent rather than sporting transgressions) rather ruined the second half – it would have been interesting to see if Susic’s overhaul had worked, but they ended up getting thrashed.
Portugal were impressive, particularly with their ball retention in midfield, but there are still big question marks about whether they can turn dominance into goals. They still lack a top-class striker and will probably play without a designated playmaker, and the quality in wide areas can probably only compensate for one of these problems. A plan B, perhaps involving Danny, should be tried before next summer.
Still, Portugal’s pressing here was impressive and they defended well at the back during both legs, and they should provide tactical interest at Euro 2012.
Once again, a strong Bosnia side failed to qualify for a big tournament because of a tough draw. They certainly deserve to qualify more than France
“They certainly deserve to qualify more than France”
=> during the qualifiers : Bosnia-France 0-2 / France-Bosnia 1/1
Anyway, with so many games during qualifications, my opinion is that it’s the team with the most points that deserves the most ^^
True
I think his point is that France got 1st place over Bosnia under dubious circumstances.
nothing dubious
According to you, perhaps. For many others, including the OP, the France-Bosnia result will be remembered as dubious, in the same way that the France-Ireland result was considered dubious by many…
I think if Portugal had their act together and won their group like they were supposed to then the playoffs would have been different having Denmark involved instead. Bosnia deserved to qualify more than Denmark (again!) in my opinion.
Would switching from a 4-3-3 to a 4-2-3-1 fix the midfield not linking up with the forwards problem or would it simply create new problems for the team?
Also I noticed that at the end they tried Ronaldo as the striker, with Queresma and Carlos Martins as wingers. Didn’t work what so ever.
“Portugal were impressive, particularly with their ball retention in midfield, but there are still big question marks about whether they can turn dominance into goals”
They thumped six, didnt they. What about trying Ronaldo as a striker, he has played as that for Real. Wldnt that be sensible ZM, considering the lack of quality strikers at the moment.
Ronaldo is most dangerous when he has time to receive the ball and accelerate. His pace and two footedness make him almost unplayable when he gets to full speed. However, he won’t get those opportunities to accelerate playing as a lone striker, and he’ll get frustrated facing two center backs with his back to goal. Portugal need to keep him on the left and hope he gets a few one on one situations. All Postiga needs to do is occupy two defenders.
Agree with what u said. My point was that since Portugal is struggling in the striking dept, Ron can be used as a stop gap solution. Saying that, he is a natural winger and that is what he should play as.
Since the days when he was in Manchester United, he hasn’t play well whenever he was used as a lone striker. That made SAF focus more on the attacking fluidity, since he occassionally had to use Ronaldo upfront as a lone striker (Rooney and Park in each side) in CL matches for better defense.
Portugal seemn a bit stuck between a midfield that dominates possession and an attack that favours Counterattack (ronaldo and nani). Still i think they will do well at the Euro’s.
Whenever Messi scores, the praise he gets in ZM’s article is amazingly high. Yesterday, it was mainly Cristiano Ronaldo who won Portugal the game and he isn’t mentioned even once.. I really think you aren’t very objective when it comes to Messi vs CR, Michael.
Regarding what you said about Ronaldo winning it for Portugal is absolutely true. But even if ZM favours Messi, he would be the last guy to show that in his analysis. He is neutral when it comes to review and i can say that coz i have been following the site since its inception.
that is because generally Ronaldo’s goals are less of tactical interests
you know, his first goal yesterday came from his trademark freekick, and second goal came from a poacher’s effort from the left forward position
the second goal DID mentioned in the review, as it well reflected the changed tactics (higher up the pitch and press more) from the Bosnian side
well, to be honest, I don’t even think that the Messi vs CR thing is in ZM’s mind.
What Messi vs CR thing is this?
Are you comparing them as players?
Ronaldo is an amazing player, and if Messi wasn’t around I’d probably have him ahead of the rest but Messi is around, and the undisputed daddy.
Portugal – The back line is very good for portugal and seems one of the strongest in Europe, and in a tournament this could be see Portugal go far. The RB played a much better game today, than he did in the first leg, getting forward much better.
Veloso had a much better game than the first leg too, with his passing looking much better due to the better pitch. This helped Portugal play much better, with his passing actually very intelligent. His positioning was very good too, isolating misimovic from the rest of the bosnian midfield. Moutinho helped keep possession with simple short balls and also getting into positions to recieve the ball back (ala xavi) which like spain could be a very good defensive strategy. Portugal looked much better with Meireles pushing higher up the pitch, as he could press Medunjanin and disrupt Bosnia’s game, while getting into good attacking positions when portugal had the ball. But i still think they could do with a better option in that position, as meireles lacks the ability to play a killer pass, and it leaves Portugal keeping the ball in non-threatening positions.
In attack, Nani and Ronaldo both played much better than in the first leg, with Ronaldo not wasting the ball as much, and nani cutting inside to better effect. But portugal seem to reliant on those two to produce something, and if they dont, then Portugal lack a goal threat. Postiga did a good job, dropping deep to give Ronaldo and Nani a option to combine with him, while also providing a target in the penalty area when they were outwide.
Overall, Portugal look a good team, they are excellent defensively with a strong defense and keep possession really well (which as spain prove is a good defensive strategy). They also have two world class wingers, who are big goal threats, and are guranteed to see a lot of the ball. But they lack a top class striker (postiga is good in the air and has okay build up play, but lacks the finish and movement of a world class striker) and they lack a link play between midfield and attack. The problem is they dont have any options really to hlp this.
Somewhat unrelated, but all this talk recently of proactive, positive football vs. reactive, negative football has brought me to wonder this: what is the majority’s general consensus on the definition of proactive/positive football (also, what’s that of reactive/negative football)?
Really curious to hear people’s thought’s (especially ZM’s of course=D)
Proactive sides look to set the tempo of the game and dictate how it is going to be played by playing to their strengths (generally assumed to be pressing and possession)
Reactive sides look to find weaknesses in how their opponents play more often than playing to their own strengths (generally sit deep and counter quickly)
well put, that is pretty much it
I asked the question because lately I’ve seen people (on various sports blogs) criticize Spain/Barcelona so much because they keep possession too much and just pass and pass and pass (which they then criticize as contributing to making the game boring). What was generally perceived as the epitome of entertaining, positive football is now seen as boring and pointless (and some even go so far as to say as its sole purpose is defensive and destructive to the game of football). Why?
Because, quite frankly, it is. I’m not arguing that Spain doesn’t deserve the success in the last two tournaments. But in hindsight, the only game I still remember was their loss against Suisse. I still remember the amazing two first matches of the Netherlands in 2008 and (though I may be a bit biased here) the only three games worth remembering in 2010 were (again) Netherland’s victory against Brazil and Germany’s two victories over Argentina and England.
And that’s the problem with possession-based tactics in exaggeration, as it often is shown by Spain and, to a lesser degree, by Barca. It may be fascinating from a tactical standpoint but it simply doesn’t produce matches worth remembering.
Or to put it in another way: I’m quite sure, if Spain had played the Netherlands yesterday, they would have won just as easily as Germany did. The difference being that the game would have ended 1-0, not 3-0. And that’s why I’d rather finish second next year, having seen some fascinating games by my team, than winning the Championship spain-style.
Fascinating response, appreciate your opinion mate!
Especially that last paragraph really gave me food for thought…
“Proactive” football is not always “positive” football. There’s nothing positive about Barca/Spain killing off a game through endless passing/possession. “Positive” football is equal to attacking football; if a team has 70% possession but is satisfied passing the ball around the midfield most of the time, they’re not spending the majority of the time attacking.
And why did Spain keep possession too much? Because their opponents often park the bus/defend deep with two lines etc and just try to counter/score from set pieces. When they played against Chile at the WC and this year’s friendly, Spain didn’t just pass pass pass to death, because Chile pressed high and thus there are a lot of space for Spain to thread the ball through.
and the first half of that game was probably the best 45 mins of football at WC2010.
<3 Bielsa.
All the top sides have to routinely face opponents who sit deep and hope to hit on the counter, yet not all top sides play tiki taka.
Besides, my comment was referring to what happens when Spain/Barca score their(usually inevitable) first goal- they tend to kill games off through possession. Funny you mention the Spain v Chile friendly as an example of Spain being positive- it’s worth noting that they were 2 goals down at the half, so they had no choice but to attack.
Ronaldo is one of the best goal scorers. I hope that he can play as a lone striker form time to time. When the time come, he cannot run fast anymore, it will be good use for him.
Does anyone one know why was Lulic sent off? I’m quite curious how he got those two yellow cards in a matter of seconds.
Was shouting at the linesman calling for an offside. When he got a yellow, he started shouting at the ref instead for the yellow. Not very smart.
I guess Postiga is too under-rated, believe me he will score many goals for Portugal, the guy is a killer. The only thing he needs is a nice cross