Los Angeles Galaxy 1-0 Houston Dynamo: Donovan moves upfront to score the winner

The starting line-ups
LA Galaxy dominated for almost the entire game, but had to wait until the 71st minute to go ahead through Landon Donovan.
Galaxy coach Bruce Arena made one enforced change from the win over Real Salt Lake. Chad Barrett’s ankle injury meant he was unavailable, so Adam Cristman was given the nod to play upfront alongside Robbie Keane.
Dominic Kinnear was without Brad Davis in midfield, so pushed Corey Ashe forward to the left of midfield, and brought in Jermaine Taylor at left-back.
Neither the scoreline nor the statistics really sum up how dominant Galaxy were – they didn’t have more possession and struggled to get shots on target, but they were more expansive throughout and simply had more quality in the final third.
Formations and positioning
In broad terms this was 4-4-2 against 4-4-2, albeit with subtle positional differences, as depicted on the left. Whilst tactics is about a lot more than pure formations, that match-up of systems is perhaps the least intriguing tactical battle possible, which didn’t bode well.
However, there were some interesting features. The man most obviously trying to break the rigidity of the systems was Donovan, who typically came in from the right to a central playmaking role, as he did well during the World Cup. He was trying to add extra creativity in that zone, because the partnership between Cristman and Keane didn’t quite work – Keane generally made runs in behind and Cristman dropped deeper, but they rarely combined.
Full-backs
The most obvious difference between the two side was the roles of the full-backs. Dynamo were essentially playing four centre-backs across the defence, and from a very early stage it was clear to see that they wanted to defend very narrow across the width of the penalty box, trying to prevent Galaxy playing through them.
On the other hand, Todd Dunivant and Sean Franklin broke forward very well throughout the game, constantly providing overlaps. They weren’t necessarily in advanced positions full-time, they just timed their runs well to stretch the play and provide passing options for the wide midfielders, both of whom played quite narrow. The chalkboards below show the difference – Dynamo’s full-backs stayed in position and played lots of passes, but rarely got into positions level with the edge of the opposition penalty box.

The contrast in the passes played by Galaxy's full-backs (left) and Dynamo's (right) - Galaxy's sees less of the ball, but get further up the pitch to stretch the play
Pressing
The second thing Galaxy did very well was to close down in midfield, and to press as a unit, bringing the defence up and remaining compact from back to front. Dynamo were a little more naive – Camargo and Adam Moffat tried to track David Beckham and Juninho, but were dragged around too much, out of position and too far away from their defence. In turn, that created space for both Cristman and Donovan between the lines.
Dynamo’s best chance was to break quickly down the flanks, to take advantage of the fact that Donovan was coming inside and leaving his full-back exposed, whilst Mike Magee was slow to get back into position. It was probably only in the 65th minute that they actually created a goalscoring opportunity through this approach, however – Moffat played the ball out to Ashe, continued his run, and headed Ashe’s cross wide from a very good position.
Galaxy substitution
One key substitution was enough to swing the game in Galaxy’s favour – Cristman was removed with Chris Birchall taking his place. Not literally taking his place, though, because Birchall went out to the right of midfield, and Donovan came into the centre to play upfront alongside Keane.
This worked in two separate ways. First, Birchall stayed much wider and stretched the play on that side, which was particularly important as the runs from full-back were less frequent after the break, maybe because of fatigue. The new challenge from wide put Dynamo on the back foot and resulted in their back four getting into some terrible positions, having been so solid early on.
More importantly, it meant that Donovan and Keane could combine, and Donovan was closer to goal to provide a direct threat. It proved crucial – Keane got the ball on the left, ducked inside, and slipped it through to Donovan who made a good diagonal run and poked the ball home.
The first goal always looked set to win it – Galaxy played well after going ahead, not dropping deep and maintaining a high line. If anything, they should have extended the lead when Donovan shot rather than slipping in Keane for a second.
Conclusion
Galaxy were better all over the pitch. In tactical terms, there were two key factors – the runs of the full-backs to stretch the play and pile the pressure on Dynamo, and then the substitution that pushed Donovan into the central position he scored the winning goal from.
In raw terms, Galaxy simply had much better players and much more experience. The two star men were perhaps the pick of the players – Beckham with his constant accurate crosses and passes into the box, and Donovan for his clever movement and positioning in two different roles. That may have a long-term impact – it was significant that the three Designated Players combined for the goal, the first time such a player has picked up a winners’ medal. “Finally, we can retire the notion that teams who are willing to drop some coin for star power are at a competitive disadvantage in MLS,” as Grant Wahl puts it.
To speak of the difference in quality without mentioning the absence of Davis would be unfair. Along with Beckham he had provided the most assists in the MLS throughout the season – and created 126 chances throughout the season, 54 than any other player. As Donovan admitted, his absence was key.

Beckham (left) fired balls into the box, while Donovan (right) drifted in well from the right
.
Los Angeles Galaxy 1-0 Houston Dynamo: Donovan moves upfront to score the winner




Thanks for covering this game ZM!
Cristman may have looked so poor because he’s clearly a target forward, not someone to drop deep. Squandered too many chances.
My pleasure.
Funny – that’s exactly what I thought from watching him (haven’t seen him play before) looked to have the touch of a target man, uncomfortable deep…
Did you catch the Real Salt Lake v LA Galaxy semi-final? That was probably the best MLS game I’ve ever seen and featured the two best sides in the league.
Yea it was. I got to go see it at the Home Depot but was dissapointed my team lost.
I didn’t watch the game, but that Dynamo formation looks funny to me. It’s so flat! It looks like something you play in FIFA, not in a real football match.
It is more of a combination of the MLS generally using players that are less tactically developed and therefore more comfortable playing rigid and the fact that the author has little experience with the side so it becomes much harder to diagram without any preconceived notion of how they play.
ZM what do you think of American soccer as a whole?
The standard of play in MLS is improving (part of what makes the league interesting is its unusual talent structure and Designated Players) and Grant Wahl thinks Galaxy is roughly as good as lower level EPL teams like Blackburn. While I would put the better teams (Galaxy, Seattle Sounders, FC Dallas, Real Salt Lake) closer to top half Championship sides, I really think that in 20 or so years MLS could be one of the best leagues in the world (maybe not as good as the ‘Big 4′ Euro leagues but certainly on par w/ Russia or Turkey). Soccer has been America’s “sport of the future” since the 1960s/70s but now there is a tangible feeling of progress. I see people wearing Chelsea and Arsenal shirts, people know who Lio Messi is and know what the Champions League is. All in all, an exiciting time for soccer in America.
As a european who watches MLS frequently I can agree that level raises slowly.
But you have to add that MLS in general is still far away from european or south american top leagues. You can still see lots of technical, athletic and tactical problems on the pitch which are not seen in current top leagues.
And the conference structure is bizarre.
The fact alone that Houston reached the finals is absurd. I think they had 18 points less than Galaxy in regular season which made them a mediocre midfield team. And they played like this in the final. Davies (by far the best player) there or not they were outclassed in every aspect of the game like ZM illustrates.
There are at least a handful teams much stronger than Houston in this league who were eliminated due to the absurd structure of MLS.
As an american I see the level rising too, but slowly. I think most american’s just don’t have that inherent “touch” on the ball and positional awareness like europeans and especially south americans do. Too many americans try to equate it to american football with rigid positions and plays. Until that changes at the youth level we’ll always be at a disadvantage to other leagues.
The conference structure bothers me too but I’ve got 2 reasons why we do it, one good and one bad…
The good one is that america is bigger than all the european countries. Having to travel from LA to NY to play would be very taxing on the players with a 3 hour time difference. Where as big european teams like barca just hop on a plane in the morning and play a game in the afternoon then head home, the MLS teams would have to fly out a couple days before, train and then fly back the next day.
The other one is money. The reason people invest in MLS teams is to make money, not raise the level of soccer in america. I don’t think this is terrible but it will stunt the growth of soccer in america because people won’t invest in teams to see the team win. Also, I don’t know how much thought is given to bringing in DPs to raise the level of the team or sell jerseys?
the touch on the ball you refer to is not necessarily inherent and can be learned through practice, but this requires starting early. coaching in the US is wack, with the self esteem brigade trying to make sure everyone feels included at a young age switching to the classic english failing of caring too much about winning at an adolescent level and not enough about technique.
as for conference structure, this is obviously not the biggest barrier to widespread adoption of the sport. millions of americans play soccer as youths and then leave the game – if the sport is to develop, the pipeline needs to be revamped.
I agree that the youth level is very undeveloped. It was only 5 years ago that the MLS created the rule that all their teams had to provide their own youth academy system. 5 years later and we have already seen some players reach the first team from these academies, but they are still a long way from reaching their desired impact.
Thanks for covering an MLS game. Great analysis.
Could you explain what the different color schemes in the chalkboards represent (e.g., for Galaxy players are purple unsuccessful and the teal color successful pass attempts)?
Thx!
Good to see the MLS final analysis again this year. Fortunately, the MLS chalkboard creator is pretty awesome in how comprehensive it is. Unfortunately, not much interesting going on in MLS as far as tactics are concerned, so the chalkboards aren’t as useful as they would be for other leagues.
David Beckham – 31 successful passes, 31 unsuccessful passes, 32 times tackled and lost possession
Robbie Keane – 18 successful passes, 7 unsuccessful passes, 10 times tackled and lost possession
Landon Donovan – 32 successful passes, 7 unsuccessful passes, 10 times tackled and lost possession
Juninho – 32 successful passes, 14 unsuccessful passes, 14 times tackled and lost possession
Some stats that show how much of the Galaxy’s play goes through Beckham, for good or bad. At first its a little alarming that he only completed 50% of his passes, until you factor in the type of passes that Beckham usually attempts. A lot of those 62 attempted passes were from crosses, set pieces and long seeking passes.
I had a pretty good feeling that the Galaxy’s fullbacks were going to be highlighted if you were going to do a tactical analysis. I’m not quite so sure Brad Davis would have done any better at left midfield than Cory Ashe. With the fullbacks pinning the wide midfielders deep in their own half and far from the forwards, Ashe’s speed ( theoretically) made him useful for joining the forwards quickly. Davis isn’t quite so fleet of foot.
With the combined attack of Ashe and Davis on the left Donovan would have had to play much more conservative positionally. As it was they didn’t have to worry about Taylor getting forward at all.
Damn shame that Brad Davis couldn’t play. He’s the Houston difference maker. Great analysis as usual though.
Nice writeup.
Gonzales was right, DeLaGarza was left (most of the time) and are an interesting CB pairing that enables the high line. They were team-mates at Maryland in college, with Gonzales playing as a stopper and DeLaGarza as sweeper. They play much “flatter” now, but still fall into the sweeper/stopper role distribution to some extent. Having DeLaGarza’s speed, and sweeper’s anticipation enables the high line, while his height and build make it a necessity. He was beat on aerial challenges around the box. But, his height was rarely an issue.
Contrast that with Houston playing narrow and deep with 4 CB’s, they were stronger in the air, but vulnerable to pace and left room between the lines for Donovan to move into and work from. And they were hopeless of pressuring Beckham when he dropped into the space his FB’s vacated as they moved into attack. He could distribute from deep, while Houston had to drop their wingers to cover the fullbacks.
I like your point about the defense. Gonzalez and De la Garza have as much to do with LA’s awesome season as the big money players. To see little and large in the CB position is interesting, but their balance is interesting to note. We think of CB’s as one sort of player (stereotypical big burly bloke) but the best defenses often have two CB’s who complement each other just like these two. One solid that can win anything, and one who reads the game so well, he often doesn’t have to.
Now I just wonder when the standard of MLS managers will improve just like the general improvement in player ability within the league.
So the name of the losing team is Houston Dynamo, not Dynamo Houston? Strange people those americans…
In general our sports teams are in the format of Place name, Mascot. Dynamo is probably one of the less ridiculous for you guys, when you consider teams from other American sports like the Boston Red Sox, Carolina Panthers or Utah Jazz. And in MLS, Houston Dynamo is significantly better than Real Salt Lake or Sporting KC… Which obviously jusst poorly lift names off of European teams. Although I am a fan of DC United’s name which is guilty of the same.
Anyway, really glad to see this game covered on here. I hope that Beckham winning over here will further increase exposure and attract more talent, I think the MLS really has potential now. Robbie Keane in particular is a fantastic example of the type of player the league could be attracting.
If the debt contagion continues to spread in Europe the UEFA salary bubble is going to pop sooner rather than later (especially in Italy and Spain) and more players will have to migrate to a) European teams financed by oil multinationals b) US c) Brazil in order to get decent contracts. I think we’ll see the decentralization of football quality in this decade, with Europe giving and the rest of the world gaining. MLS will definately gain in that exchange.
Errr…actually, Houston Dynamo is another name arbitrarily copied from European teams: eg Dynamo Moscow, Dynamo Kiev, Dynamo Dresden, Dynamo Bucuresti, Dynamo Minsk, Dynamo Tibilsi, etc. in fact, it is equally as weird as “Real” Salt Lake, because just as Salt Lake has no particular association with any Royal family, Houston Dynamo have no allegiance with any Soviet-era electrification programs.
And compared to the teams they have copied from, Houston’s name IS bak to front.
Houston is a center for the energy industry in the States.
1. Houston is in fact connected to the energy industry as per maxq.
2. Dynamo fits squarely in with the US team name tradition as well as with the European one – see the Heat, Magic, Rockets, Jazz, Thunder, Chargers, Sky, Sun, Mercury, Liberty, Shock, Storm, Red Storm, Crimson Tide, etc.
3. so Dynamo is in fact *not* as weird as “Real” Salt Lake from an american perspective.
Oh ok…thanks everyone for putting me right on that.
Dynamo clubs weren’t connected with Soviet era electrification programs. The name comes from Dynamo Sports Club and was supposed to mean “Power in Motion” (Greek word dynamis means power). Dynamo Sports Club was actually started by the head of the Soviet political police and during the Soviet era Dyanmo sides were the clubs of the secret police. Lavrenty Beria was the honorary chief of Dynamo Moscow. Maybe Houston is the club of the CIA!☺
Blackburn Rovers, Wolverhampton Wanderers, Bolton Wanderers, Bristol Rovers, Wigan Athletic, Sheffield Wednesday, Glasgow Celtic and many more. As you can see it’s not limited to Americans. In fact this common in most English countries.
I know that, but If you are going to build a club on imitation you ought to put some thought into it. Besides, Dynamo Houston would have sounded better imho. Well, at least Real Salt Lake got it right.
The name “Dynamo” was not selected because of its use in the Soviet Union … it was selected because of Houston’s deep roots in the energy industry and because an earlier soccer franchise in the town had been named “Dynamos.”
American here (sorry). Personally, I’m undecided as to the best way to raise the level of football (you’re welcome) in the States.
Do you think it helps the American game more to have Howard, Dempsey and Friedel succeed in the Premier League? Or, would it be better for our game if our best players stayed here?
Example: On a personal level, I hope Brek Shea can make a permanent move to Arsenal because I’m an Arsenal fan, but I don’t know if that would inspire American kids to pick up the sport (“maybe I can make it to Arsenal too”) or if it would cause them to lose interest entirely (“why follow this sport at all when most of our best players leave?”).
I’d say it helps, but indirectly.
Shea on Arsenal won’t attract many new fans (at least right away, while most Americans have no idea what Arsenal is), but by going to Arsenal or a similar team he should improve as a player.
And once he does that he can help make the national team succeed. Which is really the only team that is currently even slightly relevant over here. I just hope Klinsmann can bring it all together
No one cares about the MLS
Speak for yourself.
I think it’s fitting that the final turned out the way it did. The difference between the Galaxy and everyone else all season long has been their ability to grind out one-nil wins. No other team in Major League Soccer has their consistency.
Deserved champions.
Goooaaallllaaazzziiiooo “Sacked in the morning!” Sing Stoke. ‘Pay rise in the morning’ things Steve Kean. SCFC 2 – 0 BRFC