Napoli 2-1 Manchester City: Cavani double puts Napoli on the verge of qualification

The starting line-ups
City dominated possession but Napoli broke typically well to record a crucial victory.
Few managers rotate as little as Napoli – Walter Mazzarri named his usual side and his usual formation, a counter-attacking 3-4-3.
Roberto Mancini went for roughly his usual system too, though Sergio Aguero was only on the bench. Pablo Zabaleta and Aleksandar Kolarov started rather than Micah Richards and Gael Clichy.
Mazzarri played this match superbly, even if he didn’t really have to vary anything from his ideal strategy. Whilst he’s a master of making slight tweaks to his system in order to exploit a particular weakness in the opponent, this was as pure a counter-attacking 3-4-3 as you’ll find.
City formation
Whilst widely reported that City switched to a 4-4-2 (possibly because that’s what UEFA’s pre-match captions showed), Mancini’s system was not significantly different from how they’ve played throughout this season. Nigel De Jong was the holder, Yaya Toure broke forward ahead to join up with Milner, the attacking central midfielder. David Silva did his usual thing coming in from the right, whilst Mario Balotelli played high up on the left, and Edin Dzeko was upfront.
It’s difficult to understand how that could be interpreted as a 4-4-2 – even if Balotelli was playing as a striker (which he wasn’t, though of course he drifted into goalscoring positions, from where he tapped in City’s equaliser) – who was playing on the left? Certainly not Milner, who was in the centre, nor Silva who was clearly on the right.
Of course, when you play with two attack-minded wide players plus one striker dropping off into the hole, 4-4-2 and 4-2-3-1 are, if not interchangeable, not significantly different. The shape City played in the 6-1 thumping of Manchester United, for example, could be defined either way – especially if you’re looking at their shape with and without the ball. If anything, the use of Milner here, in the role broadly filled by Aguero in that game, indicates that this clearly was more of a 4-2-3-1 than a 4-4-2.
Indeed, the use of Balotelli wide was very deliberate by Mancini. In the first game, Napoli loved the fact that Silva and Samir Nasri both came into the middle of the pitch – they were too narrow, the Napoli wing-backs could follow, and they defended very well by staying narrow. As Fiorentina showed (albeit whilst only getting a draw), the way to cause Napoli’s system problems is by playing a player very high up on the flank, that neither the centre-backs or the wing-backs can naturally track. That was presumably the point of Balotelli playing there (rather than Nasri or Milner, fo rexample) and Adam Johnson also got a huge amount of time much later in the game on the flank, though his crossing was poor.

UEFA.com's average positions from the first half - Napoli a very defined 3-4-3, City's much looser but with Dzeko upfront alone, Balotelli on the left and Silva on the right
Nature of the game
As it happens, overall formations weren’t a key feature of the game. A formation match-up tends to be more important when the sides both want to play proactive football – particularly when they press and the importance of a spare man in midfield can be huge. With Napoli sitting back and City recording 62% of possession, it was more about how City could break Napoli down when the home side had stacks of players sitting behind the ball.
Here, City’s main problem was that they lacked a deep-lying central playmaker, a talented midfielder who could play key passes from the centre of midfield. That is the missing part of their jigsaw – and with De Jong and Toure getting plenty of time on the ball, they were the key players in helping to break down Napoli. The benefit of a creative player in that position is two-fold – as well as the obvious benefit of him helping to create chances, he might also force an opponent towards him to close down, therefore leaving space higher up the pitch for an opponent to exploit. Napoli didn’t need to close down De Jong or Toure, and so could remain compact.
City prone to counters
Mancini knows as well as anyone how quickly and effectively Napoli can break (effectively after the first game) – so it was surprising to see that both full-backs were given license to push forward at the same time. Kolarov was extremely attack-minded down the left, but one might have expected Zabaleta to stay much deeper – and a secondary question concerns why Mancini would pick Zabaleta over Richards if he wanted such an offensive force down that side. Zabaleta is more trusted defensively but was playing very high up – maybe Mancini simply wanted Zabaleta against Ezequiel Lavezzi, a man he doubtless knows well from international duty.
To prevent the counters, De Jong played remarkably deep in front of the back four, but by the time Napoli’s attacks reached him, they were up at full speed and broke quickly past. It is usually one of the Napoli ‘4′ that wins the ball and starts the counters, and they could storm forward and play quick passes with one of the front three to create a chance.
There was no surprise that De Jong was played in that role after Gareth Barry’s mistake in the first match between the two, but he couldn’t single-handedly compensate for both the full-backs pushing on. Marek Hamsik’s early header, for example, came when both Kolarov and Zabaleta were caught ahead of the ball when City lost possession. The first goal came from a poorly-defended corner, but the attack to win the corner in the first place had been a counter-attack.
1-0
At 1-0 down City had to push forward and were more vulnerable to breaks, and were fortunate that Salvatore Aronica’s poor clearance resulted in the equaliser. It’s difficult to know how to attack against a team, like Napoli, who want you to leave spaces at the back – the real answer is probably to try and counter-attack yourself, but Napoli sat deeper when ahead so this wasn’t possible.
Balotelli was the one player who looked likely to make something happen – Christian Maggio was often overloaded with Kolarov coming forward and Balotelli could sneak inside unmarked – watch his movement in from the flank in the run-up to the goal, and it’s notable that Napoli don’t really have a set player tracking him.
Second half
An early Napoli goal meant City were back to square one, and Mancini’s side played poorly in the second half and rarely looked like scoring – in fact, Napoli probably had the better chances on the break through Hamsik and Maggio. One of their star men was Walter Gargano, who completed all his tackles and the majority of his passes.

City’s strategy seemed confused – Balotelli wandered infield and stopped stretching the play, although did provide pace over the top for longer balls. It was hugely surprising that Mancini waited until the 70th minute to make his first change, Nasri on for De Jong – that was 21 minutes after Napoli had gone 2-1 up. In those 21 minutes, City recorded just one shot – a Silva effort from long-range that was well off target.
Aguero arrived on 81 minutes – so late that he asked to check the fourth official’s watch as he came on and looked surprised at the time – for Dzeko. With Napoli camped in their own box Dzeko’s aerial ability (even if he’s not quite a target man) would have been useful – perhaps Milner or Toure could have been sacrificed instead. The third change, on 85 minutes, saw Johnson replace Zabaleta and Milner go to right-back – a good final roll of the dice, but it would have been nice to see Johnson on the left able to go down the line and cross, rather than always having to come inside.
Napoli replaced Inler and Cavani when they tired, but otherwise maintained the same system throughout.
Conclusion
What could Mancini have done differently? He simultaneously could have been more cautious and more attacking. That sounds like a contradiction, but he could have been more cautious with the positioning of his full-backs early on – he let Napoli break into too much space and this set the tone for the first half. He then could have been braver with his substitutions – all three came very late.
The lack of a key creator from central midfield was vital, however. City have all the talent in the world in the final third, but it’s arguable that, in Europe, an intelligent ‘regista’ is the most important weapon a side needs.
Napoli were excellent and yet there’s little to say about them – they defended doggedly, countered quickly and Cavani finished ruthlessly, the features we’ve come to expect. Serie A opponents seem to have got wise to Napoli, but in Europe their unusual strategy looks like it will cause a surprise.
Napoli 2-1 Manchester City: Cavani double puts Napoli on the verge of qualification





Great article as usual
Terrific article. The rumours surrounding City’s interest in Daniel De Rossi aren’t unfounded then? I’m at a loss to think of a younger, better deep-lying playmaker they could buy. De Jong, vital as he was last season, seems to have been a square peg in a round hole this season.
moutinho
I agree.
De Rossi isn’t a regista, he’s more of a ball winner, albeit quite dynamic in midfield; more attacking than De Jong but less so than Toure, I believe mediano is a good term for De Rossi. And you’re a bit harsh on De Jong, he’s a destroyer, pure and simple, and has never been advertised as anything but.
even if you could successfully argue he’s less “attacking” than toure, I believe he has proved throughout his career that he is a better player in the attacking phase than toure – hands down. more intelligent, better passing, better range, better movement, better leader on the pitch…. the list goes on.
Really? I was under the impression that De Rossi had underachieved over the past 5 or so years. He was thought to be the next Tardelli when he first broke out, but hasn’t ever made the leap to being a world class player.
De Rossi still is one of the best and most complete midfielders in the world.
His perception is biased by being faithful to his hometown Roma, which is not a very successful side but hey, he won a World Cup with Italy.
Still, he’s not a “regista” at all, not like ol’ good Pirlo or the master Xavi, for sure.
I think City could use Montolivo as a creator.
Ballack, Modric, Schweinsteiger, Thiago Alcantara, Nuri Sahin, Emre Can (in a few years, though), Lewis Holtby… If you manage to get them.
Kroos?
I felt that Adam Johnson shouldve started on the right with Silva and Ageuro the other two attacking midfielders in a 4-2-2-1. Then maybe have played Barry over Yaya to control the middle of the park.
But then again City just played sloppy, gave away too much ball and didn’t get wide enough so blame could go equally to players or Manager.
You meant 4-2-3-1 right?
I hope he did
Haha yep. 4-2-2-1 wouldve been bold.
And a man down
4-2-2-1 is what we play at City when we’re unable to sub Balotelli off in time
At least here in the States, it’s pretty common to have commentators completely wrong in their tactical descriptions. Most times I think they just guess based on the lineup cards and past knowledge of the team’s prior tactics. Of course here in America, I’m not sure our presenters are particularly concerned with tactical analysis at all.
Which is weird considering the amount of analysis that goes into American Football!
Yeah, but alot of that is also wrong.
I was set to do a recap of this game but my damned DVR decided to summarily delete it, and I didn’t bother taking any notes while watching it live. So I’m quite glad to see this posted.
I ended up catching some highlights and felt like exploring Cavani’s second goal in detail. Toure really let City down, and Kompany’s inaction didn’t help matters one bit.
http://twelvepointcourier.blogspot.com/2011/11/anatomy-of-goal-cavanis-winner.html
What games are you all watching today? Milan-Barca?
Enjoyable and another good article to boot. I think Napoli are fast becoming one of favourite teams to watch – they are just so different from most teams I have seen and some of their individuals are really exciting.
Hopefully they’ll progress and like you say, they could catch out opponents not used to their strategy.
Would Nasri be a good option as the ‘regista’? He often played in a deeper role for Arsenal
He can certainly play that role (in fact he kind of did near the end) but it’s definitely not his specialist role. Compare what Nasri does to the likes of Alonso, Xavi, Busquets, Pirlo…He is too good on the attacking end of the pitch to be a full time deep lying playmaker.
It’s the same reason why AVB decided to snatch up Miereles last minute from Liv’pool. Mikel and Essien aren’t specialists in passing – they’re solid, but don’t expect them to make passes that will open up defences.
These players are also quite cost efficient. One Claude Makelele can play at top level for well over most of his career. Guardiola was still in tip top form in his mid/late thirties. You only need one or two DLPs in your team; and they can last for a long time.
I don’t think that would work, because I think Nasri lacks the necessary patience to play that role. Nasri is a wonderful player, but his finest attribute is his ability to skip past players get into scoring positions. He wants to score goals and create goals, not control a match.
I think Nasri only played in that position for a few games towards the end of his first season with Arsenal.
Seeing as Mancini had a first choice midfield of De Jong-Barry-Toure last season I don’t suddenly see him going Nasri-Toure-Aguero.
I think it would be worth trying Nasri in that position. It would make sense in the way ZM says in that he is an attacking threat who opponents would have to close down.
Re these two comments – personally I’m not sure it would work, but would be interested to see it given a go…
Check out Arsenal’s preseason games with Nasri in that role (b4 they sold him). It didn’t work–he doesn’t distribute well enough and takes too many touches anyhow. Strange to say, but Arsenal were correct to dump him.
Interesting to see how easily Napoli neutralized City in the midfield. Lots of scappy play and professional fouls really slowed City down in transition and took them out of their rhythm. (Also something to do with how deep Napoli’s top 3 sat?) EPL teams might learn a ton from this game.
I watched this match in patches, and what I summised was that City needed one touch passing to nullify the relentless Napoli pressing which was spurred on by the crowd.
There was glimses on show in 1/2 that City, if they made quicker possession transactions; they would eliminate about 2/3 oncoming Napoli pressers. To do this, when Yaya or De Jong pick up the ball; Silva or Milner should come inside and basically perform one touch passes back to yaya or a full back. Nasri would be preferable to Milner in that respect. In this way you can open up angles. That’s how I would counteract Napoli. That said, not many sides in Europe would of been able to cope with that pressing and hostile crowd.
I don’t think Milner suits playing in the hole, Nasri would be better there. He’s not great with his back to goal.
hehe … I might as well copy&paste some of my comments on previous posts … once again we see it is all about width … why is it that to keep the game wide you need backs coming up? Why do we need false nines and defensive midfielders that sit so deep they might as well be central defenders?
There is a constant search for adding arrows and such to tactics to mask the deficiencies of those on the field … if the wingers would just stay wide then the backs can focus on defense a bit more and don’t need to be covered by the central defenders who then don’t need to be covered by the defensive midfielders who then don’t need to be covered by the attacking midfielders who then doesn’t need to be covered by the false nine who then can focus on being a real nine and heading in crosses …
if you just fill in your line-up, be it 4-3-3, 3-4-3, 4-2-3-1 etc. with players who know how to play the position that they are put in and what the tasks are for that position … if I get put in a winger position I stay as wide as possible 75% of the time, if I’m a central defender I learn how to recognize spaces and how to anticipate the opponent’s attacks …
really … players aren’t getting any smarter in the modern game that’s for sure.
anyway … love that good ol’ Napoli won … now there’s a team who’s players know what is asked of them in the various positions …
It’s all about fluidity. You need offensive movement to create space and outnumber your opponent in certain areas. Otherwise, attacks are much more easily to defend.
cheers … but you can be fluid while playing your position as you are supposed to … might sound strange but you can be fluid playing a rigid 4-3-3 … look at how fluid the counter attacks of Napoli were but basically the players stayed in their 3-4-3 roles and did what they were supposed to do … also if I’m a winger and playing against 3 at the back I know I should stay wide most of the time because I want to either drag their defense out or their wide midfielder back (as was mentioned in the post) thus creating space form my buddies on the field … also I want to stay a touch wide when play is at the other end so that my teammates can make a cross field pass changing direction of play/attack … there are so many things a player can do to spice up his game (the coach can give the player a mountain of tasks to take in to the field) but the key is to do the things that the position asks of you … you can only be fluid if you create space the attack can flow in to, this requires intelligence, forward thinking and a dash of team spirit … here are some players who did/do just that Rui Costa, Redondo, Xabi Alonso, Bergkamp, Jonk, Munitis … they didn’t/don’t run all over the place on the field “being fluid”, they know what they want, they see space and they know what their teams mates want to do … I doubt any of the front/midfield players on MC have a tiny inkling of those ideas … I don’t see any ever becoming a coach, those on Napoli’s side on the other hand …
i feel that mancini is out of his depth here, he lacks vision to employ the ridiculous wealth in talent city possess in true tactical battles.
its not that he’s a terrible manager, but he is 2nd string and will never be top class.
If what you say about Mancini is true, what does that say about the Premier League and how much he’s dominating it?
I read Mazzari’s post-match script and he mentioned something about tweaking the positioning of his fullbacks at HT. I’d love to see your analysis on how Mazzari’s difference of approach in the 2nd half helped create the second goal!
Kudos for the awesome work overall, man. Digging up your website after matches to get a better insight has become a habit for me now.
Great analysis – City’s formation is basically 4 defenders 5 midfielders plus a pure striker, with no true wide wingers apart from Johnson when he plays. City’s best passing central midfielder is probably Gareth Barry, but I doubt he would have offered the creativity needed to break down Napoli.
Still, like a few of Argentina’s games in WC 2006 under Jose Pekerman, I’m always torn between the two options of A) Kick, Run, Cross, & Head “Power games” and B) Staying true to pass & move offenses. It would have been interesting to see City play with Aguero instead of Dzeko, and Barry instead of Milner. Then, Balotelli, Aguero, and Silva could have formed a solid and very high attacking triangle to go toe-to-toe with Napoli’s defense.
Your thoughts?
Napoli – Really good defensively, though they did sit back the whole game. The wing backs played well I thought , allways a good outball, relieving pressure and great at carrying the ball forward. Maggio especially allowed hamsik to come inside more.
My problem with napoli is they dont have enough variance in there play, and as seen in the Italian league, they are struggling with teams that figured them out. There two CM’s are a case in point, both great players but both very similar and dont offer something different. Gargano and Inler are great at intercepting, and distributing the ball to the more attacking players, which is clearly needed in Napoli’s strategy. But there isnt a plan B, Neither are particularly good at getting forward to help the attack or bringing the ball forward (usually left up the wingbacks). This is something they miss when teams defend deep against, or more related to the champions league – when they concede the first goal.
Another problem they face is that although the front three are fantastically balanced, with Cavani a threat in the air, lavezzi providing pace and finishing and Hamsik proding dribbling passing and a great shot, Is that Hamsik is actually two jobs for the team. With Hamsik both acting as the central playmaker and a inside forward looking to play off Cavani. This leaves them reliant on Hamsik, so if he doesnt bring his A-game, Napoli struggle.
If i was playing Napoli, I would play a high winger (something man city did right here), play a midfield three to block the passing between Gargano/Inler and the forwards, and man-mark/double up on hamsik as teams do with Silva.
But this shouldnt take away from how good Napoli are playing in the champions league, they are executing there strategy perfectly and could get far. But if they want to evolve as a team, they will need to add more options.
Man City – I think they had a good strategy, especially against a team that defended with so many players, and Man city realistically needed to win here. I think the problem was with De jong, he had the most time on the ball, but he isnt a player that is gonna hurt the opposition, this is why this would have been a game for Barry, at least he can provide a good range of passing and some creativity from deep. Though I agree with ZM, Man city need to bring in a good creative deep player as Barry wont win you the big trophies, and it seems strange that man city didnt go for Modric in the summer.
But i was impressed with Toure and Milner, who were good defensively and offensively. Toure, who must have realized playing deep would have accomplished nothing, pushed up and tried to cut off the passing supply to the Napoli Forwards, while also making good runs into the penalty area, which was something man city needed to break down a 5 man defense. Milner also tried cutting off the supply and made good runs, though his passing wasnt good enough and he found it hard trying to play the killer pass.
Silva drifting inside was both good and bad, he helped City dominate possession, and was able to provide the creative passing that was badly needed. But he didnt provide any penetration and usually played infront of the Napoli defense, while also leaving the LWB unmarked which allowed Napoli an outball.
Balotelli had a good game, and was Man City’s most dangerous player, winning the individual battle with Campagnarro and showing great movement to get into the penalty area unmarked.
But Dzeko had a poor game. Dominated by the napoli CB’s he didnt win anything in the air and was constantly caught on the ball. But more disappointingly he didnt provide any good movement, he should have tried to create space for toure/milner or Balotelli, but was very static and was basically left Man city a man short.
The fullbacks were interesting, I think they were right to get forward and try and overload Napoli outwide, Kolarov especially did a good job of that. But they didnt really do a good job of defending high up the pitch, letting the Napoli wingbacks spring forward a lot of the time. I agree Richards should have played today, would have been a bigger threat than Zab and can defend high up the pitch (his weakness is defending deep, wasnt gonna happen in this match).
So overall, Man city had a good approach, but Dzeko had a nightmare up front, Silva and the fullbacks didnt defend and they missed a creative deep player (the big long term problem for Man city). They also should have made changes earlier than they did, could have changed the result, espicially adam johnson, he could have made a big difference.
HI ZM,
Great analyzes as usual, only one question where on the uefa site you find their official average position graphs?
Yes. I was wondering the same.
Nice analsyis. Think the reason city don’t have one is that world class deep-lying playmakers are quite rare, perhaps the reason why man utd, chelsea (who also need another midfielder) and city have not bought one. Who do you think are the world’s best deep-lying playmakers?
so its Bayern who have discovered how to beat Napoli?
Imagine if Robben was playing. And Schweinsteiger not injured. How do they track Robben and Ribery while Schweini and Kroos/Mueller are moving around and waiting for Gomez to pop up somewhere in between Napoli’s 3 CB’s to nick a goal?
napoli’s goals against bayern were:
1.) own goal because Lahm was not covered by Ribery
2.) lazy lazy set piece defending (for Federico Fernandez’s two headers).
Yes. And in theory it is so straight forward how to play against a 3-man defence: Put your offensive wingers very wide and very high up the pitch, so your central striker has most possible freedom. Either, you are playing 3v3 at Napoli’s back, or they have to retreat their wingbacks against your wingers and then it is 3v5, and they are lacking men in midfield.
Bayern played like that, and as a result they had Gomez and Kroos enjoying goals, and they were totally dominating Napoli.
Exactly. I thought the problem was City recognized this but tried to get their width out of Kolarov and Zabaleta thus leaving them short handed in the back. In retrospect I think a better lineup would have kept Dzeko up top, Balotelli wide left and Johnson wide right for width and then Silva in the heart of the attack. This would have either pinned Napolis full backs in their third or stretched their back line and create gaps for Silva to exploit. The midfield could have been Toure and Milner who would mainly man mark Inler and Gargano and a back four of Clichy, Lescott, Kompany and Zabaleta would stay at the back and maintain a 4v3 situation at all times.. It would have maybe been a waste of personnel most of the game while City were in possession but it would have kept Napolis counter attacks at bay.
I would have described city’s formation as different than the usual 4-2-3-1. Looking at the UEFA average position chart, I would think it’s more of a 4-3-3, no? I think Mancini wanted to release both fullbacks, but particularly Kolarov, and try and stretch the back three across as much as possible. It would make sense that De Jong played much deeper than the other two, but I really didn’t see one of Milner or Toure playing higher than the other one, as the UEFA chart seems to indicate. Either way, certainly not a 4-4-2.
I thought that Balotelli was very high and they were looking for a the big switch across to him. The way that you defeat a team playing three at the back is the long diagonal ball into space where there is no fullback. Initially, at least, that’s what City was trying to do, but Napoli pressed them extremely well at the moment they wanted to switch, making it difficult for them to have the time to deliver a quality pass . I thought City’s biggest problems in the first half were Silva (in particular, this was one of the worst games I’ve seen from him) and Balotelli trying to dribble through wave after wave of Napoli defenders. Giving the ball away around the midfield line is exactly what Napoli want you to do. Much safer to drop it back and take it over the top, even if it almost always leads to nothing.
Personally, I think Mancini should have played for the 0-0 here. Keep Napoli below you and see what you can do against Bayern who won’t have robben when they come to the Etihad. As is, City need the win against Bayern, but it probably won’t matter. Take the point and live another day. To not do so is to say Mancini doesn’t think City can beat Bayern at home. If you want to advance in the CL knockout stages, beating teams of Bayerns quality (well there are probably only two other teams of Bayerns quality this year) at home is a must.
This was probably *the* game where Mancini needed Hargreaves in Europe. An actual 4-2-3-1 where neither De Jong nor Hargreaves ever pushes and only releasing one fullback at a time (primarily Kolarov) with Yaya Toure in the middle and Aguero and Balotelli stretched as wide as they can. Take your chances with long balls and cede posession to Napoli with (at least) 6 behind the ball. Even without Hargreaves, Kolo Toure is capable of stepping into one of the two defensive midfield roles.
As is, City tried to take the initiative, which is clearly what Napoli wanted. Mancini is good at many things, but I’ve seen him let Inter down time and time again in Europe. City fans will have to get used to this. To be fair, he did win three straight domestic titles with Inter, which is probably where City should start anyways.
If only Lavezzi could score a few more goals… he would be one of the greats then. He has the skills and the heart, just not the shooting boots. I love watching this guy play and would be overjoyed if he became a more complete player.
what odds city buying him in janurary to replace Tevez?
tbh, Mancini’s biggest mistake was playing Milner centrally as trequartista when you have Silva on the right… Just switch the two around really, very unwise to play Milner centrally as trequartista (a position he’s barely played recently)
“Napoli were excellent and yet there’s little to say about them – they defended doggedly, countered quickly and Cavani finished ruthlessly, the features we’ve come to expect. Serie A opponents seem to have got wise to Napoli, but in Europe their unusual strategy looks like it will cause a surprise.”
So So true, probably b/c Serie A in general is more tactical and defensive anyway, so Napoli’s strategy is much less effective against Italian teams compared to playing against more proactive, foreign teams….
Great post once again!!
First, I think Mancini set up the team to win the game.
Zabaleta and Kolvarov played probably because of Serie A experience (and as mentioned by ZM, national exp too for Zabeleta)
The thing here is that City did not need to win this game, a draw would be acceptable even if it doesn’t guarantee anything given they will host Bayern while Napoli visits Villareal. City would ONLY need a pt from Bayern (I understand 1 point from Bayern is not easy, but at least they are at home and Bayern will be already guaranteed 1st place)
Mancini from last year would’ve played tight. In this case, Napoli, which is a strictly counter attacking team will not be able to play to their strengths. In my opinion, Mancini “suffered” from too many attack choices, rather than too few midfield choices. Of course, there is a huge incentive to finish 1st in the group, but the risks far exceeds when you cant even make it to 2nd.
Which Serie A did Zabaleta play in?
Your usage of the word “whilst” instead of the much more common “while” made me look up the difference between the two
(Apparently, there isn’t any).
If I was Mancini, for a 4-2-3-1 I would play Silva as the “number 10″. It makes sense to play the most creative player there.
————–Hart
Richards-Kompany-Lescott-Clichy
———-Y Toure-Barry
——-Milner-Silva-Johnson
————Balotelli
I think the story of the game is the fact that the back three is not dead. 3-4-3 works well for a reactive team that is looking to absorb pressure and break quickly. Look at New Zealand at the last world cup!
If that’s your strategy, 3 at the back is an asset even against a lone striker formation. You have two spare centrebacks and get lots of cover behind the wingbacks and the centeback who picks up the striker.
You’re 2 v 3 in midfield but since your not looking to dominate possession who cares? All you need is two who will fill the space infront of the three centrebacks and pick up your opponent’s most attacking midfielder(s).
With three up front, you’ve got players arranged in a nice little triangle to hit when you want to break forward and the wingbacks can join in to stretch the play.
Wander of Capello’s tempted?
Even Barcelona attack in a 3-4-3 you know! They’re usually 4-3-3 when the defend, which let’s face it is not very often.
Disamina impeccabile, perfetta.
)
Grazie
(Per il dopo-Mazzarri, voglio ZM
cia’
Really, I think that for Manchester City a Champions League exit would be a blessing in disguise. In their evolution, progression to the knockout stages is not pivotal – Premier League success is. Next year, however, I fully expect City to take Europe by storm.
By the way, I think ZM makes an excellent point in saying that City need a proper regista. Perhaps they should have gone for Pirlo instead of Hargreaves…