6 points on Manchester City 2-3 Manchester Utd
The starting line-ups
The stereotypical game of two halves…
1. Roberto Mancini went with a midfield triangle featuring Nigel de Jong at the base, with James Milner and Samir Nasri ahead. This is a change from the usual system City play, which features two deeper midfielders with a more creative player at the tip. A major reason for that was the unavailability of both Yaya Toure and Gareth Barry, and Mancini clearly feels de Jong is better as a sole holding player, rather than in a double pivot – a judgement difficult to argue with.
The effect of this move, however, was to make City much less compact. Milner and Nasri played high up the pitch and combined with the two wide players, but were often slow to retreat and left a large space between them and the defence, with only de Jong covering that zone. He didn’t have a good game in the first half, with Rooney outfoxing him to get space for his first goal – the Dutchman never seemed to know where Rooney was. De Jong was excellent for City last year but probably needs a bit more protection and help in his zone – Barry and Mark van Bommel assist him at club and international level, and he missed that support here.
-
2. United were outpassed in the opening minutes, but they still exerted some level of control on the game. Michael Carrick and Ryan Giggs are not physical defensive midfielders, but both defend intelligently by occupying the zone in front of the back four, shutting off passing angles and making interceptions. When they won the ball, they distributed it forward to the attackers quickly and neatly.
Giggs did this well – he picked up a loose ball in the centre of midfield and sent it to Rooney for the first goal, and made a well-judged interception before playing it to Nani for the incident which resulted in Vincent Kompany getting sent off – the two moves putting United firmly in charge.
Even though City dominated possession, United’s midfield two were in a more comfortable position than they were against Newcastle – when they saw more of the ball, but couldn’t compete physically.
-
3. Rio Ferdinand and Chris Smalling doesn’t appear to be a natural centre-back combination – the two are very similar, with Smalling generally seen as Ferdinand’s replacement. Both would probably prefer a more physical centre-back alongside them – Nemanja Vidic if he wasn’t fit, or Phil Jones when he has more experience and becomes more dominant in the air.
For this game, though, it worked reasonably well against the movement of Sergio Aguero upfront alone. With that centre-back partnership, United probably would have chosen to play against an intelligent player based around movement rather, than a more physical target man (although, of course, they wouldn’t have chosen someone as good as Aguero). Against a classic number nine, they might have struggled.
-
How Mancini altered things - he had a spare man at the back (yellow zone), had 4 v 4 in midfield (pink zone), but allowed the wing-backs forward to occupy the opposition full-backs too. In addition, he had a central playmaker and a forward, to provide an attacking threat.
4. The only problem at the back was the positioning of Ferdinand. As against Newcastle in midweek, he dropped into ludicrously deep positions at times – most obviously in the 92nd minute when he fouled Micah Richards. In that instance, he was so far behind the rest of his teammates that he was off the television camera’s picture.
Ferdinand doesn’t seem to have any confidence in his pace, so drops deeper and deeper to save himself. Nemanja Vidic is often guilty of the same thing – it’s difficult to imagine that those two will be able to rekindle their once-brilliant partnership at the back. This isn’t a new revelation, but this game underlined the point that Ferdinand is no longer a dependable covering defender.
-
5. Mancini’s changes at half time were excellent, pushing City to a 3-4-1-1 system which featured a spare man at the back, an equal number of players, and enough attacking threat to cause United problems on the break.
The energy of the wing-backs made up for the numerical disadvantage, and the freedom of the outside centre-backs to come forward with the ball worked well too – particularly with Richards’ run forward for the free-kick which resulted in the first goal. (I’ve written more about City’s tactics at half time over at the Guardian.)
-
6. United were quite purposeful with their passing at the start of the second half, as if they wanted more goals to complete a thrashing, rather than to preserve the lead by keeping the ball and wasting time. With City shifting to a five-man defence, it would have been easy for United to cool the tempo, but they were too forward-thinking and gave City a chance to win the ball and then break.
This was probably why Paul Scholes was used so early on (despite his understandable lack of match fitness), and although he gave the ball away for the second goal, he did a decent job in calming United.
I’m confused as to the description of de Jong in the first point – you say he’s probably more effective on his own rather than in a double pivot, and then say he’s used to the protection afforded by having Barry in the side with him, suggesting he would prefer to be used in a double pivot. Are my reading skills off today?
Where do you see de Jong as being effective?
Hi Dave,
Good point. My interpretation is that De Jong prefers a conventional double pivot (see ZM’s double pivot definition here: http://www.zonalmarking.net/glossary/), in that both players are holding midfielders (emphasis on holding). Man City are playing a different double pivot this year with Barry and Toure, with Barry often the one hanging back and Toure pushing forward. So some people might not think of it as a double pivot because Toure isn’t a traditional holding midfielder.
I think De Jong is effective in a counter attacking side, such as Man City last year. In this team he’s an effective destroyer, breaking up play, winning tackles and quickly shifting the ball to creative players to counter attack with speed.
I’d argue that for the majority of the season (particularly against the smaller teams) Yaya hasn’t played in any sort of a double pivot system with Barry. He’s played a far more traditional box to box midfielder role whilst Barry just sits on his own.
They compliment eachother really well though.Yaya really helps to make up for Barrys’ lack of mobility (note world cup v Germany) and im my opinion is a better option than De Jong if City are to play good football because he’s very neat and tidy on the ball and does the simple things well….In other words he KNOWS what he’s good at and doesnt try to do to much…De Jong on the other hand seems to really affect the tempo of Citys’ play in a negative way because he thinks he’s capable of playing the odd Xabi Alonso ball!
ZM’s comments mean that Milner and Nasri were too high up the midfield so that made De Jong totally exposed to the threat of Rooney and he was unable to cope with it. You still need some sort of protection from the more-attacking midfielders even if you’re used as the only DM.
In short, the word “protection” that confused you indicates the protection from the more attacking midfielders (most likely Milner in this game), not from another defensive midfielder.
I agree with your points men, and also agree if you are fighting for them.
I agree your point that if man united bought really fast midfielder, like Sneijdler or Ibrahimovic, they would easily win.
But its because giggs is old and left foot, playing in right foot man’s position (cent. midfield). so he was unable to play well and man united suffered. Also he is not furious enough.
Man city triangle not so frosty though, as shown because it transmorphogised into not so triangle shape (but only triangle because of 3 men is always triangle except for exact split second whn they are perfect line)
All in all, very nice post. Just wish they buy fast middies, like you say it is only thing they lack to able to run Barca.
What are you talking about?
Ibrahimovic a fast midfielder? Man U don’t need another stroppy centre forward right now.
They also can’t afford, and now they’re not in the CL probably can’t attract, Sneijder.
Your continued insistence that a left footer cannot play in central roles and should be consigned to the left wing is baffling.
And transmorphogised isn’t a word. I appreciate that you’re probably Icelandic, but if you’re going to speak in a second language, perhaps you should learn to crawl before you try to fly.
blatant troll?
Their not being in the CL doesn’t have any bearing on picking up Sneijder in my opinion because he is cup tied anyways. The important factor is will they be in the CL next year, which is most probably yes – which is more than one could say for Inter at the moment.
Those bloody left footers ruining the game eh? Aint natural it aint, if God wanted us to play football with our left feet he’d have given us a left handed ball. They got squinty eyes too.
Not furious enough neither. You cant play proper football if you’re not furious. Stands to reason.
Just one small thing.
You don’t seem to rate Smalling in the air. To my untrained eye he seems to win more than his fair share of balls that are knocked forward even allowing for his usually greater height. Seems a bit strange you think he needs Jones to hurry up and get better so he can save him.
Is your point more of a “dominating the penalty box” thing or have I got this quite wrong?
I know its become fashionable to declare that Jones is all of a sudden the emperor with no clothes but when it comes to centre back in particular, I prefer Smalling (obvious differences in style accepted).
Also, Nasri??? Any theories on why he looks so poor at the moment?
I think that Nasri is actually playing the same general way as last year but is just getting less time on the ball. So even if his dribble completion rate is 20%, his 1 out of 5 per game this year looks terrible compared to 3 or 4 out of 15-20 dribbles per game last year.
Did that make any sense?
I think he is struggling to get game time, and from playing further away from goal. At Arsenal he played with fabregas, who would drop deep and let Nasri move closer towards goal. This year its gnerally been with Aguero who plays high up as second striker, so nasri is more of a convential left winger, playing deeper. He also played his best stuff on the right with arsenal, so that could be another reason.
Question: When Jones bombs forward from CB does Carrick drop back and cover his position? Very hard to see this on TV coverage. This would be aping Barcelona tactics to some extent but I can’t believe that Jones just does this on his own initiative, surely SAF must be telling him to do this.
On an unrelated note, why do some people feel that the referee has a responsibility “to let the game flow” or to “not spoil the game by send someone off too early” This discussion arose again after the Kompany red card…. The rules are the rules !!! The ref has a responsibility to enforce them consistently and fairly to all players during all points of the game. Where does this bizarre concept come from?
There is some intuition to the idea of using discretion when making significant calls. For instance, a border handball in the box might be ignored in the 92nd minute, and this makes sense.
I’m not sure if this “school of interpretation” applies to Kompany’s tackle, however. After seeing incidents like Ramsey’s excruciating break, I’m inclined to favor harsher punishment rather than lenient reffing.
Sir Alex has always believed in a player’s ability and right to take the initiative and produce on the pitch. I’m not sure if Carrick drops back to cover, but I’m sure that Sir Alex has provided the optimum strategy for when Jones decides to bomb forward. The reason being is because Jones is simply so good at it. He chooses when to do it very well and takes the opposition by surprise. I wouldn’t be surprised if he scored many goals in the vein of Beckenbauer in a few season’s time.
Thumbs up for your point on the ref’s decision for the red. Kompany’s tackle was simply illegal because its dangerous. Had Nani played the foul and took the tackle, his legs could’ve been broken and his career ended. You can’t tackle like that in the modern game. Had it been a United player who tackled like that and was sent off, I’d be disappointed but not in the ref’s decision. I’d be disappointed in the United player who atempted such a dangerous tackle. City are showing their immaturity and disrespect by claiming it was fair and appealing for the red card’s reversal.
I would disagree that Jones choose when to bomb forward “well”. There have been times when he’s left the team exposed. I do think, to a degree, that SAF does give players the latitude to push forward. That said, it’s also something that Jones needs to work on as he often doesn’t seem to be very positionally aware on his runs down the right and up the middle, nor when he leaves the side exposed. He’s not terribly fast for a back, not is his conditioning off the charts (watch him do a lot of walking in CMF and not pressing the next time he’s positioned there). There’s potential for a lot of improvement, but it’s a work in progress right now.
I wouldn’t say that Carrick drops back as well or literal as Busquets or Mascherano do for Barca (because no one really does), but he does it better than other pairing in CMF for ManU do. The club badly needs to find a second person back there, be it Cleverley (if he can stay healthy), or Pogba (if he stays), or someone else. A lot of us like Carrick when he’s on, but teams with the ambitions of ManU need the coverage that two players able to play that role provide. A lot of people thought it was nuts for Barca to sign Mascherano when they already had arguably the best in the role at his position (Busquets) who was all of 22 at the time. But if you play as many games as Barca does (and ManU playes a lot of games), deal with regular injuries, have players go in and out of form, and the need to rest players as the fixture list gets congested… you’ve got to have depth at a specialized role such as holding MF.
Agreed. Jones is still young and growing into the player we all know he can be. Once he develops and fills his potential, he’ll be much stronger in his weaker areas as well as having the advantage of experience.
Its not United’s way to adopt the modern game, no matter what era it is. While I agree United need a stronger midfield (its easy to see especially after re-signing a retiree), the position of two holding midfielders isn’t how United play. Sir Alex does believe in squad rotation so having some depth in that role would be best. I think one center-midfielder with that mindset is proper, but the other CM needs to be a creator to open up opposition defenses. Cleverley is on track to be this, but he needs to get fit and stay that way.
You’re misreading what I’m saying about holding MF. The team doesn’t need two on the “pitch”. It needs two or more on the “roster”, specifically for depth.
Chich and Welbeck play similar forward roles. Having Chich didn’t mean the side didn’t also need Welbeck for depth. As frankly has been proven this year with the injuries.
One Carrick isn’t enough. Given the injuries, two probably isn’t enough. What the club probably needs is two who are clearly geared to that role, and one of the other MF able to play it if needed. Right now they lack anyone beyond Carrick, and as much as we all like Cleverley, it’s a very small sample size of games we saw him in, at a time when ManU’s attacking for was pretty off the charts. It’s probably best to be cautious before projecting too much onto him.
“Where does this bizarre concept come from?” It comes from the clause in the British Constitution that insists that almost everyone discussing football should first turn his brain off.
Not Carrick but Smalling does
It’s not well known for some reason, but the laws of the game can be ignored to a certain extent if it goes against “the spirit of the game”. Giving a very harsh red early in a huge derby is a perfect example of when to be a little more lenient.
Also, I find it very hard to believe anyone would have cared about the tackle had it not rendered a red card.
Yeah, but how many times has a game gone out of control after a referee has let an early “reducer” go.
If I was on the side of the fouled I’d also be pissed and seek to also get away with one.
Also, whilst it’s good that 11 men stay on the field, isn’t also good to be overly cautious in this instance and send people off before a leg is broken?
I thought it was an attempt at a scissor tackle (Frank LeBeouf(?)style), but he didn’t spread his legs enough so it appeared the same as a two-footed lunge.
That is precisely the sort of thinking that leads to inconsistent refereeing and confusion. A red-card tackle should be a red-card tackle always – period. Stupid reasons like ‘intent’, early in the game, ‘not that kind of player’ should not be entertained when it comes to tackles.
Please change the pale grey typeface to black so that those with poor eyesight such as I can read it. There’s a reason books are printed in black and white you know! The article looks fascinating, but I can’t read it even with specs on unless I shove my face up against the screen.
Use w3c.org for advice on accessibility.
Increase the font size for readability. Press Ctrl and + at the same time to increase the font size.
I agree, I’m an old lady and I agree a lot
Intelligent tactical analysis aside, I admire the restraint with which you avoid discussing peripheral topics such as the refereeing in the match. I can imagine it must have been very tempting to put a word in about *that* card.
Good on you, and hopefully the comments section remains that little bit less filled with nonsense!
‘That’ card – if you care to actually READ THE LAWS – was absolutely justifiable, and actually insisted upon. Foy had no choice. End of story.
If you don’t like getting sent off for studs-up, two-footed, lunging tackles where you completely leave the ground, simply stop doing them.
I agree. At worse the ref Chris Foy was harsh, but perfectly legal red card. No controversy about that. Mancini and Kompany shld stop whining over it. If they claimed Rooney tried to influence Chris Foy to send off Kompany, they are also just as guilty of trying to bully Chris Foy into giving them a penalty when Jones clearly slipped and accidently handled the ball in the process – not a penalty,Foy was right to give Jones a benefit of doubt as he did not handle the ball while trying to defend. That said Man City shld reflect on why they lost – United were better on and off the ball and defended the final third well whereas City’s defending in the first half, especially for the second goal they conceded was poor.
Oh dear.
Oh dear oh dear.
You’re wrong. It is a common misconception which you just re-iterated, that “studs-up, two-footed, lunging tackles” are necessarily red cards. The key words in the guidance under Law 12 are “with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent..” Its the force and level of danger of the tackle which make it serious foul play. This tackle was neither forceful nor dangerous.
The full wording is as follows: “Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.”
There has been an understandable attempt to outlaw dangerous tackles of the kind that severely injured the likes of Eduardo and Ramsey. But, in my view, it has gone too far. Referees are, like you, using the wrong criteria; a tackle can be two-footed and legal, it can be one-footed and illegal, depending on how forceful or high it is.
The refs get told what to crack down on and as far as i’m aware two-footed tackles have been pretty much outlawed, whether it’s in the official rule book or not. I can’t see the argument against it and there’s absolutely no need to tackle with both feet, since when do you get taught to slide like that?!
Referees are there to enforce the laws of the game, not to make up new ones. I agree there’s no need to tackle two-footed, but that doesn’t change the fact that its not against the laws. You are, of course, more likely to be using excessive force if you tackle two-footed but the Kompany tackle demonstrates that this is not always true.
From my understanding and observation 2-footed tackles has always been a red card offense. I still remember during the 2005-2006 season at this same stadium Cristiano Ronaldo did a 2 footed tackle on a Man City player, he was still sent off, despite the Man City player jumping and not getting his leg caught.
Roy (Keane?),
Much as I don’t like to contribute to this side-conversation about refereeing (which is exactly what Brigadeer was praising ZM and its readers for generally not indulging in), I’d like to add this:
If you are tackling with two feet, it is by definition “a lunge”. If both feet are leading the tackle, then you’re not in control of the movement. You must have “jumped into” the tackle in order to have both feet leading at the same time. In short, two feet = lunge (but not all lunges are made with two feet).
Likewise, if you’re tackling with your studs up, you are endangering your opponent. There’s really no two ways about it. And these aren’t new rules, either – I was taught (circa 1990) that to jump into tackles, or to tackle with two feet, or to lead with the studs were all fouls , and I’m pretty sure it wasn’t a recent ruling at that time either.
When I sat through the referee seminar I attended last year – actually being a referee for over 20 years – watching the English FA’s video on what was a red card under Law 12, the tackles I described are ABSOLUTELY red card offences, let me assure you.
You are clearly not a referee and are not privy to what we are told. Lunging, two-footed tackles are to be instantly regarded as dangerous and with excessive force, REGARDLESS as to whether they touch an opponent.
Here is the FULL wording in the advice to referees regarding Law 12 (p120 Laws of the Game 2011):
‘A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play.
A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play unless there is a clear subsequent opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player guilty of serious foul play when the ball is next out of play.’
It’s the feet leaving the ground in an uncontrolled lunge that is considered to have ‘excessive force’ due to the amount of energy exerted by the player to get their body into such a position.
‘Brutality’ is the other thing that must be considered, but it doesn’t have to go hand-in-hand with ‘excessive force’ in order for the card to be a red. One or the other is enough. Had Kompany actually hit Nani, then he would have been guilty of excessive force AND brutality. Like you said, one-footed challenges can be brutal, or use excessive force, but a correctly-executed slide tackle with one foot has NOT been outlawed, as they, indeed, can be legal. A two-footed lunge like Kompany’s is never legal.
Nor was (Liverpool’s) Johnson’s tackle. He was extremely fortunate not to be marched.
I agree there is inconsistency in APPLYING the Laws of the Game, but not in the Laws themselves.
Michael,
Quick suggestion. I know you have the ZM Elsewhere link up at the top of the page. May I suggest you get a little more proactive in using your Facebook page (and/or Twitter though I’m not on Twitter) to link to new pieces both here and elsewhere after they get published. We’re seeing a lot of sites doing this well, be it ESPN properties (Grantland is strong at it, and Soccernet is becoming more active) or political sites (Kos, TPM). I even get something popping up nearly every day from the Rolling Stones, which was nice to get a notice that The Brussels Affair was finally getting an official release.
Anyway…
It’s wonderful that you are writing all of the place now, with the weekly ESPN and Guardian pieces along with other things popping up. Using things like facebook to help us consistent readers of yours find your pieces… that not just good for up, but smart for you in driving readers/traffic to your various pieces.
Give it a little thought. Takes only a minute or so to toss up a link on the ZM facebook page and have it hit the feeds of the 10K+ readers that have “liked” you.
Just use Twitter. Links to the articles, plus suggestions of others. Far better for quick updates. Facebook is for students to stalk each other.
Some extra points:
1/ I thought Smalling was fantastic, a very intelligent defender that saved Ferdinand quit a few times.
2/ Carrick had a good game, positioning himself excellently and playing some good passes. Giggs did the same and it worked in this game, though i still think its not a natural partnership and wont work long term.
3/ The front four of Man United worked very well, its was nicely balanced, with nani coming inside, valencia staying wider, Rooney dropping off very well (something he didnt do against newcastle) and Welbeck leading the line excellently (he is improving a lot this season).
4/ Man City missed Barry, he is underrated in that he gives them balance and calmness on the ball, which were clearly missing in this game.
5/ Aguero does not play the lone striker role well. He thrives as a second striker or as a wide forward, but he cant hold the ball up well enough when up against two CB’s and loses out in the air too much.
This is a common misconception about Aguero which constantly pops up. He isn’t a ’second striker’ at all. Admittedly, he drifts inside to search for the ball on occasions, but in City’s most effective formation of a hybrid sort-of 4-2-2-2 Aguero plays the furthest forward of the two strikers, allowing Balotelli to run the channels, like he did against Arsenal in Decemeber. Furthermore, Aguero played the lone striker excellently agsint United, buzzing around the pitch and pulling the defenders out of position: down the flanks and high-up the pitch. Sorry for the rant just annoys me when people label Aguero as a second striker because the people that do so have probably watched merely a handful of City games this season, and have not attended a fixture to appreciate the full extent of his off-the-ball movements
I think he is a second striker, he plays between the lines looking to link with silva and yaya. He becomes the highest forward when he uses his pace to make runs in behind, and Balotelli drops deep to make space. Man City are all about movement, so Aguero will move into different positions, he sometimes becomes the highest forward, and sometimes switches outwide. His best attributes are his dribbling, touch, finishing and movement. He works best when playing with a striker like balotelli/dzeko who occupy the CB’s and create movement for him to work in.
He isnt great when playing up front alone, because he isnt shielded as much, and has to play with his back to goal more. He also isnt much of a arial threat, so isnt a good outball when under pressure.
If man city are playing with a lone striker there best option is Balotelli.
Although this game was due to necessity, but Mancini has really abandoned his boring-as-paint-drying 3 man midfield of Toure-Barry-De Jong and played some positive soccer. Perhaps, too soccer (at least in Europe and some big games).
The foreign coaches seem to react a lot better to situations in the match.
i don’t agree with point 6. to me it seemed that united were avoiding too much city’s goal. they had a few chances to shoot but they didn’t and so with their sterile passing game were just sitting ducks for city’s defenders. they were inviting city to chip the ball away from them.
How did you think Phil Jones did?
I only ask as there seems to be little middle ground with him.
I disagree with those who say he’s a more natural defender. I think we’ve seen second half in this game, against Newcastle, and over United’s Champions League games this season that he’s very, very naive, and can effect games more when pushed forward.
He’s a player whose performances seem to divide people more than most. When he plays well or poorly people overreact. I personally think he’s been extremely inconsistant. He’s erratic, has poor positional sense and doesn’t seem great under pressure.
An occasionally promising prospect, but nothing more than that. We shouldn’t slaughter him when he’s below par, but neither should we declare him the new Beckenbauer when he performs.
Personally I don’t like seeing Jones utilised as a box to box midfielder, or even a right back. For me he is at his best when playing as a centre back as when he picks up the ball in attacking areas he always seems in my opinion to be slightly slow and hesitant and his decision making in the attacking third always seems to be cautious.
I believe he just needs a little bit of time on the sidelines to get some confidence again and I though Smalling did a good job on Sunday so this may well happen!
http://opitacoboleiristico.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/voltando/
How was Henry’s comeback? Magic happens.
I think Mancini can come out of this game with his head held high. It was a very brave move to go to 3 at the back and the move paid off. Winning the second 2-0 against Man Utd was impressive, but to do it with 10 men is even more so.
Their success with 10 men was largely down to a solid defensive structure at the back and incredible patience with and without the ball. His bench looked a little light for a man who is supposedly in charge of one of the richest clubs in the world and has one of the best squads – I know he had some injuries to deal with!
In my opinion United needed to use the space their full backs in the second half to better effect – they needed to drive back Johnson and Kolarov and try to create overload situation at the back which would have lead to City’s 3 man defence being stretched. They did this for their first goal where Richards was caught up field when Rooney picked up the ball and Kolarov was defending extremely narrow giving Valencia the space to run into and cross first time for Rooney.
If anyone’s interested in my take on the game: http://thompsontalkstactics.wordpress.com/2012/01/08/manchester-city-2-manchester-united-3-8th-january-2012/
It also helps that Manchester United are treating the game as a chance to avenge the 1-6. Had other team played City, the would have shut shop at the 2nd half and not played as though goal difference matters.
Credits to Mancini for the brilliant tactical change. Good football all around.
I hope Rooney got Valencia a nice holiday gift. No one on the squad comes close to supplying him like V.
Until watching this match I haven’t been able to figure out why Evans could sniff the field in a EPL match. Then I watched Rio play, and make Evans look like Tiago Silva.
I highly dislike City, but watching Mancini adjust his tactics and swing the match in his favor, a man down, was super impressive.
I like how Man city adjusted in the first half.
the title on that guardian article
“Roberto Mancini showed Sir Alex Ferguson how to play with 10 men”
It really is a stab at S.A.F his team drew 2 all with a spare man while Mancini’s men got to 5-1 with an extra man
On the first half alone i think United played a very good counter orientated game, they seemed to sit deep, making sure they pressed City, this allowed them to nick possession leading to the goal.
Also, Rooney’s role was very important, him playing behind Welbeck seemed to give him the opportunity to link up more effectively with the midfield – For the creation of the first goal i would say he was pivotal.
That’s my 2 cents, correct me if i’m wrong!
Also ZM, quick point but have you ever thought of adding a Forum to this site? I reckon it would be great for all round analysis, allowing people to maybe cover and discuss games you haven’t done or to analyse older matches. Just a thought
When i was watching this game, the most obvious things i saw is the counter attack tactic of Sir Alex ( at least in the first 10 minutes and in the first half , even when city down to 10 men)
Correct me if Im wrong cuz when united defend, they put Jones from right back to the central to play alongside with Smalling and ferdinand, the right back position then belong to valencia. I often see United with a five men defend in the first half ( Evra-Smalling-Ferdinand-Jones-Valencia) .In the midfield, 4 united midfielders play with a very narrow width ( rooney play deep as usual). Most of the time when united defend ( i mean when they give city the possestion ), they use 5-4-1 formation, when they counter, they turn it into 4-4-2 with Jones in the right back, Valencia up in the midfield. That makes the problem of combination of two central back in your third point doesnt become a matter ( cuz Jones can always move into central )
Im not a English speaker, sorry for any grammar mistake, just want to share my point.
Btw, ur 6 points are great ( except for the third one)
Manchester United began the season with the attempt to play possession oriented and high pressing game. With the current injury situation this was no longer possible as Giggs/Park cannot provide the energy, mentality, touch and vision all together (Giggs has the touch and vision, Park has the energy and neither has the mentality). Cleverly was the key to that team. To change such a playing style is extremely difficult in the middle of the season and United are poor when they can’t come to terms with no one providing creativity and energy in central midfield to start an attack.
The first half of the game was typical United. Set up to play direct and counter attacking football. Broke with speed, created some good chances and took them. City did not get a look in. In the second half they tried to swap with the style of earlier with Scholes coming in with the idea of holding possession and being the focal point in starting of attacks. However, this unbalanced them defensively and Scholes, in this being his first comeback opted to being conservative. There were more runners in midfield but it was in vain. The wing backs did not overlap and did not play first time balls. City waited for United to lose possession and picked them off. They did not create any real chances but you have to give credit to the players for their spirit and to Mancini for the tactics. I am optimistic for United but all they need a midfielder like Cleverly (easier said than done, I know) and a left back (Evra has been horribly inconsistent and error prone, hopefully it is fryers).
Giggs at Central midfield is a bit of enigma, on counter attacks, he sprays out passes wide so quick that only Strikers moving out to flank only be able to receive it, Welbeck did it a couple of times, but he couldn’t find a runner down the middle, definitely Nani could do more, United doesn’t get a lot of counter attacking goals off late, with two wingers out and wide, they should be able to stretch the play enough in the counter attacks and will be valuable option at Euro league, where the other European clubs definitely would have more possession against United…
Has anyone’s stock risen as much as Cleverley’s has from being injured?
haha exactly, he is not as good as people are making out, he put in a couple of good displays, but he wont be very consistent when hes back, and he wasnt producing world class displays like people were making out, he was helped out by young, nani and rooney being in form, and Anderson playing his best stuff in years.
I think that’s the foundation of Arjen Robben’s career – be injured; be missed.
excellent stuff. light years ahead of tv punditry. pt 3 is interesting. if Balo or Dzeko were available, would have been interesting to see if Mancini would have got them to throw a few long balls in there to try and expose that c/b partnership in the way Newc had done in the previous game. Wenger is well known for NOT doing this. playing to strengths instead of targetting weaknesses etc.
http://opitacoboleiristico.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/limite/
With Lionel Messi’s win in the Ballon D’or 2011, we may start think about his futures achievements and his limit in football. But, is it possible to see? Does he have a limit in the sport?
Hi ZM,
Did you watch the Espanyol vs Barcelona match, I would like to know what espanyol did tactically so effective to break up barcelona time after time in first half, they did not convert so many of their chances (their left sided forward – Thiery was particularly wastefull in not testing Victor Valdes) ….
Their creators did pass quick balls to forwards.. which seem to work so well against barcelona..
I would say that the second half formation was more 1-4-3-2 or 1-4-3-1-1. I don’t think they played 3 at the back. The difference from the first half from the time they started to play with 10 man was that they didn’t have enough treat up front so United could play in the middle and at the back. That’s why in the last 20,25 min of the first half United outplayed them. The reason for this was that Milner was taken from midfield to right back position. Second half City played better as they again had 3 men midfield( Millner put back in the middle) plus 2 forwards and Mancini asked two hard working full-backs ( Richards and Kolarov) to cover both wings( he took two wingers off). In my opinion that was the reason why City came back and played quite good until they were very tired at the end.
ZM very curious to know what you think of United without Vidic. I read one your articles which said that w/o Vidic United score like 2 goals morebut concede .66 less. If that is the case and Vidic impinges Utd negatively by dropping deeper and inviting attacks, should they dispose of him??
I mean it seems counter-intuitive to think that Vidic, the most revered CB in PL is providing an obvious cause for concern. Now that you have said similar things about Rio, it makes me question the very foundation of Utd. For my reckoning these two are still very powerful and effective. However with the exit of VDS and enhanced vulnerability caused by Evra and no midfield protection, these guys are dropping deeper as a fail-safe. Regardless, I found the points about Vidic interesting!
Man u iz crap