Manchester City 1-0 Manchester United: City work the ball down right, United fail to test Hart
The starting line-ups
Vincent Kompany’s header won the game – and City returned to the top of the league.
As expected, Roberto Mancini named an unchanged XI. That meant Pablo Zabaleta continuing at right-back, and Samir Nasri starting wide in midfield.
Sir Alex Ferguson switched formation to a 4-5-1 with Wayne Rooney upfront alone. Ryan Giggs and Park Ji-Sung were given starts in in midfield, while Nani was used rather than Antonio Valencia on the right. Jonny Evans was ill and Rafael was dropped, so Chris Smalling and Phil Jones were at the back.
This was evidently a completely different type of game from the 6-1 earlier in the season – it was low on technical quality, but high on tension.
Opening blows
City’s formation was predictable, but United’s was more interesting. Ferguson decided to use Park Ji-Sung high up the pitch in a central zone, tracking Yaya Toure, while Ryan Giggs was fielded in a narrow left-sided position. Nani was high up the pitch against Gael Clichy – with Ferguson probably trying to recreate Nani’s excellent performance against Clichy at the Emirates two seasons ago, the game which effectively kick-started Nani’s United career.
With that shape, United seemed to be set up to counter-attack. But they weren’t overwhelmingly reactive – rather than immediately sitting deep, they started by pressing high up the pitch. Whether this was a deliberate strategy or simply early enthusiasm is difficult to say, but it meant the first ten minutes saw plenty of stray passes from both sides, and neither gaining control.
In fact, the game took a while to settle down – both sides looked nervous, and there was a particular lack of quality when midfielders tried to play the ball into the feet of attackers. There was no real rhythm to the game, with neither City cranking the tempo up, nor United controlling the game with patient passing in the centre of midfield.
United tactics
The only goal came from a set-piece, but United didn’t compete well in open play. The first problem was clear: using Park in a central position was disastrous. He didn’t appear fully fit, which is particularly problematic considering his main assets: stamina, energy and work rate. His brief was to nullify the threat of Yaya Toure, but this failed miserably: Toure completed more passes than any other player in the first half, illustrating his influence on the game.
Park has done a good job in this position when up against static deep-lying playmakers (particularly Andrea Pirlo), but Toure is a much more mobile, vertical player. When City had the ball, Park tried to stay goalside of Toure, but this caused a large gap between Park and Wayne Rooney when United regained possession. Rooney became isolated, and United’s transitions were poor – when they play well on the break, the first pass out of defence is usually ambitious and incisive, but here the clearances were rushed.
Centre-backs v centre-forwards
City knew that United’s intention was to play the ball Rooney, get him to come deep and lay the ball off to Nani or Park, and then those three would counter directly. Again, that’s what United did so well in that win at the Emirates two years ago, with Rooney perfecting the false nine position.
Vincent Kompany always has the same strategy against Rooney, though – he’s very brave with his positioning, doesn’t give Rooney any time on the ball, and Rooney becomes frustrated. He can’t hold up play, and his sideways passes out to the flanks become rushed and overhit. Even when Kompany was booked for a tackle on Rooney (which was harsh, but seemed inevitable considering the Belgian’s high-pressure approach), he continued to come out of the defence and chip away at Rooney – although Joleon Lescott played more of an active role after the yellow card.
At the other end, United were also defending successfully against City’s centre-forwards, although the away side didn’t have a spare man, and therefore the situation was slightly different. They didn’t use a specific man goalside of Carlos Tevez, but instead told Michael Carrick to sit deep, squeezing the space between the lines. When Sergio Aguero came towards the ball he was usually tracked by Rio Ferdinand, which meant Smalling became the covering defender.
Key battle
The key battle was down City’s right. This stemmed from Giggs’ narrow positioning, a move intended to help United compete in the centre of the pitch with a lopsided diamond. Interestingly, this is exactly the same system that United used in the 3-2 win over Milan at the San Siro two years ago – the game when Park did such a fine job on Pirlo. In addition to Park at the top of the diamond, Rooney was upfront alone, Nani was wide-right, Carrick at the base of the diamond, Scholes right-of-centre. The only difference was that United had Darren Fletcher playing the shuttling left-sided role that day – here, they had Ryan Giggs.
Giggs doesn’t possess as much mobility as Fletcher. United broadly coped in the centre of the pitch (they had less possession, but this probably wasn’t a battle they were focused on winning, and they were happy to prevent City playing incisive passes through the middle) but were significantly overrun in the left-back zone. Zabaleta had acres of space ahead of him, and could move forward to combine well with Nasri. Sometimes there was a 2 v 1 situation against Evra, other times Nasri could move inside and break through the United defence once Evra had become concerned with Zabaleta.
The diagram of passes into the final third in the first half shows how often City played out to this flank. Before half-time, the two men who played the most passes in the final third were Nasri (18) and Zabaleta (13). The goal, while arriving from a set-piece, came from two corners forced after the Nasri-Zabaleta combination near the by-line.
Neither side defended corners well – City had switched off twice in the first half and allowed United to play short corners. Interestingly, though, City’s goal was the only one of their 26 crosses that found the intended target (summing up the aerial limitations of their attackers).
Second half
Surprisingly, Ferguson made no immediate changes, waiting until the 58th minute. That seemed like a waste of 13 minutes, although perhaps Ferguson was focusing on not conceding a quick second.
Instead, the only change came from Mancini. Silva and Nasri switched sides – odd, considering how well Nasri and Zabaleta had linked up. Perhaps Mancini wanted to let Silva (the better player) enjoy that space on the wing, but then Zabaleta was also told to stay in a more defensive position in the second half.
That meant the only interesting zone from the first half was no longer crucial. Furthermore, since United completely failed to get back into the game (not recording a single shot on target), the tactical battle in the second half was hardly game-changing.
However, that’s because of the way the substitutions happened. Each time Ferguson changed his side, Mancini responded in the same area of the pitch.
First subs
First, Ferguson went for the obvious move – Park off, Danny Welbeck on upfront, and United moving to their usual 4-4-1-1. Rooney dropped deeper to become the number ten, and now Kompany and Lescott couldn’t move up towards Rooney and still keep a spare man behind, as they had Welbeck to deal with. Instead, Gareth Barry dropped onto Rooney and City retained 2 v 1 against Welbeck.
This wasn’t ideal for City, though – Barry was playing very deep and letting United have control of the midfield. Therefore, Mancini responded by introducing Nigel De Jong for Tevez, and City moved to more of a 4-5-1 system, with De Jong as a holding player on Rooney.
Second subs
Ferguson’s next move was Antonio Valencia for Scholes, with Nani switching to the left and Giggs into the middle. Valencia played in his usual right-wing position.
Mancini was obviously nervous about the threat of Valencia, and went to great lengths to make his defence more secure down that side. Micah Richards replaced David Silva and became the right-sided centre-back, which meant Kompany shuffling across slightly, Lescott becoming a left-centre-back/left-back, and Clichy becoming a left-back/left-wing-back. Clichy stuck tight to Valencia, and Lescott offered support behind.
Third subs
Finally, Ferguson made a straight swap – Ashley Young on for Nani down the left.
Mancini didn’t respond to this until stoppage time – but then, he saw Nasri was slow retreating from an attack, leaving Young in space to pick up the ball. Therefore, Nasri was withdrawn and James Milner protected Zabaleta for the final few minutes.
Each time, Ferguson tried to get a player into space – then Mancini responded by shutting down the space. Since City didn’t concede a single shot on target, even with United trailing for 45 minutes, Mancini’s improvisation deserve praise.
Conclusion
United might not have lost if they’d defended that corner better – but their system still wouldn’t have done the intended job. Park didn’t take Toure out of the game, while Giggs’ narrowness meant Zabaleta and Nasri were free to create overloads down the flank.
This might have been a very different game to the 1-6, but both matches were about City creating situations of numerical superiority in United’s full-back positions.
One thing is clear, United need to buy a mobile midfielder this summer.
Maybe they could get one from the youth development system?
Pogba is expected to be that type of player but, he might not re-sign and if he does he would probably be loaned out next season because of his lack of senior experience.
Pogba have signed a contract with Juventus.
no he hasn’t….
To:Tony
Yes he has signed!Watch Sky sport!
Darren Fletcher could’ve been useful today
I suspect City reserves would have given City a better game than United did last night.
on BBC Five Live Football Daily (listen here http://bit.ly/KoP8R6) after discussing the loss and interviewing Mancini they discussed the different types of midfielders Fergs could pursue. Schweini was one suggestion, but there were others that wanted a more combative ball winner.
Seems like united both gave up the wings while being overrun in the center, and it seemed this was because of the personnel. You’d think a 4-5-1 would take control of the center against a 4-4-1-1, but united’s use of three passers (scholes giggs carrick) and the lack of quality from park meant that man city was able to dominate all areas of the pitch. You constantly saw toure and barry outmuscling their opposite numbers for possession.
i just don’t see any use for Ryan Giggs these days other than to come on late in search of a goal where he only has to worry about getting forward and picking players out in the box with his crosses.
Then you don’t understand greatness.
Great Analysis ZM.
With City, I though they were once again the better team and could have just won themselves the league title. Their Cb’s played Rooney excellently, with Kompany pushing high up and Lescott covering. the fullbacks both pushed forward and helped provide width to City’s attack, with Zabaleta especially good at this role with no direct opponent.
In midfield, Yaya was excellent at driving forward from midfield and disrupting United’s midfield three. While Barry was never put under any pressure and could sweep up in midfield, providing a passing option and keeping possession well. Both wingers moved inside, allowing City to keep the ball high up and also get the fullbacks forward. Nasri benefited more as Zabaleta had no-one tracking him back allowing more of an overload.
Up front, Tevez and Aguero didn’t click as in previous games. Tevez was squeezed out of play by Ferdinand and Carrick, while Smalling covered against Ageuro’s runs in behind. Aguero rarely provided anything other than runs in behind and I think he still plays better in the position Tevez was playing today. In fact I would have liked to have seen both reversed, with Tevez the highest up and dragging Ferdinand out of position to allow Ageuro in more, rather than Teves permanently stationed deep.
Overall, City got their tactic right in this game and had the better play out wide.
http://economicinterest.wordpress.com/ Have a read of my blog if you get the chance
I think defensively tevez is better which is why he played deeper, had tevez had played the whole season the Nasri Aguero Tevez Silva (NasAguVezilva)combination would have been lethal and more functional. The norwich game could tell you they have clicked.
Thats a fair point actually, just don’t think Aguero up front works well against the best teams, he struggles to bring others into play and really only provides pace in behind in that position, something easy to negate by the best defenses.
Yeah, but by having Aguero running in behind it helps stretch United’s backline. Having a more static centre forward would have allowed United to play a high line and cut off the space in the middle of the park for players like Yaya, Nasri and Silva.
Kieran, I take it you mean it helps stretch backlines.
United just don’t do high defensive lines against good sides.
Even against the poorer sides, not since they were exposed by Norwich in the 1st round, do they attempt this strategy.
The central midfield position at Manu is one of the hardest because if you are going to help in an attacking sense, you either need to be telegraphing your passes from very deep or must have the stamina and mobility of 3 very good players.
Fergie got it wrong, Park, despite his versatility should not have been playing, team should have been De Gea – Evra – Ferdinand – Smalling – Rafael – Jones (dm) – Carrick – Scholes (both cm) – Nani (lm) – Valencia (rm) – Rooney (st)
This coming from a Liverpool fan i believe most United fans will agree. Saying that United were unlucky to lose, but i still believe they will win the title as City will drop points to Newcastle!!!
“Rooney (st)”: do you mean ’standing’? Or ’sh*t’?
striker
Whenever United play with 5 midfielders and a lone forward, they crumble. Even if they win like in Milan, they still concede. United must play the United way. 4-4-2 free-flowing attack.
I knew this was going to happen as soon as I saw that Park and Giggs were starting. With those starting we were ceding City the possession battle. Park has done a great job in the past in big games but, he has been horrible in all the matches he played this season. His success for United was based on his speed and workrate because, he has lost a step with makes him useless on this level. Park was there to shut down Yaya yet Yaya bossed the game anyway. Giggs was the second worst on the field.
As a United fan, congratulations to City for their tremendous win. Their spirit and mentality in clawing back an eight point lead is simply fantastic. They played the better football in both legs and quite frankly deserved to win both. As much as it pains me to say it, I hope we don’t win the title this season, and that City clinches it. I feel this way for two reasons: first, City probably deserves it more (regardless of what money they’ve spent ;] ), but second and more importantly, I hope this serves as a wake up call to the United players and Ferguson.
I’m not entirely sure why Ferguson keeps on stacking on the wingers. I understand that we traditionally play down the flanks with width and pace, but that only works if you have a functional center midfield that can compete with the other team. Even with our midfield loaded with 3 or 4 (when Giggs came in from the left to act as a de facto fourth central midfielder), City looked like they were rampant for the most part down the center. Our midfielders are neither mobile nor creative enough, with the exception of Paul Scholes. Given that, when other teams close down Scholes no one else can pick up the creative onus. We need someone with better vision, and another someone with better ball winning ability.
Over the course of the last couple of seasons (and especially in the Everton game), I’ve noticed we really lack a physical presence outside of Vidic. Fellaini was allowed to single-handedly run over everyone on the team. Llorente pretty much made our current center backs look like a bunch of 10 year olds trying to play with grown men. We don’t have the pace of Ronaldo and Tevez anymore; we need to adjust. Not that Valencia, Nani, and Young are slow, but they’re not of the same quality Ronaldo was. As such, if we play them in the same role Ronaldo filled, we cannot expect the same quality.
Though again. Congratulations to City. The title is yours for the taking.
The pace of Tevez?
United failed in this game due to a few factors:
- Evra being overloaded at LB, with Giggs offering no protection. This could have easily lead to a goal as it offered Nasri far too much space.
- The use of Scholes in midfield meant there was no pressure of Barry, this meant City could recycle play much easier. Usually having Scholes in a free position would have out weighed the risk, but a poor team performance meant it proved costly
-As ZM mentioned, Park was unfit and couldnt perform his role well. This left Yaya free to disrupt United’s structure and also left United without any link to Rooney.
- Finally, carrying on from the previous point, Rooney was completely isolated. He was creating holes in the City defense, with no-one exploiting it.
Arguably United didn’t have the personnel for this strategy and should have stuck to their more familiar formation. It shows a weakness in United’s squad that could have cost them the title.
I have to agree with you. Sir Alex’s tactics and team selection were questionable once again in this game. In a crucial game against Man City, why did he field a relatively old team, especially in midfield? Welbeck and Young should have started.Where was Tom Cleverley as well? I agree with Sir Alex’s tactic of sitting deep and counter attacking, but with Giggs and Scholes the transitions were slow and lacked energy. If Young and Welbeck had started, they would be able to offer creativity and cause problems by playing in the hole or in the channels, making counter attacks count.
When Man U beat Man City in the Charity Shield and FA Cup, Man U attacked with intensity. But last night, the attacks looked tentative and slow? Did Sir Alex instructed his men not to attack too much lest be exposed at the back? Maybe. Certainly caution is not the way to go about in these crucial games where goals are needed.
Poor tactical performance against Man City. As a Man U fan, I have to say, if Man City get the Premier League trophy, they didn’t win it. Man U gave the trophy away to them, in the games against Wigan, Everton and City.
I thought City fans were supposed to be the bitter ones?
Doubt so. The result would mean City is in pole position now. Man U would have to score 8 goals in the next 2 games agianst Swansea and Sunderland, which are not easy opponents and hope Man City does not score in their next 2 games which are against QPR and Newcastle – gmaes which I don’t think it is likely for City to drop a point.
This might be controversial, but I dont think Giggs has played well for a while now, he has been found it a bit in big games both outwide (today) and centrally (Athletic).
Also Carrick and Scholes midfield only work when the rest of the team is playing well, otherwise they need more energy and mobility.
I can see the thinking behind Park, but it just didnt work in this game, maybe because he hadnt started a game for a while.
Hard to see it as controversial. Coming for a Utd fan, he has looked finished recently.
United play their best football, when they are more vertical and can counter with quick direct passes. Earlier in the season, this is how SAF had the team playing and thus Berbatov didn’t have a look in (he is much more suited to a slow technical pace of game). Due to injuries and players lacking form, SAF “re-signed” Scholes and now United play the opposite way, with him and Carrick playing a much more methodical, lateral form of football. This is fine in a game where you have possession and can dominate teams, but City are far too physically strong and up-tempo to try and slow down, especially in such a big game.
However for those who say SAF “got it wrong”, there really wasn’t many options available to him to change things. He gambled for more intensity with Park, possibly Cleverly could have added more energy, other than that, United do look like a more methodical team nowadays.
I think Ferguson’s tactics were wrong from the very start. When I saw the line-up being a United supporter I immediately thought this will not end well. Park hasn’t played since that disastrous Bilbao game (has been injured as well), while Nani has just come back to the team. Ferguson’s plan was obviously to counter the threat posed by City in the middle of the park but doing that with the tactically incapable Nani, two aging and slow midfielders in Scholes and Giggs (however good they are when they have time on the ball), and the just-returned-from-injury Park was a bad idea from the start. City has great pace (and technical quality) in their team, powerful runners as well with great stamina, I think United should have tried a different approach.
My idea would have been to play Ashley Young (instead of park) on the left side of the pitch with Antonio Valencia on the right (in place of Nani). Both these wingers would have given a much busier evening to the City full backs and their wide players would have had to track back (especially if we put Rafael in place of Smalling). Also, both Valencia and Young have improved defensively and they can offer cover for the United full-backs.
As for the middle of the pitch United could have gone with a trio of Giggs Scholes and Carrick, with Carrick sitting deep. Giggs could have played a slightly more advanced central midfileder role with Rooney in front of him while the wide players could have stretched the play to create more time on the ball for Scholes and co.
The other option would have been to play Welbeck from the start instead of Giggs (with everything else remaining as I have described above) as a traditional 4-4-2 although You have wrote that 4-4-2 generally performs badly against 4-2-3-1 and its variants (because of getting outnumbered in the middle).
So in conclusion – from a United supporters point of view – I think we underperformed both tactically and technically.
I should also add that Tevez Nasri Agüero and Silva like to drift to the center of the pitch and neither of them are good defensively. They couldn’t have provided enough support to their own full-backs with Valencia and Young on the wings (and with rafael possibly in right full-back) and so either City’s central defenders or Toure&Barry would have had to help them out -> giving more space to United’s central midfielders and opening up channels to the strikers. Quite the same could have happened to their wings as what happened to our left with Giggsy drifting inside leaving Evra alone against Nasri and Zabaleta.
Agreed. As I mentioned above, Sir Alex made a BIG mistake by fielding an old squad. For me I would have startes Ashley Young and Welbeck, Young on the right, Nani on the left and Welbeck partnering Rooney. In attack, United will try to use their front 4 to trouble Man City at the back. I didn’t know what happened to Tom Cleverley, but IMO he should have started. When City are in possession, Rooney will drop into midfield to prevent City form outnumbering United. Rooney can close down Yaya Toure while Cleverley press Barry. Young and Nani can stick tightly to Zabaleta and Clichy while Welbeck presses Kompany and Lescott. Carrick can sit in front of the back 4 to form a 5 vs 4 against Nasri, Silva, Aguero and Tevez. Pro-activity is needed instead of unnecessary caution. United’s 4-5-1 is also unnecessary, given that Rooney can simply drop into midfield to form a 4-5-1 when United are off the ball, instead of leaving Rooney isolated upfront.
Definitely this is the night where Man U didn’t lose the title, but gave it away to Man City.
United were caught is a real dilemma. The physical disadvantages in midfield were clear. But even in a 4-5-1 they couldn’t create true numerical equivalence with City.
Silva and Nasri consistently pinch into the middle of the pitch giving City 4 in midfield. In addition, Tevez drops deep and moves across the pitch adding a 5th player.
By average position Tevez played deeper in this match than than both Silva & Nasri.
Amplifying this is Aguero who while generally staying higher up is so mobile that he could also drop into midfield.
Adding Park and Giggs to midfield -even with Rooney dropping deep wasn’t going to be enough, especially given the physical advantage City possessed.
This meant that United almost had to circulate the ball rapidly to the flanks to build influence, particularly to try to create 1 vs 1 situations vs the City full backs.
But by devoting so many resources to the middle of the pitch United wound up compromising the the ability to play on both flanks. Giggs just wasn’t able to foster the needed pace & work rate along that flank to make City pay.
Ferguson was in a real bind today. He probably needed to maximize attacking llegada on both flanks while also being able to close down Yaya centrally. He could have changed tactics somewhat – perhaps even playing Valencia/ Nani wide and Ashley Young centrally given Park’s fitness. But his options were very narrow given the structural problems in midfield.
And even if Ferguson maximized thrust on the flanks he still would have needed a regista/deep lying midfielder who could dictate rhythm quickly to get the ball out wide. As terrific as Scholes is – he just isn’t a player who can take control of a game like that anymore.
I think this is well stated. United simply didn’t have the personnel in place to launch quick and effective counterattacks. Part of this problem was fielding so many immobile midfielders (Giggs, Scholes, Carrick) while only deploying one true winger (Nani). I think Scholes could have “regista-d” well enough had he someone more mobile on his left. Too lopsided and little means of connecting to Rooney up top.
A “true” 4-4-2 with two wingers would have provided better width to counter City’s more compact 4-2-3-1. But Fergie clearly didn’t trust his midfield enough to leave only two in center midfield.
Euler: interesting. Any chance we’ll get your analysis of Barca’s recent big matches on BFB? Was rather waiting for it.
Would have been interesting if City played Dzeko, he theoretically would have been a better target for all of those crosses than Aguero was. Though I suppose Kompany solved that issue himself on the corner.
If there’s one thing Mancini is great at, its managing a game after being up a goal. That was a really impressive defensive display, with brilliant use of substitutes to match Ferguson blow for blow. United were extremely quiet the entire game.
Great, nervy match, but the title is still up for grabs with City playing Newcastle.
Wow, if this game didn’t highlight United’s need for a class and energetic CM, I don’t know what will….whats funny is that this issue was apparent back in the summer transfer window, and SAF still decided to neglect that position in favor of GK and Winger, although to be fair they were coming off yet another league title and he might be excused to have thought that he could get through one more season without a single quality CM. It is all but certain they will buy one this summer though….who will be their top targets? I know Kagawa has stated his desire to play in the EPL, but I’m not really sure he fits the CM role that United need…
Well the GK was a priority because our elite GK retired and we needed another winger because our two best wingers(Nani, Valencia) are both more effective on the right hand side(and Valencia can’t play on the left at all). And to the energetic CM question it seems United are interested in Kevin Strootman, Yaan M’Vila and Javi Martinez. I have a feeling it will be Strootman.
TBF both Anderson, Fletcher and Cleverly have missed most of the season, they are the energetic CM’s that United have missed. I especially would have liked to have seen a carrick – Cleverly partnership this season.
Being fair is nice and all, but to be HONEST, United knew Fletcher had his health problems (everyone knew since last spring), and that Anderson was both a bit shit and a lot injury prone. And sorry, but no one counted on Cleverly to be a starting CM this season. He had one fairly good season at wigan, but even that was stop and start as he had a few injuries. he did have a great start to the campaign, but I think Fergie was as surprised as we all were.
We needed a midfielder, not Sneijder, but a proper midfielder who can defend, who is mobile, who can win the ball, who can pass it, a healthy Fletcher on a good day,or better yet, Schwinsteiger himself. But we didn’t buy one, for reasons beyond my comprehension. Apparently the gimps did let Fergie spend the money seeing as Sneijder was close to joining. Yet Fergie chose not to buy one, it was a huge mistake, one that cost us said midielder’s transfer fee in lost CL revenue (that extra 30 or so mil would have evened itself out had we made the semis of the CL). And it cost us the title.
There was a way to play city, it was simple really. Play 4-4-1-1. Play Welbeck up top, Rooney withdrawn close to Toure, he would not have been bouncing off him like Park was. Valencia would have helped out Jones deal with city attacks, and one of Nani or Young, when told to defend, actually do it. Of course Mr. Cox is not a big fan of Nani’s defending (we had a few twitter discussions about that) but Nani can defend and do it effectively IMO. That would help the hapless Evra. Jones, with the protection of Valencia would be free to help out Smalling and Carrick on that side if the city attackers went inside. And our counter attack would have been 100 times more effective. But Fergie chose the worst option available. And those he picked didn’t do their jobs.
Rooney having a bad day seems to always line up with United losing.
One-man bands don’t usually do well in team sports. For all the other explanations’ worth, I personally think it boils down to that one simple observation.
He was isolated against Kompany there wasn’t much he can do. Also, United are far from a one man team
And yet if United hadn’t fatally switched off at a corner just before the break, the game plan of stifling City was half way to the end justifying the means. It’s not as if United’s defence, makeshift as it was, was hanging on and De Gea was being peppered with shots, either. City, by their standards, were rather cagey themselves.
(Going into the second half on level terms would have forced City’s hand to an extent, with the increasing need to commit players forward and, consequently, open up space for United to exploit on the break. Which is what, I suspect, United were looking for – in theory anyway.)
Fergie’s biggest issue is that there isn’t really a combination of his central midfield personnel that can operate with absolute confidence against tougher opponents, be it in a 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 formation: go with the extra man and isolate Rooney, revert to four across the middle and risk being overrun. City have Toure, Chelsea have Ramires, Arsenal have Song, players who are more adept at supplementing the attack and/or defence as circumstances demand. Fletcher and maybe Anderson would have fit that mould, but in their absence you sense it’s been a case of ‘making do.’
Frankly, the surprise is such an obvious vulnerability hasn’t been exposed more this season.
United is not great in attacking when it use 433 variation, Wing back cross is not great, Rooney is not one top striker and Nani and co are not wing forward.
Park can mark out most players, he isvery good at one on one but he cannot against big truck like Yaya and Park is lack of match fit too. Park’s shortcoming is his lack of physical attribute so you better use him properly not combined with two class but old midfielders.
United looks like AC Milan, almost 40 years old two central midfielders show lack of proper invest in squad. You need serious work rate to match City central midfielder without doubt.
It is sad to see United rely on green defenders and goalie combo. lack of communication between defenders is so clear that you can feel nervous when ball float abound goal mouth.
It is very poor United team, need experienced defender and tough central midfielder not fancy wide player or second striker.
One more thing is United need to rethink about Rooney, he is great second striker but he is a focal point of team attack and it force United team into use only 442. If it is work well then it is fine but two men central midfielders is always disadvantage in CL competition or cup game.
Why not bring proper one top striker. as soon as United use 433 variation, attacking go miss.
Rooney played very well up top on his own in the 2009-10 season, United would have won the league if he didn’t get hurt. He can play that role.
The trick to playing 4-3-3 or even 4-5-1 is personnel, we don’t have the midfield for it. Rooney was not the problem in this game, 4 out of the 5 guys behind him were.
I don’t understand why Evans didn’t start (and wasn’t even on the bench.) Was he injured? Smalling’s talented, but nowhere near as experienced. Ferdinand and Evans have formed a good partnership as well – with Evans having a very good season. Strange decision, emphasised by Smalling’s mistake for the winner.
Evans was ill apparently.
I missed the first half, but I found United’s system very strange. Some sort of lopsided 4-5-1 with Giggs out wide and Nani on the opposite flank? It looked to me as though United were playing for the draw and when they conceded a soft goal they simply weren’t set up to take the game to City. They were awful in the second half, just never looked threatening at all.
Incredible, thank you ZM
Brilliant article, and it confirms what i was thinking during the match. Evans being ill was a blow, Smalling was the logical option to replace him, but im so disappointed how he lost Kompany for the goal. Jones who i had my doubts about actually did well. Evra well for the last couple of seasons hes disappointed me, positionally he seems to have lost his awareness which is so worrying, and City exploited him, but in no way did he get much help from Giggs, maybe Park should have played on the left and Giggs in the middle?
Either way Park shouldn’t have started, Welbeck, Valencia and Young have been great in recent weeks, and as a fan when i saw them on the bench i immediately thought “how would those 3 players feel?” considering Park hasn’t played in 3 months!
No shots on target is just not acceptable, i was expecting to see Valencia, Carrick, Scholes, Nani (or Young), with Rooney and Welbeck dropping off to overload and pressure the central zone hoping Nani or Valencia would exploit the space in front. So disappointed. Kompany and Toure are gems for City, two world class performers, much admiration for them.
it’s a good move by mancini : playing nasri on right flank and strecthing united defence with his combination with zabaleta. usually mancini like to play narrow with both wingers cutting inside. but then again : nobody tracks zabaleta !
this is where ferguson got it wrong. he’s too focused on competing with city in central midfield : using park against toure. if park was used to track back zabaleta, those corners from right flank will be reduced and maybe park can be united’s ramires who counter from right flank.
* i meant left flank
one just needs to look at the reserve list to see where United lost, the midfield. It’s been the problem spot everyone has talked about since the CL last season. AF had no options. I know Fletcher’s injury was unfortunate but really should have addressed this by now, and pulling a guy out of retirement (legend or not) was not going to fix it.
All that said, to play armchair gaffer after the fact, still a strange tactical decision by AF. Like many commenters, I’d have liked to have seen United try to pressure the flanks with Young or Nani, Valencia in for Park and Rafael instead of Jones. Even packing the midfield and playing narrow they weren’t going to bully the midfield with those players, so play to your strengths. Play down the flanks, overload and try to drag the back four out of position that way.
I think United got a few things drastically wrong in critical areas. With Carrick, Scholes and Giggs the problems were two-fold. As ZM says, space down the right for Zabaleta and Nasri to cause havoc, but also having less-mobile central midfielders caused a bag full of problems for United. Think about the movement of City’s front 4 – Tevez, Aguero, Nasri & Silva – all dynamic players who like to come deep and also run beyond the last defender. I don’t understand how Ferguson expected his static-type players to cope with these. Granted he is limited in his selection due to a number of injuries, however, surely there was a better implementation to be had of that 4-5-1 system with the players at his disposal. The formation seemed right, just the personnel & a slight tweaking of the zones each player was patrolling was needed. Also, having next to no ‘out’ ball really killed United’s tactic of playing on the break.
Maybe Valencia right-back, Jones into centre mid in place of Scholes, Nani/Young on each wing, with Wellbeck up front, and Rooney dropping into midfield to track Toure would have been better? It surely would have giving them more energy and a better attacking threat.
To be honest I know very little about Manchester United but even I couldn’t understand a wealth of attacking talent on the bench in the form of Welbeck, Young, & Valencia. It was clear that AF had so little faith in his central midfield that he felt the need to sacrifice the three of them to bolster it up with two ancient bodies and a journeyman. Whilst his team was something like his away European team he obviously forgot there was no home leg and no second chance. He’d have been better off playing his best players and devising a plan around them.
As much as I like to read tactical discussion site like here, I always feel real footballers cannot adapt themselves different tactical formations with easy. We often talk about plan B stuff but can player do trick indifferent formation?
United attacking is pretty much always dire when team set up for 4231 whatever formation. Nobody seems like have a clue where they gonna playing except they play 442.
SAF try to negate clear city’s attacking treat through middle but attacking from United is so clutter combined with defensive mistake, resulting in defeat.
I actually think Ferguson had the tactics spot on, the shape and organization was all good, and they were denying City attacks on goal very well, but to put it simply, Smalling cost them the game and maybe the title with just one bit of poor defending from a set piece!!
Just a few other things, I can see Ferguson’s logic in why he played Park, but after 10 or so games out, probably not completely fit and ready, for Ferguson to put him up against a monster of a man at the top of his game is ridiculous!!
Also, Ferguson said categorically that he’s not going for a draw, well, why play the way they did then? They were trying to contain City, deep defending, 1 up front, more defensive Jones over Rafael, players playing to combat City’s strengths, that looks like playing to avoid defeat to me. If he was going for the win, why was his dangerous attacking players who are all in good form (Valencia, Welbeck, Young) all on the bench?
exactly! i agree very much
City was scoring sth like 3 goals per game at home this season. Utd may not be playing well but the game was only decided by an error from young Smalling in the last seconds of the 1st half. While I didn’t like Utd’s tactics, I must say it could’ve worked..
I’m always baffled to see how, after every United loss, some people are prone to deny them any quality.
Clearly, they came to “not lose”, and after conceding the goal, they were just unable to attack efficiently with the same lineup, whilst, as Coxy said, Mancini had the opportunity to use his substitutions to negate Fergie’s ones.
I too would’ve prefered the usual side, Rooney can’t make it in the “Drogba role” and the injury list (Cleverley, Anderson, Fletcher and almost Park) shows the available players didn’t fit the chosen tactical mould. And, it’s not every day, that you get to quote Raymond Domenech, but swapping attackers for defensive minded players is not an efficient way to preserve a score.
I understand, that Fergie’s plan didn’t work out. However, there are solid claims that the usual 4-4-1-1 just wasn’t an option. The memory of the first bout, and the lousy defensive display from last week against Everton dictated a cautious display. Plus the Carrick-Scholes combination only works when United control the ball for most of the match. And the validity of the tactical choice is clearly undermined by the fact that Park just wasn’t physically able to perform a decent match.
However, some of the comments I’m reading just seem out of touch with the fact that United has actually the same number of points as City, and with an almost 20 point lead on Arsenal, they have had a far better display than any other side in the EPL (apart from City). This game constitutes no case to erase United’s come-back since Scholes’ arrival, nor to forget their extraordinary streak in august and september. United has been playing brilliant football throughout the second half of the season, just watch the goals scored against Everton last week, you don’t see many teams capable to realise such moves. At the end of the year, regarding the quality of the play, the balance is really positive for United, especially for a team so young and for a year that was scheduled to be no more than a transition.
We have been in transition since the end of 2008-09 season. Last season we fluked the title, with 80 points. We were a poor side that was lucky to get to the final at Wembley, once there, we got found out. And nothing was done over the past two seasons to fill in the obvious and gaping hole in the middle of the midfield.
Yes its great, that while being shit we can still compete, but really now, a club of United’s stature should be able to buy a proper central midfielder. Over the past few years we bought squad players, yet nothing was done to improve the starting 11 aside from Valencia who came in to fill the void left by Ronaldo. We still have no RB, our best CM is 37 and was ACTUALLY RETIRED. So excuse us while we have a bit of a moan.
I don’t care about Arsenal. And the berties? Well this was their maybe season. And while I thought they will give it a shot, they would falter and throw it away. And they DID! And then we went and gave it right back to them. Having won a championship do you think they’ll be stronger or weaker next season? Making them fail and suffer an extra season or two would have been brilliant, but no, because we were poor, 4 points out of possible 12, we choked instead. That is not what United do. Young team? Yes, but who will play CM next season? You know, the heart of the team. Just who will lead us? The fact that we have actually competed for and won some trophies is mainly down to Fergie not the poor squad. But if we’re going to compete in the future, we will need to improve it, and right now, it does not look like it will happen.
And yet, the premier league was won with a 9 point lead over Chelsea, that’s hardly a fluke…
Fergie’s been buying young rising stars, just as he did with Rooney and Ronaldo. The likes of Hernandez, De Gea, or Jones are still very far away from their peak level. No one was complaining about Cleverley and Anderson playing CM when United crushed Spurs, Gunners and Blues. You shouldn’t be blaming the recruiting team, you should be blaming the medical staff for having year after year numerous players who are out for 6 months and relapse.
80 points over 38 games is not a great season, just because United were the best out of a poor lot of challengers it does not make that United team a great one. 80 points hardly makes us Real Madrid.
As for us “crushing” Spurs, Arsenal and Chelsea. I was complaining. Well, a bit. We played some great attacking football at the time, however we used to give up more chances and we created, it was our conversion rate that was off the charts. United scored on 1 out of every 3 chances at the time, but were out-shot for most of the early season games. Even against Arsenal we gave up a lot of chances, and please, that Arsenal team was a shambles, noting resembling the team they became. Neither were the Spuds, no Adebayor, Modric “not mentally fit to play,” their first game postponed due to riots. Again, they didn’t resemble the regular Spurs side. Plus its worth remembering that United had a perfect summer, pretty much everyone was in midseason form by the time the season started, while the rest weren’t close to match fit. Against WBA it showed, and against the Spurs, the first halves of those 2 games were very even, but after an hour United begun to dominate and take over, that was fitness, which obviously the others lacked.
And sorry to brake this to you, but we didn’t crush the renties, the scoreline flattered us. Plus Cleverly was injured at the time, as he went off at Bolton when that dirty goon Devies hacked him, on purpose, as he said he would. The renties created far more than we did, it was only thanks to that donkey Torres that we won, and some dodgy offside decisions, I wasn’t complaining mind, but a bit of perspective please.
Right after that 8-2 I said that we were going to get a hiding one of these days, once the goals dry up we would be found out. Watching carefree all out attacking football was great, but its not practicable in top level football. Right after we got done in by the berties Fergie changed the way the team played. Since then we played nothing like we did at the start of the season, for good reason.
And yes I can blame the recruiters. When you have a gaping hole in the midfield and you refuse to fill it, then its the recruitment that failed. United knew that Scholes was going to retire, hell there was even a testimonial match, no one was brought in. Everyone knew that Fletcher was ill, and nothing was done. Everyone knew that Anderson was not only dodgy injury wise, but was also a bit shite. No one came in. In the end we ended up playing Rooney at CM because we not only lacked quality there, but also quantity. The two main CMs last spring were Carrick and Giggs. Sorry, one is 38 and the other not the played he was in his first couple of seasons. Yet no one was brought in. SO yeah, I can blame Fergie and Gill. They really wanted Sneijder for some reason, meaning they knew we needed help, yet we had no plan B, instead we heard nonsense about us getting closer to Barca and that he was happy with the squad and that no help was needed as the kids were going to get their shot. Well, we didn’t and they didn’t. We’re nothing like Barca and the kids hardly featured. Similar nonsense to the summer before about no value in the market, meanwhile Read take Ozil and Khedira for peanuts.
It is clear that united need both a mobile midfielder, and more creativity high up the pitch. Patrice Evra has also struggled defensively this season, and a new left back might be required. Paul Pogba is a great player who would cost us nothing, and could potentially be the next Patrick Viera. Nico Gaitan is a creative midfielder who can play out wide. He would cost us in the region of £25m.
Great Analysis ZM!
Pogba is nothing like Viera, why do people keep comparing him to that git? Just because a player is tall French and black it does not mean he is the new incarnation of Viera.
A lot of people criticizing Fergie’s tactics in this one, but I think the real flaw is in the team construction. Last night the obvious choice was to go with 4-5-1, but Utd simply don’t have the CMs needed to play the system. They really had no choice but to play Scholes and Carrick in my opinion, as those are by far the two best CM, but those two provide you with very little spark in the attacking areas and a lack of energy and mobility. That means they required a 3rd player who provides those attributes, but who in the current squad is capable of that? Park was the most logical choice, but he’s not fit and isn’t really a CM, though he can do a job there. Giggs doesn’t provide the energy, which is why he ended up choosing him in sort of an auxiliary 4th CM role. Jones would have brought the energy and might have done a better job on Yaya, but doesn’t have the attacking instincts. Cleverley might have done it, but he has been in poor form.
Last night really demonstrated what has been the weakness of the squad all year, a lack of truly quality CMs with different attributes which allow the manager to mix and match them depending on the requirements of the situation. A creative CM seems like the obvious need for purchase this summer.
Well he did try to sign Nasri and Sneijder in the summer, and seems to be actively pursuing Kagawa and Hazard right now. If I’m not mistaken, Ferguson doesn’t negotiate the transfers himself – there’s someone else (David Gill?) who does it for him. I think he clearly identified the weak point before the season started, they just couldn’t get the deals done for whatever reason (Wenger refused to let Nasri go to United, and Sneijder I think fell apart because of wage demands).
I think it’s pretty likely they will sign one of the big names – if not Kagawa or Hazard, then maybe Goetze or Marvin Martin…
Nasri, Sneijder, Hazard, these are not the players United need. Even Kagawa would not be a perfect fit.
United need mobile box to box midfielders not attackers who wont fit into the system. Just how would a Sneijder fit at United? At least Nasri and Hazard can play out wide. And in a pinch, Nasri can defend a bit.
Unless we get rid of the likes of Valencia and buy a whole new midfield to play 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 I don’t see how these players would fit at Old Trafford.
If Fergie wanted someone to track Yaya’s movement, and Park clearly wasn’t fit to do so, surely it would’ve been better to use Jones in that role? I’m not saying that he would have succeeded, as Yaya is immense and Jones is still quite young, but it’s a better idea than using a barely fit player to track the opposition’s most mobile player.
Considering that Welbeck played well for Sunderland when used out wide, I would have started with him wide on the left, with Rooney as a false 9. This would have allowed United to play a 4-1-4-1, with the option of reverting to 4-4-1-1:
De Gea; Rafael, Smalling, Ferdinand, Evra; Carrick; Valencia, Jones, Giggs, Welbeck; Rooney
(Ideally, Park would be used instead of Giggs, as someone comfortable both in the middle and out wide, to offer the flexibility of both formations. But, as I’ve said above, Park’s form/fitness meant that Giggs was the only other suitable option for this dual role.)
Everyone says fergie was overtly defensive…yet 3 of the 5 midfielders are not good defenders…giggs, scholes, and nani…..they could not get any pressure…Giggs cost the goal/CK with a feeble challenge on Nasri..he should of easily cleared the ball with a minute left in half…..all Utd had to do was see out the half…and they would have had a real chance to get a result….Young and Valencia would of done a much better job defensively than Giggs and Nani…no question…
am a fan of no team but dislikes MU to be frank…
However I could say that Fergie’s tactic was actually doing well defensively until the goal from corner. His idea of forcing City players to the flank was actually effective when u are having Aguero and Tevez up front. I believe that’s the reason y Fergie field a rather taller backs to clear off incoming crosses from the flank. I think Fergie was giving priority on not conceding rather than scoring which I don’t see is a problem when they could actually benefit from a draw. If they had prevented the goal in the first half it would be a total different ending scoreline. The only trouble they had was finding Rooney and lack support as mentioned by ZM.
City put a hell of display in their defensive work on the second half. It is hard for United to come back when City is not having their players moving forward that frequent after the goal. Having defensive quality at the same level United was obviously losing from the midfield. Throughout the whole season United have been poor on their defensive display without Vidic (along with Ferdinand & Evras’ form declining tremendously). I actually found that they did very well defensively against City.
I wanted United to win, but I’m also glad City won because they were the team who came out and played the most football. Fergie paid the price for starting off the game too defensively.
Fergie is maybe the best coach on the world, he change the history of United and the history of English Football … but now I think he is too old …
I’m a big United fan and one of the big resons for that is SAF- I just love that man-his passion in his age is remarkable.But,from tactical point of view he just got it wrong and not just this game but a lot of it during this season.To much tinkering with the squad – you can’t expect a couple of 38/39 years old to go face to face with likes of Toure,Company etc.I really think that United should bring 2 central midfielders i 2 fulbacks-actualy they don’t have an established right fullback and the cover for Evra ,who is in steady decline with his game.Congrats to City.