Spain 1-1 Italy: Spain start with no striker, Italy use a 3-5-2

The starting line-ups
A fascinating tactical battle between two systems rarely seen at international level.
Vicente del Bosque supposedly had a three-way choice between Alvaro Negredo, Fernando Llorente and Fernando Torres upfront – but instead chose to play with a false nine, with David Silva and Cesc Fabregas both becoming the highest player up the pitch at different points.
Cesare Prandelli went with the 3-5-2 system he’s been using in training over the past two weeks, which meant Daniele De Rossi dropping into the defence, and Emanuele Giaccherini making his international debut as a left wing-back.
Spain inevitably had more of the ball, and probably created more too. But Prandelli’s system frustrated the reigning champions for long periods of the game (as Spain’s own narrowness and lack of depth) and of the two unusual systems, it was Prandelli’s that was more impressive.
Formation battle
You don’t get many formation battles like this. Spain played with three forwards, none of which played high up against the Italian defence, and instead tried to find gaps between the lines. Italy were actually happy to allow Andres Iniesta, Fabregas and Silva space in that zone – they were dealt with by the defence, while the three-man Italian midfield focused their attention on the three Spanish midfielders.
Despite the midfield containing some of the best passers in the world, this zone was relatively uninteresting. It was three versus three, with little rotation, movement or forward thrust from either side.
On the flanks, there was a battle between the Italian wing-backs and the Spanish full-backs – on paper Spain could have outnumbered Italy down the sides, but because Silva and Iniesta came inside and were dealt with by the Italian back three, it was actually a simple 1 v 1 situation. As is generally the case in these clashes, the wing-backs dominated the full-backs, able to be braver with their positioning, and more mobile as a whole.
Finally, Spain had no spare man at the back. Antonio Cassano and Mario Balotelli swapped around but always looked to work the channels, getting the ball in wide positions, and dragging the Spanish centre-backs out of position before trying to storm past them.

Italy with the ball
Italy may have had only 35% possession, but they caused Spain problems when they had the ball. Spain’s pressing throughout the game was poor, and although pressure often started high up the pitch, it didn’t continue throughout the side.
The main problem, from the Spanish point of view, was on the flanks. Iniesta, Fabregas and Silva could pressure the Italian defence 3 v 3, which was easy and when done as a unit, forced Italy into hurried passes forward. But the defenders could play simple balls out to the wing-backs, Christian Maggio and Giaccherini. With Iniesta and Silva higher up, the players closing down the wing-backs should have been the Spanish full-backs, Jordi Alba and Alvaro Arbeloa. But often they were too deep, and Italy were allowed too much time on the ball.
At one point, Xavi Hernandez was shouting at Arbeloa to press Giaccherini, but the Spanish full-backs were reluctant to do so, as they were also supposed to be providing cover at the back. If they’d moved up and effectively become wing-backs themselves, they would have left an unwanted 2 v 2 situation at the back, and with Cassano and Balotelli eagerly working the wide zones (particularly the space in behind Arbeloa), this would have been too risky. Instead, they stayed at home, and Italy could pass the ball easily across the back five, and then into the middle for Pirlo, who was often closed down quickly. He looked to get the ball to Balotelli and Cassano, while further long passes came from De Rossi, who hit some good diagonals. Pirlo looked for the forwards, De Rossi looked for the wing-backs.

Spain with the ball
Here, there were the expected problems. As mentioned in the preview, del Bosque is desperate to field as many playmakers as possible, but when he fields so many, Spain become slow, predictable and congested in the centre of the pitch. Without going over old ground, Spain play better when at least one player is either stretching the play laterally, or providing depth with forward runs. Preferably, one of each.
It’s difficult to know which Spain needed more. On one hand, Spain lacked width: Alba can provide that from left-back, especially against sides that defend with two banks of four (when the opposition full-backs get sucked inside by the Silva and Iniesta, and the opposition wide midfielders get drawn into the midfield battle). Here, however, the Italian wing-backs simply had to track the Spain full-backs, so neither Alba nor Arbeloa had a great attacking impact on the game. Spain should have stretched Italy’s back three with width from higher up, attempting to drag out of position.
On the other, the lack of verticality was shocking – Spain were content to play in front of Italy, and despite the fact they often worked the ball into a position between the lines, the next pass was never available, as no-one was making a run in behind. Many of Spain’s attempts were blocked, as they shot without trying to get past the Italian back three.
Giorgio Chiellini and Leonardo Bonucci were brave with their positioning and aggressive with their tackling, happy to close down Iniesta and Silva quickly. De Rossi stayed behind and swept up – sometimes he was rash with his tackling, but he read the game excellently. In theory, Italy should have been nervous at the back with no spare man – but then with Spain’s ‘forwards’ always making runs into midfield to make a 4 v 3 in that zone, Italy usually did have a spare man.
One incident involving Silva summed it up – a pass was fired into his feet, and he would have had a clear sight of goal had he turned quickly. Instead, he played a backwards pass, and Italy had time to get back into shape. It’s entirely possible to have success with a false nine, but the idea of a false nine is to open up space for others to run into. If the verticality isn’t provided from the flanks (or deep from midfield), then you are simply playing another midfielder and not offering a goal threat.
Silva and Fabregas both took up the false nine position at points in the first half. Although Fabregas is the more direct player and therefore the best makeshift forward, it was Silva who was more suited to the role…because it meant Fabregas played deeper, and then provided the verticality. When Silva was the false nine and came deep, Fabregas pushed on. When Fabregas was the false nine and came deep, Silva stayed deep too. Those two would combine for the Spanish goal later, and support this theory – but it was actually Iniesta who was the biggest goal threat, constantly dribbling past opponents towards goal.
Second half
Spain improved at the start of the second period, with quicker passing and more movement. Xavi moved higher up the pitch and became more of a number ten, rather than dropping back to replicate the role being played by Sergio Busquets and Xabi Alonso. Spain had more shots from long-range, though no clear-cut chances.
Maybe Spain were trying to recreate their pattern at the World Cup – play cautiously in the first half, retain the ball, tire the opposition, then pounce in the second half. That generally came after a substitution, though, and despite Spain’s problems, del Bosque didn’t turn to his bench.
But this was a different situation from at the World Cup. In South Africa, del Bosque could afford to be patient because there was little danger of conceding. Here, without Carles Puyol, Spain weren’t so secure. Balotelli and Cassano’s movement was excellent, and their hunger to win individual battles was highly impressive. Balotelli’s final action before being removed was to beat Sergio Ramos and storm into the box for a great chance – but he took too long, and Ramos got back to tackle.
Substitutions
Antonio Di Natale seemed like an obvious option. This is a striker who is used to playing upfront in a 3-5-2ish system (it’s more like 3-5-1-1) with Udinese, a striker who loves working the channels and making clever runs in behind the defence. He replaced Balotelli, and the switch worked almost immediately as Di Natale put Italy 1-0 up, after some brilliant midfield invention from Pirlo, maybe the only true creativity we saw from the six central midfielders.
Spain responded immediately with a goal that showed Spain did know how to play the false nine system, with Silva moving towards play, Fabregas running in behind, and that combination unlocking the Italian backline.
Then del Bosque finally introduced some width, with Jesus Navas out wide. But he chose to remove Silva – and so, frustratingly, this meant Fabregas became the (more permanent) false nine, moving towards the ball again. Navas is a player who stretches laterally rather than vertically, and Spain seemed to lose their forward thrust immediately.
Then del Bosque brought on a natural striker, Fernando Torres, for Fabregas. Torres’ natural game – whatever one thinks of his current form – is to run in behind, and he did so almost immediately, going one-on-one with Gigi Buffon and forcing the goalkeeper into a clever tackle. Next, he made a clever run towards the right of the pitch in behind the defence, but chose the wrong passing option. Then, a couple of minutes later, he played a one-two with Xavi, was through against Buffon, but chipped over the bar. His finishing was poor, but his natural centre-forward running gave another dimension to Spain’s attack. They’d waited nearly 75 minutes to test Italy’s offside trap – it turned out, it wasn’t very good – and Spain had some very fine chances to win the game.

Italy had a glorious chance too. Sebastian Giovinco replaced Cassano and played deeper between the lines – turning Italy into a 3-5-1-1 system (much like Di Natale is used to at Udinese). Giovinco’s chip to Di Natale on the stretch could have produced a winner, and put simply, better finishing from either centre-forward would have won the game.
Italy tired late on, and Prandelli’s only mistake was not introducing Antonio Nocerino sooner – his energy would have helped Italy compete in midfield, as they risked losing the game late on.
Conclusion
The game finished as a draw, but Prandelli’s tactics worked better than del Bosque’s. Italy coped well at the back, won the battles down the flanks, and both strikers looked dangerous in the channels. Spain lacked verticality and penetration, and their full-backs were unable to stretch the play. They still need variety in their attack, and del Bosque seems to be using six players to do the job of roughly four – although the goal demonstrated the value of playing with a false nine.
Italy performed extremely well across the pitch, and Prandelli will surely stick with this 3-5-2 for Italy’s next match, against Croatia in Poznan on Thursday.





Congrats to Prandelli for that although 3-5-2 isn’t his favourite formation he used it because it had to(most of the teams in Italy are playing 3-5-2 and players are similar with it).Great match for De Rosi(I had my concerns but he proved me wrong).Maggio wasn’t so good but Pirlo was the man of the match.Forza Italy!
And like ZM said-it was clearly a very enjoyable tactic battle!
I would like to add a question-What was the last time Italy used a three man defence in EURO or World Cup?
Last time I recall Italy played a 3-men defence in EURO must have been in 2000.
Not sure about Euros, but Italy played with 3 men at the back with Trapattoni in 2002. Not really an impressive campaign, though.
I’m not sure that’s true.I checked FIFA website,Trapattoni played with 4 in defence in the World Cup.
Yes,I recall Dino Zoff used it.
Not answering to Juvefan. Instead: Some of the below comments desperately need moderation (i.e. deleting)!
Del Bosque re. false nine used yesterday: “We were seeking to keep the ball against an opponent who was going to press the ball. We had to have players who combined well not only in possesion but stay in good positions. 2nd half was better for us as we finished the match with enthusiasm and determination.”
“Cesc is very special because in centre forward use, he has lots of good late runs, gives us superiority in midfield, False 9 has its positives & negatives but we used what we thought was best.” On Torres: With an open game, gave us opportunity 2 counter”
Former Coach Luis Aragones did not agree with not having a centre forward.
“Italian defence were not comfortable when Spain had a reference point as they were in the 1st half. Spain had space to construct plays with relative ease with a number nine because Torres provoked Italy’s defensive line.”
“Although Cesc comes from second line (midfield) perfectly, there was no late runs missed by Italy’s defence in the 1st half. Italy showed courage to advance & shrink space (press the ball) which was highlighted with role of De Rossi in CB & midfield”
Jose Mourinho also disagreed with use of false nine by Spain on Al Jazeera.
“Yes there was a great effort by the Spanish midfield but without a striker the team is sterile”
Mourinho was very impressed with Italy, Pirlo and De Rossi
“Pirlo is very comfortable on the ball & creates many problems for opponents. De Rossi is the wild card & 1 of Italy’s best players. Italy can go far in this tournament. Spain failed to stop Pirlo”
Del Bosque: “We had to have players who combined well not only in possesion but stay in good positions.”, “Cesc is very special because in centre forward use, he has lots of good late runs, gives us superiority in midfield”.
Now, that’s simply cowardness! Netherlands plays with three forwards, Spain with none. Don’t call that innovative or anything, that’s simply coward. If you want an extra midfielder, take out a defender. You have the best -and by far the best- midfield on earth, and yet, they don’t have a striker to pass, who will go within and beyond the Italian defence. Fabregas did only once and they scored. But none of Fabregas, Silva or Iniesta are classic goalscorers. Most of the time, you’ll see them in the midfield when Spain has the ball (look at the Spain player inflence graph, you cannot differentiate where Silva or Fabregas is, because they are on top of Xavi). Simply, to score a goal, you need a goalscorer, who scores 15-20 a year. Look at Silva’s or Fabregas’s or Iniesta’s records, all score 6-8 a year. Switch Busquets -or Xabi Alonso- with Soldado and Fabregas with Adrian -or Pedro- you’d have a great great team.
Great article, by the way. Just that, it could be a bit shorter as some of remarks are repeated -but it’s still great.
Thanks for the breakdown. This game was so easy on the eye for me.
I thought the first half dull but the second thoroughly entertaining. Mind you, it’s sad to see Torres when you remember what he could once do.
Very sad. He look like a guy in a movie who lost memory but not his instinct.
he knows where he should go , he knows where the ball will come, he knows how to play the ball
but he doesn’t know how and why he knows it.
So you’re pretty much saying Torres is the football equivalent of Jason Bourne…..let’s hope
Top quality analysis.
though he should have added the poor condition of the pitch. Once again Iniesta/Xavi/Fabregas were treated not the way they should be. Uefa also shouldn’t let those halfgods play in the rain, that would just ruin their uber way of celebrating football. If the pitch was watered better, there is no way an average team like italy could snatch a draw from the only true champions.
Pitch was bad, but c’mon, this is Mourinho-style whining, tbh. Neither is Italy average, nor are the Spain the only team who can play football.
On subject, great analysis, as always, and fantastic game. I am usually not a fan of international football, I think club football provides more excitement and better football in general [though not always, of course], but this was really great from tactical point of view, but also if you are not tactics nerd.
De Rossi impressed me, thought Giaccherini was good too. Maybe not among the best on the pitch, but played responsibly at the back, even though he could have maybe reacted better on Fabregas’ goal.
I’m interested to see how far Italy can go. I think they might surprise a lot of people, but also need to be very concentrated for Croatia [Italy never won against Croatia]
Spain… I still thing they’ll win EC, but I doubt they will provide any spectacle in the big games. They will, I think, try to slowly suffocate opponents. I hope Del Bosque will use Llorente more.
Torres wasn’t bad, he created some panic for Italians, but IMO he simply isn’t that player that he used to be. It’s been 2 years, not 2 months, since he had last good game, maybe it’s time for everyone [including Del Bosque] to make peace with that fact and use some other players that are much more in form.
wow, you really didnt get the sarcasm?
Apparently I didn’t
There is a lot of excuses on the internet, so I thought you were serious. I Apologize.
Great analysis as usual, and a more enjoyable game than many have suggested IMO. The introduction of Torres immediately made Spain a much larger threat, and it’s a pity Torres is on such a poor run of form at the moment.
“At the moment” meaning at least 2 years, unfortunately. At what point does bad form translate into permanent decline?
12 months ago
Legendary match from a tactical perspective.
Played at a very high level of quality all around to the discerning eye.
I’ll remember this one for a long time.
Great piece by ZM as always but I would say the key factor not mentioned was Italy’s success in dribbling out of Spanish pressure from deep positions. Pirlo did it for his assist, De Rossi did it over and over again in Beckenbauerish fashion to put Spain on the back foot, and Marchisio did it marvelously to set up his 1-2 which also nearly won the match.
On the other side, other than the goal, virtually the only real threat Spain ever posed was when Iniesta simply squared up, blasted off, and took on all comers with the dribble. However, Italy’s tenacious tracking to the last blade of grass in the box snuffed out the end product in each case.
Other points: despite getting a yellow for persistent infrigement based largely on reputation than actual actions, Balotelli’s pressuring of Busquets on the ball when dropping in was phenomenally effective. And Cassano basically provided a textbook example of how to be a striker that is dangerous every time he touches the ball, and therefore does not need 80% possession by his team to be dangerous.
Torres’ first touch was heavy, and Buffon certainly knew he likes to push the ball to his right when rounding. I think that had he come on with more than 15′ to go, he might have made more of an impact. I wonder, will Spain field the same starting XI against Ireland? On the one hand, Ireland appear to have forgotten how to defend, and Spain could make them look even sillier than Croatia did. But on the other, if Ireland remain disciplined, their two banks of 4 will be even harder to break down with the kind of play Spain had today.
I think if Spain field the same side as today they could struggle against Ireland. Ireland’s clear weakness is their fullback position, Spain will need to exploit this weakness, Pedro would be a good player to start perhaps.
ZM, any chance they place Llorente up top, swap Navas in for Silva, and finally, put Cesc in for Alonso?
With the 6 midfielders Spain lacked any sort of through ball behind the Italian back 4 (i.e. one of the most common ways to create a chance), and only really offered this when Torres came on who induced a number of good chances (albeit failing to convert them). Italy on the other hand made much better use of the ball in behind the back four, often diagonally, and scored from it. I think this is what ZM is obliquely referring to in ‘verticality’.
Love the concept of oblique verticality. Not sure it’s that oblique.
Italian back 4?
For me Torres simply must start the next game. Without the striker, they have no threat in behind and a selection of players all wanting to play in the same space in between the lines; fabregas dropping deep, Xavi pushing forward and Iniesta and Silva both drifting centrally.
If you fancy my thoughts, check out: http://tttfootball.wordpress.com/2012/06/10/%ef%bb%bfspain-1-italy-1-10th-june-2012/
For an editor of a football blog, I’m greatly disappointed with your comment. Had you said: “Spain simply must start the next game with a natural center forward”, I’d understand. But to say Torres must start is rather naive and stupid. He would have simply missed 30 more chances. Pedro, Llorente, even Muniain would probably do better. Indeed, in my opinion, Spain’s problem was not the starting line-up, as it was an interesting and surprising way to start the game. But Del Bosque’s subs were late and not good. He should have removed Alonso (or Busquets) for a more attacking player.
I agree – Torres played unconfidently and squandered a number of beautiful chances to claim the game for Spain. I hope del Bosque gives Pedro, Negredo or Llorente a chance next game. It’s hard to imagine Pedro, at least, not converting at least one of those missed chances today.
How exactly did Torres play unconfidently? He failed to convert, sure, but his way of playing only lead to the chances Spain suddenly had. How many times did you see someone running at the goalkeeper on his own before Torres was on? I’d say it’s reasonable to play him again in the next match, as a starter or as a sub.
It wasn’t just that he didn’t finish. He was also had very poor touch and decision making.
I know in this country (England), the punditry is consistently abysmal (and this tournament has been no exception, shock horror), but hearing Craig Burley during the ITV commentary, in response to Pirlo’s slaloming run and assist, comment that he was “dead in the water 2 years ago”, I personally shed a tear.
Does anyone know why Soldado was dropped?
He was in better form than Torres, he fits with Spain’s system more than Llorente, and he is more established than Negredo.
I thought he would be in the squad for sure after his hattrick versus Venezuela.
Del Bosque overrated squad harmony and continuity and Soldado is supposedly something of a prickly character. He wasn’t omitted for football reasons.
Torres: Del Bosque always had a lot of trust and faith in Torres and wants to keep unchanged squad from the World Cup triumph 2 years ago.
Llorente: He’s a Plan B for Spain. Tall, strong, good in the air and skilful with the ball.
Negredo: From what I know, Negredo had a better form in the last 12 games of La Liga last season as compared to Soldado. Scored more goals than Soldado.
“Torres: Del Bosque always had a lot of trust and faith in Torres and wants to keep unchanged squad from the World Cup triumph 2 years ago.”
You mean their triumph in Euro 2008, because Torres was not part of the WC success as he was always on the bench, so there will be no changes there.
Great analysis as always.
I read your “Three greats together for first time” piece, and was curious (mostly because there was no mention of him) of where you think Scholes would rank as a passer, as an overall player and his metamorphosis from a goal poacher in his early days to a role similar to Pirlos
although Im sure hes part of the “Others have had the talent but struggled to find a club who appreciated their talents, some have performed consistently at club level, but failed to take their game to the international stage” group
Ah, here we are:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/mar/19/paul-scholes-xavi-andrea-pirlo-playmaker
Same problem for Spain. Too narrow. If Del Bosque wants to play Iniesta and Silva, he should drop Alonso and put Iniesta in the middle, Silva on the left but with Alba running up & down the left-wing. Pedro should play on the right-wing & he’d make off-the-ball runs in-behind rather than getting drawn in towards the ball carrier.
I know any parked-bus is difficult to break down, but I think they’re making it harder for themselves sometimes. Barca can play with a false-9 because they have (Messi &) two wide players who do the job of stretching defences and making off-the-ball, stuttering runs if you like. (although even Barca lacked that this season).
I thought Italy were good, and talking of parked-buses, I don’t think Italy especially set-out like that. For the first 20 minutes, Spain barely touched the ball. They pressed really good at times during the game.
I really like this comment. I think Italy played pretty well-the central midfielders running around and keeping the ball rather than hoofing it up, and balotelli’s enthusiasm to beat his marker was refreshing to see…..but i didnt like the cassano sub thou-Italy lost it a bit when he came up because be joined the midfield rather than playing as a striker. This meant Spain had a spare man at the back, and they could keep the ball better.
Very impressive from Italy, who have gained a useful point in this group. Their system was excellent in nullifying Spain and also carrying a threat. De Rossi was fantastic in the middle of the defense, covering the other two well and showing off his great passing skills. Having him and Pirlo in deep positions help Italy get the ball out of defense and evade the Spanish pressing game. The wingbacks were aggressive and got into great positions, though Italy lacked a striker in box when the ball was out wide. This was because both Cassano and Balotelli drifted into deeper and wider positions, looking to find space in behind the fullbacks and be able to run at the CB’s. Balotelli let the occasion get to him somewhat though, and the decision to sub him for Di Natale was a smart one.
But they lost their shape as the second half grew on and substitutions were made, and they were lucky to cling on for a draw with Spain carving them open far too easily.
Spain’s problems were described well by ZM, they lacked a player to offer penetration. I thought they looked at their best when Iniesta was central to their play, looking the best attacker (though Fabregas finished well for the goal). Silva just wasn’t the player Spain needed today and Xavi in the first half was far too deep and cautious. Spain upped their game in the second half and should have won it. Xavi got forward more and became the best player for Spain, with loads of time on the ball he was allowed to create moves at will and carve open Italy. Torres came on and took advantage of Italy losing their shape by running through the wide open Italy defense time and again, his poor finishing cost Spain the win.
I think a draw was deserved for both sides, Italy were the better side in the first half, but the Spanish goal gave Spain back their confidence and saw Italy lose their structure which was key to their good performance. Side note – Arbeloa is a level below the rest of his team mates and looks the Spanish weak link right now.
Check out the blog if you get the chance http://economicinterest.wordpress.com/
Why exactly should Spain have won it?
Having a bunch of possession doesn’t mean that deserve to win the game.
It’s not Italy’s fault that Torres is so bad.
I actually said the draw was the right result. I was just saying that Spain created a lot of chances late on and should have won the game, Italy completely lost their defensive structure. It’s not Italy’s fault no, more Torres cost his side the win with poor finishing, but Italy shouldn’t have given so many clear chances.
I’m against possession with no threat, it’s the most boring football, Spain were poor in the first half like I said, but they upped their game in the second half and could have won it.
England’s is the most boring football.
Bottom line for me is: Italy played to their strengths. Spain had to be prepared for that. Instead, Spain also played to Italy’s strengths.
Torres proved the need for a CF, as he immediately destabilized Italy after coming on. He also proved that he isn’t that CF. Llorente should definitely start from now. Javi Martinez as a CB, with Ramos at RB. Llorente in for Cesc. This is how Spain need to play if they want to win. They should also test out taking Alonso out for Pedro/Cazorla, during the game against Ireland (or just during the second half, when they are presumably winning). Ramos at RB can either be a wingback (requires the double pivot) or a conservative fullback (requires only one DM).
I think it’s a bit much to ask a front 3 to play with a false 9 when only 1 of them plays that way for his club, even then sparingly; Iniesta almost always is part of the midfield 3, not the front 3, and Silva is not the type to break forward. I think Spain should just play a #9; they don’t have anybody of Messi’s ability to play as a false 9, and they will still have 5 of the best passers in the world. Also, it’s not like Torres or Llorente aren’t capable technical players.
If a false 9 is deemed absolutely needed, I think playing Pedro somewhere in the front 3 makes it work.
Much being made of Prandelli using 3-5-2 and it’s rarity within in’tl football, however worth noting that Hoddle was a strong proponent of the system all the way through qualification and the finals in ‘98…. Arguably creating the most tactically cohesive England side in the last 20 years.
Glad that Spain has not lost the game
False nine will not succeed without a wide forward and an attacking midfielder who runs from deep. Also Fabregas doesn’t have the good finishing like Totti and Messi, so I am surprised when he puts one back.
BTW Torres is a joke
Cesc had a really great first half of a season, but his form dropped horribly in the second half. No surprise that he scored, but surely Spain have a better option for forward than Cesc or Torres.
Llorente!
I’m sure this has been discussed before, but I’d like to know what Alonso brought to this side today. He seems redundant on both ends–Busquets breaks up the play, and Xavi works the ball forward. I hope del Bosque drops him for Navas or Mata, especially against weaker opponents in the next two matches.
I would think more defensive stability. International teams are generally very cautious, look at Germany yesterday. There is a reason most of them use the generic, tried and true formations, such as the 4-3-3, the 4-2-3-1, etc. International tournaments happen once every 4 years, so the caution when fielding teams isn’t surprising. Also, because there are so few chances to prove yourself, managers are often very defensive, because one bad tournament, and he can’t redeem himself.
I think Spain can solve their problems by changing players towards the front. Barca play the best when they play two wide forwards. They struggle when they play too many mids (see this past season). Since the core of Spain are Barcelona players, Spain should learn from this. If they want a false nine, they should play Pedro, who regularly exploits the space given by a false nine at Barca. Or, they should start Llorente and Jesus, more direct attacking threats. Finally, they can also Torres as the striker, but he is off form, and Negredo is unproven. Both Barca and Spain are making a mistake by fielding far too many midfielders, especially since most of them aren’t retular goal scorers.
So many things to talk about, but I’ll focus on one that is getting little attention:
“At one point, Xavi Hernandez was shouting at Arbeloa to press Giaccherini, but the Spanish full-backs were reluctant to do so, as they were also supposed to be providing cover at the back. If they’d moved up and effectively become wing-backs themselves, they would have left an unwanted 2 v 2 situation at the back, and with Cassano and Balotelli eagerly working the wide zones (particularly the space in behind Arbeloa), this would have been too risky.”
A problem all game, indeed. And one that could have been rectified by Del Bosque by starting the game with width on the right (Alba’s ventures forward are less of an issue due to his mobility and style of play). An attacking sub it may have been, but Navas also relieved Arbeloa of having to provide this width.
The key to all of this, however, is playing with two centre-forwards. It allows you to make the most of your chances against Spain, without sacrificing wing players in transition.
4-4-2 and 4-2-4 always went 1 v 1 through the middle of the back 4, 2 strikers vs 2 centrebacks.
Wigan in 3-4-3 and now Italy in 3-5-2 have shown that if you are brave enough to go 1 v 1 against 4-3-3 then a back 3 can still be valid in the modern game.
We are switching from the era of “one more defender that the opposition have forwards” to “how do I cover space at the back”, which is why so many teams pull their holder deap and force their centrbacks wide when they attack and the fullbacks push on like old fashioned wingbacks (see Mexico at the last World Cup,Barca with Busquests, and Denmanrk the other night against Holland).
A weakness a back three gives you is you might have to concede space out wide, but the worse that can happen is the opposition sling in a cross into what is now a packed penalty area because you have 3 centrebacks. As Herbert Chapman used to say “the odds are 9 to 1 in favour of the defenders”. Against Spain, why worry about conceding that space, they are not a crossing team anyway!
I always mistrusted this notion that a back three cannot handle a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1. In the late 80’s Bobby Robson played an early form of 4-2-3-1 even though he never gets credit for inventing the system and most think it was a straight 4-4-2. We had Lineker up front, Beardsley deap, Barnes and Waddle on the wings. I don’t recall it looking inherantly superior in an age when many of Europe’s best played 3-5-2 or 3-4-1-2. England did not overload the wings, exploit the space out wide or anything like that. They were simply outnumbered in midfield and struggled. In Italia 90, Robson had to go for a back three himself.
The back three will made a comeback mark my words.
a 3 man defence makes sense against a 2 man attack. but against 3 it is vulnerable if the 2 “outside” forwards stay wide. this means either the middle defender is isolated and vulnerable to midfield runners, or the 3 defenders stay narrow and the wing backs mark the 2 “outside” forwards, which in turn leads to the opposition having a 7 v 5 advantage over the rest of the pitch, effectively a spare man in midfield AND defence . it might be solid defensively but what do you do when you get the ball back? the opposition has numbers to slow up a “running” counter attack through midfield AND a spare defender to cover “direct” passes to the forwards. you end up on the back foot all game, relying on set pieces. Spain failed because they didn’t use the width properly. had iniesta and silva stayed wide the italian wingbacks couldn’t have stopped alba and arbeloa because they would have already been occupied . italy wouldn’t have squeezed up had they been facing torres all game, they would have been too afraid of runs in behind which would have opened up midfield for spain’s passing football. spain needed width and penetration but had neither until the substitutions, had they started with torres and pedro italy would have had to pull the wingbacks in to a 4 with de rossi in midfield, so they were clever in having 2 systems available with the same 11 players. spain put all their eggs in 1 basket so needed to make subs to change the game.
I agree with you to a certain point but a well-drilled back 3 can also quickly turn into a solid bank of 5 and then into a back 8 with only the 2 strikers left up top. So in essence any numbers disadvantage is nullified.
Imho the system is more vulnerable to a counter-attack when you take get numbers forward and get possession or the other team cedes possession like an old school USA (young Landon Donovan) team vs. Mexico. But Italy snuffed this out and when they didn’t Torres snuffed it out for them. Spain was never going to cede possession.
As locust alluded to, it’s a gamble worth playing sometimes.
i think you misunderstood me, or i didnt explain it clearly. the team playing the 3 man defence must become a 5 if the opposition plays proper wingers as part of a front 3, or else the back 3 becomes too stretched. as soon as you turn that 3 in to a 5 you leave yourself 2 players short elsewhere. against a team like Spain who are experts at keeping possession anyway its nearly impossible to get the ball as you have 5 players trying to win the ball back from 7 opponents. you spend the majority of the match camped outside your own box and no matter how good you are eventually someone will produce a bit of magic or a defender will switch off and they are in. if you leave 2 players up the pitch you get over run(as spain will have the 3 orthodox midfielders and 2 full backs supporting them making 5 v 3 in midfield) if you pull the forwards back and form a 2nd bank of 5, you then leave yourself no players for a counter attack. Spain didn’t exploit this because they played too narrow meaning the 3 italian defenders and 3 midfielders could cope in the centre, leaving the 2 wingbacks to protect the wings, meaning they could leave 2 forwards up the pitch. had iniesta and silva stayed wide the wingbacks would have been overloaded as they would have had to deal with those 2 PLUS the spanish fullbacks OR the 2 outside centre backs (bonucci and chiellini) would have had to follow iniesta and silva which would have left a hole through the middle, either way spain would have had men free
BACK 3 BECOMES 5 AND SPAIN DOMINATE MIDFIELD, IF CASSANO AND BALOTELLI DROP BACK TO HELP THEN ITALY HAVE NO “OUT” BALL
maggio…………bonucci………de rossi…….chiellini……giaccherini
INIESTA………………………FABREGAS……………………….SILVA
…………….marcisio………..pirlo…………motta………………
ALBA…………ALONSO………….XAVI………..BUSQUETS……….ARBELOA
……………cassano…………………….balotelli……………….
…………….RAMOS………………………PIQUE………………….
BACK 3 MATCHES SPAIN IN MIDFIELD BUT LEAVES DE ROSSI 1-ON-1 AND EXPOSED TO MIDFIELD RUNNERS
..bonucci…………………..de rossi………………….chiellini….
..INIESTA…………………..FABREGAS………………………SILVA..
.maggio……marcisio………..pirlo…………motta……..giaccherini.
.ALBA………ALONSO………….XAVI………….BUSQUETS……….ARBELOA
……………cassano…………………….balotelli……………….
……………RAMOS……………………….PIQUE………………….
SPAIN FAILED BECAUSE THEIR FRONT 3 PLAYED TOO NARROW MEANING ITALY COULD REMAIN COMPACT
……………….bonucci……de rossi……chiellini………………..
..maggio………..INIESTA……FABREGAS……SILVA……….giaccherini…
………………marcisio…….pirlo……..motta……………………
.ALBA………ALONSO………….XAVI………….BUSQUETS……….ARBELOA
……………cassano…………………….balotelli……………….
……………RAMOS……………………….PIQUE………………….
Luvin’ the ‘False Nine System™’, best coinage since the ‘Makélélé Role’.
Anyway, I found Balotelli & Cassano’s positioning was so aggressively working the channels/wings that they looked more like the wing-forwards in a front 3 but without the central number 9.
Thus I don’t think it was as effective as it could have been because, I think, for effective exploitation of the channels/space behind full-backs a no.9 is needed. The ‘gravity’ of a central striker attracts the centre-backs and keeps them from spreading out and helping close the space between CB and FB.
Italy could have perhaps benefited from a Totti-type pushing forward from midfield to keep the centre-backs occupied.
Any thoughts?
Interesting quotes from Fabregas and Torres after the game. Cesc, “I was the first to be surprised. I didn’t expect it either, we hadn’t practised it on training.” Torres, “We hadn’t practised the line-up with Cesc, but it was an option.” I wasn’t disappointed with playing a false 9. But finding out that they didn’t even practice this formation; very poor from Del Bosque. It might explain why Cesc didn’t make many forward runs. Whereas with Italy, reports say they actually prepared and trained to play the system they deployed.
This is annoying. So they didn’t practice playing the false nine, and yet del Bosque decided to use it anyway. I don’t get del Bosque sometimes. He’s a respectable coach, but I’m sure he and everyone, who follows Spain, know that Spain lacks width and vertical penetration. Yet every big match, VdB always go for the same predictable system.
I thought Cesc did really well considering that he didn’t practice playing the false 9. But Spain has to realize that Barcelona can use the false 9 system because they have two wingers to stretch the play, 3 excellent midfielders and Messi. Spain doesn’t play that model, why bother using it?
Another note is the Pique-Ramos combination. They played together for the first time today and it showed. They need to coordinate better. I miss Puyi and Villa.
One last note, Casillas made some excellent saves but for this game, I wish Casillas knew how to pass with his feet. Building from the back starting with Iker would have been more useful, considering the way Italy forwards pressed.
The back three has already made a comeback. All you have to do is look outside of England.
Very true
Even in England, with Wigan.
This was a very good game, Italy to me were better in the first but seemed subdued in the second of the halves, perhaps due to lack of energy to persist in pressing. Spain looked poor, were it not for the fact that they simply have great players, in particular, Iniesta, it would’ve been worse. Iniesta was able to be a one-man wrecking machine, but the result of relying on too much individual brilliance was the inability to create obvious, easy to score chances.
The Spanish defence also seemed unsettled by Cassano and Balotelli, who, a couple individual errors aside were excellent.
Torres instantly caused Italy problems, and then instantly caused Spain problems, as Del Bosque realized he had substituted on Fernando Torres. Seriously, Buffon dribbled away with the ball after Torres’ attempted-rounding, missed a chip, and generally played like Torres. Navas also seemed far more effective than Silva. Ideally for Spain, Navas and Llorente start the next match. Silva should be dropped, and then one of Fabregas and Alonso following suit. Fabregas probably makes Spain better in attack, Alonso provides stability (although his style of passing isn’t particularly useful to the collective mentality of Spain – perhaps if he was fleeter of foot like Pirlo he would be more indispensable). Considering the remaining opponents, and the fact that today’s draw may mean Spain and Italy are separated by mere goal difference at the end of the group, the attacking option seems more logical (though I don’t actually expect it to happen).
But wasn’t the goal Spain scored more a result of Jordi Alba pushing forward and thus stretching the Italy’s defense than the result of a False Nine system?
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
Must be the cat on the keyboard
))
Indeed. But seriously ZM has to do something about moderating some of these posts. We come here for entertaining discussions and what do we see, reckless spamming…
Neither side’s alignment made sense given the opponent’s shape, so it was a very weird match to watch. I agree with ZM, though, in that Italy’s made slightly more sense in execution.
Spain will never be as good as it could be as long as Del Bosque insists on playing Xabi Alonso with Xavi and Busquets. I think he’s trying to be overly politically correct in his selections. There’s no good reason to have three holding midfielders of various descriptions in the same side. If Xavi is healthy, there’s no need for Alonso unless you play him in Busquets’ spot.
In a strikerless formation, you need a trickier player than Fabregas in the False 9 role. Iniesta would have been perfect in Fabregas’ position. He played there for Barcelona when Messi was out on suspension and had one of his best matches of the season. He was Spain’s most influential player in today’s match. Fabregas should have been playing left of Xavi and made penetrating runs from a deeper position. Alonso should have been on the bench.
Mata should start on the left in Villa’s absence. If Spain is going to use Arbeloa on the right, Silva must be dropped or moved to the left side. Arbeloa is incredibly uncomfortable when asked to go forward.
Del Bosque’s team selections are the main hope everyone else has of winning this tournament.
I think VdB also try to politically correct, beside Xabi quality, he need Madrid’s man in midfield alongside all Barcelonas
just a tought though
I’m glad there is someone else who agrees that Alonso should be the man to be dropped as there is no need for him! I wrote my own piece this morning about Spain and their system. A lot of the points ZM makes I make as well considering I read a lot of his stuff that is natural.
http://basicrulepassandmove.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spain-and-their-no-striker-system.html
Your blog needs more paragraphs. Pictures of things you discuss actually happening on the pitch would be useful too.
Spain drew because they forget to take their medicine!
I have always hoped del bosque would finally realise that a double pivot + central midfielder in his midfield is not dynamic or offensive enough for Spain, but it seems hes set on that. A False nine system can work, and can be really effective at breaking down a deep defense, but del bosque played it all wrong in my opinion. The only way he can continue to play iniesta, fabregas and silva in a false nine system is if silva plays false nine, iniesta on the left, and fabregas back into midfield (where he provides a level of directness no one else can) instead of either Xabi or Busquets, assuming Xavi is undroppable. Then have a capable wide player like Jesus Navas on the right to stretch the play laterally. If this doesnt work id like to see a true striker, either out wide or as a nine.
The part with the Winger is essential. With Navas on the right wing there was so much more space for Xavi and Co in the centre.
That opens up everything for Fabregas (or whoever plays upfront)
Could anybody go to a delbosque’s next press conference and definitely ask him those two questions:
Why doesn’t Pedro play?
Why don’t you drop xabi alonso (or busquets (or xavi))?
It’s annoying me we are only seeing two players between iniesta, silva, mata, pedro, navas(/muniain i would have prefered), cazorla, fabregas when we could watch three !
(except with this false nine formation)
I know it’s high level football so tactical rigor and defensive cohesion is primary but come on you have the best offensive midfield line on the planet by a mile grandad !
Personnaly i’d go for a 4231/433 with iniesta as the central attacking midfielder (playing central-right midfielder in the 433 just like with barca), fabregas as his sub;
Llorente upfront, Pedro as the second choice (with the possibility of a strikerless 433 with pedro on a side with this second choice);
I’d drop probably xabi alonso, but dropping busquets could be an option (very risky one for a whole tournament i admit);
On the left i’d start Mata over Silva, on the right pedro or navas or cazorla (i’d have taken & started muniain)
And here you have the more threatening midfield of the world, with substitutes on the exact same world class level if playing more directly for llorente turns out to be more physically demanding than what they’re used to.
I’m not going to wish they win if they continue with their self-limiting choices, because apart from the crazy dutch, germany kind of also play a defensive counter-attacking physical 4231 with podolski, muller on the sides.
I think spain have all the quality and brain required to make the most of my 4231 and be an attacking and still ball-possessing nightmare, come on vicente !
Lovely insight! As an italian fan, I’m glad we managed to stay alive in this one, but there’s something I probably can’t grasp: what about Marchisio? I mean, he had an impressive season in Juventus and can definitely play in a 5-men midfield, but was he the right player for us today? Of course, everyone is willing to sacrifice in a match like this (and he surely did), but, from my perspective, a pure central midfielder like Nocerino would have suited the game better, Marchisio is much more dangerous when fielded higher up on the field with less defensive duties.
In my opinion Del Bosque lost this game for Spain. I understand valuing loyalty but at what cost? Torres shouldn’t be anywhere near that field and why does Xabi have to play 90 min? There is no reason to have him AND Busquets on the field together.
Here’s how this game should have gone:
After 15 minutes of Spanish passing going nowhere Busquets should have dropped into the center back of a back 3. Allowing Xabi and Xavi to control the midfield. Arbeloa and Alba could then push up and apply pressure to Italy’s wing backs AND make decent overlapping runs. In effect making it a 3-4-3.
This was a great game from all perspectives but I think Del Bosque is just mismanaging this spanish team.
3-4-3 would have been ideal for spain given italy’s formation but defensively they miss puyol. ramos is a clumsy tackler and impatient, arbeloa and busquets are slow and pique needs a talker with him to guide him through. spain look vulnerable to counter attacks, maybe del bosque new that-why else would he play alonso AND busquets. But alba and arbeloa as wingbacks wouldnt work. arbeloa isnt good enough offensively and alba would lose the element of surprise he brings by fielding him too far forward. spain dont really do wingbacks. moving ramos to RB would make more sense. he attacks well and is a liability in the middle anyway
Easy:
—–Ramos—-Pique—-Busquets——————
-—–—————–Alonso—–—————Alba——
————- Xavi———–Iniesta——————-
Navas—————–Silva—————————
——————-Cesc/Torres/LLorente———-
Ramos should not play as an offensive RB. He did not attack at Real for more than a year. He is not used to that anymore. Navas plays instead of Arbeloa. He is decent defensively and stays wide. Busquets is comfortable playing between two centre backs and it solves the problem with Alonso.
The role of Alba depends on the opponent. He can push forward like a winger or stay back and play like a normal defensive minded LB
that doesn’t work because if alba stays back it isn’t a 3 man defence is it, which is what the original post was trying to advocate. if alba plays higher to make it a 3 my previous comment still stands-the defence lacks pace and a leader. del bosque knows that which is why he is so keen on ball retention, he knows his own defence can be vulnerable if the opposition get forward,(pique/puyol/martinez could work but that’s not an option due to puyols injury) thats why he uses 2 defensive screens. the trouble with that is alonso is used to playing in a duo at madrid and liverpool and looked ok but busquets isn’t, he plays alone for barca and looked unsure of where to be against italy, that in turn pushes xavi further forward into a role he isn’t really suited to, and fabregas too. so as good as he is, alonso has to go for the sake of the shape of the team to allow busquets, xavi and fabregas to play in their best positions. this then frees up a space for a true striker. then replace silva with a proper winger(pedro) and its problem solved.
I think there is one thing that we are forgetting about this game. Both teams were fine with a draw. They didn’t need to win because, while they might have some trouble with Ireland or Croatia can we honestly see either one of those teams doing anything but losing? I would like to see this game replayed as a final which is possible! That would make this discussion a lot more relevant.
If Spain play this system against Ireland, they’re going to play right into the hands of the Irish, who will be more than content to sit back and watch Spain shoot from distance at their 2 banks of 4. Its imperative that they make a change to beat them.
If I was Del Bosque, this is how I would line up for the Ireland game
———Casillas
Ramos-Busquets-Pique-Alba
——-Alonso–Xavi
———Fabregas—-
Navas—-Llorente—-Iniesta
Busquets and Pique have played together at least a few times like this at club level, and Ireland’s strikers aren’t likely to be a large threat to them in open play. Ramos at right back can add additional pressure to help break down Ireland’s defense. Fabregas takes up the same role he did when he scored the goal in the last match, surging forward to get on balls from Xavi/Iniesta while Llorente holds the line up ahead. Navas of course adds width and space for this to work
Del Bosque should think about if he should place Ramos back to right back. Arbeloa is just not suit to the tiki-style football, too functional but nothing else. Like Italy , the right side of Croatia (Srna+Rakitic) and Ireland (Duff + O’Shea) is better than their left side (Perisic+Strinic) , (McGeady + St Ledger). Jordi Alba would look less effectively in attacking in that case the support from right side becomes as much as important.Starting Juanfran is another option but it just look more unlikely. Another thing is Javi Martinez would look more comfortable and reliable as the last man covering his CB partner like how he did in Bilbao. Ramos and Pique both are a stopping CB which they need someone to stay behind and cover.
The idea of bringing in Navas simply didn’t work. He is more like a plan B with a completely different style but were Spain better after he came in? No. And they just became too one dimensional and too predictable , give the ball to Torres and Navas and let them run. This is not a good change IMO when you have got Mata , Santi on your bench which they are much skillful and playing the same kind football as Xavi , Iniesta play.
Change the player but do not change the system.
Impressive article and exactly the brilliance in Prandelli was obvious in how he setup the team and especially the performances of the players de rossi, pirlo, motta, mario, cassano, buffon, chiellini, maggio and all were impressive! that’s what italy is all about – tactical brilliance. The only sadness was giacherinni not tracking fabregas but giacherinni did really well considering this was a debut for him. Italy = world class! Forza Italia!
By the way. 3-5-2 is not dead! Yahhooo! Forza italia! Let the Italians show how’s it done.
If Prandelli had the natural charisma of a Mourinho or a Guardiola he would be hailed as a tactical genious (not for this game alone, of course). To put things in perspective, this has to be the worst Italy team of the past 20 years quality-wise.
I agree on all points made by ZM, but personally I think Spain also didn’t close down Pirlo fast enough, and payed for it.
Of course it’s not dead!Just look in Italy-Juventus became champions with this formation.Napoli(3-4-3) had an amazing season.We should not forget Udinese and Parma too.
Great analysis. Thank goodness there’s somewhere else to turn for a decent review of the game other than the inane prattling of TV ‘experts’ we have to suffer in England. This was the most fascinating match of the tournament so far. It had the feel of a real heavyweight clash, and your summary pretty much nails the tactical battle for me. Top marks to Prandelli, but, even when their tactics are questionable, we saw how Spain can eventually wear down the keenest of opposition. Italy looked dead on their feet with 10 minutes to go, and I think Spain would have won if they had brought on the right substitute striker.
sorry … didn’t read all the comments cuz some chump has placed really irritating ones in between. If this has been mentioned already then sorry.
1) I think not starting with a real striker was a slight mistake … without going into tactics one can already come up with one solid argument … De Rossi is not a natural centreback so one might want to put as much constant pressure on him as possible, this can be done with a striker not some false nine who is never around.
2) I’ll say it again … but as Spain, when you’ve got such an amazing midfield and the player with most influence in the first half (see ZM chart above) is your least creative ie. Busquets then you’re doing something wrong … okay, fine, play him for whatever reason but basically make sure he hardly touches the ball … that big fat name should be Xavi or Xabi or Fabregas (not playing in false 9 role) etc. …
Johan Cruijff mentioned today (and who am I to disagree with him!) that Holland played reasonably well creating multitudes of chances BUT when your two central def. midfielders (Van Bommel and N.de Jong) have the most time on the ball your buildup play will always be “wrong” … having creative players on the ball will help create more quality chances with good through balls, dinks over the top etc. def.midfielders usually don’t bring that quality to the table (see B.’s passing stats, over distance, close range etc.).
If people think Bus. has to start then okay … just don’t let him have that much influence in a game again!!
I have to disagree with you here about Busquets. The man is a genius in the pivot role and his passes are fantastic. You don’t need him and Xabi together as a double pivot, but Busquets is probably the top DM in world for the style that Barcelona and Spain play.
all the talking in midfield or false nine will be useless when we not talked about Sergio Ramos – Gerard Pique partnership in front of Casillas, just look at Casillas face when Motta’s late on first half & Di Natale’s late on second half chances, “where the hell is Puyol?!?” maybe he said.
I didn’t say don’t play him (like on my comments for Spain’s tactics) what I said is IF you play him make sure he’s not the most important person on the field … you can see he was through the 1st half Player Influence charts above … you want that to be a creative player who can make all kinds of passes … Bus. is good at short passes to team mates who can then set up an attack …
He may be a genius at his role but then he should also know that his role is not to be the main influential person on the field but to mop up loose balls and to offer a second option to defenders who are passing out from the back (first option being a creative midfielder or a wide back high up the pitch.)
His name should be the size of Marchisio in comparison to the players around him … the Italians got it right, give the ball to their best creative midfielder and make him most influential in midfield (Pirlo) with behind him a converted midfielder to defender with good vision being the most influential on the whole pitch for Italy (in the first half) in De Rossi.
That is the issue with having two pivot players in the same side, especially in a team with no strikers and relies heavily on dominating possession, one of them inevitably will end up having periods of having a lot of the ball. Which is not necessarily always a good thing as they have a different dynamic on the ball than say the more forceful and creative Xavi. But I don’t see Del Bosque dropping Xabi or Busquets as he seems to be fond of having a conservative base in central midfield.
Something has to change especially if they choose to continue to play with no striker, whether it be a more attack-minded right back, getting rid of one of the pivot players and/or bringing in the goalscoring movement of Pedro.
To be fair, Marchisio is a different kind of player as Marchisio’s natural game is to be box to box and get forward, with or without the ball (hence his sometimes high pressing) but in terms of what kind of impact on the Italy team he has in relation to Busquets, I see what you are trying to get at as for Motta & Marchisio, it was all about making room for Pirlo to orchestrate.
Why no one ever mentioned that De Rossi position and role is that off classic Libero?
Pls Zm get rid of these irritating Long worded posts by Some spammers. It’s hard to comment with them on.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Spain need to drop one of Busquets and Alonso and move to a three-man midfield and wingers.
But Del Bosque doesn’t have the cojones. When they have been forced to do this in the semis and late on in the final of the WC, introducing Pedro (in the semi), and Fabregas (in the final) they looked a much more fluid and dangerous side.
Actually the praising on Prandelli is a bit exaggerated. Putting 3 man vs the expected Torres would already be bad (as could be seen in the final minutes), but it even offered Del Bosque the chance to nullify them completely by using a false-9. That was actually a good move – that has however not been completed by not fielding a wide player (most likely Pedro) instead of the overabundant Alonso.
Beside that, the weak individual performance of several spanish defensive players (mostly Alonso and Pique, but also Busi, Ramos and Arbeloa to some extent) helped Italy to create many chances despite being generally outnumbered.
The changes at the end had nothing to do with Torres. The game changed because Navas was on the pitch and finally offered some width. Italys Defense got stretched out and there was more time on the ball for Xavi and Co in the centre. Trough Balls were a lot easier.
Fabregas had the same runs like Torres at the end. The difference was that there was nobody playing the passes because of a crowded centre..
good analysis and that one incident that i was going to highlight you picked it out nicely good one .i dont choice of fabregas as front men was wrong since he had been playing for barcelona in that same position and can link up very well with other players . although his finishing is not that good . but one thing i dont know is why do italian coaches try to be neoromantics and try to do something new . prandelli could had had a bitter face had spain finished what they created even half . i am saying this because italians went them chasing right on the flanks as well which created a loads of space for xavi and iniesta two of most dangerous players to workin the middle . you could see how they played around the players and took them out of the game . secondly italians were too flat footed pirlo is good ball player but not a great defensive player and cannot protect the back four and many a times he was played around also marchisio and motta at times when they could had maintain the discpline and formed middle three in front of the back five they went on chasing and got played around . for me since italians went chasing and try to close down players in wide positions spaniards found a lot of space in the middle of the park .
for me pirlo a good player but he certainly different to xavi gets the ball while pirlo is like alonso long ball player but better he can drive the ball and is good in one on one situations . for me he should had been more closer to the front two than motta or marchisio . i dont know but had not prandelli seen teams play against barcelona where on they built a two banks of four and defend and narrow space and dont go on chasing them on flanks instead give them the space there and keep tight in the middle and deny space since the spaniards and the barcelona’s style always try to score a perfect goal .
as i had said in my comments on spains squad they miss ramos on the right in the full back position and his thrust on that side . secondly they seem to fancy arbeloa although he is not a bad defender but still lacks that guile to forward and can shuttle up and down the pitch like ramos .
Although I agree with you, I think that was the plan – man marking rather than zonal marking. Italy to play aggressive and scare the shit out of Spain and their prima donas. De Rossi’s yellow card tackle in the first minutes showed exactly that. They want 1v1 battles and they are OK with being played around, as long as you are scared to dribble around them and go for the first ball.
I second that, De Rossi played more of a Libero than ball playing defender. It is great to have the role back and I think it is a good answer to a high pressing team. Having someone good with the ball, some passing skills is always great, but no only that he should be smart off the ball and provide some moves so he can get back the ball back deeper and look for even a better pass. I think De Rossi did just that, beside his good covering.
you cannot tackle if you get played around .
De Rossi did really well before Torres came on. But when Torres came on, maybe add fatigue, De Rossi and the defence in general were all over the place as suddenly they had to deal with a direct threat. And that was up against a poor Torres cameo.
Thing is, when Jesus Navas and Alba were made redundant. At Valencia Alba’s used to overlap with the wingers and cross the ball to the striker (Soldado) while Jesus Navas is more or less a traditional striker. By playing no striker, the two of them were unsure of what to do. When Alba did overlap with the midfielders, he looked up, saw no target man and played the ball back. Del Bosque is perhaps the most clueless manager I’ve ever seen. Somehow the sheer talent of the squad grinds out results in the big games, but seriously Spain is underachieving. If used properly, this could perhaps be one of the best national teams in history.
Navas a true Striker? Thats so wrong. You won`t find a more typical winger.
He is always wide and that was key to this game and the reason for the good finish by spain.
Frustrating game to watch.
Spain: six players looking to create the killer pass, zero players looking to recieve it.
word of wisdom ^^
lol
spain probably have four or five ways of winning most games/competitions. but my feeling is, and has always been, that del bosque is a little conservative in picking both alonso/busquets. clear also that he is not completely convinced to embrace the barca magic that is in his palm.
generally spain keep the ball well enough to get away with one holding i feel, particularly when that one is already an established member of the predominant club midfield of the generation. i think overall alonso may be a better player than busquets, but he is also a natural deep-lying playmaker and xavi inevitably loses touches to him, and the natural balance of that barca three (or four if you include fabregas) is a little disrupted.
pedro should also start, for similar reasons. and also because he offers much needed goals.
it’s a slight frustration that this spain, good as it is, has never been quite as great as you feel it could be. under del bosque certainly. but while they continue to win it’s hard to criticise too much.
@ Jon on June 11, 2012 at 10:08 am
“this could perhaps be one of the best national teams in history” ?????
I think you’ll find that it already is. Spain are the current world and European champions. A 1-1 draw with Italy doesn’t change that.
“Del Bosque is perhaps the most clueless manager I’ve ever seen.”
His honours as a manager include 2 La Ligas, 2 champion’s leagues and a world cup. Clueless, obviously.
we know his achievements but he could be greater than he already is if he would just be a little bolder and take some risks. i understand that international competitions come just once in 2yrs or 4yrs as the case maybe, hence the reason for the cautiousness. but it’s becoming painfully obvious that the team is underachieving and far below what it might be and yet he sticks to his guns. if that isnt clueless i dunno know what is?
I couldn’t disagree more. He led them to the world cup and qualified for this tournament with a 100% record. On which planet is that underachieving?
“I think you’ll find that it already is. Spain are the current world and European champions.”
He/She was speaking about being “the best team in history” of football, I assume.lol
I’m sorry but despite the fact they are the World and European champions, and despite the fact having fantastic players in their team, Spain is not the best national team in the history of football.
Brazil of the Golden Era and the Dutch team of “Total Football” and Cruyff are yet to be beaten. The later di won nothing, but they invented something new, which was big and beautiful. Since then you get perfection maybe but there is nothing new in football. These to NT are the best in the entire history of football.
Italy vs Croatia should be very interesting as well, provided Italy play 3-5-2.
On one hand, Italy will have a spare man at the back vs Croatia’s two strikers, but Croatia could overload the Italian wingbacks 2vs1 to create dangerous crossing opportunities.
Of course, the two energetic Italian midfielders, Marchisio and Motta could respond to this, by drifting into the sides depending on the position of the ball. For example, when the ball is at the right side (from the Croatian point of view), Marchisio could mark the Croatian right back, as Pirlo and Motta cover the middle.
But then, fast diagonal balls could pose a big problem for the Italian defence.
Meanwhile, as the Croatian full-backs try to overload the Italian wingbacks, Italy can once again find numerous 2vs2 opportunities from the counter attacks.
I can’t wait for the game!
The question is what will Italy do against Croatia? I think a 4-4-2 would work better. Maybe even a 4-5-1 With a midfield of DeRossi, Pirlo, Motta, Marchiso, Norcerino
I disagree with people saying Balotelli had a bad game, he made himself available and opens things up a lot more then Cassano.
Certainly not a easy system to play when using more than one player to rotate the false nine-kinda position, especially with none of the players in the first XI are comfortable so far forward. You need a player who has some movement that is attached to being a striker, whether it be coming in off the wing a la Villa or even Pedro and Spain do not have a Totti in the central area either. It was a strange formation, especially more so considering Fabregas’ comments after the game about the lack of time spent on such a tactic. I think they could have done with Pedro more than one of Silva or Fabregas, as he has that movement you want at the end of the a move in the last third, especially against the defensively suspect Italy wing backs. Cesc, for me, does better deeper and then pushing forward from deep position, instead of starting so far forward and then coming deeper. They have got to start Pedro next time, if they are going to persist with this formation, me thinks. Even then, they still need more from at least one of their full backs
Rather disappointing yet again that Spain barely tested the opposition full backs. Arbeloa isn’t cavalier enough to provide such a threat and Alba’s space was choked by the likes of Cesc and Iniesta. The midfielders didn’t bother to trouble them much. That movement for the Spain goal was a movement that they needed to do more of, that run off the ball from the wing coming inside, something Pedro provides.
Probably the one constant criticism i have of this formidable Spain side over the years, is the lack of some kind of width, even from time to time. Predictably, this is one of the things that makes Barcelona a bit more variable and penetrative with the way they use Dani Alves.
Opponents (Chelsea, Real Madrid, now Italy) have started to solve the Tiki-Taka riddle.
And to me, the idea of playing with a bunch of playmakers and no traditional strikers and wingers has been a colossal failure for the past 3-4 months.
Because every success that Barca and Spain have had in that time period has not been DUE to the system but DESPITE the system.
Thanks to the sheer individual brilliance and will of players like Xavi and Fabregas, they have managed to extract some decent results. But when they have come up against smart tactics or outright bus parkings they have failed and failed in very obvious ways.
This strategy is being suffocated. Barca may continue to use it if only because they need to provide playing time to so many playmakers, but ultimately whatever success they have in the near future will be due to their great individual talents overcoming the gross limitations of the system with sheer power of will.
Hence Im glad that Wenger avoided swinging all the way to this approach. He might have been tempted. But thankfully he continued to bet on straight-line wingers and classical strikers, which I think will be healthier for a team that doesn’t have Messi to pull it out of the dolldrums when the tiki-taka fails completely, as it does more and more often.
Is the riddle’s answer to hope that Villa is injured? Seems pretty risky!
I tend to agree. I think that Barca – in its current iteration – has peaked and is now sliding downward: 1) Guardiola got too clever for his own good with ovethought tactics and formation; 2) a lot of strange buys (Affelay, Alexis Sanchez), players the team doesn’t really need (“too many cooks, etc.); 3)Xavi and Puyol aging, Dani Alves losing his edge; 4) other teams figuring out ways to beat them, etc.
Barca are a physically weak, small teams, vulnerable to set pieces and counterattacks, and also tend to be quite one dimensional in attack. If you have good enough players and a good manager, I think these problems can be exploited. Granted, if your team can’t get the ball, you can’t exploit these weaknesses. But, again, with key players declining (even if just modestly), and perfectly fine team balance being disrupted by overthought tactics and casual player personnel decisions (I think even Fabregas, as good as he is, has disrupted the team balance – Fabregas is really an EPL player, a better version of Lampard or Gerrard in their prime, not a Xavi or Iniesta), the ability for Barca to hold and use the ball like they did from 2009-2011 has slipped somewhat. Hence, the ability for Chelsea, Real, and others to exploit Barca’s weaknesses.
Afellay or Sanchez are strange buys? The Afellay deal was a gift because he is woth much more although he had many injuries. Barca can still sell him with for more than he cost. Sanchez played a good season. He works very hard, he scored some important goals and still has upside…
If you talk about stupid buys from Barca you can name Chygrynsky, Hleb or Keirrison. But not these two guys.
Barca was second in La Liga because Real Madrid played a record season. Barca was not really weak. They had some problems against the small clubs in spain. Madrid was just better and had less injuries to worry about… Barca won the Club World Cup, the Copa and dominated both games against Chelsea… I don`t know how this a sign for “sliding downward”
Spain is hedging closer to play 4×6x0 as Parreira predicted as the future of football. But to do so, both Xabi Alonso and Busquets would have to be more involved in the attacking moves. Spain’s movements – just like Barcelona – are very similar to what one sees from a futsal team that plays in the 4×0 (carousel) system. I would expect Busquets to step back in possession, joining Piqué and Ramos and allowing Arbeloa and Alba to move forward. Didn’t happen as often as it was needed.
Italy on the other hand, was a very pleasant surprise. The 3×5x2 really spoiled Del Bosque’s plan, and we could see that the Spaniards were surprised both by the formation and the pressure. Agree that Nocerino should have entered sooner (also why Del Bosque only made two substitutions, similar to Paulo Bento agains Germany, is somethin I quite don’t grasp). Marchisio had a lovely run near the end but was too tired to finish it properly.
I don’t even know how I ended up here, but I thought this post was good. I don’t know who you are but certainly you’re going to a famous blogger if you are not already
Cheers!
Awesine analysis as always! Del Bosque is mismanaging Spain and the side will pay for it. Alonso needs to be dropped. Arbeloa needs to be dropped. Ramos needs to move to the right. Torres or Negredo need to start. The manager is trying to please too many egos and remaining loyal to Madrid’s players. After watching replays of the ‘08 Euros I imagined that Alba could not be worse than Capdevilla and Ramos in the middle was better than Macheda. The difference is that Alba is too small and is a defensive liability while not really providing anything on the attacking end. Ramos in ‘08 and in the WC was a terror. There is something missing with this team and it will putter out earlier than most expect. Not because the tiki-taka style has been solved but because of player selection, tactics and team cohesion. I saw Xavi calling for Arbeloa to move up and pressure and Arbeloa argued in return. He is obviously not capable but is being used at a level that is beyond him.
Spain will not play the same system against Ireland. I think they were overly cautious against Italy. For some reasons they still “fear” us, and that was a surprise for me because I think our team is really weak and Croatia will beat us.
For me the false 9 was a complete disaster. Spain have the talent to win this tournament but are trying to be too clever. They simple must resist the urge to put there best players on the pitch so that they can have a functional lineup. That means Silva out of the starting lineup.
After looking into a number of the blog articles
on your website, I seriously like your technique of writing a blog.
I saved it to my bookmark website list and will be checking back in
the near future. Please check out my web site too and tell me what you think.
Hello, this weekend is pleasant in support of me, since this moment
i am reading this impressive informative piece of writing
here at my home.
gOkmlwGqpn http://beatsdrdre.hpage.com/ iArsizCepf beats by dre headphones for sale
In the past few matches, Alonso (instead of Busquets) has become the holding midfielder to drop back and create a back three. Any one know why?
Both Busquets and Alonso have experience playing this role for their clubs. Busquets has better positional sense defensively, and can get the ball to Xavi pretty fast. I would say Alonso is the better tackler (but less “clean”), and he is able to launch counterattacks with his long balls.
I am thinking Busquets is playing more forward because (i) this reduces Xabi and Xavi getting in each other’s way, (ii) and he can get the ball to the forward players faster and more accurately.
Also, in case the opposition counterattacks and Alonso is able to stop them, then he would be able to start Spain’s counter-attack with a long ball.
Busquets had the second most number of passes in the match vs. Italy after Xavi. He was playing in the position Xavi used to play 4 years ago. IMO, the Spanish defense does need two holding midfielders. They will be more balanced once Xavi retires and they have Fabregas, Silva, Iniesta, Mata, Cazorla, Canales or Muniain playing as the #10.
What I would like to see in the match vs. Ireland:
Torres and Pedro starting instead of Fabregas and Silva. Navas coming in at half time for Pedro, Llorente subbing in at ~65″ for Torres, and Mata/Cazorla or Fabregas for Alonso after 75″.
And against Crotia, the better striker out of Torres and Llorente and better player out of Pedro and Navas starting, Negredo subbing in around 65″. I am thinking VdB will give a chance for every one in the squad to play, just like he did at the WC (Albiol was injured.)
My own view is that the Spanish midfield is a lot more fluid than previously.
Some of the problems of Xabi and Xavi clashing in terms of who takes the main playmaking role seem to have been removed.
Xavi is back in control and Xabi, with a deeper position is able to try and exploit opponents during transitional phases.
Busquets being slightly further forward provides more options due to his positional sense and first time passing.
There is a school of thought that asks whether Busquets could be positioned in an attacking midfield role and used as a pivot, positioned centrally and spraying passes either side of him. Its not something which completely convinces me.
http://www.chalkontheboots.wordpress.com
Cheers for the reply. Love reading your site. Please don’t stop updating.
I just read up on Busquets playing as an enganche [ http://santapelota.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/busquets-as-an-advanced-midfielder/ ] That’s an interesting concept. Though I think within the Spanish squad, Javi Martinez would be more suited to that role than Busquets. If I am not mistaken, Javi Martinez debuted for Spain as an attacking midfielder.
But anyway, that’s not what I meant by Busquets playing further up the pitch. I meant Busquets playing in the Xavi (for Barca) or Guardiola role, being the heart of the team spraying passes all around.
zFlripRizz http://beatsbydreheadphones.dmusic.net/ sTiaanLyxb beats by dr dre for sale cheap
Got your point!
.