Spain 1-0 Croatia: Navas snatches late winner
The starting line-ups
Spain played an extremely cautious game, but won after Croatia pushed forward.
Vicente Del Bosque kept the same starting XI, meaning Fernando Torres again spearheaded the attack.
Slaven Bilic made various changes, effectively using a version of the 4-2-3-1 system he finished the Italy game with. Domagoj Vida started at right-back, pushing Darijo Srna forward to the right of midfield. Danijel Pranjic started on the left, with Luka Modric as the number ten. Nikica Jelavic and Ivan Perisic were only substitutes.
Spain were particularly unimpressive despite their eventual win, predictably dominating possession but creating few chances.
Croatia system
The interesting part of this game was Croatia’s shape. Bilic adapted his side significantly, changing Croatia’s style of play to suit the challenge of Spain. Whereas they’d previously played with one solid holding midfielder in position at all times, here Ivan Rakitic played deep alongside Ognjen Vukojevic and occupied the space in front of the back four.
Modric played higher up, not looking to get space between the lines, but instead dropping in and helping battle in midfield, generally getting goalside of Sergio Busquets. On the flanks, while Srna and Jordi Alba spent the game tracking each other up and down the line, on the other side Pranjic came inside and effectively was another central midfielder at times, with Alvaro Arbeloa allowed the entire right wing to himself – always in space, but not considered a real threat.
It’s difficult to say how much the formation contributed to it, as Spain have been slow, predictable and unimaginative with their use of the ball in all three first halves in this tournament, but Croatia defended very well. They stayed compact, they didn’t get dragged around and they always had numbers in midfield, with Modric and Pranjic helping the two holders.
Spain
Spain had the same old problems – a slow tempo, no width, and not enough forward runs from midfield. The exception, as against Italy, was Andres Iniesta, who was direct on the ball and had a good chance when he stormed into the box to get a pass from David Silva. Elsewhere, Spain were simply too horizontal – always looking for the sideways ball, never getting around the Croatian defensive unit, with Arbeloa too slow and Alba being tracked.
Interestingly, with Croatia packing the midfield zone and bringing Mandzukic back to remain compact, both Spanish centre-backs stepped forward in the first half, and had long-range shots.
By virtue of Spain having the full-backs so high up the pitch, Croatia sometimes threatened on the counter. Sergio Ramos made rash decisions when moving out to the left flank to cover for Alba (something he also did against Italy).
Second half
Croatia immediately became more fluid after half-time, within the same system. The two holders were given more freedom – Rakitic is the more natural attacking player, but Vukojevic also moved forward a couple of times.
Modric really came into the game in the second half. He’s a perfect player for playing against Spain, as he has the composure to look up and pick a pass, helping his side keep possession, but also trickery to get past Spain’s initial press. He led the charge, and his superb outside-of-the-foot cross for Rakitic should have produced the game’s opening goal.
Substitutes
Croatia had to go for the win, so moved roughly back to their 4-4-1-1 system, or 4-1-3-2 with the ball. Pranjic and Vida were withdrawn, with Srna dropping to right-back and storming forward on the overlap. Rakitic went to the right of midfield, Modric dropped deeper into the centre, while Perisic came on down the left, and Mandzukic was now just behind Jelavic upfront.
Croatia looked more threatening with two strikers, although they struggled to win the ball from Spain and could have been much more energetic with their closing down. Modric, in a deeper position, continued to drive his side forward.
Del Bosque went for two more direct players, with Navas on – in place of Torres, with Silva briefly becoming a false nine – and then Fabregas introduced upfront in place of Silva, so an Iniesta-Fabregas-Navas frontline.
The key change was Navas – he stretched the play, ran with the ball, made Spain much more varied in possession and made it difficult for Croatia to crowd out Spanish attacks in the centre of the pitch. Navas also stopped Ivan Strinic getting forward, which was important considering the way Croatia dominated the left late on against Italy.
Were it not for the situation in the group, this probably would have meandered to a 0-0, but Bilic really tried to force the crucial goal, bringing on Eduardo for Vukojevic, with the Brazilian-born striker seemingly playing down the right flank. This was probably a change too far, and while you can’t blame Bilic for trying it, the third substitution didn’t really help Croatia in any way. It meant Modric had to cover a large space in front of the back four, and was too far from goal.
Spain’s goal came from their three most dangerous attacking players of the game – Fabregas, Iniesta and Navas. Fabregas’ chip over the top of the defence was superb, but it was obvious how much space he had to work in – the space Vukojevic would have been covering.
Conclusion
A bit of a ‘false’ match – Croatia needed the win more than Spain (because of slightly unfortunate circumstances – who had battered Ireland by more) and had to push forward for the win. Instead, they got caught out on the counter-attack, but they’d been equally as impressive as Spain for the majority of the game.
Croatia can be pleased with their performance at this tournament – a comfortable victory over Ireland, a spirited fightback against Italy courtesy of a clever change from Bilic at half-time, then a commendable display against the World Champions. Bilic leaves on a disappointing note, but hopefully having restored some pride after a brief problematic period a couple of years ago.
For Spain? Nothing new. They’re still not scoring as many goals as they should, nor creating as many chances as they should. Perhaps it’s unfair to judge them upon this game, when a 0-0 would have suited them, but continued false domination is a risky game, and del Bosque simply isn’t making the most of his considerable resources.
That said, Spain generally improve after half-time, and their constant possession play is unquestionably tiring for the opposition, who struggle to play against them for 90 minutes. Still, you can’t help wanting more from such a ludicrously talented squad.
Did Llorente sleep with VDB’s wife? Why He would never play him, I’ll never know. Seriously, this talk is becoming redundant and am just tired of seeing a team of spain’s calibre endlessly pass the ball and lack penetration in the final third. It’s so obvious that providing width is the solution yet for some unknown reasons a coach of VDB’s calibre doesn’t seem to see it. It’s frustrating watching this team far less than what we all know they can be. I think spain needs to be beaten to drive home this point and as long as they continue to get results this way they won’t be keen on adding more variety to their attack. Maybe Portugal or Germany could finally help drive home this point. I hope for a portugal win against spain.
Spain faces no fewer than eight men between them and the opposition’s goal, and the eight are packed in tight. Their degree of difficulty is significantly higher than that of any other side. The majority of the football community ignoring this is greatly perplexing.
True, and Spain clearly don’t help this by playing Torres, apparently unsuited to their slow build up play and again contributing little against packed, deep defence, or playing with no nominal striker whatsoever.
There is a tried and tested way to play packed defenses. It’s simple. Stretch the defense. This is done by bringing on wingers and having a tall centre forward that can hold up ball and also nod crosses. That’s why the criticism of spain has always been variety in attack i.e more width. That’s why we keep asking why Llorente won’t play, why Navas or Pedro don’t start and why we want him to drop Alonso and have Iniesta back in the middle. It’s too offer more penetration and variety in the final third. That’s what is sorely lacking and what’s more shocking is why one of the world’s best coach is reluctant to at least gamble a little. Just a little boldness on his part but sadly we aren’t going to see that.
A few things:
– The tiki-taka, as noted roughly 1000 times across the web and on this site, is both an offensive and defensive tactic: it’s tough to score when you don’t have possession. While swinging in a cross has a higher goal expectancy than, say, Busquets passing six yards to a coming-back-to-the-ball Iniesta, it also has a tenfold-or-so higher chance of resulting in losing possession. With the ferocity Spain presses with and stamina being a legitimate factor for success (Cox even wrote a piece not too long back detailing the advantage teams in Group A or B have come the knockout stage) it is not a stretch to imagine that del Bosque has chosen the certainty of possession and wearing an opponent down over the potential reward and greater risk of being cavalier in the final third. His faith in the tiki-taka is approaching ‘zealot’ status, but its sustained success can hardly be argued with.
– Spain is very Barcelona down the left flank, with Alba being the proxy of Alves, but unlike Barça — who has the winger play OVER THE TOP of Messi when coming inside — Spain’s winger (Iniesta) plays UNDER the 9 — false or otherwise — and joins midfield. It’s a modification to Barça’s hybrid that allows Iniesta to join his club-midfielders and make his mark from the centre. Given that Spain is essentially playing with a three-man back-line already — with one of Busquets and Alonso providing cover — Spain could conceivably play something of a 3-4-3 diamond with Torres/Llorente as a true CF/striker and Fàbregas in his “false-ten” role to both “keep options open” all while not losing any ability to pass its way through a defence. Navas out right, Barça’s diamond midfield (letting Busquets do his thing in defence as required) and Alba being Alves out left.
– This is all to say that Spain doesn’t have to resort to a Liverpool approach to goalscoring. The backlash against the tiki-taka is asinine: Spain wants to keep possession and take shots with a high success rate, opponents give Spain all the tempo of the game by sitting in defence, playing them differently than they would anyone else, and Spain is the team that needs to change? Spain, the team that needs to change, the team that actually PASSED THE BALL INTO THE NET?
Cox misses the point here: “Spain’s goal came from their three most dangerous attacking players of the game – Fabregas, Iniesta and Navas. Fabregas’ chip over the top of the defence was superb, but it was obvious how much space he had to work in – THE SPACE VUKOJEVIC WOULD HAVE BEEN COVERING.” (emphasis mine)
Cox is essentially saying Spain scored because Croatia stopped parking the bus, AND THAT ONCE THE HIGHER DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY Spain faces was removed, Spain’s dangerous attacking players unleashed a brilliancy. It can not be said Spain scored because of the space Fàbregas had without it being explicitly known on some level that Spain (and Barça) cannot be judged as the rest of the world because the rest of the world does not face the same hurdles. The conclusion to draw isn’t just Spain scored because Fàbregas had time on the ball. That is incomplete.
“Still, you can’t help wanting more from such a ludicrously talented squad.”
If teams played Spain like just another side, this would be an entirely fair statement to make. But they don’t, and to judge Spain as one would any other side is all wrong.
I’ve absolutely no idea what you’re talking about at the end. I don’t even think it makes sense.
Be forewarned, ZM, Tiki-taka has a reputation for attracting the most unstable members of society to it’s cause…
I think what he might be saying is that your point was that Cesc had that space only because Croatia were pushing for a goal and Vukojevic was no longer there. However, he’s saying that teams other than Spain don’t face the added difficulty of having that player there in the first place (or otherwise ultra-defensive lineups).
Something like that anyway.
While it’s true that most teams field a more defensive side against Spain, it’s not all about the other team being defensive. Spain are probably the most cautious side in the tournament.
Del Bosque’s game plan is to be very cautious in the first 60 minutes, he WANTS the team to play like this. That is why he likes to field as many passing midfielders as he can, to keep the ball and not give any scoring chances to the opponent.
At the 60th minute or so, if the game is 0-0, he starts bringing more straight forward attacking players, usually Navas to provide width and stretch the already tired defence. It’s not a coincidence that Spain score most of their goals after the 60 minute mark.
So while Spain’s game plan is not very exciting, it is very effective.
“Still, you can’t help wanting more from such a ludicrously talented squad.”
Both statements are true. I “want more from such a ludicrously talented squad”. But at the same time, I understand their approach. Tire out the opponents for 60 minutes, playing ‘cautiously’. Not exciting, but effective.
“I’ve absolutely no idea what you’re talking about at the end. I don’t even think it makes sense.”
Teams play Spain differently than they do any other opponent. You say Fàbregas has time on the ball only because Vukojevic had exited, but as CJ above (or below) understood, against any other side, Vukojevic isn’t even there in the first place. You even make note of Croatia having extra bodies deep in your review:
“Interestingly, with Croatia packing the midfield zone and bringing Mandzukic back to remain compact…”
“Whereas they’d previously played with one solid holding midfielder in position at all times, here Ivan Rakitic played deep alongside Ognjen Vukojevic and occupied the space in front of the back four.”
You can’t judge Spain as you would any other side, because the degree of difficulty they face is greater than that of any other side. That degree of difficulty must be taken into account.
My response is awaiting moderation. Blimey.
Spain In first half had to play against two rows of four and it was almost laughable at times to see those players actually keeping a line in midfield.
Torres sub was coming , which helped the game very well. In first half Torres had a chance needless to say in wide position. Other than that he was walled out by the big Croatian players in middle.
it was evident that Croatia played narrow at the back knowing Spain had to go out and cross(which they didn’t). Reason being, only Spanish player who could compete for a header was Torres, and Croatia had players who could cover him( tall and big ) so Spain had to take it to the corners so that they could bring in their other big players Pique and Ramos.
Also if Ramos was in Right instead of CD he could’ve being very troublesome to the opposition. Puyol is to blame!
Sid Lowe gets it:
“In that sense, Spain are victims of their own success. They are victims of the fact that they are expected to destroy the opposition in every single game, meaning that anything less is treated as failure. And they are victims of the fact that the teams that they are expected to destroy every game are content simply not to be destroyed. Every team Spain face adapt their game to protect themselves. Attacking teams become counterattacking ones, or simply stop attacking altogether. Croatia sought to reduce a 90-minute game to a 20-minute one.”
Oh please. Not to Sid, but to your constant moaning. Spain are not special. They are a great team, but guess what, many other sides have to deal with teams playing defensively against them. Spain have brought this on themselves as they press the ball so high up and hog the ball so much. Not criticizing it, but that is the reaction they should expect. No sane coach will set up a team to have a shootout with Spain (or Barca). Because they wont let you, and you will just leave yourself exposed. But guess what, all big clubs deal, every week, with sides that play 10 men behind the ball and rarely come out of their own half. Until recently teams like Fulham, Stoke or Villa went to Old Trafford to not lose, or only lose 1-0 or 2-0. And it was the job of United to break them down. And that is it. It didn’t make those United victories more special, nor were the odds stacked up against United, its just a game of football and its up to the team to break down their opponent, whatever tactics that opponent might use. So, while giving Spain and Barca all the credit they deserve, lets not start this nonsense that they have to somehow overcome even bigger odds to gain victories. Its actually easier to win when you have an opponent that only defends, as you are pretty much guaranteed a point. And one goal give you almost a certain victory. Spain does not have it harder, they make it harder on themselves.
Navas was brought in to give the team width, meanwhile Arbeloa was open all match long yet hardly anyone passes the ball to him. And when he did get the ball, he almost never crossed it into the box. Its no one’s fault that the Spainish frontline is full of midgets. And it was del Bosque who removed his only threat in the box and put on Navas. What was the point of that? He only had the tiny Silva to pass the ball to in the box. That created nothing. It was a ball over the top and a failed offside trap which got Spain the goal, moments after Spain should have been called for a blatant foul in the box btw. Navas was in the middle when he scored. I don’t see how his introduction helped Spain. He played well, tried to create, but had not target in the box. If del Bosque left Torres on, or introduced Llorente and Navs together, then I could see the point. But it was Spain’s tactics and play that failed Spain, not the opposition which hates football so much that it defends. Spain were slow in movement and passing. They constantly chose to pass the ball for the sake of passing then try to create something from a promising position. Spain played for a draw as much as Croatia did in the first half.
A draw suited them, so they played slow, boring, methodical football. In the end it worked. But teams play everyone the same. They figure out the best way to achieve a result against that particular opponent and go with it. Spain is not special there.
@Robert:
Your contradict yourself:
“They are a great team, but guess what, many other sides have to deal with teams playing defensively against them.”
“But teams play everyone the same.”
—
“Spain does not have it harder, they make it harder on themselves.”
“No sane coach will set up a team to have a shootout with Spain (or Barca). Because they wont let you, and you will just leave yourself exposed.”
—
You also use quite the cliché…
“its just a game of football and its up to the team to break down their opponent, whatever tactics that opponent might use.”
…to hang a lampshade on your argument. “Oh, football is just football, swing a cross in, put the ball in the net, so and so is a good lad, tactics are just a footnote, going against more defenders means nothing.” It’s very Joe Morgan arguing against advanced statistics in baseball, reducing the action of the game to some abstract concept without giving consideration to any notion not fitting the traditional (and narrow) view held by the old guard.
“Until recently teams like Fulham, Stoke or Villa went to Old Trafford to not lose, or only lose 1-0 or 2-0. And it was the job of United to break them down. And that is it. It didn’t make those United victories more special, nor were the odds stacked up against United”
Actually, yes, it meant the odds were stacked up against them. Scoring against 8 (or 9, or 10) men behind the ball is harder than doing so against 6 or 7. To be so cavalier with such a fundamental facet of the game is concerning.
To say nothing about your argument of “Yeah, maybe Spain has it harder, but Manchester United had it harder too, so that proves it isn’t harder, because ‘its just a game of football and its up to the team to break down their opponent, whatever tactics that opponent might use’”.
Spain don’t help themselves sometimes. You can’t keep on putting it at the feet of the opposition’s tactics. At the end of the day, they use a conservative double pivot in midfield, even though most teams against Spain set up to play deep and with most of their men back. Most opposition set up to play narrow and condense the midfield, yet Spain often neglect width (until making the usual Navas sub). Spain are not perfect and I feel its wrong to blame their imperfections at the door of the opposition’s tactics. Some of it yes is warranted but such lack of attacking variety can not always be put down to opposition tactics, as no one is forcing Spain not to use width, as no one is forcing Spain to always play with the double pivot system of Xabi-Busquets. Apart from alternating quite a bit between using false nine and using a orthodox striker, they are reluctant to try the same frequency of change in the other areas of the team.
All the fella above is asking for is variety. I don’t think that is too much to ask of Spain, as they don’t use a lot of variety. So I think its understandable why some get frustrated watching Spain as they do the same thing over and over again.
I agree. Spain played with a single holder four years ago at Euro 2008 under Aragones and was a much more entertaining side than the at World Cup 2010, in which VDB played with two holders (the double pivot). I would like to see them go back to the modern 4-3-3, with or without a true no.9. I suspect VDB is playing the “pass them to death” game, which works for Spain and Barcelona. But I’d like to see him make the change to 4-3-3 with wingers between the 60-70 minute mark to give the team a decent amount of time playing a more direct attacking game (which should finish off the opposition re tiredness).
Many have said that VDB is more of a managerial diplomat than a tactician. To remove either Busquets or Xabi Alonso would incite rage in Barcelona or Real Madrid fans (there are already endless debates over who is better). So while VDB probably is choosing to be conservative by electing the double pivot, the political side of things most likely plays a role as well.
Agreed. The double pivot is too conservative to the point of being too risky. First, what’s the use of a double pivot if they’re not tracking back and they’re giving up excellent counter attacking chances to latecomers in the box, which is what they did in the match – twice. Second, if they go down a goal, it would be extremely difficult for them to score, not only because of the opposition packing the box, but because of the difficult of switching psychologically from a conservative to attack mindset.
so after playing the same way and winning both the Euros and World Cup, steamrollering all comers in the qualifiers, drawing their opening game against the Italians and dispatching both the Irish & Croats; it’s still not ‘good’ enough!!! There’s a long list of countries that will take this over anything else.
As I said/implied in a post lower down (which was posted, in terms of time stamp, before this post), I much prefer Aragones’ Spain of Euro 2008 (though it wasn’t a finished team), a team that I enjoyed a lot.
As I said/implied in a post lower down, that it is effective football, admirable football, technically gifted football, results football. Nothing in that sentence to suggest I think its not successful football. I simply merely do not find Spain all that enjoyable to watch. Enjoyable football and successful football are two different bloody things. All well good that they won WC, did well in the qualifiers, etc, but I’m not talking about the successful nature of the football, I was talking about the ‘pleasing nature’ of the football for me. Context, think bloody context.
Of course there are many bloody teams that would take that, what a stupid comment to make. But I am not judging by that ‘long list of countries’ standards, I’m judging by Spain’s standards (their talent, their brilliance as a team, their performances in 08, etc).
Your like some tedious tabloid journalist with the way you deduct things from peoples’ comments in a inept and out-of-context manner.
Before you jump the gun when replying to a post, think about context. The original post we were all replying to, didn’t say it wasn’t successful football but asked for some variety and my reply doesn’t say anything to the contrary, i.e., I was not saying it was unsuccessful football, instead asking for some variety. Now here you are with your ‘trying to be smart-arse’ post, a post that doesn’t fit in with the theme of the original post (which to clarify again for your sake, was asking for some sort of variety from Spain…not because the current football isn’t successful but from a ‘enjoying’ point of view). Well done(!)
Spain would not face eight men between them and the goal packed in tight if they attacked quickly with width, pace and a natural striker pulling the opposition defence out of position.
They rarely look to play a risky pass though. It just goes in, out, sideways most of the time. Maybe if they didn’t play a shape that leaves so much space down the flanks and played Navas from the start for natural width they might be inclined to take more risks?
No I didn’t sleep with Del Bosque’s wife and I have absolutely no idea why he prefers a moron like Torres over me!
Spain won it because Croatia went bananas looking for the win (and because the referee didn’t see that Busquets penalty). Del Bosque is probably the worst coach at the Euros. Maybe up there with Smuda.
Nice read, Mr. Cox.
Spain go into the knock-out stage and will feel that they can really push on now and raise the level of their game as they never really seemed to extend themselves in the last two. I feel that they will be watching tomorrow, wanting England to top the group, as playing them will be a harder barrier to break down than the French defense.
http://noeasyfootballblogsatthislevel.blogspot.co.uk/
Wow, that’s a brilliant analysis- I really want to read your blog now.
Spain were lucky to win.
As an England fan, I would much rather play Spain than Italy in the QFs. Spain just don’t have any penetration or width when they play with Iniesta and Silva out wide. Italy on the other hand have a much better mix of players. De Rossi and Marchisio are just the players Spain could do with; dynamic players who can make vertical runs up the pitch to make the most of the rest of the midfields passing.
Also feel that Spain really need to start playing Pedro – massively underrated in my opinion.
Spain need to play Busquets as the holder, with Pedro and Navas on the wing. This gives them the luxury of choosing from Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas and Silva as the two attacking midfielders – and Fabregas or Silva as a false no.9 (with Torres in reserve). Simple changes, but could make all the difference. I don’t sense they need two holders (although the Real Madrid backs, Sergio Ramos and Arbeloa, make me very very nervous)
Really? Ramos is a much better centre back than Pique, who is one of the most overrated players in the football world. On top of that he had a terrible season, Pep even dropped him for a few games. I would be more concerned about him than Ramos. Kind of agree with Arbeloa though, he is pretty average imo. Can’t understand why Iraola is not even in the team.
Agree with Spain not needing two holders. But Del Bosque is very conservative, like we all know.
So far at the Euros Pique has been head and shoulders above Ramos who commits many errors, especially when covering the full back position
“A bit of a ‘false’ match – Croatia needed the win more than Spain (because of slightly unfortunate circumstances – who had battered Ireland by more)…”
Think you got this one wrong. Ireland games wouldn’t count for nothing if al three were on 5 points.
Also nothing about the tricky decisions regarding the two penalty shouts for Croatia? I also think that while Navas was onside for the goal, it shows everything what is wrong with the current rule. It punishes the defence and give unjust advantage to the attacker who was offside at the beginning of the action. I’m also not sure you can say he was not interfering with the GK either.
In general, I thought it was a horrible performance of Stark who was voted for the worst ref in Germany last season by the players.
“Also nothing about the tricky decisions regarding the two penalty shouts for Croatia?” I don’t comment about refereeing decisions. Go elsewhere if you want that.
Oh, thanks for being so nice!
P.S. Have you edited the Ireland tie-break comment?
The 0-0 draw would have sent Croatia home because of the overall goal difference in the group. Spain beat up on Ireland more than Croatia did, thus Spain would have gone through. Any previous tie breakers would not have broken the tie.
NOTE: A 1-1 draw would have sent Croatia through to the QF, again because of the Ireland scores. Croatia would have had more goals scored in the group than Italy! All previous tie breakers would not have broken the tie.
Not wrong at all. If SPA-CRO had ended 1-1 the games vs Ireland would have counted.
just because you write it shouldnt go in your head because people praise you . hope you keep your feet firmly grounded and start taking good with other things .
Actually, he’s quite right about Croatia needing the win more than Spain because of goal difference against Ireland. If Spain and Croatia drew 0-0 (and Italy won):
1. Italy, Spain, and Croatia are all tied on 5 points. Initial tiebreakers only consider matches played between these three teams. Each team has 3 points in these matches, with a goal difference of 0.
2. Italy tops the group on goals scored in these matches (2). Spain and Croatia have 1 each.
3. Spain holds the next tiebreaker over Croatia, overall goal difference (+4), *because they crushed Ireland by more than Croatia did.*
So Spain was happy with a 0-0 draw, while Croatia most certainly was not – and it had everything to do with Ireland, despite UEFA’s best efforts (I prefer their tiebreaker to FIFA’s).
I only wish Spain had scored earlier, so Croatia would have had more time to snatch a late equalizer. A 1-1 draw would have seen both teams through.
Casillas also got two saves wrong, I desperately wanted them to go in.
I am thinking that Del Bosque is hiding something, but even if not, I would not say that Spaniards were dominant in the World Cup 2 years ago either. They just kept controlling every match and winning by a small, but comfortable result. I am not sure if this campaign is very different from what we saw 2 years ago (I forgot the matches), it is just that the Barca style and the way Spain played were still new. Even back then Torres was not in form and Xavi often pointed at him in game asking his head coach to substitute him.
I expected Spain to rack up a big win here, with Croatia needing a win and having to push up. but Croatia (correctly to stay in the game, but not considering they needed a win) defended deep and stifled Spain. Spain also lacked attacking variety though and this was the problem identified before the tournament. Silva was rather poor on the right today and too similar to what Spain already had, while Xavi was again reluctant to make forward runs. Iniesta was good when at the heart of attacks, but he needed more options. Torres showed he still struggles against deep defenses that don’t leave space in behind, without that he doesn’t offer much. Spain looked better with Fabregas and Navas on as Zm said. Fabregas dragged the defense out of position and Navas provided the penetration.
For the next game I would start Fabregas or Llorente up front, Iniesta/Silva on the left, and Navas/Pedro on the right to add balance. I would also drop Alonso and bring Iniesta into central midfield, with Silva or Mata on the left. This would help the balance as right now Spain do not look like scoring enough goals. Defensive wise I actually thought they were good again and hardly allowed any real chances, defensively they could get far.
Croatia did better than I expected. They changed their team to their pre-tournament shape, a defensively solid 4411. The defense still allowed chances (hard not to) but their midfield was excellent. Rakitic did an excellent job in deep midfield, showing good energy and distribution, while Modric pressed well and was at the heart of Croatia’s best attacks. This balance in midfield allowed Croatia to compete in both defense and attack. But their attack was rather poor today and they always looked like both conceding and not scoring. A good run of performances here, but they needed to beat Italy in the second half to have good hope of winning.
So Italy and Spain are through, both will be tough opponents and give group D a challenge. Spain will need to re diversify their strategy to be able to create more chances, bit its likely Spain will be unchanged.
Follow me @econinterests and read my new article if you have time:
http://www.championsleague.ca/2012/06/17/spurs-must-change-their-approach-after-missing-out-on-champions-league/
Well, they won the World Cup doing this, so why would they change. Hold on to the ball, don’t take a any risks, wear a team out, then go for the goal late when your opponent is too tired to take advantage. It’ll keep working, until it doesn’t. I suppose England is a worse opponent for them than France, because they’ve been practicing how to sit deep against a team dominating possession and hit on the break. Llorente could be more useful though as a late sub.
Navas needs to start, Silva needs to start on the bench.
Silva has been involved in most of Spain’s goals (1 goal and 3 assists), so I wouldn’t drop him. But Spain could drop Alonso or Busquets and start Navas and Silva on the wings with Iniesta, Xavi and XA/SB in midfield. But that’s not going to happen with Del Bosque.
“his superb outside-of-the-foot cross for Rakitic should have produced the game’s opening goal”: it remains a mystery to me that people can reach such a high level of professional football and still seem unfamiliar with the precept of ‘head the ball downwards’.
I was really hoping that this cross went in. Would of been interesting to see how Spain change things up when they needed to get a goal…
Yes, what will be fascinating is what Spain does if they go down a goal. Surely they have planned for it, and the strength of the squad means you have great tactical options. Otherwise it does get rather boring with Spain, with a style that is great at grounding out games but offers very little penetration.
ahem. They went down goal in the opening game remember?
they went down a goal against Italy… and answered right away with a goal…
In case the above is not sufficient, I just wanted to say that Spain went down a goal against Italy.
Let me clarify then, going a goal down yesterday against Croatia would have meant Spain were heading out of the Euro’s. So I was hoping for a Croatian goal to see how Spain would respond when they really had to chase a game. They didn’t have to get another goal against Italy, so while I understand your points, I do believe there is a difference in being a goal down in these two games.
Anyone else think that England would do better to draw tomorrow and play Spain in the QFs instead of Italy? Two deep, compact banks of four appears enough to hold off Spain (if Bilic was playing for penalties, he could have got them), and England managed it against France. Against Italy, who play two centre-forwards who like to drift into the channels, I can see England trying to attack and getting caught out when Cole&Johnson push up too much.
Disappointed that Spain didn’t play with a quicker tempo or lay siege more to the immediate surrounding area of the Croatia box but I guess they were paying heavy attention on not conceding either. One small upside is they used the full backs’ width more, even if they didn’t require any crosses from them.
Generally, I am more and more finding it very boring watching Spain and their monotonous style is tedious. I just wish they add some variety to the play or quickening the tempo in the first half of a game (instead of doing the bloody usual of waiting for a sub to change things). Its effective football, admirable football, results football technically very good football, what they do but not necessarily enjoyable to watch for all. I wish my country could play football to that level as its a high level indeed but we aren’t the creme de la creme, so we have different standards, whereas Spain is supposed to be top of the pile and their football is ground breaking for recent times in terms of the domination of possession but please, add some more life to the play. They over do it far too much with their OCD behaviour with possession.
Catenaccio is about defensive shape of the team and choking the space that the opposition want to attack, Spain is about possession shape of the team and starving the opposition of the ball. Not all that different in relation to the boredom those styles can have on a game. Though I swear sometimes watching Spain, I would prefer a well-executed Catenaccio-counter attacking at times.
Even though Aragones’ Spain wasn’t a finished product, I still found them more enjoyable than Del Bosque’s Spain.
I admire Spain’s level of quality but they don’t excite me much.
I really hope they step it up in the next games but they will be facing England, who have zero confidence in their possession, so it will be more of the same. Great(!)
The likelihood is that Spain will play England, how does everyone see it going?
I said after the Sweden game, the fact we struggled to beat a team that’s average is no reflection on how we’ll do in the tournament. We was expected to go out and control the game against Sweden because we’re ’superior’ so they’ll sit back and defend, and that don’t help us as it basically plays to our weaknesses, ball retention and being creative to break the opposition down.
Playing Spain actually plays to our strengths. We can get everyone behind the ball, very defensive, and play on the counter, Walcott is key to this, and Rooney also in my opinion. Spain will just play it round in front of us, and we showed against France we can keep even the very best quiet.
I can’t comment on this game as I watched Italy v Ireland. Italy were poor. Maggio was dropped for some reason, and he’s far better than Abate!! No real creativity from midfield as Pirlo was awful. France I expect to beat Italy should it go that way.
Predictions:
Quarters Czech v Port, Ger v Greece, Spain v Ukraine, France v Italy.
Semifinals Port v Spain, Ger v Italy.
Player of the Tournament: Iniesta
Disagree
I think this Spain side has 4 problems
1. It’s difficult to win 3 international tournaments in a row
2. The Barca players look tired to me.
3. They’re trying to play the best players but don’t kow their best system.
4. Other sides are beginning to work out Tika Taka: Hold position, break quickly etc. At the end of the day, when Spain and Barca take on well drilled sides they have to live off scraps these days and rely on taking just one of the few opportunities they create. We only lost because Messi missed penalty against Chelsea! It’s the kind of excuse I’d expect from a poor side not one that dominates like Barca. It’s become no more inherantly productive than the reactive football that’s being sent out to defeat them.
End of the day, I would fancy Roy Hodgson’s England against this lot. Italy would scare me to death!
Don’t underestimate the impact of Villa’s injury for Spain or Barcelona. His goal threat is huge in generating space for other players and for scoring goals himself.
Easy cowboy. Barcelona lost against Chelsea because it was extremely wasteful, especially during the away match. They created plenty of opportunities against a parked bus but as the 180 minutes began to tick away they inevitably tightened up. At this point del Bosque is the one that is helping stop his own squad and it plays into the hands of teams like Italy and England.
Agree with everyone making the point Michael did before Euro 2012 started and back in 2010: as great of a player as Silva is, he isn’t a good fit for the players who must play (the Barca midfield trio and Xabi). The problem this year is that:
* Silva has had just enough good moments to force him to stay in the starting lineup
* Pedro hasn’t been in good form all 2011/12
Pedro in 2010/12 form would likely have forced his way into the line up with VDB seeing him as a player likely to have an understanding with Xavi + Iniesta + Busquets and Cesc when Cesc was in. Instead, what was a broken team in 2010 that got repaired as the WC went on (Torres and Silva out, Villa to the middle and Pedro in) is once again broken but “winning” so VDB doesn’t have a lot of push to change.
I don’t think Pedro was great last season, but he’s set himself high standards over the last few years, and he hasn’t been as bad as some have been making out. And anyway, towards the end of the season, he was pretty much back to his lethal best (Copa Del Rey Final prime example.)
And even if Pedro’s not at his best, he’s still a very effective player. He’ll always provide width, he’s got good movement, his pressing is fantastic, and he’ll offer some penetration in behind, which Spain really need. I think it’s best to play with one winger who’s going to cut in, and one who’ll provide width, Spain are playing with two of the previous, and it’s making them far too narrow and predictable, Pedro could help this massively, but Del Bosque seems unable to drop Silva.
Not sure I agree with you about Modric off the ball, ZM.
I kept an eye on him throughout the first half and he seemed to consistently be in the playmaker role, staying forward and always making himself available for a pass in order to spur a counter attack (much like Mata vs. Bayern). They had two solid defensive lines of four but Modric was rarely a part of them when they dropped deep.
This changed in the second half a bit when Croatia were effectively chasing the game and they had to close down more than hold shape.
[N.B. This is all based on observation - I haven't checked the stats - they may suggest otherwise]
Whilst I’ll admit Spain lacked variety today when attacking I’d like to make three basic points concerning Spain in attack:
1) Excluding the game against ROI Spain were actually better offensively when playing WITHOUT a recognised CF than with one. Against Italy they played some of the most penetrating football of the tournament thus far, only that in the first half the sheer doggedness of the italian defenders meant that almost every run into the box from deep was tracked. It is important to note that in the first half Spain played the very same ball into Fabregas that they played for the goal. The strikerless system works well for them as they play against teams that sit deep thus there is little space to be exploited behind the defence, whereas there is plenty of space in front, if the CBs have no one to mark they are eventually made to step up and it is at this moment that the space in behind becomes available and the vertical runs from deep can be made.
2) A clear difference between Spain and Barcelona is the lack of the space available between the CBs and the full backs, mainly due to the lack of width as already stated. Whilst I am not of the view that Torres or Llorente is needed i do agree with the need for he presence of either Pedro or Navas to provide width on he right in order to drag the full backs away from th CB and make the defence less compact, thus allowing for more space for the deep midfield runners (I.e In
Playing with a CF has been good for Spain because it adds another option, and another form of movement, for the all the playmakers on the team. The game against Italy definitely changed for the better when Torres got on.
Yesterday Torres had a horrible game, never running into any positions. Not his type of match either, since there was less space behind the defence. Despite all this someone actually running at the offside line would have added an option, something a depressed, walking Torres never did.
Navas is better at finding space for the cross, but that’s pretty useless if it’s only Silva or someone equally small in front of the goal.
I can agree with you.
All those critics of the strikerless plan, who said Spain have found their shape with Torres with the Ireland win, I dont know what they can say now after this match. Spain looked much better with Fabregas in. And their goal came in through a typical barca style movements with Fabregas and Iniesta, though scored by Navas.
Spain needs to bench Alonso and go to the midfield of Xavi, Iniesta and Busquests, allowing Pedro to come in at one wing, being subbed by Navas when tired, with Fabregas and Silva forming the other two forwards, changing positions often.
Please, get real. Spain only scored the goal in the 88th minute because Croatia had thrown caution to the wind and taken off their last CDM. If Croatia didn’t need to get a goal, Spain would’ve been as impotent as they were the previous 88 minutes.
your point is worthless with your useless “if”
No,I think QWE is 100% right. Spain looked completely impotent as long as the Croats did not change their starting tactics for a more offensive one in the last 25 minutes.I rarely saw Spain so helpless
Do you sometimes leave yourself logged in as the editor when you leave comments?
(I.E. Iniesta & Fabregas) to attack.
Having said that a team of Spain’s calibre should really be sharper, quicker and more incisive. Watching them one feels that like Barcelona this season they have been missing the sheer ruthlessness of a player like Villa, and to take this even further they have a somewhat of a Messi shaped void which they cannot completely fill, although I feel that Fabregas is able to provide many of the services Messi provides as a false nine and quite frankly Spain have looked their most dangerous when he has been on the pitch.
Del Bosque is too politically correct to start Spain’s best line up. They will not win the championship unless Del Bosque drops Alonso, moving Iniesta back center, and that will never happen.
Iniesta is actually the best “Messi Role” candidate on Spain’s roster. If Spain wanted to blitz people without playing a center forward, the attack would be:
Mata—————Silva
———-Iniesta——–
—-Fabregas—-Xavi—–
———Busquets——–
Mata and Silva would interchange positions, as could Iniesta and Fab.
I was actually just thinking about this. Of all Spain’s players, Iniesta is the best dribbler, the best at turning, and a pretty clinical finisher when he is told to go for goal. He is the ideal candidate for the false 9 role. The trick would be getting him the ball and successfully instructing him to be ruthless in front of goal as he has a life-long tendency to be self-less.
He would be the complete attacking midfielder if he scored more at club level. I guess that is his self-less nature of his play coming through. But apart from that, best Spanish attacking midfielder of the current lot as he has the lot (well apart from goals).
The most tricky player should occupy the False 9/False 10 role. Fabregas is very good at being direct with his moves, but he is not a tricky player in the dribble.
Iniesta has the best on-ball control of any player in the world not named Lionel Messi in my opinion. I would put Neymar ahead of Cristiano in third place. Cristiano is better in short bursts than he is on a slalom.
He doesn’t score as much because he’s not asked to, but he is a more than capable finisher (as displayed on the biggest stages possible- Champions League knock out and World Cup Final).
I find the endless moaning about Spain/Barcelona’s “boring” play far more tedious than watching them play. There is a lack of understanding about their style; you may not like it, but asking Spain to “pump up the volume” is akin to asking jazz players to play speed metal.
Yes, a different manager might have picked and put in a more productive lineup (for instance, I think Soldado is far more clever at movement and finishing than Torres, is better suited to Spain’s game, and would have beaten the defender and put in that early Alba cross). But the style of play would remain basically the same. Sometimes a player misses seeing another player’s run, or plays a wall pass when they could turn an attack, but most of the time, if a Spanish player sees an opening or advantage ahead, he advances the ball. They simply play SMART, instead of trying to play LUCKY. Asking them to get the ball in a crowded box more often is asking them to throw the ball up for grabs more. And asking them to up the tempo ignores the fact they play at a jogging pace most of the time for a reason: to rest with the ball. If every player was trying to make cutting runs all the time, they’d tire themselves out, and find themselves out of position more often.
So they just move themselves and the ball around, seeking small cracks, and only turning up the tempo when an opportunity emerges, or if the scoreline requires a less patient approach. I greatly enjoy watching this tenacious stalking of the opponent (not to mention the quality of the technique in handling the ball). Speed Metal end-to-end “action” with the ball loosely pinging about like a pinball machine on crack is what bores me. And when Spain does make an attacking move, it’s often wonderful passes and runs through tight spaces that *almost* succeed. I find those higher-percentage attacking moves far more exciting than low-percentage hopeful outside shots and crosses that depend far more on luck and quantity more than anything else.
I understand Spain’s intelligent football isn’t for everyone, but detractors should understand it’s a matter of their own taste for constant stimulation of a more overt form.
I dunno but what’s the purpose of intelligent football? Isn’t it to score a lot of goals? Isn’t it to adapt your tactics to suit the way a particular game is going and then get the win? I think Intelligence should embody Fluidity,variety, and an ability to do what is necessary for the win. What happens when their so called ‘tenacious stalking of the opponent’ approach hits the wall as we so often see nowadays? Somehow the sheer talent of the squad grinds out results but I agree with ZM that they have been false wins. And the problem with false wins is that the delude one into thinking everything is fine. I really don’t know how many defeats it will take for Spain to realise that they won’t always win with Tika Taka and they need to adjust accordingly as the circumstances require.
I think intelligent football would be playing for your strength. If Spain wants to tiki-taka it’s because they have the players to do so, a midfield run by Xavi-Iniesta-Busquets with addition of Silva is “tiki-taka” (I left Alonso out because he plays a more direct football).
As VDB said after [this] game, this is not a League game it is a tournament and margin of errors are very slim so he likes to play more conservative. Perhaps that’s their approach, play conservative 1st half, get the feel of the opponent and the pitch and whatever else there is and the 2nd half move quicker and bring more explosive players (width, direct plays, no.9, etc.)
I love Barcelona, it is my club, but their tiki-taka is far superior than Spain’s tiki-taka. Spain lacks something (x2) to play the tiki-taka that we’ve all got used to from Barca, that’s width and Leo Messi. So, to conclude, Spain’s tiki-taka is different from Barca’s one. And I agree, sometimes Spain’s game is too slow, very f*cking slow.
alonso is not more direct footballer but he is long rang passer and not the ones like xavi , iniesto playing small passes and building up play . he is there for a more direct play to play ball behind defense and also because he is a real madrid man .
Thank you for putting my thoughts into a coherent post!
Well said.
Great!! That is what I always think of Spain…
Some are hardly calling for them to change tact totally and play basketball tempo but some find it boring because of their reluctant to use width more from time to time and reluctance to experiment with just one pivot player, instead of two. Just little hints of variety, not a total change of style. I don’t see anything wrong or tedious with that at all.
So get off that high horse, making out people who disagree with the way Spain play as some sort of football neanderthals and that those kind of fans just want some basketball tempo to the game, whereas the likes of you are some sort of high and mighty connoisseur. That is just as tedious, if not more, as the so-called people you are moaning about.
What pretentious garbage. The only thing worse than watching Spain is reading the elaborate- and often condescending- justifications for their tedious football.
Playing style isn’t the problem. Del Bosque’s player selection is the problem. He has not properly balanced the team. He has three holding players in his central midfield, and only two are needed (and not on the same line).
Spain’s scoring ability/effectiveness would improve dramatically if Del Bosque ever got it right, but he’s too politically correct to leave a Real Madrid midfielder on the bench.
Since I don’t know much about Spanish politics, could you please elaborate on why he can’t bench a Real Madrid midfielder? Is it only midfielders? What would happen if he did? Other articles I’ve read are of the opinion that he doesn’t want to upset player/dressing room harmony and this influences player selection (as opposed to politics). You disagree?
No other country in the world has politics so intertwined with sport as Spain does/has had with its soccer.
Passing midfielders have become the symbolic figure of Spanish football in the last four to five years. Alonso, a Basque from San Sebastian by heritage, has become Madridista by choice as a player.
Del Bosque knows the delicate balance he must strike between Barcelona and Real Madrid players, and that’s a significant influence on his decision making. He is a very pragmatic, conservative coach by nature. He is very much a traditional Madridista in that regard. He made over 300 appearances for Real as a player, and later managed the club in three different spells.
Alonso is a long ball passer, and that is why Busquets is the better option for Spain in that position. Spain does not need Alonso to dominate possession. The opposition’s fear of Spanish technical ability cedes possession automatically (playing deep and/or purely on counter).
Interesting, thanks for elaborating. One question remains though, what would happen if he did drop one of them? Or put another way, is he afraid of the backlash from the media? Or disruption to team harmony?
How about you stop insulting people and try participating in a conversation?
I can understand his reaction as the original post he replied to treats those who don’t find Spain all that fun to watch as some sort of second-class cavemen fans.
Though I can certainly understand why so many people want to see Spain dump the double pivot, though I believe that the partnership of Alonso and Busquets is what allows Spain to dominate possession as they do, I never seem to get why so many people are prone to pick Busquets over Xabi. Defensively, neither one are especially good tacklers, though they both excel in breaking up the opponents play through clever positioning. While offensively they both are good distributors of the ball, with the primary difference being that Alonso has greater range in his distribution where as Busquets primarily plays the short and easy. Seeing that the rest of the midfield generally play short quick passes, I feel like Alonso offers more to the team. Additionally it seems that Sergio does seem prone to give up the ball in his own half too often. He is a better diver I guess, which fits well if Spain wants to emulate Barca’s system.
As far as the Llorrente not playing, I blame it on the confusing nature of Spanish surnames. I am convinced that Del Bosque submits a lineup with Fernando Torres Llorrente and the match officials read it as Fernando Torres. At least to me that makes more sense than a coach of the quality and pedigree of Del Bosque purposefully choosing “El Nino” (when can we stop calling him that?)over Llorrente.
And if I were Del Bosque, I think that I would field this squad:
Casillas
Arbeloa Ramos Pique Alba
Alonso
Busquests
Cazorla Xavi Iniesta
Llorente (Soldado, if he were available)
I feel like Cazorla would offer more width than Silva, and that Cazorla would also be beneficial as Spain is currently lacking a guy you can really trust to take a direct free-kick on goal.
Must be a family traint I don’t like Busquets too. We’ve won the euro and the wc, I’d do 3 5 2. I remember fergie starting to play 5 in midfield against Spanish team’s 4. So why play with 6. I’d do Albiol pique ramos
Xabi xavi iniesta Navas another winger
Llorente torres. But what do I know
Silly comments like these are why Busquets remains the most underrated player in world football. I think it’s OK if you think Xabi would be better suited, but the idea that Busquets is just a guy who plays easy passes and is “good at diving like all Barcelona players” (sigh) is the kind of thing that’s more suited for Goal.com comments section. ZM has written some great articles about just how great Sergio has been for club and country. I suggest you read those.
I think Busquets is rated enough !
And i like to ask why did Barca bought Mascherano ?
That is because Busquets was not enough to do certain part of duty in DM.
That duty is given to Alonso in Spain ( although he is not the direct replacement )
Honestly i think there is no player in Spain squad to do that job !
And i like to point out that those players were in same squad in past where they were used to playing long passes to release players upfront!
Mascherano plays almost exclusively as a central defender in Barcelona. Whenever he’s played as a defensive midfielder (once or twice), it’s been because Busquets was unavailable or being rested. I can remember Busquets being dropped in favor of Mascherano not once.
No! to play with him ! so that the defensive duties and long passing is not missed!
(And u know that De Rosi plays defensively too ?)
That is why i said he is not a direct replacement !
And if there was a player who could play CD i’m sure VDB would’ve put him in CD and Push Ramos to right !
There is, Javi Martinez, who is a converted midfielder like Mascherano (or Raul Albiol, if you’d like). It doesn’t quite matter, Mascherano was brought in as a backup to Pique and Puyol since Gabi Milito declined. To say he was bought to support Busquets is just nonsense. He didnt start the first Clasico of the season when Pique, Puyol, and Abidal were available. The injury to the first two and illness of the second, as well as excellent play, meant he started a lot of games, but he wasn’t bought for the purpose of “supporting” Sergio
Please watch some Barcelona games, you’ll quickly see that Busquet’s position at DM is unchallenged. Masch is a center back for Barca – even Keita has played more at DM than him!
I guess u are right.
Raul Albiol is out of sorts after joining RM so he can’t be considered for CD.
My argument is that Busquets can’t do this alone.
If u will, this is from clasico review
“Individually Busquets played the role very well, but there were two problems in the defensive transitions with this approach, mainly because of the speed with which Real attacked. Most obviously, Barcelona were bare down the flanks, but there was also the secondary problem that Busquets was forced to leave Mesut Ozil when he was dropping into the back – this gave the German time on the ball to thread passes through to the attackers. In fact, it was a combination of those issues that resulted in Real’s winner.”
In this scenario Busquets or Alonso has to do this(defensive transitions) cause Ramos is not a natural CD and Pique like to go forward with the ball.
Yes but the huge difference is Barca were playing in a 3-man defense with Busquets forming a part of a back four, which meant that while Busquets himself was doing a good job, there was no one to cover the DM position. It’s different if you already have a 4-man defense and Busquets can stay as a holder. Meanwhile Alonso was in a team with a 4-man defense and 2 holders. In fact, does Real ever really play with Alonso as their lone holder? Liverpool didn’t either, I don’t think.
I am sorry if I upset your delicate sensibilities, but I thought it was rather clear that the bit about him diving was a joke. Also, maybe you and I disagree, but I feel like playing quick, short and easy passes is a strength on Spain’s and Barca’s midfield. The truth of the matter is that being able to always find and make those short quick passes is anything but easy. It is simply that with the system that Spain has it looks and seems easy.
BTW, most underrated player in World football is certainly not a title to be given to Busquets. That is a silly a comment.
I think you massively underrated Busquets, he actually is an excellent tackler, he just doesn’t go chasing the ball, he makes the important tackles in front of the defense. He is also the reason Spain can get their fullbacks so high because he can drop onto defense to make a back three. “prone to give up the ball” is completely wrong too, he is one of the safest passers in the team, if anything he doesn’t play incisive/risky passes enough.
I think the argument with the double pivot is not whether this two are bad, but rather than Xavi is played out of position higher up the pitch and Iniesta high up on the left. The argument is that a Barca midfield three of Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta would work better. It hasn’t been done for a while and I doubt Spain will change their midfield structure, but it would be interesting to see.
Judging by your Busquets diving remark, I understand that you’re just blind Madrid fan. Alonso was decent in 2010 Mundial, but in the first three matches of Euro 2012, his gameplay was visibly frustrating. He gave away too many balls, many of them while exercing an unnecessary long pass. He’s a great player but currently definitely deserves to be dropped.
Busquets has been misplacing possesion at least as much, while not even making such risky passes. Also, Alonso is stronger and grittier, more experienced, and offers a shooting threat from outside the box.
He is Spain’s only midfielder worth shutting down when not near the area, and will be much more useful if Spain play with traditional wingers and Llorente upfront.
Sorry, but Xavi had more than double the amount of club goals that Xabi scored this season. (14 compared to 6) And that’s saying nothing of Iniesta or Cesc’s scoring ability.
Do I need to type in italics or something in order for every over sensitive Cule to understand that I was making a joke? Wow. And though Busquets does not make too many misplaced passes, I have seen him get his pocket robbed enough deep in his half more times than I have seen Alonso. That is not to say that Busquets is anything but a world class player, just that the ginger from San Sebastian is better. Heck, look at what I put out as my ideal starting eleven for Spain. It has Busquets in it over players like Mata, Silva, and Navas.
It’s funny, I really thought that was going to catch hell for suggesting that del Bosque ought to play Cazorla over Silva, but there has not been one mention of it.
Xabi is far less mobile and when Del Bosque tried playing with him alone (in the first games after he bacame coach) he kept being bypassed by the opponents easilly and that brought the defence under severe stress. That is why Busquets was added next to him.
I recall how ineffective Xabi was in that role in 2009 against the USA in the Confederations Cup–it was clear he couldn’t play the position as Marcos Senna had.
Why was Marcos Senna never recalled?
It was a ‘get the job done’ kind of performance from Spain. They knew they only needed a draw, but at the same time, wanted to win. They were exactly inbetween.
In my opinion, Alonso needs to be dropped for Iniesta in the middle with Pedro on the left wing. I don’t know why they need two defensive midfielders. It’s like what Johan Cruyff said – “The build up happens too slow – holding midfielders always need that extra touch, always need to have a look when they have the ball already. That takes time away. The opponent can position themselves to stop the killer pass and the forwards are all marked. Plus, having two holding midfielders means there is one less creative playmaker.” – That is exactly what Spain are like.
It doesn’t matter how one does it as long as they win. Just ask the Dutch what they’d have given for one-nil wins to take the trophy home.
Yes, but the Dutch didn’t have Wolfgang Stark as their 12th man…
Is it me or Ramos is playing both as a Center Back and Left Full Back, while Alba is de facto Left Midfielder. One Tight Angle Torres Shot, Two Long Distance Shot from Ramos and Pique summed up Spain’s Attack. Their only goal came from counter. Croatia were unlucky with both Penalty and Awful Header.
Spain lack balance. There face two key problems: 1) Jordi Alba provides width, confusing his teammates and 2) the double pivot is inadequate to maintaining possession.
Spain need to remove Alba and Arbeloa, put Javi Martinez in a back 3, and put Cesc in the midfield to form a triple pivot behind Xavi.That will give Spain a balanced 3-3-1-3, with all 11 players staying central, removing the element of confusion that results from players leaving central areas, and help to maintain additional possession.
Keeping Cesc in the triple pivot will prevent unnecessary runs forward that can lead to dangerous passes and consequent loss of possession. While bringing Navas in off the bench destroys the balance of the side, he at least understands the right time to shoot—when you are in, and one yard away from goal.
With these kind of performances, I think Spain have will have a tough job if they play England than France.. England perfectly likes to sit back and hit them in the wide areas.. If Rooney plays, they can have Walcott in the wings and provide crosses to him and Welbeck..
France will also like to play Italy than Spain with their weak defense.. Interesting that most of the matches in the next round are turning out to be an Attack vs Defense thing.. Hope we don’t have to see too many Bayern vs Chelsea games again..
http://this11.com/topics/show/8874/euro-2012-spain-suggested-lineup
I think Spain should go with this. Like ZM has said, and everyone can see, Spain are lacking in directness and width. This group gives them both. Pedro will be in a role similar to Villa’s at the last World Cup. He’ll play as a high left winger that will move between the right full back and right centerback, almost making the shape a 4-1-3-2. Iniesta can drift to the left like he does for Barcelona, while Navas provides the width on the opposite flank.
It’s also worth mentioning that Busquets could move into the backline as a centerback and allow Ramos to take Arbeloa’s place. That gives Spain more attacking options, more width, and another calm passer out of the back.
There is good reason Basketball has attacking time limit, Basketball player can pass the ball around until end without much failures because it use hand to touch the ball. If you score once then you can toss the ball around until end time. It will be very strange game.
Spain’s style will not change until we apply time limit rule or Spain cannot toss the ball around for 90 minutes without much failure, why should Spain change their style? It is their job to win football match not entertaining neutral footy fan.
Spain’s style will not change until somebody finds a way of consistently outplaying and beating it.
Fixed that for you.
It will happen eventually, football is an ever-evolving game. Yes, there are minor tweaks to rules every now and then but we do not need wholesale changes just because some people don’t like the style of play of the team(s) that win.
It’s happening now! No league title and a semi-final exit for Barca.
Tika Taka is based on the myth that you can control the game, if we have the ball you cannot score.
Association football will never permit that degree of control because goals are hard to score. Don’t compare it to basketball or any other football code. Until those sports produce a 0-0 draw you have to accept football’s different.
Barca/Spain need to learn that if they have the skill to achieve 70%+ posession, then they have bought the right to take some risks with posession. Instead they think they’ve bought an insurance policy. They haven’t.
The way I see it, one one the greatest club and national sides in the world is running out of steam. Barca and Spain are feeding off scraps up front which is not good enough.
I genuinely believe that Alonso is a big part of the problem. First, when a team retains possession as well as Spain does, does it really need a second holding midfielder? Second, given Spain’s well documented and now long-standing problems with attacking dynamism and breaking down tightly-packed defences, would it not be better with an extra attacking player?
The answer to both questions is yes, and the next question should therefore be which one of Busquets and Alonso keeps his place? I would pick Busquets. First, he copes at Barcelona holding on his own, whereas Alonso needs a runner next to him. Second, if Spain are going to Barca the ball around the pitch, it has to be Busquets. He’s expert in keeping the ball rotating swiftly in touches no more than two, whereas Alonso is consistently guilty of holding the ball too long, and taking a couple too many touches while he looks for the more direct, killer pass that he’s more used to playing for Madrid. Finally, having the Busquets-Xavi-Iniesta midfield would keep club links as strong as possible, which is something international managers ought to strive to do where possible.
Dropping Alonso would allow Iniesta to shift into the centre, plus the selection of a player who provides more natural width, either Mata, Pedro or Navas, or a centre forward, or a dynamic runner in midfield, like Fabregas.
Spain could always bring on Alonso for Busquets and play Llorente as a plan B, looking for more direct balls to the big man.
Oops, the answer to the first question was, “No, Spain doesn’t need a second holding midfielder”. The answer to the second was, “Yes, it would be better removing one of their holders and playing instead an attacker.”
I would like to make different comments:
- It is very boring to watch Spain playing, and in great part it is because the opposition plays super tight defence. Croatia yesterday was not the same Croatia that played against Ireland or Italy. The same happened during the 2010 world cup, teams changed the way they were playing against Spain.
- Del Bosque is making two very important mistakes:
a) Playing with no width does not help keeping up possession and getting chances.
b) Playing with two holding midfielders does not help keeping up possession.
I think we can summon up the previous examples if we talk about Xavi:
When Xavi gets the ball playing for Barça, he can decide whether to: 1) find an inside run from the wings (ie: Villa, Pedro, Alexis), 2) link up with Iniesta, or Cesc, 3) link up with the false 9 (Messi), 4) look for the run of Alves or the left back (Adriano / Abidal), or 5) recycle play with Busquets, Pique or Puyol / Mascherano.
When Xavi gets the ball in Spain, he can only 1) link up with Iniesta or Silva, 2) link up with the 9 or false 9 (Cesc or Torres), or 3) recycle play with Busquets, Alonso, or the defense. I do not take into account the forward runs of Arbeloa because he is just plain awful offensively, and I have yet to see a link up between Xavi and Jordi Alba.
Xavi (and Spain) are missing both the quality of Messi and mostly the width provided by the wingers and the overlapping runs from Alves and Abidal (only Alba tries to provide this, and he is only linking up with Iniesta, making this a 2vs2 or 2vs3 situation against the defense almost everytime).
That’s the main reason why I would not like to compare this spanish team to Barça, because in reality Spain is just trying to keep possession without doing anything with it (well, I guess tiring the opposition -and the viewer- to death can work wonders for grabbing a late goal), while Barça keeps possession and are always trying to look for offensive options.
The Barça that lost against Chelsea had plenty of scoring opportunities against a very tight defence – Spain does not play the same way. It is just a worst version of Barça.
It would be quite simple for Del Bosque to change this:
- Drop Xabi Alonso (worst single holding midfielder than Busquets), while in attack he is occupying the same space as Xavi (if you watch carefully you will see how many times they are just plainly disturbing each other’s space).
- Navas has to start on the right providing width (so Arbeloa can play more defensively, covering the departure of Xabi Alonso) and forward runs.
- Pedro starts on the left, allowing both width and forward runs.
- Do not underestimate that having both Pedro and Navas on the wings forces the opposition left and right back to defend, and does not allow any opposition wingers to defend centrally and congest the space (as Pranjic was allowed to do yesterday), finally giving Spain the space and width it needs to play possession football while looking for openings in attack.
- Silva starts as false 9 a la Messi. Cesc can also play there. Even Llorente (depending on whether Spain wants to cross and need someone who can hold up the ball).
- Busquets, Iniesta and Xavi play their regular Barça role, linking up play and finally having different passing options forward.
If Del Bosque does not do this, I can see all the teams that play agains Spain defending very narrow and deeply (England would be the paradigm of this), and Spain will have lots ot troubles and probably won’t win the championship.
I don’t know if “they won’t win,” but I think you (and others) have identified tactics that would potentially give Spain a more potent offense. For whatever reasons, political/team diplomacy or tactical conservatism, del Bosque has shown he has little desire to change his formula.
“Sergio Ramos made rash decisions when moving out to the left flank to cover for Alba (something he also did against Italy).”
Well, isn’t that Ramos’ general attitude to defending, “rash decisions”? Imho, Ramos (and Spain) got incredibly lucky yesterday that his leg-breaking foul on Mandzukic in the penalty area was not seen (maybe rather, premeditatively ignored, considering the goal-line referee was standing right next to it?). For the record, I’d have awarded a red card plus penalty there.
But somehow, Ramos gets away with those actions, time after time again. He could have earned himself another yellow for one of his typical “thanks-I-may-use-your-head/shoulder/neck-as-my-forearm/elbow-rest-dude” areal duels.
That is not to say that Croatia were playing fair or clean… But six yellow cards compared to zero simply does not scale. Spain, too, had several tactical fouls in the Croatian half, snuffing out counter attacks just being launched. Iniesta may be mentioned.
*Rant mode off*
Pretty interesting match with Croatia defending suprisingly well. Thanks for the report, ZM!
Thank you. It’s almost pathetic that you’re the first one to mention the Ramos foul. Then there’s the question of Busquets man-handling of Corluka on a late corner. Stark was absolutely atrocious.
Anyways, I’ll let everyone continue in their ass kissing of Spain.
I think Ramos got the ball in his “penalty”. Not very easy to see, but IMO not even a foul, just extremely hard tackle.
Busquets DID foul Corluka inside the box, frustrating to not even see it mentioned by the media.
The official FIFA rules say that any tackle that is ruthless or carelessly endangering the health of a player is a foul – no matter whether or not you actually (also) hit the ball. I guess this applies to Ramos’ deed.
The thing is, you cannot allow these kind of tackles at all, even if they in the end happen to be ‘clean’, getting (only) the ball. Studs-up stretched-leg lunges are simply too dangerous if they go wrong, in particular if you come running at 30km/h, crashing in from behind/the side.
This was a foul, at minimum a yellow card. Pure miracle that Mandzukic could continue afterwards.
Mind, this is the same referee that gave a straight red card for Pepe’s lunge into Dani Alves in one of those recent infamous Clasicos.
That’s true, but seeing as it was just inside the area, giving a penalty for it might have been too much.
However it’s at least suspicious that a known Barcelona fan referee “happened” to favor the Spanish.
Isn’t dangerous play an indirect free kick even inside the area? Does anybody know the rules for that?
Yes, “dangerous play” yields an indirect free kick, anywhere. But I see it less and less often called by the refs, at least compared to the Bundesliga 90s.
But again, this was not dangerous play, this was a direct foul. And it was inside the area – so why exactly would it be too much to call a penalty due to a foul inside the area?
PS: I am glad they took Stark off the tournament. He would not have performed better with the mounting media pressure.
I love me some tiki-taka, but I found myself becoming increasingly annoyed while watching this game. Iniesta and Silva simply weren’t on top of their game and were extremely wasteful. The worst was when Navas was brought on but there was no striker for him to cross to. It reminded me of France – England, where Benzema refused to get in the box when the French wingers beat their man.
With all the clamour to remove Alonso and free up Xavi by playing the Barca midfield 3 it’s worth looking at why Spain actually play the system they do. Firstly, they are really, really excellent defensively in their last 10 tournament games they’ve conceded 3 goals. Having Alonso in the side means they get more defensive cover. Remember, Spain started playing Alonso, Busquets and Xavi after their shock loss to the states in 2009. They are defensively shakier without him. Yes, Barca have a damn good defensive record as well with Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta in midfielf but teams tend to sit even deeper against them than they do against Spain because of the threat of Messi. This makes it harder for them to counter attack.
Secondly, playing Alonso means Spain have even more possession. Yes it might not be as penetrative and threatening as it could be but I’m amazed how few people notice the general pattern with Spain’s games since 2009. Keep the ball for an hour, exhaust the opposition, then after 60 minutes bring on 2 or 3 new players and win 1-0. As Spain have easily the strongest squad in international football not only are the able to bring on players of a similar calibre to their first 11, they’re also able to bring on players who change the type of threat they present (eg Navas and Fabregas last night) which poses a whole new set of problems for exhausted defenders. Spain have won so many games 1-0 at international level due to substitutes it’s unreal.
Like most people, I’d love to see Spain attack more and play Iniesta and Xavi in their best positions but, they are incredibly successful with the system and players they currently use so I can understand Del Bosque’s reluctance to change. Yes, Croatia had chances but they’ve still finished top of the 2nd strongest group at this tournament.
I very much agree with what you say. It might be boring to watch over spans but that’s the problem if you have a team with lots of possession and no desequilibrating player on Messi’s level. The actual plan really seems to be what you called, keep the ball, tire the opponent, then bring the options for the kill.
Still, it’s a pain to watch Alonso-Busquets and the problem to me is that IF it once goes wrong, they will have a lot to climb back but still.
But specially yesterday, I saw nothing wrong. He knew Croatia eventually would have to open up so he waited until then with patience.
To what degree is this a question of the absence of Marcos Senna? Wasn’t he fine as a single pivot/destroyer in 2008, and in a sense, not replaceable?
here’s the thing…from a rational point of view, he did everything right. he played with fire but…
first, I think we agree that his subs were kind of impeccable.
second, this was a game of chicken he played. a draw/0-0 was enough for them, so if Croatia planned on defending/not attacking them, well, be their guests. If they however had decided to attack early, I think Torres running at an open Croatian defense would have been fun for Spain. They didn’t though..but as you point out, at some point they did, hence the subs.
It could have all gone wrong, but it all went as he planned it out, it was a game with fire. Hence, from a totally rational point of view, he did everything right. He owes us nothing. All he cares about is to win the title and maximize his teams progress. If it has to be with double pivot and boring everyone to death, so be it. He knows more than anyone else that his team is probably still superior and vastly more talented than any other team, so he has nothing to prove and when he has to let go and attack, he probably will.
How can you say del Bosque did everything right, when, if it wasn’t for huge refereeing mistakes Spain would have now probably be out of the tournament…
I feel sorry for Croatia to be out so soon. I liked their 4-1-3-2 formation, their slick passing and If you look at some of the names, Modric, Manduzkic, Schildenfeld and Vukojevic don’t deserve to be leaving early in my opnion.
As for Spain, it wasn’t their best perfomance by any means but they just about wore down Croatia. I still feel Spain are better with an out and out striker though…
http://tttfootball.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/croatia-0-spain-1-18th-june-2012/
Agree on feeling sorry for Croatia. They were impressive in all three of their games so it is a shame to see them exit. They’re far more deserving of a place in the next round than anyone from Group A or Group D (except perhaps France), but that’s the luck of the draw I suppose.
There does seem to be flaw in the draw for the groups IMO: Group A was very poor. Group B appeared to have too many strong teams before the tournament began, but turned out about right after all games were played. Group C had 3 strong teams and 1 weak one. Group D has 1 strong team, 3 weak.
There has been an imbalance in how strong and weak teams are distributed. Some might argue it makes for interesting results. I think it’s symptomatic of flawed seedings.
Without a doubt, Spain’s MOM was Wolfgang Stark. They’re truly unstoppable so long as Stark is on the pitch.
IT’S A CONSPIRACY!!!!
Casillas is a strong contender though.
He really brought his A game. Croatia’s attacks that made it to him were quite ferocious.
Not a conspiracy per se, but it’s likely that Stark had been told to “be careful” on handing out penalties(given the fear mongering of the Italians over a 2-2(or even 1-1) draw).
My belief is that Spain’s entire game at the moment is predicated on not conceding first. That would result in the opposing team really only sitting back and Spain having to come out of their shell, which wouldn’t necessarily guarantee results. As dominant as they appear in possession, their margin for error is actually very small. That’s why you have them controlling games, but not necessarily dominating them, as we believe they should. In a way Spain and Barcelona’s revolutionary tactics and success over the last few years have become their greatest enemies, and that of football fans as most teams do not have the belief that they can compete with these guys on equal footing. The much loathed “double pivot” is Spain’s only insurance policy against not conceding. I hate it too, but without it, Spain would be unquestionably more vulnerable, with no guarantee that an attacking approach would secure a result, as the opposing team would not adapt their tactics as well to play more openly.
Spain and Barcelona tactics are very different in practice, and only the general idea is similar (ball circulation). Xavi plays a completely different role, and Busquets’ role is also different. Busquets doesn’t drop in between the center backs at all for Spain like he does for Barcelona with Alves playing so highly. Barcelona never uses three holding midfielders. Spain rarely uses inverted wingers. Iniesta, Silva, Cazorla, and even Mata are much more playmaker than forward. Pedro is the only one Spain calls up right now, and he’s not getting action. The pressing is also different due to the different shape.
The tactics are different, but the approach, namely suffocation through possession, is mostly the same. I didn’t say they had the same tactics. I will concede that in general Barcelona is more proactive, but especially this season they have used the suffocation approach more and more because they had so many players out through injury or who were under-performing. I’ll add another thing: for a system based on such razon thin margins to succeed, you cannot really have any weak points. They will be exposed, and that happened to Barcelona at the most critical moments this past season. (Case in point: Mascherano is a great tackler and that can look as if he really can play in centre back, but he played way too many players on-side in the Champions League knockout stages, which exposed his lack of awareness of the defensive line.)
This Spain team is weaker than in the past because of Arbeloa and even Alba, I would venture. Alba plays kind of like Alves on the left hand side, whereas he doesn’t really make the pitch wide; instead he comes inside to exchange passes with Iniesta time and time again. The whole point of him being there and the double pivot is so that he can stretch the play and maybe even put a cross in or two. From what I have seen so far, he is not a great crosser. Also, even if he was to push on, playing against two banks of four means he has two players to contend with on his side, and that will mean that he will just be pegged back even if he had the freedom to push on; but that doesn’t appear to be a natural part of his game anyways, as I said.
Another weak point: Ramos. He simply doesn’t have the composure to play a high line, as Spain invariably has to do (even more so than Barca) if they are to make their possession count higher up the pitch.
Good points. It’s important that they (Spain) be proactive and address their weaknesses because the nature of their problems is such that they will be inevitably exposed, at which time the remedy may be too difficult to implement.
On Arbeloa… I don’t think he has to be a weakness. He adds physical presence and is good for set pieces. He doesn’t want the ball much, either. These qualities add some balance to the squad. I think Spain have underused both him and Alba as they have not been giving them the ball even at opportune times. Several times Arbeloa has been all alone ready to cross but the ball never came or came too late.
Alba has not been left alone as much as Arbeloa, but Iniesta is crowding him. Like the other Spanish midfielders, Iniesta almost never makes runs after passing the ball to Alba, but just stands right there crowding the space. This is similar to what was happening with Barcelona – too few vertical runs – no one getting into the box – making it easy, as Bilic said, for the defenders. All they have to do is take up space. That is the key – Spain (and Barcelona) have made it much too easy for defenders. They have tilt the balance and force defenders to turn and run more. That will give them the space they need for tiki taka.
If Spain addresses this problem, then the risks of the other weaknesses get mitigated. If not, the margin remains razor thin.
Great article! I wander what would have happened if Bilic had stayed with 4-5-1/4-2-3-1 until the end. He lost that little balance he had in midfield, when the attackers came on. Mandzukic didn’t help the midfield as much in the second half. He’s idle walking was frustrating to watch at times.
I felt Croatia were more like 5-3-2 with Srna tracking Alba all the way back, but also being able to shuttle forward on the right.
Srna has the physical attributes to undertake such a role and performed it well even if he did push things as far as possible with his fouls.
The 3 central midfielders who were very narrow strengthened this area for Croatia and prevented Spain from playing through them.
It’s now twice that Spain have been presented with variations on 5-3-2 / 3-5-2 and on both occasions they have toiled against a strengethened central area.
Alba was tracked effectvely last night whilst Arbeloa just does not present a suitable. attacking outlet on the right.
Spain are missing the best Spanish right back in La Liga – Andoni Iraola.
I don’t expect del Bosque to change though. He will likely continue with this current set up, seeking to tire opponents before they start to stretch the game late on with the likes of Navas introduced.
It’s extremely frustrating to see such a talented squad deployed in such a manner.
Spain have many gears wich they can play in, they just need del Bosque to take the hand brake off.
http://www.chalkontheboots.wordpress.com
Spain have been seriously average front this tournament. Their midfield is excellent and defence decent enough. But you can see why they try to play with no strikers.
Llorente would probably make an impact – but he will have to get on the pitch first!
Lucky for Spain that they will not face a good team until the final.
Unlucky for Spain the Germans await them and will beat them in the final.
BTW what is with the nervy England fans? Ukraine are not even average and England should top the group tonight. The time for England fans to get nervous is in the knockout phase where either Spain QF or Germany SF will eat them for breakfast.
Roy vs Spain or Germany: OK lads, we face a decent team for once, everyone line up on the 18 yard line, all together now, HOOF HOOF HOOF !!!
As an Italy fan, I thought the Croats have a very good coach tactically. Bilic, together with Santos from Greece has really caught my eye in the Euros. Able to lead the underdog teams putting a good fight is really worth mentioning. Ukraine have good teamwork and tenacity. Hope they will do well against England.
Come on the Shevchenko revival!
I’m pretty sure I’m not alone here when I say the pattern of the game was predictable. That’s not to say it was uninteresting by the way.
What I mean is I’m sure there were many others who, like myself whilst sitting watching the game, said “Del Bosque’s going to bring on Navas after about an hour” and then “he’ll bring Fabregas on for Torres next”.
People around me were impressed with my powers of prediction, thanks ZM. This strategy of Spain’s is familiar to a lot of us now, but perhaps it is starting to lose its effectiveness? A bit harsh considering they won all 3 games – most teams would be delighted with that – but I think it’s fair to say that they could have been better. This is not most teams we are talking about here, it is the most talented side in the world.
I love watching them play but my worry is that a little bit of complacency might be creeping in or, if not that, they are resting on their laurels a little. To stay ahead of the game one must keep evolving and as we have seen Germany have definitely done that. To me, Spain don’t look much different to the side from 2 years ago but arguably have LESS variation due to their choice to no longer bring on Llorente as a plan B.
Still, one can’t see past a comfortable passage to the final.
Just being picky I know but they didn’t win all 3 games in the group, if that is what you meant.
Whoops, forgot they drew with Italy!
Change that to a fairly comfortable passage to the next round!
I would not label it complacency. I see Spain more worried about not losing than winning or being complacent or tired. The set up is all wrong for many reasons which ZM covered in his preview and match break-downs. I understand that tiki-taka is as much about defense as creating opportunities but would it not make more sense to attack, get the goal, and then possess while your opponent opens up to equalize? Spain has many weapons to go on the attack in a smart way. Pedro and Navas on the wings would provide width. Alonso needs to sit. Ramos is needed on the right. del Bosque is getting what he wants but he is getting it all wrong by wasting the talent he has and by waiting to be reactive rather than proactive. If teams are parking the bus at 0-0, how much harder is it when the opponent has a lead through an against the run of play counter or corner kick?
ZM, are you going to publish an analysis of the Italy-Ireland game?
Here is my take on the game:-
http://chalkontheboots.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/spain-vs-croatia-tactical-analysis/
i’d be really interested to know your thoughts on the women’s us-japan or us-sweden matches which recently happened. All olympic gold medel contenders
Croatia was robbed by the ref! Two penalties for Croatia not given (Mandzukic and Corluka), one penalty for Spain (Pique). The goal by Navas was at least passive offside and I am not 100% sure that Iniesta did not use his hand. On the otherside Croatia showed an impressive performance.Bilic showed how to play and neutralize Spain. In the last 25 minutes the Croats had to change their tactics since they had to score at least one goal,Bilic sent in three strikers to score this one missing goal. I am pretty much sure that if Rakitic had scored in the 59.minute,then Spain would be on their way home. Croatia played an impressive, honorable match against the worldchampion.Respect!
Can you explain what you mean by passive offside?
No such term exists within the laws of the game.
http://www.chalkontheboots.wordpress.com
Please check once more the football rules
There are no rules, only laws.
Navas was neither:-
1. interfering with an opponent.
2. interfering with play
3. gaining an advantage by being in that position
as defined by the offside law.
outcome?
Goal.
The ref is allowed to interrupt the game because of Navas clear offside position in the moment of the pass to Iniesta. Eventhough the pass reached Iniesta,not Navas. Because of passive offside.Especially since Navas DID interact afterwards by scoring the goal. Considering the fact that Ref Stark did robb Croatia in much more scandalous ways by not granting them TWO CLEAR penalties committed on Mandzukic and Corluka – this passive offside was indeed not worth mentioning! By the way,Iniesta played hand before his pass to Navas.But what to expect from Platinis UEFA mafia and their two different standards for big horses and for small countries?
Navas was clearly “gaining an advantage by being in that position”, but all that wouldn’t have mattered if had there been a penalty given to Croatia a minute earlier…
Of course was Navas “gaining an advantage” by being in this position of ( passive) offside. Hey,it enabled him to score the goal! So please stop arguing with funny contradictions
Spain’s man of the match was Wolfgang Stark! I am sorry for this brave Croatian Team.I really enjoyed their three matches. Great players and team.Bilic proved to be a big coach.
Guys,don’t be naive.Be aware that small countries will never get the same treatment by UEFA and the refs like the big countries. It is sad but true. It’ s a scandal that the goal line ref stands less than 2 m away from Ramos and Mandzukic. And still he did not show any reaction. It was a clear penalty for Croatia. Is it possible that they got a directive from Platini to assure that the big ones get pushed to the QF?
The Ramos incident was a clear penalty. The additional ref should have given it much like the additional ref should have given the Ukraine goal tonight.
Your passive offside comment is still absolute nonsense though.
Here is the link to the Laws of the Game:-
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/27/interpretation_law11_en.pdf
Look at example 13 in the link – it is almost identical to Navas goal last night.
Spot on!
While I agree that the Navas goal was perfectly legal with respect to the offside law (remember the article ZM had on this topic http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/12/15/offside-goal/), still I think that this law is a bit unfortunate/inconsistent:
Had Fabregas not passed to Iniesta, but shot on goal, with the ball reflected (post, crossbar, goalie) back to Navas, it would have been offside.
Why is such a situation valued so much differently than the one we’ve seen – a ball bouncing back from the woodworks, or a ball being passed by an onside teammate?)
I found an interesting point of view on some other football blog:
If an attacking player in an offside position may be legal to be there since/as long as he is not directly receiving any pass (not actively participating in play), shouldn’t there be an equivalent case for defenders:
If a defender is not actively participating in play (because he is standing miles away at the other side of the pitch), he should not be able to play any attacking player onside. In other words, he should be treated as non-existent when considering whether an attacking player is offside or not…
Sounds fair, doesn’t it? But probably impossible to manage by the linesmen, anyhow…
I had not seen that example before. I think it’s fair to say that both Navas and Iniesta were “involved in active play” by making simultaneous runs past Croatia’s back line as Fabregas was making the pass.
To me (but perhaps not to FIFA) Navas’ movement into an offside position, and the possibility that he might get the ball seems to provide him with an “advantage” – a better position to receive a subsequent pass behind the defenders — which he ultimately used to score the goal, even though he ended up being onside (behind the ball) for the pass made to him by Iniesta.
Otherwise, you could always just have a player hang-out in an offside position all game, put another player through with the ball and then have the “offside” player move in to finish. The defenders would have to choose whether to play deeper and cover the “offside” player or rely on the “opinion of the referee” that he was involved in the play.
Sorry. I now see the 2010 link and the 140+ comments there.
I’ll catch up and may be back later.
I guess Barça, Real and Spain are not allowed to be eliminated… Two penalties unseen by the referee and an off-side goal – the “victory” of the most boring team so far in the tournament was away more than shameful!
This might sound ridiculous, but I would love to see Del Bosque replicate the formation used at Barca, even though spain lack the personnel they still have players who can play the system very well. I think Del Bosque used it in the first game against italy with Cesc up front in the false 9 role in a 4-3-3 similar to that used at Barca.
————————Casillias——————
Arbeloa———Ramos—————-Pique—–Alba
———Xavi————-Busquets———ALonso—-
—————Siva—————–Iniesta———
————————-Fabregas——————-
That formation would lead to incredibly boring matches. All of the front six like would be coming towards the ball. Other than Alba (I’ll discount Arbeloa, because he is pretty average going forward), there would be no width. This formation with these players would encourage opposing teams to ‘park the bus’ even more than they already do against Spain.
I’d drop Xabi Alonso and play Pedro wide (who actually looking pretty good towards the end of last season despite an inconsistent campaign), and drop Iniesta back into midfield.
Yes, Spain would be slightly more open, but VDB would still be able to rely on the quality of Xavi, Busquets, Iniesta, Silva and Fabregas to retain possession so the increasing ‘glasnost’ would not be as important as it would be for most teams.
Shame on you.. Spain..
2 penaltys….
Like Platini said….Spain and Germany in the final…
Footbal is taken to a diferent level, with this new way of doing things…
Shame on you Spain
Something that I think is inhibiting this Spanish side even more than at the World Cup is Arbeloa at right back instead of Ramos. During the World Cup, Ramos pushing on constantly, provided an out ball for Xabi Alonso playing deeper on the left on his side. That sometimes stretched the opposition. Unfortunately David Villa is short so it didn’t amount to much in the end, but at least they had an avenue for Alonso’s raking diagonal long balls. Now Spain is just painfully predictable. Until Navas comes on. Then the party really starts.
The inclusion of Xabi Alonso (brilliant as he is) in Spain’s starting XI is very conservative. A player like Xabi Alonso needs another sitter next to him, Busquests does not. As a reuslt, I’d drop Alonso (and perhaps bring him on if Spain need to see out a game). I’d much rather see Iniesta play centrally rather than on the left. He is a brilliant player, so it seems a waste to have him positioned out wide. It astounds me that the most successful (and balanced) centre midfield combination of the last 15 years in club football (Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta) is not replicated for the national team.
Barca’s variant of tiki-taka (with a false-nine) has on the whole been successful with quicker wide forwards stretching the play (see their relative lack of success without Villa or an in form Pedro in the side).
By playing the traditional Barca 3 in centre midfield, VDB would still have a plethora of forward options. Should he choose to play a traditional centre forward he has Torres or Llorente to call on. Alternatively, Fabregas has shown that he is reasonably capable at being a false nine (I hasten to add that the inclusion of Fabregas as a false nine would potentially become sterile without a forward player or two pulling the opposition’s defence out of position – vertically if they are defending high up, laterally if they are defending deeper).
If Spain are successful in this tournament, it will be in spite of VDB’s tactics rather than because of them. VDB is lucky to have an awful lot of world class players at his disposal.
Croatia deserved at least 1 point,if not even the victory. The German ref Stark should be forbidden to judge any match in the future.His wrong decisions decided the match.He was by far Spain’s best man.
Dear ZM and football-Fans, not tactics decided this match between Spain and Croatia but a bad ref! Let’s be honest and admit it. Football matches should be decided by classy players ,magnificent tactics – but not by obviously manipulated refs like Wolfgang Stark. This match will ne remember jn the future as the match where small Croatia neutralized WC Spain and where a german ref Stark massacred the brave croatian team
Small Croatia neutralized WC Spain? You must be living in a nutshell for saying that.
Obviously Spain is the one containing Croatia since the Croats “park the bus”.
Though Wolfgang Stark did have a bad match, same to all other bad refereeing matches (England vs Ukraine for example).
Just stop being a sore loser and get on with it. This bad refereeing scenario won’t stop until we implement the Hawkeye technology anyway.
Do you seriously doubt that Bilic and Croatia COMPLETELY neutralized Spain? At least untill they had to change their tactics in the 70th minute to score the goal.Everybody saw it.Even Marca and As admitted it. Enough to say how nervous the spanish supporters were , eating their finger nails-especially in the 59th minute during Rakitics chance
Changing tactics is part of the plan for Spain. It’s been that for a couple of games, not because of Croatia threat that caused this change.
It’s understandably the supporters were nervous, but a true fan knows it is part of the tactic to play like that until the substitution.
Croatia changed their tactics in the 70th minute .not Spain! Since the Croats had to open up to score at least one goal.Otherwise Spain wouldn’t have scored even if they played 3 more hours.
I’m surprised that anyone would claim that Croatia hadn’t completely neutralized Spain. Spain had no “should’ve scored” moments in the entire match until Bilic sent everyone forward at the end(1 opportunity in the whole match). They were totally toothless. Bilic’ tactics worked perfectly(its not his fault that Rakitic can’t direct a simple header).You should really go look up the definition of contained and then come back to talk.
I think other site proprietors should take this site as an model, very clean and magnificent user genial style and design, let alone the content. You’re an expert in this topic!