Marooned

Napoli won 3-1 last night and all but decided who's going to be in Champions League's next stage. In fact, with the way things are at Chelsea, it's hard to envision them overturning a two-goal deficit (and not conceding).

Sometimes, it's hard to believe André Villas-Boas was an opposition scout (and Mourinho's, no less). Faced with a very specific opponent - arranged in a 3x4x3 -, the Portuguese coach went for his latest choice of 4x2x3x1, with Meireles and Ramires in the middle of the park, Mata just behind Drogba and Sturridge and Malouda on the wings. As it was, both Sturridge and Malouda turned their defensive chip off too often and Napoli did their usual thing and created overloads on the wings.

With Maggio and Zuñiga pushing forward and Hamsik and Lavezzi working the channels, it was hard to understand what Chelsea's defensive approach was. Because Sturridge and Malouda were reluctant in performing their defensive duties, both Meireles and Ramires were forced wide to try and stop the bleeding and mark either the wingback (Zuñiga or Maggio) or the winger (Lavezzi or Hamsik). With both defensive midfielders almost out of the picture, Cavani and Lavezzi were free to get the ball easily and run riot with it. Sure enough, the pair of them scored the three goals and were involved in several other attempts.

Villas-Boas should perhaps have stuck to his beloved 4x3x3, especially if we take into account that neither Ramires nor Meireles are exactly equipped to perform that role and that both players prosper in making runs into the box and creating mismatches. In this tactical system, they can't take advantage of their strengths and Mata becomes easy prey. By going 4x2x3x1, Villas-Boas wasn't able to outnumber the opposition in the middle of the field, which was odd, to say the least.

Chelsea still look like they are trying to find a remedy to all their problems, but keep failing in doing the simplest things, such as being a cohesive defensive unit or a simple 5-yard pass. While both players and manager don't understand that, it seems very hard to see them holding on to fourth place in their domestic league and ensure Champions League football for next year.

Udinese (almost) fail to show up

Starting lineups

Pundits (unlike myself) are often criticized for giving their opinions according to the result, and not according to what they think the game offers at that particular moment in time. The match that pit Juventus against Udinese was supposed to present two title contenders - but unfortunately only one of them showed up (for most of time, that is). In fact, the match seemed to go against what would be expected by most - myself included.

These two teams had met a little over a month ago, but this time Juve were without Pepe and Marchisio (replaced with Giaccherini and Quagliarella) and Udinese weren't able to call upon Asamoah and Pizni). Just like the match in December, Antonio Conte chose to mirror the system of Udinese, going with what can broadly be described as a 3x5x2, where as Francesco Guidolin had to reshuffle all of his midfield, which would prove decisive for the final outcome.

In the second minute, the bianconeri were already performing one of their trademark moves. If we compare the first clip with the first goal against Roma (second clip), we will be able to see several similarities. Even though the players finishing the moves are not starting out from the same position on the field, the principle is the same: a quick run on the weak side of the ball in order to take advantage of numerical inferiority or equality.

Udinese started out by assuming a clearly counter-attacking stance, keeping a low defensive line and choosing to be up in numbers. Pasquale's fielding on the left wing was surely intentional, since Guidolin will have wanted someone to mark Lichsteiner a bit closer. With Asamoah and Pinzi absent, Udinese found themselves with no out-ball and no one to act as a pivot, a role that Pinzi plays so well. This meant that, unlike the match in December, there was hardly anyone to take the ball up to Di Natale or Abdi, which in turn meant that Juve just kept on piling up the pressure. Armero, playing out of his natural position, tried to deputise as the exit man, but often seemed to forget that his job wasn't just motoring up the field.

As seen here, Udinese's midfield was constantly left exposed due to Armero's venturing forward. 

It is still strange to notice, particularly in a league as tactically aware as the Italian, how much time Andrea Pirlo is allowed on the ball. He was able to dictate the tempo and re-start the moves after Udinese throwing the ball forward, in a desperate attempt to relieve the pressure. Actually, Abdi did not exert any sort of pressure upon Pirlo (even though he seemed to have tried at first), and he even started going backwards, possibly trying to help his porous midfield. Therefore, it was no surprise that he didn't make it back on the second half - his replacement, Floro Flores, was a bit more incisive.

When Juventus scored towards the end of the first half, there was some curiosity as to what their plan B would be, given that they had been so hesitant. Oddly enough, just when everyone Juve had the game in the bag (and so it seemed to yours truly), they suddenly dozed off and let Udinese back in the game with wayward passes that mostly Isla intercepted, using those interceptions to counter-attack. Di Natale shot for the first time on 52 minutes and, only two minutes later, Floro Flores scored. Even though the goal came apparently out of Juve's own mistakes, Udinese seemed to be right where they wanted. Feeling the game was getting out of hand, Conte replaced Quagliarella (such an improvement on that particular position, when compared to the out-of-place Pepe).

Once again, Udinese's goal meant nothing and they ended up conceding precisely when it seemed that Juventus would play into their hands. After that, it was one-way traffic and the team from Udine showed that they never wanted anything more than a draw.

I would just like to point out two issues. The first one has to do with Matri. Almost unnoticeably, he managed to have 50 touches (Di Natale had 27, as a reference), from which he mustered 3 key passes, 5 shots (3 of which on target) and 2 goals. It doesn't get much better than that for a forward. The second issue relates to Giaccherini. Not only is he an avid scorer (he scores 1 goal every 5 games, on average), but he also has a tendency to find spaces to run into, opening spaces for himself and others to score. Definitely a player on the rise.

City dominate, suffer and win it (very) late

Starting lineups

In what could prove to be a decisive match for Tottenham’s title hopes, the match between Manchester City and Tottenham was very interesting indeed, with numerous tactical nouances and and uncertain outcome. Mancini left out De Jong, playing Barry and Milner in the middle instead, with Agüero just behind Dzeko, who also got the nod. Spurs went with what seemed to be an attacking lineup, but it proved otherwise. 

With both teams wary of the other’s potential, the first few minutes were a bit of a standoff. Both Barry and Milner lack Yaya Touré’s attacking drive in the final third, which meant that it was up to Silva and Agüero to try and stir things up offensively. However, despite their manager’s claims otherwise, Spurs were tactically aware and went for a conservative 4x1x4x1 approach, with van der Vaart side by side with Modric (they would eventually change sides), Parker patrolling the space in front of his defense and Defoe a bit stranded up front. The chart below shows van der Vaart's limited influence throughout the match.

This meant that Modric got Barry and van der Vaart got Milner and both pairs ended up cancelling each other out of the game. The problem for Spurs came when Silva or Nasri pulled inside (Silva was the key orchestrator, as always), the wingbacks were not willing to track them down, meaning Parker had to chase them, which in turn freed Agüero.

Spurs' midfield, with Parker behind Modric and van der Vaart

As for the Londoners’ offense, Adebayor’s absence was key. Even though Defoe has improved his link-up play and here tried his best to challenge Savic (a strategy what would pay off for their first goal), he just didn’t provide the presence Spurs needed to hold up the ball and allow the rest of the team to join, which made the team lose the ball more and more quickly.

The second half brought a more dynamic approach from City. Even though Barry and Milner continued to stay put, the wingbacks started to push forward and, most importantly, Silva and Nasri were much more active. Their movement, together with Dzeki’s, were essential for City’s first goal. Silva strayed to the middle all the way from the right, Dzeko moved to the left and Nasri made a short diagonal to the middle, leaving the opposition’s defense stranded, not knowing who to mark – and suddenly, there was a huge avenue right down the middle.

Even though City’s second goal came from a corner, the most important aspect is the play that led to it. Silva drifted once again to the left to overload that side and was only stopped by a last-minute ditch, revealing the growing difficulties Spurs were having to know who to mark – especially with Parker often being dragged out of position.

When it seemed City were in total control, Savic threw it all away two minutes later, allowing Spurs back in the game with a disastrous headed approach that left Defoe free to go around Joe Hart (who also had a terrible approach, incidentally) and score. A few minutes later, Bale equalized with a great goal, revealing a curious tendency: out of the 5 goals, 3 were the direct result of a winger pulling inside.

After that, Silva and Nasri started tiring out, meaning they were not as willing to track back, and Tottenham started pushing men forward, especially after Livermore came in for van der Vaart and brought more stability to the midfield. In fact, the penalty that gave City the victory came 30 seconds before the 5 minutes of injury time were up and Spurs had actually had the best chance to finish the game just a few minutes earlier.

In conclusion, City dominated most of the game, deserved the lead, but were not able to put the game out of reach. Spurs were very fortunate with the timing of their first goal and their conservative approach could have brought heavy consequences once again at the hands of Mancini’s team. The Italian, in turn, will surely be missing Kompany’s skills and leadership.