MY TAKE ON THE SPURS VS CHELSEA

on saturday spurs played chelsea and they just beat them very convincingly. when you are trying to analyse the game there are various factors that are taken into consideration like formation ,player used for that  awarness of players , their movement and many others . its always a coach's job to find out as to what went wrong in the match and if the scenario rises again he has a solution in mind . whichever team game it is . its like a game of chess where on the two opponents keeps on asking question of each other and try to seek answer . whoever finds the solution is the winner .
spurs started the game with 4-3-1-2 formation with sissoko preffered in the middle of the park alongside dier and eriksen . while chelsea started the game with 4-3-3 formation . the game started with spurs giving chelsea a taste of their own medicine . chelsea like to press hard and try to hit team on the counter . here spurs did exactly what chelsea does to others team . what chelsea like is that the opposition sits back and then the assess the shape and open them up with their ball movement . here spurs just didnt let them have time and space on the ball . while we talk about the formation and all that we do have to take into consideration the tempo of the game . it doesnt matters whether you play on the counter or on ball holding offense. its very important that you control the tempo of the game because if cannot control the tempo the game you can be ripped apart because if you let the opposition let control the tempo the game they can move the ball very fast and slow and get you out of shape and use that to their advantage .because after all the game is all about discipline,hard work,concentration  and organisation and if any of one quality comes short then the one team that lacks it can ( definitely) ends up on the losing side . 
so how did spurs controlled the tempo of the game . for the first 15 min they gave the same medicine that chelsea gives to their oppposition . they just closed down chelsea very hard and never allowed them time and space on the ball . the game was frantic till the first 25 min . most importantly chelsea are caught our of shape when the ball is take from back to front . the trouble is not the back four its the midfielders . apart from jorginiho the others are caught very high on the pitch and basically there is a lot of space in front of the back four which is there to exploit and thats what arsenal did in their first match against chelsea .
so how did spurs controlled the tempo and how chelsea lost it . for first 25 min spurs high pressed and scored . but you cannot do high press for the entire time of the match . you need to change levels and thats what they did . after 25 min spurs started to sit back but the sitting back wasnt that they let chelsea let time and space on the ball . instead they let chelsea come in their own half and then pressed them enough so that they had to play with a high tempo . this is where i think chelsea lost . spurs after 25 min had passed the mantle to chelsea by sitting back and chelsea had the ball . chelsea should had controlled the game better . but instead they played with on tempo and one dimensional always trying to play a forward pass game . while chelsea had the ball they should had controlled the  game better and moved the ball better . 
for that i am  going to give one example what gaurdiola team use to do at barcelona . they would slow down the game by playing tiki taka and moving the ball around and let the opposition take the shape . what this does is you can gauge the opposition's defense and can work your offensive moves . they would play tiki taka and suddenly they would up the tempo to which the opposition is caught unprepared . chelsea played with one dimensional tempo . they should had controlled the tempo better . they should had tried to draw out spurs out of their own half . the trouble with sarri's team is that they only know in one way of playing the game . the second problem is that the cohesion that is wanted between the front players is not there . conte's team had a good cohesion between hazard and costa and that won them the league . in sarri's game the no.9 is used more as a positional piece who keeps the centre backs occupied and other try to exploit the gaps . it had been a problem with his team at napoli too and i had written about it when i had analysed the napoli's game . this game should be a learning a curve for sarri who should look at his tactics and the back that remain at the back when  opposition team come very fast forward . 

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN CITY VS UTD .

utd played city on sunday . before i write about this game or anything else let me tell you some from india's great history . it is said that abhimanyu the son of arjuna of  pandava's from mahabarta is that he learnt how to break into the ckravyuh ( formation) in his mother's womb . now what his this got to do with this match well the fact of the matter is that mouriniho just learnt one part of the game and that is how stop team's . he is what they call the defensive coach in the american football . he knows what teams should do when the other team has the ball and that is what is got to do with mouriniho . mouriniho is just one way coach and i think  he just thinks about defense and what his team does when they have the ball . even though man city won but i still think that gaurdiola's team wasnt that impressive  as well . first and foremost he has studied chess and talked with them about tactics and when you talk with such sharp minds about tactics i think he needs to show some of that on the field . even though his team won it wasnt that convincing for me . they were going to win no doubt about that but the trouble is they should had just outclassed man utd which i think they didnt . when man utd were good they had such fear in opponents minds that the opponents knew that they can score at will and that is why they won a lot . gaurdiola's team is still not doing that . they still are not playing the same level as i want them to be . 
the game started with man city and utd playing the same formation . i dont have any issues in any team trying to defend deep and sit back and play on the counter attack because the coach decides what is best for the team with the players on hand . the issue is not about sitting about sitting back and hitting on the but its about when you have the ball and what you do when you have it . you need to show the quality when you have the ball . fine if its on the counter attack . the understanding of any manager about the game gets endorsed by the offense his team plays . man utd when going forward just didnt had the clue as to what they want to do with the ball and this is a clear indication that mouriniho doesnt understands offensive side of the game . while i see gaurdiola constantly tipping his players on what to do when they have the ball and what need to do . i never saw mouriniho tell his players on what to do when they had the ball . it happened all throughout the match and mouriniho just didnt had the clue as to what his team is doing with the ball .
i would like to give an example on 37th minute rashford was released behind the left backs space by herrera . rashford had lindgard and martial in support . while rashford went for the ball . lindgard and martial went inside the box with the expectation that the ball will be crossed and they should try to get at the end of it . while rashford was mobbed by two players and led to eventually ball played out and loss of possession . now this is stupidity . the player should had studied about the space that was between rashford and the middle . even there was a space between the defensive players and it should had been exploited . team works for space they try to create and thats what team try to do . here there was space and they just couldnt exploit it . ( see the pics for that . ) either one of the player should had gone with rashford and help move the ball inside while one should had gone inside the box to keep the threat of cross alive . its shows the lack of knowledge about the offensive of the part on the part of mouriniho . his players were caught on the ball because they seem to be fixated on passing the ball to a certain which you cannot be in the football game . you need to read the play and do what is necessary . utd dont have a single player who can put his foot on the pedal and control it . they are just playing like individuals and not as a team . 
the  second thing is that mouriniho prepared his team with the expectation that city will press them and if the ball is moved fast enough then he can catch them on the counter and out of shape . which is what he did at real madrid in the title winning season . gaurdiola has learnt from that . in the second season he clearly struggled because instead of trying to press him teams were sitting back and inviting madrid to open them up . mouriniho always knew just one way forward and he just couldnt make adjustments . the adjustments that man city or gaurdiola made to the city team was that they pressed but never  hard pressed . they only pressed the player with the possession of the ball . they played deep or dropped deep maintained their shape while just doing enough pressing to keep man utd on their toes . when the opposition is not doing what you expect him to do then you need to make adjustments and clearly mouriniho wasnt able to do that . this was another failure on the part of mouriniho .
let me tell you defense is a maze or puzzle which the opposition needs to solve . gaurdiola has talked with the grandmaster so they must have imparted some very good knowledge with him . man utd defensive formation was like a sitting duck formation . city has so many good players that if they move the ball properly then they can rip open utd on every move . this was seen on the third goal but in the middle of the they just didnt do enough for me . they just didnt showed their quality on the ball . i expect more from gaurdiola and this performance was not enough for me . 

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN DORTMUND VS BAYERN MUNICH .

yesterday bayern munich played dortmund in the bundesliga . while munich have a mini collapse in the bundesliga . dortmund are at the top .  munich started the game with 4-4-1-1 formation while dortmund too played the same combination . it was important game for both the coaches because it gives them the bragging rights atleast till christmas for being the best team in the land .

the game started with dortmund sitting back and bayern being the aggressive team trying to have the initiative . for bayern groetzka started the game in the middle of the park along side martinez . at other times in other games he has started in the no.10 position . for dortmund goetze started the game upfront in the no.9 formation . bayern had both ribery and gnabry in wide positions . bayern were trying to stretch dortmund so that the spaces can be  exploited by ribery and gnabry . the first goal came because bayern moved the ball from side to side in trying to steretch dortmund . because of that dortmunds defense got somewhat disorganised .plus the biggest mistake to that goal was the prenotion that akanji had . dortmunds midfield had moved up when the ball was moved from side to side and muller found the space between the lines . akanji in bid to close down muller left his position and went to close down muller . had akanji stayed in his proper position and maintained his discipline then he could had made it difficult for lewandowski to score . his prenotion was the cause for the first goal . bayern were dominating in the first half . even though they were dominating they were not able to find past dortmund . there was a reason . when you want your team to perform then you need to have each player to contribute . most of the bayern attack was from the left and ribery being the insitgator . the trouble was that the ribery and alaba were combining wide but the proper pivot that they wanted to bring the ball inside wasnt there . plus they were not that patient in their possession and instead choose to cross the ball rather trying to work the ball and get it come inside . on the defense bayern's plan was excellent . they were pressing dortmund so that they have to pass quickly . dortmund had reus and gotze upfront who were up against muller and boetang and there was no chance of them winning aerial duel against bayern's back two . so bayern's tactics were atleast working on the defensive upfront and they were able to contend dortmund in the first half .

akanji left his position and it led to first bayern goal

there is no problem in sitting back and hitting on the counter but for that you need to show your quality when you have the ball . plus the trouble with sitting back is that you are inviting the ball to be crossed or come close to your goal then you are inviting trouble . yes dortmund had a good shape to their team but individual mistakes can happen and that can  cost the team very much especially as dortmund had seen in the game against athletico madrid . ath.mad were able to stop dortmund in the tracks and were able take advantage of the deep line that dortmund play . in the first half whenever dortmund had the ball they just couldnt take the ball near bayern's goal and the reason for that  was the midfield of weigel and witsel just couldnt control the game properly and support their front line and the wingers . plus when gotze and reus had the ball they made bad decisions on the ball and that led to their attack stop in the tracks had they done better on the ball then bayern would had been in trouble .

the game is of two halves and the tempo that you have in the first cannot be maintained in the second half and that is why team make adjustment to the game . they just dont go on pressing which they will do in the first half because they are fresh . the team needs to make adjustment to their game and play accordingly. bayern just didnt that . they tried to play the same game which they were playing in the first half . in the second half the main change that dortmund made was that weigel was replaced by mahmoudi who is much more attacking minded than wieigel who is a defensive minded . mahamoudi instead sitting back like weigel started to come forward and started to join the offense and most importantly the pressing that was crisp wasnt that much crisp in the second half . this gave dortmund the space and time on the ball and they have decent players who can use the ball .
even though dortmund won their coach favre needs to look at the way they play when they have the ball . most importantly the distribution from midfield and from the back is very poor and this stops their offense in the tracks . secondly their offense can be read from a mile long . they try to take the ball wide and then the fullbacks and his forward try to combine and try to open take the ball forward . this offense was stopped by ath madrid and they couldnt conjure another way to take ball forward against ath madrid and even in this match in the first half bayern stopped them in the tracks . for bayern they just keep on dropping too deep and once the pressing fails plus the thing is that they just have one player who  is protecting the back three ( since one of the fullbacks is caught high on the counter on offense ) . he needs to be a bit more conservative because they even lost against wolfsburg even when they dominated the match but on the counters they were exposed and paid with the result .

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN MAN UTD VS VALENCIA

man utd started the game with 4-3-3 formation while valencia started the game with 4-4-2 formation . now the team plays in a coach's image as to what he thinks about the game and how he wants them to play with the player at hands . man utd at both ends had been hopeless . firstly mouriniho like to play with big man but can he think past that . can he play his team without lukaku . i know him playing rashford uptop has not yeilded desired results but then he is one to be blamed as he needs to coach his team as to what they need to do when they have the ball and the respective movement and positional aspect of the game . most importantly i whole agree that man utd are lacking a team leader a player who will push others . the team is lacking in character and direction . you just cannot put the team and you need to think about the whole aspect of the team . man utd were hopeless were at both ends of the pitch with not feeling comfortable on the ball . 
the game started with man utd in the ascendency and valencia sitting back and trying to hit man utd on the counter . the reason why man utd dont have a direction .mouriniho's team are mostly trained to play on the counter attack . so whenever any teams sits back and asks mouriniho's team to open them up then his teams have struggled . when teams are primarly drilled to play counter offense then they have a tendency to take the ball from back to front very fast and try to explore the spaces that are left behind . mouriniho's team are never eye watching most importantly his teams are not designed to open up oppositions formation . his teams particularly struggle when team sit back and play defensive game . valencia's coach must had studied this and must had known this from his time in spanish football . so he devised tactics according to that . even though valencia had two up front they would get behind the ball and make it six in the middle of the park . while mouriniho like his team to have a very disciplined defense the same is not expected from his team on  offense .
man utd were the ascending team and valencia were trying to counter . now teams try to hold a line when they defend because if you cave in too much and let the opposition too much in your half in trying to absorb the attack it may backfire . most importantly on the counter offense teams play through their centre forwards and if you can press and stop their main man then i think you can stop the counter . valencia were going to play through rodrigo or batshuayi so you just have to read the game and  dont offer them any time and space on the ball . man utds centrebacks were doing excatly opposite of that they were giving both valencia forwards time and space on the ball . since valencia had two in the middle so utd's back four were getting compact which was letting space on the flanks for valencia to explore which they were doing particularly on the left flank through guedes . had valencia been little bit more patient when they could get the ball in utds final third then i think they would have had success . 
as i had said whenever teams are drilled to play counter they take the ball up very fast but this can thing can back fire when teams are taking the ball quickly . it has its own drawbacks because when you pass the ball to the forward line he may get isolated because there may be no continuation to the move after that pass . so he either may have to cross or in trying to overdo loose possession . the reason may be because when the ball is passed to the forward line he may not have the necessary numbers . secondly when utd passed the ball to the forward line the distace between the midfield and forward line was about 25-30 yards so by the time the forward recives the pass . the defender would be on the recivers toes making it difficult for him to work the ball . secondly the midfield support line is too back to play a slick crisp football since the time taken for 10 yard passes is double to that of 20-25 yard passes so that is out of equation because you cannot play crisp football with too much of space between lines . thirdly there needs to discipline over the ball . sanchez ,rashford just dont have that they just try to overdo with the ball . you need to be patient on the offense as well . you need to read the defense as well and then make your moves . mouriniho hasnt got the brains in terms of offense . most importantly can be think of the offense minus lukaku because how many times did he lost the possession plus his understanding of the game is not very good . most importantly as i had said that they dont have a leader on the field . one who would take others to sword and most importantly he would push others to play better and have some discipline in him . i think mouriniho is not the right man for man utd and should either bring carlos quieroz back .
i worry about man utd because new fans are made when a team plays good positive football not some boring football . his constant criticism of his players  and the hopeless display of his team is nothing but going to harm man utd as a brand and it would be better they release him for good .

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN CHELSEA VS LIVERPOOL .

yesterday liverpool played chelsea . chelsea started the game with 4-3-3 formation . both the team have the same formation . this was one of the best crisp fast pace game that i had seen in years with both teams attacking at breath taking pace . while both the teams have the same formation th approach to the game is bit different and the way they work the ball or the zones that they try are different . while liverpool try to lay a bit more central chelsea try to work the channel's and then whip a cross inside the box . both like to press but the pressing is different as well as the way the offense  they have when the have the ball . 
this was a match perfect for both the teams just because both teams are in direct contrast of each other . while sarri like to keep the ball . liverpool like to hit on the counter attack . liverpool's main man is salah while chelsea's main man is hazard they try to play the ball to him and try to build the offense . but one thing is certain that the movement of their midfielders or even the team movement is quite similar . whenever one of the front three comes deep the midfielders bombs forward . both teams try to work the triangle but the end approach is different with both the teams .

space used by salah on liverpools's counteratack .

now about the game liverpool like to hit on the counter while chelsea like to hold on to the ball . compared to liverpool chelsea played a deeper line while they were good with the ball on the defense they were just hopeless . whenever they loose the ball they like to press and get the possession back . the trouble was that it was leaving a lot of space between the back four and midfielders who were getting upfield and liverpool were doing a fine job of transferring the ball from back to front especially to salah very quickly . now it not that sarri doesnt knows salah he know salah from his time with roma . salah was playing on the right so he was going to come inside . liverpool try to get more on the ball because they know he can open up the defense and is very decent in one on one situations . the first mistake was to let salah cut inside . sarri must had wanted chelsea play deep because of salah's pace and the way the front three of liverpool combine and it was very evident here . since there was not midfield cover which way upfield . salah could use that space in front of the back four and combine with firmino who is  very excellent . chelsea's back four just couldnt come out because had anybody left their defensive discipline then liverpool's would had exploited that space . still in the first half chelsea's back two made the mistakes especially luiz who made mistakes with his decision making .he tried to win a ball which was not there to be won . he went with a player even when the ball wasnt played or that he could see that the  ball wasnt going in that players direction . most importantly i dont know why do they let salah cut inside . both alonso and luiz showed salah on the inside on his stronger foot while he should had been shown outside on his weaker foot . there was a moment in the first half when milner played a 35-40 yard ground ball in salah's feet . while the chelsea's back four were just two to three yards behind salah  they could had easily steeped up and tried  to wrestle the possession or atleast make it difficult for him instead they just sit back and let him time and space on the ball . this is the type of decision making makes the difference in the game . i hope that sarri when he see's the tape tries to correct it .
i had read about how hazard needs the help of his forwards or the players around him to be best . i would say that the team needs to have hazard playing in unision with team . yes he is good player but the pace with which chelsea plays it  gets dropped when hazard is on the ball .his time spending on the ball trying to do something allows the opposition to regroup who can be  taken apart with slick insterplay as they did on the first goal .  he needs to be in unision with the team . he needs to have a better decision making as to where he can take on  the opposition. most importantly i think at time hazard puts himself in front of the team . there was moment in the match in second half where on kavacic made the run and hazard could had released him but instead he just passed it back . when you are playing on the counter attack as they did in the second half then you not only to hold the ball but also to release somebody who is making forward runs beyond you . i was disappointed with hazard .   i think willian is a better dribbler than hazard who sees less of the ball than hazard . most importantly just like previous sarri team here is also sarri's offense is revolving around the the midfielders ,wide players and fullbacks . he is still is not able to bring the centre forward in the offense . the centre forward is used more as a positional piece who keeps attention off two central back players . to be honest giroud is one of the most underrated forward and he has a very good passing ability . kovacic had a very good game and showed his quality over the ball .
liverpool depends too much on salah for offense and at time they just try to find him . it would be better if sane can share some load but he was poor in this match . salah was substituted not because he was bad but because he must had been exausted because he was seeing a lot of the ball from the first minute and was involved all of the moves . i think kloop needs to work with salah for his final ball because it lacks in precision and weight and that was the reason liverpool couldnt score against chelsea in the first half . this was the story of the first half .
in second half sarri must had seen that his team cannot keep pressing and must had asked his team to sit back and defend plus he had the lead . the italian mentality must had taken over .  this handed the initiative to liverpool and who rightfully equalised for the domination they had over the game in the second half . 

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN FRANCE VS BELGIUM

belgium played france in the first world cup semi's . although both had reached this stage but both coaches had been criticized for their lack of tactical innovation . both sides had dearth of talents but none had been able to put together a team which can dominate opponents and play some good football . the football in this tournament had been not upto the standard with none of the coaches standing out who looks to have played very good football . france and belgium both started the game with 4-3-3 formation . the game was of two halves and there is nothing such great tactical to talk about this game but still there some thing that i noticed which i want to write . there is nothing great about the tactical side its was a boring game . the game was of two halves with belgium being pressed to do something in the second half because france had taken the lead in the first half .
belgium started the game with dembele in the side drafted in the midfield alongside fellaini and witsel . while matuidi came in place of tolliso . the game started with france sitting back and belgium dominating the ball . there wasnt much in the first half with both the teams sitting back and allowing the centrebacks time and space on the ball and trying to have as many players behind the ball as they can . the centre forwards too from the both sides were trying to press the midfielders instead of trying to press the forwards. the fullbacks were tucked alongside the centrebacks making it a very compact unit . in the first half belgian had a very interesting shape .  belgium didnt had a recognised left back and vertroghen was doubling as a centre back as well as a fullback . they had hazaed on that side and fellaini was given the lisence to venture forward of the three midfielders . the intresting fact that the fullbacks didnt had a direct number against them . this fact was not noticed by either of the coaches and neither of the wide players were trying to track run from the fullbacks . neither of the coaches tried to overload the flanks and try to work the ball . there were one good chances from the either sides and it was because for belgian fellaini dropped in to the zone and they could work the ball to hazard and he had a good shot . france created the other chance when mbappe and pavard combined well on the right side to create a chance for pavard who's shot was saved by courtouis . the half ended goalless and neither of the coaches showed any great ingenuity in their tactical approach . belgian just couldnt bring lukaku in the game and they failed to build the offense around him . there were some mistkaes which i will talk later. 
in the second half france took the lead early through umtiti and since the current offense was not working for belgium they had to make the change . dembele was replaced by mertens who drafted wide . the shape change bought de bruyne in the centre of the attack while hazard too who was playing from the wide left seems to have come alongside de bruyne . fellaini continued to be operating from the wide left coming inside when the ball is on the rightside . his aerial powress created a chance for belgium . here is where i think that the belgium coach was wrong first off he was allowing hazard to come very deep . now you dont your best players too much deep as it takes that much effort to get near the goal and that many players to beat . hazard should had  been told to remain upfield and the ball worked to him . secondly i dont know as to why fellaini was replaced and his physical presence  had earlier created a  chance for belgium and had he been on the field then his aerial powress would had made some difference . most importantly martinez failed to realised that without a proper left fullback belgiums offense was not able to stetch the french defense on the left side because once fellaini and hazard come inside there was nobody who would be there who would make deeper runs or cross from wider positions . martinez should had addressed these problems earlier and should had make the necessary substitutions earlier . most importantly  belgium just didnt showed that much of a heart to equalize and at times when there was necessity of calm they seem to hurrying things . balls were crossed without having a proper target in mind . hazard made the things about himself and martinez should had asked him to get others more on the ball . there were some mistakes which could had changed the game . one of them is when de bruyne had worked the ball in the box and he had lukaku on the six yard line he made a low cross while he should had made the aerial cross he crossed low and the ball just couldnt reach lukaku . this are several small things that belgiums missed into the game and they missed the final . 

MY TAKE ON THE GAME VS CROATIA VS ENGLAND .

england played crotia in the world cup semi final's . before there were two different views about two coaches . first up england as to how gareth southgate has gathered england and united them . compared to crotia who had face some very good teams england's path to the semi's had been easy . now crotia started the game with their favoured 4-3-3 formation while england started the game with 3-5-2 formation .  out of the two coaches southgate was out of his depth in terms of the tactical innovation and nothing great to offer as how he can surprise the other team . england had started with the same formation for all of the game . i think he favoured this formation for the fact that these were the best 11 that he had and just wanted to be put together on the pitch there was no nothing new that he tried to do . but then he did acheive which few england managers failed to acheive .
the game started with familiar pattern of england sitting back while crotia dominated the possession . england went ahead inside 10 min because alli impeded by modric and tippier scored from the spot . now the onus fell on crotia as to how they are going to equalize . croatian coach had talked about how his side on offense had not been doing well . england were playing on the counter so when england lost the ball england's fullback would tuck along side their centre backs making it 5 across the back line . this means that the croatian fullbacks had  a free run to go upfield . the midfield was very much compact with england match crotia woth the middle three . croatia wanted to stretch so both modric and rakitic went on each flank trying to overload the flank . so croatia were trying to overload the flanks but the trouble with croatia was that in the first half england players had energy to close down croatia quickly so croatia were just not able to thread england's defense . while england had been defending well there counter attack was doing very well . kane was playing the no. 10 role trying to hold up the ball and bring alli and lingard in the move . while the other move would be to try to release sterling behind the back four especially against vida who england would struggle against sterling . henderson in particular was the one who was trying to time and again to release sterling behind the back four . 
in the second half after 10 mins england's closing down and their concentration started to drop while croatia which were overdoing things like trying bring the ball from the wide but were failing in doing that . this was because crotia's offense wasnt that crisp which was needed because england were thing in the  middle and croatia could had troubled england had they swithched the flanks quikcly . after 60 min croatia started to cross the ball in the box with either rebic or perisic coming inside to join manzukic in the middle . it is very important to realize that when you are defending at that time try to be first to the ball and dont wait for it to get to you . walker waited for it to arrive and perisic pounced to score . the equalizer was the turning point since england's shoulder dropped and croatia upped their ante . the trouble was that england's counter attack fell apart in that process . the trouble was that at this time the coach needs to provide input in order to freshn up things . croatia showed more desire to win the contest and one mistake by england cost them the place in the world cup semis . the reason for this is that that after the first goal england didnt showed the urgency to score the second goal and they were more than happy to defend and too the contest somewhat lightly which was the reason for their down fall . southgate should had insisted to that the team score second . there  wasnt a lot of tactical innovation in both the teams but crotia were able to grind out of the result and that would be one of the satisfying thing for croatia . 

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN BRAZIL VS BELGIUM .

brazil played belgium in the q/f of the world cup . brazil started the game with 4-4-2 formation with neymar starting alongside jesus upfront . while belgium started the game with 4-3-3 formation with fellaini starting the game alongside witsel in the belgium midfield . while chadli was there to support witsel and fellaini . should we call martinez a brilliant manager or is it that he just survived the test . for me brazil just didnt do enough to test belgium and didnt do enough to test them . martinez must had studied brazil and he had seen where neymar operates and he wanted to just close down that zone but at the same time he didnt tried to stop him or try to man mark him instead he just allowed him to have the ball and let him drive to get him isolated and then stopped him . fellaini and munier did an excellent job when he went either ways .
the game started with belgium sitting back but at the same time keeping lukaku,hazard and de bruyne high up the pitch so that he can hit brazil on the counter while at the same time he had 7 players back .  belgium were set up in a very specific way they just wanted to defend the 18 yard box and didnt bothered to chase brazil on wide side . instead they wanted brazil to come inside and then stop them . belgium were so compact that no two players had more than 5 yard space between them . martinez had studied how brazil operates and he knew that if he stops neymar he virtually stops because they try to find him on the pitch . so fellaini was specifically placed from where neymar likes to cut inside to stop him . chadli who started the match was suppose to start at the left back but vertroghen started there and chadli started in the middle three . jesus who starts in the middle cannot beat toby and kompany in the air and both have decent pace . belgium had the first chance when de bruyne found fellaini in the hole who scuffed his short . the warning signs were there for both sides which belgium having some clearances of their own in front of their goal . 
in the first half brazil were trying to control the tempo of the game . they were actually trying to slow the tempo of the game so that they could asses the belgium formation and then try to open them . the trouble with brazil was that brazil were just not able to put more than three players  together in the move then they were able to bring belgium in trouble just look at willian ,pauliniho and wagner combining on the right side and belgium had some scary moments . first off brazil mostly like to operate from the left because neymar likes to operate from there . secondly he has coutiniho and marcelo to complement on that side . but at the same time he likes to spend time on the ball where on if the opposition is good enough then they can stop him . brazil's offense was a story of two half's . in the first half brazil were seen trying to slow down the pace of the game and try to control the tempo which can be upped at their behest . the trouble was that brazil's two player were combining together but they were not able to bring the third into the play and really stretch belgiums defense . the other trouble was that brazil's slow build up was aiding belgium's defense who were able to organise themselves properly to stop brazil in the track . had brazil brought the ball from back to front quicker they troubled belgium . brazil ended the first half two down .so a change was necessary .

brazil on offense while belgiums shape to counter . 

brazil made changes in the second half . they brought firmino who a better link player than jesus who was switch wide with willian making way . tite thought that belgium were not stretched enough so he wanted to have marcelo high up the pitch while lukaku was marked by miranda . so marcelo was sent high of the pitch to try to open up belgiums defense . but then belgium had already noticed that they cannot out to stop marcelo so they wanted him to come inside and waited for him to cross or come inside . even though the players and formation  were changed but the script remained the same for brazil . they just couldnt have a good interplay between their players to trouble belgium's defense who had to thank courtouis . but then he is there for that . it wasnt that belgiums defense was watertight there were spaces that could had been exploited had tite ordered his players and his team showed a little bit of creativity and some patience which they entirely lacked in the second sending one crosses after another . the first goal for brazil showed that belgiums defense wasnt impregnable and had brazil showed some better interplay things would had been different . they should had been patient just look at the number of shots from  beyond the box and had they shown a little patience then .
for belgium lukaku ,hazard and de bruyne started upfront with de bruyne trying to mark fernandiniho his team mate. martinez had the idea that both hazard and lukaku playing on both sides of the pitch will stretch the brazil defense and the spaces will be explored by them . belgium were playing on the counter they scored two in the first half . ( had martinez bouth a page from conte's book of how to operate the front three then i think he would had caused brazil more problems ) . brazil were trying to man mark both hazard and de bruyne but one is skilled and the other is very physical . both can run can on defense and at times i though that at least in the second half belgium just didnt enough on the counter particularly hazard who should had crossed the ball when he had players in the box . instead he choose to keep the ball and in doing so he had to pass the ball back and lost possession . at times it looked like he was trying to prove a point and playing a game of upsmanship . he should had crossed more and that would had kept brazil on the back foot . with lukaku in the box he should had crossed more and tested brazil more instead of trying to  be a smart one .  fellaini was the better player but i would prefer to have dembele who deserve his chance .
martinez passed the test but it would be better to assess to how he can get his three front players to combine together rather front three going in three different ways . instead try to combine them together because france will be a lot tougher than brazil .

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN FRANCE VS ARGENTINA

argentina played france in the first round of 16 . i read sampoli talking that argentina tried everything to messi but to be honest can he say that a single tactics that he played the team he got it correct . it had always been the struggle for argentina . he didnt knew his best team and tactics that he devised were just not  on the same plane with the players available at his disposal . while looking at both the teams you can clearly make out that france had the better teams  both athletically and technically . they were a better youthful side than argentina and that was the difference maker .
both argentina and france started the game with 4-3-3 formation and it was rightful because both wanted to have maximum player behind the ball when they losse the possession . even though france had the youthful side they choose to sit back and play counter . it wasnt that argentina was dominating or anything but a clever tactics to pull argentina out of shape and then hit them on the counter with pace of mbappe and griezman . the warning signs were from the start with mbappe making the run and winning the penalty . there were some obvious things that were missing in the argentinian defense . first off they are trying to play pressing football but dont have the legs . secondly they are playing a high line compare to france who even though younger took the cautious approach of playing a deep line because they had seen as to what messi and banega can do with that kind of space . both teams like to play out of the back but the problem is that when the ball comes into the final third . argentina just didnt had any ingenuity when they would bring the ball near the france's box . 
argentina played messi upfront with di maria and pavon alongside him . both played wide in a bid to stretch defense but france were not going to get pulled into their trap who choose to stay compact . when messi was upfront for the first 15 min argentina were not able to work the ball to messi . secondly argentina were spend too much time on the ball for me .argentina's buildup was slow  the extra touches gives defense time to adjust themselves and make that much difficult for the  offense to conjure a move that would open the opposition and question there organisation .  when messi was not getting the ball upfront he becomes restless and that is a good sign to be a football but at times you need to ask a player to hold his position just like gaurdiola ask jesus to hold his in the man city formation so if messi was to come inside either pavon or di maria should had taken his to pose that threat . the thing that was very baffling was argentina trying to work the ball from the right . what were trying to do because untill they dont have a credible threat in the middle them working the ball there and trying to overload that side had no meaning . what argentina were trying to do when they had the ball was not making no sense . france had shut up shop in the middle and they had bodies in the middle with very little space there . aerial crossess were of no uses for argentina because messi was not going to win aerial duel with varane and umtiti . the wide players run were just hopeless because they were just one dimensional trying to run down the line and then crossing aerially and wasting the ball . there was no ingenuity in their runs and they just couldnt trouble france's defense . di maria scored a wonder goal but was absolutely hopeless in the open play . most of all where was argentina's defense on the fourth goal which just went to sleep where on they let france score a four pass goal .
france got the tactics right but still the performace needs some introspection because france's front three are not on the same page . mbappe brightened their day other teams will not let him have that easy . pogba too needs to needs to release the ball early just keep the ball rolling. deschamps needs to show him that he is not making proper choices because at times he trying to pass the ball to a player where on the play is going to get bogged and that there is not further passes to that move or that the player might just end up lossing possession . when france take that ball which they generally do on the flanks they are struggling to bring it inside or continue that play and are ending up in lossing possession . they need to work that offense because they kind of got easy against argentina but others will not be that easy .
portugal played uraguay in the other round of 16 . now for the last three seasons real madird had won the champions league and it is nothing because of the finishing power of ronaldo who is just deadly in and around the 18 yard box . but here i was surprised by fernando santos tactics . i waiting for the crosses because when you have ronaldo in the box you just have to take advantage of the world's best header of the ball . portugal started the game with 4-4-2 formation while uraguay started the game with 4-5-1 formation .
the game was going to go in familiar lines with uraguay sitting back and portugal dominating the possession and trying to open up uraguay's defense . portugal had jao mario and bernardo silva on the flanks both like to come inside try to link up with the front players . but both have that bad habit of spending time on the ball . this slows down the offense and an opportunity is gone to catch opposition flat footed . from the first kick of the game till queresma was put in the game i was waiting for crosses to be made and just put one on ronaldo's head . instead portugal were trying all different things but they were just not crossing and whatever they did crosses were just too much off the mark . uraguay had too shots on goal and they scored two and then just stopped portugal  . really dont understand fernando santo's tactics as to why his plan A was to take the ball the ball wide and cross and then improvise . he has ronaldo in the team just ask him to stay in the box and there about and we have the game . disappointed in the coach's tactics plus the wasy the players executed them .

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN NIGERIA VS ARGENTINA .

aregentina started the game with 4-3-3 formation while it was shown as 4-4-2 for me it was 4-3-3 because perez was shown on the right side but di maria was as high as messi . while nigeria started the game with 3-5-2 formation . nigeria just needed a point while argentina needed the win to progress so i think nigeria went with a defensive mindset of trying to stop messi and company . in the last game messi didnt saw lot of the ball and sampoli was criticized for that . another thing was that messi was far  away from goal and that stalled argentina's offensive somewhat . so sampoli made the necessary change he switched messi to all winning barcelona position on the right from where he can cut inside . another change that sampoli that was equally important for me is that he bought banega in the side . the little man is very good on the ball and his long balls created the win for argentina .
the game started with nigeria sitting back and hitting on the counter . now the nigerian coach must had thought his tactics right . he wanted to play 5 at the back but at the same time play a little bit of a high line because he knew that if they played deeper just around the edge of the box and if messi can find a space there then he knew of the quality that messi possess . so nigeria played a little bit of high line . argentina had different tactics than previous game here they were leaving messi and and di maria high of the pitch but wide to stretch the defense . higuain was coming inside to disturb the back line organisation and that when he comes inside the space he leaves behind will be exploited by messi and di maria . . now even though the nigeria thought of tactics right the execution for it was the bane for nigerians because who was going to pick di maria and messi when they were going to come inside was the real trouble . time and again argentinian players were finding space between the lines and most of it there was no cohesion on defense between the playters as to who is going to pick who and that confusion let to the first goal . the lines were flat and the coach failed to clear the confusion for the whole game . the game burst into life with banega finding messi behind the back three and messi scoring the goal it is because of that again in the first half banega could release di maria behind the back three . even though argetina scored the first goal  for me the offense for them was not working because first off banega was main progenitor . he was the one who pulling the strings . he was a little bit deep when he was trying the final ball and second was that messi was on the right but argentina dont of the quality they can successfully bring argentina inside and make messi pontent that he really is for that they lacked the left sided player that barcelona had in form of  neymar who could exploit the space that messi created by attracting the defense on right side . di maria was absolutely hopeless for me . 
i  had talked about the point of attack and that was the main problem for nigeria as well . first off nigeria only had two upfront they had three in the middle and they were pretty close in the middle the reason may be fear of messi . in the first half nigeria had to go musa and Iheanacho very quickly because argentinian players were pressing the nigerian midfield . mikel was the main man for nigeria . he was player who was  pulling the strings and he tried to play musa who has that tendency to drop on the left and then cut inside . musa was lively but the trouble was that he didnt had the proper support of other players because they were deep in their half and by the time they arrived argentina would had player behind the ball and were able to press musa .

distance between argentinian and nigerian midfield and frontline .

in football the distance between the line matters and particlular on offense . you need to take into account the time the ball gets to the player as well as his distance from the goal because if there is too much distance between players then the inter play between gets affected because the opposition can intercept the play and the offense falls apart . the distance between midfield and the front line matter because again as i had said that the interplay gets affected and if you want to have crisp interplay in your team then you need to have the lines very close . there was too much of distance between nigerian's midfield and front two . even in the first half the distance between argentian front three and the middle two was a bit too much and it was affecting their offense and because of that they had to go wide and then they were not able to bring that ball inside .
last but not the least untill now the officiating had been very good in this tournament and i just hope that the turkish official doesnt gets to officiate the game again because his stupid

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN GERMANY VS SWEDEN .

germany played sweden yesterday . this was one of the best games played in the tournament not just because germany scored a last gasp winner but because both teams had a very simplified approach as to what are they going to do with or without the ball . germany started the game with 4-2-3-1 formation while sweden started the game with 4-4-2 formation . the game was of two halved for germans who adopted different approach in both the halves . in the first half werner was the no.9 and germany wanted to outpass sweden and try to score .
anybody can read as to how the game was going to proceed . germany were going to dominate the possession and sweden were going to hit on the counter . germany had both the fullbacks high up the pitch and were trying to stretch sweden's defense . sweden were not going to drawn in german's trap. they were patient and sat back compact conceding wide spaces to germans and instead waited for germans to come onto them rather than trying to be proactive they were going to be reactive for german actions . 

the reason why werners name was taken was because sweden are one of the biggest team in the tournamet but are not that mobile  so low played werner with the idea that he would make diagonal runs which would get the defense stretched and the three at the back  of werner would be able to exploit that space . the trouble with germans is that germans have good positional knowledge and tactical very astute but the trouble is that they still lack that cohesion and they keep searching for pass . germany were finding space on the flank but there trouble was that bringing the ball inside . i had already said that when one player makes the movement it should be key for others . instead players were not on same wavelength of each other . that is why even when draxler and rues were able to find space in the box they were not able to find  their teammates who didnt had the cue make the move and make themselves  available in the box . second thing is that werner is the no.9 . even though werner is no.9 he like to make diagonal runs and get himself involved in the game . when the ball goes wide werner needs to hold his position in the box try to occupy the two centre halves which would open spaces for other . if he is going wide in trying to get the ball deeper then somebody from german team should try to occupy werner's position . germans were having all the possession and were crossing but were failing to find team mate in the box . this was the story of the first half .
low must had noticed that he wasnt having a traditional no.9 in the box and a target man in the box . so he bought on gomez to be the target man and freed werner to make those diagonal and have run on the defense in a bid to disrupt their discipline  and organisation . but the trouble for germans had been for germans all night long was that they were not able to bring that ball from the wide areas into the inside . i think they had one two many touches on the ball which slowed down the game and allowed the opposition to regroup and make it harder for them .

germany on the attack and spaces exploited by sweden on the counter . 

sweden just played according to the script . not both teams can play possession football . teams need to play to their strength and sweden just did that . for me berg and toivonen were very good in holding the ball and then releasing classen and forsberg beyond them . most importantly berg's passing was very good . sweden's organisation was very good and should have had got something from the game . the one player i was disappointed was forsberg . it is because he has the quality and he needed to show more of it . he should had noted that it was necessary for them to keep moving the ball and shouldnt spend time on the ball and two or three times he lost the possession in trying to be smart . still i am picking him to be the player to be signed by man utd if mouriniho has some brains . he is the missing piece that utd want. the no. 10 that they desperately need .

if germans  need to repeat their  exploits from the brazil worldcup then they need to improve overnight because there is still a lack of cohesion between the front three and they should devise some special play and try to have that one touch football going because better team in the world cup will exploit them .

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN ARGENTINA VS CROATIA .

yesterday argetina played crotia . to be honest i had never seen such a weaker argentina side in my life . they all talk about maradona but it was not lone maradona . he had a great support cast who would do the work for him . sampoli is talking about how the other player didnot get with messi and that is cause for defeat . if you had looked closely then i think that messi is not 100% . either he is injured or unfit and that is why he is not seeing more of the ball . secondly it is sampoli who is to be blamed for the defeat . its his team he is the one who has chosen the players . he is the one who has chosen the team and had devised the tactics . if messi is not fit then he should had just dropped him and showed the balls . sampoli just put the players on the pitch and then wants his team to gel . geling doesnt happens overnight . plus the coach needs to have his thoughts cleared if his team needs to perform . all of failure falls squarely on sampoli's shoulder and he should be the one who needs to be put to sword . i had never ever seen argentina team getting outmuscled and outpaced by the opposition . they were literally second best all night .

argentina started the game with 3-2-1-3 formation . while crotia started the game with 4-3-3 formation with brozovic playing the anchor role in the middle of the midfield . even before the game anybody would read the script that messi wasnt going to get time and space on the ball and that is why brozovic was bought in front of the back four . the game started brightly for argentina with messi finding aguero and releasing him behind the back four and this was the only chance created by messi and the argies . after that the game just slipped out of argies hand . what were argentina were going to do with the ball is very questionable . sampoli played two wing backs with the thinking that they would stretch crotia's defense but while doing that he didnt take into account other factors . first off he was having aguero in the middle so aguero beating lovren and riga in the air is not possible .secondly just consider the mobility of perez and mascherano to modric and rakitic . crotia had better midfielders than argentina . argentina were always going to have problems when they were going to bring the ball from wide areas to inside of pitch because croatia were going to have numbers behind the ball and most importantly argentina's interplay wasnt that crisp . to be honest going forward argentina just didnt had a clear plan and most importantly what is sampoli doing on the sidelines pacing up and down . he should had corrected and gone to plan b but sampoli for me just didnt had a plan b . instead he took off perez and bought messi in the midfield . now when  you bring your best player that far from the goal you give opposition the chance because you have to move the ball that much to get the ball to opposition box and in doing so you give the opposition that much chance to stop you in the tracks . the other thing was that argentina were trying to play out of the back a very risky thing to do against a good opposition . it was always risky for argies to play out of the back . argies offense not working is all sampoli's fault and he should  answer for that and not messi . messi didnt made the tactics it was sampoli . 

speaking of tactics sampoli wanted to stretch the play so he deployed two wing backs and to play out of the back with the thinking that croatia would come out and press them . i havent seen a team who had gone to press opposition in their half . instead all the team are playing safe and sitting back and press team when they come in their half . secondly team are not going to chase you in wide instead they want  you to come and then defend in numbers . sampoli's tactics were just not justifying with the ground realities .  most importantly all the teams are not capable or playing out of the press and it doesnt work very well .without the ball argentina were having five at the back so both vrsjlko and strinic had no opposing player for a good half of the pitch . the tactical problem was that whether the fullbacks tuck alongside the centre backs or do they go on and press their opposite numbers which leaves the centre backs exposed .

croatia had a simple game plan they just wanted to hit argentina on the counter and most importantly they had players to do that with manzukic and rebic very good at holding the ball . most importantly the man of the match performance came from their three midfielders  modric,rakitic and brozovic who moved the ball very well .

when the match started the only players that i was worrying about were caballero and subasic who are good goal keepers but are mistake prone and i wasnt wrong with my assumption with subasic making a hash of the situation when he should had just gone to collect the ball when lovren was sheilding it and asking him to collect it . for caballero's mistake i would again put sampoli in the cage because he wants them to play out of the back a move which backfired .
all and all hope argentina are just not the team who can win the cup and for me crotia are the dark horse who can go all the way since they have the team and style to do it . 

MY TAKE ON THE GAMES BETWEEN BRAZIL VS SWITZERLAND AND GERMANY VS MEXICO .

 swiss played brazil in the world cup match . brazil started the game with 4-4-2 because both jesus and neymar were upfront and even though they looked like 4-3-3 they were not they were more like 4-4-2 . while swiss started the game with 4-2-3-1 formation . now in what world would you let one of the best players in the world have time and space on the ball and leave him alone . it was abvious from the start that the swiss were going to strangle neymar . now here is where tite needs to coach him tell him and change the tactics . the more neymar is drawn into the battle the more he wants to fight it . instead tite should had just tried  to play one touch football and keep the play rolling and tite should had created the offense with other player who too are actually good .
the game started with a fimiliar note with swiss trying to sit back and strangle neymar . now i had just read the statistics that neymar was fouled 10 times in the match why wont he be . brazil were always going to have their offense on the left side because that the side neymar operates plus coutiniho was deployed there so that neymar can link up with him and can open up the swiss defense. brazil started the game brightly neymar was closed down so they spread the ball to willian who was on the other flank and he caused swiss the problem by crossing good  crosses  in the box . the trouble started with neymar getting shutdown more by berhami who was very good . what brazil lack is that height upfront which they make up with their crisp passing . jesus was never going to win headers against ikanji and schar so keeping  the ball on the floor was the best option .
swiss were never going to chase brazil in their half what swiss lacked was mobility but they had the physical advantage over brazil . now neymar likes to come deep and start dribble from there . berhami was specifically told to keep tabs on neymar who and he did a very good job with that . here is where i am disappointed with tite . neymar is the main man for brazil as messi is for argentina and every thing and anything is going to flow through him .  so the opposition are going to strangle them . now either you create and offense where on the other member of the team combine when neymar is strangled or create offense so that he can have space to work . the second thing that i was disappointed with tite was neymar's positioning . neymar likes to start from the left and deep . first off the deeper he comes the deeper the offense starts so brazil has to work that  length of the pitch to get to the box or goal . secondly when he getting closed down why not ask him to play one touch football instead trying to drive the ball and prove his ego . why play to his ego . if tite had taken the cue then it was there in the match when neymar was high up the pitch and he beat schar and schar had to take a card to stop him  . so why didnt tite asked him to stay high up the pitch and let the ball come to him and work his magic or let him stay on one side of the pitch and attract the opposition and let others combine . 
i was disappointed in brazil but i was more disappointed in swiss because going forward they didnt had a plan as to  what they are going to do when they are going to take the ball in the final third . now seferovic is a very good player and a good header of the ball plus you can play around him but none of that was visible in the swiss offense and shaqiri,dzemaili and zuber when the ball was bought high up the pitch . just try to cross the ball in the box for seferovic and test silva and mirando with both shaqiri and rodriguez good crosser of the ball . going forward the swiss were pretty hopeless and if the swiiss want to get into the next round then they need to have a better offense . the swiss let a very good chance of beating brazil who i think were vulnerable in the match .
both tite and sampoli need to solve neymar and messi or it may not get them far in the worldcup .
yesterday germany played mexico . germany started the game with 4-2-3-1 formation while mexico too played with the same formation . the tactics were clear from the start that mexico were going to sit back deep and hit germnay on the counter for that they had hernandez upfront who pace can trouble anybody but his overall link up play and finishing are found wanting . germany wanted to stretch the game so that kimmich high up the pitch trying to stretch the play so that players can ozil and kross can exploit that space in the defense and find muller,draxler and wener upfront . the warning signs were from the start from both sides . first germany had the shot when werner found the space behind the back four with his diagonal run . this was because mexico tried to play a slight bit of high line and werner showed his pace to find space behind the back four .  while mexico were finding the space in the hole where on either or vela or hernandez were coming inside and releasing  lugano on the left . lugano was finding the space because kimmich use to high up the pitch and his pace was causing germany the problems . germany were playing the high line trying to congest mexico and press them but the trouble is that mexico are very good in one on one situations and are extremly mobile plus their ground game is very good . their crisp passing is very good with good positional  knowledge .
the game was all about germany dominating possession and trying to open up mexico and even though they lost it doesnt means that germany were bad . it was only that they could not find the back of the net . their game plan and the way played was actually decent and i think after this game low must had thought that perhaps he had a player like sane who can make run on defense with his after burners and open it up . the only player that i would criticise here is ozil . he is the no.10 in the side and on one of the time in the game he could had just released werner . he needs to be strong on the ball and needs to pull the strings and get himself more involved in the game . vela played the no.10 role for mexico and he played it with aplomb . both the teams should could had done more into the game . mexico should had thought about having a bigger scoreline while germany would had thought to have atleast a point in the game .
i think that low needs to look into his side and play kross in place of ozil and needs to have some crisp passing going because otherwise i think that there was nothing bad with the team with some little adjustments . if mexico are to go far into this worldcup then i think hernandez's game needs to improve overnight . the second thing is that they need to be a bit more patient they work the ball in a good position but they just get impatient with their shot . instead if they just can be a little bit more patient then they can just trouble a lot of teams but playing this deep and taking chances against team would someday catch them .

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN PORTUGAL VS SPAIN .

yesterday portugal played spain in the world cup group match . portugal started the match with a 4-4-2 formation . while spain started the match with 4-3-3 formation . the game started with the usual script of portugal sitting back and hitting spain on the counter . fernando santo had his tactics right because if you are to play on the counter attack then you need to have two upfront and most importantly the front two seems to working in tandem with each other . portugal took the early lead because they able to overlaoad the left flank . portugal were able to do that because ronaldo shifted from the middle there and most importantly in the first 15-20 min spain's back line wasnt coming along upfield  with the front players to press them . so portugals players were getting time on the ball and were able to beat spains pressing game . now spain's pressing game were able to win them the 2010 world cup . the real reason why portugal were able to win the penalty was that there wasnt that clarity in the  spain team as to who was going to pick up raphael gurrero . porugal's left back was able to get go unabated upfield without an opposing player against him . spain had two player on that side with silva and koke but who was going to pick up gurrero wasnt decided . secondly he was aided by portugals tactics where on i think fernandes was told to come inside and provide cover to gurrero and let gurrero upfield because gurrero is a good crosser of the ball . in this match ronaldo was very good and he was ready to take players on and that won him the penalty for the first goal .

spain on offense

the game settled after 15 min where on the intial eurphoria of the portugal team died . the teams dont have the legs in them to close down players . spain there tiki taka game . spain attack was mostly from the left side and isco being the main progenitor .   there was some thinking to spains attack because of the players involved and the players that were in opposition . spain had isco,iniesta and alaba on that side while portugal had cedric,moutiniho and silva on that flank . portugals silva in one of the better players in that team and spain may had not wanted him to combine with the front players so spain wanted to push him back because he was marking alaba . alaba was given the lisecne to go beyond his front player a page taken barcelona's tactical book . spain had their tiki taka going and portugal were sitting back with a very compact two banks of four . even though portugal were trying to sit back compat but it a dangerous ploy because spain can move the ball very crisply and they have some very good players who have a very good game iq who know how to take position in the play and make themselves available .

what spain were trying to acheive with their offense was that they were trying to overload one flank and get either of isco or inesta getting deep into the portugal's box and then either crossing the ball for costa or koke who coming from the opposite flank .  even though spain were dominating the possession i think that they didnt use the arsenal that were at their disposal . nor did they use all of the canvas . while isco was seeing a lot of the ball silva was not having that joy . he too is one of the best ball player in that team . secondly the attack was just happening on the left flank and spain wasnt able to spread it on the right flank and they were getting greedy in crossing the ball . instead had they been patient and a better game reader and orchestrator of the game would had used the full canvas and tried to stretch portugal and opened them more . thirdly they have to bring costa more into the game and the offense should be around him and he should  be more involved in the offense . at time i felt that spain got greedy in trying to keep the ball instead of trying to take pick out players upfront who were in a good position to test oppsition's defense . spain had a good tiki taka game and dominated the possession but struggled on the counter and busquestus needs to be better with his game reading .i think he should be a little more upfront and should be the one pulling the strings . most important spain conceded three goals and at time on defense in think that on the counter there positinal awareness wasnt very good and were getting caught in wrong position . even when you are on offense you should have a reading as to from where the opposition can hurt them and should make that necessary adjustments to the game and i think after the tapes of the game heirro would make that  if spain are to go far in the world cup .

portugal had their tactics right but sitting this deep and inviting pressure in not going to get them very far in the world cup because a better organised team on offense will put them to sword . they cannot play this deep  but the satisfying thing for santos would be that they were able to beat the press and moved the ball very nicely . rafael carvalaho's performance in this game would be one of the most satisfying thing for him . the front two worked very well  and ronaldo's attitude and his performace would had satisfied him . 

MY TAKE ON THE EUROPA LEAGUE FINAL BETWEEN MARSEILLE VS ATH MAD .

on wednesday marseille played ath mad in the UEL final . marseille started the game with 4-2-3-1 formation while ath mad continued with their 4-4-2 formation . the game started with a very interesting punt from  marseille deep in ath mad half . now this stratergy has been used in the nfl,rugby to punt the ball deep in the opposition half and then try to win the possession back as high as possible in the opposition half . it puts pressure on the opposition because they have to cover that much of the grass and this true even in football . marseille punted the ball and then tried to press ath mad . atleast this move showed that rudy garcia was thinking out of the book and trying to have some advantage on his opposition . the game had a good flow to it . both the teams were cautious trying to press each other and at the same time they play deep instead of trying to play a high line and get caught . both the teams like to play out of the back but while marseille like to have possession of the ball ath mad likes to sit back and hit on the counter . ath mad had koke and corriea on the wings while griezman was playing behind costa .  when ath mad have the ball they tried to feed the ball to either corriea , griezman or costa because these three are the main weapons for counter used by ath mad . griezman and corriea are very good on the ball while costa can hold the ball and bring others into play . koke is more of a playmaker or no.10 in the ath mad team . in the first half marseille dominated the proceedings they nullified corriea and costa because the two midfielders in the middle did their job very well to support their back four . 
marseille created the first chance of the match and it was because they could strip ath mad of the possession and bring the ball from back to front quickly . till this chance i think there was  a confusion in ath mad team as to who would pick payet and he was afforded time on the ball and he was able to release germain on goal who missed . after this chance ath mad tightened up . first off they reduced the space between midfield and back four . secondly payet wasnt given time on the ball . as soon he had the ball either of the two midfielders would try to close him down . the thing marseille went wrong was that marseille had germain upfront . now germain's strength is to run behind the back four . he has a good floor game and is decent in the air given his stature but he cannot beat gimenez and godin in the air . just as payet went off the field marseille didnt had anybody who could dictate the game for them . secondly marseille were feeding germain with high balls which is not his strength . marseille's problem was that they were just not able to bring the ball inside the in the final third . the reason being that they dindnt had payed on the field . secondly even if the ball was crossed in the box germain wasnt going to win the aerial duel against gimenez and godin . most importantly marseille passed the ball crisply but there was no novelty in the final third to open up the ath defense . it was just way too straight with players occupying their respective zones and not doing anything new .
when tactics are designed at that time players at hand are considered with respect to the opposition . i think in this match rudy garcia didnt take germain physical aspect into consideration . marseille were good till the final third but lack of creativity with not many players in the box didnt bore them any fruit on offense . he tried to change that in the second half where on he brought the sub lopez in the deeper in the midfield and sent sanson upfront . sanson showed some good movement but till that the game was out of marseille's hand . he should had bought mitrogolu at the start of the second half itself when he could see that the lack of height upfront was hampering his offense so he should had bought him earlier . most importantly marseille didnt had a plan B when they need to change thing because there initial approach wasnt working and that they were just not able to bring the ball back into the centre . i think he did the substitution too late to give marseille a chance .
ath mad were on the back foot in the first half the offense wasnt working for them but there is a difference between an immature team and a mature team . mature would not hasten they would not overtry to expose themselves and would just keep on trying and they would know that the chance would come and that they will take it . the first goal for ath mad came because saul was aware and when Anguissa made the mistake he was ready to pounce and punished marseille . the second goal came into the second half and till that time ath had take hold of the game they were passing crisply costa was running channels and was holding the ball better .most importantly ath mad were able to break marseille's offense in the middle and were able to hit them quickly on the counter . they showed good quality on the ball and were able to beat  marseille's  press and were able to open them up on every counter . ath mad won just because they not only quality but are also a mature team and i think that was the difference between the two .

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN CHELSEA VS BARCELONA.

before i write about the game let me say doesnt matters as to how many time you have the ball and how much you have the possession but if you cannot stick in the back of the net . gaurdiola can moun that wigan had only one chance but what matters is the score and when after some years people will not remember that man city dominated the possession but the way we remember brazil dominating argentina in the 1990 world cup but ended up losing the match . in the game between chelsea vs barcelona i had read news about how barca dominated and messi being unstoppable but to be honest i would say that if i was conte i would just be happy at the way barca were playing because he should had figuered them out . i had never seen an offense being so concentrated around one player . i have heard that certain section of the press were critical of pauliniho starting but to be honest doenst matters whoever you start will he get the freedom to do his thing because eventually after two or three passess the ball ends at messi's feet and as if so he is everything creator and finisher . all the team has to play around him and adjust accordingly if i had to critical of neymar and PSG's tactics then what should i say about barca because they too look like a single man team . i think valverde had to look after his tactics and should change because if the barca board sane people and if the opposition starts figuering them out then i think clearly they will struggle . 
the game started with barca with 4-4-2 formation while chelsea started with 3-5-2 formation  with willian in the no.9 role while hazard in the no.10 role  but they kept on interchanging the role . it was very much written that chelsea were going to sit back and barca were going to be in the ascendancy and going to dominate the possession . before the game it was hyped as the battle between ngolo kante and messi but that was not the case atleast in the first half . in the first half messi was finding the space between lines and he was causing good trouble to chelsea and the interplay was good between him iniesta and  busquestus but again as i had said everything is messi . barca know that the opponent are going to be very compact because little amount of space can be exploited by barca . to honest i was a little surprised that valverde was not able to spot that chelsea were a little thin in their midfield . chelsea only had two midfielders in the middle with kante and fabregas . while pedro and willian were shifting besides them to make numbers . but at times willian was staying just high up the pitch at that time i thought that the chelsea  midfield was way too thin and there was space ( will show in figure ) that could had been exploited but then we come back to square one because it had to be done by messi . in the first half there was considerable space between back five and the middle three . most importantly messi's was staying in between the lines and was causing problems for chelsea . the reason why barcelona play pauliniho is his ability to make the runs and has a very good positional sense . the only thing that let him down is his touch . the other player that had benifitted from barca's formation had been jordi alaba . both pauliniho come inside and the fullbacks get the space to go up the pitch and when messi drifts on the right alaba had made some darting runs evading his opposite number and had been very successful in providing assists . 
in the second half chelsea made the adjustmest . in the first half the distance between chelsea back five and middle three was about 15 yards but in the second half it was less that 10 yards . conte made the adjustmests to make them more compact . secondly messi started coming more deeper which put him against kante and fabregas who now know on how to defend messi . they dont try to snatch ball from him instead try to be patient and they get the chance or they double on him . barca's equaliser because chelsea were trying to play out from the back . conte wanted barca to press them so that they can play around them and there are players like hazard and willian who can show their quality in the final third and in one on one situations . chelsea's formation had been based around good defending and most importantly the understanding between the front two . in this match i think both willian and hazard were not on the same wavelength . most importantly in this match chelsea's most unsung hero pedro was not that used or else he can cause trouble to the oppostion with his runs behind the back four and had got good postional sense.
barca may had the advantage with away goal but the tie is certainly not over and most importantly if conte had watched the game and if he is able to make some adjustments then definitely the tie is very much open . there are already talks of barca slowing down or getting tired but that is not true but after certain time the opposition starts fiuering you out and i think this may be the time when valverde needs to freshen up his tactics and should give more freedom to other players like iniesta who looks to be tied up to messi . they had been asking as to why dembele is not playing but to be honest in this style nobody cant shine except messi .