Yesterday's League Cup final brought us yet another example of a terrible performance when we've started a game with a flat two man midfield. We were completely outplayed first half, and only when Carrick was introduced and we switched to a three man midfield did our football improve and we get some semblance of control of the game.
Jose set us up yesterday with Herrera and Pogba playing central midfield in an orthodox 4-2-3-1, with our wide players deep. He might have had decent reasons for doing this, at least from a defensive point of view. This is why I think he did it:
Southampton like to play with width: they fire long diagonals, and the fullbacks, Tadic and Ward-Prowse like to get crosses in to Austin, who, like Gabbiadini, is good with his head. They also like to shoot from distance.
With Mata and Martial sitting deeper than they would in the 4-3-3/4-1-2-3, they would provide safety first cover against any raids by Bertrand and Soares, and also, when covering, allow Rojo and Valencia to play narrow to provide a shield against strikes from distance. And our fullbacks did play very narrow, acting almost as auxiliary centrebacks at times.
Unfortunately, the defensive side of the gameplan did not work. At all.
Firstly, too often Mata and Martial either weren't in defensive position, or were unable to keep up with or defend successfully against Saints' wingplay. Rojo it seemed sometimes assumed Martial's cover would be forthcoming and went roaming in search of the ball infield and towards the halfway line, which was a complete disaster.
Secondly, although we had numbers in the middle to defend against crosses, there was a huge gaping gap between our flat, outnumbered midfield (although Lingard had a watching brief on Romeu, often one of the Saints wide players would come inside to overload against Herrera and Pogba) and our back four. Tadic had a complete field day in the first half; he must have thought Christmas had come early as he strolled around in front of our defence waiting for a runner to pass him, a player to find space out wide, or a gap to line up a shot.
At the heart of the problem in the first half yesterday was one simple fact: Saints dominated the ball in the middle of the pitch. Now, it would be easy to point the finger at Pogba and Herrera, who both had poor first halves and failed to get any kind of a grip on the game. And Saints' work rate should be commended; there was great intensity and desire in their game.
But for me, the root of the problem was both tactical and familiar (cont.)
4-2-3-1 - enough is enough
posted on 27/2/17
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 5 minutes ago
I'm sure a lot would but that doesn't mean Kante would, or that he would pick United over Chelsea if it was just about money.
-----
No we can't say anything with certainty and what's done is done but my opinion is we could have done better. And I'm pretty sure this will not be the last time we lose out to them and I'll be thinking the same thing.
posted on 27/2/17
comment by Zlatan The King Ibrahimovic (U10026)
posted 25 seconds ago
Which shows they're just as attractive a club to sign for doesn't it?
---
No with Mikel the serenaded his family into swaying his decision... had nothing to do with football or London. They won his heart by being savvy!! While Fergie was there monkeying around...
posted on 27/2/17
I'm not talking about Mikel (I don't care, he's crap), I'm talking about them beating us to players when we ruled the roost. Because, like it or not, Chelsea have been one of the most attractive clubs to sign for in the last decade.
It's not all because they're savy and wanted players more.
posted on 27/2/17
comment by Zlatan The King Ibrahimovic (U10026)
posted 6 seconds ago
I'm not talking about Mikel (I don't care, he's crap), I'm talking about them beating us to players when we ruled the roost. Because, like it or not, Chelsea have been one of the most attractive clubs to sign for in the last decade.
---
And Mikel is the principal/classic example of this. He was not crap when we tried to sign him. He was as highly rated as Messi
I use his case cos unlike most that are just down to pure speculation about who was interested in what and when and how much was on the table etc etc. For the most part the details of this story are well known...
Not saying Chelsea are bad club. Just saying they play the game of transfers way better than us
posted on 27/2/17
As highly rated as Messi.
It's one example you have and you're trying to apply it to every other transfer we lost out to Chelsa, which is dumb.
Fact is, Chelsea are as attractive a destination for players than Manchester United. Some will prefer them, some will prefer us. Not really that hard to work out.
posted on 27/2/17
comment by Zlatan The King Ibrahimovic (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
As highly rated as Messi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seriously... Guess you weren't paying too much attention in those days... Mikel was "pure gold"... till the Alchemist at Chelsea turned him to copper.
Since as you say Chelsea are "as an attractive a destination". Can you please name one player (with concrete sources) that chose us over them?? Don't remember any of the top of my head...
posted on 28/2/17
Problem with 433 for us is that our wingers aren't scoring enough, certainly not consistently enough anyway.
Therefore, if we play 433, we pretty much solely rely on Ibra to score our goals.
At least with a 4231, we have a number 10 who can get himself in goal scoring positions on a regular basis.
posted on 28/2/17
Pretty much the first thing Jose did at the clu was extend his contract which I think shows just how much he rates him.
________________
Perhaps but you can't conclude that.
Carrick was on a one year rolling contract which expired so Jose had only two options: release him or offer him a new contract. There was no third option so you really can't read anything into the fact that it was "the first thing" that Jose did.
Also, Carrick was not first choice for the big games at the start of the season. On the contrary, he seemed to be part of Jose's reserves - playing mostly in cup games. He then played his way into contention for league games after not getting a look-in initially.
While I agree that Carrick is still an important player for us, Jose regards Fellaini as an important player for us too...so that doesn't say an awful lot! He also seems to rate Herrera more highly in that role which none of us would have predicted back in the summer.
posted on 28/2/17
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 16 hours, 22 minutes ago
Chelsea signed the likes of Robben, Ballack, Mikel and Cech, of who we were strongly linked with.
_______________
Very true - and Essien who would have been a great replacement for Keane. Saying that all these players joined Chelsea simply because they "wanted them more" makes no sense and is pure speculation.
Personally, I think it is more likely that money was a key factor - and the fact that Chelsea were more inclined to play ball with players' agents, unlike SAF.
I certainly believe that money was the main reason why Mikel's head was turned. Not because Chelsea gave him a more meaningful cuddle...
posted on 28/2/17
comment by Smalling_Jones_ (U16290)
posted 12 hours, 52 minutes ago
Problem with 433 for us is that our wingers aren't scoring enough, certainly not consistently enough anyway.
Therefore, if we play 433, we pretty much solely rely on Ibra to score our goals.
At least with a 4231, we have a number 10 who can get himself in goal scoring positions on a regular basis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe we rely on Ibra a little more with the 4-3-3, but we've scored more goals when we've played with a three man midfield than when we've played with a two, in the PL at least.
And our second and third highest contributors in terms of goals in Mata and Pogba are both most effective and dangerous playing in one of the advanced midfield roles in the 4-3-3.
If Rooney was still the player he was five years ago, things might be a little different. But we don't really have an out-and-out goalscoring number ten.