Man City’s build-up against Liverpool was very successful. For sure, Liverpool’s ineffective high press played a role, but here are two important things Man City was significantly better at compared to previous games: 1) Double pivot positioning: Rodri and Stones always tried to… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
2) Tempo manipulation during progression: Once the team broke a pressure line they passed the middle third with high speed and quickly come to final third where the opponent was not fully organized yet and allowed many 1v1s.
Few observations on Arsenal–City game, but before going deeper, I should tell I understand the frustration of people not enjoying the game. Tbh although I am obsessed with Guardiola’s Arteta’s brand of football, enjoy following their teams, I also didn’t enjoy the game a lot.
I think the main reason why the game was less enjoyable is that both coaches were fine with 0-0. City wanted to control the game, and Arsenal mostly wanted to close the space, both to minimize the risk.
Anyways, let’s go into a bit details:
Pep started the game from almost where he left off last time against Arsenal. He continued emphasizing the central overloads. He just preferred more players during build-up and reduced the tempo further, which makes sense when they didn’t have Rodri.
Guardiola’s structure in possession was certainly not overthinking. To overcome 5-3-2, you must create these overloads and City’s structure provided advantages over Inter’s structure on the paper, but implementation was a bit below City’s average.
Even after winning CL, Guardiola slightly complained about how they couldn’t use the space at/around Stones’ zone. Against City’s 3-1-5-1, Inter’s 5-3-2 mid/high press was a bit risky. We saw Dzeko was located at the center and Lautaro was at the left side at the first line.
The placement of 2nd line players was interesting. Calhanoglu was between Rodri and Stones, but mostly on Rodri, Brozovic was on no 10, Barella was between KdB and Ake, but mostly on Ake.
Just watched the game again. I am considering to work on it further and write something longer, but just a few notes:
1-City's high press in 1H was very good but they got really tired towards the end of the game.
2-Inter's press was surprisingly risky. As City overloaded left side, a huge space opened at right inner corridor but City couldn't switch the ball there effectively.
3-Using KdB deeper at left half space and Gundogan at 10 was a mistake. They switched around min 25. If KdB could've played a bit longer as no 10, City could've scored much sooner.
The line-up was a bit confusing but structures were almost the expected structure for City both in and out of possession.
The only thing I am surprised regarding structure is that City are using 3-1 at deep build-up, but it looks like it is to bait wide CM and create space for no 8 behind him. I still have some question marks with the personnel selection though.
Firstly, starting Gundo as no 10, KdB at left half space didn't work well. Maybe if City could've built more from RHS, it would've been a strong option at switch plays, but they couldn't (or didn't) specifically try that.
City might have used the same structure in possession and the exact same lineup of 1st leg, but with totally different intention; destroying their opponent.
All of us had talked about how cautious Pep was in the 1stleg. We had all looked for that extra man coming from behind… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Position is a communicative element in football, and City players are masters of this language. In that sense, De Bruyne is the reference for all teammates. His movement tells his teammates what they want to do in attacking third, while his dynamism (lateral mobility) makes the… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Switch plays to use +1s or advantageous 1v1s at far field, one of Pep’s trademark plays, were again extremely useful yesterday.