I finally analysed Argentina [after their 2-0 win against Austria] and 👏

All teams have their flaws but Scaloni's game-model is impressive and incredibly unique. It's hard to make sense of if you're used to watching European football.

Below are some findings // concepts: 1. Attract to decieve.

“Attracting to deceive’ is a central principle in South American football. Over time, many teams globally have adopted common top-level European approaches but Scaloni’s Argentina have stuck to their roots.

Watching Argentina what jumps out is how many players come short to surround the ball – unlike many top European sides who instead ask players to remain in zones to stretch the opposition.

Scaloni’s willingness to have his players crowd the ball-player provide Argentina with overloads around the ball.

Against zonal defences, the numerical overloads help Argentina establish uncontested possession which helps them bring the ball up the pitch as a unit – rather than as a team that is stretched.

Man United looked better and sharper than Palace in the second half.

Part of that will be down to fatigue in Palace's players.

But here are some interesting changes United implemented (intentional or not) that helped them dominate the second half.

Analysis thread 🧵 Zirkzee struggled to make the ball stick in the first half under intense pressure from Lacroix but looked sharper in the second half.

He made numerous sharp runs into the left flank finding separation from his marker and with smart touches, brought team-mates into play.

This appeared intentional with 47% of all of United’s attacking moves in the second half going down their left.

what Jim Ratcliffe and Manchester United’s Leadership can learn from Steve Jobs.

Words about that interview, displays of incompetence, the value of team-building, the lack of novel ingenuity, and what Man United need to turn things around.

THREAD. The Ratcliffe interview highlights one thing above anything else to me.

At an establishment as massive as Manchester United, I’d assume, like many that the intelligence, deep thought, and novel ingenuity on board scaled up as the size of the business did.

Hearing Sir Jim Ratcliffe speak, it feels as if United look and sound like they’re run by the most normal of people and not in a good way.

A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF RUBEN AMORIM’S PRINCIPLES AND GAME-MODEL.

In this thread I provide an overview of his principles and game model broadly.

More in-depth pieces coming 🔜

THREAD 🧵👇 Ruben Amorim’s Game Model:

Shape:

• 3-1-6/3-2-5 in settled attacking possession

• 4-2-2-2 in deep build-up

• 5-2-3/5-4-1 out of possession

Some people think this United system is guaranteed to fail. Others have faith

I think this United system in theory could work under ideal conditions

But I have concerns about a few things, namely the system’s sustainability and repeatability

UMIR’S THOUGHTS ON ETH YEAR 3 🧵👇 It feels like at its best final-form Man United could be something like Flick’s Bayern, ten Hag’s Ajax, or parts of Klopp’s Liverpool.

The biggest problem ISN’T the theoretical system (at its best)

There are multiple other concerns I have.

I wrote about the various attacking solutions Manchester City could look to use to get at some of Inter Milan's habits.

The piece is ~3000 words and I'd encourage you to read it but I wanted to repurpose and share the salient points in a short and simple way too.

1/

https://twitter.com/umirf1/status/1667424847557718021

1. Onana: 🔝 GK
• Weakest saving shots *high and to his right* esp after shifting weight to his left. Think about long shot to near post moving in from left?
• Punches crosses
• Near post movement w/ low crosses potentially valuable vs Onana
• Weaker passing towards the left