Liverpool 4-1 Chelsea: Tactical Analysis, Review and Diagrams
By
(Featured Columnist) on May 9, 2012
Alex Livesey/Getty Images
Congratulations to Liverpool for ending their season on a high and treating the Anfield crowd to the feast of goals that have been threatening to arrive all year long.
Kenny Dalglish served up a treat by throwing players forward in an outrageously attacking lineup—albeit in a meaningless and pressure-free game. In contrast, Roberto Di Matteo rested most of the players he'll use in the UEFA Champions League final, resulting in a rocky performance from his fringe players.
This game saw two very different attacking philosophies in place and one clearly prevailed over the other. Here is how the two teams panned out in the attacking third.
Daniel Agger's Overload
At first I was shocked by Agger's inclusion at left-back. We know he can play well there but from the way Liverpool shaped themselves right from the start, the Dane was never the obvious choice.
It was a master stroke though, as Dalglish sought to create a two vs. one situation down the left flank, with Paulo Ferreira bowing under both constant pressure and lack of match fitness.
With Maxi Rodriguez occupying Ferreira, the right-most central midfielder of Chelsea's three had to drop back and cover to even out the contest. In most cases this was Oriol Romeu.
When the Reds attacked down the left, Chelsea's defensive line and shape was absolutely perfect—except for Michael Essien dropping far too deep.
Exploiting the Space
With Florent Malouda lost, Essien almost stepping on John Terry's toes and Romeu dragged out of formation, Jordan Henderson and Jonjo Shelvey wasted no time exploiting the acres of space in front of Chelsea's penalty area.
Andy Carroll would occupy both centre-backs attention until Luis Suarez pulled on the shoulder of Terry—a move that all but guaranteed space and time for others outside the penalty box.
It is absolutely worth noting that Henderson and Shelvey had cracking games, moving up and down together in a midfield tandem that was organised, solid and dangerous.
However, it was the setup and movement of the players around them that allowed them such liberties. At times, it looked like a 4-2-4 or a 3-3-4 with Agger and Stewart Downing pushed right up level with the strikers.
Henderson and Shelvey moved up and down the pitch together with a real understanding—the central midfield was perfectly shaped and staggered throughout most of the game.
Chelsea's Lack of Fluidity and Ideas
In stark contrast, the Blues seemed unambitious in attack and disjointed during their build up. They grabbed a goal and hit the woodwork but they never looked dangerous from open play.
As the diagram shows, Fernando Torres was all alone. I was surprised to see Ramires somewhere near the right wing rather than in the midfield trio and he wasn't his usual dynamic self.
Daniel Sturridge was far from effective and often got marooned out on the left-hand side. In an attacking sense, Essien was nowhere to be seen.
They were disorganised in defence and thus disorganised when trying to launch an attack. Had Ramires and Malouda swapped, they would have fared much better in bringing the ball out of their own half whilst maintaining a solid shape.
Chelsea weren't really in the game except for a 10-minute spell at the start of the second half and Liverpool peppered Ross Turnbull with 23 shots.
Conclusion
Roberto Di Matteo tried a few players in a few positions and I'm sure he was seeing how they'd fare in case he needed to alter his UEFA Champions League final squad.
Were Chelsea right to throw away the league?
· Yes
43.3%
· No
56.7%
Total votes: 478
Daniel Sturridge did nothing to force his way into his manager's thoughts, but the main problem for Chelsea lay in Malouda going missing and the sheer unexpectedness of Liverpool's brutal attacking intent.
Chelsea lost this battle on the flanks. By including Ferreira and Ryan Bertrand, they forfeited any composure or structural build up on the flanks, leaving both "wingers" (if you can call them that) without support for the majority of the game.
Agger, Downing and Glen Johnson did a fantastic job of pinning Chelsea's full-backs in their own half, resulting in gaping spaces and a lack of help for Torres.
It should also be noted that Downing had a good game on the right while Henderson excelled in the centre. You shouldn't see the young Englishman being shoved out onto the flank too much any more.
No comments:
Post a Comment