Fergie's Big Mistake
Thursday, 28 May 09, 03:08 PM · Comments(13)
by Joel Abraham
What the hell happened to Manchester United?
Some of us expected a thrilling final, and were left disappointed. It was, in truth, a trifle dull. The general consensus seemed to be that if Barca scored first, it would force United to attack and lead to a great game. Instead, the game looked over as soon as Eto'o scored. The Catalans defended through the art of possession, which does not make for exciting football. After all, if the opposition don't have the ball, they can't score. Xavi and Iniesta were at their majestic best, passing around the United midfield as if they weren't there, but the Barca performance wasn't so much spectacular as efficient. Two defensive errors, two goals. Guardiola's side are not dissimilar to Mourinho's Chelsea of 2005.
United seemed to crumble defensively under the pressure of the occasion. Ferdinand and Vidic were both at fault for the goals. The second was utterly horrifying. To allow Xavi of all players that amount of time and space to cross, and to leave Messi completely unmarked in the area was utter suicide.
Fergie blew it. They fell into the Madrid trap rather than following the Chelsea blueprint. Ferguson saw Barca's depleted defence, and subsequently tried to outgun them rather than stifle them. Chelsea showed us how to play against Barca, to hassle Xaviesta, to defend in numbers, to sit deep and crowd out the final third.
Last night, we got Michael Carrick v Xavi, Iniesta and Messi. Carrick is good, but not that good. Anderson lacks the positional discipline to be an effective defensive midfielder, and who knows where Giggs was supposed to be playing? That midfield trio might've worked had they been sitting in front of the defence and closed down the Barca midfield, with Anderson to chase, Carrick to cover and Giggs to intercept. Perhaps with Park in the deeper role instead of Giggs, United may have had more luck.
The front three of Rooney, Ronaldo and Park left United with no real striker, with Ronaldo demanding the ball at every opportunity, shooting on sight, and fading into obscurity as the match progressed. It could be argued that this trio were effective against Arsenal, but it was only effective because Kieran Gibbs fell over and Ronaldo scored a free kick. Perhaps Berbatov should've started centrally, flanked by Rooney and Ronaldo.
At half time, with the problem clear, Ferguson swapped Anderson for Tevez, which proved to be a poor decision. Tevez's first touch has been appalling lately, which one might attribute to lack of playing time, but his introduction certainly didn't help United. The man is clearly unhappy at the club. Rooney on the left wing is something of a mystery, it seems almost designed to limit his involvement in the game, and Rooney does not perform well in big games.
The system was set up to counterattack. The major problem with this being that if you don't score first, you're stuck. They let Barca play their football, which was sheer madness. United were unbeaten in Europe for two years because Ferguson stuck to a cautious 4-5-1. The man is not a tactician, but he is lucky enough to have such a good squad that he can pick the wrong team and still win. Barca, by all accounts, should not have been in the final, having rode their luck against Chelsea and profited from some truly appalling refereeing decisions. Yet United failed to genuinely test a side who had been for the most part outplayed by Chelsea.
Ferguson clearly thought his team was stronger and would win in a pure football face-off. Had Ronaldo scored any of his early chances and United won 1-0, then we'd be hailing Fergie as a genius. Unfortunately, there was such a gulf in class in the midfield battle that Barca were in control for most of the game. Against Xaviesta, the two best midfielders in the world, who've been playing together since they were 11 years old, United were powerless to resist.
Chelsea afforded Barca plenty of possession, but didn't allow them any penetration. This is how you beat teams who like to keep the ball. If you defend in numbers, the opposition will pass the ball from side to side for long enough that they run out of ideas and give the ball away. I said yesterday that if Ferguson set out his team to stifle Barca, United would win. Unfortunately for him, he did the exact opposite.
Like this blog? Help spread the word: 
-
Amaster said:My favourite female gladiator is Lightning and my favourite male is Hunter. :) ...
tomcruise said:Its very good .. I like it
student loans consolidation
On Wenger's experiment: The good, the bad and the Verminator
-
studentsofthegame
GB
We really should be getting paid for this.
13 Comments · Add yours
what happened to man u is something called beautiful football
pure class is another term for it
united just couldnt stop barca
no one could've stopped them from claiming the cup
they played football the way it was meant to be played
No denying that, passing and possession proved to be more effective than the kick and run style often seen in England, and is much more attractive. Hopefully Spain and Barca have proved that this style is a good recipe for success. Having said that, I still think Ferguson was naive to try and take on Barca at their own game. Not to say that I wanted United to be negative, I'm just surprised that they weren't. Also, you can't legislate for the shocking defending on display last night.
Who knows what would have happened had Fergie chosen a different line up... maybe Barca would still beat them with their be-a-u-tiful game!
Yet, there is no denying Sir Alex made all the mistakes that led to the poor performance of the Devils. Ronaldo should have played what he's best at - winger, and I personally think that putting Giggs was a mistake: he was useless on the pitch. And what happened to Vidic (at fault for the first goal) or Ferdinand (for the second) will remain a mystery.
I'm still happy, cause Barca is the champion, and Liverpool were avenged... :) warms my heart...
"Some of us expected a thrilling final, and were left disappointed. It was, in truth, a trifle dull."
"The Catalans defended through the art of possession, which does not make for exciting football."
Probably the poorest evaluation of football I have ever heard in my life. Only a a total fool would call Barcelona's tactics "not exciting" or "dull." We get it, Joel, you are bitter about Man U losing (or Chelsea for that matter), but seriously, don't try to post a blog claiming that the final was boring simply because the favorites lost to a truly superior team that they were expected to roll over. You are one of the only people in the world who would have the audacity to claim Barcelona's game is not beautiful. Which most likely stems from your general lack of knowledge.
In your opinion, Man U should have played the same way Chelsea did, with a 10 man defense and a single striker who plays off the counter-attack, a style criticized in modern football for being unsportsman like because of its disregard for the basic elements of football. Yet you claim that Barcelona, the team with the best passing game in the world, is boring? Not only do they pass, but they incorporate every aspect of football in to their tactics. Dribbling, shooting, physical defending, were all present in the final. But to you, an "exciting" game would have been to play defensive for 80 minutes and spend only about 10 minutes actually trying to attack? Absolutely ridiculous.
Your claim to neutrality has officially gone out the window with this article, along with whatever reputation you aspired to of having a basic knowledge of football tactics.
Congratulations Barcelona, for playing real football.
When did I call Barca's tactics dull? Where did I say they were boring? The match, as a competitive spectacle, became dull because of United's poor performance and inability to win possession. I'm not bitter about Barca's win. On the contrary, I'm an Arsenal fan so I was jumping for joy seeing United get a beating. But you can't deny that after Eto'o scored, the match ceased to be competitive. I think Barca are great and should be lauded for their attractive style of play. That's not the issue here. I was criticising United for allowing them to have the ball and dominate possession. You've completely missed the point, so in future I suggest you read these pieces carefully and make sure you understand them before commenting.
What happened to MU was the usual scenario happening to anyone daring to outplay or outsmart the best midfield you can get around nowadays.
The ironic part in all this it's when Barca or Spain (same guys in the midfield) play you get the impression than the team in front "did not play", or were just "not in a good day". Defenders look clueless, even guys like Vidic or Ferdinand, midfields with plenty of experience like Giggs or Scholes look old. When in fact it's just than they can do nothing about it. You run 80 minutes behind guys who seem to play with a ball made in scratch or kicking it out of range when you reach them. And not only technical guys, but smart and fast. Happened to Manchester, Madrid, Germany, Russia..
Russia. They were the new favourite during the Euro after their victory on Netherland. Hiddink who is their coach and got kicked all over the place during the Euro, 4-1 and 3-0, learned the lesson : Park the bus.
Xavi and Iniesta are truly the best.. Whenever they can be supported by a Yaya Toure or a Senna, and deliver to Messi/Eto'o or Villa/Torres, I pity the team in front.
2 studentsofthegame:
Well, I got your point... and agree with you. I actually dosed off for a couple of minutes. But was lucky enough to wake up JUST before the Messi goal - that one was unbelievable!!!
(Due to major time difference the final started at 00:45 local time...)
- I agree generally with the blog Joel, although I really enjoyed the way Barca kept possession (not exciting admittedly but still good to watch).
- Obviously you're right about how to play against Barca, Chelsea proved that regardless of whether you think they were unlucky to be knocked out or not.
- Giggs was obviously a massive mistake, I def would have played Berbatov but that's more coz I really rate him. Probably would have played Scholes and not played Park even though I like him.
- Is it a slight worry for United fans that without Darren Fletcher the midfield looked genuinely poor? Or is that the measure of just how good 'Xaviesta' are?
- Gotta love that time difference :)
Wow...all this crap about Manutd should had done this,that...blah blah...if chelsea or liverpool played then....ifs and buts..pfffh!
This was a final ok, manutd are not so dumb..
Barca were the better team and they fully deserved to be the champions...Remember Liverpool also were beaten in the final by the better team (AC MILAN)last two seasons ago.
Hindsight's a killer. Admittedly it's a waste of time speculating on what would've happened had other players started, but I think the whole tactical setup was way off.
A lot of interesting points of view. I'll stick my neck out now and argue that Fergie did not make a huge mistake with his team selection and did not get it tactically wrong.
The bottom line is that there are two ways to play a football match - sit back and counter or press high and make the play. We know which way Barca favour. The problem with playing Barca is that if they score you're in massive trouble so most teams (much like chelsea) decide to defend with plenty behind the ball and hope to knick a goal on the break. As Mike pointed out earlier, Chelsea played this almost to perfection. However, in the first ten mins United went completely the other way, something Guardiola himself admitted:
"I didn't expect manchester to press high up the pitch. They pressed 4 against 4 and it caused us problems for the first pass. The goal from eto'o was marvelous for us."
This quote is taken from his post-match interview with ITV. The reason this is so important is simple - Ferguson knew that if they conceeded a goal they were in trouble. Irrespective of whether or not they had the players available to play like chelsea, if they chose to set up defensively and conceeded a goal then they would never be able to get back in the game. Therefore, the only way to win was to press Barca's unfamiliar defence high up the pitch and score first.
Here's the important bit - yes they allowed Xavi to waltz through their midfield and slip in Eto'o for the first goal. But when Eto'o received the ball he was in no better position than the two or three chances that Henry was presented with in the Nou Camp. The difference is that where Alex blocked, Vidic failed and Fergie's plan was undone. That is not a failure of tactics, it's an individual error that ruined a gameplan that was working. Once they scored the game was up no matter how they played - hold on and they grind you down, attack and they get you on the break eventually. Fergie got it right and was unlucky.
The goals were Vidic and Ferdinand's fault respectively - no one denies that. But really... it is impossible for each and every player of the team to perform as poorly as they did against Barcelona. That OR United footballers are real wimps...
how can you ever compare this Barca team to any Chelsea team?