Mancini Coaching Article by Peter North

the gentleman's club is a fantastic notion. really, nikk, you couldn't have invoked any more intoxicating names than Liedholm and Robson, Maldini and Baresi! easy charm, understated style, don't single out individuals for criticism, don't pursue grudges in the public eye, share the credit.... yes, it fits all the managers named in your post.

it also seems to be a fit for our owners, marwood and jim cassell..... and harks back to the era of Joe Mercer. as for Cook... well, at least he's not kenyon. anyway, it's as far from Fergie's routine bullying of his players and officials as you can get... what I'm saying is, it feels like the identity of the club has become more distinct, we can now claim it is responsible benefactor and his gentlemen vs the hyper-capitalist carpet baggers and fergie.

btw can anyone tell me what the hell is supposed to be going on at Lazio these days? Seems to me the el presidenté wants shooting, and the situation with the manager reminds me of Hughes....
 
stockportblue said:
masterwig said:
If Sven was such a tactical genius he would never have had to admit we'd been 'found out' and had no plan B.

Cant fault you mate.The test for Mancini will be when other premiership managers find an effective way of playing against the system-i.e quick switches of play from flank to flank and making use of the players that drift between the defensive lines.

This is my biggest fear of the 'sliding defence' system that Mancini uses.

Valencia TORE us apart in the first leg, and punished us with the goal. We leave so much space on the left and we don't have a positionally aware LB who is fit enough to take it on. Garrido is a bad fit for the system.
 
Damocles said:
stockportblue said:
Cant fault you mate.The test for Mancini will be when other premiership managers find an effective way of playing against the system-i.e quick switches of play from flank to flank and making use of the players that drift between the defensive lines.

This is my biggest fear of the 'sliding defence' system that Mancini uses.

Valencia TORE us apart in the first leg, and punished us with the goal. We leave so much space on the left and we don't have a positionally aware LB who is fit enough to take it on. Garrido is a bad fit for the system.

my reading was that he effectively halted that by lining up the three DM's, who were able to intercept the cross field balls.

and for my money, the defence isnt really 'sliding', it tends to compress towards the centre, with the dm's covering for the fullbacks.
 
bizzbo said:
Damocles said:
This is my biggest fear of the 'sliding defence' system that Mancini uses.

Valencia TORE us apart in the first leg, and punished us with the goal. We leave so much space on the left and we don't have a positionally aware LB who is fit enough to take it on. Garrido is a bad fit for the system.

my reading was that he effectively halted that by lining up the three DM's, who were able to intercept the cross field balls.

Yeah, but the problem is that they played 5 in the middle to go man for man on our three DMs. There were times when their 3 would move a bit more forward and we either had to have our fullbacks take their wingers on their own, or sacrifice a man in the centre, which left some space. Without Tevez in the team, this whole system can fall apart against a 5 man midfield. That is presuming Ade is post-Arsenal and not pre-Arsenal game.

Either way, it isn't every time that we stopped those balls, and we expended an awful lot of energy without much result in the first 20 minutes. If we don't stop Giggs/Evra or Silva/Valencia they all have the passing ability to punish us with those types of balls.

Again though, it all relies on speed, which is why we have a full compliment of pacey players on the pitch at any one time.
 
Damocles said:
bizzbo said:
my reading was that he effectively halted that by lining up the three DM's, who were able to intercept the cross field balls.

Yeah, but the problem is that they played 5 in the middle to go man for man on our three DMs. There were times when their 3 would move a bit more forward and we either had to have our fullbacks take their wingers on their own, or sacrifice a man in the centre, which left some space. Without Tevez in the team, this whole system can fall apart against a 5 man midfield. That is presuming Ade is post-Arsenal and not pre-Arsenal game.

Either way, it isn't every time that we stopped those balls, and we expended an awful lot of energy without much result in the first 20 minutes. If we don't stop Giggs/Evra or Silva/Valencia they all have the passing ability to punish us with those types of balls.

Again though, it all relies on speed, which is why we have a full compliment of pacey players on the pitch at any one time.

yeah, the first 20 were where valencia recieved two or three cross field passes in his stride. that's why it was changed around. rather than give the fullback a dedicated side-midfielder to help him out, cut out the passes. the cross field ball to valencia was highlighted in the guardian by as a key tactic. from the change being made as soon as the goal was scored, until the last twenty, I think our energy was used properly. we also moved bellamy directly against theit right back... and whether it's neville or da silva, that will be by far our best chance of a breakaway goal this time too.

actually I think tomorrow may be a little less fraught than the first leg. defending relatively deep antagonises your own support, the nerves go, and you end up clearing the ball to the opponents 9/10, pushing you further back. hopefully at the swamp, there will be no distractions or anxiety, and we can hold them in the right places.
 
Great great thread. Pretty detailed and a lot analysis were spot on.

Regarding to your 4-4-2 formation deployed at Inter, Mancini like to use two central midfielder who are more defensive minded, while relying creativity and attack on RM/LM. One of the CM would step right in front of defense (aka DM) while the other one steps in front and act as CM. Cambiasso was playing the holding midfielder role while Vieira was station in front. During the game, if Inter goes on defensive, you will see both Cambiasso and Vieira in the DM role.
 
Thinking about it, what happens if somebody plays the doubling up defence model against us, but with 2 DMs and a flair player in the centre of the park?

Doesn't that pretty much bugger us, as our wingers will be doubled up on, and our attackers will be caught dropping deep while they still have a man free?
 
Have confidence in Mancio. has always had the ability to change style of play, when necessary, to better adapt to the opponent (this is a feature of Italian football ;)
 
Yesterday's excellent Telegraph article by Rory Smith belongs here too

JANUARY 26TH, 2010
ITALIAN STEREOTYPE DEGRADES ROBERTO MANCINI AND SERIE A

Rarely do Manchester City fans find reason to complain when their side has overcome their all-conquering rivals from down the Mancunian Way.

Seeing Manchester United’s Red Devils swamped by the sky-blue sea is such a treasured occasion that it seems churlish to find fault with the method by which it is achieved. Perhaps, then, it is a mark of how much the outlook of City’s fans has been changed by the billions of Sheikh Mansour, by the excitement which surrounds the club, that last Tuesday’s Carling Cup semi-final win was deemed, by some, insufficient.

The general theory seemed to be that United, rocking back on their heels after Carlos Tevez first equalised and then fired City ahead, were there for the taking. Instead, City, lining up with three defensive midfielders – Pablo Zabaleta, Nigel de Jong and Gareth Barry – failed to go for the jugular, content merely to protect what they had. A 2-1 win leaves the tie as finely poised as the balance of power in what is, arguably, England’s greatest footballing city (that, though, is another blog, for another day).

Consensus had it that there was only one reason for City’s reticence to pour forward. “He’s Italian,” bemoaned Gary Lineker after the game. Roberto Mancini, that is. He’s from Jeda, you see, in Italy, and it is a widely-believed fact that football managers from Italy are all defensive cynicism and impeccable tailoring.
Lineker, obviously, is not the only person to have bought into the idea that Italian football is inherently cautious. If he was, he would not have said it, the increasingly orange former Leicester front-man being famously afraid of original thought. It is a stereotype which endures from the 1960s heyday of catenaccio, and it is, as with all cliches, based partially in truth. Nereo Rocco, who would go on to manage Milan, introduced the system – first pioneered at Servette in Switzerland by Karl Rappan – at Padova in the 1950s, before Helenio Herrera perfected it with Inter. Pure catenaccio is a simple construct, achieved by playing a defensive sweeper behind a three- or four-man defensive line, with diligent midfielders employed to track runners. Defenders mark man-to-man, the sweeper picks up loose balls, and players double up where possible. It is the Ronseal of tactical systems. Done well, catenaccio, quite literally, closes the door and bolts it shut.

That is not to say that Herrera’s Inter or Rocco’s Milan were not capable of great artistry when going forward. Inter won the 1965 European Cup final 1-0 with a team which included Jair, Sandro Mazzola and Luis Suarez, all fine attacking players. Yet the image endures: Italian teams grinding their way to success. Even 40 years on, we cannot escape the stereotype. Whenever an Italian side, or in City’s case, a side managed by an Italian defends against more attack-minded opposition, the old cliche is trotted out. Where the Premier League stands for excitement, passion and flair, Serie A means boring, defensive, cynical.
Such a stereotype misleads. The Premier League, it is fair to say, enjoys a certain tactical uniformity. Most sides play a 4-4-2 – which, as everyone in England knows, is the correct formation – or, possibly, the old 4-5-1 which becomes a 4-3-3 in attack (except that it doesn’t, it’s still a 4-5-1, the players are just standing in different positions).

A few renegades play a 4-2-3-1, which is just a 4-5-1 with an attacking midfielder. The value prized above all, as Robinho would testify, is work rate, and industry. Fans will politely applaud a step-over, or a pirouette, but they will howl derision at a player who ducks a tackle or fails to be elbowed in the face when competing for a goal kick. If football is war, English football is still, largely, two groups of woad-painted barbarians running at each other really fast.

To extend a metaphor to the point of absurdity, in Italy, if football is war, it can be a phalanx against guerrillas, or two sides fighting to a standstill in the trenches, or infantry against cavalry, or whatever. Just as English teams were lining up in the W-M formation when Rocco was honing catenaccio, Serie A continues to leave the Premier League behind in terms of innovation. It may not be played with the same frenetic pace – and only a fool would suggest it is as blood-pumpingly exciting as the English game – but tactically, Italy is the world’s crucible.

It was at Roma that Luciano Spalletti first experimented with the 4-6-0 formation which Sir Alex Ferguson has tried to implement at Old Trafford. It sounds defensive, but it really isn’t. It is fluid, and reliant on players of great technical ability. Udinese have played a 3-4-3 for several years, enjoying considerable success for a team of scant resources. Genoa play the same system, and find themselves in the Europa League. Bari play a 4-3-3, a true 4-3-3, earning themselves the nickname Baricelona in the Italian press. Napoli currently occupy a Champions League slot and have been known to play a 3-5-2. Remember that? And they don’t even have Vegard Heggem.

It is in Italy, too, that the role of the trequartista was perfected. Teams continue to find room for a playmaker, freed from defensive responsibility, who is tasked with infusing their play with a dash of imagination. The more common term for the role is fantasista. Another Ronseal moment. It was the position which gave the world Gianfranco Zola, Roberto Baggio, Alessandro Del Piero, Francesco Totti and that lad at Sampdoria, the one who went to Lazio, had a spell at Leicester. Oh, yes. Roberto Mancini.

The trequartiste still thrive in Italy, though they have, admittedly, been given less licence to defend as and when they fancy. Stevan Jovetic, at Fiorentina, is as good an example as any, while hopes are high for Sebastian Giovinco of Juventus. The closest the Premier League has are Steven Gerrard and Wayne Rooney, and we still struggle to think of them as anything other than a midfielder and a striker. Small wonder, when a player as imaginative, as gifted as Mancini comes to coach in England and we naturally assume he must be defensively-minded, just because he’s Italian.

Oh, and for the record, I fully expect Mancini to play on the counter tomorrow night. But not because of where he was born, but because football is about winning. After all, there’s nothing as entertaining as a victory.
 
Damocles said:
stockportblue said:
Cant fault you mate.The test for Mancini will be when other premiership managers find an effective way of playing against the system-i.e quick switches of play from flank to flank and making use of the players that drift between the defensive lines.

This is my biggest fear of the 'sliding defence' system that Mancini uses.

Valencia TORE us apart in the first leg, and punished us with the goal. We leave so much space on the left and we don't have a positionally aware LB who is fit enough to take it on. Garrido is a bad fit for the system.

They bloody did this again!!
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.