MANCHESTER CITY VS JUVENTUS . 1-2.

now yesterday city played juventus and were beaten . i read yaya toure's statement just now where he said that juventus were lucky to beat city and i do have to agree with him quite a bit but then i too have to disagree with him on certain things . city even though were good and enjoyed the better possession were not able to open juventus up . city had chances and their failure to convert was one of the reason why juve were the winner and why city didnt had any points on the board .
now lets talk about the game city started with a 4-2-3-1 or say 4-4-1-1 the way you want to take it . city had sagna.kompany,mangala and kolarov at the back while toure and fernandiniho were in front of the back four . nasri and sterling on the wings with silva behind bony having a free role . juventus started with  a 4-2-1-3 but on the field they were 4-5-1 with moratta dropping on sagna on defense and pogba sliding besides sturaro and hernanes . now juventus started with game with trying to press city high but quickly receded back in their own half on defense .city were playing slow building offense and they had a reason because nasri was playing and juve were just sitting back and hitting city on the counter .  on the defense city had all 10 players behind the ball with morata dropping on sagna to help defense.on other time's you would see juve's all players in their own half cramming space and letting the city's CB's ( centre backs )  plenty of time on the ball . if you take out the statistics then you would see that city's CB's had the most touches and had the highest completion ratio of passess completed ratio and that is because juventus just allowed
city's CB's to have the ball and not press . they were content to sit deep and defend and waited for the ball to cross the mid line and let the ball be passed to the wingers or either silva or bony and then press them and dispossess them off the ball . juve gave no space between the lines to city and did defende very well . while juve did this on the offense they were not very well . they wanted to play from the black but were not able to put together a good move . i would like to give you an example . juve's evra  would pass the ball to pogba who in turn will pass back to evra . now city were trying to close juve down quickly and press them high on the pitch and when tried to involve the third player say morata he would be dispossessed by fernandiniho who was very good in this match. i would love to fernandiniho and see how many time he dispossessed moratta and how many times he made interceptions and how many tackles he won . fernandiniho was good and was the best city player on the pitch in this game .he not only kept moratta quite but also kept sturaro on toes and nicked ball off him a couple of times .  now even though juve were not able to put 4 or 5 passing move together but whenever they could they found the space between the lines but were not able to exploit it very well . now the reason why juve were finding space between the lines because city's centre backs were kept occupied by manzukic while moratta moved from right to centre on offense . now city's midfielders were not getting help from silva who i suppose lacked a man in the middle . they had the job of stopping the offense as well as pressing juve so they were getting quite high on the pitch . so two or three times cuadrado and moratta found space in front of the back four but were not able to utilize it properly . now juve were keen to move the ball from the left and there was a reason for that . they had pogba there who was arguably juventus best player . plus they had moratta dropping in trying to overload that side . now the other reason is that kolarov was getting tight on cuadrado and was continuously nicking the ball off him and it is another statistics worth seeing as to how many times he nicked ball off cuadrado . kolarov was good on reading the game and came out quick from the back to press cuadrado and dispossess him.
in the first half city had more clear chances than juve and error or judgement made them loose that . now city were slow in their offense and it was because of the fact that nasri was playing now whenever nasri plays he slows the game . this fact was very well noted by the commentators . what it meant was that it gave juve the necessary time to adjust their shape and deny city any space to work with . now another thing is sterling needs to learn is that he needs to understand as to when he need to take on defender and when to pass . here sterling was loosing the physical battle and should had passed the ball quickly rather than holding up and trying to beat juve players . instead a quick passing on the run would had been better . he and silva did loose a no. of physical battle in the first half and it should be lessen to pellegrini to make the necessary adjustments .
now in the second half city scored on the corner and chilleni wanted a foul . now it has to be foul and it cant be because chilleni never tried to jump and contest so on the jump naturally kompany's hand  were going to be on chilleni's back and to be honest chilleni does this all the time and cries foul so the referee were right to award the goal . now in the second half the same pattern continued but there was a change with pogba coming more infield and collecting the ball and trying to release manzukic . now city were playing a dangerous game they were trying to hold a bit of a high line they were trying to hold a line just off the box . now the warning signs were already there when in the first half on cuadrado's free kick pogba was caught offside by a nick. so pogba was trying to pick out manzukic and on one such attempt he found manzukic who scored . now i found mangala a bit stupid in this . instead of trying to win the ball just try to stick with manzukic and make it difficult for him and then try to nick it off him . the second came when bonucci just lobbed the ball beyond the back four and which manzukic headed and it fell kindly to moratta who had earlier missed a good chance but here he just curled it past hart . now i had talked about the space in front the back four and lack of protection from the midfielders or that they were getting caught up the pitch and it was the case with moratta's goal . had anybody been near then he wouldnt had got that easy chance .
to be honest i think city should had started with navas who provides the necessary pace to the game and would caused problems . nasri slows down the game and the commentators were constantly asking for change in for of navas for nasri but it never happened . another thing is how can bony perform when he had very little service and he was still quite decent winning quite an amount of aerial challenges and nut megging bonucci to open himself for a good chance so i wont criticize him . i thought that .
now i want to complement Allegri not for tactics which were negative and coming to city for a draw but because on the 85th min when cuadrado tried to dribble an opponent insteaf of passing that time alllegri got furious and should be because the ball went out of play for a throw in and the opposition could win the ball quickly on the throw win and they had ample time to score .allegri didnt want to give the ball to city and wanted it to move around and wanted to pass quickly forward so as to push city back . i think it was good on part of him and him shouting and shoving cuadrado was sign of him being involved in the game . 

MAN UTD VS LIVERPOOL 3-1

now yesterday utd played liverpool at old trafford . utd were with rooney while coutiniho was the notable absentee for liverpool . utd started the game with a 4-2-3-1 formation while the same was with liverpool . now in the first half liverpool choose to sit back while utd pressed liverpool very nicely to get the ball back and liverpool couldnt just put  a move together . the highlight of utd pressing was the work done by herrera,schweninsteiger and carrick . herrera would start the first press and other would join in . the most important fact was the game controlled by carrick on both offense and defense . they controlled the tempo of the game . now the disappointing fact for both the teams were for utd was memphis who was hopeless . he never threatned his fullback his attitude was hopeless and he gave the ball away two or three times which was carelessness . now why memphis role in the utd team is important is because he is one who provides the actual width to the attack he remains wide like a natural winger and is suppose to beat the fullback on the outside . he is important because mata come inside denying the natural width on the right side . but yesterday memphis was just hopeless he never troubled clyne and he always passed the ball back or sideways which was disappointing . just as memphis was pathetic i would say liverpool failed to put a move together and the reason being that liverpool players this season had been holding the ball too much.  just because of this fact rodgers had not been to put a proper offense together . it can be said that it had been rodgers inability to gel them together and create a proper offense .

now i want to complement van gal he saw what was lacking in the utd team and he just made the necessary change . he bought young was depay in the same position with no formation change . as soon as young came on the field he did what was asked of him . he ran on clyne with the ball and got a foul from which utd scored the first goal . the goal was the highlight just because the way it was taken . utd duly scored the second with herrera in the run of play but to me young was the real impetus if you had seen then he passed a very good ball shaw over the player who fumbled slightly had he had a clean technique then he would made a run in the box and tried to pick out some one . to be honest the other hero for man utd was carrick untill he was on the field utd were just in control of the game and liverpool had no chance or sniff at the goal . carrick's substitution did helped liverpool a little who then went with other plan they started to go direct to benteke who was faboulous on that day winning every aerial duel with smalling and was the only bright spark in the liverpool lineup . since benteke was good utd went compact and this offered liverpool space wide on the flanks and it created problem for utd . it was benteke who scored a very good goal .carricks sub presented liverpool with chance but utd bought martial and he just closed the game with a good solo goal .
now about the players for utd carrick,herrera,schwenisteiger ,darmian and blind were the very good . blind was supposed to be the weak link in the utd defense but he handeled benteke well scored and most importantly he can pass very well from the back which is very important assets for utd . carrick and schweni had a very good partnership in the middle and herrera even though is not the natural no. 10 but he keeps the game ticking and has a very good postional sense . darmian had been the unsung hero for utd . young too was very good and did his role nicely . i would really expect valencia being the chance in place of mata so that utd can just fully stretch the oppoents and valencia can deliver good balls from the wing  and cover darmian very well . to be honest i fear for deapy who can another expensive mistake .
for liverpool benteke was the only sparkling star other were just poor .
to be honest when utd bought martial the real reason why wenger was disappointed because he knew martial was a very good player and martial went to utd rather than to arsenal was the real reason why he was angry . 

EVERTON VS CHELSEA .

now yesterday chelsea played everton . now chelsea played with 4-2-3-1 while everton played with the same formation . both the team play deep their centre backs dont like to come out of the defense instead they try to stand their ground and defend .
now let us talk about the game since the lineups are known to everybody . now from the start if you had seen then you would see that everton were trying to work out the chelsea's left side for that they had kone high up the pitch very close to lukaku who had shifted little bit left to be close to kone . now in the last game we had seen that there was a considerable difference between kone and lukaku so both were not able to find each other so martinez identified the problem and fixed it . the other thing was lukaku by moving to the left was that he was coming against terry who doesnt likes to chase his opposite number maintaining his positional discipline . now  kone wasted a beautiful chance which was carved out by everton . now even though chelsea had two guys in the middle everton were finding a lot of space in the middle with barkeley able to collect the ball and pass it under no pressure or run on defense . this is because matic was trying to help cover up the left side zone which everton were trying to explore with kone,lukaku and coleman . the real culprit in chelsea failure in defensive discipline had been mikel . when matic was getting sucked in one one side of the pitch trying to help out the defense he should be the one who should keep things tight in the middle .but as i had pointed earlier mikel is very poor in his defensive discipline his game reading is very poor and if you can see the first goal then you could see naismith turning so easily and passing the ball to galloway who made a delightful cross for naismith .
now there are more than one culprit in chelsea's debacle . now as i had read the blame is being put on fabregas which is find ridiculous . now over the years chelsea's success under mouriniho had been because of the defense and the hard work that the players use to put on both end of the pitch . now if you watch the first goal then you have to question as to where is pedro . pedro was playing on the right side  and he was suppose to be tracking galloway who was his opposite number but where is he . now the media is blaming ivanovic for the goal but then what can he do should he look at his opposite number who is naismith and look at the back four discipline . it was pedro's job to help his fullback to deal with situation . even the second goal came from the similar situation when naismith collected the ball in the similar position and instead of passing the ball he shot the ball back of the net now it had to mikel's work who need to close him down or atleast make it difficult for him but he did not .
now kudos to mouriniho his team was not ticking in the first half and he had realised the problem and he replaced mikel with kennedy and bought fabregas alongside matic . he bought hazard behind costa and kennedy on the right . now in the second half too everton made some changes . lukaku swithced more on the left side and even kone would move into the zone trying to overload that zone and work it out . when kone would move inside it would give coleman to bomb forward and he was causing all sort of problems to chelsea and at time was playing as a right winger . but even with the changes everton were able to find space and most importantly now kone and naismith were changing zones and causing problems . even though chelsea made changes they could not prevent the defeat .
chelsea's defeat could be blamed to three person's namely pedro,mikel and hazard but most importantly on mikel as to when everton did most damage when he was on the pitch . he was poor in covering his players and not reading the game properly leaving his team mates in lurch . pedro is good offensive player but he not a creative player but he is the one who like to get at end of things not the ones who create it . now pedro's inclusion has come hard on hazard who gets to see less of the ball so his influence on the game is not that much as much as we want . plus we must give credit to jagielka rather than stone who dealt very will with costa .
now for eveton i have to mention naismith not because he scored  a hatrick but i suppose he is one of the most underrated and most improved player in the everton ranks . he passes the ball well works hard plus he takes very good positions so that his team  mates can find him .his passing had increased and must be best floor passer in scotland team .

MY THOUGHTS ON INDIA VS IRAN .

to be honest as like any other india i too dream of my country's song to be played at the world cup .

yesterday india played against iran in the world cup qualification . there was not much of expectation from indian side because iran are the super asian side with quite  a bit of better team and super physical side and with a world class coach . my eagerness to watch the match was from the fact as to how much of a fight can the indians give to the iranians who are technically better and can execute the plan better .
now about the game india started the game with with 4-4-2 formation with chettri and jeje up front . while robin singh was on the left while eugenson was on the right . ganesh and halder in the middle with ganesh being subbed on the 15th min . while there a back four . now for the major part of the game iran had the ball and india had little of the ball . to be honest i am trying to speak of tactics here but with good technical ability the formations and the tactics are of no use . now in the game india were sitting deep perhaps just because dejager was in the iranian team who has good pace and indians didnt want to get caught flatfooted .

i will try to put some points as to when indians had the ball well as i had said earlier indians lacked the physical ability . now how many times during the game did i saw the ball being launched up field for chettri and jeje . now in which world are indian strikers going to win header against the iranian counter parts with a six inch difference between them . so launching ball towards them was not going to be effective . india's target man could had been robin singh who rightfully won the no.9 shirt and should had been playing in the front two but was on the left side . he won some headers and could had been useful had he been played in the front two . to be honest during the game robin singh won the ball but instead of passing to the closest open player who was georges (sub) he passed it to chettri who had no continuation to the move because he was closed down and was dispossed of the ball .the only positive in the game was i saw ball was played in the channel behind the back to be chased by chettri but after that the move had no continutation . i think constantine has to coach this as to what postions will the players take when the ball wide or with whom and how do they continue the move and how do they try to open the opponent up . i think he needs to take these and coach them more properly . now  with the lack of technical ability what the indians have is that they dont release the ball early . they tend to make the extra two touches which does slows down the game and get themselves slowed down and throw away the possession. many a times indians made bad decisions on and off the ball . just as for the second goal one of the midfielders tried to win a ball which was never there to be won. eugenson trying to dribble the iranian fullback who was quicker and stronger than him . now i am giving a pic over here which is very important when you try to play good football .
now to be honest i was disappointed with indians approach . indians battling iranian's in the physical battle was never going to be solution instead india keeping very tight at the back and frustrating iran and then trying to hit them on the counter was the solution . the most i was disappointed was the midfield and for that i blame constantine .he was against the coach who is one of the best planner in world football and executes it perfectly . he should had read as to how he prepared man utd for barca clash in their 2008  ucl title winning year . they were too much high up the pitch compared to back four and time and again you could see iranians getting the space between the lines .i was surprised iranians not exploiting that much the space that was provided by the indians .
i thought the score line will be higher had iranians pulled indians in the floor game .but the coach went in the aerial dule where also they had the upperhand and i think they were quite happy with the win with game in the bag by the 60th min.
to be honest for indians i think they have to long way to go we need to build our base on strong technical play and when players from IFL come they should consult these players and coaches about the physical regimen and diet's that need to go with it . i think its time we indians stop crying about the lack of playing infracstructure and all and start showing on the pitch and work extra and build ground for the next generation .

TURKEY VS NETHERLANDS in the ECQ

yesterday's game against turkey for the dutch was the most lacklusture game that i had seen so far played by the dutch from the time i had started watching them . they were very flat ,unimaginative and lacked fight . they looked like an underdog in the contest and the score line doesnt lie .

now yesterday against tukey the dutch started the game with 4-2-3-1 with van persie up top and sneijder behind him with memphis and narsing wide on flanks . blind and klaasen in front of the back four with vanderwiel,bruma ,devrij and riedewald in the back four . while turkey had 4-3-3 with yimaz at top and turan and chalongolu besides him . while oguzan,selchuk and ozan in the middle . to be honest i am not that familiar with the turkish back four .
now during the game turkey started the game playing deep sitting back and soaking pressure and
hitting dutch on the counter attack . the dutch played a very high line and they tried to close turks quickly and win the ball back but they clearly lacked a clear cohesion in attack as well as defense. now why i said dutch were unimaginative is because they clearly couldnt use the ball when they had it and their offensive moves were not more than 3 to four passes . the turks could clearly read as to what was going to come and prepare for it . let me explain the dutch had congested the central zone so the dutch had plenty of space on the flanks but whenver memphis and narsing had the ball they would just try to dribble the ball or make a cross for van persie for which the turks were prepared . only once did i say narsing combine with van persie and had a clear shot at goal but other than that memphis looked like a person who was playing with a half heart . there was no cohesion between sneijder,van persie,narsing and depay . the midfield duo of klaasen blind had no role on the offensive front not one of them came out of the midfield to join the front four to join on offense and the dutch clearly lacked numbers in the opposition half . most importantly i saw the fullbacks only make one or two runs beyond the wingers . now my whole point to write this was that the wingers crossed the ball too early to the van persie where they could had passed the ball more and tried to have a better penetration and stretch the oppostion out of position . but the dutch handed the ball to the turks very easily and were very hopeless on the offensive front . to be honest i sensed a clear lack of direction as to what they were trying to do . daley blind should had demanded more from the team . his team were too direct from the teams that i had seen over the years ( except for van gal's world cup team who just sat back and hit on counter and that's why had no style at all ) who would move the ball very well and carve out a clear opening .this was for the first half .
now in the first half sneijder was the only man behind van persie and daley blind did saw that he needs to have one more man who would play along side sneijder and explore that hole properly so he replaced de vrij with winaldeum and made him play along side sneejder and play behind van persie and for atleast 5 min everybody thought that they would play proper football and carve out a opening and winaldeum missing a sitter . but after 5 min dutch again reverted to their orignal plan and started bombarding ball's in the box for no avail . his other two subs made no impact .

now the turks knew they clearly lacked pace in the back four so they just sat back deep and denied too much space to the dutch . they closed the central area so that sneijder wouldnt exploit it . when they had they ball they used it well and one of the reason for that had been yilmaz's tireless running who would run channel's come deep and link with his midfielders and help them out to move the ball . his movement was responsible for the first goal which caused the split in the defense and oguzhan's run was properly spotted by turan for a clear shot on goal . the other came because of blind's mistake and the third one was a clear foul which the referee did not give . to be honest all and all the turks were better in all departments and they clearly used the ball well . they knew when  they should try to close down the dutch or when should they hold and get in shape and discipline and let the dutch work them up .
it looks like if such type of performances continue then i think we wont see robben and company in next year's euro's .

BAYERN vs LEVERKUSEN

now yesterday as always gaurdiola continued with his tinkering and playing a different formation and keeping the opposition guessing as to what tactics he employs . even though dante was available he was not played instead gaurdiola started with one of the shortest lineup at the back with lahm ,alaba and bernat while alonso was mobile midfielder/defender who would as wanted dropped in the back four to help out the defense . while the opposition leverkusen started with 4-4-1-1 with keisling at top and cholongulu behind him . bellarbi and mehmedi were wide while bender and kramer were in the middle . for bayern they had vidal just in front of the back four while thiago and muller much like fullbacks and shifted as the play wanted . while the bayern front three consists of lewandowski and robben and costa on either side .
now if we are to talk of bayern then we know that gaurdiola like to tinker with his lineup he like play his players like chess pieces and like to draw his opponents into his game . now we know over the years that gaurdiola's team are the ones who like to keep the ball they like to out pass the opponents test them with their organisation and defending skills and open them up with outpassing them and their superior passing skills . while it was very opposite to me for what i saw yesterday . it was just like an old fashioned game that was played by bayern . whenever they had the ball they didnt tried to pass the ball around and out pass leverkusen instead the approach was simple they tried three approach in the game first one give the ball to coasta and make him run on him. similarly give ball to robben and do the same .while if not then get lewandowski dropping deep and collect possession and let him release either robben or costa in space . bayern were very direct yesterday with their approach  whenever costa he was running at the oppsition full back at every chance he was getting and in that he was helped by some hopeless leverkusen defending .

i think much of the attention in this game has to be given to the way leverkusen played rather than bayern playing them . leverkuses had good players but they didnt had a proper approach . if you take you stats and just look at the no . of balls that were won by keibling in the air then you would start considering as to why didnt leverkusen bombed bayern with crosses and try to test the back four in the aerial duel . the bayern back four was the shortest one and keibling could had given them a hard time with this one approach and  with this one threat they could had then  had improvised . instead leverkusen tried to out pass bayern and tried to play out bayern . there were obvious flaws in the leverkusen approach first their midfielders even though may be world cup winners but are still not mature and still dont have that matuirity as to how to control the game .
the most hopeless aspect of the leverkusen's game was their defending they were just hopeless . from the start hilbert knew that he was no match for costa's then why didnt he tried to show him the outside instead of trying to match him in the footrace . another facet was the way they defended at the start with both wendell and hilbert trying to chop down robben and costa and getting themselves booked instead they should had been a little patient in their approach . hilbert for me was very bad and the coach should had replaced him or atleast put somebody near him to help him out deal with costa instead the coach too let him out dry . plus it was alonso who was very good who passed quickly from back to front to put costa in one on one against hillbert and catching leverkusen on the back foot. to be honest all the three goals could had been prevented had leverkusen been sensible and given bayern a good game had their approach been different . leverkusen have good quality in their squad where on they can match the opposition and make it interesting .
last but not the least but many a pundits are fascinated but the combination played by gaurdiola and the way he makes them work but to be honest i think that he plays them when he finds that he hurt the opposition better than the opposition doing so . he does know the game but to be honest i think the quality of the oppostion and their players quality makes it possible for gaurdiola to play such formations because he know he can out play them with the quality at his disposal . 

WOLFSBURG vs SCHALKE

now just as the scores suggested wolfsburg were totally dominant in the game . they were totally dominant in the middle of the park and were better in all departments of the game . their players were comfotable on the ball compared to the oppositon they had better options around them and most importantly they didnt spent time on the ball and get caught in the possession and got dispossessed .
now both the team started with 4-4-1-1 combination . for wolfsburg dost let the attack while for schalke it was
huntellar . now from the start wolfsburg were dominant .they pressed high on the pitch. the most notable thing in the entire match was that schalke was not able to put 5 passes together in a move . their players spent too much on the ball . now the most notable factor in the entire match was the dominant display by one teams's midfield and while the other team was utterly hopeless in that department . gustavo and joshua played in front of the back four and they were the reason why wlfsburg were dominant . plus the work put up by veirhina and caliguir on the defensive front . when wolfsburg lost the ball they pressed very correctly for the first 30 min in the first half . now gustavo and joshua were very dominant in the worlfsburg midfield they provided the proper support to the wingers and fullbacks . they kept the ball ticking plus they switched the play very correctly .
now there were early signs of trouble for schalke and it was evident on the first cross itself . if you had seen  then you would had seen that the first cross that wolfsburg made was headed cleared by matip but then you could see that dost had space between the centre backs and both the centre backs were not paying proper attention to him . now for the whole match wolfsburg had their offense on right and credit should go to joshua.veiriniha and trasch who combined beautifully on the right flank . just as i said dost was getting the space in between the central defenders and he got the first goal from that . the most notable players for wolfsburg were veiriniha and joshua who were very good . while veiriniha was moved up by the wolfsburg coach from defense to middle and joshua had the lisence to bomb forward . the most notable thing was not only their performance on the ball but also without it . when wolfsburg lost the ball these guys were the reasons why they could press and press successfully . veiriniha's quality can be judged from the fact that the majority of the wolfsburg offense on the right and he was the major reason for that . his quality on the ball is very good plus his ability to pass the ball and know the players around him . joshua was also very good he is quality midfielder who is also a good passer as well as  a good defensive player. i cant understant as to how he is not a regular in the france setup  .
now just as wolfsburg were very good schalke were bad in all departments . their centre backs were poor from the start they didnt keep tab on dost which led to the first goal . plus they were just poor . it was evident from the fact that dost could come out of the defense and make a half turn without any pressure with the schalke centre back looking on and doing nothing is the evidence as to how bad they were . now the most important factor as to why they were poor is because no coach in the world likes his team being dominated in the middle of the park  but the schalke coach was having none of that . his midfielders were poor they choose wrong options to pass . they couldnt support their wingers plus they were bullied by wolfsburg midfielders . while this was happening whenever sane and choupo moting had the ball they spent too much time trying to dribble and play solo and get themselves dispossessed . schalke's main game plan was that whenever any of the wingers have the ball they would move inside and huntellar would move outside creating space for them since both of them are good dribbler and have good pace . to be honest schalke could have caught wolfsburg and made them pay . wolfsburg midfielders were trying to press and in doing that they moving upfield and this created space between  back four and the middle two . now there were two instances in the match where schalke could had made wolfsburg pay but failed because of the lack of quality. the lack of quality was evident from the fact that goalkeepers kicks who was very poor and was seen kicking either straight to opposition players or outside .
all and all it was a satisfying performance by wolfsburg but they need improvement since they need a player like de bruyne who will go beyond bas dost and one who can open defense with his defense splitting passes . while wolfsburg was satisfying schalke needs to go to training pitch and get the team moulded in a proper style . he needs to change the  midfield who were poor and needs to make the player work harder .