MY TAKE ON S/F GAMES .

 real madrid played man city in s/f of the ucl first leg . real madrid started the game with 4-2-3-1 allthough on paper it would look like 4-3-3 but valverde was played in a more defensive role along with kroos to give him cover and that they dont expose . man city started the game with 4-3-3 formation. the game started with city dominating the possession and real playing on the counter offense . both the team had 3 players upfront for counter attack. . now when you see man city attack at that time you can see that while grealish and de bruyne were direct gundogan and silva would take the ball deep and would prefer to pass the ball rather than crossing the ball or doing something with it . to be honest there are some thing which the managers miss . rudiger was getting very tight on hallanad and you cannot complain about that .but at the very start of the match if you had notice then halland got the better of rudiger . he could outmuscle rudiger and was able to turn on him. i think that gaurdiola should had played more balls to halland and try to play through him. 

the game had good pace to it . both the teams started with three uptop trying to put pressure on the opposition . both the teams played a very cautious game . they never tried to a high line both the teams had respect for the opposition and both the teams centre backs stayed on the goal side . city had experimented with stones playing as a extra player in the middle of the park when they are on offense but he swithches to his centre backs role when they loose possession . the thing is that city are not able to fully exploit this advantage unless they can exploit this advantage . grealish was very handy and most importantly he needs to work with halland as to what he will do and where should halland expect the ball in the box if he is going to cross . the most interesting fact about this game is that what man city did in first was used by ancelotti in the second half . in the first half stones was coming into the midfield from defense to help move the ball and help dominate that possession . in the second half ancelotti did that . he brought camavinga from left back into midfield to dominate that possession . while doing that had he given some freedom to valverde then i think the game would had been more interesting . 

both the teams struggled to score . there are multiple reasons for that . first off city now as i had said that silva and grealish were playing wide to halland . the trouble with city is that gaurdiola hasnt taken into consideration as to what halland needs to do when the ball is with which player and how should he position(halland) and against whom . this is the main reason that even though city dominated the possession they were not able to create clear cut chances . let me tell you . garudiola hasnt made clear as to what halland needs to do . halland nees to make better reads of the situation first off when the ball is with de bruyne he tens to cross the ball as to what hallands positions . so when the ball is passed to de bruyne then he needs to take the best position and let de bruyne sees it so that he can cross it . de bruyne will the get the ball to you . most importantly what gaurdiola needs to work is what positions halland should take inside the box . whether he shoudl try to be first to the ball or try to outjump the centre backs . gaurdiola needs to work halland positions to make city more potent . 

real madrid played with 4-2-3-1 . now why do i say that is because valverde was played along side kroos . real madrid relied on slick crisp passing to open up man city and they were good . ancelotti had really drilled his team on how they would his team would counter . most importantly man city had specifically played walker to counter vinicius's pace . but i think he had learnt that he didnt need to engage in running battle instead kept on cutting inside and most importantly benzema linked with him very well . the only think that was lacking was that they couldnt bring valverde more into game . he is the most underrated passer and finisher . real needs to drop kroos and bring valverde into the game and play Tchouaméni in place of kroos . 

inter vs milan was good game what ac milan lacked inter had that . ac milan just didnt had that necessary cohesion which was required and inter had that . inter were playing on the counter but they had that necessary cohesion  which is required on counter attack or in football. the game can be summed up by the battles between inter's forwards vs milan's centre back and milans forwars vs inter's centre back . just look at the number of duels that dzeko won compared to the number of duels that giroud won against inter's centre backs particularly acerbi. the game is not over yet and if milan can just get that necessary cohesion then they can reverse the fixture and we can have interesting game on our hands . between city and madrid i think that halland's position and valverde's involvement into the game will deceide that tie .  

MY TAKE ON MADRID AND MAN CITY GAMES .

 i really dont know as to what the owners think . i dont know who there advisers are . i dont know what sort of advices they give them . just think of the situations at chelsea and bayern munich . both of these clubs are in tatters . they made moves even without thinking of future of the club . graham potter was bought in to replace touchel. now even when touchel was brought in  what was his track record . he didnt complete tenure at any of his previous clubs . potter was brought in and wasnt even give time to get the to gel and  make a mark too  many players were brought in . i dont think he was consulted when players were brought in . 

there is japanese term called harakiri which bayern munich did when they sacked julian nagelsman and similar stupidity was done by chelsea  .  i wont criticize  them for sacking nagelsman because the team was not getting the results that they were suppose to get . but they were not getting over run but they were just getting unlucky . bayern's affairs are looked after by kahn who knows the game . he sacked nagelsman and whom did he bought touchel . when appointing the new manager kahn should had considered the playing styles that these coaches deploy and the changes that they make . how do these managers try to change the game .kahn should had done a meeting with naglesman and tried to explain his concerns regarding the playing style and the changes that he needs to make . nagelsman was sacked but who did they bring on . they brought on touchel . touchel is a defensive counter attacking manager . what bayern were playing under nagelsman were they were playing a very aggressive game . they would just cram up the opposition and start the counter as soon as they win back the ball . he had built a team for that. he had a very athletic team for that . the trouble with nagelsman was that lately teams had started to figure them out . although in europe he was still winning. what kahn did with bayern was harakiri . what the players had been doing for the last years and half suddenly they were told to opposite . they were pressing the opposition under nagelsman while touchel would just want them to sit back and then counter attack . the second thing is what didnt the bayern heirarchy looked at the touchel's history . the most annoying thing is that the coach should be able to change things when he sees that his plan is not working or his players are not doing things as to what he wants to do . touchel took too much time to change most importantly he should had told musiala to change his style of play and try to pass more of the ball rather than trying to dribble . 

the game started with gnabry as the no.9 role . now how would he perform the role as to whether he would come deep and let musiala and coman bomb beyond him or will he try to test the man city centre back's by playing on their shoulders . what touchel had come and done is that he has slowed down the game . secondly he has increased the distance between lines . thirdly he has starting to play deep on defense which gives the opposition to press him. nagelsman team played a very high tempo game under touchel that had fallen . earlier bayern would go and press the oppostion . now that is not possible because they are playing a cautious game that gives the opposition time and space on the ball . touchel had just come and destroyed the team . nangelsman had assembeled a team which was able to play a very high tempo . a team which is very athletic and energetic . touchle had come in and tried to impose his will on the team . just look at what had happened to bayern .

what happened against man city was nothing but the stupid tactics by touchel . bayern had started to play counter attacking game under touchel . this allowed man city to press them most importantly playing deep allows opposition to press you and you have to . the most important thing is the distance between line . under nagelsman they were playing compact game . the difference between the lines was not more than 10 or 12 yards . touchel increased it and its more than 15 yards now .second is the way they take the ball forward . earlier it would very quick passing and most importantly just as soon as they would recover the possession they would start the counter attack but not the team looks directionless . they are trying to take the ball forward through the wings but if you want the wings to work then you need to dominate the centre and i think that where man city choked bayern . 

now gaurdiola like to make opponent dance to his tunes . he had seen that bayern dominate the centre and from his past matches he had seen that players like sane, musiala likes to drop deep and help recover the possession and then start the offense . touchel just dismanteled every thing that nagelsman built . he slowed down the game . the team which was dominating and would had been favourite was dominated and just folded . although man city dominated the game still they are not using halland very much . they are not playing through him which they need to improve but gaurdiola teams dont necessarily play throught their no.9's 

chelsea were already a mess even before potter took over . football club buying is just hilarious . if you just buy then you need to buy players and spend big whether you need or not . i dont think that potter was taken into confidence but i do feel that he should had been given the chance to take charge of the madrid games . the person that they brought to replace potter was lampard which is stupid . 

when you play offense then you need to be like a well oiled machine if you are that then you can open any defense . in the first game against madrid they started with 3-5-2 system . they were playing felix and sterling upfront . now when you play two fast players upfront it is assumed that you are trying to explore the space behind the back four .but its stupidity the opposition too is ready for what is you are going to do . its like a chess game . they want you to do that because they had prepared for that . every time there is fast forward it is thought that he plays on the shoulder balls are played to get him on goal . instead use the speed to your advantage . use that speed to draw the defenders out of their positons . why were barcelona or spain successful . they were playing 3-5-2 so there were two fullbacks who are going to have space but there was no plan as to how they were going to bring the ball inside and create chances or how they are going to cross and how they will trouble the opposition . 

in the second game he changed the foramtion from 3-5-2 to 3-4-3 . the thing with lampard is that they move the ball but there is little movement of players . really dont understand as to why gallagher was played when he just looks naive .the second thing is he played havertz upfront who is not known for his headind ability . the most important mistake in terms of positional aspect of the players is that he played hernanzed in the no. 6 role instead i would had played him in the no. 10 role where on he would had combined very nicely with havertz . on the other had madrid were just very good . most importantly earlier it used to be just vinicius and benzema combining together but now they had added rodrygo to the mix and he looks good . his techinique is good but most importantly is the understanding of the shape and spaces of defense and how he can explore them . his decision making is also very good . madrid have just assembeled a very good team and they have valverde already who must be one of the best underestimated player in the world . 

JUST FOR A DAY AND WILL BE DELETED .

 i have just read that man utd are interested in signing alvaro moratta on loan . moratta for me is not bad but if man utd are serious then they should sign marcus thuram . chelsea might be reading my blog because they are ready to sign enzo hernandez but if they play him in the DM role then they are wasting his talents . sign him but make him play high  off the pitch . 

MY TAKE ON THE WORLD CUP FINAL.

 france is playing argentina in the world cup final . now both are counter attacking teams . both had won the s/f matches by sitting back and countering their opposition with pace . france started the game with 4-3-3 and same was with argentina . for this final argentina bought di maria as he is good dribbler and has a good pace . france brought back rabiot in place of fofana for the final . both the teams are wary of each others pace . the game started with argentina choosing to sit back and hitting  back france on the counter attack . before i write about the game i was to write about what france coach can do to test argentina's defense . instead of playing dembele who had been awful for me . france could had started with giroud and thuram upfront with mbappe . we had seen as to how good both giroud and thuram are in playing with mbappe and how well they combine plus one aspect which mbappe has but is not much talked or thought is his crossing ability . he is a good crossing ability and if france could had started with two uptop then i think it would be a worrying sign for argentina but they didnt . 

france started with dominating the possession while argentina sat back and hit france on the counter . now both the teams are sitting deep, because both have fear of the quality of players that are there specially upfront. compared to france argentina played a deep line. argentina played di maria for his pace and trickery and his pace and trickery got the first ( though it is contentious as di maria has that reputation to go down easily and the var didnt showed any different angles of that foul.) as i was saying that compared to france argentina were playing a deep line so the team who is playing high up the pitch has that urge or that benefit that they can go and press the team who play deep because they have space to fall back . another thing that i had been saying is that you have to constantly read the game . you have to read as to whether you are over committing and how much space you are leaving behind the back and front for the opposition to explore . the second goal for argentina was miscalculation on the part of france in terms of pressing . first off they were high up the pitch . they went for over pressing instead of calculating the space and movement that the players can make . although france may have miscalculated but mccalister made a very good run which not only sent him clear but also on goal. argentina played a very cohesive game in the first half . 

while argentina were playing a cohesive game in the first half france were poor . i think deschamps should had watched argentina's games and the tactics that they were using on defense. first off they were bringing all the players behind the ball. they were playing a deep line compared to france . just like england they were not going to give space and time to mbappe who was the main threat . there was a lack of cohesion in france's team which was very well exposed in the final. another thing was that instead of dembele i would had started with thuram and as i had written initially i would had tested argentina . for the first half france was run down over by argentina . 

in the second half he brought kolo nouani which brought pace to the france's rank but the most important factor that led to france's equalizer was when france brought on coman . having three pacy players on the pitch was too much for argentina plus it was late in the match . you get tired so the initial pressing was not going to happen and mbappe combined very well with thuram for the equalizer . 

the game ended at 2-2 and the extra time started . scaloni made the first move and that was the game changer he brought on paredes and that freed hernandez from the defensive midfilders role and now he can join the attack and you could just the change in argentina's tempo and offense . this kid can find players and can play a very good offensive game and that led to the third goal but france equalized through hand ball but all and all argentina prevailed and won the cup . 

i had already said that enzo hernandez is the player to watch and he was spectacular in the finals. there is another player in the argentina's squad who i think needs consideration and he still looks good . thiago almeida is that player and i think that he too is good and needs to be looked at . 

MY TAKE ON THE ENGLAND VS FRANCE GAME.

 there were two q/f yesterday . england played france in the last q/f of the world cup . to be honest after watching england i think these players deserve especially saka,kane,rice and belligham deserve better . they need to be better coached . england started the game with 4-3-3 formation while france started with 4-5-1 formation but i would call it 4-4-2 because mbappe wouldnt come deep to defend so it had to be 4-4-2 . to be honest the game went different that what i expected . england started the game with the team dominating possession while france choose to sit back and play on the counter attack. 

england even though were dominating possession they were pretty cautious about mbappe's threat so they had walker playing very conservatively and not getting too high on the pitch and getting caught on the wrong side of the ball with mbappe and also henderson was instructed to help walker in dealing with mbappe . i had been reading papers and reading news by several so called pundits that this player was good and this players made the difference . to be honest from my point of view kane was the best player . england started dominating when the game was played around him or he was at the centre of the move . if you had seen games then you must had seen that kane coming inside and then releasing players beyond him made all the difference . just look at the games between iran and senegal . kane came inside and the opposition's organisation got disturb . this allowed bellingham and henderson to bomb beyond him . if you see kane even in this game then i think that he was very good . 

now the game . england started as a dominating team and france were happy sit back and hit on the counter attack . france like team tom close them down. they have got excellent players who are good in one on one situations and can wriggle out of the press and open opposition. whenever england tried to close them down you could see england were not doing with full steam because they dont want to caught exposed . for me when england had the ball they were a bit too much distance between players . they could had played some what compact but it was understandable because they couldnt play the high line for the fear of mbappe's pace . the other thing that made it not possible was that france too played a deep line. so they stretched the game and they could offord that because they had mbappe upfront who can open up any opposition . england played some good football . the passing was excellent and you can see the difference it makes to play under good coaches . the movement by henderson and saka . the turn by kane is nothing but resultant of good coaching to them on the club level.    you cannot prevent strikes like the one by aurelin took for france first goal . when england equalized i think that france stepped a gear. england should had just weathered out next 10 min but they couldnot and i think that this is where southgate's managerial skill will have to be questioned . all and all i think england had a chance but lack of coaching and big game mentality got to them.

today argentina is playing croatia . if croatia wants to be in final of the world cup then i think that they have to just cross the ball in the box that is the plan A. for argentina i think they should go for paredes in the middle and let enzo henandez play a little upfront in place of mccalister or mccalister and him can switch positions.

MY TAKE ON THE GAMES BETWEEN CROATIA VS BRAZIL AND NETHERLANDS VS ARGENTINA.

 in the first q/f of the world cup brazil played croatia . brazil started the game with 4-3-3 . while croatia too started with the same formation . brazil may had started with 4 at the back tite brought out a page out of gaurdiola's book where on he brought danillo and even militao in the centre . the reason being that they knew that croatia are going to press them in the middle and high up the pitch so casmeiro wouldnt have time and space on the ball . so they brought mostly danillo who is a better passer than militao in the middle of the park with casmeiro . the game started with a similar note with croatia sitting back and hitting back on the counter attack . brazil were the aggressive because they they had more athletic players while croatia had more physical players . of all the croatia players juranovic was the most impressive one . he was playing against vinicius against whom he did very well in the one on one duel plus he was very athletic going forward . brazil started with two wide players . i really dont understand the concept of inverted wingers . for the whole of the game that raphinha was there he was just there to stretch the game and nothing more . most of the brazil's offense came from the left side from vinicius side but he had juranovic to deal with . 

brazil blew past south korea because they played against them on the counter attack . here croatia didnt made that mistake . they allowed brazil time and space on the ball . they made brazil to slow down the pace and they held there shape very nicely . i was disappointed with tite he should had worked more on the cohesion of the team . he should had thought that croatians were not going to give them time and space in their own half . croatians started the game with the right theme . they took the ball wide and whipped the cross in the box . but as the game progressed it became very less instead they were happy to keep the ball. they should had crossed the ball more in the box . neymar scored a very good goal in the extra time but it was useless since croatia equalized and won the tie on penalties . 

the second game was played between netherlands and argentina . argentina started the game with 3-5-2 formation while holland started the game with 3-4-1-2 formation . the game started with argentina sitting back and playing on the counter attack. while argentina were sitting back they didnt gave holland any time and space on the ball when it came into the midfield and beyond . they worked very hard but to be honest i was disappointed in van gal and his tactics . let me explain why. 

holland had 2 uptop with depay and bergwin while gapko was behind them . argentina knew of the pace that these three possess atleast bergwin and gapko have decent pace . argentina played a deep for them and when the ball came to them they man marked them and didnt offered them any time and space on the ball . the first reason that i am disappointed in van gal was that for the entierity of the game he kept all three of them high up the pitch . these players kept backing into argentinian players and that made argie players easier because they didnt had to come out of the defense to man mark them . van gal should had made them them deep and tried to disturb the argentinian formation . the second is the lack of cohesion between the front three and thirdly that all the players seemed to be cramped into one zone . all the full back was but didnt had any support from any of his team mate ( explain that in formation pic ) . the argentinians were very good in their defensive work as they didnt allowed any time and space for the dutch players . what van gal should had done is that he should had asked these come deep or atleast make inward runs so as to drag argentinian players out of their position and disturb there formation   if they are to mark them and if they dont then they would have time and space on the ball which would be great . vangal just didnt do any of these things. 

on the defensive front too they made the mistakes . blind was against molina so ake was tasked with the job of marking messi. now ake made a lot of mistake his hesitation cost the team . first off ake cam out to mark messi . now when you come out to mark somebody just do it . instead of thinking of the space behind you or anything just mark the player whom you are asked to mark . his hesitation gave messi time and space on the ball and he was able to pick out molina who could score .the dutch never though that molina would make such a run and that messi would pick him out . argies played a very good game and they deserved to win the game atleast by tacitcal standard. 

there are two players who were standout in last night ties . first we all know is juranovic of croatia and the second one is enzo fernandez who was very good . his man marking and his defensive ability is very good . from the day he had came into that DM position argentina had been ticking plus he had two very good shots at the end of the match . he is also very handful when going forward and is definitely a player to watch .  

MY TAKE ON THE GAME BETWEEN NETHERLANDS VS USA.

 usa played dutch in the round of 16. now the dutch started the game with 3-4-1-2 formation while usa started the game with 4-3-3 formation. the game started with dutch sitting back and hitting usa on the counter attack . usa team doesnt seems to know as to how play in the box be it on offense or defense . as i had said the players that you choose are very important. dutch had dumfries and lind in the wing back position . dumfries is a very good fullback and if you had seen his game against barcelona then you had seen that he was kept high on the pitch by the inter coach and his running cause all sorts of problems for barcelona . the us know as to how to play in the middle of the park and press and recover possession and this was noted very well by the dutch because they wanted that usa should press because then they can playaround the press . if you had seen the first goal that the dutch scored then you would see many mistakes that usa made on defense . all the goals were scored because of the organisational mistakes and the shape they had on defense  . the attack starts from the left and they beat the press from usa and shift it to the right to dumfries . as i had said that the usa doesnt knows to defend . first off they the midfielders were caught high off the pitch which should had not happened . secondly tyler adams and the mackienny or musah should had taken position in front of the back four which they completely did not . the defense just switched off . 

the usa was playing the classic back four and compared to the three at the back of the dutch . so when the attack starts from the wide positions supposedly right then the left back tucks up with the centre backs to provide the extra cover and not expose that back behind them . now when if you see in the goals scored by the dutch usa fullbacks are in their rightful positions because they have to tucked up with their centre backs .in the open play when you are pressing then its ok that the fullbacks can go press ( even though its a risk ) because the pace is slow compared to the counter attack because they are pacy that is why they are called counters . now as i was saying that the fullbacks are going to be tucked alongside the centre backs then the usa coach should had asked the respective midfielders or the wide players to mark the fullbacks when they are on defense on when the ball comes in their own half . he should had done that and asked weah and pulisic to mark lind and dumfries. the third goal was classical mistake of positioning and body shape . i would show that in pics . 

even though the dutch won the game i am not so impressed by the game because they have all the tools to win this tournament . they started with depay and gapko forward and classen in the middle of the park . in the first half they scored the goal but they were dominated by usa in terms of possession because they the front two were not combining very well and klassen is not a no.10 . van did corrected his mistake in the second half and to be honest if you have gapko,simmons and bergwin in the team who can just any defense to ground if they can combine together. gapko as no.10 is very good it is now upto him as to how much big he wants to because because i will tell you there are two players gapko and leao who have all the qualities in them and its upto them as to how much forward they want to go. 

usa has a lot of work to do . they know on how to win possession but they dont know on how to open up the opposition defense as well how to defend their own box . there are some good players but they have to work on the defense and offense . 

i didnt watch the game between australia and argentina . australia could had troubled argentia had they had a better midfield . the midfielders were poor their decision making was very poor and some of the passes that were made were just poor . the switched the ball from one side to other way to quickly making it easier for argentina to close them down. argentina needs to pray to god that poland do some godly miracle that they beat france so that they can have a real chance to win the cup but at this time i think for me dutch are one of the teams to beat other than france .