Valencia 0-1 Barcelona: both sides try different systems, but both switch back to the usual

The starting line-ups

Lionel Messi had an off-day…and yet still scored the winner as Barcelona temporarily move ten points clear at the top.

Unai Emery had been trying Juan Mata as a number nine all week in training, and used him that position here, as Valencia went into the the game with no real striker. There was a reshuffle at the back, and two full-backs were used in tandem down the left flank.

Pep Guardiola left out Pedro from his starting XI. The shape wasn’t clear until the game actually started, but it turned out that Sergio Busquets was playing as an extra centre-back in a back three.

The first half was a bit  like Barcelona’s recent defeat at the Emirates. Their opponents seemed to be coping very well, and yet Barcelona still managed to manufacture chances – here, Lionel Messi missed two one-on-ones. As such, it’s difficult to say which manager had the upper hand, but for the third consecutive game between these two sides, it was an intriguing tactical battle.

Valencia formation

The headline here is perhaps slightly misleading, for Valencia’s basic shape was the same as usual, a 4-2-3-1. However, one cannot overlook the fact that Mata is a completely different type of player to Roberto Soldado, the man who usually plays upfront. Soldado is a classic central striker: strong, good in the air and a lethal finisher. Mata is very much a number ten, someone who plays between the lines and creates chances for others, and therefore whilst the formation was the same, the system was different.

Mata came short and linked play, but with Barcelona playing three at the back, they were relatively untroubled by Mata’s movement towards the ball – one defender could come out from the backline (Busquets, Gerard Pique and Eric Abidal are all happy to step up), and no notable space would be created.

Barcelona formation

Barcelona’s formation was a clear departure from their usual 4-3-3. Sergio Busquets played at centre-back, something he’s done before to good effect before. This was slightly different, though – previously he’s played as part of a back four, where nothing changes tactically, or as part of a 3-4-3 (for example, against Atletico). Since Barca often move to that system in games when they play a 4-3-3 anyway, with Busquets dropping in and the wing-backs moving on, that’s also a relatively comfortable shift.

In this game, Guardiola decided to use Javier Mascherano ahead of the back four, and omitted Pedro. This meant that Barcelona played with just a front two, which not only limited their attacking options, it also changed how the wing-backs operated compared to the 3-4-3. Against Atletico, Dani Alves and Maxwell caused such damage because Barcelona’s front three narrowed, in turn forcing the opposition back four to narrow, and opened up space on the flanks. From there, Alves and Maxwell could get forward unchecked – or they’d force the opposition wide players to move into a back six.

Battlegrounds

That happened here a couple of times early on – before Valencia realised that, up against a front two, they didn’t need to be so easily manipulated. Their centre-backs dealt with Messi and David Villa, whilst the full-backs were relatively free. They defended in lopsided way, however – with two left-backs down the left (the same tactic Emery used with some success at the Nou Camp), Jeremy Mathieu dropped in and picked up Alves, with Jordi Alba moving narrow. This meant that when Barca’s wing-backs got forward, Valencia were defending 5 v 4 – far better than 4 v 4 or 6 v 4, as they had a spare man at the back, whilst being able to compete in midfield.

The opposite side was their biggest worry. With Pablo Hernandez not tracking back nearly as much as Mathieu, and coming inside to join the attack (possibly trying to exploit any space created by Mata’s runs), Adriano had a lot of freedom down the left. Time and time again, Barca got the ball out to him 1 v 1 against Marius Stankevicius in the first half, but he couldn’t take advantage of the time and space. It might have been worth Barca playing someone else to the left of the pitch – Villa, Andres Iniesta or Abidal – to help out, and even if that dragged another Valencia player over to that side, it could have created space in the centre, where Iniesta and Xavi Hernandez were both quiet.

Aside from formations and positioning, the game was played at a quick tempo, with both sides pressing and subsequently using high lines. The game was essentially one huge midfield battle, and it seemed a goal would come as soon as one side exploited the other’s high line. The best chances came this way – Messi’s early miss, and Alba’s ‘goal’ that was disallowed for a narrow offside decision. From Barcelona’s point of view, the use of a (narrow) front two effectively restricted them to creating chances that way, especially with Alves tracked on the right and Adriano’s lack of a final ball from the left.

Second half

The line-ups after Barcelona's formation change on 63 minutes

Emery decided to change things at half time. He removed Joaquin (who had been playing, unusually, in the centre behind a main forward (another ‘central winger’)) and brought on Soldado, with Mata dropping into his number ten role. That was an admission that Valencia’s strategy hadn’t really worked upfront – Mata wasn’t creating space or causing the Barcelona centre-backs many problems.

The game continued in vaguely the same pattern, though with Soldado on, Valencia were more of a goal threat. A couple of decent chances came and went, with the Valencia full-backs supporting the attack well.

Barca change shape

That threat from full-back (as well as the obvious desire for more attacking threat at 0-0) prompted Guardiola to turn to the bench, and Pedro. He replaced Mascherano, and Barca moved back to their usual 4-3-3, with Messi in the centre deeper than Villa and Pedro on the flanks.

Barcelona looked much more comfortable with this shape – they had 2 v 1 rather than 3 v 1 at the back, they weren’t subject to being outnumbered 2 v 1 down the flanks, and they played with more natural width upfront, which is such a crucial part of their game. It also meant the sides were more naturally ‘matched’ in individual battles across the pitch, which made Barcelona’s pressing easier and more effective.

Goal

Crucially, the two players who had moved backwards, Alves and Adriano, remained an attacking threat. Alves continued to be tracked by Mathieu, but Adriano still had that freedom down the left, and finally produced a good ball for Messi, who squeezed a shot in on 77 minutes.

Emery threw on all the attacking players he could find for the final ten minutes, but Guardiola introduced Maxwell and Seydou Keita to keep things tight, and Barcelona were comfortable at 0-1.

Conclusion

A fascinating tactical contest, though it’s fair to say that neither side’s initial shape worked particularly well for them. Valencia’s false nine didn’t do much against a back three (which in itself is an interesting development) whilst Barca lacked width.

By the very nature of the result, it must be said that Guardiola’s tactical shift worked better. The real debate is whether it was a great move to start off with the 3-5-2 and move to the 4-3-3, or whether he simply should have gone with the 4-3-3 from the outset.

A final point – Barcelona had “only” 61% of possession in this game, their joint lowest figure of the season – the other game was also against Valencia. That suggests Emery’s tactics coped well in midfield (certainly, Xavi and Iniesta weren’t very prominent), but is also an indication that Valencia have good ball-playing midfielders, and a reflection on the fact that their full-backs were often ‘free’ until Barcelona made the tactical change.

Valencia 0-1 Barcelona: both sides try different systems, but both switch back to the usual

Related articles on Zonal Marking:

• Real Madrid 1-3 Barcelona: Real press early on, but tactical switch gives Barca the upper hand Dec 2011
• Mourinho tries to counter Messi's false nine role by pushing Carvalho up the pitch Aug 2011
• Barcelona 5-1 Shakhtar Donetsk: Shakhtar incapable of dealing with runners from deep Apr 2011
• Espanyol 1-5 Barcelona: high line exploited Dec 2010
• Barcelona 3-0 Valencia - a Messi masterclass, but credit to Guardiola and Henry Mar 2010

Tags: 3-5-2, adriano, alves, barcelona, false nine, mata, messi, spain

39 Responses to “ Valencia 0-1 Barcelona: both sides try different systems, but both switch back to the usual ”

1. 

   Tilemaxx on March 3, 2011 at 12:52 am

   Interesting. Considering Barcelona is 7 points ahead of Madrid, can we assume that the 3-5-2 formation was a test by Guardiola in order to figure out if this system can be used as his Plan B? Maybe, but it didn’t worked well.

   It is fair to say that it was proven why the two-man offense formation had declined over the 21st century.

   Minimal width = minimal workload for opposing centre backs.

   Look at Italy and England at the World Cup…
   • 

     ZonalMarking on March 3, 2011 at 12:56 am

     Possibly. It’s notable that the plan B of his 2008/09 season, with Messi behind two wide strikers, is now pretty much his plan B for most games. His plan B for 2009/10 was that 4-2-4, which hasn’t resurfaced. Arguably 3-4-3 is his plan B now, not sure he’ll go for this 3-5-2 again.
     • 

       mo.B.bad on March 3, 2011 at 1:06 am

       I think he may wheel the 352 out against Valencia some more, but I doubt anyone else will see it. Pep obviously has a lot of respect for Banega and Costa, and the speed with which they’re able to move the ball forward/wide. hence the inclusion of Mascherano.

       otherwise, yeah, 343 is a much more likely Plan B.

       Messi as False9 was his “Plan B” for 08/09 but it turned into “Plan A” at the end of the season, where he used it in the Bernabeu and Champions League Final. it’s now the default set-up, allowing Messi the maximum freedom to influence games. his starting position is CM in some contests!
     • 

       mo.B.bad on March 3, 2011 at 1:08 am

       and the 424 isn’t necessary now Zlatan has buggered off. his inability to play anywhere but centrally is probably why Pep came up with the 424, as he seemed intent on using Messi in a central position rather than as a wide-forward.
     • 

       sic on March 3, 2011 at 11:09 am

       I suspect that this formation was devised a bit out of necessity as Pedro picked up a knock against Mallorca (lower back) and I’m pretty sure that Pep kept him on the bench to rest him in view of the CL match next week rather than to explicitly change tactics. Without Pedro the team lacked depth in attack and fluidity on the right wing; hard to believe how important he has become to the team in such a short time. It also shows that Bojan has completely lost his place on this squad…
       • 

         SpaceGhost on March 4, 2011 at 6:34 pm

         Pep could have played Iniesta wide left and Busquets and Mascherano in a double pivot, so I think the 3-5-2 was deliberate experimentation.

         The 2 in attack may have been intended to tie up all 4 defenders, and might have worked if they had played wider in the channels. The key was the use of 2 fullbacks on the left flank, allowing Valencia’s back 4 to shift across and ironically play closer to 3 CB’s in positioning.
2. 

   mo.B.bad on March 3, 2011 at 1:02 am

   if Barca had started 433 then Mata would have caused problems as a False9. the 352 nullified him completely, partly because he’s not used to the position and his support wasn’t good enough, but mostly because Sergio Busquets is a Titan.

   Pep definitely won the tactical war. apart from nullifying the False9, the 352 allowed Piqué and Alves to match-up well with Valencia’s marauding double-LB system that caused so much woe at the Camp Nou. frankly if Messi hadn’t been so poor in front of goal they’d have been 0-2 up at HT (faced with just two forwards the Valencia defenders had more time than they expected, so they dithered and Messi took the ball from them on a few occasions).

   so Emery blinked first and switched to the regular formation, by which time most of his players were too tired to make a real go of it. Barca then switched to regular as well and moved through the gears a bit to find the winning goal.

   some interesting things:
   -Mascherano looks much more comfortable in a hostile atmosphere away from home, cleaning house in a tight congested midfield, than he does in the methodical chess matches that usually take place at the Camp Nou. he thrives on the pressure. would they have lost in Milan last year with him in the side?

   -Busquets seems to have replaced Yaya Touré in the sense that he is equally adept at DM and CB. he’s also a much better passer than Yaya, so greatly improves the team’s possession when at DM. he’s much more crucial than people think to the way Barca play. and he’s won 25 league games in a row or somethin’!

   -Valencia’s third choice keeper might just be their best keeper. Messi caught him out for the goal, but other than that I thought Guaita was superb. he made a series of very good saves to keep Valencia in it. his work against Messi was particularly good.

   -Pinto’s kicking/distribution is woeful in comparison to Valdés. and he often lacks the command of his area that Valdés has – the defenders almost don’t seem to know where they stand with him coming to collect, etc. he’s a wonderful shot-stopper, but limited in other areas.
   • 

     sic on March 3, 2011 at 11:15 am

     I agree about Busquets, his versatility embodies Pep’s vision of total football. I had a similar thought about Mascherano the other day after Barça gave up that late counter against Arsenal. He is so good at breaking up play, perhaps away against teams that won’t be overawed by Barcelona’s passing game (Copenhagen and Rubin Kazaan come to mind as well)and who have powerful counters he would be a better option at DM. With Puyol out Piqué and Busquets at CB and Abidal back at RB could be a nice lineup for such matches.
3. 

   harrrry on March 3, 2011 at 1:11 am

   “Valencia’s false nine didn’t do much against a back three (which in itself is an interesting development) whilst Barca lacked width.”

   That is an interesting development. I suppose a false nine can’t be as effective in creating space for other attackers when there is always going to be two space centre backs covering.
4. 

   Adrian on March 3, 2011 at 1:19 am

   That has to be one of the most congested “starting line-ups” diagrams I’ve ever seen.

   I thought it was a strange decision by Gaurdiola to start with 3-5-2 against a team with one striker (as it happened, they barely even had that).

   Also, it’s not often you see Barca with such little width up front. Xavi and Iniesta really suffered from the crowded central area. I noticed Xavi trying more dribbles than usual. A sign that there weren’t many passing options for him? That seems to be reflected in Barca’s “low” possession.

   Adriano didn’t make the most of his attacking opportunities. If Alves had been afforded that space, Barca would probably have won comfortably.
   • 

     DARREN WILSON on March 3, 2011 at 4:57 am

     this is why there was two “left backs” against Alves, as Adriano was considered the lesser of two evils. Adrianos performance during the first half in particular showed that Valencia were vindicated in their decision initailly.
5. 

   ECanalla on March 3, 2011 at 1:24 am

   Well, I would like to point a couple of things out. To be honest, I don’t think Barça’s back four (yes, four) were different than in other games. Alves plays usually as a wing back in all game rather than as a full back, and today Adriano didn’t have the same defensive reponsability as Alves. I don’t mean the chalkboard isn’t telling the truth, but Abidal played clearly more to the left than Piqué to the right and Adriano didn’t have to normally go down more than the midfield line for defensive duties.

   The lack of available right backs for Valencia was clearly the decision why Guardiola decided to exploit the left with a real winger like Adriano, since Villa usually drops to the centre of the attack as Messi has total freedom. Considering that I think Adriano isn’t really a player for Barcelona, although maybe he’s ok as a reserve, he did very well today, also considering the few minutes he’s played this season so far (we saw he had little confidence in a couple of runs), so I don’t really agree with “Adriano’s lack of a final ball from the left”. He did create two chances for Villa in the first half – a shot that went wide and Guaita’s chest save.

   About Valencia, if we see the team’s average positions, we find out that Mata was playing behind Joaquín, so the Andalusian player was actually the false striker. He didn’t make an impact at all, so no surprise Emery decided to sub him after half time. By the way, Valencia’s defensive line wasn’t much different than Barcelona’s. We saw this when Guaita had to take his goal kicks – Stankevičius, Costa and Dealbert forming a three-men defensive line. We could say Alba’s was Valencia’s Alves, with Mathieu, another defensive player, in front. It was clear that Emery was over worried about the Alves-Pedro partnership on the right once again, so this was another reason why Guardiola changed his mind and tried to exploit Valencia’s weaker side. Pablo proved once again he isn’t a player who’s going to help much in defence.

   So it was logical that Guardiola subbed Mascherano and insisted with Adriano in the second half. The game was to be won on Valencia’s right side. In addition, as the minutes went by, Valencia started to look more tired. We saw this in their midfielders Mathieu, Pablo, Costa and Banega, especially the latter, who dropped deeper in the first half than in the second, when legs start to get heavier.

   It’s really easier to say this after the game, but Emery should have solved his defensive problems on the right. I don’t think Stankevičius had a bad game, but he was overwhelmed and he’s proved before he plays better as a centre back anyway, so he should have actually reiforced that right side.

   Well, it was a match to comment a lot of things. Both teams innovating in this way was a really nice spectacle to watch, so there’s actually a lot to comment, but I think this is already long enough!

   Keep it up.

   PS: By the way, Busquets and Adriano were for me the best players on the pitch. Busquets as a centre back was flawless, which is really surprising. This player improves and improve