Tag Archives: Portugal

Portugal 1-0 France

Embed from Getty Images
Portugal dispatched of hosts France to claim their first major international trophy courtesy of an extra-time winner from Eder.

     Screen Shot 2016-07-11 at 12.01.36 PM

Didier Deschamps named an unchanged XI that narrowly snuck past Germany in the semi-final.

Fernando Santos welcomed back William Carvalho into his holding midfield role, while Pepe returned to the XI to form a centre-back partnership with Jose Fonte.

Portugal stuck to their defensive brand of football here, but Deschamps’ inability to alter his broken system witnessed Santos’ men strike late once again to become European champions.

Deschamps goes 4-2-3-1

Deschamps’ major decision ahead of kickoff was whether to return to the system he started the tournament with or aim to maximize Antoine Griezmann’s talent in a central role. Despite being completely outplayed by Germany in the semi-finals the French manager opted for the latter, which meant Blaise Matuidi and Paul Pogba formed a double-pivot ahead of the back four, while N’Golo Kante started on the bench.

Though the system caters to Griezmann’s strengths, it certainly decreases the impact France can produce in central areas. With Kante on the bench, Pogba and Matuidi were often adopting deeper positions to ensure the hosts weren’t overrun in midfield, thus making France’s attack quite predictable. It was simply based around knocking balls into striker Olivier Giroud, but only Griezmann was free to play off the striker or run beyond the defence, as the midfield duo were required to maintain their positions.

Portugal without the ball

The pattern of the match suited a Portuguese side that was never keen on being proactive. Their run throughout the knockout round has witnessed Santos’ side drop off into two banks of four, aiming to congest space between the lines and in central zones within their third.

To be fair, Santos was probably pleased that France went 4-2-3-1 because it ensured his men didn’t have to cope with the midfield runs from Pogba and Matuidi. Instead, Nani often attempted to sit goal-side of Matuidi, Adrien Silva stepped forward to Pogba when he received the ball around the halfway line, and William Carvalho was tasked with tracking Griezmann’s movement between the lines.

Attachment-1 (18).png

Full-backs Patrice Evra and Bacary Sagna were harried by Joao Mario and Renato Sanches when they received possession, which ultimately deprived France of natural width. Samuel Umtiti and Laurent Koscielny were free to carry the ball forward, and had no other option but to find the attacking midfield trio who sought out space between the lines, but this was what Deschamps must have expected considering Santos made no changes to his defensive approach.

France shape

Apart from the opening 10 minutes of the match, similar to their opponents, France equally dropped off into two banks of four and were reluctant to press the Portuguese defence from the front. This may have backfired against a German side containing genuine creative outlets possessing excellent passing range, but Santos midfield are renowned for being functional and dynamic. Therefore, the hosts could afford to allow Portugal monopolize the ball in their half while they conserved energy.

Giroud and Griezmann occasionally pushed forward to half-heartedly close down the centre –backs – on one occasion the former’s pressing forced Pepe to concede possession and Dimitri Payet instantly located Griezmann drifting across Fonte, but the forward’s nodded effort was pushed over the net by Rui Patricio – and William Carvalho was free to drop deeper to create 3v2 overloads. France, however, covered space in midfield superbly with Matuidi and Pogba closing down their markers, so apart from long-balls over the defence Portugal struggled to bypass the midfield zone.

Cristiano Ronaldo suffering from a collision with Payet in the early stages of the first half, combined with sloppy passing in transition meant Portugal’s offensive threat during the opening half hour was scarce. Perhaps Deschamps could have encouraged his men to win the ball in advanced zones, but Portugal rarely threatened despite receiving space in their third to build attacks because of their poor passing, so Deschamps’ decision was justified.

Santos adjusts

Ronaldo’s unfortunate substitution could be considered the turning point of the match, as it forced Santos to make a key decision regarding his shape. Santos could have summoned Eder to lead the line here with Nani playing off the striker to maintain their 4-4-2 system, but the Portuguese manager decided to alter his shape.

Impact substitute, Ricardo Quaresma, replaced Ronaldo and shifted to the right of a midfield band of five (it was effectively a 4-1-4-1) while Nani remained upfront as a lone striker. This made sense due to Nani’s impressive movement upfront – in the opening three minutes he received a half chance following an intelligent run behind Koscielny to receive Raphael Guerreiro’s long diagonal, but the Portuguese forward fired his effort wide.

Screen Shot 2016-07-11 at 12.03.02 PM

Nani’s passing in the final third was sharp, and on the rare occasion Portugal drifted into France’s third he looked capable of creating a half chance at minimum. Likewise, the system alteration provided Portugal with cover in wide areas, and now gave Renato Sanches and Adrien sole marking jobs against the France double-pivot.


The most peculiar feat of the match, though, was that Moussa Sissoko was the standout attacking player throughout. Renowned for excelling when provided space on the counter attack for now relegated Newcastle United, Sissoko’s inclusion on the right of a 4-2-3-1 offered defensive discipline and powerful running.

However, here, Sissoko darted infield from the right or into deeper central positions to receive the ball and instantly motor past opposing defenders to earn corner kicks. Although Sissoko’s impact decreased significantly in the second half, he still forced Rui Patricio to make a key save when he received a pass from Umtiti between the lines and subsequently tested the keeper from 30-yards – the move illustrated one of the structural flaws Portugal encountered out of possession.

With France lacking invention and penetration in the final third, Sissoko’s quick change of pace and direct running highlighted the structural issues Santos’ men faced. But it equally showcased France’s sole route of attack when Portugal put numbers behind the ball, obviously indicating that Deschamps system wasn’t maximizing the strengths of his star players.

France attack

It was France who created the better chances from open play, yet apart from Sissoko’s individual slaloms through midfield, the hosts generated their attacks predominantly down the left flank. Karim Benzema’s suspension from the national side meant Giroud would always be the first choice striker at this tournament, and while the Arsenal man receives criticism for his production in front of goal, he remains a useful focal point upfront.

Attachment-1 (20)

It was evident Giroud was instructed to nod down balls into Griezmann’s path, whilst bringing other teammates into advanced areas – he effectively created chances for substitute Kinglsey Coman, and a combination with Griezmann led to a Sissoko chance, but Deschamps may have envisioned this route of attack would create space beyond the Portuguese back-line.

Secondly, Giroud and Griezmann constantly stormed down the left behind Cedric to get into good scoring positions. The opening minutes witnessed Matuidi nod the ball behind Cedric for Griezmann, but the Frenchman fired his effort wide of the net. Both strikers received opportunities to take the lead via precise incisive passes from Coman, but both failed to beat Rui Patricio at the near post.

France weren’t particularly poor going forward, but their attacking moves appeared fairly individualistic rather than cohesive. The wider players were now nullified, and the midfielders rarely ventured near the box, so the hosts’ intent to cleverly play quick passes around the Portuguese defence rarely occurred. More so, they were solely relying on Coman and Sissoko’s penetrative runs narrow positions to unlock Portugal’s defence.

Second half

The second half followed a similar theme until the managers made personnel alterations. Deschamps replaced Coman for Payet, which should have resulted in natural width from the left to create more space for Griezmann centrally, and another dribbler/crosser. But Coman’s positioning was identical to Payet, yet he offered pace and quick combinations to fluster the Portuguese back-line. The French substitute forced Santos to react, as Coman’s arrival sparked a brief French resurgence.

Coman created the game’s golden chance when he cut onto his right foot and clipped a cross to the far post that saw Griezmann glance it inches over the net. And along with creating chances in half space for both strikers, he equally combined with Giroud at the edge of the box, and broke away from Fonte, but his heavy touch led to a poor shot at Patricio.

Santos turned to Moutinho for the tiring Adrien, and with the overall tempo of the match decreasing significantly, Portugal improved when they retained possession. Meanwhile, France’s preference of waiting for Portugal to push forward as a unit helped the midfielder settle, and Portugal began to create some half chances from both flanks, but lacked a striker to attack crosses into the box.

The other significant change occurred at the same time with Andre-Pierre Gignac replacing Giroud and Eder being summoned in exchange for Renato Sanches. Gignac moved laterally into the channels to receive the ball and his sole contribution to the match was decisive, as he received Evra’s low cross from the left, subsequently turned Pepe to the ground, but scuffed his shot off the post.

Attachment-1 (19).png

Eder, on the other hand, provided an alternative threat to Portugal’s attack. The Portuguese midfield were now provided a penalty box threat when they delivered crosses into the box, but more importantly, his hold up play brought his teammates further up the pitch, and equally forced the French centre-backs into committing needless fouls. Eder’s arrival resulted two bookings – Umtiti and Matuidi were both cautioned – whilst pushing Nani to the right flank, which saw the Portuguese veteran expertly negate Evra’s threat from left-back.


Nevertheless, it was fitting that the game’s defining moment featured the two impact players Santos brought off the bench. The goal came seconds following Raphael Guerreiro’s brilliant free kick that smashed off the crossbar, and it vividly illustrated the positive contrast in Portugal’s game following Santos’ substitution.

Moutinho dispossessed Griezmann following an Evra throw-in and quickly combined with Quaresma before playing the ball into Eder with his back to goal. The Portuguese striker easily shrugged off Laurent Koscielny and ran towards goal – Umtiti retreated backwards to his box – and fired a low shot past goalkeeper Hugo Lloris.

Moutinho provided the forward penetrative passing and ball retention Portugal lacked for large portions of the match. Likewise, Deschamps’ men couldn’t cope with Eder’s physical presence, and regardless if whether Lloris was at fault for conceding the long distance drive – or slightly injured trying to save Guerreiro’s free-kick 30 seconds prior – the Portuguese striker represented an unlikely goal threat within the final third.

This was simply the case of proper game management from Santos, while Deschamps panicked following Eder’s winner, and immediately introduced Anthony Martial without a legitimate method of attack to rescue the match.


It’s difficult to find anyone other than Deschamps culpable for France’s downfall. Unable to identify his best XI, the French manager persisted with a 4-4-2 that didn’t get the best out of his dynamic midfielders and equally left his side exposed in central areas. While Deschamps did get his initial system wrong, what’s more disappointing was his inability to acknowledge his mistake: Martial’s mobility and willingness to run the channels and take on defenders was wasted, while Kante was forced to watch from the bench with Pogba and Matuidi being virtually ineffective from deeper midfield zones.

The semi-final against Germany was a prime example that France were unable to reach an elite status if changes weren’t made. Against Portugal they provided scares in brief spells, but Deschamps reluctance to alter his ineffective approach proved crucial. While basing the side around the in-form Griezmann was logical, following his missed opportunities, it’s difficult to understand why Deschamps didn’t alter formations — in short, that’s where he deserves blame.

Embed from Getty Images

Santos deserves credit for Portugal’s triumph as he out-witted and out-coached Deschamps on the night. Portugal were unconvincing for large portions of the tournament, and relied on a few standout performers on their road to success, but they remained unbeaten throughout the tournament which validates their success.

Attachment-1 (21).png

Ultimately you need a bit of good fortune to win a cup competition, and finishing third in their group turned out to be a blessing as Santos’ men avoided the few elite sides in the tournament. More so, this was bigger than Ronaldo, which is once again credit to Santos for properly displaying how to effectively utilize a squad throughout the tournament as all 20 players featured at Euro 2016.

Moving natural wingers upfront saw Ronaldo and Nani transition into timely penalty box poachers, and though his side’s defensive shape wasn’t perfect, it was surely enough to ensure Portugal remained unbeaten at Euro 2016.

Nonetheless, Portugal’s European Cup run epitomizes Santos’ tenure thus far: uninspiring, scrappy games that were ultimately won in the latter stages of matches. With majority of the experienced players likely to be phased out, now, Santos is tasked with building an identity the current winners severely lacked throughout the competition.

Pepe, Raphael Guerreiro, Rui Patricio and Nani were outstanding throughout the tournament, but now they must develop a coherent brand of football to build on this success. They were far from the best team at the tournament, but it’s fitting that a centre-forward is responsible for Portugal’s first major triumph following their decade long search to fill the void in this position.

Leave a comment

Posted by on July 12, 2016 in Euro 2016, Published Work


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tactical Preview: France – Portugal

Embed from Getty Images

Although we’ve possibly witnessed the best games of Euro 2016 in the previous stages of the knockout round, France’s showdown with Portugal is built to be a fascinating prospect.

Two teams that have attempted to join world football’s elite over the past decade offer several intriguing clashes prior to kickoff. Neither France nor Portugal have been remarkable throughout the tournament, but have found a way to cruise through favourable matches thus far.

Germany presented France’s sole threat in the previous round, and Didier Deschamps were completely outplayed for the first half, and were fortunate to pounce on mistakes committed by Joachim Low’s defence. Deschamps men won’t have to worry about spending long periods without the ball or intelligent playmakers across the pitch against Portugal, but the system isn’t relatively convincing.

Possibly the biggest decision the French manager must make is whether to persist with the 4-4-2 or revert back to a 4-3-3. The 4-4-2 has been the catalyst to France’s best performances against Iceland and Ireland, but against the Germans, they were completely outplayed for large portions of the match.

Against a Portuguese side containing the best player in the tournament in Cristiano Ronaldo, Deschamps may have to rejig his shape. Deschamps’ obsession with the 4-4-2 is based around the tournament’s leading goal-scorer, Antoine Griezmann, playing closer to Olivier Giroud in a central role, whilst receiving the space to maximize his talent.

If Deschamps were to opt for a 4-3-3, Griezmann would be pushed out wide, but France would have a solid shape in central areas as they transition to a 4-5-1.

Screen Shot 2016-07-09 at 6.56.13 PM

In ways the system can still be effective with Griezmann and Payet attempting to overload William Carvalho between the lines, as it’s evident both men strive in central positions. Olivier Giroud will attempt to hold off Pepe and bring his teammates into play, but with two roaming space invaders, Blaise Matuidi and Paul Pogba should receive space to penetrate.

However, this leaves Pogba and Matuidi with defensive roles ahead of the back-line, which ultimately decreases their ability to charge forward towards goal. Kante’s inclusion provides a midfielder filled with dynamism and the ability to break up plays and swift counter-attacks, which is exactly what the hosts lacked against Germany in the opening half. France were guilty of leaving too much space between the lines and ahead of the midfield bank – Griezmann and Giroud did very little from a defensive aspect – against Germany, which offered players like Mesut Ozil, Toni Kroos, and Jerome Boateng space to excel.

Luckily for the hosts, Portugal doesn’t have midfielders at their disposal that are capable of dictating the tempo of a match like the aforementioned German stars. Fernando Santos identified his best XI in the knockout round, as Portugal has operated in an unorthodox 4-1-3-2 en route to the finals, with wide players in Ronaldo and Nani leading the line.

In fairness, neither France nor Portugal have been consistently good throughout the tournament despite their easy road to the final, but the latter in particular has been fairly uninspiring. Apart from a few standout performers in Pepe, Raphael Guerreiro, Adrien Silva, and Nani, there’s very little to get excited about the Portuguese side.

Their attacking play has been predominantly based around crosses from the full-backs, and their functional midfield has been unable to supply service to the frontmen, who in fairness, have made excellent runs throughout the tournament. More so, they struggle to put together slick passing moves in the final third along with exploiting space between the lines.

Frankly, the goals Portugal have scored in the knockout round are telling – Ricardo Quaresma’s counter-attacking goal came when Croatia pushed too many men forward, Renato Sanches’ equalizer against Poland followed one of the game’s few nifty combination plays, whereas Ronaldo notched a set-piece winner and his scuffed shot was fortuitously redirected by Nani to eliminate Wales.

Santos essentially fields three gritty midfielders ahead of William Carvalho that are quite similar in terms of skill level and traits, but severely lack creativity and guile around the penalty area. Meanwhile, although the full-backs have been great from a defensive aspect, their contributions in the attacking third have been equally scarce.

William Carvalho’s return from suspension should see the midfielder push Danilo to the bench, following his difficult afternoon against Gareth Bale in the semi-final win over Wales. Assuming Portugal stick to their current defensive approach and willingly drop into two banks of four out of possession, Carvalho will still face a huge defensive task on the night.

Portugal haven’t been quite convincing out of possession when they transition into a flat 4-4-2, and with Griezmann and Payet aiming to find pockets of space in central zones, William Carvalho could be susceptible of being overrun via a combination of quick incisive passes and deep midfield runs. Likewise, Deschamps has several counter-attacking threats within his XI, so it’s unlikely that Portugal will push several men forward as it would increase the likelihood of being exposed in transition.

The other major talking point involving Portugal is their goal source. Nani and Ronaldo have been positive in this respect, scoring timely goals from minimal service from their teammates. The former’s movement towards the channels has posed issues throughout the tournament, and he’s developed a knack of poaching goals within the penalty box.

Ronaldo’s winner against Wales displayed his set-piece threat, and if Portugal’s full-backs can deliver quality crosses into the box, Santos’ talisman could be the decisive factor. It’s likely Ronaldo will aim to drift to either back post when crosses are played into the box due to his height advantage over diminutive full-backs Bacary Sagna and Patrice Evra.

The Portuguese forward’s opener for Real Madrid in the 2012 Champions League knockout round against Real Madrid witnessed Ronaldo leap over Evra to score against his former employers, and here, he may attempt to replicate that feat. It would be expected that Portugal can also rely on counter-attacks if Kante starts on the bench, yet oddly, their transitional attacks have been underwhelming.

In wide areas, both full-backs have become adept to providing width, but there could be a hint of caution displayed from both, here. Cedric and Raphael will be wary of a French counter, and while Sagna and Evra have improved as the tournament’s progressed, Ronaldo offers arguably the greatest threat on the counter ever, which may see Deschamps’ full-backs limit their adventurous positioning.

While set-pieces can prove significant, there are still many key decisions both managers have to address that could impact the outcome. Portugal’s protection of the back four, along with Deschamps’ decision to play a two or three-man midfield will be pivotal. Nonetheless, this is equally poised for Ronaldo to produce on one of the biggest stages for his country, and it will be interesting to see how Santos aims to utilize his captain.

It can’t be overstated the significance of the first goal, but this could be a cagey affair until one team is forced to push forward.

Leave a comment

Posted by on July 9, 2016 in Euro 2016, Published Work


Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Tactical Preview: Wales – Portugal


Courtesy of Flickr/Jon Candy

Euro 2016’s first semi-final will feature the top two players at the tournament. Gareth Bale and Cristiano Ronaldo may be teammates for Real Madrid, but they stand in each other’s path of claiming their country’s first trophy at the international level.

Surprisingly, while the two men are capable of single-handily winning matches, it’s arguable that the work-rate of their teammates has been pivotal towards their success thus far. Portugal and Wales have been labeled as “one-man teams” prior to the tournament, yet their progress illustrates the significance of working as a collective.

Tactically, this could prove to be another underwhelming showdown between two sides that prefer to play on the counter-attack. This was supposed to be the case between Wales and Belgium, but the latter’s poor defensive structure ensured the former received ample space for Bale to constantly launch counter-attacks.

Portugal offers an entirely different challenge. Fernando Santos’ men won’t be naïve out of possession, and they pose a larger threat on the counter attack that should worry Chris Coleman considering Wales weren’t entirely stellar in that aspect despite out-playing Belgium in the previous round.

Nonetheless, the biggest disappointment revolves around the players suspended for the semi-final. Portugal will be without William Carvalho, whereas Aaron Ramsey and Ben Davies have also been suspended for the semi-final. In comparison to Portugal, Wales’ quality is limited and it’s evident that the suspensions could prove decisive.

Three-man defences have fared well thus far, and it will be interesting, yet equally surprising if Santos were to replicate Joachim Low’s decision to alter his system. In many regards, on paper at least, Chris Coleman’s system may frustrate a Portuguese side that severely lacks width.

Wales’ centre-backs prefer to engage in aerial duels, and their man advantage at the back ensures Ronaldo will be positioned in many 1v2 positions when he attacks crosses, or aims to cut centrally from the left. Then, similar to their triumph against Belgium, Coleman could encourage his wing-backs to position themselves higher up the pitch to negate Portugal’s main source of width.

The main issue for Wales could be the Ramsey suspension solely due to his role in midfield. Ramsey has been impressive throughout the tournament, offering diligent work-rate, tenacity, and an additional body in midfield.

Screen Shot 2016-07-05 at 4.31.31 PM

Likewise, he was provided the freedom to join counter-attacks with Bale and the selected striker, whilst covering his box-to-box duties. The build up to Hal Robson-Kanu’s quarter-final winner epitomized his significance – Ramsey made a diagonal charge from the half way line into right half space to meet Bale’s dinked pass, and the midfielder instantly delivered the cross that resulted in the goal.

Without Ramsey, Coleman may transition into more of a 3-4-2-1 with Jonny Williams joining Bale behind the striker. Williams is more of a raw attacking threat – he plays nifty passes into tight areas and is capable of dribbling beyond opponents – in comparison to Ramsey, and though it doesn’t affect Joe Allen and Joe Ledley’s role ahead of the back four, Wales will likely need another body central areas to cope with Portugal’s gritty midfield.

This could interest Coleman to field Bale in a midfield role – he’s displayed he can be disciplined defender in a reactive system during his time at Real Madrid – and have Robson Kanu playing off Sam Vokes to ensure Wales have a focal point upfront. If not, Williams will be forced to play a more functional role alongside Ledley and Allen.

On the other hand, William Carvalho’s suspension also affects a crucial aspect of the match. The game’s pivotal battle will be whether Portugal can cope with Bale’s threat on the counter. In terms of form, Bale is the best player on both sides ahead of kick-off. The Welshman consistently displayed his threat via set-pieces, on the counter-attack and hints of creativity from deeper positions.

While it’s arguable Danilo is better suited in Portugal’s 4-1-3-2 opposed to William Carvalho, he faces a difficult task in coping with Bale’s running on the counter-attack. Assuming Coleman will avoid engaging in a physical battle between Vokes and standout defender Pepe, Kanu’s decoy diagonal runs into wide areas could fluster the Portuguese back-line. Ultimately, if Danilo struggles against Bale’s runs, Pepe may need to exceed the superb performance levels displayed throughout the tournament.

In truth, Portugal must improve in open-play. Wales will happily concede possession to Santos’ men and welcome crosses into the box, and the intent of quickly facilitating passes into Ronaldo may not prove successful considering the Portuguese talisman will be outnumbered upfront.

Renato Sanches’ physical presence and powerful running is one of the few positives during this semi-final run, but Santos may turn to Joao Moutinho alongside the 18-year-old and Joao Mario. Moutinho is the sole genuine passer at Santos’ disposal – his pass over the Polish defence to Ronaldo in the second half of the quarter-final was evidence – and with the full-backs likely to remain cautious due to Bale’s threat, it’s difficult to highlight how Portugal will get behind the Welsh defence.

Here, we have two teams utilizing diverse systems: Coleman’s success has been based around a collective effort whilst maximizing the talents of his best players. Santos hasn’t been afforded that luxury – Ronaldo hasn’t been effective in the final third, but individual performances from Nani, the defenders, and Renato Sanches combined with previous tournament experience has sufficed.

The threat of Bale and Ronaldo will dominate pre-match talks, but a place in the finals will rest on which side can perform better as a unit.

Leave a comment

Posted by on July 5, 2016 in Euro 2016, Published Work


Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Portugal’s non-existent identity guarantees tough road to Euro final


Courtesy of Flickr/All Rights are with hayvehayveson

Portugal’s narrow win over Croatia could possibly be remembered as one of the worst games to be played at the international level.

Ricardo Quaresma further justified the significance of substitutes at Euro 2016 with his extra-time winner serving as the game’s sole shot on target. An underwhelming spectacle featuring two cautious sides that feared defeat appeared to be destined for penalty kicks, yet it all unraveled within minutes.

Many believed this would be one of the better games of the round, but unfortunately it was considerably dull. Perhaps the belief that Portugal would improve against well-known opposition, combined with Croatia’s result against holders Spain can be held responsible, but stylistically, both sides appeared content with a slow-burning contest.

Croatia’s undermanned triumph over Spain was based on deep organized defending and quick counter-attacks, whereas Portugal excel playing in a similar manner. However, the round of 16 clash witnessed both teams wary of conceding space to the opposition, therefore thwarting any possible offensive threat in the final third.

Fernando Santos’ men deserve plaudits for keeping a clean sheet throughout the 120 minutes, led by impressive individual displays from Pepe and Raphael Guerrero. Adrien harried Luka Modric into deeper midfield zones, and though at times the Croatian easily waltzed past the Portuguese midfielder, the Real Madrid star was unable to dictate the tempo of the match as preferred.

Mario Mandzukic’s fitness issues ensured the Portuguese defence were rarely tested, as he offered very little coming short and lacks the pace to pose a threat beyond the back four. And where Santos’ men shifted well laterally to contain Croatia’s threat on the flanks, on the few occasions Croatia received space to counter, Ivan Rakitic, in particular, was quickly fouled. Rakitic isn’t renowned for his movement between the lines, so majority of Croatia’s buildup play was facilitated through the flanks, and while Darijo Srna served as a legitimate attacking threat, Portugal were only troubled via set-pieces.

However, Santos’ men suffered similar issues in possession, which fully explains both sides combining for one shot on target. For all of the quick intricate combinations in central areas ahead of the box, Portugal simply lacked the final ball beyond the defence to create clear-cut chances. Meanwhile, poor service from midfield nullified Cristiano Ronaldo and Nani’s intelligent runs into the channels.

Essentially, that’s the issue that’s constraining the Portuguese at the moment. Still an excellent side on the counter, and probably better equipped defensively under Santos, now, the midfield is too functional and brawn. In the past, Portugal could turn to Rui Costa, Deco or even Joao Moutinho for creativity, whereas now, even with the latter in the squad – his form has dipped significantly since Euro 2012 – Santos’ side remain lacklustre in the final third.

In regards to the midfield, Santos clearly hasn’t identified his best XI, but this hasn’t been an issue solely because his options are practically at the same skill level and considerably raw. Therefore, squad rotation isn’t harmful, but the scrappy nature of the midfield personnel is partially responsible for the poor service to the forwards and the issues Portugal encounter when they come across organized defences that sit deep.

The current Portuguese system includes four central midfielders across the second band, and though they’re deprived natural width under these circumstances, it ensures they remain competitive in central areas. But with many teams preferring to play on the counter, identifying space to penetrate has become a nuisance to Santos’ men as they’re failing to break beyond the opposition – often seeing their moves collapse as they approach the edge of the box.

In truth, the four goals scored thus far epitomize their overall approach. First it was Vieirinha’s cross that found Nani at the near post that briefly gave Portugal the lead in their opener against Iceland. Then in an open encounter against Hungary, both forwards exploited slack defending by making simple diagonal runs across defenders to convert chances –  two were from wide areas, and the initial equalizer stemmed through Ronaldo’s exceptional pass from midfield.

The winner against Croatia illustrated Santos’ side at their best – in transition, Renato Sanches’ powerful running through midfield enabled Nani and Ronaldo to break forward, with the former’s inch-perfect pass meeting the latter in the box, and Quaresma nodding a loose ball into an open net. It was the first time in the match when Croatia took initiative to push men forward, and despite hitting the post and creating arguably their best moves of the match during this brief period, it provided Portugal space to threaten on the counter.

Although, it was strange to see Croatia revert to such caution – though they may have attempted to limit space for Portugal to exploit in transition – Ante Cacic’s defensive-minded proved beneficial. Perhaps poor finishing can be associated with Portugal’s shortcomings in the opening matches, but going forward they continue to excel when there’s ample space to run into – hence why they often perform well against superior opposition.

Nevertheless, Portugal possibly hoist the easiest road to a major international final, and though it appears another opportunity to claim silverware is straightforward, stylistically, their side of the bracket presents several cagey encounters.  Crossing is undoubtedly a method of attack that can be mightily predictable throughout a match, but the intent to play quick intricate through central areas has been anonymous.

Unlike Portugal’s group-stage opposition, Poland and Wales are better suited adopting an extremely deep defensive back-lines, and have players in Robert Lewandowski and Gareth Bale that represent legitimate goal-threat in open play and via quick counter-attacks. Belgium, on the other hand, are also better suited to attack in transition, and a showdown with Portugal could set-up a pattern similar to their showdown with Croatia.

The main issue, however, is that Santos’ options are fairly limited. Jose Fonte does represent an improved option in defence based on his mobility, whereas Sanches’ power and directness can help the Portuguese dominate the midfield zone and break forward instantly. Still, against Poland, in particular, it’s difficult imagining the Portuguese will receive many opportunities to catch the Poles out of position, providing they don’t score an early goal.

Despite the late goals that have defined Santos’ tenure as Portuguese manager, it’s difficult to highlight this current side’s identity. They remain combative in midfield, and have the pace and counter-attacking threat of Nani and Ronaldo upfront, but there are still many questions to be raised regarding their attacking and defensive ploys.

Though poor finishing and some heroic goalkeeping can be associated with Portugal’s issues in front of goal, the lack of a genuine passer in the final third halts any possibility of improvement barring a Ronaldo master-class. Frankly, at this stage specifically, finding a way to win remains decisive. But considering the possible awaiting opponents in the upcoming rounds, from a stylistic and tactical viewpoint, perhaps the opposing side of the draw was better suited for Santos’ men.


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Fernando Santos’ Portugal live and die through crosses against inspired Iceland

Portugal ronaldo iceland euro 2016

ST ETIENNE, FRANCE – JUNE 14: Ronaldo (L) of Portugal objects to Turkish referee Cuneyt Cakir (R) during the EURO 2016 Group F football match between Portugal and Iceland at Geoffroy Guichard Stadium in St Etienne, France on June 14, 2016. (Photo by Evren Atalay/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)

Birkir Bjarnason’s second half equalizer earned Iceland a historic draw against Portugal, but Fernando Santos’ side produced a positive performance that merited maximum points.

Over the past decade, the one issue preventing Portugal from becoming a genuinely good side has been the lack of a competent centre-forward. The wide players were the main attacking threats in a 4-3-3, whereas the midfield and defence usually compensated for their occasional shortcomings upfront.

Nevertheless, Santos’ reign with the national team has seen a transition towards an unorthodox 4-4-2 with Cristiano Ronaldo and Nani upfront. Essentially, the movement of the front two could confuse the opposing defenders, but with Portugal’s strengths now based around a youthful group of talented midfielders, Santos opted to shift the culture, stylistically.

Ironically, Portugal’s width was pivotal throughout their opening group match despite Santos tweaking the formation. Once upon a time, Ronaldo was renowned for cutting in from the left, and Nani produced crosses from the right, but here, two central midfielders in Andre Gomes and Joao Mario operated in wide zones.

Attachment-1 (14)

The main weakness in Portugal’s XI is the back-line, so the decision to field four tenacious midfielders that can remain compact and narrow evidently benefits the Group F favourites. On paper, it appeared the Portuguese may encounter difficulties incorporating natural width, yet surprisingly, it was the main facet of their buildup play.

Gomes and Joao Mario drifted centrally to deliver crosses into the box, whereas right-back Vieirinha surged forward at every opportunity to join the attack. Coincidentally, it was Gomes and Vieirinha’s swift combination down the right flank that created Nani’s opener, thus justifying Santos’ insistence to play through wide areas.

Though Portugal were unable to penetrate the Iceland defence with incisive passes in the final third, they showcased a legitimate threat via crosses from either flank. However, Nani and Ronaldo squandered several opportunities in the opening half – in truth, Portugal could have been up by three or four by the half hour mark.

Nonetheless, Santos’ decision to start Ronaldo and Nani upfront is logical due to their experience operating as wide attackers in previous tournaments. However, although Ronaldo has developed into an exceptional poacher, he still prefers to roam around the final third opposed to solely attacking crosses. This presented an issue to the Portuguese attack even with the duo maintaining balance.

“I don’t know if it is my favourite position, but it is where the coach puts me,” Ronaldo said. “I like more to arrive from the wing to the centre, but I have the freedom to go where I want. I will have to get used to it.”

Attachment-1 (15)

For the most part, Ronaldo drifted wide, whereas Nani stayed central and vice-versa – both men created super chances for each other in this manner but were denied by Iceland goalkeeper Hannes Halldorsson. Yet, there were times when they were both guilty of drifting into the channels, which deprived Portugal a crossing target in the box. Ronaldo and Nani simply didn’t operate as a natural strike partnership, and neither player consistently aimed to link play with teammates, thus limiting Portugal’s threat around the box.

Iceland equally posed a threat in wide areas by initially attacking make-shift Vieirinha in the opening stages of the match, but were only tested Rui Patricio once in the first half. Bjarnason’s equalizer may have not stemmed from the right flank, but the make-shift defender was culpable because his poor positioning ultimately left the Iceland attacker unmarked at the far post.

Kolbeinn Sigthorsson and Jon Dadi Bodvarsson’s combination via aerial duels was initially promising, but as Iceland were pegged deeper into their half, their impact decreased drastically. Heimir Hallgrimsson’s men sustained lengthy spells of pressure due to their inability to retain possession, and when they aimed to push out of their zone in unison, neither striker was capable of linking play with the midfield.

Santos’ decision to introduce Renato Sanches, Ricardo Quaresma and then Eder in the final 20 minutes saw the Portuguese increase the tempo in their forward passes, as they suddenly transitioned into a 4-2-4. Sanches quickly turned defence into attack on a few occasions, Quaresma always ran towards goal from the right flank, whereas Eder’s presence created additional space in the box for Ronaldo.

The score-line and result flatters an Iceland side that barely posed a threat to Santos’ side, and although they should still feel comfortable in topping the group, Portugal’s attacking structure is fairly interesting. Portugal’s final two group games are expected to follow a similar pattern, and though they could turn to set-pieces for goals, they must discover another attacking ploy from open play.

Leave a comment

Posted by on June 15, 2016 in Euro 2016, Published Work


Tags: , , , , , ,

Euro 2016 Preview: How the tournament may be dull but ridiculously unpredictable


There’s a contrasting feeling looming around the upcoming Euro 2016 tournament following the decision to include eight additional teams.

Although it offers an increased viewership due to a larger tournament, the overall quality drastically decreases due to a limited amount of great sides.. Now, the inclusion of eight teams paves an easier route to the knockout stage, and can arguably hinder the tournament from a footballing perspective.

Frankly, that belief hinges on the true definition of ‘entertaining football’ – while one used to associate the term with Spain’s ability to retain possession and pass their way through opponents, the sudden shift in success involves organized defending and quick transitions on the counter-attack. Leicester City’s Premier League triumph, combined with another successful Atletico Madrid campaign – despite finishing the season trophy-less – suggests teams may attempt to replicate their approach considering the tournament favourites’ insistence on possession dominance.

More importantly, despite the inevitable likelihood of several limited sides reverting to deep defensive blocks and solely attacking on the counter-attack, realistically, the ploy is fairly logical. Defensive solidity is essential in a knockout competition, and considering avoiding heavy defeats should guarantee progression beyond the group stage, tight games could surface throughout the tournament.

This reactive approach, however, should favour several tournament underdogs if executed properly – the best teams in the world possess various attacking options, and would clearly prefer to operate in space opposed to probing until they find an opening. Likewise, the lack of a genuine great side or tournament favourite equally increases the tournament’s overall interest. The quality is fairly scarce, but ahead of the opening match, it’s difficult to fully justify a clear favourite.

Spain, Germany and France dominate the conversation, but the European giants all possess positional deficiencies that inhibit the belief that they’re superior to their rivals.

Reigning world champions Germany and two-time defending Euro holders Spain can no longer turn to reliable goal-scoring centre-forwards and may both encounter issues providing penetration in the final third. Mario Gomez, Alvaro Morata and Aritz Aduriz will be responsible for the goals despite the possible stylistic inadequacies, whereas Mario Gotze and Cesc Fabregas have featured as significant false-nine options in past tournaments – the former is arguably better in midfield, whereas the latter’s role requires out-of-form wide players David Silva and Pedro Rodriguez to offer penetration.

The reigning world and European champions pose different tactical dilemmas ahead of their opening group games, though. Often accused of over-possessing the ball, Spain have additional direct options in Lucas Vasquez and Nolito to offer variety to their patient possession-based football. Germany, on the other hand, have the option of utilizing Gomez as a legitimate target-man, but will be without key players in Ilkay Gundogan, Anthony Rudiger, and Marco Reus.

Meanwhile, hosts, France aim to hoist their first major tournament in 16 years, and the talent Didier Deschamps’ possesses suggests Les Bleus may never receive a better opportunity to end the drought. The hosts have several direct options like Antoine Griezmann and Paul Pogba that can play off Olivier Giroud’s impressive linkup play, but defensive absentees Raphael Varane, Mamadou Sakho, and Jeremy Mathieu leaves the French with very few options in defence. It’s also difficult to overlook that France’s recent tournament exits have come against Spain and Germany, and Deschamps’ men still look devoid of the experience to overcome their rivals in a head-to-head showdown.

Elsewhere, the same issues arise amongst the remaining notable contenders.

Italy possess the best defence and goalkeeper in the tournament but offer no creativity in midfield due to injuries to Marco Verratti and Claudio Marchisio, while their attacking options are extremely underwhelming. Antonio Conte has been heavily criticized for his selection prior to the tournament, but from an optimistic perspective, the Italian manager’s first two seasons at Juventus were fairly similar, with various players from midfield players scoring goals. Conte’s attention to detail, and overall cohesion in attacking moves will define an Italian side that appears sturdy at the back.


Cristiano Ronaldo is the best player at Euro 2016, and a free role upfront ensures Portugal won’t be overloaded down the left. Fernando Santos midfield is one of the best in the tournament, and though they also lack major tournament experience, they’re capable of outmuscling and dominating most sides in central areas. The movement of the Portuguese attackers will be interesting, but the defensive options at Santos’ disposal places significant responsibility on the midfield to ensure their shape isn’t disjointed – Ronaldo’s role will always be the difference-maker but Santos must find balance quickly.

Oddly, it’s difficult to identify better striker options in this year’s tournament than the four men Roy Hodgson possesses in Harry Kane, Jamie Vardy, Daniel Sturridge and Marcus Rashford. However, with England straying away from a flat 4-4-2, and the rapid growth in youthful, highly-technical players amongst the ranks, England currently suffers from the same issue that’s plagued them for years – striking the right balance and fielding his strongest XI. Needless to say, while many other teams would welcome England’s striking issues, like Portugal, their back-four is undoubtedly the clear weakness.

While this was expected to be the tournament Belgium evolved into world beaters, the same questions are being raised regarding their role amongst Europe’s elite. It still feels like Belgium’s success rests on the form of Eden Hazard and Kevin De Bruyne as the front line hasn’t substantially improved, whereas Marc Wilmots is still without natural full-backs. While Belgium’s individual talent still remains – they can count on a rejuvenated Moussa Dembele, possibly the best Premier League’s best centre-back partnership in Jan Vertonghen and Toby Alderweireld, and two top-class attacking midfielders in Kevin De Bruyne and Eden Hazard – the pressure is now on Wilmots to put the pieces together to launch a deep tournament run.

The tournament is still filled with stars like Gareth Bale, Robert Lewandowski, and Zlatan Ibrahimovic that will be aiming to overcome a lack of genuine support to make a statement, whereas Croatia’s impressive midfield – that still lacks a holding midfielder – is unlikely to make up for a tireless, yet often frustrated Mario Mandzukic and an unconvincing back-line. With more room for error, and no real powerhouses – this is possibly the antithesis of this year’s Champions League – it really leaves the tournament up for grabs.

Denmark (1992) and Greece’s (2004) triumphs – in much difficult circumstances – offers every team a sense optimism, and with the likes of Iceland, Turkey, Austria and Slovakia also involved, this is possibly the most open tournament in recent memory. It certainly may be a truly dull spectacle from a football standpoint, but the possibility of several winners guarantees a high-level of excitement.

So many questions remain unanswered.

So many teams look far from the finished product.

And with the international game drastically suffering with every passing tournament, the level of unpredictability presents a breath of fresh air that many will appreciate.

EURO 2016 is unlikely to be remembered as the best tournament of our lifetime, but the inaugural 24-team format has potential to usher in a new era courtesy of several shock results.

Perhaps now is the time where the impossible becomes possible.

Leave a comment

Posted by on June 9, 2016 in Euro 2016, Published Work


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Portugal 1-0 Sweden


Courtesy of

Cristiano Ronaldo’s late winner earned Portugal a narrow victory over Sweden at the Estadio da Luz.


Paulo Bento stuck with his traditional 4-3-3 with Ronaldo, Nani and Helder Postiga leading the line. Miguel Veloso, Joao Moutinho and Raul Meireles formed a midfield trio.

Erik Hamren didn’t provide many surprises either, as he preferred a 4-4-1-1 with Zlatan Ibrahimovic ahead of Johan Elmander. Alexander Kacaniklic and Sebastian Larsson operated on the flanks, while Kim Kallstrom and Rasmus Elm played in midfield.

Sweden defended admirably for large portions of the match, but Portugal’s guile, and perseverance guided them to an important victory.

Sweden shape

Hamren’s aim was evident in the opening minutes of the match, as his side swiftly dropped into a 4-5-1 without the ball. The Swedish wingers tucked in centrally to help maintain a narrow shape and Elmander admirably tracked Veloso. Elmander’s positioning on Veloso was significant – in the past Veloso’s opted to drop between the centrebacks and play long diagonal balls to build play from the back. But here, Elmander prevented the Portuguese midfielder from dictating the tempo of the match.

With Elmander keeping Veloso quiet, Elm and Kallstrom had the duty of tracking Moutinho and Meireles. Hamren’s approach prevented Portugal from constant penetration in the final third, yet it also provided an attacking spark for Sweden. Sweden’s narrow shape allowed Portugal’s fullbacks forward, but it left gaps for Swedish fullbacks – mainly Mikael Lustig – to expose.

A main issue Portugal’s encountered over the past few years has been preventing 2v1 situations on the left flank, as Ronaldo sits higher up the pitch to lodge quick counters. In the 6th minute, Lustig got into an advanced position and delivered a great cross towards Elmander, but the Swedish striker directed the ball inches wide.

Seconds later, Hamren’s men got forward again, and earned a corner kick, as the Portuguese defenders couldn’t cope with Lustig’s venomous ball into the box. Sweden’s best chance of the half also stemmed through great wing play from Hamren’s men. Elmander did well to deliver a cross into the box, and Ibrahimovic cleverly dummied the oncoming ball, and it fell to Larsson who watched Rui Patricio parry away his shot.

Sweden’s shape nullified Veloso, halted Portugal’s activity in the final third and gave them attacking options from wide areas, but they were unable to make the most of their created chances.

Portugal approach

Sweden’s reactive approach towards the match handed Portugal the onus to go forward and search for a goal. One of the main issues this Portuguese team has encountered over the years is breaking down sides that sit deep, focus on organization, and maintain a compact shape when out of possession.

Bento’s men experienced the same recurring issues in the first half. The front three struggled to get involved in the match, thus leading to Ronaldo and Nani constantly swapping positions. The Portuguese wide men often took up more central positions to receive the ball, as their fullbacks and midfielders were encouraged to attack space in wide areas and attempt to create overloads.

In particular, Joao Pereira enjoyed heaps of space on the right flank with Kacaniklic tucked in centrally, but the Portuguese right back’s crosses didn’t connect with any attacking players. Martin Olsson and Kacaniklic struggled from defensive aspect throughout the match, and despite Bento’s men enjoying success down that flank, the productivity from the right was poor.

Meireles and Moutinho’s activity in the final third was limited when they attempted to build play from the back. The Portuguese duo were forced to drop deeper in midfield to string passes together and their combination should’ve led to an opener in the 4th minute. Meireles slipped a pass between the Swedish defence, and an advancing Moutinho received the ball, rounded Andreas Isaksson, but his shot hit the side netting.

Meireles and Moutinho both finished the match with an 85% pass accuracy rate, while Moutinho completed a game-high four tackles and accurate crosses.  Meireles was dangerous in deeper positions, as he lobbed passes over the Swedish defence, attempting to get Portuguese attackers in goal-scoring positions. The Portuguese pair were influential throughout the match, and although they were restricted to certain areas across the pitch, they were able to dictate the tempo of the match.

Portugal got into great positions in the final third out wide, but they were stifled in central areas. Hamren’s men maintained a compact shape in two banks of four –  this forced Portugal’s midfield into deeper positions and their attacking three were ineffective. For all of Portugal’s possession in the first half, it was shocking to know that Sweden had created the better chances, despite Ibrahimovic’s minimal influence.


Portugal’s main concern heading into this two-legged affair was clear. Bento’s men were on a mission to neutralize Ibrahimovic, and over the course of 90 minutes, they succeeded.

First off, Sweden’s shape without the ball was an issue. Their midfield bank of five were pegged too deep into their half, and their transitions into attack were slow. Ibrahimovic was an isolated figure – in the first half, the Swedish striker had 17 touches on the ball. When the prolific striker successfully held the ball up, he lacked options and support to help push Sweden forward, but more importantly he didn’t receive adequate service.

Secondly, Pepe and Bruno Alves held a 2v1 advantage over the Swede, and their physical presence kept the prolific striker quiet. Ibrahimovic didn’t have any clear goal-scoring opportunities, nor was he allowed space to penetrate – the Portuguese centre backs performed a magnificent job on the Swede, as he was merely a peripheral figure.

Portugal down the left

As the second half wore on, Portugal’s overall performance improved, due to Hamren’s men dropping deeper into their third. Ultimately, this left a large gap between Ibrahimovic and the Swedish midfield, and it placed a daunting task on the Swedish wingers, who were forced to track runs from Portugal’s adventurous fullbacks.

Nonetheless, Bento’s troops were still struggling to test Isaksson. Majority of Portugal’s play came down the left flank, where Coentrao began to take advantage of Larsson, as the Swedish winger’s energy levels dipped quickly.

  • 70th minute: Coentrao and Almeida completed a one-two and the Portuguese full back got behind Larsson and drove towards the box, where he was tugged down by the Swede, thus leading to a Larsson booking.
  • 80th minute: Nani’s movement pushed Lustig out of position, and Coentrao played a pass behind the Swedish fullback towards the Portuguese winger. Nani delivered a decent ball into the box, which was half-heartedly cleared by Anders Svensson, presenting an ideal shooting angle for the Portuguese winger, but Svensson made a timely block to earn Portugal a corner kick.
  • 88th minute: Ronaldo received the ball on the left side of the pitch, and wonderfully turned Lustig to break free. The Portuguese captain played in an advancing Coentrao – who once again got past Larsson – and his dangerous cross in the box fell to Moutinho, who laid the ball off for Ronaldo, but he fired his shot over the net.

Towards the end of the match it was evident that Bento’s men targeted Larsson. Portugal got into great positions through these three situations, as Ronaldo’s winner and his header off the crossbar were created down this flank.

Hugo Almeida

Over the past few years, Postiga and Hugo Almeida have been maligned figures for the national team. Their inability to capitalize in front of goal has led to their ridicule, but it would be difficult to criticize the Portuguese strikers here.

However, despite Postiga’s positive attacking contribution, Bento decided to take another route of attack, and introduced Almeida. The move created turmoil worldwide over social media, but Almeida’s impact on the match provided Portugal with that extra bit of attacking impetus they lacked throughout the half.

  • 65th minute: Almeida receives the ball between the lines and is allowed to turn and play an overweighed pass to Coentrao, who flew past Larsson into a goal scoring position. Although the ball went out for a goal kick, Almeida displayed his intent to penetrate in the final third, opposed to feeding the ball back to the midfield like Postiga.
  • 70th minute: As stated earlier, his one-two with Coentrao got the Portuguese fullback into a dangerous position, which resulted in a Larsson booking.
  • 82nd minute: Veloso quickly threw the ball into Almeida’s feet, and their quick one-two allowed Veloso to evade Larsson and deliver a cross into the box. Ronaldo got in front of Olsson and his diving header flew past Isaksson. This was significant because it was one of the few times Veloso wasn’t shackled by Elmander, and Ronaldo finally decided to target Sweden’s weak link in Olsson – Lustig had a pretty decent outing coping with Nani and Ronaldo in 1v1 situations.
  • 85th minute: Almeida drifted to the left flank and received a lovely diagonal ball from Joao Pereira. The Portuguese striker lofted a ball into the box, and once again Ronaldo beat Olsson, but his header rang off the post.

Portugal dominated the second half, but Almeida’s introduction made the difference. The Portuguese striker’s movement, mobility and intent to penetrate, gave his side an element of attack they lacked, prior to his arrival.


Although the performance from Bento’s men was below par, Ronaldo’s goal puts Portugal in a great position to progress to the World Cup. However, failure to increase their lead in the second half could come back to haunt the Portuguese as they squandered several chances to win the tie.

“I’m always disappointed when we lose. On the whole, we played a good match defensively. What hurts a bit is that we had three good chances to take the lead in the first half. We would have liked to have come away from here having scored a goal,” Hamren said. 

Sweden had the better chances in the first half, and defended admirably for large portions of the match, but one defensive miscue proved costly. In fairness, their negative approach in the second half allowed Portugal to mount pressure in their third, and limit their chances of nicking an important away goal. Sweden looked better when they attempted to play through midfield, opposed to the direct approach they adopted in the second half, as Ibrahimovic was often disconnected from the midfield.

“We dominated the whole match, even more so in the second 45 minutes, as we created several chances to get a more comfortable result. Now the goal is to prepare the team to win again in Sweden, knowing that we are going there with a slender lead but with no goals conceded. We certainly won’t go to Sweden to defend this result,” Bento said.

Nevertheless, this was an ideal result for Portugal. Ronaldo struggled throughout the match, but the team fought hard, and provided him the platform to once again display his superiority on the field. The importance of the first goal will be crucial in Stockholm, but the occasion plays into Portugal’s hands. Sweden will be forced to attack from the start, and Portugal’s reactive approach and threat on the counter could expose a feeble Swedish backline. Bento’s men are nearly there, but they’ll need to defend better, attack with more precision and be efficient in front of goal if they intend on securing qualification.

Leave a comment

Posted by on November 16, 2013 in Match Recaps, Published Work


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,