2012 Champions League: The One That Goes All Wrong

It's ironic that maybe the greatest stretch of games in Chelsea's history kicks off with one of the more crushing losses. Going into this game Chelsea sat at fifth in the table and had gone five matches without a win before pulling out an unconvincing 3-0 victory over Bolton. Andre Villas-Boas' tenure was quickly coming to a fiery and unceremonious end, having alienated nearly every major figure at the club. 

Despite all of that, Chelsea still entered this game as the favorites. The Blues at least had experienced veterans they could call on, many of whom had played in 2008 Champions League final. They were playing a team in its first Champions League campaign. That alone gives Chelsea an advantage. This Napoli team had the makings of a superb squad but it wouldn't realize that potential for another few years and managers. All the same, Chelsea took a beating square on the chin here, in the first leg of the Round of 16.

Summary

Chelsea opened in a 4-2-3-1 formation. I'll talk more about the profound flaws in the lineup and tactics, but just off the bat AVB got this wrong. To his credit, John Terry was supposed to play in the match but he picked up a knock hours before. I'm not sure how much Terry could've helped against Napoli's destructive counter-attacks, but at least Chelsea would've had it's captain. The other failures are on the manager. Villas Boas dropped Ashley Cole, Frank Lampard and Fernando Torres, three experienced and talented players who could've really bolstered the squad during this match. The irony is that both Cole and Lampard would later sub on, and both performed substantially better than the players they replaced.

Napoli trotted out it's then-trademark 3-4-3. While the formation would make a wider comeback later in the decade after Antonio Conte popularized it (ironically with Chelsea), it hadn't been seen in soccer for a while. This of course leads Gary Neville to oogle over it in generic football man cliches on the broadcast: "I've played against it, and it can be tough to defend." Great analysis Gary!

The defense and midfield are a little spotty (Inler's passing from central midfield is amazing), but what really makes this shine is Napoli's front three. The Lavezzi-Cavani-Hamsik trio is absolutely devastating. Their athleticism, physicality and relentless pressure is really reminiscent of a high-end pressing basketball team. Lavezzi and Cavani really shine tonight, but Hamsik's passing holds the team and front line together in an understated way.

That front three tears Chelsea apart front the start. Within the first fifteen minutes Lavezzi and Cavani both have had excellent chances (Cavani wiffed his, Cech pulled out some great saves on the rest). 

Chelsea faced three main problems. First, the tactics and formation are all wrong. Napoli's front three play tight, with the two wingers roaming the half-spaces. Chelsea really doesn't cover those lanes at all: the fullbacks are too wide, the midfield pivot just sort of drifts around and the central defenders are too focused on Cavani. 

The second problem is more important. Chelsea simply doesn't have the personnel to keep up, especially with Lavezzi. Ivanovic gets stuck in 1v1 situations with Lavezzi far too often (partly because Daniel Sturridge refuses to track back and help), and Lavezzi burns him time and time again. Ivanovic will go on to be a key player in this run (and for the next few years), but this was one of his low points.

After the first fifteen minutes Chelsea are able to settle down a little more. They get control of the ball but really struggle to create any meaningful chances. Napoli does a good job of focusing on shutting down Mata, who was clearly the only playmaker Chelsea had, and then was pretty happy to let the Blues boot the ball down to Drogba. 

Chelsea miraculously takes the lead just before the half-hour, when Paolo Cannavaro botches an easy clearance and Mata puts the loose ball home. After that Chelsea seems like they could hold on until halftime, but then the floodgates open. Lavezzi grabs a loose ball and curls a beautiful shot home from outside the box on 39 minutes. Chelsea left Lavezzi wide open at the edge of the box, with both of the defensive pivot failing to close him down.

Anybody want to try to get near the shooter?

Napoli take the lead in first half stoppage time on a beautiful cross from Inler and finish from Cavani (his fifth goal in seven CL matches that year; this one looked preeeeettttyyy close to a handball). After the break Chelsea get nothing going, and Lavezzi puts the game away just after the hour mark. Napoli almost make it 4-1 late in the match, but Cole clears the ball off the line: Roberto Di Matteo would later call that clearance "the most important moment in our Champions League campaign." If Cole hadn't saved that goal, Chelsea would have had to score four, instead of three, in the reverse leg. Even in a stretch full of heroics, that would've been a bridge too far.

MVP

Lavezzi is the clear MVP of this match. He dominates Chelsea's backline from the start, scoring two goals and almost finishing off a couple more. His dribbling on the counter and cut-ins from the wing warped Chelsea's defense to the point where it really couldn't hold. 

What's aged the best?

There are a few potential choices here (see honorable mentions below), but I think the clear answer is this Napoli team. Aggressive, physical and impossible to handle. Although they finished fifth in Serie A this season, they defeated Juventus to claim the Coppa Italia. After spending the next few years in a state of unrealized potential, they hired Maurizio Sarri and start challenging Juventus for supremacy in Italy. After watching a season of stale Sarri-ball at Chelsea, I hypothesize that the reason his system worked so well at Napoli is because the remnants of the 2011-12 team gave it an edge and belligerence. Anyways, this team was super fun and full of hidden-gem players that you only saw in the Champions League or during summer international competitions. Plus they were sooo much fun to play with on FIFA.

Honorable mention 1: Chelsea's away kit

This black away kit was awesome. I loved the blue squares on top that slowly fade into the black jersey. The white strips add a nice edge. Also this was the first Chelsea jersey I owned, so it holds a special place in my heart.

Honorable mention 2: the commentary team

While I did make fun of Gary Neville earlier, the Martin Tyler-Neville team is really excellent and will be a part of this whole run. Their calls of the matches are a (usually) solid mix of analysis and excitement. They're the odd commentary team that aren't a complete pain.

What's aged the worst?

Andre Villas Boas. Just, the whole AVB experience. He survives a week after this game, but after losing 1-0 to West Brom Abramovich sacks him. After that he goes to Tottenham, which actually might be his greatest failure. At Spurs he tried again to do his same aggressive high line pressing defense, and again fails miserably. The really sad thing (for him) is that Spurs say, "Hey, we like that idea we just think that we can get somebody better to implement." So they go hire Mauricio Pochettino (with a brief Tim Sherwood appearance first), who does everything AVB wanted to do and does it better. 

To be completely fair to AVB, the problems that he struggled with as Chelsea manager are mostly the same ones that every other Chelsea manager struggles with that decade. The defense lacks the speed and skill to keep up with attackers, and Chelsea's attacking talent doesn't quite fit together (although he doesn't even have the benefit of Hazard's brilliance). 

He still could've done better. For starters, a good manager would've stopped trying to impose a system on the team that clearly couldn't work and instead lean into the team's strengths. Chelsea had the makings of an excellent defensive team that would generate offense through long balls to Drogba or by letting Mata and Torres dribble. They also had lots of experience and leadership in the likes of Terry, Lampard, Cole, etc. Instead of pushing those players (literally) to the margins, AVB could have empowered them (as Di Matteo would do) and maybe been able to put together a competent squad.

Best goal

Lavezzi's first goal is a beauty. It's a perfect mid-height curler that rolls along the side netting into the back of the goal. There's something so hypnotic in how perfectly he struck that ball: just the right amount of power and curl to put it in the one spot Cech could never get at. It's like a perfect back-shoulder fade from a quarterback: maybe it looks like the cornerback could've gotten the ball, but he really couldn't have.

What happened to that guy?

For this week's installment, let's take a look at Jose Bosingwa. The Portuguese fullback came to Chelsea in 2008 from Porto (for a tidy £16 million). Aside from the 2009-10 season, he notched at least 20 appearances in each of his years at the club. He was a solid rotation player, and not much more. But he's also instantly recognizable, partly by association with a certain period of Chelsea's history and partly because he has original claim on being called "The Brow." 

His post-Chelsea career is...divisive. Jose leaves the Blues for QPR, a move which attracted a fair amount of ire from Chelsea fans. But after just a year he leaves the club for Turkey, finishing his career with three seasons at Trabzonspor and a few more international call-ups. 

Since then he's effectively dropped off the radar: basic Google searches yield nothing but stat pages and decade-old articles. I suppose that could be a good thing. Many players retire and then cause enough trouble to fill a tabloid, so maybe Bosingwa is keeping his head down and living large off his well-earned money. 

Or...I mean, who just fully drops off the face of the earth after a 15-year sports career? He has no discernible social media presence as far as I can tell, which is strange in and of itself, and apparently hasn't popped up in any commentary booth or talk show anywhere. That's a little strange. Jose, you doing ok man?

Next week, we hit on the first great match and comeback of this run. 

New Series: Chelsea's 2012 Champions League Run

Over a month into isolation and I've run through at least six distinct stages of boredom, only maybe four of which I knew existed before now. Desperately in need of something to do, I decided to spend hours every week watching decade-old soccer games and then blathering about them on my personal blog for a couple thousand words. Productivity!

Anyway in a pretty blatant rip-off of The Ringer's Rewatchables podcast series I'm going to be doing a series of posts, coming out every Friday, on Chelsea's run in the 2012 Champions League. I'll do a post for each game of the knockout stages (except for the quarterfinals against Benfica, which will be one post for the two legs-when the highlight of two games is a Raul Meireles goal, you know it's got to be pretty bland).

Each post will start with a summary of the game where I'll run through what happened and why. Then I'll hit a few categories: MVP of the game; best goal; what's aged the best and worst; and "what happened to that guy," a mix of the Dion Waiters and Joey Pants awards where I'll highlight one of the (many) great role players on Chelsea's squad and track their career since then.

This run is super interesting for a couple reasons.

First, it comes smack in the middle of a really weird time for Chelsea. The players (Drogba, Lampard, Terry, Cole, Cech, etc.) who had been the core of the club during the last decade were heading out the door. Starting in 2010 the club ramped up its spending during transfer windows again in an effort to replace that core group (between 2005 and 2009 Chelsea spent just $65 million or so every window, a paltry sum compared to what Abramovich is known for). Between 2010 and 2014 the club spend well into the hundreds of millions every summer trying to find new talent, especially offensive players (like Eden Hazard, Willian, Oscar, Juan Mata, and Fernando Torres).

Even as Chelsea looked for fresh talent they also tried to revamp their on-field identity. Even though Jose Mourinho had left the club in 2007, his pragmatic and pessimistic defensive style had lingered on after him. As Barcelona's attacking play swept the world, Abramovich (like so many others) looked around and said, "I want that." So he hired Andre Villas-Boas (a really yikes decision that I'll unpack more later). AVB (despite being in the Mourinho coaching tree) promised to bring a new, more aggressive style of play to the club. Part of that transition would involve ushering out the old players, who had neither the legs nor the interest in the young manager's opinions.

In many ways the 2011-12 season unintentionally became the last hurrah of the core that Mourinho formed. Drogba, Lampard and Cole were all gone within the next two years. Cech and Terry lasted longer (partly due to club legend status in Terry's case), but they didn't impact the club after Munich like they did before it.

Second, it was ridiculously improbable that Chelsea could have actually pulled this off. All due respect to 2015-16 Leicester, but I think that this Champions League title is the most surprising soccer run of the decade and maybe ever. This was, by far, the worst team of the Abramovich era up to that point. No squad had finished worse than third and with fewer than 70 points; this team dropped to sixth on 64. It is the second worst league performance of any Chelsea team since Roman took over (2015-16's squad finished tenth on 50 points, although I think that team was better than this one and really only collapsed because Mourinho went full Mourinho in December).

2011-12 Chelsea was a pot-pourri of aging stars and journeyman role players. The team got big performances at just the right times (especially from Drogba and Cole), but for the most part it struggled to put together a consistent stretch of quality play.

On top of that, Chelsea ran a gauntlet to lift the trophy. In the semis they beat Barcelona, who the year before had won the Champions League (and the treble) in one of the most impressive 90 minutes any team has played. In the finals they beat Bayern Munich (in Munich!), who the very next year would win the treble. I'll talk more about just how good those teams in later posts, but it's insane that Chelsea beat both teams on the road in major matches.

Third, these games are just plain fun. There are so many memorable moments from this run: the second leg comeback and extra time at the Bridge against Napoli; both legs of the Barca semi, but especially the second half of the second leg; and of course the incredible final. I'm genuinely really excited to revisit these games, partly because I have such clear memories of watching them all the first time around.

Fiorentina vs. Napoli: Match Analysis

Italy is often thought of as the great defensive country. Many of the great defensive tactics and systems were developed in Italy: catenaccio in the 1960s, with Herrera’s “Grande Inter” teams; compactness and pressing, with Sacchi’s two-time European Champion Milan teams. In the 1990s Italy gained a reputation, both within Serie A and on the international stage, as a league of great defenders and defenses.

Defense and Italy are nearly synonymous. But many times we forget that Italy has produced great offenses. Sacchi’s Milan were equally adept going forward as they were in defense, scoring five goals on Real on the way to their first European Championship. Maradona, Zidane, and the Brazilian Ronaldo all plied their trade in Italy. While the Italians may be known for defending, they can turn a great offensive performance in. While Serie A may be known for its defensive showdowns, the league can produce some great offensive matches as well.

The matchup between Fiorentina and Napoli was a perfect example. Both teams were aggressive and attacked throughout the match, creating an end-to-end, wide open game. It was fascinating 6 goal thriller, with both teams exhibiting fascinating tactics.

Lineups

Napoli Dominate the First Half

Napoli controlled the match throughout the first half, while Fiorentina looked unsettled and uneasy despite being the home side. Maurizio Sarri’s team was able to boss Fiorentina around with a combination of high intensity defense and strong positional play when in possession.

During Fiorentina’s build up Napoli put on a high, intense, man-orientated press. They were so man-orientated that sometimes the press resembled more man marking than a zonal system. To cover for the risk of high man-orientation, as well as their high defensive line (often playing in Fiorentina’s half), Napoli played with a ridiculous amount of intensity, putting enough pressure on the ball to ensure that Fiorentina wouldn’t have enough time to find the open space behind Napoli’s press.

Napoli's man orientated press

Napoli’s press was effective in destabilizing Fiorentina’s build up play throughout the match, especially in the first half. Sarri’s team were able to take advantage of Fiorentina’s insistence on slow, deep build up through passing and combinations, shutting the Viola’s attack down. Later in the match, Fiorentina was able to beat the press by playing more direct, taking advantage of Napoli’s high line.

When Fiorentina were able to push past Napoli’s press and into the middle of the field, Sarri’s men dropped into a 4-5-1, with both wingers dropping into the midfield. While playing this formation statically would rob Napoli of access to the ball, Sarri adapted it to provide greater pressure on and access to the ball. The midfield 5 chain acted as a pendulum, swinging whenever the ball shifted to one side. When Fiorentina played the ball to the right wing, the ball side winger (Insigne) stepped onto the first line, alongside Mertens (Napoli’s striker), to pressure the ball and force it back to the centerbacks. The rest of the midfield shifted over, with the nearest central midfielder becoming a wide midfielder and so on. When the ball moved back, Insigne would return to the midfield line. The same would happen on the other side, with Callejon stepping up. This created an asymmetric 4-4-2 that provided good defensive access and put strong pressure on the ball.

A similar action happened when Fiorentina moved the ball into midfield. With a three-man central midfield, one of Napoli’s central midfielders could step up and pressure the ball without leaving space behind. The other two central midfielders simply shifted into the open space, creating a 4-4-1-1. This allowed Napoli to pressure Fiorentina anytime they brought the ball into the center of the field, forcing it out to the backline.

During the extended periods when Napoli played with a 4-4-2, if Fiorentina held the ball on the wing, then the central midfield was often staggered. With Fiorentina often focusing their attacks down Callejon’s side, and thus with Zielinski shifted outside, Diawara and Hamsik occupied the center. They would stagger their movements, with one dropping deeper whenever the other stepped up to pressure a man. Mostly this was to cut off potential passing options into the center, but it sometimes worked to lure Fiorentina into bad passes and then catch a quick counter attack.

While Napoli’s press disrupted Fiorentina and forced turnovers, Napoli’s deeper defense simply stopped their offense from working. Fiorentina was stalled without any options to progress on the ground, and were reluctant to try to pass over Napoli. Napoli were able to dictate where Fiorentina could play the ball, forcing them out of the center and the wings. This left Fiorentina to shift the ball between their two center backs, hopelessly looking for passing options.

Napoli’s offense also played a key role in controlling the match. Strong positional play has featured in Napoli’s attack throughout Sarri’s year and a half in charge, and this game was no different.

#Napoli offensive game. Superiorities, third man combination, attract the opponent @KieranSmith1 @TPiMBW @ManagerTactics @faja274 @edinh_96 pic.twitter.com/JrC6ydVyMy

— Kamil Orawczak (@KamilOrawczak) December 29, 2016

Both Insigne and Callejon played inside of the wings, in the half spaces, acting as inverted wingers in a similar way that Hazard and Pedro (or Willian) have in Chelsea’s successful 3-4-3 formation. This created numerous opportunities for combinations when Napoli had the ball.

It also allowed Napoli to overload either side of the field. With the fullbacks pushing high to provide width, and multiple players both deep and high in the halfspace, Napoli were able to overload Fiorentina and manipulate their opponents to open up space. When they found open space Napoli often used aggressive vertical passes to break Fiorentina’s lines and create chances.

Napoli’s buildup was varied in speed. At times they used long, vertical passes to quickly hit Fiorentina.

Napoli providing the definition of "lightning fast counter attack." Literally two touches take the ball the length of the field, in seconds pic.twitter.com/rvW7orRYwI

— James Sutherland (@thepitchview) January 1, 2017

Other times they were much more patient, stringing together passes and slowly looking to open Fiorentina up.

Got to love Napoli. Merry Christmas, guys. pic.twitter.com/PVw2v4lxKc

— Eduard Schmidt (@EduardVSchmidt) December 25, 2016

Both ways exposed Fiorentina’s defensive inadequacies. Throughout the first half Napoli was able to open their opponents up fairly easily, but only scored one. A combination of a few offside players, some timing that was just off, and poor finishing held Napoli back from scoring more.

Fiorentina Fights Back

It was clear from the start of the second half that Fiorentina was not going to lie down. They put on their own man-orientated press, and began to play higher up the field. Fiorentina then matched Napoli in intensity, and it paid off. The visitors seemed unsettled, and after 6 minutes and a fortuitous deflection on a free kick, Fiorentina was level.

Napoli settled back into the game, and then retook the lead in the 68^th minute. But less than 60 seconds later they had given away another goal. Bernadeschi, with his second of the day, scored a whopper from 40 yards out, and although Reina should have done better it is tough to criticize Napoli for the goal out of context. In context it was unacceptable. Twice Napoli had taken the lead, and twice they had given it away.

Fiorentina then took the lead on a beauty of a goal from Mauro Zarate with less than 10 minutes left in the game. At that point Sarri threw caution to the wind, and Napoli pushed forward with everything they had. Just when it looked like Fiorentina might hold out, Napoli won a penalty. With the second to last kick of the match, Napoli pulled level, at 3 all.

Conclusion

From the standpoint of a neutral, this game was thrilling. 6 goals, end to end and wide open, the two teams both played with reckless abandon. It was a reminder that Serie A is still one of the most entertaining leagues in the world.

Undoubetdly Napoli and Sarri will be incredibly frustrated with the result. They dominated the match, were the better team throughout, and yet had to claw back a draw. The game played into a greater trend of Napoli’s season: that they can grab a lead, but not hold on to it. Napoli haven’t been able to shut games down. It isn’t that they can’t; it’s that they won’t. Sarri doesn’t want to shut games down, but rather keep them open and a little chaotic. While this creates fantastic games for the neutral, it often leads to Napoli letting leads slip out of their grasp. All the more frustrating for Sarri will be the three goals Fiorentina scored. The first was a deflected free kick; the second a 40-yard whopper; the third a volley on the edge of the box, off a beautifully floated cross. All three are nearly impossible to defend, or lucky, or some combination of the two. Napoli dominated the match and yet gave away three goals on low quality chances. This should have been three, desperately needed, points for Napoli, and yet they walked away with a draw. Sarri and Napoli clearly have some thinking and self-searching to do.