AC Milan scored two goals in the last twenty minutes to rescue a 3-2 away win at Frosinone in Serie A Matchday 23, and Luka Jovic was the hero.
The Rossoneri took the lead in the 17th minute when Oliver Giroud headed in his 11th goal of the season from a pin-point Rafael Leão cross.
The home side believed there had been a foul in the lead up to the goal, but the referee waved play-on and Milan capitalised upon their attacking transition.
Frosinone’s luck changed in the 22nd minute, however, when Leão was harshly penalised for the ball striking his hand and the hosts were awarded a penalty which Matìas Soulé converted.
In the 65th minute, Frosinone caught their opponents sleeping by taking a quick freekick and then finding Luca Mazzitelli inside the box. The midfielder’s shot eluded the reach of Mike Maignan to make it 2-1.
Milan did not have to wait long before leveling though, with the visitors again benefitting from a second-phase set-piece and far post header in the 72nd minute.
Then, with nine minutes of regular time remaining, Luka Jović made another impact from the bench to grab a winner after some fortuitous ball bounces.
Here to provide some tactical observations on another eventful Milan game is @Tactics_Tweets.
Forced attacking play
‘Control’ has been a buzzword in Stefano Pioli’s recent media interviews. Ahead of the match against Bologna, the Milan manager divulged aspects of his team’s “style” of play.
“We must continue our style, which is to defend by controlling the game more. We don’t have to force many plays. I believe we will never be such a solid team without the ball, but we can be with the ball.”
The way in which Milan aims to ‘control the game’ is through retaining possession and this season the Rossoneri have averaged 55.8% of the ball in Serie A, the fourth highest in the league. The idea is, by having a higher share of the ball it enables Milan, not only, more opportunities to attack but also the opportunity to try and dictate how they want to attack against the opposition.
A major aspect of Milan’s attempt at ‘control’ is through their build-up play, which includes their set-ups from goal kicks and possessions in their own and middle thirds. The location of where the majority of this build-up starts and takes place will be impacted upon the opposition’s first line of engagement.
For example, if the opposition uses a high press or high block, Milan are likely to start their build-up deeper towards their own goal, whereas if their opponents sit off then Milan can progress possession towards the top of their own half.
The players most directly involved in Milan’s build-up is their goalkeeper, backline and midfield pivot(s). In recent fixtures (Udinese, Bologna and this one against Frosinone) a recurring arrangement Milan have been using in deep build-ups is a 4-2 substructure, consisting of their back four and double pivot of Tijjani Reijnders and Yacine Adli.
Then, when Milan enter the middle third of the pitch, their full-backs have license to advance towards their forward players with one of their double pivots pulling out wide to fill that slot, if desired, or a centre-back sliding out wider (to help with wide progression).
The intention behind Milan’s build-up play, whether deep or in the middle third, is to bait the opposition higher up the pitch to create spaces elsewhere that can be exploited and used to create both progression and attacking opportunities – ones in which they can preempt so therefore prepare for.
The attacking opportunities can include – getting in behind the opposition backline if their opponents squeeze up high or progressing through the opposition if they fail to compact the spaces between their defensive lines.
Each has their respective upsides and downsides and effectiveness can be dependent on the profile of players available at a team’s disposal.
Bringing the focus back to the Frosinone game, what was slightly surprising was how Milan’s attacking gameplan centered around the former opportunity above – using their build-up play to bait the opposition’s 4-4-2 high press forward to then generate direct attacks that intended to exploit the space in behind their backline.
Milan performed 50 long passes – defined by Wyscout as a ground pass longer than 45 meters or a high pass longer than 25 meters – versus Frosinone.
This was their third highest volume of long passes this season, only bettered by 54 in games against Sassuolo at home and Atalanta away.
On average, Milan have played 37 long passes per league game in 23/24 so there was a big uptick in this progression / attacking method.
And whilst there is nothing wrong with this tactic, nor is it something Milan are unfamiliar with, it’s more a consideration that a byproduct of this ‘long pass’ approach is that it can lead to more turnovers in possession.
With consequences of this being a reduction in a team’s ability to ‘control’ the game. Plus, it is also a slight contradiction of Pioli’s comments about not wanting to “force many plays.”
There was of course rationale and merits behind this attacking intent, but also some inevitable consequences too. So let’s look at some examples in practice, starting with this sequence from the 8th minute below.
Milan had possession in their own half and the ball circulation between their 4-2 substructure (pink circles) had suitably (and intentionally) baited the Frosinone press towards them.
With six opposition players now detached from it’s back four, and space in behind to exploit, Milan determined this the opportune moment to clip a long pass over the opposition defence for Pulisic to chase onto.
The USMNT managed to get the ball under control inside the box and then had teammates Giroud and Giroud nearby to pass to, making this a 3v4 attacking situation – it could have been 4v4 if Leão had kept up with play – but in the end, the number parity was irrelevant as Pulisic’s pass was underhit and easily defended.
A couple minutes later, Milan tried the direct route to goal tactic again. On this occasion, Milan had deeper possession, after playing short from a goal kick which triggered the Frosinone press, and as a result of the gameplan (plus, being under pressure) Kjær went long.
Also note below how Milan’s use of a double pivot helped bait both opposition central midfielders upfield, meaning there was less protection in front of the Frosinone backline.
The direct play led to Milan having a 3v4 against the Frosinone backline and Giroud trying to get in behind – less of a threat for the opposition. After collecting the ball, the French striker switched play to the left wing but the attack was soon dealt with.
At the end of the 13th minute, Milan were in possession in the middle third and Calabria advanced higher to join the forward line, as he had a tendency to do.
As a result of this positional adjustment, Adli rolled out to the right-back slot and into the space Calabria had vacated which enabled him time on the ball to firstly receive, then look for and execute a forward pass into the space behind the Frosinone backline.
Even though Abdou Harroui (Frosinone left winger) continuously dropped deeper to cover Calabria when he advanced, in this instance, Milan were able to find their right-back in behind using opposite movements between him and Pulisic.
Although the attack came to nothing, as after entering the final third, Milan lost possession after working the ball inside.
The passage of play below actually started 30 seconds prior and began from the hands of Maignan. After rolling the ball out short to his backline, Milan circulated possession amongst their build-up phase in an attempt to entice the Frosinone forward, and probably more importantly, midfield line upfield.
Then at 28:38, Maignan saw his cue to go long…
…not only because the Frosinone defensive organisation had become disconnected but also because he saw a 2v2 opportunity for Pulisic and Giroud.
The American attacker actually lost the aerial duel here and despite Milan winning the second ball, they soon turned over possession again.
The consistent cues, or triggers if you prefer, for Milan choosing to play a long pass to get in behind the Frosinone backline were;
1) their build-up play helping bait Frosinone higher and, in the process, disconnecting their 4-4-2, thus increasing the distances the opposition midfielders (and Soulé) had to recover to get into their 4-4-1-1 low block,
2) having numerical parity (1v1 or 2v2 opportunities) or at best a 3v4 against the Frosinone backline (and, of course, space in behind to attack).
Here’s another example from the end of the first half which showcases both points 1 and 2 above. Play starts with a Milan throw in which they direct backwards to begin the process of baiting Frosinone upfield. Multiple passes are exchanged between Maignan and Gabbia to initiate the opposition engagement.
Off-the-ball, to further manipulate the opposition block, Calabria and Loftus-Cheek made opposite movements – which had a knock-on effect of suggesting the Milan right-hand side would be their direction of play – but instead possession was worked back over to the left flank.
In anticipation of Theo Hernández receiving the ball, Giroud dropped lower – into the space the Frosinone right winger would soon vacate to go and press – to offer a passing option between the lines and drag Caleb Okoli out with him.
The Frosinone right centre-back quickly retreated, however, after realising his jump would leave his right-back in a potential 1v1 against Leão.
These decisions, all happening in milli-seconds, resulted in Giroud being able to receive the ball unmarked and therefore able to turn and pick out his next pass – in behind for Leão to run on to.
Leão was able to enter the penalty box but his attempted cross took a deflection – off Okoli in fact, who must have been pleased with his last-minute change of mind – and looped over towards the far post where Pulisic had been unable to arrive in time for a sure tap in.
In the second half, Milan’s direct attacking play continued. Here’s an example where the visitors 4-2 substructure set-up to play out from a goal kick. However, after receiving the ball, Maignan spotted his cues and went long…
…towards a 2v2 opportunity (Giroud and Pulisic), that nearly became a 4v4 (four Milan attackers versus back four) but Loftus-Cheek failed to control Giroud’s knock-on despite being uncontested.
Speaking of Loftus-Cheek, if readers were to scroll back through the provided examples they would notice how he often took up positions between the lines, specifically, in behind the Frosinone central midfielders.
Despite his positioning offering Milan a positional superiority, the away side rarely looked to utilise the English attacking midfielder with line breaking passes – despite this being an obvious upside of their build-up.
In fact, Loftus-Cheek only received 10 passes the entire game – his lowest number of receptions when playing over 45 minutes this season (Wyscout).
To conclude this section, it could be argued that some of the examples shown had the benefit of hindsight and on another day these could have resulted in better attacking moments and/or goals. And this is true.
It is also true that despite this attacking tactic regularly conceding possession to the opposition, Milan still had the majority of the ball across the ninety-minutes (56%).
But from watching the game, Pioli’s plan of attack did not align itself with his side’s apparent intended style of play i.e. controlling the game with the ball. Instead, it mainly served to offer Frosinone more regains.
Fortunately and coincidentally for Pioli, Milan’s best attacking moments came via transitions (e.g. Milan winning the ball back from Frosinone and then attacking against their disorganised defensive shape).
These moments included Giroud’s cross in the 35th minute which evaded both Pulisic and Leão at the far post, but more importantly their first and third goals which helped ‘force the win’.
The fruitful far post
On the subject of goals, Milan’s three all had one thing in common – the far post.
Here’s the opener, where Giroud peeled off towards the far post, and the last defender (as the Frosinone left back had been caught upfield) to head in.
Then the second where Giroud’s position at the far post from the second phase of this corner kick enabled to head (most likely headed shot) across goal for Gabbia to bundle in and the new far post.
And then finally, after winning the ball back high, substitute Bennacer clipped a pass towards match-winner Jović at the far post where he got a little fortune but cashed in his luck to win his side the three points.
Next up, Napoli
Ahead of the game, Stefano Pioli was quoted as saying: “We have to try to score one more goal than the others” – and Milan certainly lived up to that advice against Frosinone.
Since the turn of the year, Milan have collected 13 points from a possible 15. But conceding two goals in each of their last three fixtures, and the need for late goals in some victories, has certainly raised questions about the sustainability of this current ‘form’.
But with one of or both Inter and Juventus guaranteed to drop points this weekend, three points for Milan was of absolute paramount importance.
If the Rossoneri have any serious ambitions of finishing higher than third place this season, wins are needed, however they come by – whether through control, forcing the play or a bit of both.
Next up to test Pioli’s side’s form credentials, Napoli at San Siro on Sunday evening.
Interesting read. Our players ha some issues with execution
Giroud’s assist to Gabbia was clearly not a “most likely headed shot”, it was on purpose.
He’s been doing those headed assists time and time again since last season, it’s pretty much a signature move at this point, haven’t you guys catched it ?
Definitely. He did a few times during this game but it seemed the players around him weren’t on the same wavelength. You could see his frustration. Like they weren’t expecting him to do that. TF?! Y’all train together almost every single day all year, some for years.
He’s 37, too old & too slow they say but it looking like it’s the players around him that can’t seem to keep up.
I think this is the fundamental problem. Pioli wants to be a possession team when actually Milan are better suited to be a counter attacking side like they were when they won the scudetto. Milan don’t have that many players that are good on the ball and their passing is not good enough either. Inter was more than happy to let Milan have possession and then hit us on the counter. Milan do not create much when they have possession, most of their opportunities come from turnovers off of their press. Maybe we can get away with it against the lower teams but when we face top teams the better strategy is to play a solid, compact defense and hit on the counter attack, like we did against PSG. You can’t play like Man City when you don’t have their players.
This was a thorough analysis. Well done!
Facts!
We don’t have good passers of the ball (Maignan is arguably our best🤦🏾♂️) but we have great ball carriers. We can be a great counter attacking team. At least we have a Scudetto to show for it.