More Thoughts on France-Scotland

September 18th, 2007 | by: Laurie |

I’m home at last, sitting here drinking a venti triple latte from Starbucks. (Because I can.) Then I think I’ll have some ICE water for the same reason. And I’m sitting here at my computer trying to get used to an American keyboard again. I’m still automatically looking at my fingers every time I need to type a period or an apostrophe.

I had an absolutely wonderful time in France and am now home again. Friday I took the train out to Metz to watch the Saturday game between the newly-promoted FC Metz, currently in 20th place out of 20 teams in Ligue 1, and Olympique Lyonnais. An excellent game and far more exciting and interesting than the 5-1 scoreline might indicate. (I’ve fallen in love with the scrappy Metz team and am now hoping desperately that they can avoid relegation.) I’ll talk more later on the pairing of Karim Benzema and Hatem Ben Arfa, who had four goals between them, and my thoughts on what it means for France’s future.

For now, though, a few more thoughts on the Scotland game. L’Equipe didn’t agree with me about Mikael Landreau and the unstoppable goal. They blamed him for the loss and gave him a rating of 3.5 out of 10. (Patrick Vieira was the only other player to score so low.) After watching the replays (which one of the Sunday French sports programs showed something like six times in a row from different angles), I’m leaning a little more in that direction. It didn’t look quite as unstoppable as it did live — Landreau was just a little out of position and consequently couldn’t bat it away quite far enough. Even so, it was an amazing and well-placed strike and I don’t think that there are a lot of keepers who could have stopped it.

I was also impressed with Scotland’s ability to switch gears and change tactics mid-game. In the first part of the game they were relying on long balls, which France was winning with ease. Later on they switched to more of a focus on keeping possession and avoiding those long balls, and it worked. Scotland was much more dangerous offensively in the second half.

Even so, though, France still dominated possession and should have dominated the scoreline. I still don’t have any answers for the team’s offensive woes. How do you create goals, particularly against teams that play defensively? Going 4-4-2 with the current cast of characters doesn’t seem to be working.

What do you think? What formation would you use if you were Domenech, and who would you put in it?

My thoughts aren’t fully formed on this, but I think if I were sticking with 4-4-2 — which I’m not sure is the best way to go — I would replace Vieira with Toulalan and Trezeguet with Benzema. (Benzema and his three goals on Saturday really impressed me. Can you tell? His ability to get past the keeper on breakaways is amazing.)

So, yes, now my new need-to-see pair is Benzema and Anelka. Do you think they could accomplish anything together? I just don’t know right now — I’m filled with doubts about everything — but it can’t be worse than what happened last Wedensday, right?

And one more question: Can Vieira make it through Euro ‘08? And should he? (Assuming we’ll qualify, of course. Which we will if we can win all three remaining games, given the fact that Scotland and Italy still have to play each other.)

I’d like to hear your thoughts.

France World Cup Blog RSS Feed

sandrahn

Welcome back, Laurie! Despite the loss against Scotland, at least you had the wonderful opportunity to see Les Bleus live and even got to see Lyon and Metz play live.

As to solutions for Domenech…

Check out this link from l’Equipe that l’Americain posted in your first France-Scotland post. It’s a comparison between the formations Domenech used pre-wc, during the wc and after the wc. You can see that France were more successful when they used a version of 4-5-1, i.e., 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-2-1. Scotland used a basic 4-5-1 formation in Paris. I often hear pundits and fans when talking about international club football that some version of 4-5-1 is always best. It’s what Arsenal did for all our CL games during our 05-06 CL run and it got us to the final.

http://www.lequipe.fr/Football/RETRO_2006_FRANCE_SYSTEME.html

Also, keep the faith. Remember that in 1999, the wc winners barely scraped thru to Euro 2000. In the final qualifying rounds, they lost to Russia in Paris (the only other team to do so before Scotland) and drew away with Iceland. They barely qualified and of course we all know what happened then.

The Scottish analyst on Fox Soccer Report commented in his blog that he was very surprised at France’s tactics against Scotland, saying that they were just like the France of the group stages at last year’s wc and that Domenech didn’t seem to learn anything from their loss against Scotland last year in Glasgow.
Doumé

Welcome back!
It seems you made the best out of your trip! Next time you’ll have to visit my reigion, Normandy!

Well, these games are difficult and have been specially difficult for France in the last 8 years: Switzerland, Greece, Scotland, Senegal, Korea. As soon as the other team plays its game (Brazil, Spain, etc), France can show more of what they can do. The ideal solution would be to score early, to avoid having 3-4 (Ribéry Malouda Anelka etc) players who, by the time they approach the area, are exhausted and coming against 8-9 fresh guys who have been standing around. They might make it through, but their shots get poorer and poorer as time goes. And some combinations were lovely, but the plums that came at the end were right in the keeper’s hands.

So, how do you break this?
Well, you can have a fast, short game of passes on the ground, which we used a lot. It could have worked.
You can also have a good penetration on the wings, and cross with accuracy to Trézigue or Anelka – but we missed Sagnol very much on that. Come on Willy, get better! (and playing together all season with Ribéry will make a beautiful collaboration when it’s time to swap the red shirt for the blue one)
You can also shoot from far away; but the shots were a little too predicatable, although it could have worked (we don’t have a real far-away shot taker IMO). The downside is, when you do all that work, it’s no good for morale to just see the ball sail way above the bar when 3 other guys are in the area.
Platini’s opinion, however, was that France didn’t “eliminate” the defensive players enough. Meaning that some players should have gone 1 on 1 against them and won duels. The great Michel says he only saw 2 players attempt this, Ribéry and Nasri. He wanted more from everybody. That could be a good key to a game like that.

I agree with you that the Scottish shot was excellent, but I honestly think if Mickael had been able to put both hands on it, the ball would have gone above the bar – Thuram also said that somebody in the 4 guys surrounding the shooter should have put his foot in front of the ball a little more aggressively. I’d say, great read from Mc Fadden, who saw that both the defenders AND the keeper were having a tiny moment of inattention.

Oh and by the way, being French and living in the US (different keyboard etc) I found this nifty little program which is free; it’s a little tool bar which has all the characters which you select with the mouse, I like it because you don’t have to memorize codes. It’s called “Type French Characters” and is available at avisoft.co.uk
Patrick

Why do we need two defensive midfielders. We just just play 4-1-3-2 like this

—————–Coupet———-
–Sagnol—-Thuram—-Gallas—-Abidal
—————-Makelele————-
–Ribery———Nasri———-Malouda
——-Trez/Henry——Anelka———-

That formation hasn’t been tried because Domenech loves having two defensive mids. Also, I’m concerned about Henry. He seems to have lost all of his pace. During Italy v. France, he was so slow! Perhaps, he just needs to get back into shape.
http://france.worldcupblog.org Laurie

Patrick, I like your lineup a lot. There was certainly a lot more energy to the team when Nasri subbed in for Vieira. Nasri has no fear when it comes to taking on defenders, and that’s fun to watch.

I’d prefer to see Benzema over either Henry and Trezeguet.
I agree with you about Henry’s pace also. I hope it’s temporary, but I don’t know. Rumor has it that Arsene let him go because physicals showed he was past his peak. I don’t think I disagree with this.

Doumé, you have brightened my day considerably. How could I have forgotten about Sagnol’s beautiful crosses? And he and Ribéry should be amazing together once they’re playing regularly on a weekly basis.

And I’m also wishing we had a long-ball specialist who could deliver into the net. It would certainly add an element of surprise to the attack. I think Makélélé could theoretically have the ability occasionally, and Malouda occasionally, and maybe Ribéry, but right now there is nobody who can do it on a consistent basis.

(And thanks for the pointer on the toolbar. I will definitely be looking into this.)

Sandra, for some reason that article would only partially load for me. I’ll be trying again. I think 4-5-1 could be the answer if it’s the right 1. I don’t think Henry is good for having a team built around him any more. Maybe Anelka instead, maybe Benzema. But definitely someone else besides Henry.
Frank Claus

We go to Europe every year for 4 weeks & we especially love France.
Please give us some feedback regarding the following subject:
Most of the French players in the national soccer team do not sing the national anthem that is played before a match. The national anthem is a symbol of a country like the flag & players should be proud of representing something they love & is deep in their hearts. These values are not taught, they come from the heart, they are part of what we are.
Some matches from World Cup 2006 & countries performances:
Spain – Ukraine: no player from Spain sang the anthem
Germany – Poland: 8-9 player from Germany sang
France – Brazil: 9 Brazilian players sang, only 5-6 French players sang
France – Italy: 10 Italian players sang, only 5-6 French players sang

Are players in the national team playing just because the world exposure & the potential of more money ? World class, high paid players, would they play their best for their country or the club/country they draw a pay check all year around ?
Is it a difficult task between the love for your colors, shirt, anthem, country and pretend ? for Love is an intangible value.
Doumé

Frank,
(re: singing the National Anthem)
This has been a furious debate in the past when a politician, Le Pen, felt outraged at the players with their mouths closed during La Marseillaise. His view, very controversial, was that perhaps they didn’t quite feel French and probably didn’t even know the words to it. He would have liked a “more French” team, meaning … more white. Names like Zidane, Makelele didn’t sound French enough for him. Well, let’s leave it at that. France has a long history.

What I can say, having lived in both countries for a length of time, is that it is a cultural difference, more than a difference in love for the country. In France, we play the Anthem much less often than here. We don’t have a pledge of allegence (sp?). I personally never heard a French person say “we have the best country in the World” kind of thing. But that doesn’t mean we don’t love France. Singing before games is I think, up to the players, they each have their own private rule. Some feel an overwhelming urge (you can always count on Thuram to sing the loudest and proudest – not even close to the key) and some live the emotion inwards; remember the 10-mile stare of Ribéry or ZZ right befor the WC Final, I found it so intense and meaningful too. About 2 years ago, the players, to show they cared, tried to put their hand on the heart during the Marseillaise for a couple of games, and quickly reverted to holding each other (which I think is nice too), because the hand on the heart is not really part of our gestual vocabulary and doesn’t come naturally.
So, to answer your question, it has nothing to do with ego or money, it’s just a cultural difference between France (/Europe) and the US.

Laurie, once the page is loaded, click on the text underneath the little icons that look like soccer fields (located below the picture of Raymond), it should work. I like Angel Marcos’ analysis.
sandrahn

Re the national anthem:

Very few of The US players sing the national anthem either. There was a website during the wc last year that calculated how many fouls, dives, etc. each team committed, and also whether or not players sand their national anthem. The US and France had the worst ratings.

For France, I think a lot of it has to do with some of the players not liking the words to La Marseillaise. It’s a war song. I and many others (incl. many British pundits who dislike France) think it’s the world’s most stirring national anthem but the words are divisive.

The US national anthem is also a war song.

And Laurie, I’ve had my doubts about Henry for the NT for awhile. I really thing Domenech should stop relying on these older players, much as I love them.
Patrick

Does anyone think it would be possible for France to play with three forwards, as in Henry-Trezeguet-Anelka? Anelka and Henry, in my opinion, would be great on the wings, delivering precise crosses to Trezeguet. Malouda and Ribery are not great at that.
http://france.worldcupblog.org Laurie

Patrick, who are you seeing in the midfield here?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but last time Domenech went 4-3-3 (one of the Spring games? Lithuania, maybe?), if I’m remembering correctly pretty much the entire midfield was defensively oriented. This seemed to defeat the purpose of going 4-3-3 in a team that has problems scoring.

Doumé and Sandra, thanks for responding on the National Anthem question. I vaguely remember the Le Pen brouhaha but couldn’t remember the details enough to relate them. I was hoping somebody else would chime in.

Btw, in case anyone is interested, here is a link to the English translation of the Marseillaise (French National Anthem.) http://www.marseillaise.org/english/english.html
sandrahn

Patrick, for international football, unfortunately, I think it’s clear in recent years that only the conservative formation of 4-5-1 or some variation thereof works. A lone striker seems to be what all successful teams use.
Patrick

Sandrahn, I would tend to agree with you about the success of conservative formations in recent years. However, France has so many good forwards, I hate to see any of them on the bench. This was the formation I was thinking of:

——————–Coupet————–
Sagnol—-Thuram—-Gallas—-Abidal
—————Vieira—-Makelele——–
–—–—–——Ribery————–
—Anelka————–Henry—
————Trezeguet———

Here, Malouda is sacrificed, but I think Henry and Anelka on the wings will do better crosses than Ribery and Malouda. And Ribery in the middle is where he should be.
Patrick

Hmm, well the formatting got messed up. The four offensive players should be more to the right.
glatisant

The national anthem is a symbol of a country like the flag & players should be proud of representing something they love & is deep in their hearts. These values are not taught, they come from the heart, they are part of what we are.
————————-

Not to be rude, but I think those who have represented their country for over 100 games, who have played through injury despite their clubs’ open displeasure (see Vieira, up-post), who have come out of retirement to help their country qualify for international play, who have endured taunts from their own countrymen for their origins, as this generation of the French side has done, on numerous occasions, don’t really need a lecture on what it means to represent the flag, the anthem, what have you.

And please tell me that you didn’t go back and count the number of players who did or didn’t sing aloud during WC matches last year. Please tell me you didn’t.
paul howitt

Congratulations to France on Qualifying for European championships. As a Scot i am disapointed that we did not make it but maybe next time. Once again well done.