Critical errors, finishing problems and ingenuity: Tactical analysis of AC Milan 3-2 Parma | OneFootball

AC Milan secured a big win in pursuit of the Champions League places by beating Parma 3-2, but the scoreline doesn’t even begin to tell the full story.

Parma twice led during the game through Matteo Cancellieri and Enrico Del Prato who scored either side of Christian Pulisic’s penalty. As the whistles rained down at San Siro it looked like they were heading for a league double.

The board went up to signal six added minutes at the end of the 90, and something magical happened. Tijjani Reijnders firstly fired in a through ball from Yunus Musah to equalise, then a couple of minutes later Samuel Chukwueze bundled in a late winner having come on.

It was an emotionally exhausting game in truth, with Sergio Conceicao and Davide Calabria letting off some steam in a full-time bust-up. Below is Rohit Rajeev’s tactical analysis, making sense of the drama.

Another block test

Milan staged yet another comeback, but Conceicao will have his fair share of worries. Milan used a high block to press Parma’s players 1v1 but what it did is that it created a huge gap between Milan’s pressing players and the rest defence. The centre, as we can see below, was unprotected.

Parma played a mid-low block keeping a shape of 4-4-2, but what was striking was that when play was deep in their own half they would defend with nine men behind the ball (including the goalkeeper) while two forwards stayed up.

More than tactical instructions, an attacking player earns his money when he identifies space or makes runs to attack this space. Milan’s first big chance came when Reijnders attacked the space and was on the end of a through ball from Pulisic which he squared for Morata.

To make inroads into Parma’s block, the wingers would tuck inside and play as inside forwards like how we can see Rafael Leao is playing and asking for the ball.

Critical errors and ingenuity

While the shot for the Cancellieri goal was brilliant, it came because of mistakes out of possession too. Error one was a press executed incorrectly by the Rossoneri.

Milan allowed Parma to switch from the right flank to our left flank leaving Cancellieri in isolation with Theo, who recovered after a slip.

The second mistake was how Theo allowed the winger to shoot, not knowing he could have gone for the challenge because even if he had missed it he had Strahinja Pavlovic as a safety net behind him. He seemed distracted by the overlapping runner.

Whether this is a practiced thing or a brilliant piece of thinking from Strahinja Pavlovic, it paid off for Milan. Starting from behind the goalkeeper before the kick, Pavlovic comes and block the keepers view leaving Suzuki no other option except to push him to clear the ball, given his big frame.

Inspired changes

Given how Parma were defending with nine men they would tear forward in numbers, as we can see here below in the 4v4 transition.

This was one of the ideas behind the substitution when Conceicao took off Rafael Leao and Theo, much to the surprise of even Parma boss Fabio Pecchia. The switch meant that Bennacer would come into the centre of the pitch and add an extra man.

Parma’s second goal was very worrying. A player who was in his natural position as a right-back when the counter-attack started just waltzing into the Milan box with zero markers.

The defence was all over the place, meaning that a problem that presented it self from the days of Stefano Pioli still hasn’t been solved.

Being aware of your team-mates was something Milan missed and Conceicao needs to opt for a bit more organisation in comparison to the chaos we have now. Creating carnage can help to scramble defenders, but it needs a good amount of vision to help each other

Now coming back to Reijnders’ spatial awareness, and making those penetrating runs to target channels and disorganise a compact rearguard. It was a lovely through ball by Musah to find him, and an attack which he started ended with him.

It can be distilled down to a game situation thing. Without taking the chances created from early pressure, the players become desperate and the coach gives further license to attack, which leaves gaps open at the back.

The two misses below are a great example. Individually picking out players is not the point here, rather the theme that if one of them goes in and there is a lead to then manage, it draws the opponent out more and further gaps are there to be targeted, like a virtuous cycle.

Finishing problems

The question that everyone is asking at the moment is quite simple: why do Milan keep requiring comebacks? In addition to that, why do the team get exposed at the back, especially versus teams that defend so deep?