The Champions League round of 16 first legs are complete. Here are five takeaways from the second set of first legs.
United bailed out by David de Gea
To the surprise of no one, Manchester United adopted a conservative game plan away to Sevilla, committed to the “destroy and counter” philosophy. At times, they looked like a high school team going on the road to play a superior opponent, defending with eight or nine men at all times and launching the long ball to the big and fast fella playing forward, in this case the $100 million man, Romelu Lukaku.
The sole bright spot for United was once again David de Gea, the main reason Mourinho’s team still has a good chance to advance. The Spanish keeper came up with some incredible saves on at least three or four occasions, with one or two saves on headers that looked like clear goals. According to Opta, the expected goals were 1.8 to 0.5 in favor of Sevilla, a reflection both of their quality and de Gea’s.
Roma pay for a weak second half
It was a tale of two halves in Ukraine as Roma had the better chances in the first half and capitalized right before halftime. Shakhtar came out determined after the break and equalized after a textbook counter which showcased Facundo Ferreyra’s speed and finishing skills. The tying goal didn’t serve as a wake up call for the Romans. Led by their trio of Brazilians — Fred, Taison, Bernardo — along with the naturalized Ukrainian Marlos, the hosts started showing more confidence and finding space between the Roman defenders.
Even after Shakhtar went up 2-1, it looked like the hosts wanted it more. The Romans dodged a huge bullet in the final minutes as Ferreyra’s shot from close was saved off the line. It’s all to play for in Rome in March, and judging by the last 45 minutes of play, the Ukrainian team has plenty to feel optimistic about
Barcelona’s midfield a far cry from the glory days
This game looked very much like we’d expect a Chelsea-Barcelona game to look. Tension-filled, with Chelsea happy to cede possession and Barcelona looking to possess, switch the point of attack and break down the defensive lines set up by Antonio Conte.
The 70 percent possession percentage was reminiscent of the Pep Guardiola era. However, just about all of Barcelona’s possession was stale and failed to create any clear chances. The issue was that none of the Barcelona midfielders were able to beat their marker either with speed, dribbling or quick combination play. When your most dynamic midfielder is the soon-to-be 34-year-old Andres Iniesta you know you lack incisiveness.
Sergio Busquets, Ivan Rakitic and Paulinho are some of the best in the world at what they do. The problem is that their game is generally focused on ball distribution, vision and pressing to recover the ball. With Lionel Messi kept in check and without a Phillippe Coutinho or Ousmane Dembele to break down a wall of Chelsea blue, the visitors needed a grave defensive error to create a clear scoring chance. And that is exactly what they received, thanks to a giveaway by young Danish center back Andreas Christensen. Messi only needed one good look to capitalize, finally managing to score one against Chelsea after nine games.
Chelsea’s conservative game plan may have cost them dearly
A 1-1 tie against Barcelona may seem like a respectable result, but if we dig a little deeper it becomes apparent Chelsea could have done better had they adopted a more aggressive game plan. On numerous occasions when Chelsea pressed higher and committed more men forward, they created havoc around Barcelona’s area. This was all done without a true center forward and with a tactical formation aimed at absorbing Barcelona’s possession and quickly springing counter-attacks.
You have to wonder if Chelsea’s timid approach compromised their chances. Even with a limited commitment to offense, Chelsea were able to create enough chances — Willian hit the post twice, and Eden Hazard seemed to have his way with whoever was marking him. Chelsea played like a small club and it showed. Perhaps with a more courageous approach playing a true center forward and with Hazard and Willian roaming behind that number 9, Conte’s men could have gotten the win. We’ll never know.
Next: 25 best club soccer teams of all time
The English teams played not to lose
In stark contrast to last week’s performances by English teams, this time around the managers of Chelsea and United seemed intent on having it all to play for in the second game. Nothing about the way United played suggested they were looking for a win. Similarly, Chelsea treated Barcelona with so much respect actually beating Barcelona seemed to be out of the question.
United were on the road and it was definitely unsurprising and very Mourinho-like that they lined up with three defense-first midfielders (Nemanja Matic, Ander Herrera and Scott McTominay) in the quest not to lose. That game plan is understandable to an extent, but the fact de Gea was their best player is an indication of the problems with their defense.
The failure to score an away goal may cost them, as they’ll presumably need to push forward in search of a goal at home, thus allowing Sevilla the chance to counter and get that precious away goal.
Chelsea looked to be on their way to a valuable 1-0 win until Christensen committed a fatal error. It wasn’t his first either. And this is the larger point: Oftentimes, by refusing to take risks, you inadvertently end up placing wagers of a different kind. Betting that the young Danish center-back Christensen would play mistake free against the likes of Messi, Luis Suarez and Iniesta, or that Luis Muriel’s point-blank header goes within inches off de Gea’s hands … these are bets with long odds.
With all the talent at their disposal you sometimes wonder why Mourinho and Conte are never willing to take a more proactive tactical approach.