Stretching a Back-Three — How Le Mans broke down VilleFranche

3rd placed French Championnat National (Division 3) team FC Le Mans sealed all three points in a tight battle with a Villefranche side who were unbeaten in eight going into Friday evening.

So, how did Le Mans break down their opponent’s man-orientated defensive system that had only conceded four goals in its previous six games?

Le Mans’s plan in possession was to stretch the man-marking system of Villefranche and isolate their wide centre-backs, a plan which proved successful.

Le Mans aimed to do this by:

1. Creating space between the wide centre-backs, central centre-back and wing-back.
2. Rotations using both height and depth to pull their markers apart.
3. Playing direct passes in behind and into the feet of their wingers.

Below is how the two teams set-up when Le Mans had the ball in build up play, with Le Mans in red and Villefranche in blue:

As shown above, Le Mans set-up in a 4–3–3 in possession whilst Villefranche set up in a man-orientated 3–5–2 out of possession.

Villefranche’s two wing-backs were tasked with closing down Le Mans’s full-backs all over the pitch, leaving the left/right centre-backs to track the runs of the two wingers.

Isolating the Wide Centre-Backs

The first method that Le Mans used to penetrate their opponents was to isolate the wide centre-backs of the opposition against their wingers by playing direct balls in behind and into their feet, particularly in transition.

With the opposing wing-backs positioned high and in a position to press the full-backs, this often created a 3v3 between Le Mans’s front three and Villefranche’s back three.

An example of Le Mans using a ball over the top to exploit the 1v1’s created by the wing-backs pressing high

Villefranche wing-back pressing high against the opposite full-back, so the wide centre-back must come across to defend against the winger. Le Mans isolate the wide centre-back and attempt 1v1 into space vacated by said centre-back.

As shown in the examples above, Le Mans were able to exploit the height of Villefranche’s wing-backs by playing direct into their wingers, who could then attempt to penetrate through a 1v1 dribble.

Le Mans created a couple of goalscoring opportunities playing direct passes into their wingers, however were unable to show a final moment of quality to impact the scoreline.

Creating Space Between the Back Three

Recognising the man-oriented structure of Villefranche’s defensive setup, Le Mans sought to stretch the space between the players in their back five and exploit this space with runs in behind from deep.

As shown in the image below, Le Mans used passes into their full-backs to draw out the opposing wing-back to press. With their winger holding the width and drawing out the wide centre-back, this created a channel for a central-midfielder to attack from deep between the wide centre-back and central centre-back.

Villefranche’s (blue) wing-back closes down the full-back whilst the wide centre-back closes the winger, stretching the back 3 and creating for Le Mans to run into

This was a rotation that Le Mans frequently used in the first-half, forcing the screening Villefranche central-midfielder to track back into the space between the centre-backs.

The rotation above came with a few crucial variations that allowed them to stretch their opponent’s backline.

In the second-half, Le Mans made a much more concerted effort to switch the play at speed across the back-line whilst also using a central-midfielder who dropped deep in wide areas during build-up play.

Quick switch gives less time for wing-back to close full-back in possession. Winger holds the width drawing out the LCB, creating space for a CM to run in behind.

Contrast this image with the first image shown of this rotation. As a result of Le Mans switching the play to the full-back at greater speed, their opponent’s wing-back was unable to close them down.

This helped Le Mans to penetrate as it improved the quality of the balls in behind that stretched Villefranche’s back three and allowed them to build pressure by eliminating the press of the wing-back.

Also crucial to this is the positioning of the centre-forward on the central centre-back’s blindside. This shifts the centre-back’s attention from covering the space vacated by the left centre-back (white space below) and onto the potential blindside run of the centre-forward, further stretching the back three by pulling him in the opposite direction to the left centre-back.

The diagram shows how Le Mans attempted to stretch their opponent’s back 3. The right-winger pulls wide and drops short to draw out the LCB whilst Villefranche’s left wing-back is drawn out to press the right-back in possession.

In this example, the Le Mans central-midfielder opts not to run in behind the back 3 but receive short after creating separation from his marker through rotations. This time, the effect of the left centre-back being drawn out to the winger is that the central-midfielder is able to receive with his back to goal without being directly closed down since the left centre-back isn’t narrow enough to do this, allowing him to turn.

Le Mans did not open the scoring as a direct result of this exact rotation, though they did frequently penetrate but didn’t show enough quality to take advantage.

However, as they did throughout the match, they were able to manipulate the man-marking system of Villefranche through clever rotations that stretched their structure.

The first image below shows the buildup to the opening goal. Throughout the second-half, in tandem with their desire to switch the play across the back with more directness, they frequently dropped one of their central-midfielders either side of their centre-backs. This had the effect of:

1. Breaking their opponent’s man-marking structure when dropping on the non-ball side and switching the play.
2. Drawing out their assigned marker to press when receiving the ball, as shown below.

Red arrow shows Villefranche central-midfielder pressing Le Mans central-midfielder who has dropped deep and wide. Normal man-marking structure shown, with CM’s marking CM’s and the right wing-back ready to press the advancing left-back. Crucial — notice how Villefranche’s left wing-back is positioned very high during the switch of play.

Stretching the man-marking: whilst the CM who has just received possession deep and wide draws out his assigned marker, the left-back pins the right wing-back with a run in behind. As usual, a Le Mans CM runs in behind the centre-backs, forcing them back. These movementd create space between the lines, shown by the red circle.

So, the depth of the central-midfielder combined with the height of the left-back, central-midfielder and initially the centre-forward increases the space between the defensive and midfield lines.

A further point to add to the image above is the large distance between the wide centre-back (bottom right) and the central centre-back after Le Mans switch the play at speed.

The third image shows the importance of Le Mans exploiting this large gap:

Centre-forward drops to receive in the space created. The highlighted central-midfielder attacks the previously mentioned space between the left centre-back and central centre-back. The effect of this is to draw the left centre-back across to cover this run, with his usual opponent the right winger now on his blindside and unmarked.

Notice in the picture above that, as a result of the left centre-back shifting across, the left wing-back who was previously pressing Le Man’s right-back high up must now recover to cover the run of the far-side winger who is now in space.

After the left centre-back (highlighted) is drawn across to cover the run of the central midfielder, he is now no longer in a position to deal with the run of the right-winger. The left wing-back is unable to recover after previously pressing high against the right full-back before the switch of play, allowing a (brilliant) diagonal into the right-winger who is able to finish.

The key point from this goal is that Le Mans were able to exploit the space behind the high pressing wing-back and take advantage of the large distances that he was required to cover after a rapid switch of play.

They did this by:

1. Stretching and exploiting the space between Villefranche’s defensive and midfield lines (by pulling apart their man-orientations).
2. Dragging the far sided centre-back across with runs across him from deep, so that he loses the far sided winger.
3. Taking advantage of the fact that the far sided wing-back has not had time to recover and cover the far-sided centre-back after previously pressing high against Le Mans’s full-back.

Conclusion

This was a really interesting game to analyse. The National 1 is a league that generally employs deep, zonal blocks when out of possession. In this game, both teams were very aggressive in their pressing and both teams deployed man-orientated defensive systems.

The difference was in Le Mans technical execution. The cohesion of their triggers in possession was very good, giving a lot of what they did a sharpness to gain an extra yard of separation from their markers, in addition to their forward passes being consistently of a higher quality than Villefranche.

From a tactical point of view, the game highlighted the potential pitfalls of employing a man-orientated system against a 4–3–3, the greatest of which is the consistently large distances that the wing-backs must cover in order to both press high against the full-backs and cover their centre-backs in the box.

This type of system sacrifices an element of compactness in favour of trusting individuals to win their duals and constantly mark their opponent, requiring a team with certain physical and mental characteristics.

It can work to effectively close down space and deny an opponent the opportunity to penetrate and dominate, however one loss of concentration can be immediately exploited due to a lack of cover that is not a feature of zonal-oriented systems.

I hope you enjoyed this tactical analysis of how Le Mans exploited Villefranche’s man-orientated defensive system! Any shares and feedback is much appreciated!