前言： ZonalMarking是一个不错的足球分析网站，不时会针对比赛、战术、阵形分析，这篇是 分析上周惨输给曼联，我知道这是许多板友不愿想起的痛(我也是>"<)，但历史如镜， 就算是惨败，我们也能学到一些东西....吧(话说看球的球迷是要学什麽阿? XD) 这篇文章可谓「鞭鞭入肉」，看了很痛，大家要小心服用！ 原文：http://tinyurl.com/4258vf2 Manchester United 8-2 Arsenal: Wenger’s heaviest defeat as Arsenal manager An astonishing game ended with a resounding Manchester United victory. 这场惊人的比赛以曼联的大胜作为结束 Sir Alex Ferguson kept the side that defeated Tottenham on Monday, with Danny Welbeck continuing upfront. Ferguson维持了上一场击败热刺的阵容，让Welbeck顶在最前面当中锋。 Arsene Wenger was without Thomas Vermaelen and Bacary Sagna to add to various previous injury and suspension problems, so Carl Jenkinson played at right-back, and Johan Djourou in the centre. Francis Coquelin made his debut in the centre of midfield. Wenger在这场比赛前已少了许多伤兵与禁赛兵，本场Vermaelen与Sagna的缺阵更是雪上加 霜，不得已，只能让小将Jenkinson踢右後卫，Djourou踢中卫，而小小将Coquelin则在他 生涯英超首发踢CMF这个位置。 The match was a barely believable stream of United chances in an amazingly dominant display. Arsenal were wretched from start to finish, completely unable to make the most of their numerical midfield advantage, and remarkably disorganised at the back. 这场比赛几乎只看曼联表演，兵工厂从头到尾都很惨，完全无法因中场人数占优取得中场 优势，而後防则是一片混乱。 Defence 防守分析 Where to begin? It’s difficult to look at an 8-2 and break it down into specific areas that went wrong. Arsenal were simply poorer in every possible attribute that goes into competing in a football match, and the logical continuation of this stream of thought is that Arsenal’s problems do not lie predominantly in tactical issues – there’s something deeper that must be addressed. 该从哪边开始呢？在一场8-2的比赛当中，你已经很难仔细去看到底是哪个环节出了问题 ，兵工厂就是在所有的环节上都表现得较差，更仔细的说，兵工厂这场比赛主要的问题 并不在战术，我们必须把某些更深层的问题提出来。 That’s not to say that there weren’t tactical problems, however. For a start, they lacked any kind of cohesiveness without the ball. Some of the side seemed to be pressing, some seemed to be standing off. Coquelin, thrown into such a huge game on his debut, played a relatively deep position and picked up Rooney. Bizarrely, despite Rooney claiming a hat-trick, Coquelin did reasonably well: Rooney’s impact upon the game in open play was relatively little in the first half, and all three of his goals came from set-piece situations. Wenger’s decision to remove Coquelin at 3-1 on 61 minutes (though possibly because of fitness reasons) backfired spectacularly. 并不是说在兵工厂在战术上完全没有问题，从一开始，他们失去控球权时看起来像是一盘 散沙，有些人在压迫对手，有些人就只是冷淡的旁观。Coquelin，这位小朋友在他英超的 首发(甚至连联赛杯都没上过?)就踢如此刺激的比赛，在场上的位置靠後，负责盯防Rooney ，若不谈Rooney的帽子戏法，Coquelin其实干得不错：Rooney在上半场并没发挥显着的影 响力，而他的三个进球都是来自定位球。Wenger在61分钟，场上比分仍是3-1时选择把 Coquelin换下(虽然可能是体能方面的问题)，看起来是完全错误的决定。 That was the only thing that went OK for Arsenal. The problem with pressing meant that Arsenal frequently had no pressure on the ball in midfield – despite the fact that they could afford Coquelin sitting, because Aaron Ramsey and Tomas Rosicky could close down Anderson and Tom Cleverley. Somehow, and again arguably due to fitness reasons, this failed – Anderson and Cleverley got time on the ball and could hit passes over the top. Coquelin可能是兵工厂那天唯一正常的地方，Arsenal在压迫对手这个环节出了问题，这 意味着他们几乎没有在中场施压 - 别忘了兵工厂在中场多一个人，就算Coquelin坐在地 上休息，Ramsey跟Rosicky也应该能够去防守Anderson跟Cleverley，然而，或许是体能的 问题，结果完全行不通，Anderson和Cleverley有足够的时间处理球，并传出许多好球。 The secondary issue was with the high defensive line, which is suicidal enough when there is no pressure on the ball – but that almost becomes a pedantic point when the main issue was that the back four was incapable of moving as a unit. Two players would step up, two would drop back. Sometimes it was amazingly easy for United players to waltz through and score – the Nani goal being the best example. On other occasions a lone Arsenal player would become trapped behind the rest of his defence and be forced into a last-ditch tackle – Jenkinson collected both his bookings in this fashion. 第二个问题是太靠前的防守线，在没有压迫对手时这看起来像是自杀 – 但没有压迫对手 并不是主因，主要是後防线上四位仁兄无法像四人三脚一样前进、後退，前进、又後退。 总有两个在前，两个在後，我进去了，我又出来了，让曼联的球员能像跳华尔滋般轻松得 分，Nani进的那球就是最好的例子。另一个情况是孤立无援的兵工厂防守球员掉进了队友 挖的洞里，然後只好背水一铲 – Jenkinson就因为这样拿到他的两张黄牌。 United were frequently pleasing on the eye, and the quality of their finishing was consistently superb, but they didn’t even have to play particularly well. They passed the ball much better in the 3-0 win over Tottenham and in the 3-2 win over Manchester City. Some of the goals – the Park Ji-Sung shot, the Welbeck header – simply came as they had too much time and space on the ball. Rooney’s three goals came because Arsenal had conceded fouls by diving in. Young’s strikes were superb – yet if they’d been the only goals in a 2-0 win, we would have been here questioning why a right-footed player was allowed to come inside onto his stronger side so easily. Almost everything went wrong for Arsenal. 曼联踢得不错，他们在门前的最後一击是非常好，但他们甚至不用踢得「特别好」- 他们 在3-0赢热刺，3-2赢曼城的那两场比赛传球都还比较好，有些进球 – 像Park Ji-Sung的 还有Welbeck的头球 – 是因为他们有太多时间跟空间可以处理球；Rooney的三个进球都 是由於犯规，只有Young进的两球是世界波；但就算他们只有2-0赢球，我们还是要问：为 什们一个右脚球员可以这麽容易让他内切进来用强壮的右脚射门？兵工厂几乎全身上下都 不太对劲。 Basic errors 基本的错误 The most striking thing from the chalkboards is that even in the basic areas, the most primitive concepts in football, Arsenal were outclassed. United completed 64% of the tackles they attempted, Arsenal just 45%: 从下面的比赛抄截(tackle)统计图： http://tinyurl.com/3ze252v (by Guardian Chalkboards) 我们看到令人讶异的事情，就连在最基本的地方 – 抄截，兵工厂也完全败给曼联，曼联 有64%的抄截成功率，而兵工厂只有45%。 Another example – despite the ball spending most of the time on the edge of the Arsenal area, United managed to block six shots compared to Arsenal’s one: 另一个例子我们可以看到下面这张图： http://tinyurl.com/3qmy5sm (by Guardian Chalkboards) 虽然球大部分在兵工厂防守的那一侧，但曼联有过六次的阻挡射门(shot block)，而兵工 厂才一次。 Getting tackles in, getting blocks in – not sophisticated, not the Arsenal way and unlikely to be a deciding factor upon the game, but when your side can ’t keep the ball, can’t keep an offside line and is letting the opposition play, these are the things you have to be halfway decent at. If not, you’re liable to concede eight goals. 抄球跟盖火锅 – 这并不复杂，虽然这不是兵工厂输掉比赛的主因，但当球队无法拿住球 、无法拉好越位线，又让对手自由在场上跳舞的时候，这就是你至少该做的，否则你丢掉8 球，只能说不、意、外。 Conclusion 结论 Part of the issue, in simplistic terms, is that Arsenal didn’t have players who were fit to perform the tasks required. Some of this was because they lacked experience, some because they were simply the wrong players for the situation. Laurent Koscielny finished with a 100% pass completion ratio…yet kept getting caught too high up the pitch when defending. Carl Jenkinson was a force going forward and got an assist…yet didn’t make a single successful tackle. Ramsey and Rosicky are creators, not battlers. To use these type of players in the positions they played in, you must be in control of the game, and Arsenal were never close to that. 用简单的话来说，兵工厂的球员没能达成应完成的任务，有些有可能是因为他们缺乏经验 ，有些可能是他们被放到错误的位置。Koscielny完成了100%的传球成功率，但他防守时 站得太出来，Jenkinson冲得太靠前，拿到了一次助攻，但没有一次成功的抄截。Ramsey 跟 Rosicky是中场大脑，并不是中场屠夫，如果你要把这样的球员摆在场上，你就必须要 能控制住比赛节奏，但兵工厂在这场比赛从未办到。 United continue their impressive start, though even they must have been surprised at how easy it was. Their 4-4-2 shape (with two strikers coming deep) provides forward runs from a lot of different angles, and with Nani and Ashley Young being able to go down the line or inside for a shot, they are very dangerous going forward. 曼联持续他们本季亮眼的开局，就连他们可能都会觉得怎麽会这麽顺利，他们的4-4-2阵型 (两个突前的前锋)，提供了从不同角度的向前跑位，而Nani 跟Young可以下底传中，也可 内切射门，他们在前场提供了许多威胁。 ------ 後记：虽然这场比赛被鞭得一文不值，但我看到後来虽然输很多球，场上某些兵工厂球员 还是很努力在进攻，看了满感动的，相信只要兵工厂一天有这样的热血球员，我们就有 机会能够重返荣耀， Let's go ARSENAL! -- http://twgosport.blogspot.com/ My Blog, My Dream! --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 118.169.33.237 ※ 编辑: jehannn 来自: 118.169.33.237 (09/07 22:46) ※ 编辑: jehannn 来自: 118.169.33.237 (09/07 22:47) ※ 编辑: jehannn 来自: 118.169.33.237 (09/07 22:49) ※ 编辑: jehannn 来自: 118.169.33.237 (09/07 22:50)