Constraining mechanisms in a 5-3-2 mid-block
To suffer, to suffer.
Ball-sided midfield; allow 2v1 overload on the far-side while possession is on the near-side working under the assumption shuttling will be sufficient to cover the space because of the inertia period of ball travel.
Ball-sided midfielder moves onto opposition full back when they receive possession, while the central midfielder covers the near half-space looking to move onto ball-sided midfield support in man-oriented fashion. The far-side midfielder orients himself around the opponents far-side midfielder in ball-sided mid-block, facing onto him meaning any potential reception faces the compactness rather than allowing for him to turn onto the underloaded side and thus act as a link. Near-side centre forward drops onto the pivot. Free pass is backwards towards the centre back when the shape reconsolidates.
Near-side wing-back waits for reception before jumping onto opposition winger, allowing him to be a free pass but additionally a pressing trigger. Underlapping midfield runs are passed onto the near-side centre back to prevent access arising from the dropping centre forward. Centre back cannot follow - now free midfielder because of underlapping run takes zonal responsibility of the role.
If flank is overloaded through quick ball recycling around the defence which exposes the lack of coverage and ground required to be covered by the midfielders, the defence must be more proactive in space covering to compensate. Wing-back steps out earlier onto full back, near-side midfielder moves intensely onto half-space link player (abstracted deep-half-space occupier and thus the same role, usually near-side midfielder dropping rather than full back who instead widens), centre back tracks the wider forward while the rest of the team shuttles. Same fundamental mechanics, just with less compact spacing because of the more transitional game-state created by quick ball recycling. This was more likely to occur when Liverpool’s spatial dynamics became more flank-based and therefore transitional because of the engagement of opposition pressure. Milner would drop and Robertson would push forward while Sadio Mane centralised to a greater extent making the dynamic wing-back to Roberston, ball-sided midfielder to Milner and ball-side centre back to Mane. However, abstracted in spatial terms, the responsibilities of width holder, deep half-space occupier and advanced half-space (to-wide if underlapping) occupier remained the same which facilitated more fluid transitions while maintaining the strengths of tight marking. Thus, constraining pressure was maintained via as ‘passing on’ which prevented discombobulation while continuing to have the compaction potential presented by tight marking.
A lot of effort is required from the wide midfielders as the opposition will typically introduce wide depth – think dropping player – to work around the initial compact block which requires them to step out onto the ball-side, pressure the player into passing then reforming if recycled backwards or continuing to stay alert onto the same player if progression is attempted down the flanks. Intensity is not paramount as the aim is not to win possession but rather created more optimal compaction conditions, through limiting progressive access to the centre while reducing the time and space available to the ball carrier forcing an action. Covering distances and not being discouraged by lack of instant gratification is paramount. Therefore, despite lacking the intensity of Nicolò Barella (which nevertheless helps; however, because direct turnovers aren’t the aim, isn’t essential), Tanguy Ndombele could still ably perform the role.
As the team compacts onto the ball-side via these mechanisms, and the team begins to converge, the far-sided midfielder moves onto a more zonal role, covering some of the space left vacated by the commitment of the central midfielder who tracks the supporting wide midfielder of the opposition, using the opponent as a reference point for compaction. This moreover aids in transition by providing a stable link to the far-side to compensate for compactness, who can move possession to either the wing-back, far-side (now near-side) centre back or progress via dribbling depending on what is most optimal. The dynamic sought to be achieved approximates a triple vertical defensive set-up as the supporting opposition midfielder looks to move wider to open up space but is tracked by the pivot with back to goal limiting turning potential and thus making him a bad player to receive possession.
There is a greater degree of centre back man-orientation (implied is zonal man – player standing in between the lines in the half-spaces rather than a particular player) in mid-block phases because of the higher commitment required by the ball-sided midfielder to close down the ball resulting in greater vertical spaces in between the lines to be covered. Not as necessary when positioning becomes more compact and space infiltration in behind becomes more dangerous (shots can be taken in dangerous areas quickly where higher it would be considered to wide to be directly dangerous).
Progression checklist:
1) Compact the centre, front two oriented around opposition pivot – play is funnelled to the deep half-spaces
2) Near-side midfielder steps out while the rest of the midfield shuttles to the ball side where man-orientation is adopted. In-to-out pressing blocks progressive central access
3) Opposition midfields look to come wide and short to support ball-carrier progressively resulting in pitch compaction and greater chance of a turnover as man-oriented tracking leads to backwards reception which has a compacting effect
2a) If opposition move backwards reconsolidate and move back to 1 – if a ball-side overload occurs due to quick circulation, ball-sided centre back steps out to cover space in between the lines in a man-oriented manner.
Read also: Inter Milan and Defending in a 5-3-2