This is your new section on Stade Rennes Online. Having worked with the young people of the SRFC and today an educator at the CO Pacé, holder of the BEF and member of the Technical Committee of the Football District, Théo Rauzy gives you some tactical keys observed during the Stade Rennes matches. Following the victory against Angers, here is Theo’s eye.
A boss match. Faced with Angevins having revised their file well but too respectful to shake up the hierarchy, the players of Bruno Genesio only had to affix their stamp on the contract to validate the 3 points.
A 2-0 victory without shaking which, failing to have thrilled Roazhon Park, remains welcome at the dawn of a busy (and very tough) end to the season. To analyse.
COMPOS:
Rennes (1-4-4-2): Gomis – Meling, Aguerd, Omari, Traoré – Terrier, Santamaria, Martin, Bourigeaud – Laborde, Guirassy
Angers (1-5-3-2): Petkovic – Doumbia, Ebosse, Traoré, Mendy, Ounahi – Fulgini, Mangani, Bentaleb – Boufal, Jakolis
As against Troyes, the absence of a midfielder (Majer) is compensated by a move to 1-4-4-2 with the tenure of Guirassy. No surprises either.
Opposite, Baticle starts in a traditional pattern for the SCO with a defense at 5, the young Ounahi, usual midfielder, replacing Jimmy Cabot at the piston position. Mangani starts at a low point in the middle. Also note the absence of Ali Cho in front, he who had hurt the Bretons so badly during the first leg.
THE GAME :
Unlike the last outings of the Rennais at home, the show was not always there on Sunday and Rennes got fewer frank situations than usual (only 4 shots on target in the end, lowest total for 3 months ). A few reasons for this:
- Too much technical waste: The Rennais had an unusual technical waste, whether in the discounts or even sometimes on simple passes like at the start of the match on the action leading to Boufal’s strike where there are 2 gross technical errors successive. Sufficiency, lack of concentration, fatigue?
- The absence of a creator like Lovro Majer to make Rennes’ game more fluid was felt: Despite Santamaria’s notable progress in creation, his ability to hold the ball and draw several opponents on him to find gaps was lacking .
- Angers’ desire to defend high: Not all teams do so at Roazhon Park, but we can note that Baticle’s men wanted to hinder the opponent’s raises as soon as the ball reached Gomis’ feet ( without however having the risk-taking or the aggressiveness necessary to recover the ball in the Rennes camp). This forced the Senegalese to play long regularly. However, as in Montpellier, this long game proved to be rather effective with Laborde’s ease in taking up position on his defender before putting away/deflecting as well as thanks to Guirassy’s aerial game.
- The large axial density of Angevin: In a way somewhat similar to that against Lens last January where the Bretons had been hampered by a defense at 5 and a midfield closing the interior game, the Angevins directed the opposing attacks on the sides, preventing the Rennes to find spaces between opposing midfielders and central defenders, the preferential zone of a Terrier less prominent on Sunday.
However, the Angevins considerably lacked aggressiveness on the carrier to recover the ball more often and did not have the offensive weapons to counter with an inactive Boufal and a transparent Jakolis, while the Rennais were serious in pressing and to counter-pressing.
Moreover, if the Angevins have closed the axis very well, the players of Génésio have been able to exploit other spaces…
LIVE MY LIFE AS A PISTON AT SCO D’ANGERS
If the Rennais did not manage to cross the last opposing lines via the central axis, they made good use of the excess numbers on the sides facing Angevin pistons left to fend for themselves.
Indeed, in addition to having to play the role of defender by closing on the opposing wingers when the ball was on the opposite side, Doumbia and Ounahi were supposed to go out on target to the opposing side when the ball was on their side. Starting from too far, facing Breton laterals intelligently located a little lower than usual, they very often arrived at the wrong time, leaving Traoré and Meling too much time to organize themselves like here:
Ounahi starts from very far and arrives with a delay on Meling. The Norwegian goes inside on his right foot, taking Ounahi on the wrong foot.
Or here:
Once again, Ounahi starts from very far and arrives with a time delay, letting Meling go inside. The latter finds a very nice forward pass with his right foot to Laborde, Terrier having intelligently let the ball pass.
Note in these situations the ease of Meling to play forward with his right foot when he goes inside, which Truffert, an exclusive left-hander, has more difficulty doing.
In addition, they regularly defended at one against two lower on the ground and could not count on the help of Fulgini and Bentaleb who also came from too far from the axis to help them manage the numerical inferiorities. We notice it here:
No player to follow the duplication of Traoré. Doumbia must defend two players at the same time. Bourigeaud takes advantage and returns on his left foot for a crushed strike.
Or here:
Doumbia in 1v2 against Traoré and Terrier. Not being able to go out on target on the Malian, the latter has plenty of time to adjust his deep pass for Guirassy for a great opportunity from Rennes.
In addition, the Rennais tried to occupy the space behind their backs as soon as they went out on target, a space very poorly covered by Mendy in particular, whose former director of the training center in Nantes Samuel Fenillat said that he preferred it in the middle because “it doesn’t have the characteristics to stay in place, MANAGE THE COVER”. However, we can see several times that the latter has covered Ounahi very badly, preferring to play offside or taking time to start to cover his partner’s back. You can see it here:
Ounahi a bit far from Meling. Laborde goes behind the Angevin piston but is not followed by Mendy who prefers to take a step forward to play the offside.
To be :
Meling projects into the back of the space left by Ounahi, released on Bourigeaud. Mendy prefers to step forward to play offside. Luckily, Bourigeaud returns inside and does not serve Meling
Or on the other side, this time with Ebosse:
Doumbia comes out on frame on Bourigeaud, Traoré projects himself behind his back. Ebosse is too far to provide good coverage. Fortunately for the Angevins, Bourigeaud misses an easy pass
BATICLE, THE VISIONARY
Finally, we can be surprised by this strategy of leaving these numerical inferiorities on the sides by remembering the words of a Baticle, however very lucid, before the match, evoking the ability of the Rennais to attract the opponent to one side, to switch on the other and end up in a third zone. In short, the definition of the two Rennes goals, on which we nevertheless find all the Angevin evils mentioned above:
Start of the action from the right where Bourigeaud miraculously saves a ball which was going to go out in touch. The game switches to the left. Ounahi finds himself in 1v2 and is fixed. Laborde occupies the space in the back of the Angevin piston while Mendy (surrounded) does not take cover. Meling goes inside and serves Laborde with his right foot. The ex-Montpelliérain switches the game back to the far post for a Bourigeaud left alone (would he have been if the Angevins had played with 2 lane players?).
Ditto on the second goal:
Rennes fixed on the right side then the game shifted to the left until Truffert. Ounahi gets fixed and still remains in a useless jump-ball position. Doku goes behind his back while Mendy (surrounded) doesn’t take Ounahi’s cover. Doku crosses for Laborde who scores easily.
The pre-match analysis was therefore good, the strategy a little less, which was amplified by the positioning of Ounahi in a totally unusual position and Mendy in a position that is not his preferred role…
See you next week !
–
