Analysing Bayern Munich Women — Part Five
Having analysed Hansi Flick’s Bayern Munich in the past, I wanted to examine the tactical framework of FC Bayern’s women’s side, who currently rank first in the Frauen-Bundesliga (two points ahead of Wolfsburg). The team’s goalscoring and defensive record (at the time of writing) is scarcely believable — 73 goals for, and a measly 8 against. They are by far the Bundesliga’s most potent side — Wolfsburg rank second in goals scored, with 59 across the 19 games played so far. Through this series, I wanted to analyse the games that Bayern have played in the UEFA Women’s Champions League, in a bid to understand the trends that underpin this team’s tactical framework.
[Previous posts in the series: Part One, Part Two, Part Three and Part Four.]
Line-ups:
First Half — Bayern Reveal Solid Low Block Organisation
In the larger scheme of unpacking Bayern Frauen’s tactical framework, this game was a pivotal one, coming as it did against a side with equal (if not more) talent within their ranks. Emma Hayes’ Chelsea are a machine, boasting the kind of talent differential which can reduce most games to training ground simulations. In response, Jens Scheuer did something unexpected — he adjusted Bayern’s identity, switching to a 5–3–2 shape to keep the likes of Sam Kerr and Pernille Harder at bay. What was different about this formation from the one used against Ajax was its explicit emphasis on a defensive role for the wingbacks, reducing the space in behind and forcing Chelsea to carve them open.
Lineth Beerensteyn and Klara Bühl were the strikers, with Lina Magull, Sydney Lohmann and Sarah Zadrazil making up the midfield three. Simone Laudehr and Amanda Ilestedt flanked Marina Hegering as the center-backs, with Hanna Glas and Carolin Simon picked as the wingbacks.
As seen above, the strikers were positioned on the halfway line, and had two options available — either they could get close to the center-backs and leave the fullbacks open, or they could press from an angle, such that the fullbacks were in the cover shadow and passes into the center were encouraged. The actual strategy used was a mix, depending on how many Chelsea players had moved out of the block. Behind them, Zadrazil aggressively pursued the dropping Chelsea midfielder (Melanie Leupolz or Ji So-yun) in a bid to slow down the pace of the visitors’ moves.
Noticeably, Chelsea struggled to advance the ball per the scheme they had designed, instead playing possession back to the defenders and looking to restart attacks from there. Chelsea right back Jessica Carter was deeper than counterpart Jonna Andersson on the left, and was pressed aggressively by Simon whenever she got on the ball. On the other hand, Andersson was allowed to take up advanced positions near the touchline while another player dropped into the right back role, which attracted pressure from Lohmann. This allowed Glas to focus on her direct assignment in Andersson, while Ilestedt kept a watch on left winger Guro Reiten who was always in the half space.
Given the low block and the pressure exerted along the touchlines, Chelsea’s execution of their scheme perhaps did not go as planned. However, this is not to say that they did not manufacture any offense — there were situations where Ji and Fran Kirby came deep, with Pernille Harder in the №10 area. These phases saw the Bayern midfielders duel relentlessly for the ball, but Chelsea’s quality meant that they were able to get the ball into Harder who could then lay it off to either Reiten or the overlapping Andersson. Under pressure, Bayern then took up a narrower block, where Chelsea’s rotations (particularly Harder’s perpetual movement) could cause some confusion in terms of switching the defensive assignments. These movements were also possible because of Lohmann’s jumps from the midfield line, which could sometimes leave space behind the midfield line. A couple of these sequences saw Reiten and Harder get shots off from decent areas, which were good efforts despite not being from highly threatening areas. Still, these were isolated phases that were more the result of quality than being the results of a scheme, and arose only when three of Chelsea’s most creative players — Ji, Kirby and Harder — all moved from their usual advanced positions. Even the visitors’ equaliser (and all-important away goal) arose from a set-piece and a fortunate deflection off midfielder Leuopolz, demonstrating the strength of the Bayern block.
For Bayern, the defensive part was well executed, though the offense left something to be desired. The change in formation and mindset meant they could not play their usual brand of possession football, and even in attacking scenarios, it was just three players — Beerensteyn, Lohmann and Bühl — who provided the firepower. Out of buildup, the plan was to play passes into the channels for the strikers, with the wingback acting as the conduit from the touchline. Predictably, this did not result in much success, though possession in advanced situations sae Glas whip in a cross which Lohmann was able to get on the end of.
Second Half — Tweaks Help Bayern See Out the Game
As the game went on, Bayern began displaying more comfort in executing their approach, and some small tweaks helped them consolidate the block. Magull began stepping up as the midfielder behind the strike duo, with Lohmann and Zadrazil staying in midfield.
In some scenes, Beerensteyn would also drop into midfield, since Ji and Kirby began dropping a lot more often than in the first half. With more discipline in the block (restrained movements from Lohmann and Zadrazil ensured that the halfspaces were adequately covered), Chelsea’s already infrequent forays down the left were curbed even more, whereas Bayern’s offense picked up a bit with the introduction of a sturdier forward in Lea Schüller. Bayern’s winner arose before her introduction, as progress down the left drew Chelsea to the side and left open up a switch to the marauding Glas on the right. The wingback demonstrated good hesitation to keep Andersson on her toes, before curling a shot from just outside the box into the near corner.
Comfort in the tweaked approach and good covering for teammates — when one of the center-back stepped, the wingback dropped into the defensive line — contrived to keep the scoreline at 2–1, from which positives could be taken for either side. Chelsea came away with the away goal, but Bayern came out with the understanding that they had a scheme which could nullify teams of Chelsea’s calibre. It would have perhaps been truer to the team identity if Scheuer had stuck to the possession game, and we may perhaps soon see a version of this side that does not compromise on its philosophy even in the biggest games.
Conclusion
This is a series focusing on Bayern — as such, the main takeaway has to be the fact that this team can shed its identity and play an unfamiliar brand of football at least for a one-off tie. Flexibility is crucial for any side, but this was a game where Bayern did not see as much of the ball as they usually do. Further, Magull and Zadrazil — the duo at the heart of this midfield — were cast in the role of defensive midfielders than organisers, given Chelsea’s possession figures. Still, the adaptation shows that this team is not completely wedded to one style of playing, which can only be considered a positive in terms of understanding their identity. Up next is the second leg which marked the end of Bayern’s UWCL campaign; however, I do not think the side were outplayed as much as they were just unable to execute with their usual efficiency.
