An opening day defeat against Boavista naturally was going to bring criticism. Whether it was pointed at a player or the manager, it was inevitable, but, is the criticism valid given the context of the match?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. We all view the match differently, which is great for debate and discussion, but here’s my take on Roger Schmidt’s changes and how I interpreted them.

DOWN TO 10 MEN

Moments after Petar Musa was sent off, Roger Schmidt adjusted the formation and brought in Morato. Benfica moved to a formation featuring three central defenders, and Rafa became the focal point in our attack.

Looking at the change, here’s how I interpret the substitution.

Down to 10 men, away from home, despite being in the lead, we know straight away that we are going to have moments where the team needs to dig in and defend. For that, you’re going to need players with some pace, stamina, discipline, and the ability to get into a tackle.

Of everyone on that field, Di Maria is the obvious one to take off in my opinion.

He’s generally not going to help you defend with 11, and you certainly don’t want him out there chasing shadows with 10 men. While in the final third he can make a difference, you need to get the ball there, and with 10 men, you need to stay compact, with the ability to recover.

Bringing on Morato gives you a few different options.

Offensively, you push your wingbacks up the field, giving Bah and Jurásek freedom to get forward, which they did often. You continue to have some security at the back with three central defenders, and then you can also fill the midfield with Aursnes, Kökcü, and João Neves. While Kökcü doesn’t have the same pace to recover as Aursnes and João Neves, he has shown that he isn’t afraid to get into a tackle, therefore, these three are going to balance each other out on and off the ball.

This approach is extremely taxing on the wingbacks, but given their characteristics, it works well. The amount of times both Bah and Jurásek got forward was incredible given we were down a man.

Defensively, you then retreat your wingbacks and play a line of five, still being able to pack the midfield, with Rafa also dropping in as a false 9. This helps you make sure you’re not outnumbered in the midfield, limiting the amount of chasing you have to do without the ball.

This worked well to the extent that we were always in control even with ten men. We had a decent amount of the possession, and we never got pushed into our own half.

BRINGING ON JOÃO MÁRIO

Now, if we look at the option I’ve seen many people toss out there; bring on João Mário for Di Maria. In this scenario, you’re playing a 4-4-1 formation.

Where I see the biggest issue here is that you then become outnumbered in the midfield. João Neves and Kökcü are going to get overrun, and are going to spend a lot of time chasing the ball. Even if you have João Mário or Aursnes pinch in, Boavista will always have the switch available. Whereas with a line of five, your outside backs are out there, but also have the security of the three central defenders beside them.

Going forward, the wingers will get up the field, but if we lose the ball in transition, you are stuck with the two midfielders needing to cover a lot of ground. If you push your outside backs further up to compensate that gap, you then expose your two central defenders.

I would expect us to be buried in our midfield with this formation, finding it very difficult to get out, and relying heavily on the longball to Rafa.

While João Mário is safe in possession, we’ve talked about his lack of speed and intensity in recovering. At a time where you’re going to be chasing most of the time, and with a midfield two, his safety in possession may not be that helpful if we don’t have the ball. We’d then be left with Kökcü who isn’t quick but can get into a tackle, and João Mário who can keep the ball, but is slow in recovery and isn’t known for his aggressiveness defensively. Aursnes and João Neves would have had to do a lot more running than they did.

DON’T CHANGE RIGHT AWAY

Some fans also suggested that Roger Schmidt not make a change right away, readjust the team on the field, and see how it plays out. In theory that’s easy, but again, you’re left with Di Maria on the field in an unfavorable situation for him.

He’s 35, he’s had his fair share of knocks and injuries, why risk running him into the ground? That right side would have been extremely vulnerable, and Bah would have been drinking water from a firehose.

In all honesty, if Boavista doesn’t score straight after the red card, I’m not sure we’d even be having this discussion.

Then again, if he doesn’t change, and we concede, fans would be asking why he didn’t take him off because he doesn’t help defend as much.

This is the beauty of the various perspectives and interpretations of the game. I’m not sure there’s an actual right or wrong answer to these debates, apart from when it works, it feels right, and when it doesn’t, well, this happens.

Before I turn the page on this match and move onto matchday 2, that final goal. We clearly went for it, trying to get the game winning goal, and unfortunately got caught in transition because of a ball cheaply lost in our midfield.

I don’t see that as Roger’s fault. Up until then, we’d been organized. Naturally, as you push forward and get into desperation, the team gets stretched, and you tend to occupy spaces you generally wouldn’t. Hence why António Silva was in Boavista’s half dribbling, toe poked it to Bah, who then tried desperately to keep possession, and instead gave Boavista an opportunity to play their striker into loads of space in behind.

If we are blaming Roger for the team losing their positional awareness while trying to go for it, I think we are grasping at straws, but that’s just me.

Let me know how you interpreted the changes, and if you agree with my point of view. What would you have done differently, and why?