Key adjustments and becoming possession-oriented: Tactical analysis of Genoa 1-2 AC Milan

By: Oliver Fisher

AC Milan climbed back into the top four in the Serie A table with a much-needed win away against Genoa before the international break.

Milan found themselves two goals up inside 20 minutes when Alphadjo Cisse slotted in a cut-back from Adrien Rabiot and Christian Pulisic buried a square pass from Gonçalo Ramos, with both goals coming from the high press.

However, it wouldn’t be the Rossoneri without some late drama, and Ellertsson made it a very nervy finish for the Rossoneri with a goal inside the final few minutes from a long-range strike. Milan did manage to hang on for what was an important three points.

Como’s defeat to Inter means that Ruben Amorim’s men move into the Champions League places, though after the break the pursuit of consistency will continue. Below is the tactical breakdown, from Rohit Rajeev.

Amorim chose to make five changes from Thursday’s defeat to Ferencvaros. Mike Maignan, Mario Gila, Luka Modric, Diego Moreira and Christian Pulisic all came into the side, though there were some question marks about whether it would be a four or three-man defence based on the names selected.

Genoa’s direct approach immediately put Milan on the back foot, with the hosts threatening to exploit the space behind the defensive line in the opening minute.

They played a long ball into the space behind Koni De Winter, allowing Osmanjic to run in behind and chase the delivery. Although the move appeared to be offside, it served as an early warning of the threat Genoa’s direct approach could pose to Milan’s defence.

Genoa anticipated Milan’s tendency to create numerical overloads in the wide areas and adjusted their defensive structure accordingly.

They used the corresponding centre-back, wing-back and both players from the double pivot to create a 4v3 numerical superiority against Milan’s wide combinations.

This allowed Genoa to outnumber Milan’s attacking players, restrict their progression down the flanks and make it difficult for Amorim’s side to exploit their usual wide overloads.

Milan’s in-possession structure alternated between a 4-1-4-1 and a 3-1-4-2, with the positioning of Musah largely determining which shape the team adopted.

Rabiot occupied the left half-space, while Pulisic preferred to operate closer to Moreira on the right. Meanwhile, Cisse provided the width on the left flank, functioning as Milan’s left winger.

Milan operated with a vertically staggered double pivot, comprising Modric and Rabiot. Modric occupied the deeper position, acting as the midfield screen in front of the back four and providing a link between defence and midfield.

Rabiot, meanwhile, operated higher up the pitch, effectively taking on the role of an attacking midfielder and providing an additional presence between Genoa’s midfield and defensive lines.

The move leading to Cisse’s goal began with Vasquez being tasked with progressing possession from the back. However, Milan managed to create a 3v4 numerical disadvantage for Genoa in the wide areas, forcing Vasquez to recycle possession rather than progress the ball.

Pulisic recognised the opportunity to press and initiated a ball-oriented press, eventually dispossessing Vasquez. He immediately released Rabiot, allowing Milan to exploit the turnover before Genoa could reorganise defensively.

As the possession changed hands, Ramos scanned his surroundings and identified Cisse’s position, recognising the opportunity to attack the space inside the penalty area.

Milan subsequently created a 3v2 numerical advantage inside the box. Cisse initially ran alongside Ramos before checking his run to deceive Marcandalli. This subtle change of movement created separation from his marker and allowed him to attack the space.

Rabiot delivered the cross into the penalty area, where Cisse was perfectly positioned to finish the move and give Milan the lead.

Although Milan adopted a high, man-oriented pressing structure, there were gaps that Genoa could exploit during their build-up. Musah, conscious of the possibility of Genoa creating a 2v1 situation, chose to stay closer to Diawara rather than move out to engage the ball carrier.

This left Ezhibue free to receive possession in the sizeable gap between Musah and Cisse, exposing a weakness in Milan’s pressing structure.

The move leading to Milan’s second goal began with Cisse pressing Traore from behind as the Genoa defender approached the goal line.

Under pressure, Traore attempted a cross-field pass, but Ramos positioned himself intelligently to block the passing lane towards Vasquez. The deflected ball fell kindly into Cisse’s path.

Rather than attempting to finish the move himself, Cisse showed excellent composure and unselfishly squared the ball into Pulisic’s path, despite Moreira also calling for the pass.

What made the assist particularly impressive was Cisse’s execution: he played a no-look pass, deceiving both the goalkeeper and the recovering defender about his intended target. Pulisic capitalised on the opportunity and converted the chance to double Milan’s advantage.

With each passing game Milan are moving into a pure possession-oriented team. In this sequence you can see Pulisic and Rabiot exchanging their positions to confuse their markers

With a 2-0 advantage, Milan shifted towards a more conservative approach, prioritising defensive stability over attacking progression. Amorim reorganised the side into a 5-4-1 defensive structure, adding greater protection to the backline and reducing the spaces available for Genoa to exploit.

However, one of the inherent vulnerabilities of a five-man defensive structure is the space left behind the wing-backs when they are drawn towards the ball.

Genoa looked to exploit this weakness by deliberately dragging Moreira out of his defensive position. As Moreira stepped forward to engage the ball carrier, Gila was forced to jump out of the defensive line to prevent Genoa from creating a 2v1 situation.

This movement consequently opened up space in the right channel, allowing Genoa to exploit an area that would otherwise have been protected by Milan’s compact 5-4-1 defensive block.

Genoa switched from their initial 3-4-2-1 to a 4-4-2 formation as they looked to change their attacking approach. El Shaarawy moved into the left midfield position, Vitinha operated on the right, while Baldanzi took up the role of a second striker.

The substitution of Marcandalli also prompted a structural change at the back, with Genoa abandoning their back three in favour of a back four. Ekhator moved into the right-back position, allowing Genoa to maintain a more conventional defensive structure.

For Genoa’s goal, Milan failed to close down Ellertsson, with the defenders seemingly anticipating a cross rather than a shot. Ellertsson recognised the opportunity and noticed that Maignan’s line of sight was obstructed by four Milan defenders.

Taking advantage of the goalkeeper’s limited visibility, he opted to shoot rather than deliver a cross, finding the back of the net.