Vissinger’s bold tactics expose Al Nassr weaknesses as Ronaldo struggles in Saudi Clasico

Al Ittihad coach Yens Vissinger surprised Al Nassr with an aggressive tactical plan in the Saudi Clasico, using relentless early pressure to disrupt Ange Postecoglou’s side and secure a deserved 2-1 victory.

Most pre-match expectations suggested Al Ittihad would approach the game cautiously, retreat into their own half and rely on counter-attacks against an Al Nassr team packed with high-profile attacking players. Vissinger instead instructed his players to press from the opening minutes, denying their opponents time and space to build from the back.

Al Ittihad did more than simply close down the player in possession. They blocked passing lanes, won a large number of individual duels and repeatedly recovered the ball in advanced areas.

The team moved as a compact unit. Whenever possession was lost, the press began immediately. Steven Bergwijn and Hamed Al-Ghamdi operated in advanced positions before moving inside, making it difficult for Al Nassr to pass cleanly from one defensive line to the next.

For almost the first 22 minutes, Al Nassr were unable to escape that pressure in any consistent fashion.

The approach produced an early reward when George Ilenikhena opened the scoring in the fourth minute. The goal was not an isolated moment but the direct result of Al Ittihad’s superiority at the start of the match.

Ilenikhena found space behind the Al Nassr defence, taking advantage of an advancing back line and the visitors’ overall commitment to moving forward. The goal gave Al Ittihad an early lead and forced their opponents to alter their plans.

The Nigeria striker was particularly well suited to Vissinger’s strategy. His ability to run behind defenders and attack open space provided Al Ittihad with precisely the weapon they needed against a high defensive line.

Ilenikhena struck again in the 22nd minute with an excellent finish, completing the 10th brace of his career. The second goal also underlined how effectively Vissinger had used the forward’s strengths against an exposed Al Nassr defence.

Al Ittihad’s threat was not based solely on direct passing. Their control of midfield made it easier to reach the final third. Lupi and Mukhtar imposed themselves in the central areas, while Bergwijn and Al-Ghamdi moved inside to create numerical advantages.

That movement separated Al Nassr’s lines and reduced the space available for their players to construct organised attacks.

Ronaldo’s tactical problem

One of Al Nassr’s most significant problems centred on Cristiano Ronaldo. It was not only his attacking contribution that affected the contest, but also the impact of his role on the team’s overall pressing structure.

Ronaldo was unable to apply sustained pressure to Al Ittihad’s defenders. That gave Danilo Pereira, in particular, more time and room to receive the ball and start attacks from deep without serious disruption.

On several occasions, Al Ittihad were able to begin their moves calmly before progressing the ball into the areas they wanted, without facing the level of pressure Al Nassr needed to force mistakes.

Tactically, Ronaldo was “present but absent”. His presence gave Al Nassr one of the most dangerous forwards in world football, but when Al Ittihad had possession in defence, the home side’s pressing system often appeared to be operating with one fewer player.

The issue was not Ronaldo’s ability or his threat in front of goal. Rather, the match demanded continuous collective pressure, something he was unable to provide to the required level.

Postecoglou could have responded by altering the shape of the press or reducing the gaps between his lines. But Al Ittihad had already established a two-goal advantage by the time Al Nassr needed an answer.

Vissinger also identified the space behind Al Nassr’s full-backs. Whenever they pushed forward, Al Ittihad looked to play long passes into the areas they had left unprotected. That allowed the visitors to move rapidly from defence into attack after winning possession.

The tactic showed that Vissinger had not simply studied Al Nassr’s weaknesses; he had turned their attacking strengths into potential liabilities.

Al Nassr respond but Al Ittihad adapt

After roughly half an hour, Al Nassr began to regain their balance. They dealt with the pressure more effectively, kept possession for longer periods and started reaching the attacking third with greater regularity.

Their improvement was reflected on the scoresheet when Angelo Gabriel reduced the deficit in the 36th minute. The goal provided Al Nassr with a major lift and made the contest far more complicated before half-time.

It also suggested that continuing to press with the same intensity for the entire match could create spaces for Al Nassr to exploit.

Vissinger responded decisively after the interval. Rather than treating his lead as a reason to continue taking risks, he changed the structure of his team and dropped deeper. Al Ittihad began to rely more heavily on transitions and on attacking the spaces Al Nassr would leave while searching for an equaliser.

The second half therefore developed in a very different way. Al Nassr took the initiative, possession and territorial pressure, while Al Ittihad defended in a more compact block and waited for opportunities to break forward.

The plan was straightforward: trailing by one goal, Al Nassr would have to commit more players to attack, creating the counter-attacking spaces Al Ittihad wanted.

Vissinger also sought to exploit the match’s late pattern by introducing Youssef En-Nesyri and placing greater emphasis on crosses and deliveries into the penalty area.

The Morocco striker was a logical option for that phase of the game. Under sustained pressure, Al Ittihad needed a forward capable of attacking aerial balls and competing inside the box. En-Nesyri also offered an additional outlet for direct passes and counter-attacks as the space behind Al Nassr’s defence increased.

In the closing stages, the young coach was content to surrender possession completely and rely on transitions. The decision worked, allowing Al Ittihad to hold on and complete a deserved victory.