The tactical narrative of this UEFA Nations League clash was defined by a contrast in control versus chaos. Van Bommel entered the match with a clear mandate: to weaponise Belgium's explosive wide talent and use high-turnover situations to bypass Italy’s technical midfield. While Italy sought to dictate the tempo through superior ball possession, Belgium’s strategy focused on verticality and rapid counter-attacks, looking to exploit the space left behind by the aggressive Italian full-backs.
Roberto Mancini, conversely, aimed to utilise a fluid 4-3-3 system that morphed into a 3-2-5 in possession, prioritising ball retention to stifle the Brussels crowd. The tactical objective for the Azzurri was to isolate Pio Esposito against the Belgian central defenders while using Nicolo Barella and Sandro Tonali to create numerical superiorities in the half-spaces. However, this commitment to an expansive attacking shape eventually became their undoing as Belgium’s structure proved more resilient under pressure.
Belgium's tactical setup
Van Bommel deployed a 4-2-3-1 formation that functioned with immense tactical discipline. The defensive block remained compact, usually sitting in a mid-press that only triggered when Italy’s Nicolo Fagioli or Alessandro Bastoni attempted to carry the ball across the halfway line. The double pivot of Youri Tielemans and Romeo Lavia was essential, providing a screen that forced Italy to play wide, where Belgium felt comfortable engaging in 1v1 duels. When possession was regained, the trigger was immediate: find Kevin De Bruyne or De Ketelaere to launch vertical transitions.
The role of De Ketelaere was particularly nuanced; he operated as a roaming playmaker, drifting between the lines to provide two crucial assists. By dragging Italian defenders out of position, he created the space for Maxim De Cuyper to arrive late for the equaliser in the 15th minute. Belgium’s attacking patterns frequently involved overloads on the right flank before switching rapidly to Jeremy Doku on the left. This "switch of play" tactic exploited Michael Kayode’s high starting position, eventually allowing Doku to score the third goal in the 26th minute after a relentless period of Belgian pressure that saw them score three times in just eleven minutes.
Italy's tactical setup
Italy initiated the match in a 4-3-3 that looked highly effective in the opening ten minutes. Their build-up play focused on short, triangular passing sequences between Kayode, Barella, and Esposito. This paid immediate dividends in the 11th minute when Kayode’s delivery found Esposito for the opening goal. Defensively, Mancini employed a high line, intending to squeeze the pitch and limit De Bruyne's time on the ball, but this left them vulnerable to the pace of Diego Moreira and Doku.
Related Topics
The primary issue for Italy was the lack of defensive cover in the transition phase. When Fagioli and Niccolo Pisilli pushed forward to support the attack, the gap between the midfield and the back four became a chasm. Even with Bastoni and Riccardo Calafiori’s ball-playing ability, they struggled when Belgium forced long balls into the channels. Italy finished with more possession (53%), yet their xG of 2.273 compared to Belgium's 3.355 suggests that while they had the ball, they lacked the defensive stability to manage the quality of chances they were conceding on the break.
The tactical chess match
The defining tactical battle took place in the central corridor between Belgium’s double pivot and Italy’s interior midfielders. Van Bommel won this battle by instructing his wingers to tuck inside when out of possession, creating a central block of six players that Italy simply could not play through. This forced the Azzurri to rely on crosses - completing 23 over the course of the match - which Brandon Mechele and Nathan Ngoy dealt with effectively. The mismatch was evident: Italy wanted a game of patience, while Belgium forced a game of sprints.
Mancini’s decision to maintain a high defensive line even after conceding the equaliser was the turning point. By not dropping the block to account for Belgium’s speed, Italy allowed Doku and De Ketelaere to dictate the tempo of the counter-attacks. The 2-1 goal by Ngoy in the 22nd minute, coming so shortly after the equaliser, psychologically broke Italy's tactical composure, leading to a frantic ten-minute spell where their defensive shape completely evaporated.
In-game adjustments
Trailing 3-1 at the break, Mancini attempted to rectify the midfield imbalance by introducing Federico Dimarco and Issa Doumbia for Fagioli and Pisilli. The move to a more traditional wing-back system was designed to provide better width and defensive tracking. Initially, this steadied the ship, as Italy saw more of the ball in the second half, but they lacked the clinical edge to convert their 12 total shots into goals. The yellow card for Tonali shortly before his 62nd-minute substitution highlighted the frustration of a midfield that was being bypassed too easily.
Van Bommel responded with pragmatic substitutions to see the game out. Bringing on Nicolas Raskin for Lavia added fresh energy to the press, while the introduction of Dodi Lukebakio and Leandro Trossard in the final minutes maintained the threat on the break. The most significant late adjustment was the instruction for Moreira to sit slightly deeper before exploding forward; this paid off in the 80th minute when he latched onto a De Bruyne pass to make it 4-1, effectively ending any Italian hopes of a comeback. Belgium's ability to maintain their intensity through substitutions was superior to Italy's structural changes.
Conclusion
Ultimately, Belgium's victory was a triumph of transitional efficiency over possession-based aesthetics. Van Bommel’s decision to concede the ball and strike rapidly through the creative hubs of De Bruyne and De Ketelaere exposed Italy’s high defensive line and slow central recovery. While Italy’s early goal suggested a different outcome, their inability to adjust their defensive height in response to Belgium’s pace led to the three-goal blitz in the first half. Belgium’s superior shot quality and clinical finishing in big moments ensured a comprehensive tactical victory in Brussels.