France 4-4-2 (Bouhaddi – Torrent, Mbock, Renard, Majri – Asseyi, Henry, Bussaglia, Le Sommer – Diani, Gauvin)

Brazil 4-4-1-1 (Barbara – Leticia, Kathellen, Monica, Tamires – Ludmila, Formiga, Thaisa, Debinha – Marta – Cristiane)

France played some exciting football in the group stages, much of which was built on their high pressing. However, against Brazil they dropped a little deeper. Perhaps wary of the pace of Ludmila and runs in behind of Debinha, the hosts had their defensive line 10 to 15 yards beneath halfway, rather than right on the halfway line as it often was against Nigeria, South Korea and Norway. Their pressing was also less aggressive.

Here, defending in their usual 4-4-2 shape, the two front players refused to press Brazil’s centre-backs in their build-up play. Instead, Diani and Gauvin blocked passes from centre-back to central midfielder, forcing Brazil to go out to their full-backs. Once there, France shifted across collectively. The near winger moved out to press, the near striker moved up to press the pass back to the centre-back, while the near central midfielder stepped up to mark the pass inside (Thaisa or Formiga) and the far-side striker moved over to help cover the other Brazilian midfielder.

Brazil have struggled in their build-up throughout this tournament, and this game was no exception. With passes into midfield well covered, or quickly closed down, they often went wide and down the touchline. However, at times they were able to play out of pressure using simple triangles between the full-back, central midfielder and winger.

Their full-back would receive and pass inside to the central midfielder. Formiga or Thaisa would then play first-time diagonal passes to the wingers, who had dropped but remained wide near the touchline. With France’s full-backs hesitant to close down at times, Ludmila and Debinha could then get on the ball with time and space to turn and dribble forwards. Alternatively, with French central midfielders stepping up, Brazil’s full-backs could threat balls through to Cristiane or Marta.

These moves showed some holes in France’s defensive strategy. If the pressing movement of their winger is not in to out diagonally, angled and timed correctly, then opposition full-backs can get open passing lanes to play through the French midfield line. Ultimately, if France are to keep defending in this shape and with these patterns, they had better press with more speed so as to at least rush the decision-making of their opposition. Otherwise, they can be opened up.

Most of the time the wingers got their pressing runs right and Brazil were then forced into long balls. But, while these didn’t always succeed, they were quite dangerous from broken play situations. If the ball fell their way after a long ball out from the back, they had the pace and runs of Ludmila and Debinha to play in behind France’s defence, as well as the trickery and ingenuity of Marta and the penalty box prowess and aerial ability of Cristiane. This meant that, even if they did not have controlled possession, Brazil were always an attacking threat.

France were also direct in their possession, but this – unlike Brazil – was by design. Rather than build through the thirds, they used long diagonal balls from the back towards the wings for their wingers or full-backs to get onto. Alternately, they played long in the channels of Brazil’s back four for their pacey front two to run in behind onto. It’s notable that this approach worked against Norway and South Korea, but not so much against Nigeria and here v Brazil. The difference? Nigeria and Brazil not only sit off, but have speed in their back line.

The French varied their attacking play more in the second half. Le Sommer came inside and looked to receive in the channel between Ludmila and Formiga and break the lines, while Majri overlapped down the left as she always does. But there was little combination play out wide, and most of their crosses were hopefully floated in rather than aimed to a specific target or cut back from the byline. Thiney came off the bench to give another option between the lines, but was unable to make much of an impact.

Overall, the quality of possession from both sides was poor. However, both sides also carried a real threat in the final third thanks more than anything to the individual quality of their forward players. France sneaked an extra time win in the end, but their performance raised some valid concerns ahead of a quarter-final clash with the USA.