Al-Ahli Dubai FC lost the AFC Champions league title after a 1-0 score against the Chinese team Guangzhou Evergrande in the final’s home game, while the away game ended goalless.
In the away game, in comparison to the home game, a number of points can be extracted sufficient to understand the reasons of loss.
The removal of one of Al-Ahli’s players was significant even if it was not the most effective in the two matches. In the first match, right-back player Abdel Aziz Heikal was removed from the game in minute 84 due to an unnecessary violent intervention without the ball despite being one of the best players in the team.
Although he was kicked out only six minutes before the end of the game, his real impact was revealed in the away game with Heikal’s absence in the home game in light of the team’s need for him. Abdel Aziz Sankour was not a good replacement when he took this position.
After revising the Chinese team shots’ statistics, they showed the best offensive fronts from the right. The Chinese team recorded 13 shots, while the shot that recorded the goal came from the same side. Walid Abbas played a significant game but returning to the away game, this same shot did not achieve a goal in light of Sankour’s presence as a left-back where the team achieved 12 attacks, only two of which were completed.
The second ejection in the home game in favour of the Chinese team came early in minute 66 of the game after Guangzhou’s goal in light of Al-Ahli need to make several offence alternations to make up the difference. Achieving one goal would have been sufficient for Al-Ahli to win the championship title. However, the goal was due to a mistake from Salmin Khamis, and his removal caused an emotional impact before the technical impact on the team and prevented making more courageous and offensive alternations.
Al-Ahli’s attack was not in its best shape during the two matches. The large precaution of Al-Ahli knights in the past game on their field amid their audience was normal to continue in this precaution and even increase in the game outside their land, which actually happened. It remained a large negative factor despite the team’s reliance on quick counterattacks and the complete closure of the defensive zone in front of Guangzhou’s invasions.
At an individual level, and contrary to what is known about him, Brazilian Lima continued to waste extremely easy opportunities. If he had scored even one of said lost opportunities every game, Al-Ahli would have won the title. Despite being the player who scored the most goals in two encounters – four goals away and three at home – he lacked accuracy, focus, and calm. He missed an opportunity in the UAE match.
This poses the logical question; where are the rest of the offense players, especially Ahmed Khalil? Khalil shot two balls, one weak in the hands of goalkeeper with his head in the home game, but in the first game he did not shoot any goals, nor did he actively participate in posing any sort of threat. Where was the support from Al-Hammadi and Ribeiro in aiming and shooting a goal?
It is true that Ribeiro had two opportunities for the team in the home game but one shot by him in two games is not enough for a player of his size and influence. This leads to questions about the plan and way of playing, which relied on the skills and speed of Ribeiro in counterattacks but the plan lacked the support and assistance in centre. It put a heavier burden on the shoulders of the skilled Brazilian.
In the two games, Ribeiro was the player who lost the ball the most as a result of attempting individual passes or reversing pressure from rivals, because of which Ribeiro easily lost the ball in the absence of a supportive colleague in a place that allows a pass. Ribeiro lost the ball 11 times in the home game against seven times in the away game. Of course, these lost balls cost the team offences and turned into reverse attacks in favour of Guangzhou.
There are many other points that can be reviewed but perhaps those previous points are the most prominent one that caused losing the two national championship games.
In the second leg, Al-Ahli had eight shots, two of them on target, an accuracy of 25%. The team hit seven shots in the first leg, three of them on target, an accuracy of over 40%. Apart from the accuracy or the total number of shots, reliance on rebounds and absence of non-traditional solutions to create opportunities impacted the team’s offense line. Al-Ahli was granted two opportunities in both encounters and all were wasted by Lima. Ribeiro alone failed to save the situation.
Guangzhou was the most organised in offence and the team had the same number of shots of ten attempts. Three of these attempts were on target while seven missed it. The Chinese team played for certain chances to score in the UAE and six successful ones on its pitch.
The Chinese team’s ability to penetrate the defences of Al-Ahli ensured its victory. During the first game, the team shot 40% of its total attempts from the inside Al-Ahli’s penalty area. In the second leg, the ratio increased to about 90%. This shows how easy it was to penetrate Al-Ahli’s lines.
Al-Ahli was on the other side of the spectrum. Looking at their statistics, 43% of their total attempts in the first leg were from inside the penalty area, slightly increasing to 50% in the second leg. This sparks discussions about two things; the first is positive since Al-Ahli was playing better away from its pitch. However, the second point is negative, since the first leg should have been more positive. In total, penetration of the Chinese lines did not form any risk to them.
Both games witnessed a negative situation from both parties. Even though Al-Ahli tried to diversify its offence among its three fronts, the defence and centre of Guangzhou stood on lookout. Both wings of the team failed to provide adequate support. In the first leg, the total spin-off was nine balls, an accuracy of 55% and in the second leg, the total fell to eight, and an accuracy of 25%.
The actual play time was in favour of the Chinese team, where its players played over 40 minutes, compared to 20 minutes in the first leg. The ball was inside the pitch for most of the second game and mostly played among the Chinese. This deprived Al-Ahli from playing most of the game. After scoring a goal, the Chinese spent the rest of the game time passing the ball skilfully. Al-Ahli played almost 17 minutes in the first game at home since the team played on rebounds only. In the second leg, the time increased but many things deprived it from scoring, including playing with 10 players only.
