Fernando Hierro’s conservatism costs Spain in the World Cup

By Benjamin Barkworth | Jul 1, 2018

(L-R) Gerard Pique of Spain, Andres Iniesta of Spain during the 2018 FIFA World Cup Russia round of 16 match between Spain and Russia at the Luzhniki Stadium on July 01, 2018 in Moscow, Russia(Photo by VI Images via Getty Images) /

Spain lost to Russia on penalties in the Round of 16 in a hugely disappointing display.

La Roja dominated possession and had more chances, but they were unable to make their dominance tell. Hierro set his team up conservatively in a 4-2-3-1 in order to reduce the effectiveness of Russia’s counter-attacks. However, it severely limited them offensively as they struggled to make their way into the final third.

It was a poor way to exit the tournament considering the strength of their squad. The main question around this team is how far they could have gone if Julen Lopetegui would have stayed on as manager. It’s understandable that the RFEF were annoyed by his decision to take the Real Madrid job without informing them during negotiations. However, their pride came before the best interests of the team.

Lopetegui showed himself to be an innovative manager and was unbeaten during his tenure with the national team. He was willing to take risks with his lineups, although he didn’t manage them in a tournament.

Spain played with a sense of positional play under his management rather than having possession for the sake of it like they did against the hosts. They would have probably done a lot better with him in charge, but he’s as much at fault as the RFEF and Real Madrid for his dismissal.

Where did Hierro go wrong?

More from Analysis

His set-up and the personnel he used weren’t the best options for this opponent. The main issue was the use of a double pivot with Koke playing alongside Sergio Busquets. Russia were always going to have a defensive approach and were unlikely to press high because it would have exposed their slow back line. 4-3-3 with two creative players as well as two attacking midfielders in front of them would have been better than the 4-2-3-1 they used.

Busquets has shown for Barcelona that he can recycle possession and keep the team progressing even under severe pressure. Therefore, there was little need for Koke to play. He reduced the threat of counter-attacks, but he made a number of mistakes with his passing. Thiago would have been a much better option because he would have offered more penetration in the final third through his willingness to break the lines and take risks with his passing.

Diego Costa wasn’t great, but he was left isolated because there wasn’t enough service to him in dangerous areas. They needed to use him more as an outlet to get the best out of him. Iago Aspas or Rodrigo would have been better options to start with because they would have stretched the defence.

Andres Iniesta should have started as well in order to make sure they created openings in the final third because Isco was often negative or took too long with his passing without his presence. They have shown previously that they have a great understanding in the final third.

The use of Nacho over Dani Carvajal was also odd considering that they needed the full-backs to provide width. Hierro’s selection was quite baffling and has cost Spain when they had a real chance of winning a second World Cup. They may have gone out on penalties, but they should have had enough to see this game out comfortably in 90 minutes.

Next: Head scout Ariedo Braida confirms Arthur signing

Unfortunately, this will also be Iniesta’s last game for La Roja because he announced his international retirement after the match. However, he does bow out with three trophies as part of one of the greatest international sides.