Atalanta Vs Napoli [2–1] – Serie A 2025/2026: Raffaele Palladino In-Game Adjustments That Changed The Outcome – Tactical Analysis

Atalanta hosted Napoli at the New Balance Arena in Bergamo for Gameweek 26 of the 2025/2026 Serie A campaign, and the match ended with a 2-1 win for Atalanta after Napoli had a 0-1 advantage in the first half.

The result could be crucial for Atalanta in the long run, as it gets them much closer to the UEFA Champions League spots.

Although Atalanta will still have to face many of the top teams in what’s left of the season, a win against Napoli can keep their hopes alive.

It will definitely serve as a boost for them to believe in their ability to battle with more determination for the top four.

On the other hand, the loss obviously did not benefit Napoli at all, since it allowed Roma to catch up in points and brought Juventus, Como, and Atalanta closer to them in the standings.

This means that Napoli will not be permitted to make any further missteps and will need to ensure they win most of the remaining games to secure a UEFA Champions League spot; otherwise, they will risk dropping to lower spots.

In this tactical analysis, we explore Napoli’s set-piece solutions, Atalanta’s in-game changes, and what was lacking in Atalanta’s attacks initially.

Atalanta Vs Napoli Lineups & Formations

Raffaele Palladino started the match in a 3-4-3 formation, with Marco Carnesecchi as the goalkeeper, and all three of Giorgio Scalvini, Isak Hien, and Sead Kolašinac as centre-backs.

The midfield consisted of Marten de Roon and Mario Pašalić as central midfielders, with Davide Zappacosta and Raoul Bellanova as wing-backs, before Lorenzo Bernasconi came on for Bellanova.

Attacking-wise, Atalanta relied on Kamaldeen Sulemana and Nicola Zalewski as wingers, with Nikola Krstović as the main striker.

And in the second half, Gianluca Scamacca replaced Krstović, and Lazar Samardžić replaced Sulemana on the right wing.

Antonio Conte started the match using a 3-4-3 formation, with Vanja Milinković-Savić as goalkeeper and a defensive line of Juan Jesus, Alessandro Buongiorno, and Sam Beukema.

The midfield comprised Stanislav Lobotka and Eljif Elmas as central midfielders, Pasquale Mazzocchi and Miguel Gutiérrez as wing-backs, Antonio Vergara and Alisson Santos as wingers, and Rasmus Højlund as the main striker.

Atalanta Impactful In-Game Changes Vs Napoli Set-Piece Exploitation

Atalanta started the match with the needed intensity and were able to have more possession and try to disturb Napoli’s organisation, mainly through quick passing and a lot of determination to play inside Napoli’s half for as long as possible.

This was done by using a high defensive block to keep Napoli’s players inside their own half as much as possible and prevent their high pressing.

More importantly, what helped Atalanta maintain possession for long periods was the dynamism of their players and their movements between the lines, and their ability to create passing options without the ball.

Atalanta Giorgio Scalvini Attacking Positioning

In this regard, it was important to highlight Scalvini’s excellent work without the ball in attack and his continuous advancing to exploit the spaces left at the back of Napoli’s defensive line.

As soon as he receives the ball, he passes it vertically and accelerates to provide a passing option to the receiver of his pass, which makes Atalanta’s players’ chances of finding vertical passing opportunities more certain.

This was a recurring theme throughout the match and helped Atalanta create more attacking chances, suggesting the team can work more extensively on this plan and make it more automatic, as that would surprise opponents considerably.

During this particular action, Scalvini initiated the advance on the right wing with a pass to Sulemana, who in turn passed the ball to Bellanova.

In the meantime, Scalvini continued advancing without the ball until he created some space for himself away from Napoli’s marking and in a dangerous spot.

Unfortunately for him, Bellanova was unable to pass the ball to him quickly and avoided taking risks.

That said, Scalvini’s positioning in such situations can be even more effectively exploited, especially if Bellanova opted to advance towards the corner-line and cross towards the box.

In this case, Scalvini would have become a second striker inside the box and would have been much less marked than the main striker, which would have helped him use his aerial abilities and even score a header.

Napoli Exploitation Of Atalanta’s Poor Set-Piece Defending

After conceding a goal due to poor defending in the air in the UEFA Champions League first leg of the knockout phase playoffs, Napoli did well to exploit this weakness and rely on it to score their single goal of the match.

First, Højlund pushed Scalvini to commit a foul in a dangerous area, even though Scalvini could have avoided it, as the action was not particularly dangerous.

The unnecessary foul was therefore exploited well enough by Napoli thanks to an accurate cross towards the box and an excellent movement from Napoli’s players inside the box to win their duels against Atalanta’s defenders.

In fact, it was Pašalić who made this whole action very dangerous, as the plan was to put Napoli’s advancing players in an offside position.

However, Pašalić was not standing on the same line as his teammates, which helped Napoli’s Højlund, Buongiorno, and Beukema find themselves completely unmarked, as the picture shows.

At the same time, their markers remained on the same line to put these players in an offside position.

This was a disappointing set-piece defending from Atalanta, as they allowed Napoli to take the lead, not thanks to a well-structured attack, but rather to their lack of coordination and communication in defending set pieces.

Atalanta Nikola Krstović & Kamaldeen Sulemana Attacking Duo

It took a while for Atalanta to create dangerous opportunities and respond with authority after conceding a goal, as the chemistry between Sulemana and Krstović had not yet been established.

In particular, Sulemana was moving internally as if he were a second striker during Atalanta’s attacks and did not lean a lot towards the wide areas, specifically the right wing.

This limited the possibility of providing him with passes, as he was continuously marked inside the box.

But as soon as Krstović started moving outside the box, Sulemana found more spaces as Krstović attracted defenders and was able to provide passes to Sulemana.

This particular action was dangerous for Atalanta, as it involved both players in a counterattack in which Krstović moved to the right wing, beat his direct marker, and provided a key pass to Sulemana, who found space inside the box and shot on goal with power.

Atalanta Raffaele Palladino Crucial In-Game Changes

The second-half changes to the striker, right-winger, and right wing-back made Atalanta more dangerous against Napoli.

They added more freshness and the ability to disturb their opponent’s defensive line.

That said, the comeback and the equalising goal came from a set-piece situation that saw Pašalić exploit the little space left between Napoli’s players just behind the near post.

Both Samardžić and Scamacca had a completely different impact on Atalanta’s attacking performance compared to Krstović and Sulemana, as Scamacca had a more physical presence inside the box, disrupting Jesus.

At the same time, Samardžić was more dynamic and more technical than Sulemana on the right wing.

This helped Atalanta create more than one attacking situation, thanks to both players, while getting very close to scoring.

Furthermore, Bernasconi was way more dangerous and effective in terms of acceleration and crosses from the left wing than Zappacosta, who made no difference in the first half.

Being aight-footed did not help Zappacosta much with crossing, as he was always obliged to cut inside and confront Napoli’s defenders instead of running towards the corner line and crossing, something Bernasconi did repeatedly in the second half with remarkable crossing quality.

Bernasconi’s crosses made the difference for Atalanta.

They provided an additional attacking option that proved crucial at the end of the game, as Bernasconi provided the assist for Samardžić, who scored an outstanding header despite tight marking, confirming his goalscoring talent and his ability to be dangerous not only on the wing but also inside the box.

Conclusion

Atalanta succeeded in surprising Napoli with an outstanding comeback that highlighted Palladino’s work with the team and his ability to improve performance, both individually and collectively, especially from a playmaking and attacking perspective.

The reliance on multiple players and the tactical flexibility needed to use them and make several in-game changes, as well as key positional changes to suit the needs of the match, are among the factors that are making Palladino’s side perform well, especially in the second half.

On the other hand, Napoli’s failure to beat Atalanta despite numerous opportunities after scoring their first goal was disappointing, as it put the team in a risky position for qualification to the UEFA Champions League.

Conte will need to fix the issue of failing to kill games when the opportunity arises, and this can only be done by finding alternative attacking plans to surprise opponents and confuse their defences.

Furthermore, the finishing by the attacking players needs to improve, as this match saw many misses and inaccurate or weak shots.