Astana went into this match already knowing they would not advance to the next stages of the competition, having not being able to register a single point in the previous four matches in the group. Manager Roman Hryhorchuk was adamant though, that his side would take the match against Manchester United seriously, even if they have subsequently already been eliminated from the competition. That being said, because their league season has subsequently finished (Astana won the league for the sixth year in the row, beating title rivals Kairat by one point), Hryhorchuk put out a notably weaker squad, with a mix of experienced players and young stars. After their final match in the Europa League against FK Partizan in December, their season will be over by March.
On the other hand, Ole Gunner Solskjær opted to take a very young squad to Nur-Sultan to take on Astana in the matchday five of the UEFA Europa League. It was clear that he felt that the 6000-kilometre trip was not worth risking members of the senior squad. Manchester United are in a race to finish in the top four in the Premier League, and after the match against Aston Villa this coming weekend, a match that will be quite tough in its own right, they are scheduled to play against Tottenham, with former coach José Mourinho at the helm, and then an away trip to the Etihad Stadium against current Champions, Manchester City. With a tough schedule coming up, Solskjær opted to instead leave most of his senior squad back in Manchester.
This tactical analysis will look at the tactics that both teams deployed, and use analysis to figure out how Astana managed to come from behind in a 2-1 victory.
Lineups
The 8% of the time Hryhorchuk had his team line up in a 4-4-2 were against stronger opposition. Hryhorchuk has only used it in the Europa League matches, the Champions League qualification matches, and in the league against some of the other top teams, specifically when Astana are trying to maintain a lead, and see a match out. The 4-4-2 gives them the extra defensive protection, with two banks of four, while simultaneously having two strikers up top to combine in attack. This differs from the 4-5-1, another formation that Hryhorchuk tried out in more difficult matches. While the 4-5-1 gave them the extra man in defence, which was especially useful to track runners, having a lone striker upfront made it really difficult to counter-attack effectively. Having the second striker for support really helps ease the pressure off one single player to carry the attack of the team.
Solskjær went back to his 4-2-3-1 after tinkering with the 3-4-3 in the Premier League against Sheffield United, with disastrous results. Manchester United were favourites for the match on paper, but it was complete dominance from Sheffield United, that Solskjær was forced to revert back to his 4-2-3-1 after half-time. This formation, which is Solskjærs preferred formation, sees United really dominate the flank areas, with four players staying wide in attack (two wingers, and two fullbacks). Furthermore, the player in the number 10 role, and the striker are often given freedom to switch amongst themselves and play in between the lines, making it difficult to defend against.
![Lazio Vs Napoli [0–2] – Serie A 2025/2026: Maurizio Sarri Zonal Marking Weaknesses And Unsuccessful Attacking Choices – Tactical Analysis](https://totalfootballanalysis.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Lazio-Vs-Napoli-tactical-analysis--350x250.png "Lazio Vs Napoli [0–2] – Serie A 2025/2026: How Antonio Conte Tactics Exploited Structural Flaws – Tactical Analysis 4")
