Inter-Napoli has given Italian football a great deal of hope: we can have matches here too with the rhythm and intensity you see elsewhere in Europe. For the way it was played, for what it said about the two teams and, above all, for what it said about Serie A, San Siro produced one of those nights when the result can, in some respects, be put to one side. It was a fantastic game because neither side really wanted to be cautious. Inter and Napoli played to win, not simply to avoid losing. They took risks, left space, attacked even when dropping deeper would have been the easier choice. Perhaps it was no coincidence that the match was greeted with enthusiasm abroad. The Guardian described a contest in which, after 2-2, “it was anybody’s game”, with the action continuing to move from one penalty area to the other. GOAL.com, meanwhile, focused on the Champions League and Premier League tempo, and on the spectacle it produced in the best possible setting, the Scala del Calcio.
Paradoxically, the first half had no goals, but it already contained almost everything else: chances, intensity, duels, goalkeepers called into action. Inter had more possession and built more, but Napoli never looked as though they had come simply to wait. Quite the opposite. Aside from Dimarco’s crossbar, they produced the two biggest chances of the opening 45 minutes, with Anguissa denied first by Martínez and then by Bastoni. The teams went at each other at a speed that left very little room for pauses. Sozza’s refereeing added to the feeling. Few interruptions, seven fouls apiece, three yellow cards in total and a willingness to let the game continue whenever possible. It is the kind of refereeing that, when it works, you barely notice: the match stays in top gear and the players are left to take responsibility for what happens on the pitch. It was the sort of refereeing we tend to associate with European football.
Then came the second half. In the 50th minute Politano found the net after a rebound; three minutes later Højlund took advantage of a piece of brilliance from Di Lorenzo, who refused to give up on a ball that had somehow stayed in play, and drilled a precise left-footed shot from distance. In three minutes Napoli were 2-0 up, in a match Inter had controlled for much of the time until then. Inter did not collapse. If anything, the two goals seemed to wake them up. They pulled one back in the 56th minute through Lautaro, again from a ball that seemed lost and was kept alive brilliantly by Dimarco, then Thuram hit the post before heading the equaliser in the 82nd minute, rising above Badiashile, who had been brought on by Allegri to counter Inter’s dominance in the air. From 2-0 down to 2-2, the game never lost its pace.
At 2-2, with eight minutes left, there was everything that normally takes an Italian game towards a draw: fatigue, caution, the need to manage the result. Instead, Inter and Napoli kept playing. “Anyone could have won,” Chivu said afterwards. It acknowledged the quality of the opponent and, indirectly, that of his own team, but it was also a straightforward description of those final ten minutes. First came Thuram’s right-footed effort, sent into the second tier of the Green Stand from inside the area after the high recovery by Lautaro and Calhanoglu. Then Napoli had a double chance, with Alisson Santos making the same kind of mistake Thuram had just made at the other end, while Anguissa arrived slightly late to close down Politano’s diagonal. Then, in the 91st minute, Lautaro settled a scramble half a metre from Meret, helped by Akanji’s intelligent touch.
The most interesting numbers, perhaps, came after the lights went out at San Siro. Inter had 29 shots to Napoli’s 16, with eight on target against seven. They had 63 per cent possession and 10 corners to Napoli’s five. The xG varies according to the provider, but every metric points to a match in which the chances were real and numerous. A spectacular match can come with defensive mistakes and lapses, and there were some at the Meazza too. But they were often lost amid the quality and speed of the football. Inter confirmed that they have the structure and depth to change a match even after going two goals down. Napoli showed that they can put the Italian champions under pressure and that they have players capable of inventing, accelerating, striking. For Allegri, the regret is obvious: his team were 2-0 up and lost. But there is an important difference between losing a match like this and losing one in which you have simply suffered the superiority of the opponent, as against Como. Napoli had put Inter in difficulty, but Inter had done the same to them. That is what made the defeat different.
The reaction abroad was there too. The Guardian included Inter-Napoli among the great matches of the European weekend, while Between the Posts, the site specialising in tactical analysis, described Chivu’s victory as a significant step for a coach who still had something to prove in the biggest games. The result mattered, but so did the way the match had been played. A September game is not a prophecy for the championship, and Serie A has not suddenly become the most beautiful league in the world again. But Inter-Napoli is a good sign. It shows that a great match can be played without constantly having to choose between spectacle and balance. You can be tactical without being cautious, defend without giving up on attacking, reach the 90th minute at 2-2 and still think about going for three points rather than settling for the one that would have brought a half-smile to both sides. Inter-Napoli was, above all, two teams that kept playing until the end. There were mistakes, there were spaces, there were moments when either side could have chosen something safer. Neither really did. And if the future of Serie A passes through nights like this, then it is a rather interesting future.