Inter 5-3 Udinese: Four Wins from Four, Three Conceded, and an Unanswered Question About 'Martinez'

In the 15th minute at San Siro, the scoreboard read 0-2. Abankwah scored his first Serie A goal — from a defensive position. Ekkelenkamp doubled the lead. Inter, a side still listed among title contenders, were pinned back by Udinese to the point of breathlessness.

The match ended 5-3.

I watched the tape twice. The first time to watch the ball. The second to count. When I finished counting, I realised the scoreline had told a different story from the one the stands wanted to hear. Five goals do not erase three conceded. And the three conceded are the part of the data worth sitting down to argue about.

When the numbers speak, I listen; when the crowd shouts, I count again from scratch.

Context: a perfect 12 points and a suspicious promise

Four rounds, four wins. Inter and Roma sit joint-top of Serie A on a perfect 12 points. Cristian Chivu — newly installed — has the best start an Inter coach could dream of. On Saturday his side travels to the Olimpico to face Roma, who are also unbeaten and perfect after four rounds.

That is the context outside the pitch. The context inside it is far less comfortable.

After the match, Chivu said of one player: “He will never be a problem, I will defend him to the death.”

First ambiguity: the report never clarifies which “Martinez” this is. Inter’s squad contains two — Lautaro Martínez, the captain and forward; and Josep Martínez, the goalkeeper. One sentence, two entirely different meanings. If it is the captain, this is a form crisis for a dressing-room icon. If it is the goalkeeper, it is a number-one shirt under question.

Second, and more serious: a coach rarely says “I will defend him to the death” about someone who is not already under attack. The statement does not extinguish pressure. It confirms that pressure existed before this fixture.

Third: Inter needed five goals to beat a mid-tier opponent.

Five different scorers: a healthy signal or a screen?

The scoring list spreads across the pitch: Carlos Augusto on the left flank, Barella in central midfield, then Thuram, Esposito and Bonny up front. Five goals, five different names.

Structurally, that is healthy. A side whose output depends on a single striker collapses when he is injured or out of form. Inter were not that side on this night. They can score from the second line, from wide, from set pieces.

But I do not buy that screen wholesale. Five goals against a lower-rated opponent prove nothing about beating a well-organised defence. They prove only that Inter can score once they have been cornered.

And here is the crux: the goals arrived after the team was woken up, not before kick-off.

I once wrote about “Paulinho’s 19 goals” in exactly this way. A midfielder scored 19 in a league season, the media celebrated, until someone counted again and found 12 of them came against bottom-half sides. Volume is not quality. Goal counts are not value. In Serie A round four, Udinese are not a bottom-half side — but they are also not Roma at the Olimpico.

Two conceded inside 15 minutes: system failure or accident?

At elite level, conceding twice in the opening 15 minutes is not a random event for a well-drilled side. It usually comes from one of three sources: a deficit of intensity and concentration in the opening phase; a high defensive line exposed before the shape settles; or weakness in set-piece and second-ball defending.

I do not have the data to separate those three. The original report provides no expected goals, no expected goals against, no PPDA, no possession share. That is my limitation, and I state it plainly rather than guessing.

The one notable signal: Abankwah, a centre-back, scored his first Serie A goal. Defenders rarely score from open play. The highest probability is a corner or a second ball. That is my inference, not a verified fact from the source.

Based on my experience watching matches across many seasons, this kind of start recurs in teams shifting from a low block to a high press before the transition is complete. They score more, but they also leak more in precisely the window where the back line has not yet found its rhythm.

The headline is the three conceded, not the five scored

A 5-3 against a mid-tier opponent is the kind of result that masks process. When a side needs five goals to win, the scoreline is inflated relative to its actual defensive quality. In football, 5-3 is one of the least repeatable scorelines there is. No team sustains that scoring rate across 38 rounds.

And the fifth goal was not a tactical device. It was psychological release.

The same thing has happened to sides that win 4-3 repeatedly and then collapse in November. People praise the character. When the character runs dry, they realise it was loss of control dressed up as goals.

The comeback habit carries a price

Repeated comeback wins build resilience. They also embed a dangerous habit: waiting to be provoked before playing at full intensity.

A 38-round season. European commitments on top. Injuries, suspensions, travel. A side that needs five goals a match to win will not complete the journey. They will win beautifully a few times, then lose coldly once, and by then nobody remembers why.

A sporting bubble does not burst with a bang; it deflates with a sigh.

And Udinese? They came to San Siro, led 2-0 after 15 minutes, had three different scorers (Abankwah, Ekkelenkamp, Gueye), and left empty-handed. Seen another way, that was a match in which a club with a fraction of the budget proved that Serie A’s floor is sharp enough to punish anyone who sleeps. That is more valuable information than the final score.

Where I could be wrong

Four matches is 4/38 of a season, roughly 10.5%. Conclusions about title credentials at this point carry low confidence, and I raise the doubt against myself before anyone else does.

The comeback from 0-2 may be a sign of rare mental depth rather than a systemic fault. Many historic champions have wins like this on their record.

I do not know whether Chivu made a structural change between the 15th and 30th minute. The source reports outcome, not mechanism. If he did and it worked, that is credit to him, not a debit.

If Udinese’s goals came from two individual errors that cannot repeat, my entire system-failure argument collapses in one sentence.

And I have not established which “Martinez” Chivu meant. Every dressing-room reading of Inter rests on an unverified assumption.

I publish these weaknesses up front rather than let you find them later.

What interests me more: the calendar

The season does not care about emotion. It cares about the calendar.

On Saturday, Inter go to the Olimpico to face Roma. Two teams on 12 points. It is the season’s first genuine head-to-head between two leading contenders, and the first real test of the “perfect start” story.

The pressure is asymmetric. The winner keeps the contender label. The loser drops points and loses the framing too. A side entering a top-of-table clash with a 100% record will be reassessed entirely if it loses.

And if “Martinez” — whichever one — is involved in a decisive moment, the pressure doubles. Chivu’s promise to defend him to the death becomes a public debt.

Takeaway

An honorary trophy is a tissue to wipe the tears of the deposed champion. So is four wins from four, 12 points and top of the table — if it does not come with a defence solid enough not to concede twice inside 15 minutes.

I have watched football since pitches still smelled of dirt, not money. From that vantage point, I am not against Inter. I am against reading a 5-3 as a verdict of ascent.

The crowd has the right to be dazzled; I have the right to be awake.

When Inter needed five goals to beat Udinese, what happens on Saturday, when Roma do not give them the full 90 minutes to come back?