Crystal Palace wrote history by winning their first major trophy – after a tactical master class from Oliver Glasner.
Pep Guardiola's Manchester City have outsmarted the Eagles to take on a deserved 1-0 win over Wembley on Saturday.
Glasner used similar tactics such as the 5-2 loss of his team against City earlier this season.
But Sunssport's Dean Scoggins reveals how subtle tweaks were paid off for Palace.
How is Palace set up?
Glasner had an absolutely brilliant plan.
It's great for a club like Palace to win their first trophy.
The Austrian said in his press conference before the game that as Pep again plays in the same way as he defeated them 5-2 at Etihad, he will have a plan for it. I have his number.
And he did it. He had his number. Everyone had to be drilled well, but they were.
It is a setup that we know they play 3-4-3 but it was more a 5-2-3.
They set up with the wing, very deep, Tyrick Mitchell on one side and Munoz on the other.
Munoz came out much more than Mitchell, but essentially they were a back five.
In addition to midfield two in the front, it was where Eze and Ismaila Sarr came into the position to stop the city.
Manchester City was set up in a fairly predictable form, but it was Nico O'Reilly who went into the position within the left
Eze and Sarr fell by two of the midfield, and then Mateta created a semicircle for midfield in the front.
Everywhere you looked, it seemed that Palace had more players.
Who attracted attention?
The working speed of Eze and Sarr was so impressive.
It showed how much Glasner trusted on his forward players to do defensive work and then to be compact between the lines.
You also gave a hat tip to Adam Wharton, who was like a young English midfield player like the Marshal there.
You could see him point him, the conversations he had with teammates.
It is a relief, he is fine after a concussion, who stopped his parties.
But his mind was certainly there when he was in the game. He was absolutely brilliant.
How did Mateta influence the game?
He may not have had many opportunities for the goal, but Mateta was crucial for the success of Palace.
We know he is holding the ball well. We know he makes good runs behind him.
Palace said before the game, we know that City will have an in -depth midfield player who will be sitting, who will drop off and will recycle possession and will go outside.
Mateta had a huge task to do – and that was actually to mark that player from possession.
As a striker, he managed Bernardo Silva for the most part of the game.
City later exchanged it and it was De Bruyne who tried to be the playmaker. Mateta did the same.
It was a thankless role, but a crucial role that the city stopped to bring the ball to their danger.
How did Palace score?
Glasner had a plan with Daniel Munoz where he was looking for holes left by O'Reilly.
When the ball enters Mateta, Munoz thinks only one thing – go through the wing.
It is the understanding of tactics and when to go, when to gamble.
Because if you choose the wrong time against Manchester City, you have Jeremy Doku to go the other way.
Where did the city go wrong?
Apart from the penalty, Omar Marmoush did not enter at all.
Erling Haaland had a moment early in the first half where I thought City will break them down here.
De Bruyne went back to the bag and City forced Palace back in their area around the penalty spot.
The Belgian hit a beautiful cross, which Dean Henderson makes a great save.
After that it didn't work – but they didn't change it.
City did not put the full-backs on the touchline and pushes the wing players inside.
They could have put Haaland in the middle to try to push the palace in a 3V3 at the back.
But they didn't. It was the same setup completely.
They just didn't have three or back for the back to dictate the game.
Mateta was the key and gave them a problem with the way he marked.