Christian Pulisic has rarely been short of attention since arriving in Italy, but the past week has pushed him into one of the most searching spotlights of his Milan career. With Pulisic at the center of the debate, Massimiliano Allegri and Fabio Capello have both weighed in—one with blunt realism, the other with cutting comparison—after a frustrating night that left AC Milan feeling they had dropped precious points. What began as a routine analysis of a draw has turned into a broader conversation about expectations, margins, and how quickly form can become scrutiny at the elite level.
On paper, a 1-1 result away from home against Fiorentina is rarely disastrous. The opponent is demanding, the atmosphere unforgiving, and the schedule congested. Yet this particular draw carried a different weight.
Milan created enough chances to win the match long before the final whistle. The first half, especially, belonged to the visitors. The structure worked, the combinations flowed, and Pulisic repeatedly found himself in positions he usually exploits with ruthless efficiency. Instead, the scoreboard remained stubbornly unchanged. That contrast—between process and outcome—set the stage for what followed.
Pulisic operated as a second striker in Allegri’s 3-5-2 system, frequently combining with Niclas Füllkrug. The German’s classic center-forward play—holding up the ball, timing layoffs, drawing defenders—created space that Milan had been missing in previous weeks. Three times, that space opened for the American star.
Once, he hesitated when a first-time shot beckoned. Another chance ended straight at the goalkeeper. A third drifted just wide. None were glaring misses in isolation, but together they formed a pattern that felt uncharacteristic for a player who has been among the Rossoneri’s most reliable finishers this season. Despite late salvation through Christopher Nkunku’s equalizer, the sense remained that Milan had paid the price for inefficiency rather than tactical failure.
What did Fabio Capello say?
It was in the aftermath that the conversation sharpened. Writing in La Gazzetta dello Sport, Capello delivered a typically uncompromising assessment. “Pulisic did everything thanks to Fullkrug. The attacking duo created two or three chances out of nothing, but the American uncharacteristically missed them all,” he wrote. “Mistakes uncharacteristic of him, like when he tried to beat De Gea instead of shooting, even though there was no space: in that space, only Ronaldo Nazario could have beaten the goalkeeper and scored.”
The comparison was not meant as praise. It was a reminder of how extraordinary such improvisation is—and how unforgiving soccer can be when players attempt the exceptional instead of the efficient.
Christian Pulisic of AC Milan in action against David de Gea goalkeeper of ACF Fiorentina
What did Massimiliano Allegri say?
If Capello’s words framed the debate, Allegri’s response grounded it. Speaking ahead of the next fixture, the Milan coach refused to single out his forward for blame, instead placing the discussion in a wider context. “On Sunday, after 15 minutes, we had already been through on goal three times with Pulisic,” Allegri noted. “If you score, the approach is right; if you don’t… everything is judged by the result.”
Then came the line that quietly anchored his stance, revealed only once the dust had settled: “‘Ifs’ and ‘buts’ get you nowhere.” In six words, the Italian boss drew a line under hypotheticals. What mattered was not what might have been, but what Milan does next. “He had scored before, and maybe he’ll score again tomorrow,” Allegri continued. “We have to focus on our performances and improve our mental focus. We’re in the second half of the season, and there’s no more time to make up for mistakes.”
