Is 442 dying

[Bus-Conductor]

I've been thinking about this for a while. It seems we are one of the last teams to play a proper 442 in the EPL. Arsenal, ManU, Chelsea, Everton, Portsmouth, ManC, Villa etc. Not to mention most of those below us. The only exceptions I've seen recently are Reading (at our place) and Blackburn. Even West Ham don't usually.

I always hated 451 and what it stood for. It doesn't always have to be a negative formation, as Arse & ManU prove (and some of Europes finest). And under Jol I found myslef suggesting it as a way to accomodate the deficiencies of Hudd, Jenas, Zokora whilst playing to their attacking strengths and with Malbranque, Bale, Lennon etc we had the flair to make it an attacking formation. Especially away from home where we were a soft touch. But when deployed in the Bolton way it kills football, it is anti-football. It's about function at it's ugliest. And if we were ever to adopt this I would be very fuckied off.

Thankfully Ramos has managed to negate the need for 451 of any kind so far. And even if he did deploy it I'm positive it would be the Arse, manU variety not the Bolton variety.

In my heart of hearts though I would love us to find a way to continue to play 442 successfuly (I know it needs not just two fantastic CM's but two fantastic everything to make it really successfull FB's, CB's, Strikers, Wingers) and I think we are close. This is what I love about 442. Done properly it is about beautiful mathamatics. About simplicity and interchangeable partnerships. It is not about safety first or stopping them. It is about the shapes and paterns you make.
It is the ultimate efficient footballing design concept.
To Dare is To Do.

 

[robbiesavagehasbreasts]

Agree 100%.

Ar5ena1, though, are only playing it this season because first Van Persie was out and now Eduardo is out. But I actually think they are better with Adebayor up front and Hleb right behind him. But then again, who cares about fucking Arsenal?

I love that we play 4-4-2 and at the moment it's out of the question not to play with two strikers, seeing we have in Berba and Keano, the best striker-partnership since Gudjohnsen/Hasselbaink.

 

[Pedro]

I too love that we play football the 'proper' way, with our 442. I think the main reason we dont use 451 is down to the quality of our strikers, and in particular the berbs keane partnership. In berbs and bent we have 2 strikers that can play to good effect up on their own, but keano could not fit into a 451.

I would rather we continue our persuit of the perfect 442. With another world class CM and LM we will have a beautifully balanced team. COYS.

 

[guy]

The good teams who play 4-5-1 are forced into doing so by not having good enough strikers.

chelski only drogba, man u before tevez and l'arse because rvp was(is) always injured.

We have 3 top strikers but not enough good MFs so its logical for us to play 4-4-2.

I wouldnt mind us trying a 5-3-2 formation if we dont get the illusive left winger, ie Hutton And Bale as wingbacks

 

[Black]

Lots of teams still play 4-4-2, Arsenal may play 4-5-1 but there midfield players get forward so its not a problem for them

 

[Barmy_in_Palmy]

I think so, the FourFourTwo is no longer available in NZ, not even the shitty australian version.

 

[Houdini]

Stuart Pearce once attempted the 4-4-3 at Man city! until, that is, his wife pointed out something quite important to his formation!

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Can someone tell me why this thread has been moved ????

 

[Cicada]

you could say that a lot of the time we play a hybrid 451, with Keane dropping deep, especially in away games.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

I didn't do it mate, but it is definitely a poser about football rather than specific to Tottenham. We try to keep specific things affecting the club in Spurs Chat and everything else in GF, so guess thats why it got moved.


I agree, by the way. I've always had a soft spot for the 3-5-2, but have been shown time and again how it simply isn't the right formation to win on a consistent basis.

 

[milkman]

I like the 4-1-2-1-2 diamond formation.

We do have good full backs aswell, so we could play wing backs (Hutton RWB, Bale when fit LWB)
then in the centre have Jenas, Hudd and Malbranque. Keane and Berba up front

 

[sheringmann]

I guess Chelsea and Man U is more of a 4-3-3 with attacking wingers. 4-5-1 is more with one sitting defensive midfielder and the two midfielders beside him go on attacking runs...In a 4-5-1 the wingers arent that attacking..

 

[SpurSince57]

They were when we played it.

B-C, a more Mod-friendly title might be: 'Are Spurs the only side playing a genuine 4-4-2?'

 

[idlepete]

Great post BC. Totally agree with all of it. I'm made up that Jol's successor appears as dedicated to a dynamic 4-4-2 as he was.

The best 4-5-1 I've seen to this day though was the French team around the 1998 World Cup. But then they had Petit and Vieira sat behind ZZ, possibly the best midfield triumvirate ever.

Cicada - having a striker linking with the midfield doesn't make it a hybrid 4-5-1 IMO. It would be more correct to say The 4-5-1 is a hybrid version of the 4-4-2 that has one striker dropping off.

 

[themanwhofellasleep]

I hate 4-5-1. It works about one game in ten and every other game is a borefest.

I think a lot of teams only resort to 4-5-1 when lots of strikers are injured and out of form. Man U nearly always look better when they have Rooney and Tevez up front instead of Rooney and an attacking midfielder.

We look at our best with a 4-4-2 formation. Keane often drifts wide anyway, allowing wingers to come in more centrally and get a few goals.

 

[yanno]

B-C: interesting thoughts, with which I largely agree. For me, the goons do play a version of 4-4-2. The variation is that their wide players look to cut inside or make runs inside the opposition FBs. In other words, the Arse don't play with wingers, or wide midfielders who hug the touchline - that kind of width comes from their FBs. Of course this causes goon fans to scream at Wenger for playing the right-footed Diaby at LM....

Ramos' Sevilla side played a breathtaking 4-4-2, with the attacking flair coming down the flanks, and both the wide midfielders and the FBs getting forward. Sevilla's CMs were never very attacking. Poulsen rarely gets near the opposition penalty area (apart from setpieces), and the likes of Renato, Maresca and, this season's addition Keita, are playmakers who press. They're certainly not box-to-box midfielders (athough Keita scored a couple of stunning long-range strikes). And one of the things Ramos has certainly done with Jenas is make him more disciplined, picking and choosing his forward forays far more selectively than under Jol. JJ is not a box-to-box CM under Ramos, although he will get forward more than his CM partner.

Fundamentally, when you have a world class striker like Berba who can play as a fulcrum (like Kanoute at Sevilla), 4-4-2 is the logical formation. Man Utd don't have this kind of "fulcrum" striker. Chavski are in post-Mourinho 4-3-3 transition: I would argue that playing Anelka wide of Drogba in a 4-3-3 is stupid, and they should switch to a 4-4-2 with SW-P and Joe Cole playing wide. But then they'd have a lot of unhappy CMs (Essien, Obi Mikel, Ballack, Fat Frank, Makelele) fighting for two places in the team.

If we keep hold of Berba, I expect Ramos to build a 4-4-2 over the summer which attacks down both flanks and competes in the middle of the pitch. So, a left-footed flyer like Diego Capel for the left flank, and a combative, disciplined CM who can pass, like Lucho or a better version of Tiago.

 

[themanwhofellasleep]

Yanno... I agree with you about Chelsea. 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 often just seems like a way of keeping midfielders happy, rather than playing to your strengths.

 

[idlepete]

4-5-1 has played very much to Chelski's strengths though. How do you think Fat Frank scores all them goals?

 

[Legend10]

Lampard can't play in a 4-4-2, he has shown this for England. In short if you take away his protection to get forward without continuous defensive worries and therefore his ability to arrive late he becomes a very very average midfield player. In this country only Gerrard can offer what lampard does offensively and still be good enough to play in a conventional 4-4-2. Even then Rafa does all he can to relieve Gerrard of those duties, whether it be playing wider or an extra midfield body.

Chavs problem is completely their personnel, not only do they have an abundance of central midfield players who would be unhappy with a 4-4-2 formation but they also have 2 strikers in Drogba & Anelka who operate best up front on their own. Grant has so many problems with that group of players it's unreal.

As for us I'm glad we are sticking with the 4-4-2 but to be successful with this formation you do need to be exceptional in the FB and 4 midfield areas as well as having to have a Berba figure up front. The load on the 2 central midfield players is particularly difficult as they are usually going to be outnumbered and it was a system change essentially away from 4-4-2 that got us back into the CC final.

I think that the most important thing for us is to be a 4-4-2 side with an enormous amount of flexibility to adapt to game situations, you really do need good players to be able to do this, not to mention discipline.

 

[stevenqoz]

BC - surely one of the biggest plusses of the new regime is the re-education of many of our 'vanilla' SC contributors. Ramos has already shown that if you have the right players changes of formation are not only possible but often necessary within one game. Ironically a feature of the new regime has been its general inability to find an ideal balance with a 4 4 2 from our existing squad. It many games he has at some time gone away from it to get a result and rightly so. As a caoch of over 800 games I never rule out any formation but just ensure that the system fits what you have not the other way around.