- Dec 27, 2014
- 7,405
- 13,785
I think people place too much emphasis on naming starting formations to be honest. It's more important what role each player is given to be honest. For example, we played last season with 3 CBs and 2 fullbacks/wingbacks but because the fullbacks pushed up a lot, it was called as a 3-4-3 or 3-4-2-1, but another team playing with 3 CBs and two fullbacks it would get called 5-3-2 or 5-3-1-1 if the fullbacks didn't push on as much. Same formation, different roles.
Also teams nowadays move fluidly between multiple formations throughout the game depending on who has the ball and where abouts it is on the pitch. For example, if you think back to Mourinho's first era at Chelsea, they played 4-3-3 which would move about between that and I suppose a 4-1-2-3 or 4-2-1-3 depending on what was going on, and then when they lost possession they'd drop the wide forwards back to make a sort of 4-5-1
So in answer to the original question, no I don't think 442 is dead, but the idea of a team having one formation that they hold for 90 minutes died years ago.
Also teams nowadays move fluidly between multiple formations throughout the game depending on who has the ball and where abouts it is on the pitch. For example, if you think back to Mourinho's first era at Chelsea, they played 4-3-3 which would move about between that and I suppose a 4-1-2-3 or 4-2-1-3 depending on what was going on, and then when they lost possession they'd drop the wide forwards back to make a sort of 4-5-1
So in answer to the original question, no I don't think 442 is dead, but the idea of a team having one formation that they hold for 90 minutes died years ago.
Last edited: