Poch...Please stop playing 4231

[NickHSpurs]

Got to agree, these performances seem to happen when we revert to a back four.

I know Davies isn't a wing back and no where near Rose's quality but surely he can't be any worse there than he was yesterday?!

I'd much rather see a back three of Toby, Dier & Wimmer with Walker and Davies at wing back than the shower of shit that was yesterday's back four.

 

[$hoguN]

Playing 4-2-3-1 exposes our weaknesses. Our complete lack of creativity becomes very evident and we compensate by pushing the midfield duo forward to congest it, so we can extremely susceptible on the break.

Despite looking negative playing with 3-4-3 actually gives us width and means that we do not look narrow in attack whilst still giving us enough men at the back to deal with through/long balls. Absolutely mistifying why we have moved from a formation that suits us to 4-2-3-1 which we have looked shit in every games this season other than the demolition of City

 

[Shadydan]

We beat Southampton playing 4-2-3-1 didn't we?

 

[yido_number1]

Playing 4-2-3-1 exposes our weaknesses. Our complete lack of creativity becomes very evident and we compensate by pushing the midfield duo forward to congest it, so we can extremely susceptible on the break.

Despite looking negative playing with 3-4-3 actually gives us width and means that we do not look narrow in attack whilst still giving us enough men at the back to deal with through/long balls. Absolutely mistifying why we have moved from a formation that suits us to 4-2-3-1 which we have looked shit in every games this season other than the demolition of City

It's well known the club track fatigue levels closely and they probably feel without Vertonghen we don't have enough numbers to constantly have 3 CB's on the field. Add to that Wimmer has looked shakey of late.

We are much better in the 3-4-3 and I think the day Vertonghen is back we will be playing that again.

 

[Krafty]

I believe formations can be very fluid, so an x-x-x becomes y-y-y or z-z-z depending on circumstances, however...

4-2-3-1 is one of my most disliked formations. That five in the midfield are not given enough responsibility, and it can leave us both open at the back AND stunted at the front.

At its worse, the '2' never leave the comfort of their holding midfield roles, slow down the play as they create lateral lines rather than angles for passing, and do not get close enough to the opposition's box to create anything, let alone score themselves.

Then the '3' fail to get beyond the loan striker, meaning there is little threat in the penalty box and they do not take responsibility for scoring goals as they aren't a striker, and they also do not track back as they feel there is plenty of cover with the 2 holders, so they end up in a no mans land where they aren't expected to deliver defensively nor offensively (relative to others)

I would prefer we either went with a hard 4-2-1-3, or something with 3 at the back (and therefore more in the middle of the pitch)

 

[mil1lion]

It comes down to availability of players. I love the 3 at the back when Vertonghen is fit but Wimmer just isn't good enough in the big games. I think the system was the best option available on Saturday. I'm not even sure we can play Wimmer in the league now the Europa is starting either. When Vertonghen returns we can go back to a 3 and still rotate a bit.

 

[nightgoat]

It's all about the personnel. Last season we played 4-2-3-1 most games and were considered the best team in the country by many people. That was with the Dier-Dembele axis in midfield that had actual balance, and Lamela-Alli-Eriksen as the three. Only Man City scored more goals than us, and last day aberration aside our defence was comfortably the best in the league.

That formation doesn't become shit or ineffective overnight, and was not the reason we lost on Saturday which seems to have lead to more people wanting to see it completely abandoned. Some games will suit playing three at the back better, as the Chelsea game demonstrated, but we should be striving to be a team that is comfortable playing more than one formation.

 

[tiger666]

We beat Southampton playing 4-2-3-1 didn't we?

We've beaten plenty of teams using it. There's some proper bollocks being spouted in here.

 

[John48]

Not so sure, I believe we've been at our best this season playing 3 at the back, mainly because I think it brings Eriksen into areas where he can be more effective.

 

[Everlasting Seconds]

All I know is, we average 1.65 points per game in PL this season in matches with 4231, and 2.45 ppg in matches not played in 4231.
No you are right, you are right. Coincidence. No doubt. As is the fact that we score 1.43 goals per match in 4231, and 2.36 goals per match not in 4231. It's all coincidence. Look at *insert the one match from the last 12 months that comes close to proving wrong the entire hypothesis*.

 

[Galactico14]

We had to scrap the three at the back vs city as they were causing us all sorts of problems.
The issue is more about how we deal with teams pressing us then just formation.

 

[Johnny J]

4231 was not the reason we left ourselves pathetically wide open against Liverpool.

 

[ralvy]

The problem is not playing a 4-2-3-1, the problem is playing a 4-2-3-1 with Dier as one of the center 4. If Poch insist with doing this, we´re screwed

 

[Hoops]

We had to scrap the three at the back vs city as they were causing us all sorts of problems.
The issue is more about how we deal with teams pressing us then just formation.

Got in one little fight and my mum got scared, she said you moving with aunty to a place called bel air....

Meaning, we played badly against a good side away from home, then decided to go ultra negative away to Sunderland.

 

[Everlasting Seconds]

The problem is not playing a 4-2-3-1, the problem is playing a 4-2-3-1 with Dier as one of the center 4. If Poch insist with doing this, we´re screwed

But over the scope of the season(s), we've played this shit-shit-shit formation with several different starting 11s. Putting it down to one player just makes no sense. It's a systematic problem with 4231 not being the most effective way for us.

 

[nightgoat]

All I know is, we average 1.65 points per game in PL this season in matches with 4231, and 2.45 ppg in matches not played in 4231.
No you are right, you are right. Coincidence. No doubt. As is the fact that we score 1.43 goals per match in 4231, and 2.36 goals per match not in 4231. It's all coincidence. Look at *insert the one match from the last 12 months that comes close to proving wrong the entire hypothesis*.

If you're going to go back 12 months then you'll have to include all the games we won last season using 4-2-3-1 as well. How many games have we played with three at the back this season anyway? It's such an incredibly small sample size it's akin to Tactics Tim claiming to be our best ever manager because of his win percentage.

Incidentally, do you consider the point at Man City this season in the 4-2-3-1 side for when we salvaged the point, or three at the back when we were getting ripped to shreds?

 

[Everlasting Seconds]

If you're going to go back 12 months then you'll have to include all the games we won last season using 4-2-3-1 as well.

I didn't go back 12 months. All fresh stuff from this season.

 

[nightgoat]

I didn't go back 12 months. All fresh stuff from this season.

"Look at *insert the one match from the last 12 months that comes close to proving wrong the entire hypothesis*."

 

[Everlasting Seconds]

"Look at *insert the one match from the last 12 months that comes close to proving wrong the entire hypothesis*."

That was me being a sarcastic jerk.

 

[nightgoat]

That was me being a sarcastic jerk.

My point being, there is way more than just one match over the last 12 months to counter the '4-2-3-1 is shit' argument, like how we scored 1.95 goals per game from January till the end of last season. On the contrary you could point out how we were insipid turd playing three at the back against Villa until switching to 4-2-3-1 won us the game.

Different games suit different formations and tactical approaches, there is no one definitive approach for every game. Which is why this thread is kinda silly.