hackajack
Established Member
Pretty much everybody used to play 4411. Now thay don't - ManU play 4231, Chelsea play 4141, Barca play 433.
hackajack said:Yes they are but they are all subtlely different and the distinction is worth making in my view since it has implications for what happens in games.
General said:Anzac said:Last season our 'strength' was our midfield - the 442 NOT the 451 IMO. This season we are struggling in the engine room, and IMO we will lose the season campaign in the 1st & last 3rds of the pitch as a result.
It depends which 4-5-1 you're referring to. A flat 4-5-1 (like Sunderland) is certainly not our style and 4-4-2 in the big games is a non starter because it's quite simple too permeable to win the midfield battle - hence the reason you never see United, Chelsea, Barca at all employing such tactics in big games.
Traditionally, 4-4-1-1 (with a real number 10)has always been our strongest formation, whether it's Merson slotting behind Smith or Bergkamp (or Wiltord) behind Henry. In the first leg of our CL tie with Liverpool, it was only when we went 4-4-1-1 with Hleb behind Ade did we actually look more threatening whereas before, Liverpool dealt with us quite comfortably with our straight 4-4-2.
I certainly agree with you that to execute both formations to the optimum, the engine room must be sorted.
I don't really see where you're coming from with this one. Seems to me the fullbacks are already doing the job defensively often tucking in to make a 'third' CB if the play is on the opposition flank and only going forward in ones to leave 3 at the back. With narrow wingers they will always be needed to create width at the other end of the pitch.Anzac said:As I've said IMO the engine room is defficient because it's being used to provide the primary cover for the defence, whereas IMO the simpler option is to have the FBs take this role.
hackajack said:I don't really see where you're coming from with this one. Seems to me the fullbacks are already doing the job defensively often tucking in to make a 'third' CB if the play is on the opposition flank and only going forward in ones to leave 3 at the back. With narrow wingers they will always be needed to create width at the other end of the pitch.Anzac said:As I've said IMO the engine room is defficient because it's being used to provide the primary cover for the defence, whereas IMO the simpler option is to have the FBs take this role.
FBs are key attacking players for all top teams in the modern game (see ManU with Evra, Chelsea with Boswinga, Barca with Alves etc etc). In fact my view is that they have become too attack oriented at the expense of defensive qualities in general (players like the ludicrously overrated Ramos, Lahm and Johnson - who can't tackle). We've used them extensively since we replaced Dixon and Winterburn (who were more attackminded under Wenger anyway). With crowded midfields and narrow wingers it's absolutely essential - in fact what you see more and more is a CB breaking forward as well to create the extra man (see Kolo last season). We shouldn't be looking for new solutions to the problem which disrupt the whole balance of the team we should just fix the problem the 'simple' way by getting a DM (or two).Anzac said:My impression is that we look to use the FBs as an element of our attack as often as possible, unless it's a fast paced counter - more so now that we've got the supposed Plan B with the crosses from the flanks. For me the FBs are a STANDARD element of the attack, as opposed to being an EXTRA option like Ca$hley used to be. Likewise if one is staying back I don't see them as playing any deeper than the central mids, which still leaves the 2 CBs as the backline. The only time I see them in any defensive pattern is when we are playing the ball out of defence - but that's probably being a bit harsh.
The FBs ARE the defensive key, based upon the player resources available.
I have some sympathy for the view that FBs don't actually contribute that much in terms of hard numbers of assists and goals (though I think I've made by position on using topline stats clear here and elsewhere) and that many modern FBs would be better off doing their defensive jobs properly (which why I love Bacary who's a defender first and no mug going forward) but in our case they create the space without which it would be even more difficult to open up teams.Anzac said:I get what you are saying about FB play in general as attacking options, but IMO it's gone too far when you continue to play that option at the expense of another, particularly when they offer so little by way of end product. It's not as if it would be removing a major contribution to our goal supply etc, whereas removing a striker is halving your options by comparison.
hackajack said:I have some sympathy for the view that FBs don't actually contribute that much in terms of hard numbers of assists and goals (though I think I've made by position on using topline stats clear here and elsewhere) and that many modern FBs would be better off doing their defensive jobs properly (which why I love Bacary who's a defender first and no mug going forward) but in our case they create the space without which it would be even more difficult to open up teams.Anzac said:I get what you are saying about FB play in general as attacking options, but IMO it's gone too far when you continue to play that option at the expense of another, particularly when they offer so little by way of end product. It's not as if it would be removing a major contribution to our goal supply etc, whereas removing a striker is halving your options by comparison.
Nasri's goal was coming as a result of the WBA defence getting confused as hell as to what was happening with Gael occupying the RB and Sami attacking through the middle as Nik floated around.Anzac said:Only because the wide mids come infield to create the space - and then the FB contribution to any end result is currently zero - so why bother??? I'd rather see the wide mids try to beat their man to get behind the defence, or see an interchange to open the defence as per Nasri's debut goal.
So are players allowed to improvise if things don't go smoothely, or is their creativity restricted within that system.General said:Our general style of play and formation hasn't altered for the past decade under Wenger’s tenure and it is not going to now. Every single player, including Nasri, is fully aware of the requirements to the systems we play. To ask for it to be altered to accommodate players is a non-starter.
DC Gunner said:So are players allowed to improvise if things don't go smoothely, or is their creativity restricted within that system.General said:Our general style of play and formation hasn't altered for the past decade under Wenger’s tenure and it is not going to now. Every single player, including Nasri, is fully aware of the requirements to the systems we play. To ask for it to be altered to accommodate players is a non-starter.
What if an opportunity arises for someone to make a killer pass [of any range] or a killer shot ! do you think they have second thoughts, or does the system allows them the flexibility !?General said:DC Gunner said:So are players allowed to improvise if things don't go smoothely, or is their creativity restricted within that system.General said:Our general style of play and formation hasn't altered for the past decade under Wenger’s tenure and it is not going to now. Every single player, including Nasri, is fully aware of the requirements to the systems we play. To ask for it to be altered to accommodate players is a non-starter.
Clearly being creative / improvising is different from altering the system. Allowing players to express themselves is actually a mainstay of Wenger’s strategy. The downside is a player cannot improvise to good effect if he lacks the tools or is simply not good enough.
Well, our full backs need the wingers to do their job and make the other team's FB think about having to watch either the crosser or the winger, if the winger runs @ the defender, few things can happen:arsenalfc0719 said:Our fullbacks need to be more aware of their defensive responsibilities and less occupied with offensive ones. We turn to our fullbacks far too much, this only makes us predictable and boring. When our fullbacks get the ball they should cut back and put it right back into play instead of trying to put in the final ball which they do far to often. Our fullbacks putting in a cross nearly at opportunity to do so really kills the whole point of possession based football. Crosses should diminishes to the bear minimum.