Football is simple Walter

[chilledbear 16]

4-4-2 with two attacking players on the wings is fairly redundant in modern day football as it leaves you far too exposed against any half decent midfield but in the SPL we rarely come up against half decent midfields so I suppose it doesn't matter.

 

I'd like to see us playing a formation and starting 11 that remains the same regardless of the opposition. Possibly a 4-5-1/4-3-3 with the only change being the attacking mentality depending on the opponents.

 

 

I championed the 4-5-1/4-3-3 at the start of the season, but I do not think we have the players to carry it out.

[Bluedell 5,599]

If defensive central midfielder isn't McCulloch's best position then what is?

 

Striker? Centre half? Left mid? Don't see it.

[Super_Ally 0]

2 games in a row playing 4-4-2 with players in natural positions and we beat St Johnstone 3-0 going on 6-0 then go to Tannadice and batter a supposed title contender!

 

A proper midfield 4 of 2 central midfielders (although I still dont think McCulloch is at his best there, but Davis is), with 2 wide men and look at the difference!

 

Is this not the formation Eck was pilloried for playing?

 

Some fans likened it to a 4-2-4 with the wide men essential playing as auxialliary forwards leaving the midfield over run. So what was the difference last night?

[Gribz 825]

Is this not the formation Eck was pilloried for playing?

 

Some fans likened it to a 4-2-4 with the wide men essential playing as auxialliary forwards leaving the midfield over run. So what was the difference last night?

 

You have stated the difference. Eck played it like a 4-2-4. He left the midfield fat too light weight with the likes of Konterman and Ricksen in there whom neither were midfielders, and Tuesday was like played a proper 4-4-2 with 11 players in their current natural positions (I say current as McCulloch and Novo were originally a strikers but have probably found there new comfortable positions. Also Broadfoot and Papac were centre halfs yet seem like better full backs - this is what happens, even Henry started as a winger moving onto a world class striker).

Edited December 17, 2009 by Gribz

[Gribz 825]

4-4-2 with two attacking players on the wings is fairly redundant in modern day football as it leaves you far too exposed against any half decent midfield

 

Erm....Spurs thumped Man City 3-0 last night playing Lennon on 1 wing and Kranjicar on the other with Huddlestone and Palacios holding in the middle.

[pete 2,499]

Agree with Gribz 4-4-2 with wingers is in on the continent.

[Super_Ally 0]

You have stated the difference. Eck played it like a 4-2-4. He left the midfield fat too light weight with the likes of Konterman and Ricksen in there whom neither were midfielders, and Tuesday was like played a proper 4-4-2 with 11 players in their current natural positions (I say current as McCulloch and Novo were originally a strikers but have probably found there new comfortable positions. Also Broadfoot and Papac were centre halfs yet seem like better full backs - this is what happens, even Henry started as a winger moving onto a world class striker).

 

Not sure I see the difference myself. Just think it suits people's argument to support it when we're winnning yet slate the same tactics when we're not.

 

Personally I don't necessarily think it's the end of the world playing an attacking 4-4-2 with 2 wide/forward players on the flanks. It's easy to criticise in hindsight. Like all tactics and formations it has it's weaknesses, leaving us open to being over run in midfield. However, it is an attacking outlook which people have asked for.

[pete 2,499]

To add to my last post you have to have the good wingers in position. They have to defend well but be super quick to turn defence into attack. The same effect can also come from attacking full-backs where the midfielder covers his defensive duties.

[craig 5,199]

The difference with the 4-4-2 we played on Tuesday is that Novo and Beasley offered protection to their full backs but also broke at pace.

 

Playing 4-4-2 with 2 wingers it is vital that they recognise the importance of tracking back. Both did that. But Utd couldn't get out of their own half because we played with high tempo and shut them down quickly which allowed those wide players to get on the ball regularly and quickly.

[Totti 0]

Erm....Spurs thumped Man City 3-0 last night playing Lennon on 1 wing and Kranjicar on the other with Huddlestone and Palacios holding in the middle.

I said 'fairly redunant', not 'completely redundant'. Spurs are notorious for being an all out attack, dodgy defensively side anyway. If you look across Europe, regardless of what formation a side players there will 9/10 be 3 midfielders playing all capable of tucking in. If I was to think of a classic example to represent an ideal midfield 4 in modern football it would be the 90's Man Utd midfield 4 of a wide midfielder that can tuck in (Beckham), 1 winger (Giggs), one holding player/defensive (Keane), one attacking/creative player (scholes).

 

4-5-1/4-3-3 is very much the default formation now in world football although 4-4-2 has made a bit of a return this season in the premiership and it's working well for Chelsea (note how strong they are in central midfield).

 

I actually think the side we played at Tannadice was a massive risk but I can't complain since it pulled off. Good to be taking positive risks for once I guess. I think as stated the simple fact of most players playing in proper positions will take care of games itself. Of course against Aberdeen at Pittodrie we played with hardly any midfield and it didn't work that day...

Edited December 17, 2009 by Totti