For me, the pinnacle of Arsenal's style, in recent years, was in 07/08. The midfield we had built was, in my opinion, even greater than Barcelona's current one. Since then, our "beautiful" style has actually faded year on year. It's often said that Arsenal's problem is that we try to play central midfielders out wide. The likes of Arshavin, Nasri and Rosicky. But actually, Arsenal seemed to manage best with 4 central midfielders in Rosicky, Hleb, Flamini and Fabregas. I think we have the players to make something like that work again. Nasri and Arshavin are capable of playing wide. I think Ramsey might prove himself out wide also, if he has the legs for it. Nasri Fabregas Wilshere Ramsey The creativity from this midfield would be mind boggling. Flamini was the holding mid before, and Wilshere can also do that IF our midfield stops trying to spend all its time in the final third, which it'd need to do less if we were playing two strikers. I genuinely think that this midfield would be balanced enough to be used regularly. Our midfield needs to sit further back and the lack of the recognised DM (Song, who bombs forward anyway) would make them have to be more defensively aware and share that responsibility better. We want Ramsey to replace Fabregas long term, and this formation would allow him regular playing time. We could also play a striker partnership of: Walcott RVP With Van Persie sitting just behind Walcott Which would also be fabulous as it would allow Walcott to get the experience out front that we all want him to have. The good thing about this formation (with these players) is that it's only one substitution away from returning to a 4-3-3 with Song coming on for Ramsey and pulling Walcott back out wide. We are often accused of trying to mimic Barcelona, and that was perhaps true recently. It's also one of Arsenal's greatest mental flaws. Until we once again define what Arsenal style is, we will always consider ourselves second best. We both play beautiful football, but Arsenal's style is different. It can be typified by comparing Xavi and Fabregas. Xavi holds on to possession obsessively, breaking down teams slowly. Fabregas attacks, searching for that killer pass. And that style was so good that Barcelona wanted it for themselves, lusting after Hleb and Fabregas. I don't want Arsenal to play "more direct" football in the sense of being Birmingham, or even along that track. There is more than one way to play football, and likewise more than one way to play beautiful football. And I think the best way for our current side lies somewhere between that of the 07/08 season and the days of Pires Vieira Gilberto Ljungberg.
1.Last team to win the league with a 4-4-2? Us in 2003-2004 (which was more of a 4-4-1-1 anyway)the last team to win it with a traditional 4-4-2 was United in 1998-99. 2. Last team to win the European Cup with a 4-4-2? Real Madrid in 2001-2002. 3. Last team to win a World Cup with a 4-4-2. Brazil in 1994. Just saying. I personally think its an antiquated system.
Surely those stats are false. Also, 4-4-1-1 is still a 4-4-2. It's just a form of it. Like our 4-2-1-2-1 is still a 4-3-3. In 07/08, Arsenal were easily the best side in the Premiership. But for a dodgy tackle in Birmingham, Arsenal probably would have won more than trophy.
We should play the reverse of whatever formation the opposition use! So if they play 4-3-3, we should play 3-3-4 If they play 4-4-2 we play 2-4-4 --szneznky --TV--Djourou -Nasri-Fab-Song-Wilshere Walcott--Chamakh--RVP--Arshavin
Thats highly debatable. The 4-2-1-2-1 is actually more like a 4-5-1 than a 4-3-3. A 4-3-3 does not have tradionall 'wingers' but should contain three forwards - they are not part of the midfield. (much like Barcelona who play Messi/Villa out wide) It's a much more attacking system than say a 4-5-1, something the English football press get consistantly confused about. Nearly all of the better domestic and international sides have now adopted either a 4-3-3 or various four-banded formations (4-1-2-3 etc.) that allow a certain extent of fluidity within it’s constraints, thus facilitating a much more open and expressive style of football.
I see what you mean. I still think that this 4-4-2 would be a strong choice for at least some of the games.
Our 433 formation was very good on the road last year, but at home you are right it could be good to change to a 424/442 so we can be more attacking.
Whatever happened to some of the things we tried at the start of last season. Where Fabregas, Song, Wilshere took it in turns to attack whilst the other stayed back. That seemed to work pretty well.
And the 424 plan b too. We should have been more ready to switch to this formation. http://www.zonalmarking.net/2011/02/02/arsenal-2-1-everton-tactics/
A 4-2-2 is not more attacking than a 4-3-3. It's a myth, mainly because the English press generally cant tell the difference between a 451 and a 433. Check out this excellent article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/jul/14/the-question-what-next-for-442
It makes it easier to play more direct football though, which we should try when we aren't doing our passing game well.
It all depends on the personnel. With the players we have, a 4-3-3 would be less attacking than a 4-4-2.
Our midfield is more suited to it though. Sorry to be pedantic by the way but we play a 4231 rather than a 443
We need to be willing to play more than one formation. And the DM position, whilst important, isn't so key against weaker teams as long as your midfield doesn't get carried away too often.
Yes we do. Last Season we played a 4-2-3-1 with Wilshere and Song as our deepest midfielders. The Season before last we played 4-3-3 which suited Alex Song much better.
I agree with TheBear. Song has had a poor season compared to the one before. What annoys me is the idea of this "modern" 4-3-3 as if it is the ultimate formation and will always be so. It's not.
But it also meant that we got destroyed on the counter attack much more easily because our midfielders occupied a higher position on the pitch and only Song did defensive work. With Song and Wilshire as a double pivot this year we have got rid of that weakness.
I stopped reading when you said your midfield in 07 was better than the Barca team's that has won 2 european cups in 3 years.
The problem with the two holding/deeper midfielders is the lack of goals, and that you'll often pick up silly draws at home, like we did with Alonso and Mascherano in our midfield. Wilshere needs to add goals to his game or the formation will never win you the league.
Well, put Villa and Messi in front of that midfield and you'd have had some impressive silverware too. After all, the Holland side featuring Cruyff was actually crap because they didn't win the world cup.
