Slightly OT - Is 442 dead?

Long time reader (since the 606 days) without commenting on here...

This is a bit OT but what are people's opinions on 442?

Having dabbled in coaching it's remarkable how many teams still play 442 at amateur level with the trend moving towards 451 in the top flight. I must admit I miss the days of wingers being wingers attacking the byline (so I may be biased) but struggle to see how 442 can't still be an effective an exciting formation.

My thoughts are that 451 is merely a 442 formation which effectively forces 2 central midfielders to hold deep and a centre forward to drop deep. (I.e. A defensive phase of a standard 442 formation). So why is it that this is becoming the default in the top flight?

From working with young players I'm tempted to say it's due to a lack of discipline and ultimately intellect with most lads not wanting or being able to read the game sufficiently to know when to defend in a standard 442. This is also coupled with the tendency for top flight managers to fear losing more than wanting to win (I.e. Defensive mind sets).

I'm firmly in the camp that 451 works only for technically strong teams with the ability to play through the middle but doesn't work for teams (I.e. Newcastle) who struggle to break down premier league defences.

Thoughts?

 

4-4-2 is fine if the team is really fit and athletic. A lot depends on your strikers pressing from the front, they moment they don't do this the opposition defence bring the ball out, their full backs push on and they have 6 players in midfield dominating your four every time they have the ball.

I think with Riviere and Cisse we could easily play 4-4-2 with Aarons and Cabella wide. You'd then have Sissoko and Tiote in the middle.

 

4 4 2 is tied to the "old fashioned number 9" - - the big hold up player who acts as an outlet and lays the ball off to his strike partner. they both have gone out of fashion

 

Good post and bang on in my opinion. I didn't want to bore you all with a longer first post but was going to bring out that it is dependent on having an athletic team.

Agree it would require sissoko and Tiote in the middle ideally for their athletic presence. Given the squad Aarons wide is probably the best option on the left (though I don't think he's ready who else do we have?).

RE: being overrun in midfield - that's exactly the situation I allude to initially - a striker should have the capacity to know to drop in to assist - unfortunately it's unusual for players to think for themselves without being instructed to do so.

Thanks for the post - it's a topic I'm keen to discuss - still have ambitions to get my coaching licences!

 

Chinos used to not be in after a long time.

 

Reasonable point but 451 rarely works without a top class CF who has the ability to bring others into play and grab a bag full of goals - their aren't many off these players around! Usually have to have a large physical presence also. So not a million miles off the old fashioned number 9. Just an isolated number 9 nowadays!

 

I think people get way to bogged down in formations. Look at Van Gaal. He switches around formations regularly and has success with different ones. The key for me and the diference in the modern game is about how you apply any given formation. The biggest change I have noted in modern football has nothing to do with formations. It is Barcelona introducing a hgih intensity "blitz" situation when not in possession. Southampton have successfully adopted this into their play. They do not play the same way as Barca, but they do apply the same philosophy of getting the ball back.

442, 343, 352, 4231, 4132, 4141 etc and are all viable solutions to win football matches. Intensity coupled with technical ball retention is the key to modern football. We lack this in abundance. My main criticism of Pardew is not our ball retention which has actually improved, it is the intensity of our game when we don't have the ball. I don't think Newcastle sides under Pardew are fit or hungry enough.

 

IMO its ability and the application of that ability that most often wins games. How often when the 'weaker' team wins is it due to the better oppostion underestimating/not putting in the effort.

Formation, and perhaps more importantly (which often dictate formation), the specific roles of players for me only really makes a difference for teams even in effort and ability.

 

Goodness, I remember when it used to be 2-3-5 and jumpers for goalposts.

I have no idea what Pardew puts out each week as it seems to involve a pile of players wandering around midfield, a gaping hole at left back and, perhaps, a striker.

 

This is turning into a reasonable debate. Again very valid points - I think players need to have an understanding of their roles but agree that high intensity (especially without the ball) and the ability to play a technical game are a must (although I think there is a balance - I.e. There's nothing wrong with throwing a cross in - tearing my hair out when watching barca, for all their brilliance, refusing to put corners into the box and passing back to the halfway line ).

Strange how much more reasonable the responses on here are than anything that comes from Pardew's sound bites!

Other interests of mine (having a Masters in Mathematics - who said northerners were thick) is the use of statistics in football. I agree with old adage stats can lie but I'm sure that there are a few football basics that can be proven/disproven... E.g. Men on the post at corners vs not, inswinging vs outswinging corners (I'd rant until blue in the face inswinging corners are more dangerous), inverted vs normal wingers chances created/goals scored/positional heat maps. Shame no-one would fund me to analyse it all!

Call me unreasonable but I look at a team like us and think "what could we be" under the right set up.

 

Regarding the use of statistics in sport, "The Signal and the Noise" is a very good read. Now standard procedure with baseball - - a chance for you to make your name applying them to football

 

Do you think we play with 1 striker becasue strikers cost so much more than any other player on the pitch?

Or is that too far and just a coinsidence that fits into fat mikes financial plan

 

I'm not convinced with the personnel we have in either the coaching or playing staff. There is undoubtedly still a place in the game for crossing, and I think it dying out is the lack of a traditional number 9's in the modern game. There are very few who are leaders of the line. Lambert does it and proved at Southampton they can function within that kind of system. Dzecko is one and Carroll is another. Abroad you have the likes of Ibra, Klose, Gomez, Negredo who fit that kind of mould.

Its why we've seen the advent of things like the false 9. Its basically thinking a way round the lack of physicality in your front line. It can work but you do need unbelievable talent sitting behind to make things happen. Personally I think Poyet is missing a big trick at Sunderland by misusing young Wickham. I would love to see him here as I think the lad could be something with the right guidance.

I have never realy moved on the statistics front. They have their place in all sports. They are undoubtedly more useful in some than others (baseball is a prime example as are other regimented sports with set targets to achieve an end goal). In football they are helpful but the moment you put too much credence in them is the moment you slip for me. I think the stats are great from a supporters perspective, its another talking point. However from the actual coaching side football is a sport with so many variables at any given time. It is fast moving. Its a feel game for me rather than analytical sport. I think you have to look at the analysis as a coach, as it can help confirm what your eyes are telling you. You mention corners which to me is the best example of all. I read stats about inswingers, outswingers etc. Then I watched a session by Pulis and Gerry Francis. I quickly realised that the type of ball you put in was only a small part of successful routines. It was all about structure, bending the rules and being better drilled. The way they used blockers was akin to the very best illusionist! The oppo, ref and linesman are watching one thing while the actual game transires somewhere else!

 

I think the "in thing" at the minute is the phrase everyone keeps repeating about "getting outnumbered in midfield". It's total garbage in my opinion. I don't really place that much importance on formation, what matters is getting all your best players in their best positions. For example, 2 years ago it worked a dream for us when we switched to a 4-3-3 as it took defensive responsibility away from Ben Arfa, freed up Cabaye to go into a number 10 role and gave Cisse all the responsibility right in front of goal. The only player a bit out of joint from it was Demba Ba but he was actually pretty decent from the left.

 

Yeh i agree with that but if you play footy youll know what its like playing as part of a 2 man central mid vs 3 man central mid. You really do get outnumbered!

 

At low level yes, at professional level it really isn't just 2v3, players get dragged into the spaces and you can actually end up 2v1 in your favour as 2 opponents are drawn wide to deal with wingers and overlapping fullbacks. Disadvantaged on one part of the pitch = advantaged on another, it evens out. So really for me you pick the best formation for your players whatever that is, and that will give you the best chance. If your wide men were, say, a HBA and a Cabella, then a 4-4-2 clearly isn't your best option.

 

2 man v 3 man midfield means there will be and extra player somewhere else for the first team. They might have an extra forward, therefore the 3 man team will have to be more aware defensively stifling their attack.

What ^^ he said.

Seems the majority are singing from the same hymn sheet.

 

Yep seems a fairly shared opinion. The problem for us is that Pardew always picks the wrong formation for us, when Ben Arfa was still "in", he persisted for a long time with a 4-4-2 and whinged constantly about his tracking back. Now that we have 2 complete workhorses (and not much else) on the wings in Gouffran and Sissoko, it seems Pardew is completely obsessed with the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1.

 

Welcome to the forum mate.

 

4-4-2 is alright if you have two good strikers that can work together and if you have balls being delivered from the wings.

It's good for defensive game styles.