4-4-2

[SAred]

A system that had brought so much of United's success is hardly ever used by pity much any Football manager, Why?

 

[The Mitcher]

Because it's not trendy.

 

[stefan92]

A system that had brought so much of United's success is hardly ever used by pity much any Football manager, Why?

A flat 442 lacks control in midfield, a diamond lacks width. More emphasis on possession based systems leads to these points being crucial for most teams.

However I see a slight movement to come back to using a 442. Rose (already well known hipster manager on the Caf) and Baumgart (might evolve into the next one) are using a 442 diamond in Dortmund and Cologne this season and are so far quite successful.

 

[sp_107]

Against Week |Teams

----------------Ronaldo-------------------Cavani-------------------

---Rashford------Bruno---------McTominay---------Sancho----


Against Big Teams

-----------------------------Cavani-----------------------------------

----Ronaldo------------Bruno------------------Lingard-----

------------------Donny-----------McTominay----------------

 

[bond19821982]

Because you need wingers to maintain the width and put some good crosses in so that the two forwards can hold their places and attack them. Now tell me a world class winger who is playing now ? Wingers are being played as full backs now.

I remember City playing a 442 under Pellegrini. With Silva and Nasri as inverted wingers . I don't think anyone has actually played a 442 after that.

 

[JuriM]

Because you need wingers to maintain the width and put some good crosses in so that the two forwards can hold their places and attack them. Now tell me a world class winger who is playing now ? Wingers are being played as full backs now.

I remember City playing a 442 under Pellegrini. With Silva and Nasri as inverted wingers . I don't think anyone has actually played a 442 after that.

Leicester and Atletico played 4-4-2 for ages.

 

[bond19821982]

Leicester and Atletico played 4-4-2 for ages.

Yeah forgot about Leicester. Atletico isn't a flat 442. Simeone just plays different variants of it.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Mourinho killed it amongst top teams in his first Chelsea stint, maybe it's time it was revived

 

[Big Andy]

FOUR FOUR feckING TWO

 

[DickDastardly]

I'd quite like it to come back.

I have to say i grew up playing and watching 442 football.
We even have some of the players who could play in a 442.

What we are missing is a right fullback, cos AWB aint it.

A formation of

DDG
Right fullback - Varane - Maguire - Shaw (Telles)
Sancho (Lingard) - Bruno (VDB) - need a world class CDM (so far we have Fred or Mctom) - Rashford
Ronaldo (Greenwood) - Cavani (Martial)

We could pull it off, considering we bring in a attacking right full back and a world class CDM aka Roy Keane.

 

[Adam-Utd]

The arrival of 433 killed it basically.

The extra man in midfield allowed too much control for the better teams, and added another body defensively to turn the 2v2 into a 3v2 for the defending side.

Now though with many teams starting to use a 3-5-2 again, 4-4-2 will start to become more popular again.

Every formation has a counter, it all depends on where the space is given.

 

[largelyworried]

FOUR FOUR feckING TWO

Carlos Quiroz's ears just pricked up.

 

[Zen86]

What's the xG for 4-4-2 vs 4-3-3?

 

[peridigm]

442 with a 4 barrel and 4 on the floor... stubbidy

 

[Borys]

It would be interesting if more teams play through midfield (4-3-3) rather than through the wings (4-4-2). It seems likely because traditional wingers are extinct, but at the same time fullbacks have become more adventurous so not sure.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

To be fair Man City last season played 442 few times except instead of using 2 strikers, Pep used 2 attacking mid/false 9 drop deep.

 

[adexkola]

To be fair Man City last season played 442 few times except instead of using 2 strikers, Pep used 2 attacking mid/false 9 drop deep.

This

Simeone uses it as well. With 4 midfielders instead of 2 midfielders/2 wingers, but still.

 

[B20]

You need two very well rounded top class midfielders to make it work, imo.

I wouldn't mind seeing it for us with Hendo and Fabinho.

No idea how Ferguson pulled it off with Carrick and Scholes as late as 2013. I think I concluded back then that most teams are a bit shit and couldn't live with their quality on the ball.

 

[adexkola]

You need two very well rounded top class midfielders to make it work, imo.

I wouldn't mind seeing it for us with Hendo and Fabinho.

No idea how Ferguson pulled it off with Carrick and Scholes as late as 2013. I think I concluded back then that most teams are a bit shit and couldn't live with their quality on the ball.

In the PL, sure. I think we were struggling more in Europe in later years partly due to this (obviously also due to our team was aging, that bitch referee against Madrid...)

 

[stefan92]

It would be interesting if more teams play through midfield (4-3-3) rather than through the wings (4-4-2). It seems likely because traditional wingers are extinct, but at the same time fullbacks have become more adventurous so not sure.

But those adventurous fullbacks are now often used in a 3-5-2. Keeps the midfield three so you don't lose the battle there, but allows you to relatively safe attack on the wings.

 

[eldanielito]

I believe that a 4-4-2 still can be pulled off with great results. It requires complete midfielders and forwards who both can defend, playmake and attack.

 

[11101]

You need two very well rounded top class midfielders to make it work, imo.

Mostly this. Those players don't exist anymore. You have specialist defensive midfielders, box to box, attacking, high tempo, deep lying and more. A midfielder that works in 442 is a jack of all trades master of none and would get left behind by a group of specialists. As good as he was, 1990s Roy Keane would not defend enough, attack enough, run enough and lots of other things to be effective in a modern midfield.

You also need wingers who like to get paint on their boots, and there are not many of those around either.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

You also need wingers who like to get paint on their boots, and there are not many of those around either.

True. And one could also add that the very best 4-4-2 teams often had at least one wide man who was more of a "side midfielder" than an actual winger, i.e. someone who could drift in (centrally) when needed and who was both hard working and tactically aware (someone like, say, Donadoni for Milan - or Beckham for United).

We couldn't pull off a 4-4-2 with our current personnel - no chance, since the middle of the park is just too weak.

Pogba is actually a plausible "side midfielder". And Bruno a very plausible "second striker". Fergie might've used those two to good effect in a 4-4-2. But even he couldn't work - at the highest level - with some kind of McFredish combo in the engine room.

 

[Harry190]

4-4-2 when behind. Opposition can't handle the pressure.

 

[Sandikan]

I'd quite like it to come back.

I have to say i grew up playing and watching 442 football.
We even have some of the players who could play in a 442.

What we are missing is a right fullback, cos AWB aint it.

A formation of

DDG
Right fullback - Varane - Maguire - Shaw (Telles)
Sancho (Lingard) - Bruno (VDB) - need a world class CDM (so far we have Fred or Mctom) - Rashford
Ronaldo (Greenwood) - Cavani (Martial)

We could pull it off, considering we bring in a attacking right full back and a world class CDM aka Roy Keane.

Awb would surely work much better in a 442. At times our full backs have to do all the work down the wing. With a proper partner out there it'd help.

 

[Sandikan]

442 would need to have the second striker as a Bruno.
Basically we're playing similar to it now!

 

[Superden]

English 442 teams kept getting shown up in europe / international football when meeting continental teams with their greater numbers in midfield, thus we had the famous xmas tree formation.

 

[bosnian_red]

It would be interesting if more teams play through midfield (4-3-3) rather than through the wings (4-4-2). It seems likely because traditional wingers are extinct, but at the same time fullbacks have become more adventurous so not sure.

Not extinct at all. Leroy Sane has rediscovered his form that made City in 2017/18 so good. I hate how Ole has a hard on for inverted wingers tbh.

 

[bosnian_red]

I genuinely believe that the actual formation isn't that important. 442 can work fine if you have the players for it. You need midfielders who can cover space, are secure positionally and defensively and have good passing range and a good eye for progression from deep. You need actual wingers and hold some width, not force everyone to come inside always. Pep tbf has used this part quite often, Nagelsmann is using it with Bayern now and it's working great with Sane on the left and the others on the right. Then you need a good balance of the front 2, which we basically use Bruno as a second striker anyway. Bayern use Muller behind Lewandowski.

Bayern uses a 4-2-3-1 like we do, except they do it really well and much more similar to a 4-4-2, or latter day Sir Alex's 4-4-2's. It's just important to have balance. We could do a 4-4-2 of sorts, but one winger would be the inverted winger at least (Rashford) with Sancho playing on the right. But Rashford and Sancho are much closer to "forwards" than someone like Sane and Coman are, who are classic wingers.

I'd love to go to something like we had in 07/08, Rashford playing the old Ronaldo role, Sancho on the other wing, and both swapping. But they'd have to change massively defensively, and the rest of the midfield and attack just isn't suited to it at all.

 

[OhGee]

Against Week |Teams

----------------Ronaldo-------------------Cavani-------------------

---Rashford------Bruno---------McTominay---------Sancho----


Against Big Teams

-----------------------------Cavani-----------------------------------

----Ronaldo------------Bruno------------------Lingard-----

------------------Donny-----------McTominay----------------

Dude our defensive midfield duo of Fred and Mctominay gets run over by mid table midfielders (Wolves, Southampton and Villa) are recent attestations to this. How in the world will Bruno and Mctominay shape up?

 

[11101]

True. And one could also add that the very best 4-4-2 teams often had at least one wide man who was more of a "side midfielder" than an actual winger, i.e. someone who could drift in (centrally) when needed and who was both hard working and tactically aware (someone like, say, Donadoni for Milan - or Beckham for United).

We couldn't pull off a 4-4-2 with our current personnel - no chance, since the middle of the park is just too weak.

Pogba is actually a plausible "side midfielder". And Bruno a very plausible "second striker". Fergie might've used those two to good effect in a 4-4-2. But even he couldn't work - at the highest level - with some kind of McFredish combo in the engine room.

All true though the main problem is in central midfield. Compare two elite midfields of Keane - Scholes, and Iniesta - Busquets - Xavi.

Forget being outnumbered, Iniesta was a better attacker, Busquets a better defender, and Xavi a better passer than either of Keane or Scholes. Even if those two may have been better all rounders than any of them. No midfield two will ever match a half decent three, let alone the very best.

 

[Diabovermelho]

Perhaps Hasenhüttl's 4-2-2-2 is better. Unorthodox high pressing system we could deploy. We also have the players to play in this system.

 

[tenpoless]

A flat 442 lacks control in midfield

Thats not true. In the classic 4-4-2 the wingers are pacy but running isnt the only thing they do. They provide passing options when needed and track back to defend against opposing wingers.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Forget being outnumbered, Iniesta was a better attacker, Busquets a better defender, and Xavi a better passer than either of Keane or Scholes. Even if those two may have been better all rounders than any of them. No midfield two will ever match a half decent three, let alone the very best.

Yes.

Make a list of the greatest teams (particular vintages, I mean - like Pep's Barcelona, etc.) ever - how many 4-4-2 teams would make that list?

Sacchi's Milan, for sure. Fergie's mid-to-late 90s vintage - possibly (looking at it from a neutral perspective). Liverpool late 70s, early 80s (great results, but who other than Liverpool fans consider those teams on the same level as, say, Pep's Barca?).

For national teams - what? Holland '88?

The 4-4-2 is an outlier - you could say - in terms of historically great teams.

(And if you wanted to make an "all-time greatest XI" you wouldn't go for the 4-4-2 as your formation of choice).

 

[stefan92]

Thats not true. In the classic 4-4-2 the wingers are pacy but running isnt the only thing they do. They provide passing options when needed and track back to defend against opposing wingers.

It is true when you look at the "real" midfield, the center of the pitch. There you only have two players in a flat 442, and therefore lose against a 433 in that area. But filling the wings with a full back and a winger means you are strong there.

In a way the 4231 that is often used in the last years is a combination of the classic 442 and 433 systems. Take a 442 and replace a striker with a 10, you get a 4231. Take a 433 and replace the wide forwards with wingers, you get a 4231.

 

[BerryBerryShrew]

All true though the main problem is in central midfield. Compare two elite midfields of Keane - Scholes, and Iniesta - Busquets - Xavi.

Forget being outnumbered, Iniesta was a better attacker, Busquets a better defender, and Xavi a better passer than either of Keane or Scholes. Even if those two may have been better all rounders than any of them. No midfield two will ever match a half decent three, let alone the very best.

???
Got to disagree with all of that. I guarantee that if you replaced Biscuits with prime Keano in the Barca midfield, it would drastically improve. Keane could anchor a midfield better than anyone: it just so happened that he could play the B2B role better than anyone as well so that's what he did.

And Scholes was an infinitely better passer than Xavi. I mean, Xavi rarely attempted a pass that was more than 5 yards while Scholes could put a ball on a sixpence from 60 metres. Xavi had better off the ball movement and positioning than Scholesey though.

Don't want to sidetrack the thread too much but it annoys me how much our own greats get underrated. A 3 man midfield with Keane, Scholes and Iniesta would have been far more dominant than Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta.

 

[stefan92]

???
Got to disagree with all of that. I guarantee that if you replaced Biscuits with prime Keano in the Barca midfield, it would drastically improve. Keane could anchor a midfield better than anyone: it just so happened that he could play the B2B role better than anyone as well so that's what he did.

And Scholes was an infinitely better passer than Xavi. I mean, Xavi rarely attempted a pass that was more than 5 yards while Scholes could put a ball on a sixpence from 60 metres. Xavi had better off the ball movement and positioning than Scholesey though.

Don't want to sidetrack the thread too much but it annoys me how much our own greats get underrated. A 3 man midfield with Keane, Scholes and Iniesta would have been far more dominant than Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta.

The point of that Barca midfield was that they never had to rely on risky long balls.

However I agree that it would have been possible to field a midfield of Keane, Scholes and Iniesta if they had played at the same time. But especially Keane would focus on some of his qualities instead of doing everything, and in those a hypothetical 433 Keane would have surpassed the real 442 Keane

 

[Bebestation]

Ole's 4 2 2 2

De Gea

AWB - Varane - Maguire - Shaw

Mctominay - Fred

Bruno - Pogba

Ronaldo - Cavani

​

Rashford and Greenwood gives us both a left and right footed Forward to come off the bench.

Sancho competes with Pogba at LAM.

 

[Skills]

Football doesn't produce the players for the formation.

The classic flying winger is dead, he's playing at full back. And to play him at full back you need an extra midfielder to cover them from the middle or a back 3. Teams would rather attack the middle of the pitch with 3 dynamic forwards than 2 strikers as you open up more passing lanes - the forwards are also much better at cutting in scoring/shooting rather than taking their full back on the outside.

 

[Trequarista10]

Personally I'd play a lopsided 442 but that's just me.

One striker in the Henry at Arsenal role, drifting left. The other striker playing deeper as a 10 or second striker. Left mid cutting inside to join the midfield in possession, similar to Pogba's position recently, with the LB given license to bomb forwards and create width. The RB being more conservative/central, but instead the right mid playing as a traditional winger to provide width on that flank. Obviously could also work mirrored.