4-4-2
- Thread starter SAred
- Start date
Ralf Hasenlhuttl play 442 at Southampton, i noticed that his wide mids tuck into midfield as well as going up and down the flank. it works for them
Team you can make of current players most suitable for a classic 4-4-2?
------- Lewandowski ---- Mbappe
Sane ---- Kante --- Kimmich --- De Bruyne
Shaw ------ Van Djik ----- CB --- R James
----------------------------Goalkeeper
Sane might be controversial, but he's the only left footed LW I can think of who actually can take the ball either side. De Bruyne RM might be turning back some years, but he can be almost like a version of Beckham from there.
Reece James might be controversial as well, but he's played as a RCB in a back 3 which makes me think he'd be quite comfortable in a more traditional full back role. Though I think you can probably get away with someone even as attacking as Cancelo. The other CB can be anyone who's good in a back 2 - so none of the 3 back specialists. Varane and Maguire have a shout.
------- Lewandowski ---- Mbappe
Sane ---- Kante --- Kimmich --- De Bruyne
Shaw ------ Van Djik ----- CB --- R James
----------------------------Goalkeeper
Sane might be controversial, but he's the only left footed LW I can think of who actually can take the ball either side. De Bruyne RM might be turning back some years, but he can be almost like a version of Beckham from there.
Reece James might be controversial as well, but he's played as a RCB in a back 3 which makes me think he'd be quite comfortable in a more traditional full back role. Though I think you can probably get away with someone even as attacking as Cancelo. The other CB can be anyone who's good in a back 2 - so none of the 3 back specialists. Varane and Maguire have a shout.
4-3-3 but it would be a lot of work for the deepest-lying midfielder, particularly if Pogba was to be one of the other 2 CMs, so we'd need to sign a 'pure' DM for it to work imo.
Whether that's someone with the legs/energy to cover a lot of ground or someone who does it through holding their position and reading the game wouldn't really matter. It would certainly give us much more of an attacking threat though.
Saying that, we could also use the backline a bit like Italy did in some of their games in the Euros if AWB is the right back - let Shaw/Telles go forward and the other 3 shift across a bit to create a back 3 when we're attacking. Obviously we wouldn't have as much of a threat on the right doing that, but it's not one of AWB's strengths anyway.
We played 442.We didn't play 442 in 2013
We played 4231.
It's actually used plenty.
so essentailly 4-6-0 Spaletti style??
Us and Bayern still use it.
Nowadays formations only seem to come to fruition when defending.
I like the 4-1-5 we usually end up with.
Can we just throw out the numbers because they're so meaningless?
With the exact same players in a single game, we are 4-4-2 if Bruno decides to play as a second striker, 4-3-3 if both Pogba and Bruno are in left / right half spaces and 4-2-3-1 if we play McFred and ask them both to stay back and cover.
With the exact same players in a single game, we are 4-4-2 if Bruno decides to play as a second striker, 4-3-3 if both Pogba and Bruno are in left / right half spaces and 4-2-3-1 if we play McFred and ask them both to stay back and cover.
We don’t have the players for it. For 442 you need two proper, top quality center mids who can do everything, like a Vidal or Carrick. You also need more traditional wingers. Our wide players are wide playmakers or wide forwards, the closest thing we had to a traditional winger was Dan James. Also 442 doesn’t have a position for our most productive player, unless you want to play Bruno as a striker.
Bayern‘s is a 4231 not a 442
I remember a quote from Tuchel in an interview with Rio from last year, where he is asked about playing 3 at the back. He responds that formations aren't key - key is that players understand the general way he wants them to play in defense and attack. But the difference between 3 or 4 at the back may be 5, maybe 10 meters in terms of positioning, that's all. That discussion is here (the quote about 5-10 meters comes at 9:50):
Obviously, formations do matter to some extent, but ultimately, the question is what kind of general approach you want to use. I mean, a 4-4-2 with a narrow diamond doesn't actually offer the width everybody associated with 4-4-2; and 5-3-2 with wingbacks isn't necessarily particularly offenssive.
The fact that you can discuss this shows how similar those systems can be to each other.
Teams generally use two basic organizations, one when they have the ball and another when they don't have it. A 4231 in attack can and often will be a 442/4411 in defense.
sorry, but what? Roy Keane wouldn’t be effective in a modern midfield?
In that configuration it's basically the same thing.
Pirlo's Juve played a somewhat tilted 4-4-2 last season
Describing the formations by numbers can be a bit reductive as there are different ways to play formations but assuming by 4-4-2 you mean two all rounder CMs and two wide players, the football meta has shifted away from it.
It's easier for midfielders to have specialist role than to do a bit of everything to a high standard, it's easier to dominate possession when you have three mids rather than two, fullbacks do a lot of the work wingers used to do and inside forwards are more valuable than wingers in terms of end product.
I'm sure there are teams who can and do implement 4-4-2 well but in general the specialist roles it tends to entail are less common now.
And it's certainly not something we should try given our midfield problems.
It's easier for midfielders to have specialist role than to do a bit of everything to a high standard, it's easier to dominate possession when you have three mids rather than two, fullbacks do a lot of the work wingers used to do and inside forwards are more valuable than wingers in terms of end product.
I'm sure there are teams who can and do implement 4-4-2 well but in general the specialist roles it tends to entail are less common now.
And it's certainly not something we should try given our midfield problems.
Not unless he changed the way he played, no. Football has changed since then.
I don't know what you were watching but Rooney played number 10 behind Van Persie. We played 4231 or 4411, same thing. We played with 2 midfielders, 2 wingers, a striker and a number 10.
If Kante can thrive in this era, so can Roy Keane
Im sure he could adapt but that box to box do it all midfielder of the 90s would stand no chance against the specialist midfielders of the modern era.
Any formation can work with the right set of players for it, but I think it's far harder to produce top class midfielders to play 2 in the middle vs playing in a 3.
Well of course he’d change the way he played since it’s a different style between playing in a two or three. You’d have to look at his skill set and use that to see if he could do it, and if you look at Roy Keane playing and think he wouldn’t still be a top class midfielder in the modern game then I guess we’ll definitely be disagreeing.
Nothing has changed. Midfielders are no more 'specialist' than they were in Keane's day. The positions in centre midfield were exactly the same then as they are now, and they were populated with players of varying abilities and tendencies just as they are now.
Keane could play as either the deepest midfielder or as the box-to-box/ link/ no.8/ 'other' one. It would be exactly the same now.
4-2-3-1 is actually much more complex than that.
The reason this particular formation have thrived is not because it has two deep midfielders like a lot of people would point out. It’s because this formation is flexible both in defense and attack.
Essentially in attack it can become: 4-3-3, 4-3-2-1, 4-4-2, 4-4-2 diamond, 4-4-1-1, 4-2-2-2 and 4-2-4 with almost seamless transition. Depending on the instructions of the coach and flow of the game. Sometimes it’s so subtle that fans don’t even notice it. Including the original starting positions, that’s 8 variations. That’s providing the full back doesn’t play as a winger as has been the case in certain teams, which could even lead to back 3 formations and even further variation.
Similarly in defense it can become: 5-4-1, 4-1-4-1, 4-4-2, 4-4-1-1, 4-3-2-1, 4-5-1, 5-3-2 and even 4-6-0.
The formation itself is not important. Where players are placed at kick off and goal kicks is not often where they play. Heat maps show just how wide of an area players make up. If they were rigid like people often believe, it would mostly be a square box. Players are no longer confined to zones in the traditional sense.
Also, Real Madrid won a champions League with a 442 and on a smaller scale Burnley play a 442
Well that's just wrong.
Not always. Yes, there are specialists, but when I look at someone like Leon Goretzka I don't see one. And Bayern won a CL with him. Same goes for Kante at Chelsea, also someone who can do almost everything, also a CL winner.
Keane would do fine in the right team today.
Not for the first time Roy Keane's technical qualities overlooked again.
Yeah and the players like Maradona would be playing for Hull City in this era.
I am not saying that the players could not adapt their games do it.
I am saying that the midfield 2, as played in a 1990s 442 setup, would be overrun by a modern midfield with specialist DMs, box to box players, and all the rest. It doesn't matter if you put Keane in there or Lothar Matthaus, the game has changed too much.
Goretzka plays the defensive role with most of the goal creation in the centre of the pitch coming from Kimmich and especially Muller. Nobody in the current era does both. In the 90s they did.
I dont know if people have a weird baseless perception of Keane now. A lot of people in their early 20s probably never saw him play. Absolute monster midfielder. Great passer, great combative and tackling qualities. Had a good vision for where the ball would drop or where the interception could be made. Could turn a man and was a decent dribbler. Add to that leadership and motivational qualities on and off the pitch. I would give absolutely anything for a prime Roy Keane (albeit with modern fitness levels) in our team right now.
You are simply wrong when you think Goretzka plays a defensive role. That's what Kimmich does, along with his passing to keep attacks going. Goretzka is playing box to box, 8 goals and 8 assists last season show that he delivers up front.
Yes they have Müller to support them in midfield, but he is more like a second striker than a real midfielder, so Bayern's setup is quite close to a classic 442.
Rubbish. There is nothing you get now in midfield that you didn't get 20-25 years ago.
Yeah that used to be called a 4411, minor deviation from 442. I remember instances where Both scholes and giggs played off ruud van nistelrooy for us in that.
City played 4-4-2 effectively
Last edited: