...won the Premier League or the Champions League.
I don't like this formation.
I don't like this formation.
When was the last time a team using 4-2-3-1...
- Thread starter jderbyshire
- Start date
Bayern won the champions league with it last season. We can change the formation all many times but our current system or style of play is not going to win league titles or champions league
If anything we look worse when we deviate from 4231 apart from the odd one-off game where the players are really fired up.
“Formations” aren’t nearly as consequential as the players and their efforts.
Bayern last season won the league & CL with 4231. It’s a good formation when you have top quality front four and also wants to attack with full backs. Poch used the same formation for his front four and his attacking full backs. Even Liverpool used it few weeks ago against city.
Exactly - when we play poorly it's usually when we're passive, lacking in intensity and moving the ball slowly.
You could say Real Madrid under Zidane in the Champions League, since Zidane would often put Isco in an advanced midfield role depending on the opponent.feck' sake.
Right, apart from them.
In the Premier League it'd be Mourinho's Chelsea 2014-15. Leicester played more of an orthodox 4-4-2 than 4-2-3-1 when they won it the next season.
Formation doesn't matter that much. Its the way the coach has the players playing, instructions, tactics within the formation, coaching to get them to know and understand what to do...
People obsess over formations but a formation won't get the players to learn how to progress the ball up the pitch. Coaching will.
People obsess over formations but a formation won't get the players to learn how to progress the ball up the pitch. Coaching will.
I don't totally agree.
There's a reason why players like Karius and Skrtel aren't at Liverpool anymore. If your players aren't good enough no amount of coaching will change that.
The fact is Man Utd have to play 4-2-3-1 because of the balance of our squad.
Our defence is one dimensional, panicky when pressed and mostly slow. That makes it hard for us to play in a way that would leave it exposed to lots of 1v1 duels in either a defensive or offensive capacity. Yesterday, we did see some moments when Lindelof and Maguire actually dribbled forward. However, mostly they don't show either the ambition or the ability to do this. We lose the ball quickly when we play out and then we are in trouble.
That defence needs two sitting midfielders to a) give it easy passing options and b) extra cover so its lack of pace and power is not exposed. As it would be if we played with one sitting midfielder and committed more players forward.
We could play 3-4-3, because again you have the extra insurance of the sitting midfielders, but that would expose Wan-Bissaka's offensive limitations even more. So four at the back it is.
I agree with your comments. We look so much better with three CB's, as we have cover. We also look better defensively when both McTominay and Fred are together, but that inhibits our creativeness somewhat. We badly need some pace in those defensive positions, either Maguire or Lindelof needs to go, so we can just use one of McTominay or Fred, and bring Pogba or VDB in to help us create more.
One of the main problems has been lack of investment recently. I know Ole bought Maguire and AWB to shore up a leaky defence, which they have, although it doesn't look watertight by any means, and indeed got us into 3rd place last season. Bruno has been a revelation since his arrival, but I'm not sure our strike force is on the same wavelength as him. VDB may not be Ole's pick, but I wonder if Woodward has indicated that the club intend to sell Pogba in January, or more likely next summer, so VDB is a straight replacement.
I still feel that Tuanzebe needs to be given a good run in the team, probably in place of Lindelof, who is not great in the air, and does lose some 1 to 1 tackles. Tuanzebe is quicker than both current CB's, so could be the answer. We badly need a right sided attacker, as opposing teams tend to double up on both Rashford and Martial, therefore nullifying their effectiveness in the last third, which makes them look 'useless' according to some posters, and I wonder if we put in a bid for David Brooks, who looks like he played well yesterday, and seems to be getting back to the form he had in 2018/19. Think Bournemouth would ask close to £40 million for him, but I would try £20 million to test the water, he's still young, and could get a good return if things didn't work out.
I can understand not paying £108 million for Sancho, as I think that's overpriced, Grealish could have been a great acquisition, but again, £80 million is a lot.
Like some posters on here, it doesn't really matter what system you play, it depends on the players you have, and what system suits those players. I've always thought that a diamond shape would suit us best, but that's dependant on having a pacy CB, and also encouraging AWB to attack his opposing full back more often. On the few occasions that he has ventured forward, he has popped in some good crosses, in fact yesterday he created two openings.
Last edited:
Still early days, so maybe Spurs this season?
Current league leaders mainly uses that formation, but yes as others have said, it's just a formation. What matters more is the whole system.
Formation is like a template or a "Face", or a "Name". It's just in front or the thing that is most obvious. It never does tell the whole story.
Current league leaders mainly uses that formation, but yes as others have said, it's just a formation. What matters more is the whole system.
Formation is like a template or a "Face", or a "Name". It's just in front or the thing that is most obvious. It never does tell the whole story.
Have to totally disagree with this.
We were good defensively with 4-3-3 when Herrera is still around, with Pogba the more free-r and attacking part of the midfield trio. Herrera did a lot of defensive works. Simialrly that season, we tried Pogba-Fred-McT when Herrera and Matic are out injured. It's good defensively. We lost the Barca game when for some bizarre BS tactical reasoning, McT is being pushed high up the pitch leaving Fred and Pogba at the back defensively exposed. It's better once McT is back in deeper position in that game.
Point is, whatever formation it is, 4231 or 433, it depends on the specific settings of each players. The 433 we used at that time for instance is not where two CMs attack but rather, just 1 CM attack while the other 1 CM is balanced depends on timings. Same thing with 4231, 2 DMs doesn't meant they must stay at the back, we can simply put one of the 2 DM to join in attack marauding mode.
Ole play 4-2-3-1 because of his own preferences of having a specific role CAM (it's for Lingard at that time), then he stubbornly insisted on it despite Pogba's attacking contributions already declining massively (the injuries are just an excuse, it's already declining before that and we see the continuation once he's back) and brought in Bruno who we know is tactically astute and flexible in many positions but he's given the choice to only play that role.
We play 4-2-3-1 not to balance our whole squad. It's just a formation Ole generally like to pick. Maybe some of his assistant coaches sing the song and he's tempted with the idea of 4231. I mean you could argue the variation of 5 defenders formation is more balance. In the end, it's still about choices and settings of each player.... which we don't really do and maybe do but bad at it.
Since your main argument is to balance our defenses...
In fact if you think about it, isn't having 3 midfielders in 433 better for the defense for extra cover and passing options, unless the 433 version is where 2 midfielders bomb forward. Point is it depends on how you set the whole thing. 4231 or 433 or hell even 352, all can bring balance as long as you thinker with it well.