4-2-3-1 -- What's the obsession???

[ian__marshall]

Why oh why does every manager we employ rigidly play this formation and refuse to deviate no matter how poor the results? 

 

I'm starting to wonder whether Rudkin is writing this as a requirement into manager contracts. Since Brendan, every manager has played this formation. Is it down to manager recruitment and picking managers who are wedded to this formation or is it that there's a perception that because the majority of PL teams play this formation it must be the way to setup a team? I'm leaning towards the latter, given that Rowett reverted to this setup when clearly he had no idea how to implement it. 

 

I wondered if I was being naive and deluded in terms of modern football, but actually having done a quick bit of research of preferred formations of coach's who have been successful over the past few years, with the exception of Emery, Iraola, Maresca (arguably not that successful yet in PL) , there does actually appear to be quite a few variations in shape, e.g. 4-3-3 (Klopp, Enrique, Arteta, Howe, Frank), Pep preferring 4-1-4-1, and Glasner going 3-4-2-1. 

 

What does stand out is that all of the managers that have had success with 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3, have deployed exceptional acceleration and pace in the front 3, hitting teams hard and fast on the break/turnover. This has worked particular well for the lesser teams who have experienced success. If you think about Villa, Newcastle, Brentford, and Bournemouth in particular, all were/are still happy to invite pressure on, set traps, then explode forwards on the turnover with great success. 

 

So why do we insist on this style of play given we have no explosive players in the side?

 

Would it not make more sense to play a formation that plays to our strengths, maybe going 5-3-2 (3-5-2) giving us more security at the back, allowing McFarlane and Joseph to push forward more, and offering more support to the isolated immobile forwards we have.

 

At this level, I'd even consider 4-4-2, as anyone who has ever played the game knows how to play the system, and with all due respect to League 1, you're not exactly coming up against elite players and coaches so it pretty much comes down to who works the hardest, wants it more, and who has the better quality. 

 

Interested to hear others thoughts as I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking this way. 

[em9999]

Imagine being 3 down and taking off a striker for another striker

 

 

 

 

[jv1]

1 minute ago, em9999 said:

Imagine being 3 down and taking off a striker for another striker

 

 

 

 

This - absolutely pathetic 

[Fish]

As Mike Bassett said . “ we will play four  four ****in 2 “ . No isolation up top , no confusion for players . Start our two forwards and let ‘em avit . 

[Chelmofox]

It’s a deep rooted issue at the club. Everyone buying in to the bullshit last year that our players couldn’t play any other system. We have lots of academy energy and 14 new players. Yet still 4 2 3 1

 

You have to do such little research to play us, regardless who our manager is. 
 

We have about 8 players who can play in a back 3 now. Yet we will persist with the same. 
 

It 100% comes from the leadership, and guarantee that a manager only takes the gig under the assumption we have to play a certain way. 

[davieG]

I thought we were more 4 1 4 1 yesterday as Braybrooke spent most of his time just behind and sometimes along side the striker.

[weusedtobegood]

 Martin has failed in every position hes had because he can't change his tactics,  every fan of the clubs he ruined told us hes useless but Rudkin knows better.

[Fish]

3 minutes ago, davieG said:

I thought we were more 4 1 4 1 yesterday as Braybrooke spent most of his time just behind and sometimes along side the striker.

And it was shit . Two up top . 

[LCFCCKEANO]

38 minutes ago, davieG said:

I thought we were more 4 1 4 1 yesterday as Braybrooke spent most of his time just behind and sometimes along side the striker.

Think this was arguably the worst decision made yday, after Braybrooke and Page have done so well playing deep as a pair I have not got a clue why he would put more distance between them, their interplay is pretty much the only way we get the ball out of our defense with the way we play

[Jimmy]

we aren't playing 4231 its a 433 maybe a 4141

[Spudulike]

5 hours ago, weusedtobegood said:

 Martin has failed in every position hes had because he can't change his tactics,  every fan of the clubs he ruined told us hes useless but Rudkin knows better.

It's hardly come as a surprise, has it. Everyone (almost) know that he's useless, we didn't need to be told. It's more about the mystery why owner's appoint him. It's just baffling and, to be honest, very weird.

[st albans fox]

If we were playing 4-2-3-1 then we wouldn’t be conceding so many goals thorough the centre of the pitch 

 

we are not playing a double pivot 

[Muzzy_no7]

4-3-3, 4-1-4-1, 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-2-1 it doesn’t matter with the coaches and players we have as well as the mentality running through the club. 

[Super Shinji]

If you are going to play with 1 up top, you either need your striker to play off your 10, which means your 10 needs to either be a good ball carrier or be able to hold it up really well whilst your wide players overlap. Or, your wide players need to be getting ahead of your 9 to pull others off him. Playing possesion based football and trying to put crosses in from behind the 18 yard line to a lone striker just won't work as they will never find the space. This has been the case for the last 3/4 years, even when Vards was still here. The 9 constantly has to drop deep leaving nothing in the box when we eventually do put a decent ball in. 

[Fox92]

Don't understand the obsession with one striker, never have. Why would you go into a (home) game with one striker.

[Motiv8a]

Was always going to be hard for us to play more than one striker up front when we don’t have anyone to play. Now we’ve got Riis it will be interesting to see if he experiments with a 2. Evidence from yesterday would suggest Russ isn’t going to. 

 

How are other more successful league 1 teams lining up/championship teams lining up?

[Muzzy_no7]

6 minutes ago, Motiv8a said:

Was always going to be hard for us to play more than one striker up front when we don’t have anyone to play. Now we’ve got Riis it will be interesting to see if he experiments with a 2. Evidence from yesterday would suggest Russ isn’t going to. 

 

How are other more successful league 1 teams lining up/championship teams lining up?

Sheff Weds are very ordinary and playing a simple 4-2-3-1 while Huddersfield are just streetwise with pace and power playing 3-4-2-1 variants.

 

Neither are possession based and both are very willing to hit the channels and play percentages. 
 

Crucially both are dominant in front of the defence playing double pivots.

[Motiv8a]

4 minutes ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Sheff Weds are very ordinary and playing a simple 4-2-3-1 while Huddersfield are just streetwise with pace and power playing 3-4-2-1 variants.

 

Neither are possession based and both are very willing to hit the channels and play percentages. 
 

Crucially both are dominant in front of the defence playing double pivots.

 

Yeah thought that might be the outcome. It really feels like we are playing a possession based system that it would only be sensible to play if we had a team that were gelled and working well together. Which we have been so far away from being for years. It’s really difficult to watch. The formation change wouldn’t make a huge amount of difference but the philosophy is killing us rn. As was prophesied over and over 

 

[sdb]

8 hours ago, ian__marshall said:

Why oh why does every manager we employ rigidly play this formation and refuse to deviate no matter how poor the results? 

 

I'm starting to wonder whether Rudkin is writing this as a requirement into manager contracts. Since Brendan, every manager has played this formation. Is it down to manager recruitment and picking managers who are wedded to this formation or is it that there's a perception that because the majority of PL teams play this formation it must be the way to setup a team? I'm leaning towards the latter, given that Rowett reverted to this setup when clearly he had no idea how to implement it. 

 

I wondered if I was being naive and deluded in terms of modern football, but actually having done a quick bit of research of preferred formations of coach's who have been successful over the past few years, with the exception of Emery, Iraola, Maresca (arguably not that successful yet in PL) , there does actually appear to be quite a few variations in shape, e.g. 4-3-3 (Klopp, Enrique, Arteta, Howe, Frank), Pep preferring 4-1-4-1, and Glasner going 3-4-2-1. 

 

What does stand out is that all of the managers that have had success with 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3, have deployed exceptional acceleration and pace in the front 3, hitting teams hard and fast on the break/turnover. This has worked particular well for the lesser teams who have experienced success. If you think about Villa, Newcastle, Brentford, and Bournemouth in particular, all were/are still happy to invite pressure on, set traps, then explode forwards on the turnover with great success. 

 

So why do we insist on this style of play given we have no explosive players in the side?

 

Would it not make more sense to play a formation that plays to our strengths, maybe going 5-3-2 (3-5-2) giving us more security at the back, allowing McFarlane and Joseph to push forward more, and offering more support to the isolated immobile forwards we have.

 

At this level, I'd even consider 4-4-2, as anyone who has ever played the game knows how to play the system, and with all due respect to League 1, you're not exactly coming up against elite players and coaches so it pretty much comes down to who works the hardest, wants it more, and who has the better quality. 

 

Interested to hear others thoughts as I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking this way. 

Because everyone running the club, and subsequently the managers we hire, are stupid and stuck in the past. They only hired Martin because Pep praised him once (after battering him 6-zip or something). We are controlled by people with sub standard intellect.

 

To be honest, this forum is full of the same sorts of questions: "why do we do [something inexplicably stupid] at this club?". The answer is always the same.

[Pliskin]

It’s the implementation of the tactics that is the problem. 
 

Martin is a poor coach, he has an ideology, but he can’t implement it…. His time at Southampton is starting to look more like it was down to his resources than his methods. 
 

You just need to look at how we try to beat the first press from the opposition………..

 

The defence stand in a straight line and pass it between them….. that’s not a tactic, it’s suicide……. We don’t move off the ball, there no basic moving into space to create space for runners and passers to keep the ball moving….. 

 

Just think about how Enzo beat the first press, Vesty invited the press, beat it with a pass into Winks, who bounced of Ricardo to open the pitch up and advance…

 

There no movement at all under Fartin, the players just stand still, almost expecting the ball to come to them…. You’re movement off the ball in this system is more important than what you do with it, because that’s how you create the space….. all we’re doing is inviting teams onto us, shitting ourselves and losing the ball…. 
 

It’s coaching, poor coaching… those who have seen Sammy play know he’s capable of doing what Winks did for us, what he is being asked to do is completely ineffective…. If Enzo was here, we would be top, because he knows how to coach this system, Russel doesn’t… 

 

Nothing this clown does will work, he’s not got the football IQ to deploy it without having players good enough to to deploy it perfectly….

Edited 6 September by Pliskin

[Parafox]

8 hours ago, ian__marshall said:

Why oh why does every manager we employ rigidly play this formation and refuse to deviate no matter how poor the results? 

 

I'm starting to wonder whether Rudkin is writing this as a requirement into manager contracts. Since Brendan, every manager has played this formation. Is it down to manager recruitment and picking managers who are wedded to this formation or is it that there's a perception that because the majority of PL teams play this formation it must be the way to setup a team? I'm leaning towards the latter, given that Rowett reverted to this setup when clearly he had no idea how to implement it. 

 

I wondered if I was being naive and deluded in terms of modern football, but actually having done a quick bit of research of preferred formations of coach's who have been successful over the past few years, with the exception of Emery, Iraola, Maresca (arguably not that successful yet in PL) , there does actually appear to be quite a few variations in shape, e.g. 4-3-3 (Klopp, Enrique, Arteta, Howe, Frank), Pep preferring 4-1-4-1, and Glasner going 3-4-2-1. 

 

What does stand out is that all of the managers that have had success with 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3, have deployed exceptional acceleration and pace in the front 3, hitting teams hard and fast on the break/turnover. This has worked particular well for the lesser teams who have experienced success. If you think about Villa, Newcastle, Brentford, and Bournemouth in particular, all were/are still happy to invite pressure on, set traps, then explode forwards on the turnover with great success. 

 

So why do we insist on this style of play given we have no explosive players in the side?

 

Would it not make more sense to play a formation that plays to our strengths, maybe going 5-3-2 (3-5-2) giving us more security at the back, allowing McFarlane and Joseph to push forward more, and offering more support to the isolated immobile forwards we have.

 

At this level, I'd even consider 4-4-2, as anyone who has ever played the game knows how to play the system, and with all due respect to League 1, you're not exactly coming up against elite players and coaches so it pretty much comes down to who works the hardest, wants it more, and who has the better quality. 

 

Interested to hear others thoughts as I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking this way. 

Too long a post for me to be interested, but I guess your saying something sensible.

[Muzzy_no7]

Skubalas Lincoln averaged less than 40% possession last season? 
 

They were the kings of pressing and chance creation though.

 

Also…they predominantly played 4-4-2😂

[BKLFox]

When are Page and Braybrooke playing as a pair?

[Trav Le Bleu]

People do know Mike Bassett isn't real.

 

Right?

[Dan]

It's a club policy. Couldn't be more obvious. It's why they purposely sign loads of attacking midfielders.