Why Manchester United must now revert back to 4-2-3-1
Article courtesy of our friends at Stretford End Arising
*
To paraphrase Sir Alex, 4-4-2 is the best formation in order to move the ball with speed from back to front but increasingly 4-2-3-1 has become the shape of the “noughties”, and for good reason. Jonathan Wilson in 2008, discusses with greater aplomb than I the rationale behind the collective shift here The Question: why has 4-4-2 been superseded by 4-2-3-1?, but the main premise is simple: playing with four forward players supported by a structured defensive shape is more conducive to sustained attacking play, and encourages greater cohesion in general. Ferguson, an underrated tactician and fully aware of the pitfalls of both systems, must be reflecting of late on the catastrophic defensive flaws which have been all too frequent on the domestic front – and thinking, justifiably, of a reversion to the 2008 ECL-winning formation – the formation he continues to use in the majority of European games and in the bigger domestic fixtures.
I will happily admit that I was in favour of the tactical change which sought to revert to the swashbuckling attacking dynamism which was the blueprint for success in the 1990’s (seemingly stemming from the purchase of Berbatov, the replacement for the less refined Tevez). The 4-4-2 on paper was in reality a 4-2-4 or at the very least a 4-4-1-1 in which Valencia was recruited as your typical wide right midfielder, able to hug the touchline and take up some very useful attacking and crossing positions; and with Giggs or Nani utilised on the opposite flank, memories of the Beckham Keane Scholes Giggs era came flooding back. But although United remain unbeaten (and joint top of EPL), the system (and the performance level) has raised more questions than it has given us answers. In short, United look devoid of fluidity, shape and direction and must alter their approach soon to stop this awfully abject season descending into an anti-climax.
The problem United have with 4-4-2
4-4-2 is a system in fairness that has served United well in the last 2 decades or so. Actually Ferguson goes to great lengths in fact to stress that he has never actually played a strict 4-4-2 and with the deep lying striker a symbol of his success: Yorke, Berbatov, Hughes, McClair and of course Cantona are fine examples. As with all tactical discussions and coaching instruction, it is the player’s ability to interpret the message on the field as part of the collective assignment which is essential.
However, due to injury and largely inconsistent rotation by Ferguson, United have yet to look at their tantalizing best; This season has seen the team performing in a lackluster manner with collective lapses in concentration (starting at Fulham and continuing on the road) typifying our frustrations. United have often been forced to chase the game either looking for that winning goal or as versus Bolton, Stoke and Villa of late, searching for that vital equalizer. For me, United simply do not have the right midfield dynamic to apply the 4-4-2 with a parallel high pressing game; The net result being that United have been hugely vulnerable to the counter-attack when committing men forward (goals from Cahill, Petrov, Elmander, Tuncay, Ebanks-Blake spring to mind, as does the counter for the penalty for Liverpool and the Fletcher chance for Wolves to kill the game at 1-1 recently).
The problem is two-fold: Not only do the vast majority of top European clubs (including Chelsea, Arsenal, {City}) not utilise this system – meaning that Ferguson often adopts a 5-man midfield when against such teams – but that the destructor/creator model implicit in the 4-4-2 does not suit the abilities of the central midfielders available to Ferguson; Scholes can no longer consistently apply the creative finesse (and high up the pitch); Fletcher whilst having a fantastic engine and passing range is no Roy Keane or Bryan Robson just yet; and although Carrick is invaluable to United’s defensive shape and has a fantastic football brain Michael Carrick: Midfield Genius his abilities are more conducive to the first band of midfielders within the 4-band system.
Take Barcelona’s front six with Xavi, Busquets, Iniesta, Messi, Pedro and Villa performing with such elegance (and dominance) in recent times; Mourinho’s Madrid, with Khedira and Alonso sitting in, Di Maria, Oezil and Ronaldo interchanging beautifully behind Higuain. The system is coached to perfection and there is no reason why Ferguson (with Phelan), cannot try to replicate this model once again (Ferguson had his very own unique brand of this formation when he and Queiroz conquered Europe with Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney leading the line).
Why 4-2-3-1?
One of Valery Lobanovskyi’s famous quotes is: “I don’t like players having positions. There is no such thing as a striker, a midfielder, a defender. There are only footballers and they should be able to do everything on the pitch.”
Now whilst this appears to be a sleight against tactics per se, upon reflection the implication seems clear: Players must proactively seek to improve the balance of the system and act with autonomy given any circumstance. Lobanovskyi actually talked about an “energy system” which can ebb and flow during a game, but which must be able to capitalise in a timely fashion. 4-2-3-1, applied in an astute manner is the most obvious formation which allows this energy to system to be most effective. Indeed it is no coincidence that the vast majority of the World Cup competitors utilised this system, with FIFA making this point in its technical report stating: “Of the four semi-finalists, only Uruguay played in a formation that resembled 4-4-2, although the position occupied by Diego Forlan merits further examination. In effect, Forlan had a free role and was always looking to keep play moving before driving forward.”
One benefit to United would be control of the ball and thus the systematic attacking “pressure” elicited which is defined by the formation; Another positive being that if the energy system dictates that the players adopt a 4-2-2-2 shape for example, Rafael and Evra would attack the space in front of them to provide the much needed width. With Berbatov, Rooney, Hernandez, Nani, Valencia, Giggs, Macheda, Obertan and Park all able to adapt individual roles and function in a fluent attacking front four Ferguson could benefit in three key areas: 1. Improve overall motivation of squad by increasing the game-time of the forward players in question and 2. Improve the overall efficiency and attacking potency by encouraging the players to develop and hone their forward play. And 3. Release the attacking energy and enthusiasm of a certain Wayne Rooney (at least until the summer!), allowing him to play off the front man and interchange with the other members of the quartet. Adopting this system would also give the elusive Anderson and youngsters such as the promising Cleverly a chance to shine, as well as allowing the vastly improved Nani the freedom to work across the line and maximise his creative output. It goes without saying that crucial to this system would be the positional maturity of Carrick and Fletcher, the former fantastic at intercepting the ball and the latter able to contribute both defensively and combatively in the middle third.
Which leads us to the role of the much unloved Dimitar Berbatov. For all his detractors he has still scored 6 goals in 14 games (so 1 in 2) and has been crucial to the side in recent performances, not least the Manchester derby. Whilst it is true he has not played particularly well since the Spurs game, it is pertinent to state that he is no more a “failure” for a few off games than Rooney is for not scoring from open play since March 2010. It is perhaps the right time however to experiment with the Bulgarian, and many are now asking the question as to whether he can build on his impressive false 9 role in behind Rooney, creating chances and maintaining vital possession, and then keeping that position (see Formation A below) which would take the onus off him in terms of “hitting the box”. See here for Berbatov-Rooney starting positions/movement:
by Guardian Chalkboards
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/chalkboards/j23n98Z5Z0K5Yx7564M5)
It is certainly unlikely, but given his creative abilities it is one that Ferguson can not fail to have thought about. (Here, we can see the forward’s influence on United’s overall performance, the team winning far more games when he is a starter than when a substitute: Berba’s century.
Continued on Page TWO
The options:
Formation A
—————— Carrick——————-Fletcher————-
Nani————————- Berbatov—————————-Giggs
——————————- Rooney———————————-
Formation B
—————— Carrick——————-Fletcher————-
Rooney———————— Scholes—————————-Nani
——————————- Berbatov———————————-
In Summary
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
There are benefits of both the 4-4-2 and 4-2-3-1 systems, with the former allowing Ferguson two decades of success, especially on the domestic front. What is clear is that despite the differing descriptions of tactical application, United have to improve their defensive shape, meaning that 2 of 6 forward players must keep their positional discipline and provide much needed defensive solidity and cover for the back four. With International teams also prospering with the system (at England’s expense!), and many successful teams now engineering it’s next phase of development, now is a very opportune time for United to revert back to it.
Perhaps it is due to the youthful nature (though ferociously talented) of United’s squad that Ferguson has delayed in imposing a system which requires concentration and intelligence; Or simply that the 4-4-2 is more suited to the spontaneity, freedom and attacking verve on which Manchester United has based its footballing principles. Either way, United have the players to adopt an attacking 4-2-3-1 and the system should now be adopted as United seek to stay at the forefront of dynamic and entertaining football as we edge ever closer to that elusive 19th League title.
Written By Nik Storey (www.twitter.com/Sleepy_Nik)
*
If you wish to discuss this issue further with myself, Nik or other members of the Stretford End Arising community, you can do so in the SEA: Forum or visit their excellent website below: