Why the sudden obsession with formations/systems?

[Millsy_Yiddo]

Firstly, my intention is not to start a 433 is better than 442 is better than 4231 thread (which it will inevitably turn into). But looking down the forum at the top few threads pretty much all of them are littered with, 'had we played 4231 we'd of won', 'Oh, you can't play him in a 433, he can only play in a 4231', 'He needs to play as part of a 3 man midfield he's no use in a 2' '4231 will always beat 442 becuase of the numbers in midfield'.

What is it that makes the modern football fan believe they are some kind of tactical genius no-matter their experience of the game (and before anyone jumps on me, I'm as guilty as any of discussing tactics/systems etc ad nauseam, so I'm not having a dig at anyone here)?

Personally I think it's alot to do with Sky TV and they pundits they have on. All started with Andy Grey and that analysis thing he used to do with Richard Keys on the little board. Everyone now feels they have to have an opinion on who's fault every goal was and why it happened. That and people who play Champ Man too much.

On here I think combined with the above there's also a bit of an element of those who support AVB trying to talk up his incredibly precise approach and because he put so much importance (allegedly) on formations and systems it rubs off a little on here. Although I'm not a massive supporter of AVB, but as I said, I'm still guilty of arguing till death that Walker was at fault for the Arsenal goal, formations are fluid and 442 can be as good as 4231 etc etc.

Thoughts??

 

[milo]

Funny, I had been thinking of starting a similar (but slightly different) thread. I will post what I had in mind in this thread later.

 

[Cochise]

I personally just like talking about football

 

[machotime]

Emirates Marketing Project play 4-4-2 and succeed but in Yaya Toure and Fernandinho they've got 2 excellent central midfielders.

Against Arsenal we played a rookie in Bentaleb and Dembele who is good but no world beater. I'm hoping that Paulinho will turn out to be a top class midfielder. Next to him, it's a toss-up then between Capoue, Sandro and Dembele.

Definitely do need all the players to work hard when tracking back and we also ought to see some tactical variation when needed. 4-4-2 with that line-up away at the Emirates was asking for trouble

 

[the fox in the box]

I think that whatever he formation we adapt to the team and how the game is going

A 442 can easily be 262 or 244 or hell even 2134.... to me it doesnt matter... I want to see us win playing the shexy football....

if the players dont perform and the manager doesnt make sure players cope with threats from the opponents players that is why we will lose... not becuase of a pretty graphic oon sky sports....


saying that you do need to have a DM,CM and AM in midfield to change play up protecting defence, dictating play and linking to the attackers! other than that you adapt like I initially said

 

[Millsy_Yiddo]

I personally just like talking about football

Me too, in fact the part I probably enjoy most is debating about tactics and players with someone who I feel knows a bit about the game. Nowadays (I'm sounding like an old fart here and I'm only 27). It seems everyone feels they are experts, I've had heated debates with people in my local pub who have literally never put on a pair of football boots in their life and only spend 90 minutes each week watching MOTD about various different tactical systems. What makes them think they have such an understanding of the game?

 

[Jordinho]

I think using numbers provides a useful description of how you want to line up/what roles the players have. City don't play 4-4-2 as most think of it, it's more of a 4-2-2-2 or 4-2-3-1 if you think Aguero plays a bit deeper that Negredo.

 

[Baleforce]

Looking long term I think its a natural progression of the game, as the level of training, fitness and ability increase across the board you have to find other differentiating factors to win games.

Go back 15 years and it didn't really matter how we lined up against the gooners (for example) as they were so much better than us all over the pitch, now with the (perceived) closeness of the two squads there has to be more to it than Wheelchair is better than Dembele.

 

[Cochise]

Me too, in fact the part I probably enjoy most is debating about tactics and players with someone who I feel knows a bit about the game. Nowadays (I'm sounding like an old fart here and I'm only 27). It seems everyone feels they are experts, I've had heated debates with people in my local pub who have literally never put on a pair of football boots in their life and only spend 90 minutes each week watching MOTD about various different tactical systems. What makes them think they have such an understanding of the game?

Same here Millsy, I'm only 28 but had to hang up my boots due to injury a year ago. If anything my addiction to the game has increased since I have stopped playing.

 

[Millsy_Yiddo]

Same here Millsy, I'm only 28 but had to hang up my boots due to injury a year ago. If anything my addiction to the game has increased since I have stopped playing.

Unfortunately I'm going the same way. Having broken both may legs (right badly at 17 and left a few years back) I have been plagued with injury for that last few years, that combined with having a little girl 4 months ago has pretty much knocked it on the head for me this season. Weighing up the pros and cons of going back next year at the minute.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Firstly, my intention is not to start a 433 is better than 442 is better than 4231 thread (which it will inevitably turn into). But looking down the forum at the top few threads pretty much all of them are littered with, 'had we played 4231 we'd of won', 'Oh, you can't play him in a 433, he can only play in a 4231', 'He needs to play as part of a 3 man midfield he's no use in a 2' '4231 will always beat 442 becuase of the numbers in midfield'.

What is it that makes the modern football fan believe they are some kind of tactical genius no-matter their experience of the game (and before anyone jumps on me, I'm as guilty as any of discussing tactics/systems etc ad nauseam, so I'm not having a dig at anyone here)?

Personally I think it's alot to do with Sky TV and they pundits they have on. All started with Andy Grey and that analysis thing he used to do with Richard Keys on the little board. Everyone now feels they have to have an opinion on who's fault every goal was and why it happened. That and people who play Champ Man too much.

On here I think combined with the above there's also a bit of an element of those who support AVB trying to talk up his incredibly precise approach and because he put so much importance (allegedly) on formations and systems it rubs off a little on here. Although I'm not a massive supporter of AVB, but as I said, I'm still guilty of arguing till death that Walker was at fault for the Arsenal goal, formations are fluid and 442 can be as good as 4231 etc etc.

Thoughts??

I agree with this point, I read so often people saying this or that player simply doesn't work in this or that system and I just don't buy it at all. People like to make sweeping statements based on the example of just one game, as if it means it will then be the case for the rest of the season or the next 3 seasons. It just doesn't work like that.

But personally I do find the idea of systems immensely interesting. It's how coaches differentiate themselves nowadays, and I find tactics a lot more interesting than say, sports science for example since we don't need to read journals to understand it - we can see it on a basic level out on the pitch. And if that is how coaches will work, the discussion will naturally evolve as to which ones are successful doing it.

I think it does need to be cautioned though. As I said so many people are confident in their sweeping statements and almost never consider the other side. I think there has to be an appreciation of the fact that, if we are discussing a tactical system, we are only discussing it at its most basic level and any criticisms we are able to provide would likely be batted back in an instant by the coach involved. For that reason I would absolutely love it if there was some way to talk to coaches about tactical systems, how it works, the challenges in implementation, how it can respond to different opposition. It really would be fascinating and I don't think there's enough real opportunity to do that. Punditry is condensed into manageable bite sized chunks and you rarely get a tactical coach writing an article for the masses. Guys like Michael Cox and Wilson are ok but I feel even they look upon it a bit too simplistically, or simply don't go into the detail I would like because they don't know it themselves.

 

[metalgear]

yeah me too.. shexy football... but please enough of narrow minded managers without a plan B, setting up to play into the oppositions well documented gameplan etc. lets look smart on the pitch too, not just in post game interviews

 

[Raziel]

as others have stated, the game evolves -> true professional sport -> fitness, nutrition, training, recovery, etc.

Thing with formations (and systems/styles) is about a few things for me

- How do clubs create a playing style that allows for easy integration of youth -> academy -> first team
- How do clubs buy right, i.e. know a player will be suited to the style (i.e. a smart player can play in most teams, but a slow player may struggle in a fast counter attacking setup or high line)
- How do clubs get through manager changes without wholesale team changes
- how do managers get their ideas across to often not so smart players (capability may be there, but they need to know how/where to play)

Bu also as a lot of people mentioned, it's just a fun conversation/distraction between games

 

[Yiddo]

Firstly, my intention is not to start a 433 is better than 442 is better than 4231 thread (which it will inevitably turn into). But looking down the forum at the top few threads pretty much all of them are littered with, 'had we played 4231 we'd of won', 'Oh, you can't play him in a 433, he can only play in a 4231', 'He needs to play as part of a 3 man midfield he's no use in a 2' '4231 will always beat 442 becuase of the numbers in midfield'.

What is it that makes the modern football fan believe they are some kind of tactical genius no-matter their experience of the game (and before anyone jumps on me, I'm as guilty as any of discussing tactics/systems etc ad nauseam, so I'm not having a dig at anyone here)?

Personally I think it's alot to do with Sky TV and they pundits they have on. All started with Andy Grey and that analysis thing he used to do with Richard Keys on the little board. Everyone now feels they have to have an opinion on who's fault every goal was and why it happened. That and people who play Champ Man too much.

On here I think combined with the above there's also a bit of an element of those who support AVB trying to talk up his incredibly precise approach and because he put so much importance (allegedly) on formations and systems it rubs off a little on here. Although I'm not a massive supporter of AVB, but as I said, I'm still guilty of arguing till death that Walker was at fault for the Arsenal goal, formations are fluid and 442 can be as good as 4231 etc etc.

Thoughts??

Football Manager.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Formations have been a big deal since the 1920s when Herbert Chapman abandoned 2-3-5 for the 3-2-5 WM.

The game evolves and using an out-of-date formation is like trying to compete doing the straddle technique, rather than the Fosbury Flop.

I think it has been more of an issue in recent seasons because the vast majority of English clubs have finally caught up with the latin countries (10 years late) and all moved to variations of 4-5-1. It's just been a step change largely across the board.

I also think Jonathan Wilson is important in guiding debate in this country with these sort of articles: http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2008/dec/18/4231-442-tactics-jonathan-wilson

 

[indianspur]

its all about the players. If you have the best ones they can play any system/formation and be successful

 

[scaramanga]

its all about the players. If you have the best ones they can play any system/formation and be successful

But only one club can have the best players - the richest one. That means the rest of us have to do those nasty, thinky things like tactics.

 

[Cochise]

But only one club can have the best players - the richest one. That means the rest of us have to do those nasty, thinky things like tactics.

And so again we come around to someone like Brendan Rodgers who has achieved a lot with a lesser team like Swansea and now greater things with a team like Liverpool.

 

[milo]

Funny, I had been thinking of starting a similar (but slightly different) thread. I will post what I had in mind in this thread later.

OK. My thought was can people name a formation blind? I have taken some player position diagrams from Who Scored from random games over the last few seasons and anonymised them. All you have to do is guess the formation that the team is playing. I will post links to the original match reports once people have had a chance to guess.

Formation 1

Formation 2

Formation 3

 

[BrainOfLevy]

OK. My thought was can people name a formation blind? I have taken some player position diagrams from Who Scored from random games over the last few seasons and anonymised them. All you have to do is guess the formation that the team is playing. I will post links to the original match reports once people have had a chance to guess.

Formation 1

Formation 2

Formation 3

From a quick look on my phone as I sit here on the can....

4231
442
433

?