I hate this formation. I dont think it suits us one bit. The only reason i can see why we have to play it is because the board have gone out and bought far too many AM's and thats the only formation to keep them happy.

I think we would be much better playing a 4-3-3 or even a good old 4-4-2. The problem is we are light on strikers for a 4-4-2 and light on CM's for a 4-3-3 unless we moved someone like Oscar or KDB back down the field a bit.

I feel sorry for Jose really, he has joined us when the team is in such a mess. We dont have a good balance to the team at all. We have 8 or so AM's. We just dont need that many.

I f**king hate it too. We only need, at most, one defensive midfielder. 4-1-2-3 is best for us.

I think the formation really isn't that important, with a 4-3-3 we'd still be playing essentially the same team, in essentially the same places.

The only difference really is that we're playing 1 striker as opposed to the classic 2 striker system. Would we be more efficient with 2 up front? Who knows.

All I know is that we have 3 strikers who rarely score and having 1 of them on the field at a time is enough for me.

Its a good system if you have a decent striker.

You need a good link up striker and two very good players who suit playing the deeper role. We have none of these.

4-3-3 would suit the likes of Frank, Ramie and Essien. Eto'o would play well in a 4-3-3 as he has done in a lot of his playing days.

I f**king hate it too. We only need, at most, one defensive midfielder. 4-1-2-3 is best for us.

 

So 4-3-3 essentially?

What system did " total football" of the old Ajax and Holland use ?

So 4-3-3 essentially?

No, silly billy, he means having two ultra wing defensive attacking backs, two footballing mobile central defensive backs, one water carrier in front of the defence, two daisy cutters in support, 2 ball boy chasers out wide and a goal hanger up top. 

 

How did you not get that? 

 Don't get your knickers in a twist now mate, I was just trying to pretty much clarify that what he described was akin to a 4-3-3.

Hey, guys! Can't wait to get to know you. Fulham or die.

 Don't get your knickers in a twist now mate, I was just trying to pretty much clarify that what he described was akin to a 4-3-3.

It was a poor attempt at a joke, I'll take my leave now.

What system did " total football" of the old Ajax and Holland use ?

 

 

Despite what many think about those sides, fluidity in movement and interchanging of positions didn't mean that they didn't have a discernible formation with defined roles - it was arbitrarily a 4-3-3.

 

That said it's difficult to take formation graphs very seriously - in the 74 WC final Cruyff was broadly an inside-left and was marked heavily by the German right-back Vogts throughout, yet the charts will show him in a no. nine role. I certainly don't remember Cruyff ever playing up top for Holland. It was Rep doing the stuff a striker would usually do while Cruyff just drifted about anywhere, spending most of his time deeper in midfield. Along with a few others they're relatively unique systems that have been constantly tweaked until they found the perfect combination of players and style of play to make it work.

 

You couldn't just chuck them all together and say "x is playing the Messi role," for instance.

Edited December 16, 201312 yr by Teritus

It was a poor attempt at a joke, I'll take my leave now.

 

Right, apologies then. You'll excuse me I'm sure, it's hard to tell what's a joke and what isn't on the internet at times.

I think our squad dictates the formation we play. Jose got his reputation from playing 4-3-3 so clearly understands this formation better than 4-2-3-1, which i think is a hard formation to find a good attacking and defensive balance with. Having said that, don't Brazil play 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-3 with rami and oscar as the 2 in CM?

don't Brazil play 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-3 with rami and oscar as the 2 in CM?

 

no, they dont

Most teams plays 4231 right now its the most common formation in Europe.I like it,we didn't exactly look that good playing 433 against Basle away.If players are playing well and are confident 4231,4321, 433,442 whatever one play we should win most of our games.

It was a poor attempt at a joke, I'll take my leave now.

no, it was a good joke.

Despite what many think about those sides, fluidity in movement and interchanging of positions didn't mean that they didn't have a discernible formation with defined roles - it was arbitrarily a 4-3-3.

 

That said it's difficult to take formation graphs very seriously - in the 74 WC final Cruyff was broadly an inside-left and was marked heavily by the German right-back Vogts throughout, yet the charts will show him in a no. nine role. I certainly don't remember Cruyff ever playing up top for Holland. It was Rep doing the stuff a striker would usually do while Cruyff just drifted about anywhere, spending most of his time deeper in midfield. Along with a few others they're relatively unique systems that have been constantly tweaked until they found the perfect combination of players and style of play to make it work.

 

You couldn't just chuck them all together and say "x is playing the Messi role," for instance.

thanks for this...but shouldn't any formation be fluid, and adapt to what is happening on the pitch ?.

Players today don't seem to be able to react to the opposition unless the manager instructs them.

As for formations, we don't see teams marching up and down in tight formation do we, I reckon its all pseudo science anyway, and as I just tend to follow the ball, it passes me by mostly.

433 > everything

I can not tell you how pleased i was last night going back to 4-3-3. We looked so much better. We were strong and orginised. It looked miles better than the 4-2-3-1 that we have been trying to play. Even though it was a draw i was so pleased with the way we played. It was like Chelsea of old. We rarely looked in trouble unlike most of this season. I really do hope that Jose sticks with the 4-3-3. I hope Roman just lets Jose get on with his job and we can start winning.

Top teams in Europe use it and we are aiming for that. Kings of Europe is our aim and it fits for CL. Pretty simple answer for this question.

Doesn't work half as well in the prem as 80% of teams setup to play destructively towards that formation and style against us as well as against Arsenal.

433 is good for sitting back and trying to hit the opposition on counters, like against the Arse yesterday. Wouldn't work when we have to crack open smaller teams who park the bus. You need a Drogba to play that isolated lone striker role, any of our current crop would be absolutely lost there.

short term, 433 works best as the old guard are used to playing it, and our players suit it better. but looking at the long term plan, we have to start playing a less comfortable formation now, so that in future our players are comfortable in it, and we can get the best out of the likes of oscar, hazard, schurrle who are our future

The problem with 433 is that we leave another attacking mid on the bench and it stops Mata playing behind the CF which i know he hasn't done much this season but its still his best position.We didn't look great when we played 433 against Basel.I like 4231 we have played well using it many times,its just our current CM its more balanced to using a 3 man midfield,Ramires and Lampard our much ore comfortable playing it.