4-2-3-1: pretty much ALWAYS! WHY?!?

[Japhet]

He's too easy to dribble past and not mobile enough to sit in front of the defence, he needs someone next to him in a double pivot or needs to play either side of the 3, look when Cancel went past him so easily by dropping his shoulder for example.

Nope.

 

[Waiwonder]

Ok- so for example in the Spurs of 2015-16 was Christian Eriksen a deep lying playmaker, part of a midfield three? No, right? On offense he was mostly advanced- camped out on the edge of the area ready to spray a pass left, right or center- no?

I mean you will grant me that sometimes 4-2-3-1 means two midfielders and 4 attackers? If I'm wrong I'll accept it I just want to know how.

Not really sure what you're actually getting at? Eriksen wasn't played in a double pivot. He was in a more advanced role.

Pochettino liked the double pivot of course. Doesn't mean managers who use the same system have a double pivot. Liverpool use the same formation but fabinho always holds position or drops in between the back 2. The same could be said of fernandinho of city.

 

[Shadydan]

Nope.

ok

 

[rabbikeane]

Mason have gone 433 so far, preparing for life under ten Hag

 

[Bobby TwoShots]

not sure formations matter that much - players win matches

Even Ardiles with his bonkers 2-1-7 or whatever it was?

 

[dtxspurs]

I'm pretty sure Ten Hag plays with a 4-2-3-1 haha

 

[ralphs bald spot]

Even Ardiles with his bonkers 2-1-7 or whatever it was?

of course there is an element of organisation and you couldn't pick a team of strikers but when you are talking about what amounts to the finesse of the game its ultimately the quality of players you have. The best players can pretty much adjust to any system

 

[spoon]

We could have the best formation in the entire universe and our players would still be shit without movement off the ball, inability to complete a simple pass or to play through midfield.

 

[ILS]

Watching Leicester last night on paper it looked.like a 5-3-2 and then at times it was a 4-4-2 in certain areas of the pitch.

You can achieve that with a good coach.

 

[danielneeds]

Not many teams go with three in midfield these days because the goal is to overload in attacking areas, to have five players pressed up against the opposition defence.

 

[mumfordspur]

Glad you raised the point about space Wai,
I watched with Mrs M and the dog (Mrs M knows f all about football).
Anyway I said this to the dog so many times he was getting fed up about it "we cant seem to find players in space". Get the ball/get rid of it asap/player receiving either has a player on him or just about to and we lose it so often.
Not just the Manc Arabs game but against all good teams.
The dog reckons it is our off the ball work that is shit. Find some space ffs Citeh did it ok why cant our useless mob?

 

[Albertbarich]

I always think 4231 is a fancy way of doing a 442. Remember wengers arsenal side with Henry and Co. That was a 442 but Bergkamp 100% played deeper than Henry. Same thing different name.

I love a good old fashioned 433 and must admit to being put off any manager that plays 442 but in truth it's bollocks. Any formation can work with the right players and good coaching.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

Watching Leicester last night on paper it looked.like a 5-3-2 and then at times it was a 4-4-2 in certain areas of the pitch.

You can achieve that with a good coach.

Bit line Pochettino’s side in 16/17.

Whether we lined up 343 or 4231, when we had the ball it always became a 3331.

 

[Bobbins]

Jose did actually play 4-3-3 and not 4-2-3-1 though. He also played 4-4-2 on a few occasions.

 

[spurs9]

Mason have gone 433 so far, preparing for life under ten Hag

Ten Hag doesn't usually play 433.

 

[fortworthspur]

433 works if you have the quality players for it. Madrid with Kroos, Modric and Casimiro or City with DeBruyne, Gundrogan and Fernandino for example. Until we have players like that I prefer some variation on 451. And honestly, the difference between the two is a matter of degree as 2 of the middle 3 will have varying degrees of defensive responsibility. 442 is antiquated to me.

 

[whitesocks]

Glad you raised the point about space Wai,
I watched with Mrs M and the dog (Mrs M knows f all about football).
Anyway I said this to the dog so many times he was getting fed up about it "we cant seem to find players in space". Get the ball/get rid of it asap/player receiving either has a player on him or just about to and we lose it so often.
Not just the Manc Arabs game but against all good teams.
The dog reckons it is our off the ball work that is shit. Find some space ffs Citeh did it ok why cant our useless mob?

Tell your dog that humans get disheartened making runs and movements, but no attempt is ever made to pass to them.
It is like playing fetch with an owner with no arms. Very frustrating.

 

[mr ashley]

433 works if you have the quality players for it. Madrid with Kroos, Modric and Casimiro or City with DeBruyne, Gundrogan and Fernandino for example. Until we have players like that I prefer some variation on 451. And honestly, the difference between the two is a matter of degree as 2 of the middle 3 will have varying degrees of defensive responsibility. 442 is antiquated to me.

It’s common to see formations evolve to adapt to highlight the weaknesses in a strategy though, and as a result can become cyclical.
For example, 352 and 4231 both became popular as a way to overload the midfield 2 in a traditional 442
But 343 or 3421 can highlight the weaknesses of 4231 or 433 by overloading in different areas of the pitch too.
And then to highlight the weaknesses of a back three, the natural step would be to play 2 strikers. So 442 could easily be back on fashion before you know it.
Obviously things are more nuanced than this simple summary (which is missed in the OP), and you are right about the midfield roles.
in general I don’t think success comes from the ability to coach a specific formation, more so from the ability to coach adaptability to switch between different formations mid game.
Poch did this well for us when we would have dier drop in to make a back three, allowing Walker and rose to push on simultaneously, then switching back to a back four with 3 in the middle when defending.

 

[rabbikeane]

Ten Hag doesn't usually play 433.

That's as far as I know debatable. With double pivot and the freedom of the central midfielder to move forward the formation is fluid but not uncommon to be said 433.
But it's certainly not classic 433 with a midfield anchor, two box to box, and crossing wide wingers no.

 

[AustroSpur]

I agree with the opening post in that the 4-2-3-1 made perfect sense a few years ago but using it now is like shoehorning in players who are not made for this system, at least not as far as the best possible 11 is concerned. Not sure who the 2 in the pivot should be (if we leave out the obvious Winks-Sissoko pair). Both Lo Celso and Ndombele don´t quite fit there but I would not know where to put both of them in the front 4 either. The back 4? Reguilon and to an extent Aurier would fit the system, Davies certainly doesn´t and no idea about Doherty. Either way the CBs are way too shaky these days to leave them exposed.

It seems to me that the 4-2-3-1 was employed purely to have Dembélé and Sandro/Wanyama on the pitch at the same time, and it was perfect a few seasons ago with Dele, Eriksen, Son and Kane in front of them, but now? No idea what the best system would be for Spurs. 4-3-3 with Son-Kane-Bale up front and no overlapping fullbacks but no idea who the midfield 3 should be/how they should be lined up if we consider PEH/Ndombele/Lo Celso the best possible mix...