What's new

Is 4-4-2 dead?

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
I think people place too much emphasis on naming starting formations to be honest. It's more important what role each player is given to be honest. For example, we played last season with 3 CBs and 2 fullbacks/wingbacks but because the fullbacks pushed up a lot, it was called as a 3-4-3 or 3-4-2-1, but another team playing with 3 CBs and two fullbacks it would get called 5-3-2 or 5-3-1-1 if the fullbacks didn't push on as much. Same formation, different roles.

Also teams nowadays move fluidly between multiple formations throughout the game depending on who has the ball and where abouts it is on the pitch. For example, if you think back to Mourinho's first era at Chelsea, they played 4-3-3 which would move about between that and I suppose a 4-1-2-3 or 4-2-1-3 depending on what was going on, and then when they lost possession they'd drop the wide forwards back to make a sort of 4-5-1

So in answer to the original question, no I don't think 442 is dead, but the idea of a team having one formation that they hold for 90 minutes died years ago.
 
Last edited:

lukespurs7

Well-Known Member
Feb 21, 2006
4,833
4,259
I miss 442. Was more exciting to watch. The high press possession football can be boring.
I agree mate. Watching prem league years of 90’s and 00’s and although we were shit the football was more exciting.
Even the dreaded arsenal invincibles on paper was 4-4-2 but in reality it was a very fluid formation with a.cole higher than Lauren and vieria ahead of Gilberto bergkamp n.o10 pires wide but ljunberg tucked in. The man.u of 99 was prettt flat 4-4-2 which I think would struggle these days.
 

lukespurs7

Well-Known Member
Feb 21, 2006
4,833
4,259
Maybe your right. I was a bit young at the time to know what was going on and I'm only judging the players based on those season rewinds Sky do and other things.

That's probably the reason why teams that had those players had more success than others in an era when most team were 442. I'm not sure everyone had that style of player in their team. You stilll had partnerships like Sutton/Shearer, Ferdinand/Shearer, Yorke/Cole, Iversen/Armstrong.

I guess what I also meant is you can't get away with two forward players who don't contribute anything when the opposition had the ball. I don't remember a huge emphasis and your forwards working hard and defending at the time. Seemd like a bonus rather than an expectation.
Spot on pal
 

Armstrong_11

Spurs makes me happy, you... not so much :)
Aug 3, 2011
8,572
19,110
I kinda agree with @'O Zio, these days teams play with a very dynamic formation... which changes as the game goes on.

We sometimes go 4-4-2.... with Alli or Son upfront with Kane. Sometimes we go 4-4-1-1 with Eriksen just behind Kane.

But I also agree that a soild 4-4-2 is kinda out of fashion. Club's these days see the importance of dominating midfield. So having 5 or 6 players there is really the norm.
 

Ben1

Well-Known Member
Jun 22, 2015
2,130
8,411
It'll be dead until someone wins with it, then it'll be the in vogue formation of the masses again. As it stands, people are obsessed with City (rightly so) and Liverpool, so 4-3-3 is in. Last season, everyone changed to 3-5-2 with the Chelsea approach. A few years back there was talk of the rebirth of 4-4-2 with Leicester (it was never a 4-4-2). Ultimately, a strong set of players and executing any formation well is a recipe for success. Maybe, its harder to execute the 4-4-2, maybe not.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
I agree mate. Watching prem league years of 90’s and 00’s and although we were shit the football was more exciting.
Even the dreaded arsenal invincibles on paper was 4-4-2 but in reality it was a very fluid formation with a.cole higher than Lauren and vieria ahead of Gilberto bergkamp n.o10 pires wide but ljunberg tucked in. The man.u of 99 was prettt flat 4-4-2 which I think would struggle these days.

Agree that utd probably came closest with yorke and cole upfront. But would you say that scholes played as a cm or beckham as a normal winger? Sheringham came in aswell.

It's always been fluid. Just we used to have fast wingers bombing on and crossing into the box. I think it's probably just as much teams putting 10 men behind the ball these days that has caused this.
 

Gassin's finest

C'est diabolique
May 12, 2010
37,350
87,813
Didn't Pellegrini win the league with a 442 a couple of years ago?

Also it's alive and kicking if you look beyond the premier league.
 

SugarRay

Well-Known Member
Jul 6, 2011
7,984
11,110
Football formations tend to go in cycles.

It’s ridiculous that you have people believing things like 3 at the back, wingbacks, one up top and inside forwards are fresh and modern ideas! I’ve seen nothing new in the last few years in the game. Just tweaks and more importantly, clubs being able to accumulate ridiculously talented sides in order to make the slight variations in style based on age old formations and approach.
People were going crazy for Spain’s tika-taka football but they were playing that years ago. They just never had the freakish level of players that came through, in order to be successful with it. It’s no coincidence that they suddenly started winning things when Xavi, Iniesta, Villa and the like came through at once. It had little to do with their style, they were just lucky to have 7 world class players peak at once.


Football has become stat obsessed in recent years and too much emphasis is put on starting formations. Formations change during a game all the time. What starts out as a 4-2-3-1 can easily become 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 or 5-4-1 or all 4 during the course of one single game.
 

DJS

A hoonter must hoont
Dec 9, 2006
31,261
21,760
Our Euro 96 England Team was a good example of flexible formation.

Seaman

Neville Adams Pearce

Southgate

Anderton Gascoigne Ince McManaman

Sheringham

Shearer


We could flick between 3-5-2 and 4-4-2 with Southgate being a recently converted centre back having been a midfielder originally.
 

Sevens

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2014
4,583
6,947
No, although they won the treble they only won the league with 79 points that season, so well behind this year's Man City

Far more difficult league to win though. Teams were a lot more evenly matched as it was just before the big boys really started squad hoarding.
 

Sevens

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2014
4,583
6,947
I think formations these days have gone a bit beyond the 3 lines system of def/mid/att. And on top of that, they shift depending on whether you are attacking, defending, counter attacking etc.

the 3 5 2 can often shift to a 5 3 2 if the wingbacks are transitioning a lot for example and it's almost impossible to call one of those over another.

Even in a classic 442, the 4 in the middle can be subdivided into a 2 2 or a 1 2 1 mini formation for example.

Today's game favours speed and uses a fast ball. A few roles like centrebacks have a solid purpose and don't move too much, but some other positions like playmaking central midfielders and wingbacks almost have a free role.

They were always beyond that. The media need something to talk about and that combined with the arrival of Championship/Football Manager has got everyone talking about formations and tactics.
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
Far more difficult league to win though. Teams were a lot more evenly matched as it was just before the big boys really started squad hoarding.

West Ham finished 5th that season on 57 points and a goal difference of -7
 

Sevens

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2014
4,583
6,947
When did anyone play 442 with two out and out strikers though? Bergkamp, shringham, cantona,beardsley were not out and out strikers.

The classic 4-4-2 is the small man big man combo. But there are loads of variations of a strike partnership. But there are differences between a 4-4-2 with a forward that drops deep and a 4-4-1-1 with a number 10 that generally stays deeper than the forward.
 

Sevens

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2014
4,583
6,947
West Ham finished 5th that season on 57 points and a goal difference of -7

Exactly. Now we expect the top six to post some impressive figures. Back then it was often a case that anyone could beat anyone.
 

Sevens

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2014
4,583
6,947
I think 442 with two wingers and two out-and-out strikers is dead, but 442 seems to be having a bit of a renaissance. France often go that way too.

A recent trend has been dressing a 442 and making it look like a 433 defensively. Real Madrid (before they went with a diamond) and Liverpool have had success doing this in recent years. Both have played 433 with the ball, but defensively the right of the front 3 (Ronaldo and Salah) stay high and wide up the pitch and rarely track back, daring the left back to go forward, while the left of the front three (Bale and Sane) plays like a left midfielder. Both have a hard working striker too. I think Barca will go that way with Dembele in the side.

Leicester City played that way when they won the title. And obviously not title contenders but Palace shot up the table playing that way after Hodgson took over this year.
 

werty

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2005
25,074
26,310
Leicester City played that way when they won the title. And obviously not title contenders but Palace shot up the table playing that way after Hodgson took over this year.
I don't think Hodgson played Zaha and Townsend with two strikers very often. Most of the time it was them two plus a striker, or one missing with two strikers, or both of them up front with four centre midfielders behind them.

Leicester were more 4411, especially when Okazaki was in the team.
 

Sevens

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2014
4,583
6,947
I don't think Hodgson played Zaha and Townsend with two strikers very often. Most of the time it was them two plus a striker, or one missing with two strikers, or both of them up front with four centre midfielders behind them.

Leicester were more 4411, especially when Okazaki was in the team.

Okazaki was played as a deeper striker. It's like when we were playing VDV under Harry. Everyone kept quoting 4-4-1-1 but both Redknapp and VDV themselves said they were playing 4-4-2. And last season Alli partnered Kane up top for us. Poch said we were playing a 5-3-2 and not a 5-2-2-1 (which is what most people assumed we were playing).
 
Top