What's new

We Are Spurs. We Play Four-Four-Two!

tttcowan

Well-Known Member
Aug 12, 2005
2,792
3,295
Firstly, to state the obvious, I along with every other self-respecting spurs fan have been getting more than slightly concerned at our league form of late. At the start of the season we had two clear priorities. Number one, qualify for the Champions League proper and, number two, retain our top four credentials, simple right? Well, whilst we’ve been putting in some dazzling performances in the Champions League, we’ve also been left scratching our heads on more than one occasion after a league match.

I did make the point to a manure fan this week that we are playing a very different system this year to accommodate a rather special player that is one Mr Rafael Ferdinand van der Vaart. But I have to say, I didn’t quite come to the conclusion that I now have and it’s perhaps something that ‘Arry has known for some time.

We all know that VDV is a brilliant player, he oozes class and flair, a true product of the Dutch youth methodology, he seems to epitomise everything that historically Tottenham are about. However, when he first arrived, ‘Arry seemed unsure where to play him. He tried him in various formations in various positions but it became very apparent very quickly that he thrives in the free-role just behind the striker. Spurs therefore adopting the elusive 4-5-1/4-4-1-1 formation that, if you cast your minds back to the summer, was something we all understood would need to be called on for those difficult away days in Europe. Brilliant then?!?

Not quite. I’ve seen on more than one occasion when we play this way, whoever is the lone striker doesn’t seem to get the support he needs. For example, when someone shoots we’ve often missed that extra man surging into the box looking for the rebound. Or that man that’s really pulling the defence around creating space for another who’s right in line with their last man. Our strikers have taken some heavy criticism this year, and for the most part it’s been justified. But football is seldom that simple and while I’m not suggesting part of the blame does not lie at their proverbial striking boots, I’m not sure our system of play has been doing them any favours either.

What we saw on Saturday was a return to the old system which for the most part served the team so well in the previous terms assault on the traditional big four. While it’s obvious that VDV cannot operate in his best position in such a system, I think perhaps we shouldn’t have been so hasty to turn our backs on it to accommodate a single player. Don’t get me wrong, the lone striker formation seems great for difficult hard away days and works brilliantly in Europe but at home for the most part, two up top looks like our best option, at least until January. This will of course require VDVs wings to be clipped somewhat at times and him to compete with Lennon for a place on the right of midfield. But with such a hectic fixture schedule and VDVs questionable fitness levels that would seem to be no bad thing.


Having said all that... 4-4-1-1 at the Emirates please Harry! :grin:

COYS
 

billnick

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2003
1,246
341
You make a fair argument but I think you're wrong. The traditional 4-4-2 has long since had its day, we have plenty of players who are more than capable of adapting to something new - indeed for many of them something other than traditional 4-4-2 isn't even new, then there's the simple fact that players like Modric, Van der Vaart and Huddlestone are far more devastating to an opponent than Lennon's speed (something which is only useful when a) he remembers how to cross and b) somebody else has managed to keep up enough for him to be able to cross to).

The real questions are, why do we seem unable to adapt? Why do we not learn from the same types of defeat? Why is Palacios ahead of Bentley* if Lennon comes off? How have THREE International quality strikers gone off the boil at the same time? Why was Defoe allowed to return early when anybody with half a mind could see what would happen? Once that's sorted out, worry about formations - our problems run a lot deeper than that.

*Yes, Palacios is a better tackler than Bentley - but you don't need to tackle very often if you learn to keep the ball. Changing a working system to something barely tried just encourages a fightback. As my friend commented on Saturday, "4-1 up and they're scared?"
 

tttcowan

Well-Known Member
Aug 12, 2005
2,792
3,295
Good points also... I'd agree that our problems run deeper than a simple formation change. But I would still say that the 4-4-2 is far from a dead art, see spurs circa 09/10.

You're right we should be able to adapt and for the most part we do... But we seem to get very one dimensional in the 4-4-1-1 system. Basicly, get the ball out to bale, bale cross, hope pete can get a knock down to someone in the box(usually VDV).

I'd also like to point out that Hudd and Modric play very well in a 4-4-2 together and are more than enough to combat any 5 man outfit... See chelskum and arsenal games last year... Also see Sunderland destoying Chelskum yesterday... I for one would like to see the two up top adopted more at least until we buy Suarez or Dzeko. It's just a very Spurs way to play!:beer:
 

billnick

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2003
1,246
341
Good points, but I see your Sunderland beating Chelsea once and raise you Man U and Chelsea winning the Championship without it every year since 04/05

Personally I think 4-4-2 suits our coaching staff more than our team.
 

tttcowan

Well-Known Member
Aug 12, 2005
2,792
3,295
Good points, but I see your Sunderland beating Chelsea once and raise you Man U and Chelsea winning the Championship without it every year since 04/05

Hehe, very true... And I think you may be right about it suiting the coaching staff more but I don't think anyone would argue that it also suits our strikers better.

We'll see anyway at the next home match against average or lesser oponents!
 

steveb

Active Member
Jun 3, 2004
260
43
This debate will run and run, especially if our league form continues to be a bit stop start. We have to look a number of factors as to why things have not gone some smoothly and yes the formation change can be a factor, but we also have to look at the fact that we are now playing champions league and Premier league, which is something we have to get used to. Its ok us beating Inter, but the players also have to be up for a trip to the reebok the week after.

My own view on the formation arguement is one that in my view if very simple. If we are to play 4-5-1 then we have to have the players available for this to work. You need to wide players that will hug the touchline and spread out play, so if Bale or Lennon is injured then for me 4-5-1 will not be as effective. You also need a player that will lead the line on his own and cause the back four a problem, by clever movement and running in the channels between centre back and full back, which is why for me when we play Crouch in a 4-5-1 is does not quite work as well. Look what happened when England played a 4-5-1 or 4-4-1-1 against Bulgaria with Rooney operating behind Defoe? this for me would be ideal with Defoe playing up top on his own and VDV just behind. We are also guilty of playing constant balls in the box when Crouch is up front, which becomes predictable and easy to read, a la home game v Sunderland, and therefore we need to go back to what we are good at which is playing the ball along the deck. Especially as we have some great passers of the ball at the club. The 4-4-2 argument is also an interesting one, but as Harry says if VDV plays wide then we have more chance of leaving gaps in behind, as VDV is not someone who is going to chase back 70 yds to help out his full back, and against the top sides we would get ripped apart.

For me, Harry has to look at this game by game and evaluate who he has available to him. I am sure that if all were fit, then he would adopt the 4-5-1 and play a team such as Gomes, Hutton, King, Dawson, BAE, Lennon, Modric, Huddlestone, Bale, VDV and Defoe and for me with would work well, but if Defoe is not fit, and one of the wide men are out then he has to go back to 4-4-2 for me as Keane, Pav and Crouch do not have the pace and movement to cause the opposition back 4 a problem, hence the reason why our top scorers this year are Bale and VDV.
 

Krafty

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2004
4,768
2,098
Losing Defoe has also meant losing the 4-4-2. While Rafa has done fantastically, at home against teams that get men behind the ball we need two strikers (and rafa) so we can press the defenders so we win the ball high up the pitch, and so we have men in the box when crosses come in, like Pav's goal, like Crouch following up for his goal, and then when more men join the box (Bale and VdV for the fourth) we have enough men that defenders are preoccupied and a late arrival in the box (Bale) is not picked up or closed down quickly.

We needed to learn how to play 4-4-1-1, we need to learn to play 4-5-1/4-1-4-1 and keep out strong teams away from home, but we have certainly progressed overall. But as when teams try something new, sometimes the results arent the best, and at home especially we need to go 4-4-2 in a lot of games. Blackburn at home (and arguably Sunderland last week) we should be playing two upfront and able to accomodate VdV floating as well.
 

JimmyG2

SC Supporter
Dec 7, 2006
15,014
20,779
'Horses for Courses' as they say in the racing world.

You need to fit the system to the players that you have and plan in the medium term to buy the players for the alternative systems you might wish to play.

You need to fit the system to the occasion, home and away, and to the opponents that you might play.

You need to modify the system during the game, and the personnel through substitution as the game develops.

You need players that are flexible and for them to understand that all players are squad players.

One system cannot possibly fit all, and none of the players can possibly play every minute of every game.

Finally you need a manager and coaching staff that can anticipate the twists and turns of the season and of games as they are played.

In the meantime you have to do the best with what you've got.

Our latest star turn is a flexible and can play a number of roles including second striker and floating midfielder behind the front two.
We need to make best use of this.
 

double0

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2006
14,423
12,258
We're in transition from the traditional 442. 4411 4231 seems to be the way forward, considering what the best teams in European football do we'd be fools not to adapt. These formations lean towards possession football we have technical squad members capable of making it work but of course to really take it forward our focal point of attack needs to improve, Levy Redknapp must identify a quality N.9
 

le_magnifique

New Member
Nov 3, 2004
266
0
Good points, but I see your Sunderland beating Chelsea once and raise you Man U and Chelsea winning the Championship without it every year since 04/05.

Agreed. Also, as Bale and Lennon are encouraged to push on in our current shape, we've become more 4-2-3-1 than 4-4-1-1.

And the 4-2-3-1 shape won Spain the World Cup and made Inter the Italian double-winners and European Champions last summer.

That said, 4-4-2 has served us very well, and with a fit Jermain Defoe, I think our current squad are very well suited to that too. I don't see Crouchy as the right sort of centre-forward to play in a 4-2-3-1 as he's just not quick enough. The fact that he's only scored once in the PL is proof of that for me. 4-4-2 in the League, and 4-4-1-1 or 4-2-3-1 in the CL.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
I think it's all a bit of a numbers game. I don't think we've been playing 4-4-1-1 at all, because I don't think that VDV has been playing as a midfielder. He's been playing as a support striker in a 4-4-2 formation and that's why he's been in position to score so many goals from Crouch knockdown - not, by contrast, hurtling into the box to make the extra man from midfield, in the manner of Lampard or Scholes.

VDV plays no deeper than Keane and helps out no more in midfield than Crouch or Pavlyuchenko. He's basically been working as a striker.
 

tttcowan

Well-Known Member
Aug 12, 2005
2,792
3,295
I think it's all a bit of a numbers game. I don't think we've been playing 4-4-1-1 at all, because I don't think that VDV has been playing as a midfielder. He's been playing as a support striker in a 4-4-2 formation and that's why he's been in position to score so many goals from Crouch knockdown - not, by contrast, hurtling into the box to make the extra man from midfield, in the manner of Lampard or Scholes.

VDV plays no deeper than Keane and helps out no more in midfield than Crouch or Pavlyuchenko. He's basically been working as a striker.

I agree to a point, in that Rooney and Tevez seems to do more defensive work than VDV... But, as as I said before,

"I’ve seen on more than one occasion when we play this way, whoever is the lone striker doesn’t seem to get the support he needs. For example, when someone shoots we’ve often missed that extra man surging into the box looking for the rebound. Or that man that’s really pulling the defence around creating space for another who’s right in line with their last man."

VDV is a lot of things, but I really can't fully accept him as a striker.
 
Top