The future?
Discuss.
Printable View
The future?
Discuss.
4-4-2 or 4-2-4? When have we ever played 4-2-4?
It's what England, United and (in the second half) Chelsea where playing this weekend.
Essentially it's two ball winning CM's, or CDM's supporting 2 strikers and wide forwards. We're still stuck on 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 AFAIK but today Yossi spent a lot of time really high up the pitch swapping from central to wide positions with Park.
Yet to see it done well enough to want us to change (not that we ever will) Manyoo played well last night using it but come on, leeds were half pace and Manyoo had a quality team out there.
Chelsea lost using it at Manyoo and England are wankier than a wanky wankstain on Frank Lampards head
Still, couldnt be worse than our current "tactics"
4-3-3, 4-4-2, 4-2-4...it doesn't matter.
Learn how to bloody defend first.
Even against the pub team last night, the guy was totally free in the box to score.
4-2-4 is incredibly ambitious. Speaking in the traditional sense, you'd need a pair of really strong midfielders in the middle- Vieira and Petit, for instance (although I don't think we ever played 4-2-4 between 97 and 2000)
Nowadays, 4-2-4 is much more likely to transform into 4-4-2 as the paradigm of the game changes. I can't see wingers staying forward and not helping their full-backs for 90 minutes.
you've never watched fat fuck have you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernesto
In the system it's the center forwards who normally drop back to help with ball winning but yeah, the system is as fluid as any.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernesto
Re-defending. Ever seen Barcelona defend a set piece? There defence is winning and keeping the ball. Vs a half decent opponent they can leak silly goals.
Our defence is something less entirely however, it's like they just said "ah fuck it, might as well be as bad as everyone says we are"
4-2-2-2 on fifa :coffee: effective tactic
Play 10-0-0 as i do on FIFA and still guaranteed to scored 20 goals at least in the first halfQuote:
Originally Posted by GunnerFan4Life
4-2-4, what a retarded formation. Teams need a midfield you know.
They also need a defence ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Toffee
I think when God created football, early man played a it in a 442 formation.
With the invention of the wheel, gunpowder and pornography, various hybrids have been created including the highly ambitious 2-5-1 1/2 -1 1/2. . . .
I say to hell with that, time to go back to basics, matbe a tweeked version of 442, strikers playing one behind the other or if Chamak gets in alongside each other.
We have tons of pace and not just Theo, Oxo should be out wide.
Pre seasons or more where they are played should not matter as long as we get back in plenty of time. . .what is important is that we play preseason games with at least the main core of our squad, ummmmmm could this be why Utd are tearing teams a new hide I wonder but not very hard. . . .not rocket science
If we had least have had some prototype CBs playing together preseason we may not be witnessing the fucking horror shows we are seeing now from players with two games together. . .
Also formations work when you play players in their right positions, do uou think Wenger knows that?
Like your genealogy thenQuote:
Originally Posted by Dog Toffee
:lol:
:good:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Overmars
Judging by our half arsed attempts to track back by our midfielders, I'd say we've been playing 4-2-4 for quite a while
:good:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Overmars
Maybe a 6-2-2 would be more beneficial.
Nah. We could stick all the outfield players in defense and we would still concedeQuote:
Originally Posted by Grimandi's Perm
Assuming one of the centre forwards drops a bit deeper, is 424 really any different to what we are playing (4231)?
7-0-3
:good: