ToffeeWeb - Season 2008-09

The Mail Bag

4-6-0 : genius or luck?

With our continueing success at playing a goal-scoring midfield player as a floating lone striker, will this start to be seen as an effective recognised tactic? Will Chelsea start to play Lampard or Joe Cole; or will Liverpool play Gerrard in a similar floating role?

Watching the last few games without a known striker on the pitch was interesting in seeing how the formation actually worked. Cahill floated between midfield and being upfront, with Fellaini and Pienaar also having runs up front, sharing with Cahill the job of being the striker. This tactic makes it very difficulty for the opposition defenders to pick which player to mark, especially if you have several players who can take up the forward role in the course of a game.

Does this new 4-6-0 formation work just by luck or is it the work of a tactical genius?
Brian Baker, Aldershot Posted 29/12/2008 at 12:12:43

back Return to the Mail Bag

Comments

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Michael Kenrick

Since strikers are also by tradition the most costly of players in terms of transfer fees and salaries, surely this also has merit as a cost-saving measure befitting our potless state? The procurement of such a striker, so yearned after by the baying mob, can thus be dispensed with in the coming transfer window... indeed we could even have sold one or two of ours (if they weren't injured) before the bottom completely drops out of the market. Sheer genius!

Matthew Lovekin
1 Posted 29/12/2008 at 20:41:17

It’s interesting to see that if we keep up this form when Anichebe and Saha return, will they get back in the team!?! Surely you should keep a winning team?

Simon Skinner
2 Posted 29/12/2008 at 20:27:06

It still isn’t really a 4-6-0 formation though - it’s still 4-5-1 with Cahill playing as a striker. Roma played a genuine 4-6-0 a few seasons ago (maybe they still do? I don’t watch Italian football any more) and Man Utd’s formation last season was much more of a 4-6-0 than Everton’s currently is.

As it is, saying Cahill is still playing in midfield just because he drops deep so often is no more true than saying Berbatov is a midfielder for the same reason.

Jim Slade
3 Posted 29/12/2008 at 20:34:48

Big question now, Brian, is what does Moyes do if his strikers become available again? With Anichebe fit now and maybe Saha for the next game, will Moyes keep this winning 4-6-0 formula?

He usually does stick with a winning team. It would be a strange one but the phsycology of having no strikers might throw the opponents off guard. Also Baines and Pienaar are creating a good understanding down the left so what if Yobo becomes available next game? I would keep Baines in and the 4-6-0.

Mike Oates
4 Posted 29/12/2008 at 21:17:31

The only problem we have is that 95% of the goals come from set pieces with this formations - as we have NO recognized true forward.

The team needs a Yakubu,Saha ... to actually convert moves into goals , they are the ones who create space and have the skills to clinically finsif off moves - we dont have that with the current lads . Moyes will revert toa 4:5:1 asap away from home and possibly a 4:4:2 at home if playing a "lesser" side.

Connor Rohrer
5 Posted 29/12/2008 at 21:27:51

I agree with Simon, it’s a 4-5-1 more than anything. Although at times it does interchange between 4-4-2 and 4-6-0.

I still prefer a natural striker in there, hopefully Saha if he gets fit. It would give us so many more options. I saw Arteta get on the ball, get his head up and look for that killer pass so many times against Sunderland, there was no one making the runs though and giving the team a different outlet.

I think Louis a great player, a class act really and if he’s fit he should play. Neville should switch to right back, Fellaini can play alongside Arteta and Cahill can play behind the striker. I think that’s the best way forward with the current squad.

Dennis Karanikolopoulos
6 Posted 29/12/2008 at 22:40:05

Spot on Connor, couldn?t have said it better myself!!

Although, as much as I?ve believed Hibbert at right back has been our Achilles heel and much preferred Neville there, neither have done too badly in their roles recently...

Christine Foster
7 Posted 30/12/2008 at 00:41:47

I think the obvious thing is that, despite playing with no recognised strikers, we are winning games. That's got to be good. But secondly, it's the way we have been playing. On the deck. No hoofball... because who are you going to hoof it too? Strangely enough, the team looks better balanced playing football.

Moyes turned a few heads with the 4-5-1 formation but even more so with what is a 4-6-0 one. I do believe, as I said before, defenders don?t like players running at them from deep, they fail to pick up the runners well, and that's caused the opposition real headaches. It may well have been caused by necessity, but I think even Moyes must be surprised how well its worked.

The midfield still needs a destroyer to play alongside Arteta but when Saha is fit, that's going to cause a few (welcome?) headaches for the manager.

Tim Luke
8 Posted 30/12/2008 at 04:29:11

Never change a winning team. Don’t follow convention. Just because we don’t play with a recognised striker doesn’t mean that we can’t score goals and play attractive football. The team has been doing this over the past 3 games, and all without a striker. So let’s just leave it to Moyes to decide. Let’s not start the ’moaning game’ and force the manager to change a winning line-up, or demoralise the team.

Jason Lam
9 Posted 30/12/2008 at 06:23:30

At times it?s almost Fellaini is our most advanced player. Cahill does track back a lot and so Fellaini needs to stay as high up the field to help pin back the opponent?s defensive line. Plus Fellaini is a lazy git so probably not complaining anyway.

Actually Fellaini is a great target man, but much more cultured than Big Dunc was. I think we have a special player here. Those criticising his fluffy top should only look back to the header he scored against Man U. Nothing soft about that header. You head with the forehead, not the top of your head. Might as well shave his monobrow instead.

Dave Wilson
10 Posted 30/12/2008 at 07:12:49

The game is evolving, guys, even the England manager says he wants more than just goalscorers, defenders are faster stronger and more tactically aware and over the piece will dominate the relatively static "traditional forward". Unless these "goalscorers" actually score ? and the very best of them are no more than 1 in 2 merchants ? they are often no more than passengers.

Playing 4-5-1, it's essential for the guy up top to make life very difficult for the opposition defenders, thus releasing 2/3 midfielders with the capability to score, to all go for the jugular, Cahill is exceptional at making life difficult for defenders.

RS lined up virtually the mirror image of us on Sunday, Cahill/Kuyht ? neither blindingly talented but both a real handful ? Gerrard/Fellaini, Pienaar/Babel. the Argentine and that fella they all hate/Arteta and Pip . . . .

This is not 4-6-0, its 4-5-1, but is it tactical genius?Well it was when the Cat won the league with this system 40 years ago!

Joeynkoo Ludden
11 Posted 30/12/2008 at 09:52:05

For what it?s worth, I think the thing that?s being overlooked with the 4-6-0 debate is the defence. Sunderland game aside, this latest good run is based on not conceding and trying to nick the one goal. 0-1 at Eastlands, 0-0 v Chelski, 0-1 at the Riverside and another clean sheet v Sunderland. If you take the Boro game as a quick example, we controlled the game and should have scored 3 or 4, in the end, we won by one scrappy goal. It?s the clean sheet at the other end which means that one scrappy finish from a plethora of chances equals a win.

With the 5/6 man midfield, and Jags (Villa through balls aside) at the top of his game, sides are finding it difficult to get near Tim Howard, meaning we only need to scrape the odd goal ourselves to win a game.

I also agree that Moyes never seems to change a winning team, which is why Osman coming on for Gosling to start v Sunderland was a surprise.

3 points v Hull at Goodison will set us up nicely for the next 3 fixtures: the derby followed by games against Arsenal and Man Utd. Those games will provide a thorough test of the 4-6-0 / 4-5-1 tactics.

Dave Richman
12 Posted 30/12/2008 at 11:13:17

The 4-5-1 was widely accepted to be pretty revolutionary at the time, when Davie played it that way a few years back and we ended up 4th.

Now this season the 4-6-0 is working and it’s looking quite good.

Just wait until Davie unveils a brand new 2-9-0 formation. We’ll be fucking unstoppable!

Dan Mckie
13 Posted 30/12/2008 at 11:16:29

If Moyes only has Victor to choose from as a striker, then he has a difficult decision to make, but if Saha is fit then he hasn't, he has to play ahead of Cahill in that role every time and move Tim back to midfield. The only question is at whose expense? I'd say Hibbert even though he has been playing well.

Brian Baker
14 Posted 30/12/2008 at 11:50:06

Dave Richman. Don?t you mean 2-8-0? As 2-9-0 will leave us with a rush goalie!! ... LOL!

Steve Burns
15 Posted 30/12/2008 at 12:12:11

If the last few weeks has proved anything, it is that the defensive midfield role is more important (for us at least) than the striker role. We haven?t conceded since Castillo/Pip have been holding back to release the more attacking midfielders, and they are the only two players that I would currently trust to play that role. Arteta may not have the strength; Fellaini is too good a threat in the box; Rodwell?s a little inexperienced; Osman... HELL NO!! And Cahill is a bit too one-dimensional for that role.

David Oliver
16 Posted 30/12/2008 at 12:42:37

Dan - No way should Cahill go back to playing midfield in a 4-4-2 or even lying deep in a 4-5-1 for that matter. His strengths lie in getting into the box and causing trouble, making the defenders think.

In a 4-4-2, fulfilling this role is inevitably to the detriment of the normal midfield role ? put simply, he can't be in two places at once! 4-5-1 is definitely the way to go if you want to keep the potent goal threat of Cahill when he is on form.
Don't get me wrong, I think Cahill is a good player, he has guts, drive and determination, but he is not world class. If £30 million + fell into our laps and was spent wisely, he would quite rightly end up a squad player. As that's not likely to happen, playing to his strengths (and the team's as a whole) is the best bet.

Simon Jones
17 Posted 30/12/2008 at 12:59:28

Whether we play 4-4-2, 4-6-0 or the successful 4-1-4-1 from a couple of seasons ago (which mostly worked due to Lee Carsley), sooner or later the other teams suss you out. We have done ok without a recognised striker because we have caught the opposition out, but surely as a long term strategy it's a no-go, because eventually the secret gets out and the better sides work out how to beat you.

Philip Harris
18 Posted 30/12/2008 at 16:35:25

The patterns they weave remind me of those Hollywood Busby Berkeley routines, all bright flows and rolls - they just need to wear pink and diamonds with lacy hats and they’d be fine :0)

Nick Veitch
19 Posted 30/12/2008 at 16:49:34

Connor, you seem to have a support group hanging off every word you say. Even when you speak absolute basics. Sure it?s not just you agreeing with yourself? It would make a lot of sense.

Connor Rohrer
20 Posted 30/12/2008 at 18:17:55

Not at all Nick, I just post my opinion. If people want to agree with it then that’s up to them.

Derek Thomas
21 Posted 30/12/2008 at 21:56:21

Fluke system or no, whoever said the game is evolving is right, and at the moment, the one with the biggest worry is Big Vic, who has until May to prove that he has a long-term future at the Club.

You can only live on potential for so long, ask McFadden, before the dreaded prefix UNFULFILLED goes in front of potential.

Over to you Vic!!

Jason Lam
22 Posted 31/12/2008 at 02:00:23

If some club were to offer even £1 mil for Anichebe then we should accept it. Out of the 4 strikers, it's only Anichebe cannot oust a makeshift striker in Cahill from the team.