Season 2011-12 Fan Articles
A New Formation
By Neil Turton :: 08/12/2011
28 Comments (»Last)
I have seen a few articles recently on ToffeeWeb about what formation Moyes should be playing, which players should fit in to that system etc etc. Sadly for us, as much as some fans may find this fun to speculate on such matters, it is (like the Premier League), a pretty futile exercise. What I think is worth debating is what players he should use within his favourite 4-5-1 formation. I happen to think that it could be more accurately described as 4-2-3-1, and it?s the middle of the 3 that holds the key for me.
I?m sure I?m not saying anything that hasn?t really been said/thought by most intelligent fans already but I needed to get it off my chest. I should say from the outset that I?m not a massive defender of Moyes, I think he has his limits and the football can be pretty dour, but I think we?d be in a much worse position without him. I also acknowledge that his years of study and UEFA coaching badges means he knows more about football tactics and formations than I will ever know. But I?d like to think 25 years of football watching and playing gives me some idea of how the game works.
The crux of my argument is that I don?t think there is anything inherently wrong in the formation Moyes adopts, it just needs adapting. It?s all very well saying ?we should play two men upfront?, or ?we should play wingbacks because Coleman and Baines are full backs who like to attack?. This is what fans like to do. Play Football Manager in their head with their team and think that a change in formation solves any apparent issues. Most fans criticisms seem to focus on us being negative and would rather we should play 4-4-2. Others have suggested returning to the outdated 3-5-2. I?ve outlined below why I do not think either of these are tactically viable options.
4-4-2
Only managers like the two idiotic Steve?s of Bruce and Kean play a straight 4-4-2 regularly, while even Mick McCarthy, not renowned for his tactical nous, has this season employed Jamie O?Hara behind a lone striker, with mixed success granted. Everton fans lamenting Moyes for not playing 4-4-2 are massively wide of the mark if they think that is our problem. Any team playing that system is likely to have both central midfielders (who are generally expected to perform a ?box to box? role) over run by the modern 4-2-3-1 where their two deep-lying two will draw one or both of the attacking team?s central midfield higher up the pitch and leave the deep lying playmaker free.
(Fig.1 - Fellaini/Rodwell outnumbered, opposing playmaker is not picked up effectively)
Â
(Fig.2- Fellaini nullified, Rodwell outnumbered thus reduced attacking options)
You are then left with strikers up against two centre halves. Whilst people may say this is better than one striker outnumbered, most Premier League central defensive partnerships are more than adept at marking two strikers. Unless you have the luxury where you have one striker capable of dropping in to space between defence and midfield and another that can run the line and poach goals (e.g. Rooney and Hernandez) so the deep lying striker can pull one centre half up the pitch and break the defensive line. Everton do not have this option. Playing Saha/Velios/Stracqualarsi/Anichebe as a pairing is just as easy for any central defence in the Premier League to deal with as playing with one on their own. The alleged ?defensive? 4-5-1 which Moyes employs, more often than not includes Cahill as one of the supposed 5 in midfield. This moniker is a complete misnomer. Cahill makes this formation 4-4-2 because of his nature. With the greatest respect to what he has done for Everton, he is not an intelligent footballer. Playing him ?behind? Saha basically means playing with two strikers because Cahill does not have the positional sense and ability to find space to be a playmaker. He therefore needs to make up for that deficiency with goals. Ignoring the fact that he hasn?t scored this calendar year, this means pushing further forward on to the centre half, rather than dragging him out of position, something even Richard Dunne can cope with.
5-3-2
I?ve read articles recently and seen people making arguments that Moyes should employ a formation based on wingbacks. The fact that 5-3-2/3-5-2 died a natural death with Glenn Hoddle leaving the England job in 1999 does not mean you should necessarily write it off. Formations evolve and come back in to fashion over time. In Everton?s instance however, it simply would not work in my opinion. The main argument behind it is that we have two attacking fullbacks in Leighton Baines and Seamus Coleman, so let them attack. Aside from the obvious point that Coleman can?t defend, rather than allowing these two to fulfil their attacking potential, this would have the adverse effect. The reason why Baines is currently the best attacking full back in Europe ? is that he is able to overlap whoever plays in front of him. It is a testament to Baines that despite Steven Pienaar leaving, his attacking output playing behind the largely ineffective Diniyar Bilyaletdinov hasn?t diminished. The overlap is the key to this. Most teams now employ a flat back four, narrow midfield and a central striker with two wide players supporting the strikers. With a player in front of him occupying the opposing full back, Baines is able to make forward runs without being tracked, unless of course the opposing team?s right sided attacker is either a hard worker, incredibly disciplined, not very adventurous or a combination of those traits.
(Fig.3 ? Baines overlap. Opponent RB occupied by Drenthe, AMR must be disciplined to keep track of Baines)
With a switch to wingbacks, the opponent?s full back only has Baines/Coleman to worry about. This will have one of two effects, neither of which is positive. Firstly, the opposing full back can stay deep, let Baines attack them and back themselves to deal with him one-on-one. This creates space behind Baines that the opposing right-sided attacker can exploit and force the left-sided of the three centre halves to move across to left back to cover, dragging him out of position and creating potential problems in the middle.
(Fig.4 ?Baines attacks fullback, leaves space behind that can be exploited. Distin dragged out of position)
Secondly, the opposing fullback can overlap and force Baines/Coleman back, thus completely nullifying them and turning an attacking 3-5-2 setup in to a defensive 5-3-2.
(Fig.5 ? Opposing full backs overlap, forcing Baines/Coleman back)
The solution
I believe that with only a slight tweak, and one signing (a good, technical right-sided midfielder), Everton can play a formation and style of football that can unlock these sides lower than us who come to Goodison, frustrate us with 9 or 10 men behind the ball, and invariably come away with a hard earned draw or 1-0 win. My solution would be to drop Cahill. This is the key role to breaking down a defensive team. We have three options to replace him. Leon Osman; Bilyaletdinov; or Ross Barkley. In fairness to Moyes, he has tried this on occasions mainly using Osman but even then, Osman has been deployed too advanced and not finding proper space, mainly due to his lack of pace. Barkley was tried there in the Carling Cup tie earlier this season against West Bromwich Albion and struggled, as WBA played a formation where you couldn?t fit a cigarette paper between the defence and midfield, let alone a promising young midfielder. In the absence of any money to spend on some sort of David Silva-esq player (someone who seems to be able to find more space than a cat in a Renault Espace), why not Bilyaletdinov there? He hasn?t worked as a winger, so before we ship him back to Russia for whatever we can get, let?s try him where he?s been reasonably successful for his national team.
A withdrawn playmaker there forces either a centre half to come out and mark him, or a holding midfield player to sit deeper. Either way, the opposing team?s formation is disrupted, creating space somewhere. With Rodwell and Fellaini as insurance, if an opponent?s midfield player sits and picks up our playmaker, it creates space for one of them to step forward in to that space.
A 4-2-3-1, with Coleman at right-back, two of John Heitinga/Phil Jagielka/Sylvain Distin, and Baines left-back. In Jack Rodwell and Marouane Fellaini we have a central midfield partnership comparable to most teams in the league. The attacking options are more of a problem. If you choose to play Bilyaletdinov in the middle of the three, the obvious choice on the left is Royston Drenthe. While I bemoan Osman?s lack of pace, I still maintain that the shape of this formation would allow an intelligent player like Osman to perform a wide role. I know he won?t beat players and swing crosses in but that isn?t the job of these wide strikers anymore. Osman can keep the ball, is diligent in his tracking back to help Coleman defensively and is good enough on the ball to keep it and allow Coleman to overlap when attacking. In an ideal world a new signing here would be perfect but that is not going to happen. While not blessed in the striker department, within this framework, a lone striker can flourish, provided they play off the shoulder of the centre halves, be it Saha/Velios etc.
(Fig 6 ? Bilyaletdinov receives ball at feet high up pitch. Support for Saha from middle and flanks)
I know there is nothing ground-breaking here, but the shape and flexibility within that shape are what is needed to beat these defensive-minded teams. Intelligent ball playing players are what is needed, not Cahill pushing high up and putting alleged pressure on the opposing back four which can all to easily be absorbed.
The argument that one upfront is defensive is complete nonsense. With this shape you have one up front, with two attack minded midfielders either side that can make it three upfront, while still having a ball playing midfielder in an advanced position. You also have two full backs that can join in the attack when the attacking midfielder/forward in front of them tucks in to draw in the fullback in field ready for the overlap.
I wrote this purely as a cathartic exercise for myself to be honest, I expect a lot of people will disagree and pick holes in it. As I said at the beginning, I obviously don?t claim to be an expert or have a fraction of the knowledge that David Moyes has but I think what frustrates fans in to complaining about his formations is that he doesn?t change shape or system. He has a very rigid system that he plays against Arsenal at home as he does against Stoke at home and doesn?t seem to acknowledge that there are different ways to beat these teams. Even substitutions don?t tend to bring about a great change in shape or approach. With twenty minutes to go and 1-0 down at home, invariably he will simply change player for player and not change the formation. As a final throw of the dice he will finally give the supporters who demand two upfront by withdrawing Cahill for another striker which only serves to further exacerbate the problems I highlighted earlier.
And breathe? oh, I feel better after that? Calculated rant over! COYB
Reader Comments (28)
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
2 Posted 09/12/2011 at 08:40:00
One additional point though... I think he benefits from a right footed left winger (i.e. - not Drenthe).
This player moves infield, bringing the full-back with him and giving him more space to attack. This happened often with Pienaar and even to a lesser extent on a few occasions when Osman has played there.
Ideally I think you'd want an 'inverted winger' on the left, and an orthodox winger on the right.
And I'd be interested to see Bily play in that role, but I suspect his inclination to dwell on the ball would mean he'd suffer in the Premier League.
That's one of the biggest criticisms of his game, is that in the PL you need to transfer the ball quickly and he's just too slow in doing this.
A good analysis though, like I say. Out of interest, how did you create the formation images?
Anyone looking for good tactical analyses of Everton games should go to the Executioner's Bong website: theexecutionersbong.wordpress.com
It can be a bit stats heavy, but definitely worth reading his pre- and post-match analyses.
3 Posted 09/12/2011 at 08:00:34
For instance Fig.1;
"Any team playing that system is likely to have both central midfielders (who are generally expected to perform a ?box to box? role) over run by the modern 4-2-3-1 where their two deep-lying two will draw one or both of the attacking team?s central midfield higher up the pitch and leave the deep lying playmaker free."
Without the ball the wingers tuck in and outnumber the three. This means that the ball has to go backwards to a player less likely to hurt you I.e. the defensive mid or a centre back, it also means the full backs can't get forward to overlap/outnumber as there are two strikers that need to be marked and that's suicidal. If we gain possesion we immediately open out and move the ball wide where our winger has a free run at a full back with no cover.
In Fig.4;
"Firstly, the opposing full back can stay deep, let Baines attack them and back themselves to deal with him one-on-one. This creates space behind Baines that the opposing right-sided attacker can exploit and force the left-sided of the three centre halves to move across to left back to cover"
RE; Cover, you have effectively three centre backs, if Distin moves over to snuff out the right winger who has found space behind Baines the sweeper moves in to create a back 4.
Most managers will not allow a player of Baines quality to have a straight run at thier full backs, certainly not for a full 90 mins, he's too good. That means they have to move one of the two deep defensive midfielders out to offer cover, leaving our three a lot of space and numerical advantage in the centre or more likely they pull the right sided attacker back which means our sweeper (Heitinga) moves forwards into the DM position and gives license to the whole side to move up the pitch and commit extra men forward. The opposing full-back would have to be very gung-ho to attack regularly and try to pins ours back as he would be leaving his defence in a 3 on 2 with our forwards, odds far more favourable than 3-4 0n 1 which we quite regularly have to deal with now.
I'm not trying to discredit you in any way by pointing out the respective flaws in each argument. I agree with most of what you say. I just think that the mentality we approach games with will play a large part towards whether any given formation is successful or not.
For instance we do not get enough men in the box and we do not shoot from distance, even though we are always in a position to. This makes us very easy to defend against regardless of formations. A change in attitude is what would bring about this, not a change in formation.
I agree 100% about Cahill. At his age with his injury record he should be used mostly as an impact sub and occasional starter in away matches where we don't want to play an expansive style. A ball playing No.10 is a must for any side that's playing one forward IMO. That player as well as dictating the play must also be able to chip in with at least 10 goals and have the movement to manipulate the opponent's defensive shape to create space for the lone forward to use.
4 Posted 09/12/2011 at 08:44:51
I put on another thread that i don't believe 5-3-2 is completely out-dated,using Liverpools victory at Chelsea as an example. But that doesn't really matter.
What matters is that we both agree why so many of us get pissed off with Moyes. You said he plays the same formation and players at home to Arsenal and at home to Stoke. Well i went one better and said he plays the same formation and players away at Old Trafford as what he does at home to Cardiff in the cup.
I just don't understand it. I don't care what formation he picks but lets just at least try something a bit different. Catch a team off guard for once.
I also agree with you that Bily should be tried centrally. Like i said on another thread,what's the harm? He's shit on the left wing so lets just find out for sure if he is shit regardless of where he plays on the pitch. I actually thought we should have Bily on the right with Coleman overlapping him from the full-back position so Bily could cut inside and shoot with that(occasionally awesome) left foot. I know it's defensively weak but we concede soft goals anyway,at least this should see us score a few more.
We just need to shake things up a bit/lot.
5 Posted 09/12/2011 at 09:06:28
#2 Graham, the site I used to create the chalkboards is http://this11.com/
P.S. any podcast fans out there feel free to check out my weekly football one, Soccermax (http://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/soccermax!/id448033632)
@NeilTurton
6 Posted 09/12/2011 at 11:01:41
My mate bought me a ticket for Man City v Bayern Munich in the week. I went along and it was interesting watching a game as a neutral and not on the telly. You get to watch one player or look at a formation. You can objectively observe tactics without being emotionally involved or getting constantly pissed off with the ref. I suggest you all do it.
I know it's not a fair comparison with Man City but they play a very high line. I think that's something Everton should adopt. At the moment we sit far too deep. That means Coleman or Drenthe is marked by the midfielder. They've got to beat the midfielder and the full back in order to get a decent cross in. It also means we get these massive hoofballs from out centre halves. It's also very difficult to build an attack when you're starting from your own penalty area. It's why we have stats of 60% possession because opposing teams are happy to let us tap it about around the half way line.
If we play higher up the pitch, we've enough pace in our back line to cope with any through balls and you just coach the keeper to be quick off his line as well. Playing a higher line means there's less space in midfield so it's easier to break up the opposition attack. So when play does break down you're already in their half and nearer to the penalty area. You've also got more chance of getting Coleman and Drenthe 1-on-1 with the opposing fullbacks.
If we change formations but still sit deep, it won't make any difference. Moyes has to shift his whole mindset and philosophy to a more attacking one if things are to change. Something he won't do.
7 Posted 09/12/2011 at 16:42:53
8 Posted 09/12/2011 at 17:04:30
The issue here is not Osman (Jesus!), it's the overall philosophy of the team selection. Putting players where they want to play and building a trust between them (in terms of receiving the ball in tight areas) is something Harry Redknapp seems to get right every weekend.
Moyes doesn't seem to realise you can play a relatively attacking formation and still be solid by retaining possession and keeping good positions.
Our possession never goes anywhere because none of those 11 players on the pitch (and the increasingly dwindling numbers in the crowd) believe that it will. There is no trust. And this negativity comes from the manager, sadly it now infects us all, the worst of us being the ones who continue to defend him. Why is he/we so afraid of what the opposition are going to do to us? There is no confidence or joy, whether you're watching or playing for Everton.
Tim
Seamus John Syl Bainesy (c)
Rod Fella
Royston Ross Maggie
Apostolos
Come on Dave, you know it makes sense.
9 Posted 09/12/2011 at 17:16:51
Add to that a defensive combination that has never been tried before.
Isn't that a 4-5-1? Are you looking to be criticised on here for being too negative and dour?
10 Posted 09/12/2011 at 19:01:16
How else do you try a defensive combination that has never been tried before?
Will Barkley and Gueye ever be ready to play in Moyes's universe? How is this playing time going to materialise? What exactly are the regular starters for Dave experienced at? Being very poor?
I accept management is more complicated than most people make out, but you can also easily over-complicate it and instil fear and dread into your players. Apparently, Gueye is nowhere near fit enough and Barkley may give the ball away now and again (of course Osman and Cahill never do this) but the solution to all of these problems is play them. Play them, play them, play them.
Technically, that is a 4-2-3-1, but the nomination of the system is completely irrelevant. What's important is the league has changed this season; the goal count is very high with attacking formations being rewarded for their bravery, while negative sides like Villa and US are stagnating.
All I'm saying is (and all anyone who wants change is saying is), why persist with the shite that we're seeing every week? It doesn't work. And it's sapping the morale of everyone who genuinely gives a shit about the performance of the team. You can't play well every week, but at the same time you can't play shit every week. And that's are current situation.
11 Posted 09/12/2011 at 23:07:06
12 Posted 09/12/2011 at 21:34:28
Tactically the game is one of fluidity wherein its state of play changes by the second. It is impossible to predict exactly what an opponent will do with or without the ball. A well-trained team will adapt within split seconds to whatever the situation presents.
In a well-organised squad, naming a player for a particular position should be all that is required. If he has not got the brains or ability to do what is required then he should not be in the squad in the first place. That is why I am also against long drawn-out instructions with diagrams given to substitutes. A few simple words should suffice or is the man a thick head.
If there is one thing football could adopt from Aussie Rules it would be for all managers and assistants to be in a box up in the stands. From there they would have a better view of the game. They could be in contact with the dug out where specially trained lunatics could translate instructions to the players.
13 Posted 10/12/2011 at 06:46:38
But have tried to rise to the challenge:
Us - pass- us - pass - us pass = goal
Does this work for you ?
14 Posted 10/12/2011 at 09:49:39
I have a feeling we overcomplicate things which is why players are afraid to try something out of the ordinary and stick to the'playbook' (one for our Yankee friends).
I don't know this for certain so I'm not critisizing but that's how it appears to me.
The most important attribute a player can have is the intelligence to react to situations around them. As Dick says, you probably can't teach that, nor can you coach the team as a whole to do this.
15 Posted 10/12/2011 at 11:35:43
Look at The Times' average player position diagrams and you won't see a single one that matches a classic "formation".
Every time the ball or an opposition player moves a team's formation should change. It is a dynamic system.
Basically, discussion of formations is largely bollocks.
16 Posted 10/12/2011 at 12:41:18
Drop Cahill.
Play a formation that plays to our strengths, i.e. no out and out wingers.
Give Billy a chance, thunderbolt shot, Play Osman as part of a narror three not a winger.
The options for Barkley, velios, and guyerve (not the swiss nutty cheese) are numerous.
Unfortunately the fat waiter was playing this formation for years wih mascerano and alonso holding for years. Its the way forward for us. But no we have to put up withy hibbo right back, Osman on the wing and Cahill behind Saha, makes me want to gag!!!!! You are only as strong as your weakest link and we are therefore as strong as Tony Hibbert!!!
17 Posted 10/12/2011 at 14:58:01
Basically, from the diagrams you are correct. The 4-5-1 formation is about five years outdated. Most successful teams after the World Cup have been using the 4-2-3-1. This allows a solid defensive base to build on but with three creative and flexible forwards to excite the crowd.
The top managers like Ferguson, Wenger and Mourinho can change and adapt formations and systems. Unfortunately it looks like Moyes can't.
For all our debating with articles and diagrams, it looks like Moyes will never change. He is not a top manager and Everton will never archieve anything under him because of his inability to change.
It's depressing reading how things should be done when we all know they won't change until we get a new manager.
18 Posted 10/12/2011 at 15:11:43
Gueye in place of Osman, and
Barkley in place of Bilyaletdinov?
or
Bilyaletdinov in place of Osman and Barkley in the middle?
I feel Bilyaletdinov could play as a wide forward (perhaps on the right, cutting in on his left foot) as well as the central playmaker, and far better than Moyes plays him as a left winger
19 Posted 10/12/2011 at 18:26:49
I'm a professional in my field, if my manager stood over me all day telling me in minutiae how to do my job, I'd get fuck all done. Its not surprising that our players look bereft of confidence or a clue.
20 Posted 10/12/2011 at 20:58:31
Defo. agree that Saha and Timmy are getting games on past glories. Vellios seems to be the only one scoring so play him alone or wih Stracq. in attack. Sounds good, at least. He's not been given a chance yet really. Is he that rubbish? Can't do any worse.
Good to see the young lad get a few minutes today. That's the gaffa's biggest asset. Blooding in the youth. Looks like we'll have to let Rodwell and Jags go this summer in order to bring some new life to the team.
21 Posted 12/12/2011 at 22:42:49
22 Posted 13/12/2011 at 11:50:00
Reminds me of the (possibly) apocryphal story of Keith Burkinshaw at Spurs when Ardiles and Villa came over. Allegedly he pointed backwards and forwards shouting "Ball - Goal - Ball - Goal", and when Ardiles stated he spoke English, Keith said "This is not for you it's for the others".
It's a simple game really and endless over analysis and confusing not-too-bright footballers is bound to end in tears.
Generally, the better your footballers, the more you win.
Der Ball ist Rund.
23 Posted 13/12/2011 at 11:58:19
24 Posted 14/12/2011 at 17:11:48
25 Posted 16/12/2011 at 12:45:25
26 Posted 18/12/2011 at 23:17:52
6 Posted 09/12/2011 at 11:01:41
O`h Well said mate! Alan you can have my Coaching badges mate and take over Everton in the Morning as far as I am concerned,....See if we the public can see what Alan has just pointed out then why Cant David Moyes Or Strong? I have said this for years now, in fact the last time we sat on the halfway line was the season we won a spot in the Champions League, We soaked up the pressure and then slowly moved up the field...when we usually got the winner! We had the likes of Andy Johson running at players and the final pass usually ended up in the net... Running from the half way line chasing a ball is much harder than say 10 yards outside the box then turning and having a shot..... 3 or 4 of those types of runs can dampen any striker or wingers spirits, especially if nothing comes of it....he will start asking his own players to push up! The midfield will be swamped and the only way out would be to play to the wingers, or over the top! Either way that would relieve a lot of the pressure that our players are feeling at the start of every game.. So Thumbs up from me Alan apply for the job as soon as moyes caves in.
By the way:
Brilliant article Neil Turton .....
Alan Clarke
6 Posted 09/12/2011 at 11:01:41
I actually don't think the formation is Everton's problem. We can play 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 4-3-3, the xmas tree, 5-3-2, it basically doesn't matter. The main problem is how defensive we are and how deep we sit on the pitch.
27 Posted 28/12/2011 at 01:32:19
28 Posted 28/12/2011 at 04:11:02
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.
1 Posted 09/12/2011 at 07:28:38
1.That is exactly the problem with Moyes - he does not change or adapt his tactics.He does not seem to take into account different teams/state of the match/ availability of players.
2. He seems to publically criticise his strikers more than other when errors are made or there has been a bad result. e.g. Tim Howard's gafff at Blackburn last season - if a striker makes an error of similar proportions e.g. misses an open goal then he's maybe dropped next match.
3. As regards formations - most pundits have stated that it works best if the striker is supported from midfield. There is a danger that the lone striker can become isolated. Sometimes - and I did say SOMETIMES playing 2 strikers together can work well. And personally I think Strac and Vellios would benefit from playing alongside Saha.