Season 2011-12
The Mail Bag

The Death of the 4-4-2

 13 Comments: First  |  Last

I spotted this interesting article on the "think football" website.

http://thinkfootball.co.uk/the-decline-of-the-4-4-2/

It's a fairly thoughtful piece on the decline of the 4-4-2 formation, and as a consequence the end of strike partnerships. We still get many toffeewebbers criticising Moyes for being defensive (often correctly) and linking this to his stubborn persistence in using 4-5-1.

The article helps explode this myth. 4-5-1 is not necessarily defensive. It simply is a better formation than 4-4-2 given modern fitness levels and the ability of full backs to play the attacking flanking role. Most teams now use this formation. Moyes was one of the first to adopt it ? out of necessity as we only had one striker at the time ? take a bow Marcus Bent who set us on the way to Champions League qualification. Things got worse when we signed a second striker ? James Beattie ? who could not make the transition to the 4-5-1 formation.

I wonder just how much of Everton being the strikers graveyard has to do with this transition from 4-4-2 to 4-5-1? Strikers who can play in a partnership up front are not always able to play the solo role. AJ and Beattie both fall into this category and maybe it just took us a while to work out which strikers can fit in with the new formations.

Other strikers have faded before their time during this tactical transition, eg, Michael Owen.

David Ellis, Hong Kong     Posted 14/05/2012 at 04:34:03

back Return to the Mail Bag  :  Add your Comments back

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


James Martin
843   Posted 14/05/2012 at 09:27:33

Report abuse

Formations are all well and good but I think its about the personnel you have out there. Playing 4-4-1-1 with Cahill jumping for high balls looking for a flick on to Saha who is on the wing with both of them being 50 yards away from the midfield and defense is never going to work. I think 4-5-1 can work if you have a player in the number 10 role like a Rooney who can play at the top of midfield and has the pace and goal threat to instantly chnge the 4-5-1 into 4-4-2 when attacking. Cahill and Fellaini in that role don't have this pace so have a definite 4-5-1 at the moment although with Jelavic and Pienaar in the team it doesn't really seem to matter what we are playing, they socre and play well whoever is aorund them.
Ciarán McGlone
847   Posted 14/05/2012 at 10:01:19

Report abuse

4-5-1 is just a 4-4-2 where the second striker can actually play football.

The problem Moyes has is that he often plays formations which he doesn't have the personnel for... The 4-5-1 with Cahill has been pretty useless for quite some time.
Dave Roberts
853   Posted 14/05/2012 at 10:25:26

Report abuse

Why do so many people persist in thinking 4-5-1 is something new?

The Holy Trinity team of 69/70 played 4-5-1 with Royle as the lone striker and Wright and Newton as the 'flying full-backs'. Alan Ball was usually the midfielder who got up to support Royle, hence his great goal tally for a midfielder. Everton were the first British team to play this formation.

The great thing about 4-5-1 (as long as you have the players who can manage it) is that it can be defensive if it needs to be, it can tranform to 4-4-2 or even better to 4-3-3 when you're really on top. Surprisingly, it's very often 4-4-2 shapes that end up with huge gaps between midfield and the strikers when teams are under pressure as the four midfielders drop back. (This happens with England quite often when they play with two up front) In a 4-5-1 formation, if it's played well, there is usually a midfielder who can do something to fill the gap.

It's not new, we were playing it 42 years ago!
Shane Corcoran
854   Posted 14/05/2012 at 10:35:41

Report abuse

I haven't read the article but the 4-5-1 gives much more flexibility and ironically doesn't stay as 4-5-1 for any length of time. If you take Everton as an example and James' point above, I think the fact the Pienaar drifts inside alongside whoever is at the front of the five, allowing Baines to take up his wide position results in a 3-4-2-1 formation a lot of the time. The flip side to this in when we have possession on the other wing we are at a stand still and a very rigid 4-5-1. 4-3-3 is essentially the same formation with two of the forward playing in midfield when without the ball. We need to invest in the right side of the team to exploit the system better.
Barry Rathbone
857   Posted 14/05/2012 at 11:20:50

Report abuse

The formation is where the players stand for the kick off.

The type of player and the mentality of the coach dictates if you're an attacking or defensive outfit.

Redknapp always buys creative players and lets them play (anyone remember Bale not getting picked by Jol) the likes of Mcleish, Mcarthy and certain others (guess who?) employ grafters and caution first.

Numbers on a board mean fuck all.
Ryan Holroyd
881   Posted 14/05/2012 at 13:14:20

Report abuse

James

Fellaini is a much better player than winning flick on's with his head. His 1st touch, chest control, ability to bring others into play. I can see him being very successful in that position behind Jelavic. Jelavic, Fellaini, Pienaar, Osman. All good footballers who like the ball at their feet.

I don't like 2 out-and-out forwards. Football goes through cycles and 4-4-2 has gone for the moment.

My wish for this close season is a backup to Jelavic, some pace on the right and Pienaar signed up.

Sell Vic, Coleman, Cahill if possible.
Joe Clitherow
932   Posted 14/05/2012 at 14:47:49

Report abuse

James strangely I agree with you almost 100% with the addition provided by Ryan's point.
Paul David
934   Posted 14/05/2012 at 14:50:38

Report abuse

I still believe 442 is the best formation to play if you have the right players.
Joe Clitherow
947   Posted 14/05/2012 at 15:17:01

Report abuse

Paul I think if you really have the 'right' players then formations matter less and less the more 'right' they are
Dave Roberts
949   Posted 14/05/2012 at 15:14:18

Report abuse

.......every formation is the best one to play if you have the right players for it. You have to play to your strengths or set out your stall, choose a system and get the players for it.

Right now Everton are playing 4-5-1 and despite the weakness on the right it looks lovely! So it is the best system for us.

Anybody who thinks 4-5-1 is defensive is deluded. Doing a rough count on my fingers Everton have scored 20 goals in the last 7 league games playing it. That is virtually 3 goals a game!

The advantage of 4-5-1 is that, depending on the players you have, it so flexibly morphs into any other combination or formation you want without wholesale repositioning or replacement of players.

4-3-3 (or even 4-2-4!) used to be determined as the most adventurous way to play football. But 4-3-3 is just 4-5-1 when you're attacking. There were moments yesterday when we were actually playing 4-2-4 with both Fellaini and Osman getting up to the opposition area consistently and hanging about up there with Neville and Gibson looking after the midfield.

4-5-1 offers much more flexibility on the proviso that you have the players for it and right now we very nearly have. My ideal 4-5-1 (from the players we know rather than wishful thinking) would be:-

Howard

Hibbert (in lieu of somebody better)
Heitinga
Jagielka (arguably Distin?)
Baines

Pienaar
Gibson
Neville (Barkley?)
Fellaini
Donovan

Jelavic

So, IMHO, keep Pienaar, get Donovan, get a right back half as good as Baines, bring Barkley out of the cupboard and into the daylight and we'll challenge!
Paul David
950   Posted 14/05/2012 at 15:29:22

Report abuse

I get what your saying that formations are flexible but when I say the right players I dont mean the best players.I mean players that are suited to their position.

I dont think we should have played with wide men all season as we simply dont have the players to play out wide effectively.With the players we've had this year I think we were more suited to 4312 formation.
Jon Ferguson
996   Posted 14/05/2012 at 18:42:53

Report abuse

Dave - I agree with everything you posted except signing Donavon. If we sign Pienaar who is fast approaching 30 we can't afford to sign another player of that age.

Donavon in particular would need replacing after a couple of seasons and without a resale value (due to his age) we are unlikely to be able to replace him. Pienaar is a must and then a right winger, but it has to be someone in their early 20's or younger, so that we can either keep them for years to come (obviously a preference if they turn out to be quality) or sell them on and replace them with the proceeds.
Roman Sidey
104   Posted 15/05/2012 at 06:28:34

Report abuse

4-5-1 is a fine formation, and is very similar to 4-3-3. The problem with Everton playing it is that we have 5 central midfielders (maybe Pienaar is a lefty now) playing across the midfield.

4-5-1 as it should be essentially has 4 wingers with the fullbacks coming forward.

If you count Pienaar for the last half season, we have two active wingers in the club that Moyes trusts on the field. Hibbo is shit, and Neville is not a fantastic attacking fullback (stepovers notwithstanding).

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment to the MailBag, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

Log in now

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 MailBag submissions across the site.



© ToffeeWeb