[WillieJohnstonsGreenhouse]

I know we have a few tactical genii onboard and we have many a week to ponder.

Why have some teams suddenly gone 3 at the back?

Why is 4-4-2 frowned upon

Why can't we play well in any formation for more than a week?

I'm a massive dinosaur,
Having two quick wingers, two fairly mobile full-backs to take their place as the wingers push on to produce sublime crosses onto the heads of our supremely agile strikers who either nod it in or knock it down to the free striker.

Am I a tactical genius who sees a no-brainer or do I need to get a tan, wrap a pastel cardigan around my neck and be a European god of football??

Don't be nasty

[WBA-Josh]

1) Playing with 3 centre backs is a good way of giving your team possibly a spare man at the back as well as a spare man in midfield and 2 strikers upfront. The 3-5-2 for example gives a spare man at the back and a spare man in central midfield which is a great way of playing against a normal 4-4-2. However, playing with 3 centre backs is not useful against teams playing with 1 striker. A 3-5-2 up against a 4-3-3 for example doesn't give a spare man in midfield, leaves 2 centre backs not marking anyone, it can cause havoc against teams who play with flexibility and leaves the 2 wing-backs 1v1 against the opposition wingers.  

2) In modern day football, most teams now play variants of 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3. The days of most teams playing a basic 4-4-2 like you described are gone. There are still teams who can play 4-4-2 successfully (Albion showed it under Pulis) but generally 4-4-2 is slightly outdated in it's set-up. 4-4-2 has been such a popular formation for the past few decades that every type of 4-4-2 with individual tactics has been worked out by coaches both present and past.

3) Coaches in modern day football have had to learn to be adaptable. Using just 1 formation all the time is never always a good idea because different matches need different formations and tactics. For example, you wouldn't play a 4-4-2 away at Barcelona just like you wouldn't play with 3 centre backs either. For a team like Barcelona, a 4-1-4-1 or 4-3-1-2 formation is usually a good bet to match them up in midfield. On the flip side, if you were playing against the bottom of the league team who are a playing with 3 centre backs and 2 wing-backs (Hull and Wigan in recent years) then playing a 4-4-2 could work because you have 2 strikers against their 3 centre backs. A lone striker can easily be outnumbered, outmuscled and outthought by 3 centre backs.

Sorry about the above answers being a little long but I hope they answer your questions Wille.

[BaggyBomber]

1) Playing with 3 centre backs is a good way of giving your team possibly a spare man at the back as well as a spare man in midfield and 2 strikers upfront. The 3-5-2 for example gives a spare man at the back and a spare man in central midfield which is a great way of playing against a normal 4-4-2. However, playing with 3 centre backs is not useful against teams playing with 1 striker. A 3-5-2 up against a 4-3-3 for example doesn't give a spare man in midfield, leaves 2 centre backs not marking anyone, it can cause havoc against teams who play with flexibility and leaves the 2 wing-backs 1v1 against the opposition wingers.  

2) In modern day football, most teams now play variants of 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3. The days of most teams playing a basic 4-4-2 like you described are gone. There are still teams who can play 4-4-2 successfully (Albion showed it under Pulis) but generally 4-4-2 is slightly outdated in it's set-up. 4-4-2 has been such a popular formation for the past few decades that every type of 4-4-2 with individual tactics has been worked out by coaches both present and past.

3) Coaches in modern day football have had to learn to be adaptable. Using just 1 formation all the time is never always a good idea because different matches need different formations and tactics. For example, you wouldn't play a 4-4-2 away at Barcelona just like you wouldn't play with 3 centre backs either. For a team like Barcelona, a 4-1-4-1 or 4-3-1-2 formation is usually a good bet to match them up in midfield. On the flip side, if you were playing against the bottom of the league team who are a playing with 3 centre backs and 2 wing-backs (Hull and Wigan in recent years) then playing a 4-4-2 could work because you have 2 strikers against their 3 centre backs. A lone striker can easily be outnumbered, outmuscled and outthought by 3 centre backs.

Sorry about the above answers being a little long but I hope they answer your questions Wille.

Thank heavens I never realised footy was so complicated when I played, at a reasonable amateur level, if I say so myself, in schools, works and Sunday league football for twenty five years.  The mental stress would have been too much.  Even thirty five years ago, though, we still had eleven v. eleven on the pitch!

[silverbaggie]

Josh really needs to research his footie subjects more thoroughly before spouting forth!

Being of the 'old school', I prefer the W formation upfront myself, with defenders not allowed to cross the half way line under any circumstances.

I don't know about all this proposed technology enhancing the game. It was much more fun when we used our coats for goal posts. You could spend hours arguing about whether a goal had been scored.

[Baggievicar]

Does anyone, anywhere, still play with a sweeper?
If not, how long till it comes back into fashion?

[silverbaggie]

Does anyone, anywhere, still play with a sweeper?
If not, how long till it comes back into fashion?

Do you mean one of those little boys they used to shove up chimneys?

Can't see us using one myself as TP seems to prefer height in his team.

[talkSAFT]

Does anyone, anywhere, still play with a sweeper?
If not, how long till it comes back into fashion?

Do you mean one of those little boys they used to shove up chimneys?

Can't see us using one myself as TP seems to prefer height in his team.

Haha
Fellaini looks as if he could do the business.

[drewks]

Love some of these posts from my fellow Old Farts!!

Seriously though, I think everyone in the game spouts on too much, and talks too much, about formations.
IMO, the basics are still true - when in possession, find space; when defending, deny space. Good players will have that drilled into them and be able to apply it WHATEVER the tactical lineup; again, IMO Arsenal do this better than any other team.
The ability to adapt to what the other team is doing is more important than the way you line up on the team sheet, and obviously the better the players the harder they are to play against, whatever the formation you choose!

[WillieJohnstonsGreenhouse]

1) Playing with 3 centre backs is a good way of giving your team possibly a spare man at the back as well as a spare man in midfield and 2 strikers upfront. The 3-5-2 for example gives a spare man at the back and a spare man in central midfield which is a great way of playing against a normal 4-4-2. However, playing with 3 centre backs is not useful against teams playing with 1 striker. A 3-5-2 up against a 4-3-3 for example doesn't give a spare man in midfield, leaves 2 centre backs not marking anyone, it can cause havoc against teams who play with flexibility and leaves the 2 wing-backs 1v1 against the opposition wingers.  

2) In modern day football, most teams now play variants of 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3. The days of most teams playing a basic 4-4-2 like you described are gone. There are still teams who can play 4-4-2 successfully (Albion showed it under Pulis) but generally 4-4-2 is slightly outdated in it's set-up. 4-4-2 has been such a popular formation for the past few decades that every type of 4-4-2 with individual tactics has been worked out by coaches both present and past.

3) Coaches in modern day football have had to learn to be adaptable. Using just 1 formation all the time is never always a good idea because different matches need different formations and tactics. For example, you wouldn't play a 4-4-2 away at Barcelona just like you wouldn't play with 3 centre backs either. For a team like Barcelona, a 4-1-4-1 or 4-3-1-2 formation is usually a good bet to match them up in midfield. On the flip side, if you were playing against the bottom of the league team who are a playing with 3 centre backs and 2 wing-backs (Hull and Wigan in recent years) then playing a 4-4-2 could work because you have 2 strikers against their 3 centre backs. A lone striker can easily be outnumbered, outmuscled and outthought by 3 centre backs.

Sorry about the above answers being a little long but I hope they answer your questions Wille.

Cheers Josh, top answer, knew I could count on you -   now where's the paracetamol
(and less of the old fart drewks  )

[BaggyBomber]

Love some of these posts from my fellow Old Farts!!    

Seriously though, I think everyone in the game spouts on too much, and talks too much, about formations.
IMO, the basics are still true - when in possession, find space; when defending, deny space. Good players will have that drilled into them and be able to apply it WHATEVER the tactical lineup; again, IMO Arsenal do this better than any other team.
The ability to adapt to what the other team is doing is more important than the way you line up on the team sheet, and obviously the better the players the harder they are to play against, whatever the formation you choose!  

This Old Fart is in total agreement, drewks.  The simple basics and.........when in doubt, kick it out!