4-4-2ers: This is for you

[Machiavelli]

One of the most repeated and tedious claims made on NSC is that we should play 4-4-2, or two up front. This, quite patently, is not going to happen while Oscar is in charge, yet that doesn't seem to deter you. I'm of the view that all you 4-4-2ers are akin to flat-earthers, 'intelligent' (!) designers, climate change deniers, but here's an opportunity for you to amend this view, by answering the following questions. One of the claims made in defence of 4-4-2 (and there aren't that many to make for it) is that Man City play it, so it can't be that bad.

1. why did Pellegrini decide to abandon 4-4-2 as he did last night, and play a 4-5-1 (or, if you prefer, 4-2-3-1), as soon as he came up against top-class opposition? FYI, that opposition are the most ideologically committed to 4-3-3, which is the system Oscar operates, and he very much buys into that ideology.

2. was the reason why they lost last night because they abandoned 4-4-2 and, as a consequence, Pellegrini will somehow recognise that he made a terrible mistake, and will revert to it in the second leg, and City will overturn their current deficit, and storm to victory against Barcelona before defeating all the other teams in the last 16 that play one up-front, with Vincent Kompany holding that big trophy above his head in late May?

 

[pastafarian]

One of the most repeated and tedious claims made on NSC is that we should play 4-4-2, or two up front. This, quite patently, is not going to happen while Oscar is in charge, yet that doesn't seem to deter you. I'm of the view that all you 4-4-2ers are akin to flat-earthers, 'intelligent' (!) designers, climate change deniers, but here's an opportunity for you to amend this view, by answering the following questions. One of the claims made in defence of 4-4-2 (and there aren't that many to make for it) is that Man City play it, so it can't be that bad.

1. why did Pellegrini decide to abandon 4-4-2 as he did last night, and play a 4-5-1 (or, if you prefer, 4-2-3-1), as soon as he came up against top-class opposition? FYI, that opposition are the most ideologically committed to 4-3-3, which is the system Oscar operates, and he very much buys into that ideology.

2. was the reason why they lost last night because they abandoned 4-4-2 and, as a consequence, Pellegrini will somehow recognise that he made a terrible mistake, and will revert to it in the second leg, and City will overturn their current deficit, and storm to victory against Barcelona before defeating all the other teams in the last 16 that play one up-front, with Vincent Kompany holding that big trophy above his head in late May?

Question 1.........i have no idea
Question 2.........dint bother reading it but i would be clueless anyway

But 4-4-2 Absolutely ing Rocks.

 

[BadFish]

Question 1.........i have no idea
Question 2.........dint bother reading it but i would be clueless anyway

But 4-4-2 Absolutely ing Rocks.

Old skool

It is great if you want some retro chic, not so good if you want to win games of football.

 

[bobzam]

Still think Man City should have played their normal game and see how Barca coped with that. Just invited constant pressure echo surely is always gonna tell against good opponents. Thought we sat too deep against Hull in second half but they weren't that great so it made for a nervous ending but I thought we'd hang on.

Having somebody closer to Ulloa (regardless of the formation) would be a real benefit at times, especially when trying to relieve some pressure from our defenders. Ulloa does well to get in front of defenders and nick the ball but can't turn and sprint past some players. Obika tried that and kicked it out for a throw.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

People forget that we ditched 4-4-2 after conceding 3 goals a game for a while against modest opposition in our first Amex championship yr – We were being over run in midfield and Bridcutt was completely over worked. That said, one of those games was the 3-3 draw against Leeds which is one of my favourite games at the Amex so far – It tightens us up but those kind of see saw high scoring games have disappeared with it.

In answer to the specific question, I think Pellegrini will be found out tactically by all the top managers. Mourinho already did a number on him this year and I suspect others will follow. It also doesn’t matter if you play 4-4-2, the Christmas tree or 0-1-10 if you play a long haired donkey who can’t even time his fouls right. Also, no-one in Manchester complains when they smash mediocre prem sides using 4-4-2 at home. In terms of us, you could argue it’s over cautious playing 4-5-1 against, say, Yeovil who will only come for a point and look to shut up shop. Equally 4-5-1 away at Leicester is the obvious choice. We should have the ability to play systems. It amazes me when managers say that players ‘can’ t play that way’ – They are hardly being asked to split the atom.

 

[bobzam]

Our goal against Hull, a lightening quick attack was only possible because when Ulloa won the ball there was a team mate with him. If, as usual he had controlled the ball and knocked it back 10-20yards to nearest team mate we wouldn't have scored. 442 is not the answer, not in the old school england international rigid way but someone close to Ulloa to take advantage is key. Buckley, Orlandi, Spanish Rodney....

 

[shaolinpunk]

...so I'm just going to leave this here...

http://panopticview.wordpress.com/2014/02/11/brighton-power-of-three/

...and walk away...

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I was expecting a Youtube clip of Jarassic Park or some other dinosaur movie.

 

[pastafarian]

I was expecting a Youtube clip of Jarassic Park or some other dinosaur movie.

never mind eh, German humour will give you that fix.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Football has changed and continue to evolves.

We will never see 2-3-5 again, but that doesn't mean it is wrong or otherwise. I think 4-4-2 has a place, but you have to have the players to play to it.

There can be no doubt that currently Ulloa frequently finds himself on his own, with only limited options.

 

[Stat Brother]

you could argue it’s over cautious playing 4-5-1 against, say, Yeovil who will only come for a point and look to shut up shop. Equally 4-5-1 away at Leicester is the obvious choice. We should have the ability to play systems. It amazes me when managers say that players ‘can’ t play that way’ – They are hardly being asked to split the atom.

But WHEN WE HAVE THE PLAYERS FIT AND AVAILABLE, we don't play 4-5-1 against Yeovil, et al.
We play 4-3-3, which at times (more so Ward & Calde not so much Ward & Bruno) has looked like 2-3-5

Those that recently seem to enjoy directing the 4-4-2 mantra at Oscar, clearly have forgotten at stages this season we have had as many as 8 attacking options unavailable.

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

But what about Heskey and Owen?

 

[drop dead fred]

Had their best player been fit last night I think they would of played 4-4-2

 

[Iggle Piggle]

But WHEN WE HAVE THE PLAYERS FIT AND AVAILABLE, we don't play 4-5-1 against Yeovil, et al.
We play 4-3-3, which at times (more so Ward & Calde not so much Ward & Bruno) has looked like 2-3-5

Those that recently seem to enjoy directing the 4-4-2 mantra at Oscar, clearly have forgotten at stages this season we have had as many as 8 attacking options unavailable.

I take your point but there are lots of games in the past 2 years where we have scored 1 or none against teams that shipped goals like we did when did when the Hawk was playing centre half. All I think is the ability to play 4-4-2 as well as 4-5-1 (4-3-3, call it what you will), shouldn't be beyond the wit of man and there is a time and a place for it albeit as the exception rather than the norm. Teams and players should be able to adapt to the team of the day.

I think what we miss without 2 out and out strikers is the counter attack. How many times does Ulloa hold the ball up, play in a winger who then has no ball to play becuase no-one has filled in the striker gap where ulloa should be but can't be in 2 places at once? As stated before, The trouble with 4-4-2 is being over run in midfield and shipping goals. There isn't a perfect formation - If there was, everyone would play it (except England of course would play 4-4-2)

P.S I think we sort of played 4-2-3-1 on Monday which was new to me (missed a few recently though).

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

So bored of these people who think just because they've watched a Barcelona game and a few YouTube videos they are now tactical masterminds :snore:

 

[Brighton Breezy]

We certainly started 4231 last time. It meant Ulloa was far less isolated because he had Forster-Caskey not far behind him. Worked well in that sense. But lack of width limited Lua Lua's impact on the ball.

I would like to see us play the same 4231 formation but with Orlandi in the left hand role.

 

[WhingForPresident]

It's worth a smash in a home game against a lesser team. But if we're still winning, no need to change.

 

[MattBackHome]

But what about Heskey and Owen?

Or Crouch and Defoe

 

[Albumen]

Don't worry, the forfortwoers have gone away for a while cos we've won a few games. They'll be back when we drop a point.

 

[Stat Brother]

I take your point but there are lots of games in the past 2 years where we have scored 1 or none against teams that shipped goals like we did when did when the Hawk was playing centre half. All I think is the ability to play 4-4-2 as well as 4-5-1 (4-3-3, call it what you will), shouldn't be beyond the wit of man and there is a time and a place for it albeit as the exception rather than the norm. Teams and players should be able to adapt to the team of the day.

I think what we miss without 2 out and out strikers is the counter attack. How many times does Ulloa hold the ball up, play in a winger who then has no ball to play becuase no-one has filled in the striker gap where ulloa should be but can't be in 2 places at once? As stated before, The trouble with 4-4-2 is being over run in midfield and shipping goals. There isn't a perfect formation - If there was, everyone would play it (except England of course would play 4-4-2)

P.S I think we sort of played 4-2-3-1 on Monday which was new to me (missed a few recently though).

Gus out of choice played with CMS isolated.

Bridcutt, Hammond, and even Dicker together isn't going to attack anyone.
Crofts was restrained.
Barnes was a 'holding' left winger.

That got us to fourth in the league, and everybody was happy.
But our season changed from the moment Gus said 'we now have to risk losing to make sure we win'.
Bingo, up the table we shot.

That's clearly not Oscar's style, but it has been forced on him.
Nobody was happy v Derby.
But v Burnley we were a different team, so much sharper and quicker going forward.

Defensively resolute v Reading & QPR, then the wheels fell off.

The only judgement that can be made on Oscar from then to now is that he's fookin brilliant.
To get us to where we are with the players he's had available is nothing short of miraculous.

Bizarrely enough OG's season starts here, he has the players to play whatever formation he feels we need to win (or not lose).

We'll never see a 'rigid' 4-4-2, from OG, but when all the players are fit we may well see some great attacking formations.

Pick any 3 from Ulloa, CMS, March, Buckley, KLL, Orlandi, Spanish Rodney.

That's without mentioning Bruno, Calde, Ward, Spanish Dave.