blonde poker forum

Watching Gillette soccer Sat and they mentioned that Stoke were playing 352.

This is basically a dead formation??? I'd almost forgotten that teams played this. Are their any successful teams who still play this way???

Any views on why it doesn't work? Is it simply because the wing backs get overloaded???

I always used to do quite well with it on champ manager.

Then I got a girlfriend

Sick I used to do well on champ manager brag

I used to use 4-1-2-2-1 formation with wide men

Then I had 4 kids.

Brazil?

There is no reason why 3-5-2 won't work against some teams. ..but you need wingers that can track back occasionally as well.

Why does no one play it then?

Best teams in the world use 4 at the back don't they?

I really like the system but it's VERY specific to your personnel.

If Chelsea didn't have Ancelotti (who had and will always play the diamond) I think they could be very suited to it with the full backs they have. It would allow Drogba and Anelka on the pitch more often and you get to play your three CMs.

No other EPL side has the personnel to handle it. Most of the rest of the big 4 have one good attacking fullback/winger not two and only Liverpool (arguably) have three excellent centre halves but even then their midfield cant handle 3 CMs for the course of a season.

If they had another good centre half I think Barcelona would suit this system as well.

(Although if you were Barca why would you break up a brilliant front 3?)

3-4-1-2 imo

433 ftw

Leeds tried it vs leicester when we signed rio from west ham - got smashed as I recall.

Obv was the nuts on champ man around 98 though!

3 centre backs just get ripped apart with wingers pulling them out wide and if they leave the wingers to the wing backs it leaves 3 centre backs in the middle covering 1 or 2 strikers which is a waste of a player.

It gets more complicated when delivering the ball from the keeper as well.

You now dont have two full backs with chalk on their boots to pick up the ball meaning you have to deliver to a centre half instead (delivering to a full back is the better play as the team without the ball wont push wingers up so high whilst not in possession - most top sides full backs will move straight to the touchline when their keeper has the ball).

Now if an attacking midfielder pushes up covering the third man you have to kick every time, effectively here you are giving up a decent proportion of moves you can start on the ground from the back.

(Note Hiddink's excellent tactics in the CL quarter at Anfield last season where he had Malouda pick up Arbeloa as the third man and Liverpool had awful possession all night)

This is the one reaon I believe a 3-5-2 works better with world class wing backs such as Cafu and Roberto Carlos rather than out and out wingers.

But just because it presents new tactical challenges it doesn't mean with the right personnel it wont work.

Systems come and systems go.  When 3-5-2 was first introduced it worked very well, but decent managers worked out how to play against it.
Then a few years ago 4-5-1 was introduced (Mourinho was one of the first) and again it was very succesful to begin with and many teams still play that now.
Over the next 2 or 3 seasons though i think it will become less effective as teams work out the best way to stop it.
4-4-2 has and always will be the best long term system, and almost all teams that have won major competitions have played this system.

However, if you are good enough to introduce a system that works immediately, your team will be succesful until other teams work out how to stop it.

The 4-5-1 is only without the ball though. With the ball and Robben and Duff/Cole killing teams down the wings it was a blatant 4-3-3 (or 4-2-3-1).

I'm not sure this one will be a fad it has been around in Spain for nearly 20 years we've only seen it recently thanks to Benitez and Mourinho coming here. The last few winners of the champions league; Barca, Utd, Milan, Barca, Liverpool, Porto have played this system. (Milan is debatable - the diamond was used but more with two sitting players, Pirlo and Gattuso, but it wasn't a 4-4-2!) It's very adaptable according to if you have the ball or not and what opposition you are against, and works so well against a 4-4-2 in terms of an increase in your possession % in the middle of the park.

In fact thinking about it the Greek side in 2004 is about the only recent major win I can think of that played a 4-4-2 and that was the most unnatural, defensive 4-4-2 I can remember. I cant think of one other unless you count Spain.

World Cup - Italy no, Brazil no, France no

Euro - Spain no (altho I guess they did prior to the final), Greece yes, France no

I remember Celtic under O'Neil used to play a back 3 with wing backs and changed to a back 4 for an old firm game because Lovenkrands and De Boer had been running amok.  Celtic then went on something like an 8 game old firm game winning run conceding only 2 or 3 goals.

Play 4-3-1-2 then change to 4-1-4-1 when winning 1-0 with 10mins to go and always hold on ftw,that's on football manager.As for real life 4-4-1-1 seems to be the future of the game

Noes, it was all about the 4-1-3-2