First of all let me say to the mods if this isn't relevant enough for '100% Forest Talk' then please move it to the relevant forum, thanks! (I will say I think it is though!) and also this isn't meant as a dig at anyone, more something that has interested me for a while and something I've intended to write about for a while...
4-4-2!?
I've noticed on various platforms, not just 'COYR' that the cries of "Karanka needs to go 4-4-2!", "He never plays 2 up top!" etc. have begun to rear their head again. It's nothing new, it seems to happen two or three times a season and it's something that often makes me wonder, do the people asking for that really believe 2 up front = more goals = winning more games? If it were that simple more teams would do it, wouldn't they?
Well first of all we know modern football, for the most part, is won on possession of the ball and possession is usually held (for the most part) by the midfield, they're the ones who can pass it, they're the ones who are usually the most comfortable on it. It's no big surprise that for the last 10-15 years players like Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets, Pirlo, Xabi Alonso, Fabregas, David Silva, Modric, Kroos etc. have been lauded as geniuses even Paul Scholes, who was never as appreciated at the time and often stuck on the left wing for England, gained the recognition he deserved as a midfield maestro, albeit a bit late. If not for the 'out of this world' talents of Messi and Ronaldo those I listed previously would've shared the Balon D'Or between them for the last 15 years, no doubt. 15 years... Significant that those players have been gushed over for the last 15 years. Now I'm not saying there weren't midfielders hailed as brilliant before then but not to the level and frequency these players are/were and definitely not in this country, where if you were a centre midfielder who was under 6ft by the age of 17/18 you would've had to be a prodigious talent to make it in a Premier League team, else you'd have been dubbed "too small", "not strong enough" it's part of the reason we still lacked a top play-maker at the World Cup this summer gone. Thankfully those in charge of our academies have now woken up and see technicians for what they are, brilliant footballers.
15 years ago is also around the same time that 4-4-2 died as a mainstream formation in top level football. In the Premier League the United team of 98/99, the Arsenal Invincibles of 03/04 and Liverpool, who enjoyed success under Rafa Benitez in the mid 00s all used 4-4-2 and then gradually it faded away. Those top teams simply couldn't compete using that formation anymore, why? As the above paragraph alluded to, the game is won in midfield and that was still true when 4-4-2 was king, but the game kept getting quicker and quicker and suddenly those teams with 3 in midfield simply over-ran those who had 2, they took all of the ball and because they had geniuses like the ones listed earlier they controlled games, you don't need me to tell you that Barcelona just didn't give the ball away when Xavi and Iniesta were in their prime, it's no surprise to see City doing the same now with David Silva and KDB.
It's not just centre midfielders who have adapted, fullbacks, wide-men and strikers are different now too. In teams like Barcelona, Bayern Munich, City, Liverpool etc. over the last 10 years or so the wide-men aren't placed on their natural side and told to get to the byline, cross the ball and track back to cover the fullback anymore; they're skilful strikers, placed on the opposite wing to their dominant foot, told to play narrow, cut inside and cause havoc... The width comes from the fullback and I know the likes of Roberto Carlos, Ashley Cole, Cafu etc. have been bombing on for years but they did so in support of the wide midfielder, now in a lot of cases the fullbacks are the primary source of width, they're the ones told to get to the byline and cross the ball. Strikers are also a different beast, tenacious and relentless like Suarez, Firmino and Aguero or powerhouses like Drogba, Lukaku and Lewandowski it's growing more and more difficult for a simple poacher to play for a top team, they just don't do enough work for modern football.
Before concluding I just wanted to highlight a couple of examples of 4-4-2 working in the modern Premier League but explain why I think those examples are different to what 4-4-2 used to be. The obvious case is Leicester City winning the league playing 4-4-2 under Ranieri in 2015/16. Leicester's direct style was aided by 3 key figures in my opinion, they are: N'Golo Kante, Jamie Vardy and Shinji Okazaki. Starting with Kante, nobody needs me to say how good he is but I will anyway... He's God-like, sometimes there appears to be 2 or 3 of him on the pitch, he's everywhere and that was so crucial for Leicester who conceded a lot of possession due to their formation and style. Without Kante they don't win the ball back and they don't get on the counter... Which brings us to Jamie Vardy, a paragraph back I spoke about tenacious and relentless strikers and listed 3 South Americans, they tend to have that quality, well Jamie Vardy has it too plus he can finish and he's rapid. Leicester lulled teams into a sense of security by allowing them so much possession, that meant the opponents tended to hold a high line, unfortunately for them Kante would win it back like a flash and straight away Vardy would be on his bike: ball over the top, touch, bang, goal. It really was that simple and teams couldn't handle it, they kept underestimating Leicester all the way to them winning the league. Finally Okazaki, work, work, work, work, work and more work, he didn't get the plaudits Vardy did but he should've done. When they lost the ball they shifted to 4-5-1 and Okazaki dropped back and became a midfielder, he didn't stop running, became the extra man and cut out space (Vardy did this too by pressing the back line), in turn that caused errors and Kante was able to pounce. So that's Leicester's perfect storm 4-4-2.
Burnley under Sean Dyche use a 4-4-2 and you'll often hear statisticians say how baffled they are that Burnley finished so high last season. In my opinion Burnley play the game of chance and do it very well. They have competent players, strong defence, top class goalkeepers but their forwards are intriguing and clever. When Burnley are up against tougher opposition they play this game of chance and rely on winning free-kicks in and around the area, taking advantage of their height at set pieces to nick goals and then shut up shop, that is how they win games. When they don't have possession they're incredibly well drilled and one of the strikers (Usually Barnes) will drop into midfield much like Okazaki and squeeze the space, once they win it back it goes out to the wide-men who then attempt to find one of Barnes, Voakes or Wood to hold it up and draw fouls, they play a simple style, they're well drilled in it but they don't dominate games.
In conclusion 4-4-2 has a place in modern football but only when you have a specialist set of players and a certain style, it's extremely rare that you'd ever see a team play 4-4-2 and dominate possession and lets face it with our Iberian manager possession is gonna be important.
So those are my thoughts apologies that it is so long, as I said it's something I've meant to write on for a while and where better to share than here. Thanks for reading if you did and I'm keen to know what people really think about 4-4-2 especially where Forest are concerned.
4-4-2!?
I've noticed on various platforms, not just 'COYR' that the cries of "Karanka needs to go 4-4-2!", "He never plays 2 up top!" etc. have begun to rear their head again. It's nothing new, it seems to happen two or three times a season and it's something that often makes me wonder, do the people asking for that really believe 2 up front = more goals = winning more games? If it were that simple more teams would do it, wouldn't they?
Well first of all we know modern football, for the most part, is won on possession of the ball and possession is usually held (for the most part) by the midfield, they're the ones who can pass it, they're the ones who are usually the most comfortable on it. It's no big surprise that for the last 10-15 years players like Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets, Pirlo, Xabi Alonso, Fabregas, David Silva, Modric, Kroos etc. have been lauded as geniuses even Paul Scholes, who was never as appreciated at the time and often stuck on the left wing for England, gained the recognition he deserved as a midfield maestro, albeit a bit late. If not for the 'out of this world' talents of Messi and Ronaldo those I listed previously would've shared the Balon D'Or between them for the last 15 years, no doubt. 15 years... Significant that those players have been gushed over for the last 15 years. Now I'm not saying there weren't midfielders hailed as brilliant before then but not to the level and frequency these players are/were and definitely not in this country, where if you were a centre midfielder who was under 6ft by the age of 17/18 you would've had to be a prodigious talent to make it in a Premier League team, else you'd have been dubbed "too small", "not strong enough" it's part of the reason we still lacked a top play-maker at the World Cup this summer gone. Thankfully those in charge of our academies have now woken up and see technicians for what they are, brilliant footballers.
15 years ago is also around the same time that 4-4-2 died as a mainstream formation in top level football. In the Premier League the United team of 98/99, the Arsenal Invincibles of 03/04 and Liverpool, who enjoyed success under Rafa Benitez in the mid 00s all used 4-4-2 and then gradually it faded away. Those top teams simply couldn't compete using that formation anymore, why? As the above paragraph alluded to, the game is won in midfield and that was still true when 4-4-2 was king, but the game kept getting quicker and quicker and suddenly those teams with 3 in midfield simply over-ran those who had 2, they took all of the ball and because they had geniuses like the ones listed earlier they controlled games, you don't need me to tell you that Barcelona just didn't give the ball away when Xavi and Iniesta were in their prime, it's no surprise to see City doing the same now with David Silva and KDB.
It's not just centre midfielders who have adapted, fullbacks, wide-men and strikers are different now too. In teams like Barcelona, Bayern Munich, City, Liverpool etc. over the last 10 years or so the wide-men aren't placed on their natural side and told to get to the byline, cross the ball and track back to cover the fullback anymore; they're skilful strikers, placed on the opposite wing to their dominant foot, told to play narrow, cut inside and cause havoc... The width comes from the fullback and I know the likes of Roberto Carlos, Ashley Cole, Cafu etc. have been bombing on for years but they did so in support of the wide midfielder, now in a lot of cases the fullbacks are the primary source of width, they're the ones told to get to the byline and cross the ball. Strikers are also a different beast, tenacious and relentless like Suarez, Firmino and Aguero or powerhouses like Drogba, Lukaku and Lewandowski it's growing more and more difficult for a simple poacher to play for a top team, they just don't do enough work for modern football.
Before concluding I just wanted to highlight a couple of examples of 4-4-2 working in the modern Premier League but explain why I think those examples are different to what 4-4-2 used to be. The obvious case is Leicester City winning the league playing 4-4-2 under Ranieri in 2015/16. Leicester's direct style was aided by 3 key figures in my opinion, they are: N'Golo Kante, Jamie Vardy and Shinji Okazaki. Starting with Kante, nobody needs me to say how good he is but I will anyway... He's God-like, sometimes there appears to be 2 or 3 of him on the pitch, he's everywhere and that was so crucial for Leicester who conceded a lot of possession due to their formation and style. Without Kante they don't win the ball back and they don't get on the counter... Which brings us to Jamie Vardy, a paragraph back I spoke about tenacious and relentless strikers and listed 3 South Americans, they tend to have that quality, well Jamie Vardy has it too plus he can finish and he's rapid. Leicester lulled teams into a sense of security by allowing them so much possession, that meant the opponents tended to hold a high line, unfortunately for them Kante would win it back like a flash and straight away Vardy would be on his bike: ball over the top, touch, bang, goal. It really was that simple and teams couldn't handle it, they kept underestimating Leicester all the way to them winning the league. Finally Okazaki, work, work, work, work, work and more work, he didn't get the plaudits Vardy did but he should've done. When they lost the ball they shifted to 4-5-1 and Okazaki dropped back and became a midfielder, he didn't stop running, became the extra man and cut out space (Vardy did this too by pressing the back line), in turn that caused errors and Kante was able to pounce. So that's Leicester's perfect storm 4-4-2.
Burnley under Sean Dyche use a 4-4-2 and you'll often hear statisticians say how baffled they are that Burnley finished so high last season. In my opinion Burnley play the game of chance and do it very well. They have competent players, strong defence, top class goalkeepers but their forwards are intriguing and clever. When Burnley are up against tougher opposition they play this game of chance and rely on winning free-kicks in and around the area, taking advantage of their height at set pieces to nick goals and then shut up shop, that is how they win games. When they don't have possession they're incredibly well drilled and one of the strikers (Usually Barnes) will drop into midfield much like Okazaki and squeeze the space, once they win it back it goes out to the wide-men who then attempt to find one of Barnes, Voakes or Wood to hold it up and draw fouls, they play a simple style, they're well drilled in it but they don't dominate games.
In conclusion 4-4-2 has a place in modern football but only when you have a specialist set of players and a certain style, it's extremely rare that you'd ever see a team play 4-4-2 and dominate possession and lets face it with our Iberian manager possession is gonna be important.
So those are my thoughts apologies that it is so long, as I said it's something I've meant to write on for a while and where better to share than here. Thanks for reading if you did and I'm keen to know what people really think about 4-4-2 especially where Forest are concerned.
