As Manchester United’s season came down the stretch last year it seemed like every game was up for debate as whether to employ the 4-5-1 or the 4-4-2. Both formations had their advantages and downfalls. In the end United opted for 4-5-1 in European matches, and big Premier League matches home or away, while they played the 4-4-2 in Premier League matches against weaker opposition, normally at home. So far on both of United’s North American Tour matches they’ve played a pretty basic 4-4-2. Which once again raises the question for the coming season, 4-5-1 or 4-4-2?
The Gaffer of the Man Utd 24 blog recently tackled the issue and pointed out some of the benefits of each, citing that although the 4-5-1 was the favoured formation of Sir Alex last season with a fully fit Macheda and Chicharito coming into the fold playing a 4-5-1 may not offer enough opportunities to the United’s full array of strikers. This isn’t yet a Manchester City sized problem with nineteen potential starting forwards, but with Wayne Rooney, Dimitar Berbatov, Michael Owen as well as the previously mentioned Kiko Macheda and Chicharito plus possible addition of Danny Welbeck if he is not sent out on loan thats a pretty serious load of forwards. If United were to opt for a 4-5-1 for the majority of the season that takes a potential year of first team development away from Macheda and Chicharito.
On the other side the 4-5-1 brought Manchester United some huge results that the 4-4-2 might not have. The key to United’s 4-5-1 was a high-octane, high pressure midfielder, playing high up the pitch. Both Darren Fletcher and Ji-Sung Park filled this role very well last season. This gave more room to the wingers while helping Rooney and co. capitalize quickly on mistakes through counter attacks. The 4-4-2 often slows down these attacks, and instead of having a quick ball winner high up the pitch like a Fletcher or a Park there is another forward who in the case of Berbatov or Michael Owen is not great defensively and doesn’t provide that same pressure. This slows down the United attack into a pin point passing mode.
While in the 4-4-2 this pin point passing is key. Because the pressure high up the pitch isn’t there, and the attack in general is slower United will have to break down eight, nine and ten men defenses all playing in one third of the pitch. The 4-4-2 changes the focus of the game from the centre third to United’s attacking third. This takes away any opportunity for a counter, but allows United to get the ball into the opponents final third more easily/often which may lead to more chances depending on how well the opposition defends.
The beauty of the 4-5-1 is it leaves United much more defensively sound, while taking away the problem of breaking down teams that play ten men behind the ball since most of the game is played in the midfield. What the 4-4-2 does allow for though is more dangerous, attacking players in the opposition third. From there it is all about moving the ball quickly, taking players on 1v1 and finding openings. United has often been successful breaking down stern defenses, but they’ve also been left frustrated on many an occasion. The 4-4-2 is where a player with a bit of trickery like Nani or a player who can move the ball across the pitch in an instant like Scholes, become very important. Another key element to breaking down teams who “park the bus” is with a bit of pace, and based on what was on display at the World Cup, Manchester United have a player with that and more in Chicharito.
If United do opt for a 4-4-2 Chicharito may see a lot of playing time. One partnership which could be very effective would be a Berbatov-Chicharito duo. With Berbatov’s ability to hold up the ball and lay it off, the speedy Mexican may be able to run on to Berbatov’s deft flicks and create openings in the opponents back line. Of course this partnership leaves Wayne Rooney out of the equation, something that Sir Alex surely would never do by choice, but as United learned the hard way last season a plan B is key.
Even a Rooney-Chicharito partnership could flourish into something with Rooney providing the creativity and drive forward, while Chicharito could exploit these pockets of space. Then of course we come to the ever complicated Rooney-Berbatov partnership. As I said earlier, I do believe it can work, just maybe not in an orthodox 4-4-2.
Fergie will most likely employ both the 4-5-1 and 4-4-2 in the season to come. The 4-5-1 has produced the results over the past year, but with Nani hitting top form, Macheda returning from injury, Chicharito joining the club and Berbatov looking solid in pre-season, there is a lot of potential with the 4-4-2. Whatever Sir Alex choses this season one certainty is that the 4-4-2 vs. 4-5-1 debate will rage on.
I think that 4-4-2 really is (outside of the EPL) becoming a dinosaur – and I haven’t seen United line up with a Strict 4-4-2 for a little while now. They really weren’t 4-4-2 with Cantona, nor was Arsenal a 4-4-2 with Merson – both players played in that withdrawn role and created havoc as a result. EPL teams don’t deal effectively with that ‘hole’ player as they’re rooted in the 3 ‘lines’ of 4-4-2. Even at an international level, England has so much trouble dealing conceptually with a ‘hole’ attacker (Hullo Frau Ozil! – What was Capello playing? Yep – 4-4-2 and as a result pushed up the backline in the 2nd, like Ancellotti did at Milan… and we know the rest!)
The ol’4-4-2 is a relic, as is the strong, physical Centre Forward. They’re relics of the English game going back decades, and really show the mentality that has made it so hard for many English teams to progress.
The English game is rooted in 4-4-2 while other countries develop around more fluid systems, where players learn versatile positions.
As Fulham showed the 4-4-2 does have a future but its as a purely defensive situation – with some counter-attack ability. You sit 8 deep behind the ball, and leave acres of space for your 2 strikers up front. Liverpool did this with Owen & Fowler. OR you can do the Ancelotti thing at AC Milan and try and compress the field by having a high backline, but you’re risking a looser offsides rule, and better have central defenders with pace!
There IS a place for 4-4-2 at a high level but it isn’t as the fluid barging attacking version. Its as a defensive bar the gates model – one England might consider taking. (I may post something on this on my blog soon!)
The variants of 4-5-1 can easily be versions of 4-3-3′s or the now ‘sexy’ 4-2-3-1 offer more flexibility and the new brand of attacker is a more versitile player. What is the true position of Rooney, Ronaldo or even Lionel Messi? -Striker, Winger, ‘In the hole or trequarista’?
True answer is ‘anywhere’. This is what makes them dangerous, when they can be found anywhere at any point in a match – how then do you mark them?
Todays top class attackers rotate and move around the pitch in a forward diamond with two attacking midlfielders WIDE (think Holland with Kuyt, Robben, Van Persie & Snejder) – United did this with Giggs, Rooney Tevez & Ronaldo – and I THINK that’s what we may see again. Its hampered by some things:
1) Antonio Valenica is really only a right-sided player at present – but Giggs was once only a left sided player too! Now you find Giggsy all over the place. Owen is a poacher but has lost his biggest weapon – world-class pace, and he can’t play anywhere else but up front.
2) Berbatov really doesn’t fit the role of the wide players – however he does possess the skills to exchange nicely with Rooney as the lone CF – a withdrawn #9 (Totti-like) or the hole player. He finds space SO well, and creates space for others. Obertan’s goal vs Philly was just as much from Evans’ run as Berba’s drift that created a seam for Obertan to literally walk through!
3) System is highly dependant on Rooney. He can play ANYWHERE effectively in that front 4 diamond. I’m unsure if anyone else on the squad can do that right now.
Sorry that was the AC Milan side managed by Sacchi – with Ancelotti in the centre of midfield. Capello also used a 4-4-2 at Milan, but without a winger on the left as Boban operated more as a withdrawn playmaker.