Here's a question...
Let's assume we signed Mata or Silva 1-2yrs back.
Does anyone think SAF would have changed our style of play to get the best out of these type of players.
Or they would be asked to play wide, and cover the fullback because we only play with 2 midfielders.
I just don't get it.
Football has moved forward, none of the top teams play 4-4-2, atleast not against a good opposition.
However, playing 4-4-2 we can still win the PL but we will be found out in most of the cup competitions against decent opposition.
I actually feel sorry for Carrick as he has to carry the likes of Clevz/Ando/Giggs(although he has been rather good in some games) and play against a 3 man midfield almost entirely by himself.
I guess SAF needs to understand that 4-4-2 is not the future, he bought a player like Kagawa but has no idea how to play him.
The sad part is, we actually have some very good players who can play in a better system like 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1.
I have no doubt in my mind that we can win a lot of league titles playing the system we play, but we will sadly be found out more often than not in big games against good opposition.
Players like Mata, Silva
posted on 9/4/13
Let's assume we signed Mata or Silva 1-2yrs back.
Does anyone think SAF would have changed our style of play to get the best out of these type of players.
--
If we had Mata or Silva, we would actually be fine and Sir Alex wouldn't need to change anything. By shifting Kagawa to the left, we're trying to recreate their performances through Kagawa. However, the problem is Kagawa doesn't play there and is number 10.
posted on 9/4/13
442 is fine as long as the right players are used, particularly in the CM positions.
For us, Silva actually played wide in a 442 quite a lot last year with Dzeko and Aguero up top. It turned into a 4231 when we had the ball, but it was absolutely a 442. The problem we had though was with Silva and Nasri on the wings, they both cut in so the width came from the fullbacks which can leave you vulnerable.
It has still been the same this year, Silva only plays higher up when we play with one striker. I keep seeing these comments about 442 and it is simply not true, I think people need to realise how many teams actually still play it when they don't have the ball, and that even in the old days when they did have the ball, it turned into a 4231 anyway.
posted on 9/4/13
Good post, Melton.
I do think we should adapt our team so it's not a traditional 442 but people talking about players with skill being destroyed by it aren't correct.
For me 442 is highly dependant on who plays in the central 2. For me, Carrick and Cleverly are not good enough to dominate top opponents - especially ones that play with 3 cm's.
Stick Vidal and Marchisio - two world class box to box players - or Toure and Wilshere and United would be improved vastly and compete better in the middle - as they suit that formation.
posted on 9/4/13
You hear of many players who started as strikers etc. and are moved back as they get older.
I think the same can be applied in these cases also. Park and Anderson for example perhaps were not gifted enough attackers to be successful in the premier league, just because that was more their game before it doesn't mean that they were better players
posted on 9/4/13
However, playing 4-4-2 we can still win the PL
---------------------------------------------------
Yea, i can't think why SAF keeps persisting with it
I'm quite proud that we have generally kept to our own style of play, while most other clubs try to fill the midfield
posted on 9/4/13
Scholes, I'd say it was more to do with the fact they were attacking midfielders that were rarely played as attacking midfielders.
Their ability to run with the ball, pick out passes and link up with the attackers were their best attributes.
These were reigned in somewhat and more of an emphasis was put on their physical attributes, of that I have no doubt.
Doesn't mean the same would have happened with Silva and Mata though, as 1) Both players were and are far superior attacking players to the aforementioned, and; 2) Neither of those possess the same physical attributes that Park and Anderson did.
posted on 9/4/13
Forget Mata/Silva, I can see Kagawa being the next Veron.
posted on 9/4/13
"For me 442 is highly dependant on who plays in the central 2. For me, Carrick and Cleverly are not good enough to dominate top opponents - especially ones that play with 3 cm's. "
Spot on. It relies on mobility, otherwise the midfield can go deep, forcing the defence deep. That is what happened to you guys a few times last night. Carrick and Cleverley were deep, but because you play Wellbeck on the wing, he tends to stay higher up. It meant there was a big gap at times between your back six and your front four and there were a few times when a long ball was pumped up to RVP, which Kompany could deal with all day. When you guys started to play well and get into the game, it was by keeping the ball on the deck and the midfield two being slightly higher up the pitch.
Have to say though, Mancini was spot on in playing three in midfield and just Tevez up front, I wasn't sure when I saw the line up but it really worked.
posted on 9/4/13
Giggs, not Cleverley
posted on 9/4/13
Agreed, Melton.
This is the problem. Carrick and Cleverly are not fast or mobile enough to compete with the best.
They're players that suit playing in the middle 3.
We play a striker that does the running for them and tracks back, however, this really limits the attacking prowess of whoever that might be.
And as you say, we end up either being pushed back or we sit back.
I thought Tevez was brilliant last night.