4-4-2

[Hound]

4-4-2 is almost always 4-4-1-1 anyway.

4-2-3-1 is what we usually play, I think. It's a matter of interpretation anyway.

Because 4-3-3 easily morphs into 4-3-2-1 or 4-2-3-1.

No simple sequence of numbers can really sum up the tactical sophistication teams need to use today anyway. It changes in different phases of the game.

Longing for 4-4-2 and a nice long ball from the goalkeeper every time is pure nostalgia.

Ince didn't believe in tactics and coaching, preferring old style management. Look how that worked out.

Yeah. Though I guess we’re prob more 4-1-4-1. But we have some strange habit of O Mahony dropping deeper than the wide men which I don’t like at all

Tbf to Ince and know this isn’t a popular opinion but it almost did work. With a pretty absymal squad we were doing fairly well until the points deduction/ he got found out a bit

That was genuinely a bottom 3 squad and he may have kept us up without that 6 points.

[Forbury Lion]

If we had two quality strikers that worked well as a pairing and were scoring goals then we'd likely play 2 up front and then we could look at 4-4-2 but we'd have to have good wingers who can cross the ball in and a midfield who can cope in a 3 on 2 situation

So in summary, if we had a completely different squad and travelled back in time 20 years, we could play 4-4-2.

Quality as ever Forbs.

I'm just saying 4-4-2 isn't dead, it's just sleeping.
The manager understandably plays the best formation for the players we have and since we don't have the funds to do a massive rebuild it isn't an option to drastically change the way we play.

[stealthpapes]

4-4-2 is almost always 4-4-1-1 anyway.

4-2-3-1 is what we usually play, I think. It's a matter of interpretation anyway.

Because 4-3-3 easily morphs into 4-3-2-1 or 4-2-3-1.

No simple sequence of numbers can really sum up the tactical sophistication teams need to use today anyway. It changes in different phases of the game.

Longing for 4-4-2 and a nice long ball from the goalkeeper every time is pure nostalgia.

Ince didn't believe in tactics and coaching, preferring old style management. Look how that worked out.

Yeah. Though I guess we’re prob more 4-1-4-1. But we have some strange habit of O Mahony dropping deeper than the wide men which I don’t like at all

Tbf to Ince and know this isn’t a popular opinion but it almost did work. With a pretty absymal squad we were doing fairly well until the points deduction/ he got found out a bit

That was genuinely a bottom 3 squad and he may have kept us up without that 6 points.

100% would have - what killed us was the deduction and the complete collapse in any form that accompanied it.

[Sebastian the Red]

If it’s all about having an extra man in the middle and overloading opposition centre-backs, we should revert to the old 2-3-5 formation.

I know you know and you know I know you know, but the move from 2-3-5 to 'W-M' was all about having extra men where it was perceived they were needed most.

Oh look at Papes, he's read Inverting the Pyramid like every other middle aged football bore.

EDIT: (he's right though, of course)

[stealthpapes]

He's got a point, you know.