Hughes and 4-4-2

[hal9thou]

So yet again in a major competition 4-4-2 is found wanting. It doesn't really encourage posession football for the simple reason that players always seem to end up further apart from each other when in posession. It's too predictable.

Whilst neither Spain nor Germany will be turning up down the bush next season, are we going down the old two up front road, which Sparky allegedly favours? If you play 4-5-1 it turns into 4-3-3 in attack, so the idea that one up is defensive just doesn't wash anymore. Spains 4-6-0 rapidly turns into 4-3-3 or even 4-2-4 when they're on song and going forward, and 4-6 is the closest we get these days to the old Dutch total football scenario. You can't man mark against it in open play. 4-2-3-1 is what England should have played throughout, kind of evolved 4-5-1, it works well if one of the three has some pace so you aren't depending on wing backs. I was really disappointed that Roy reverted to type, he's another 4-4-2 merchant at heart, you just don't get away with it against decent sides.

Obviously your personnel play a big part in deciding tactics, but assuming we only add a CB to the squad during the rest of the close season, what sort of side and formation would you put out as an alternative to 4-4-2? If we must play 4-4-2 I'd stick Mackie up top with Cisse because he's mobile. Remember Wigan escaped becaused Martinez had the wits to change the set up, I just hope Sparky is as flexible. I reckon we need a couple of alternatives to 4-4-2 to cater for the different set ups we'll encounter next season. This was an area where Colin struggled once we went up.

[gator]

Some good points mate! I think Sparky changed the formation enough during our stretch run for me to think he's not inflexible! The good thing is, as you pointed out with Mackie, we have players who can play hybrid or different positions! Traore is another guy who can play LB or LMid which can come in really handy! I don't think tactics are going to be a problem with Sparky, I'm more concerned with having enough quality and depth!

[Artful]

Don't remember many time that Hughes set up 4-4-2 last season. He seemed to favour 4-4-1-1 or 4-5-1. Im sure if you troll back through the posts of last season on here that there was a clamour for him to change to 4-4-2

[lymehoop]

You could play any formation and those shower would still come home with their tail between their legs, simply not good enough. Until we play the players with flair (if we got any) and not those whose attribute is basically an engine, then we will be talking about poor technique, inability to keep possession into the next century :rage:

[1cliveallen]

when cisse was out we played 4-5-1 and chelsea away we played 4-5-1 with cisse wide...mackie should really only play up front as as hard as he works out wide hes not really too clever as a wide man.

[QPR1234]

4-5-1 away from home, 4-4-2 at home...

that said if we have the right players available we can play 4-4-2 anytime.

the rigid 4-4-2 thing is only relevant to the players you have. daikite and faurlin dont lose the ball that often.. so both would offer themselves up as options whereever the game went.

if we play derry, barton or buz then yeah we're likely to go missing with that formation. our 4-4-2 is never predictable either.. adel always comes inside and traore would always overlap.

the 4-4-2 argument comes off englands failure but thats to be expected when you dont play a highline and/or your full backs dont overlap often enough to offer support.

[EYR]

I think 442 will suit us,i want Cisse up top with Zamora not out on the right.

[winalotto]

Its Hughes's preferred formation when we haven't got the ball, likes his two banks of four close together , remember formation's are really only for when you haven't got the ball to be back in your shape as quick as you can, he does like to play the Hodgson way.

[hal9thou]

remember formation's are really only for when you haven't got the ball to be back in your shape as quick as you can, he does like to play the Hodgson way.

agree with that but the problem with England was that they looked predictable in posession, in other words Hodgsons 4-4-2 did compromise us going forward. Strange thing was against France we had a decent shape which wasn't 4-4-2 and looked OK when we did go forward, it was easily our best performance in my book. Unfotunately it was abandoned when Rooney came back.