What formation and why

Recent trawled through several blogs and unsurprisingly noticed that many Arsenal fans are unhappy and frustrated at our lack of 'penetration' using 4-2-3-1. I strongly feel that we need to utilise a 4-4-2 or maybe a 4-3-1-2.

I don't want to hear people say that we can't. If Utd can mix it up, then why can't we?! I'll again reiterate the fact that Hleb-Flamini-Cesc-Rosicky managed just fine...

Whatever brings the best out of Poldi. I'm very frustrated that such a deadly finisher and such a powerful left foot is being stranded on the left.

I think many fans feel that way.

I'm not holding my breath concerning a change in system.

Fact is, when we did use two up front for an hour or so at Reading we created so many chances it was ridiculous.

Sometimes the simple solution to a problem is in front of your nose.

Problems: Not creating enough chances(striker isolated). No width. Zonal marking.

Solutions: Play 4-4-2. Play one right footed small-ish forward with pace (Walcott) and one left footed one over 6ft tall with a good all round game, with reasonable pace who can also finish(Podolski). Go back to man to man marking at set peices, or a mixture of zonal/man marking.

60 minutes against Reading when we were desperate to score goals and turn around an embarrassing scoreline really isn't a good indicator of 4-4-2's success, especially if you consider that we went 4-4-2 for a time against United and it did sod all for us.

The difference in those two games being, of course, the levels of motivation and urgency from the team.

Man marking also isn't a good system to play when your team lacks physical strength and aerial ability.

60 minutes against Reading when we were desperate to score goals and turn around an embarrassing scoreline really isn't a good indicator of 4-4-2's success, especially if you consider that we went 4-4-2 for a time against United and it did sod all for us.

The difference in those two games being, of course, the levels of motivation and urgency from the team.

Man marking also isn't a good system to play when your team lacks physical strength and aerial ability.

So, would you like to see a change and if so what?

This is not a knee-jerk reaction, it's based on seeing us looking unlikely to create chances for quite a few games in the PL and the last CL game.

Don't agree with your comment that we only created chances against Reading as we were embarrassed . Against Utd it didn't work as Wilshere was sent off 15 or so minutes after Walcott came on. With the entire team worrying about Santos leaving his station they were more worried about conceding more.

I do get your point on zonal marking, but I have seen teams use a mixture of zonal and man-marking. When a team sends two or three known dangermen in the air up front for a free kick, you can't give them five yards to run into. The likes of Mertersacker/Vermaelen/Sagna/Kos/Giroud could pick up the two or three players known to be good in the air and the others can mark zonally. It is a tough one, I'll give you that.

We need some proper widemen on the pitch, having Ramsey and Poldi there is useless in a 4-3-3

I'm of the opinion that our difficulties creating chances is not down to the formation, but down to the players within the formation not playing with any confidence and as a result not utilising their talents or moving off the ball as well as they could do. I maintain that at this moment in time, playing a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-1-2 isn't going to change our fortunes if the players still aren't playing well.

Tactically, I feel that a bigger problem is our approach play. We're trying to play possession football like we usually do but our front players aren't capable of doing so. Podolski, Gervinho, Walcott, Chamberlain and Giroud aren't the sort of players who will float about in that final third and then play neat one-two football with the midfielders and incisive passes into strikers. They aren't Nasri, Rosicky, Hleb or Arshavin.

I think we'd be better off playing a more direct or a more counter-attack oriented style; soaking up pressure by keeping a solid shape and then springing out quickly. Remember our opening goal against Liverpool? Perfect example of the sort of style I think suits our players.

We scored seven goals against Reading playing a direct style. None of those goals were a result of silky passing moves. Instead, they came from forcing the issue and being capitalising on mistakes - two goals from corners, one from a cross in the box nodded down to someone else, one a tap in after a player ran the length of the pitch with the ball...

Right now, with how we're playing, it's too easy to counter. We're playing Cazorla, Ramsey and Podolski current in the "3" but they're all looking to come inside and get on the ball, and Ramsey and Podolski on the flanks don't or can't beat their man with the ball and don't make direct runs behind defences.

Replace Podolski and Ramsey with two players who can beat their man and make positive runs, though, and it might lead to more chances. Chamberlain and Walcott, for example.

^
Some good points there GoonerJ to be fair.

Only problem is only the 'big' teams come at us when we play away. Liverpool case in point. We didn't get the chance against Utd as we conceded after 3 minutes. They were cautious until they realised they could get at us down our left.

Playing the likes of Sunderland, QPR or Norwich if we sat back and waited to counter they would love it. They just wouldn't come at us. Only Southampton (of the so called smaller teams) came at us. They got murdered.

The current system, to me anyway, is too reliant on us scoring first.

Ramsey does need replacing though. He can come back I'm sure, but more centrally and once he's got his confidence back.

If Wenger is going to continue with the current system, I do agree with you that he should play players out wide who can actually beat a player.

And I'm firmly in the 'Poldi is a striker' camp if you hadn't noticed

Of course, I wouldn't want us to sit back against lesser sides. Against those types of sides, I'd want us to play with more intensity with pressure high up the pitch and quick build-up play. Our issues against these sides has always been our slow build-up play and lack of pressure, which allows them to settle into a defensive shape that we then have to get through somehow.

I am up for playing Podolski centrally, although I do think if he comes off the left flank and plays closer to Giroud instead of being closer to Cazorla we'd see play better.

Despite what we say...you just know he's gonna play Santos and Ramsey again

Was talking 4-3-1-2 long before the season began....and now that Wilshere is back it seems much more feasible. Song was a big part of every team I proposed, I felt he'd be better utilized as someone playing in forward areas and pressing high instead of being expected to actually defend.

Replacing him is somewhat difficult so I'm just going to put Ramsey in for him, but if you feel Coquelin has the talent to play in forward areas without being a nuisance,it might as well be him.

Arteta needs protection , whether it be in the form of a healthy array of short passing options or a physical presence to cover the ground in front of him and give him some flexibility to get where he needs to be.

Sagna-Kos-Mertesacker-Vermalelen
=----------Arteta-------------------
-Ramsey----------Wilshere----------
-----------Cazorla----------------
---Walcott---------Podolsji----------

Great points jay about overall style and not tinkering with formations
some stats about counter attacking and importance of scoring first goal

last season top 2 city and united took the lead in 29 and 31 times respectively
we did on 20 occasions
so had to recoup 24 points from losing positions
which is impressive

but chasing the game for long periods is physically demanding
considering our European Commitment and more internationals compared to lesser teams
ideal example for me would be Everton away last season
we started greatly at high intensity and should have killed the game scoring 3-4 goals in first 20-25 mins
then soaking up pressure and going for counters

maybe its mental problem that players are yet to switch on early in games


i think at the moment with players we have we can still become solid team but main problem is stability when the core of the team changes every year........

Kay, you said

"I'm of the opinion that our difficulties creating chances is not down to the formation, but down to the players within the formation not playing with any confidence and as a result not utilising their talents or moving off the ball as well as they could do. I maintain that at this moment in time, playing a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-1-2 isn't going to change our fortunes if the players still aren't playing well. "

I'm going to take this section of what you wrote as I feel this is your answer, although you did bring up some other good points.

I genuinely believe that it is precisely because of the 4-3-3 against certain teams why we lack the confident play and lack of chances. Dont get me wrong, at home against the bottom 3rd of the table,4-3-3- will work. But essentially, against other team a la Chelsea and Utd, it has prove futile imo.

I think we worry to much what the other team are doing as opposed to what we could accomplish using a different system. I feel we lack balance and penetration albeit what the formation on paper may have you believe.

If we cast our minds back to the time of Hleb, Flamini, Cesc & Rosicky, the reason why we were so effective is because we effectively had Henry playing in FREE-wide left position, as Henry liked to peel off then come back inside. Something I feel would definitely suit Podolski. If Henry wasn't peeling off from the left he'd just take a more central role. Either way our ball retention was so much better. we were also able to control the middle third allowing the likes of Henry Adebayor and a mixture Hleb and Rosicky going forward in a more attacking motion. The 4-4-2 in theory shouldn't have even worked because Hleb and Rosicky aren't even natural "wingers". But boy did they make look easy. On that token we could have a 4 man midfield that consists of Wilshere Arteta Cazorla Gervinho/Ox/Arshavin.

However, with the 4-2-3-1 things break down once it gets into the third quarter (derived from the 4-2-3-1 segments). It's as if when Podolski gets the ball, he has nothing in the final quarter to look too. Nor is he a penetrative players who's going to do something like Adam Johnson. for example; committing defenders into tackles or gettin to the byline- that isn't his game- proving that it's the formational system that's hampering him. His Koln performances will prove that.

Chances of any of what I said happening is second to none. But I strongly believe it will work.

A lot of that though is down to the individual qualities of the players in the system. Our ball retention wasn't so much better because we were playing 4-4-2, but because Cesc, Hleb and Rosicky were each technically superb players with such a great understanding with each other. Those three could keep the ball between them all day and when you throw in van Persie and Henry it becomes an excellent set-up.

Wilshere, Arteta and Cazorla are also excellent technical players but Gervinho, Walcott and to an extent Chamberlain are not, and neither are Podolski and Giroud. So even if you played a similar system with Arteta holding and Wilshere, Cazorla and Walcott buzzing about behind Podolski and Giroud, you're not going to achieve the same results.

On top of that, if we play our same passing style with that set-up, it's not going to work since Podolski, Walcott and Giroud don't suit that sort of style of football. They suit a more direct style of play, which is why I don't think the formation makes a whole lot of difference and isn't really the issue here. The issue is that we're not playing in a way that suits the players we have, and we're not playing with any sort of confidence or urgency which I don't believe to be tactical considering how well we were playing before the international break.

Wenger just has to show some guts for once and try something new. I mean, what can we lose, it's not like we're on a rich vein of form and can't be stopped.

Agree that it's not down to formation, although as many have already mentioned, playing the likes of Walcott and Podolski (more) centrally could become fruitful in our next games which are all winable imho.

Players need to show more hunger and desire and I believe everything will turn out just fine.

Well, this is interesting. Ive lurked a lot and saw these type of posts, but have never seen anybody mentioning 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-2-1. Yea I can understand the reasoning. It is a rarely used formation this day, added by the fact that the squad is gunned by a stubborn intellect. Anyway, I'll explain the reasoning for this.

The formations:
3-4-1-2
Sczcz
Kosc-Mert-Verm
Sagn-Art-Wils-Diab
Cazorla
Giroud-Podol

3-4-2-1
Sczcz
Kosc-Mert-Verm
Sagn-Art-Wils-Diab
Cazorla-Podol
Giroud


Tackling the weakness
Despite the brilliant defensive coaching from Bould, Arsenal are still always struggling to not being shaky at the back. The record may prove otherwise, however the reasonable Gooners could always see the problems: vs crosses, vs attackers who drag the defense out of place.

Against a league which predominantly used two strikers or one striker and one attacking midfielder ready to counter, added by the fact that high balls are somehow popular/effective; using 3 at the back will be essential in ensuring two basic defensive traits. They are the ability to repel crosses and the single number of spare man of defense vs attack.

The other problem is somewhat hot and cold. Usually its never associated with the gunners, which is the approach play in the final 3rd. It seems that the only constantly decisive member in the final is the current crowd pleaser Santiago Cazorla (which makes me wonder if I should consume Tapas or playing with buffalo everyday). Giroud is too high, Podolski is too invisible (yeah, a God's trait), Walcott too inconsistent, Gervinho too consistent, Arshavin too lazy, Rosicky too dizzy, Ramsey too crazy, Gnabry too babzy, and Chamakh too cozy.

Actually none of the players are really pure wideman, with most being comfortable somewhere 45 degree from opponent's goal. With those formations, nobody would be isolated out wide or up high, as there would still be movements around them.


The justification
Err wait, why do you put diaby out there? Why such a non-used formation? Actually I'm more of a put your best players out there guy. However, I didnt put them where they are without reason.

From the back, for a 3 backs formation, you need at least one who could play like a defensive midfielder, stopping the play early, being the base of the attack. That, complemented with some sweeping and line controlling at the heart would almost always make the combination work.

Then, 3 backs is mostly associated with wingbacks or at least shuttlers who is adept at playing wide. There are several players who suit the condition, with Sagna and Diaby being the most skilled of the bunch should be the first choice. Diaby? Yeah, he was deployed as a left sided shuttler early in his career, much like Asamoah in Juve, Cambiasso in Real, Simeone, Davids, Falcao, Ramires, and former legend Petit when playing for France. With him being constantly injured, Gibbs could prove as a reliable deputy.

WilArtZorla is the backbone of the team and played accordingly where theyre best at. To get Podolski clear in sight of them, put him closer to the goal, with better view of the goal, facing the goal so should be behind the bomber. It would be either as a traditionak 2nd striker or as a midfield attacker, positions which are comfortable for him. Cazorla will again get the connection he desperately needed and Giroud the supply he likes.


The upsides
In conclusion, with these formations, Arsenal will have advantage in:
-fielding the best players
-doing point a without sacrificing the qualities and exhibiting the negatives of each individuals
-minimizing some weaknesses
-dominating the midfield (key)
-better linking up of players
-and somehow being the antidote to the popular formations of the league


I know Wenger have played with similar formations before and I hope he is brave, crazy, witty, and ugh flexible enough to apply this.

Hope you like my suggestion, feel free to provide critics or encouragements

Pre-international break we showed several indications that we had turned a corner. Tighter defence, collective work rate and patience. Yet why we haven't confined where we left of against West Ham is a mystery no one can answer...

However, I have to disagree with the Hleb, Cesc and Rosicky statement, as in this case, you inferred that they may in fact be slightly ahead of Cazorla, Arteta and Wilshere, technically, if played in conjuction with Theo, Ox, Podolski or Giroud. Personally I think it's 6 and half a dozen. Arteta pass completion, Cazorla's interchanging play and intent, coupled with Wilshere's drive and eye for a killer pass is a perfect remedy for a 4-4-2.

Although Podolski doesn't have the like for like attributes as Henry- as in beating player and blistering pace- he's just as clinical and evidently performs better as a SS, with Walcott playing of his shoulder: essentially sitting on the last man.

I wouldnt say the age of out and out wingers are lost but using versatile players seem to be the norm. The versatile players in question are the like of Wilshere, Arteta, Cazorla and even a fit Diaby. I strongly believe now, more than ever, we have the players to revert back to 4-4-2. I'm not suggesting we use the 4-4-2 system as a means of stretching teams. I'm simply saying that by using the 4-4-2 we'll be able to dictate that play more efficiently and confidently.

Agree that it is more about the players than the formation.. The midfield trio of Arteta-Wilshere-Cazorla looks strong on paper.. But possession football demands more.. If you are planning to play possession football all the players should have high technical, possession and passing skills.. Like Barca, Dortmund, even Swansea..
Our midfield trio gets poor support from the wide players and strikers..
So too many players not suiting our playstyle.. Gervinho, Podolski, Ox to an extent, Walcott, Giroud, Metskr... That is about 4/starting 11.. Too high to be good for possession football...

Gervinho and Ox are esteemed squad players. Mertesacker is a defender; similar to how Toure and Gallas were, during 07/08. If Pisolski doesn't suit our current playing style because he is stranded out wide on the left, how can you then be certain Podolski playing as a SS , wouldn't suit a proposed 4-4-2?

I somearemissing my point too. I'm actually saying we play 4-4-2 with the ayers who worker necessarily be consider as wide players. For e.g. Ox-Arteta-Cazorla- Wilshere. I don't see how that differs to Hleb-Cesc-Flamini-Rosciky. I think some of us have actually forgotten the fact that Hleb and Rosicky started off as central player; who excelled playing in 'the whole' behind either one or two front men. Please look at Rosicky during his Dortmund days and Hleb while at Stuttgart. They played more games centrally than they did out wide. Yet they had the freedom to cut inside and 'light shit up'. Then, Flamini was the 'insurance policy' who'd sit back and cover the defenders; similar to what Arteta does now. If say Clichy or Eboue advanced forward, we'd always have 3-4 players back, those players were: Gallas, Toure, Flamini and Eboue/Clichy.

In this case, Mertesacker, Vermalen/Kos, Gibbs and Arteta would be our players who sit back. While Theikes of Wilshere, Cazorla, Diaby/Ox, Podolski and Theo will be doing the attacking.

I really don't see where the lack of comprehension comes into this. We have the players to play 4-4-2 purely because history has proven that even when we didn't have the players, 4-4-2 worked.

It's not the position that's the problem but the individual qualities of the players themselves.

Arteta is a completely different player to Flamini, Cazorla is a different player to Cesc and Wilshere and Chamberlain are different players to Hleb and Rosicky.

Yes, theoretically you could play all four in a 4-4-2. You could also play them in a 4-2-3-1, a 4-3-3, etc. But you can't have them play in the same system and style of that 4-4-2 which had Flamini, Cesc, Hleb and Rosicky, because that system worked by utilising the skill, creativity and flair offered by those players and gave it great support from both ends.

In other words, the players made the 4-4-2 work, not the other way around. Any formation can work if you play in a way that suits your players, which isn't what we're doing now. At the moment, we're trying to force our players to play a way that doesn't really suit them. Lining them up in a 4-4-2 isn't going to change much if you're still playing a style that does not suit them.

Here are some of the possible formations Arsenal:


http://goo.gl/gRgKS

The players available should play an important part when deciding on the formation. The fact is arsenal lacks players to play both the 4-3-3 or the 4-4-2 effectively. The 4-3-3 is best used when you have at least on good holding player and a good passer in the team. Both the 4-4-2 and the 4-3-3 needs good wingers to be successful in the final third.
Arsenal does not have a good holding player nor a genuine winger( calling walcott a winger is a disgrace to wingers).
A 4-4-1-1 would suit the team. Giroud could play as the CF with podolski playing of him. Cazorla and walcott will play wide with arteta and wilshere in the middle.
However this team will lack strength in the midfield to hold off physical attackers from the opposition.

We need intelligent players . That's why we should not sign Aaron Lennon.

Just saw him interviewed on TV (100% genuine) and the question asked was, ''If you could travel anywhere in THE WORLD, where would you go?''

His answer was....

...''Outer space.''

He was also asked ''If you were Prime Minister, what would you change?''

For a minute, I thought he was going to talk about the dangers of macro-economic policies and the need to stop relying on a economy based on scarcity and to try and move to one based on abundance.

However, after a pause, a glazed look, he replied ''Err...Dunno.''

Gotta love the Spuds.[b]

Macro policies are dangerous? You need them to kick start the economy during downturns, micro policies only work in the loooooooooooong run.

acro policies are dangerous? You need them to kick start the economy during downturns, micro policies only work in the loooooooooooong run.

Looks like Wenger has become a member of this site