Formation (4-3-3) the problem?

[BournemouthRED]

4-3-3, 4-4-2, 2-7-2 it doesn't matter. If the players can't be arsed, like every othe game, we won't get the result

[kite]

@ Barriecuda
I don't think City have such a great squad. It's a bit of a myth caused by people who think expensive players must be good but in fact players like Nasri or Balotelli are not really better than average.
Anyway I agree that you have to use your squad well to get something out of it but in the country of the blind the one-eyed red nose is king
To compete with another team over a whole season you don't need a squad as good as theirs but it can't be too much worse and I think there are three teams with a squad that is capable of winning the league and they are City, United and Chelsea.
Di Matteo was probably the worst of them. They didn't have a plan it was just like if someone went in and told them who would start and nothing more. Horrible though maybe because the players seem to have too much power over there.
City isn't really much better and of course that's just embarassing as Mancini had more than enough time to do something but it is what it is.
United at least has some kind of idea what they do when they come out. Or maybe it just looks like that because "play the ball to van persie or rooney" works better than "play the ball to Dzeko or Tevez" and certainly better than "play the ball to Torres" - what do I know.
Fact is all three of them are tactically quite bad (they just don't have a clue what they might do to prevent the other team from scoring..) and that's the reason why a team with bad tactics can be on top.
Really.. United don't even do pressing in 8 out of 10 games or so or they do it just in their own half I mean WTF That's just embarassing.
There is a reason why City went out of the Champions League once again.
Ever wondered how Manchester United could dominate the Premiere League for such a long time, be one of the 5 or 3 richest clubs on this planet and still never - not once - be really "the best" team in the CL? Because red nose isn't a great tactician. When Wenger came in he was able to beat Fergusson with less money because he was the better tactician and to be honest I actually think he still is. He might have only one system but that system is still better than what United have. At least Arsenal plays pressing
I absolutely don't want to say Wenger is perfect but tactics are not the main problem IMO.

About misleading stats:
Like I said Arsenal did score in 15 out of 20 games and that's not too bad especially if you consider the squad isn't that great really. I agree with supagoons rating. The squad has a lot of problems and is just not good enough to win the title. That's just the way it is.

[augie]

We dont play 4-3-3 now and actually play 4-5-1 so anybody claiming differently is watching a different game We play one striker and regardless of whether it is giroud,walnut,klingon or whoever that one striker is isolated up top on his own. It is my belief that wenger spouts this 4-3-3 bullshit to try and pretend that he is not putting out negative teams and also to try and cover up his glaring weaknesses in defence and midfield by trying to overcrowd those areas.....isnt exactly working is it ?

Bring in a different manager in the morning and he would straight away identify that the system we play doesnt suit the players we have but putting square pegs in round holes is second nature to the CIC

[SteveO 35]

We dont play 4-3-3 now and actually play 4-5-1 so anybody claiming differently is watching a different game We play one striker and regardless of whether it is giroud,walnut,klingon or whoever that one striker is isolated up top on his own. It is my belief that wenger spouts this 4-3-3 bullshit to try and pretend that he is not putting out negative teams and also to try and cover up his glaring weaknesses in defence and midfield by trying to overcrowd those areas.....isnt exactly working is it ?

Bring in a different manager in the morning and he would straight away identify that the system we play doesnt suit the players we have but putting square pegs in round holes is second nature to the CIC

Exactly - it has never been 4-3-3. He's tried to fit all sorts of players into his silly 4-5-1 puzzle too - sticking Bendtner out there as a left winger, ruining the Great Abou by playing him wide, Ramsey, now Podolski. All the sad old fool is doing is converting naturally attacking players into poor man's wing backs.

[I Hate Hleb]

....
Ever wondered how Manchester United could dominate the Premiere League for such a long time, be one of the 5 or 3 richest clubs on this planet and still never - not once - be really "the best" team in the CL? Because red nose isn't a great tactician. When Wenger came in he was able to beat Fergusson with less money because he was the better tactician and to be honest I actually think he still is....

No, the reason Wenger was able to beat Ferguson at that time was because he had better players, not because he was a better tactician!! Even then, in my opinion he still lost matches with those great teams and players during his most successful period that someone more tactically astute would probably never have lost.

[northbank123]

Anyone else think that we play with too much width at times? Southampton were more or less setting up defensively with all 11 players in the width of the penalty area and making us pass wide, and then backing themselves to close us down out there and that we wouldn't be able to do anything with the ball on the touchline, especially with Walcott up front.

Every single time I've watched them this year they've been ripped apart by good movement and balls being threaded between their defenders, which you have to say is probably our strength with Wilshere and Cazorla pulling the strings in midfield. Instead we barely had the ball between their midfield and defence in the middle of the pitch all game.

[hugh jardon]

Whether its sexed up as a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 it's essentially 4-5-1 with one lone striker up front. This would be understandable in away games at top opponents but hugely frustrating when being constantly deployed at home even against the likes of QPR and Swansea.

One striker to pass to gives the rest of the team little to aim at in terms of forwards passing and so as mentioned by others results in the ball being over played sideways and backwards in midfield with a lack of penetration and forward passes. When the lone striker does receive the ball he has no strike partner to play the ball forward to and so he will usually have to play the ball back to the midfielders behind him and so the process begins again.

When playing two up front the strikers can create space for each other and more "risky" quick passes over the top or between the defenders have are more likely to produce results by turning the defence and making life difficult for them. Currently our slow sideways and backwards passing style allows the entire oppo defence to get back into position and regroup.

If you look back at Bergkamp, Wright and Henry they were all truly great attacking players but they also worked damn hard chasing defenders on the ball and forcing errors. Playing two up front makes this feasible and the team additionally benefits from "defending from the front". Playing one up front makes this impossible and so we also suffer defensively as a result as the oppo defenders have time to initiate their teams attacks.

[SteveO 35]

Whether its sexed up as a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 it's essentially 4-5-1 with one lone striker up front. This would be understandable in away games at top opponents but hugely frustrating when being constantly deployed at home even against the likes of QPR and Swansea.

This is one of my biggest gripes with Wenger, Hugh. Look at some of the comments that Armchair and I have been dragging up on the Wenger thread. Its been happening for years against teams that come to the Emirates in woeful form, getting smashed out of sight by allcomers - Blackburn, Sunderland, QPR - and he lines us up in a way that allows them to get comfortable for 30 mins or so and gradually strangle the game. Its so fucking basic and obvious to anyone that watches us. The worst example a couple of seasons ago was Blackburn who came to town have conceded something like 38 goals in away games, and we drew 0-0, in a slow paced bore of a game where we played into their hands, but it equally applies to a whole stack of games from 2008 onwards.

Why we can't revert to a 4-4-2 against these teams with Walcott and Chapman (pray for a better alternative some time soon) is beyond me.

[gordo]

I did feel that the issue against Southampton was the keeper booting the ball to midfield then it was nut ball until one side got the ball to ground. Mainly them. Are we still a side that can pass from the back?

[Yankee_Gooner_Dandee]

we play a 4-2-3-1. i'd love to play 4-1-3-2 but we simply do not have a midfielder that is good enough/disciplined enough to hold down the defensive midfield role solo ala Flamini or Gilberto.

[northbank123]

Whether its sexed up as a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 it's essentially 4-5-1 with one lone striker up front. This would be understandable in away games at top opponents but hugely frustrating when being constantly deployed at home even against the likes of QPR and Swansea.

This is one of my biggest gripes with Wenger, Hugh. Look at some of the comments that Armchair and I have been dragging up on the Wenger thread. Its been happening for years against teams that come to the Emirates in woeful form, getting smashed out of sight by allcomers - Blackburn, Sunderland, QPR - and he lines us up in a way that allows them to get comfortable for 30 mins or so and gradually strangle the game. Its so fucking basic and obvious to anyone that watches us. The worst example a couple of seasons ago was Blackburn who came to town have conceded something like 38 goals in away games, and we drew 0-0, in a slow paced bore of a game where we played into their hands, but it equally applies to a whole stack of games from 2008 onwards.

Why we can't revert to a 4-4-2 against these teams with Walcott and Chapman (pray for a better alternative some time soon) is beyond me.

Amen. It's embarrassing playing a lone striker against relegation fodder, not to mention far less effective.

[Supagoon]

kite & supagoon: Squads are only as good as how effectively they're utilized. Hence why City - who I would argue have the deepest squad in the country - are not on top of the league. United has dominated the league so far despite having many players well over 30, even in spite of Rooney and Nani not playing up to their standard. SAF finds ways to effectively use all the pieces he has at his disposal (and the refs lol)

Arsenal's goals-for stat (40 in 20 games) is slightly misleading due to several lopsided scores against Southampton and Newcastle. We have no problem running up scores late, but it's the meaningful goals that we struggle with IMO. And for as much as we concede (22 in 20 games) we need to be scoring a lot, putting further emphasis on our somewhat dull attack.

Anyway I feel like we have some of the best players in the Premiership but we don't get full value out of them. Podolski and Giroud are good goal scorers; Arteta, Wilshere and Cazorla are all individually in the top-10 for creative midfielders in the EPL; Vermaelen Koscielny and Mertesacker have all shown, albeit inconsistently, that they are excellent defenders. But when we go out on the pitch, none of those players look the value I've just rated them at.

Quartz: 3-5-2 is interesting; I would almost prefer a 4-5-1 with our current LWF/RWF playing deeper to give us 5 across the width of the middle of the park. Then just have the one target man; eg) Giroud for physical teams, and Walcott for teams that try to play a high-line or that press heavily. However like you mentioned, and this is the point I had hoped to touch on - we have a lot of good players who can play a variety of positions, so we as a team should be willing to experiment with new ways (i.e. new formations) to get more out of them. Especially when we're struggling against Southampton after 75 minutes.

City and Utd are very close, but i'd put Utd's higher, they're both sensibly stacked with strikers and that puts them beyond the likes of chelsea. Defences are close and Utds may be creaking with age but is more than good enough to win the league. Utd's midfield is derided, but City aren't exactly stacked there, Milner, Barry, the player from Benefica.

Fergie can rotate and they still win games, they have the best striker in the league, even Hernandez scores for fun and Rooney is Rooney. City and Utd are close, but frankly, Nasri and Silva have not been playing as well as Valencia/Rooney or even Young.

I really disagree with this though, Arteta is far far from a creative player even as a CM, and he sure wont create much as a DM. Jack is still learning and i doubt he'll get many assists this month. Carzola yes is the one true creative output we have. I'll never rate any of defenders as Excellent. I know Sagna popularity has waned, but as bad as he has been recently and its really only recently, i've seen Kosceilny and Vermaelen screw up for game after game.

If Giroud was at Sunderland and I could have easily seen him there, would we even bat an eye?? Compare him with Dzeko both big and strong, one has a cultured finish the other far from it.

As bad as we've been, and how inept the coaching of our players has been over the years, I reckon this squad is in its rightful place.

To be able to play 4-4-2, i really think we'll need another midfielder in there. I agree with our 4-3-3 is really like a 4-5-1, and very easy to defend against. When we had someone like Cesc this formation could work and we would fashion many chances, right now we're far far to slow to move the ball around, and if the players can't trust their technique to play one touch football, we better find a different way of playing.

[LDB]

It's not about formation in my opinion. When you write down numbers and Sky stick the players on the screen pretty much every team in the league plays with the same "formation". I saw you wrote in the article that we have nobody who shoots from outside the box, I'm guessing you've never watched Cazorla play?

The difference between United and most other top teams in the league (other then having the best striker) is that they play with proper wingers who can cross a football from any wide position. Teams against united have to defend the entire width of the pitch which gives a lot of space for the likes of van rapist in the middle.

I do agree though that we dont look to play behind teams anywhere near enough be it through the middle or out wide. Too much possession hoarding and not enough forward motion but its nothing to do with formations imo.

[Skooner]

I’m definitely an advocate of trying two strikers but commenting on the formation at the moment, we don’t have enough natural width in the 4-5-1. Yes we play “wingers” but most of them are stuck out there by Wenger when it isn’t their natural position. The only player in the current squad that looks like a natural winger is the Ox and even he drifts in a fair bit.

I completely disagree with earlier comments about United not having tactics. If that is true why did (until recently when they can pretty much do what they want against us) Fergie always play a different formation with hard working players against us and not others? I also remember at Highbury when we led them twice and he called Scholes over to give him some instructions and from then on their two wide men (Ronaldo and Rooney I think) stuck right to the touchline whenever United broke out from their own half and they tore us to pieces 4-2.

Our main width comes from our full backs, but that leaves us open at the back.

Bigger problem than the formation is speed of play. Getting the ball out wide quickly and exploiting space is the best way to attack a team.

[Old Rosie]

What about someone playing in the hole while the wing backs push on creating an overlap with the sweeper?

Just a thought!