You'll never win the league with 352

[bazza76]

I keep hearing but can't work out why? Given our over abundance of world class midfielders it would seem ideal.

Again why are so many convinced that it can't work?

3-5-2 will always be an option, but it will never be the prefered formation. Rafa as we know, is about possibilities, he will never stick strictly to one formation. If he did he would become predictable, and that is something he doesnt want.
So really I think this question, when it concerns Rafa and formations is pretty much irrelevant.

[El Jefecito]

3-5-2 will always be an option, but it will never be the prefered formation. Rafa as we know, is about possibilities, he will never stick strictly to one formation. If he did he would become predictable, and that is something he doesnt want.
So really I think this question, when it concerns Rafa and formations is pretty much irrelevant.

Rafa almost always plays 4411, so I would say your assertion about changing around is largely untrue.

[bazza76]

Rafa almost always plays 4411, so I would say your assertion about changing around is largely untrue.

Well I would say that your assertation about Rafa playing 4-4-1-1 is largely untrue, because Rafa's prefered formation is 4-2-3-1
But I still maintain that we do change formations alot during games, we may start alot with 4-2-3-1 but that is almost hardly ever true about how we finish a game.

[Morph]

not so much to do with this conversation but thinking back to some of our best formations, I remember a few times when we had Gerrard, Kewell, Garcia playing as a top three with a striker in front and they kept switching positions with each other all through the match, the few times we played that we absolutely destroyed the opposition, wish I could remember a few of the matches and that was a 4-2-3-1, i've always thought that how Rafa would like to go, but we've either not had the players fit and available, or they've been on crap form

[-V-]

If would be ideal if the players could be drilled into switching easily from 442 to 352. If it was possible for the players to adapt easily then yes it would be a huge advantage to us. We certainly have the right players for it. Maybe another centre back and another right-back and we are there

[enema of the state]

george grahams arsenal played this formation for most of the 1988/9 season. Theyre the only side I know to have won the league with that formation but its possible!

Evans lfc 1995/6 - playing this setup - were the best side in the country but failed to win the league through reasons separarte to the tactical

germany have won several world cups this way but most of the best teams since the early 1960's have played a flat back 4. that might relate to a change in the offside rule/interpretation.

at the end of the day, its just an old chestnu and several people on here cant get their heads around it, but all titles, and most individual games, are won by the team that executes the basic football techniques best. As long as your setup isnt silly, if you do this better than your opponents you win.

[dww]

I keep hearing but can't work out why? Given our over abundance of world class midfielders it would seem ideal.

Again why are so many convinced that it can't work?

A/ You ask too much of your wingbacks. To be any good they have to be able to defend the wings attack and be capable of getting up and back all match. There are very few players capable of dong it let alone well.

B/ Against good teams you get pressed back and have a back 5. You have to select three centrebacks which means that you have (in general) got less ability on the ball and so it is harder to turn defence into attack and much easier for teams to press your midfield as you have less options.

C/ Three defenders over the season will often come up against one up front with wide players or a deep lying striker suplementing them. With a back four this means you can release one or both fullbacks when appropriate - with a back 3 (in particular a back three marking zonally as we do) you almost have to keep three back effectively watching one man.

D/ Playing in a back three against good teams is a specialist skill and requires a long time to learn. We have no defenders used to it and Rafa specifically uses it against poor teams where this matters less.

[CAD]

3-5-2 is too easy to shut down and counter if you know it's comming in every game. We don't have enough quality to pull it off imo.

[El Jefecito]

A/ You ask too much of your wingbacks. To be any good they have to be able to defend the wings attack and be capable of getting up and back all match. There are very few players capable of dong it let alone well.

B/ Against good teams you get pressed back and have a back 5. You have to select three centrebacks which means that you have (in general) got less ability on the ball and so it is harder to turn defence into attack and much easier for teams to press your midfield as you have less options.

C/ Three defenders over the season will often come up against one up front with wide players or a deep lying striker suplementing them. With a back four this means you can release one or both fullbacks when appropriate - with a back 3 (in particular a back three marking zonally as we do) you almost have to keep three back effectively watching one man.

D/ Playing in a back three against good teams is a specialist skill and requires a long time to learn. We have no defenders used to it and Rafa specifically uses it against poor teams where this matters less.

Great post man. Thanks for the insight. I'll need to ruminate on this for a while to absorb. Old brain isn't like it was

[El Jefecito]

3-5-2 is too easy to shut down and counter if you know it's comming in every game. We don't have enough quality to pull it off imo.

Why is it too easy to shutdown vs. for example a 442?

[enema of the state]

A/ You ask too much of your wingbacks. To be any good they have to be able to defend the wings attack and be capable of getting up and back all match. There are very few players capable of dong it let alone well..

doesnt mean its a bad formation - just that you need good fullbacks. you ask more/too much of you central defenders in a 4-4-2 with a flat backline

B/ Against good teams you get pressed back and have a back 5. You have to select three centrebacks which means that you have (in general) got less ability on the ball and so it is harder to turn defence into attack and much easier for teams to press your midfield as you have less options..

against good teams you outnumber them in midfield and have more possession

C/ Three defenders over the season will often come up against one up front with wide players or a deep lying striker suplementing them. With a back four this means you can release one or both fullbacks when appropriate - with a back 3 (in particular a back three marking zonally as we do) you almost have to keep three back effectively watching one man..

this is simply an example of playing the system; when theres 1 striker, theres always somebody playing a deeper attacking role a la kaka. In a well drilled 3-5-2, one of the defenders moves forward to pick up this man as soon as the ball is in the defensive 3rd

D/ Playing in a back three against good teams is a specialist skill and requires a long time to learn. We have no defenders used to it and ..

Rafa specifically uses it against poor teams where this matters less.

like milan in the 2005 champs final you mean he uses it when he thinks thats of benefit

[Shaggy]

We played 3-5-2 in the 2nd leg at Juventus too. Worked very well that night - we were almost flawless.

When a 3-5-2 is executed well it can seem like you've got an extra man on the field.

[enema of the state]

We played 3-5-2 in the 2nd leg at Juventus too. Worked very well that night - we were almost flawless.

When a 3-5-2 is executed well it can seem like you've got an extra man on the field.

another good example

[dww]

I'm still not sure about the CL final formation - it was officially very odd and exceptionally fluid. We were also dominated for most of the match and had 6 magical minutes which I don't believe can really be used to assess teh quality of a formation for an entire campaign.

We do regularly use three at the back against Wigan and Newcastle for the reason that they are crap and the wingbacks can push up with little worry.

[dww]

We played 3-5-2 in the 2nd leg at Juventus too. Worked very well that night - we were almost flawless.

When a 3-5-2 is executed well it can seem like you've got an extra man on the field.

That was a 0-0. I'm not saying that it can't work and if you intend to get a draw which we did and was what was needed then that is fine. We had next to no chances that night - my reasoning for why that happens is above.