Use our Resources! The Case for 4-4-2
By dixon9
March 10 2008
Or perhaps I should say “The case for 4-4-2 for Chelsea at the moment with the players we’ve got.” This is a personal viewpoint rather than what I suspect a lot of Chelsea fans feel, although I’d be surprised if at least a few of the current Chelsea squad don’t feel the same. We are currently entrenched stubbornly in the Dutch school of 4-3-3 and I believe there is a case to change.
It’s clear that Ten Cate (hardly surprising considering he comes from the club, Ajax, that helped make the formation so popular) and Grant (not sure what Steve Clarke thinks) feel that 4-3-3 is the way to go and despite the odd comment from Grant in the press re changing formation, it’s not happened so far –at least not as a starting formation.
“Arrrh yeah! But with 4-4-2 we’d have no width!” “We can’t change now – not at this stage of the season!” I’d respect those view points although I can’t agree with them.
Don’t get me wrong - I think that 4-3-3 can be a very effective formation but I just don’t feel we have the quality wide players to carry it off properly.
Wright-Phillips keeps demonstrating that he’s better inside than out wide; Joe Cole can adapt and do a “reasonable” job because he is a naturally talented player but am I the only one who feels we are only getting 70% of his potential when stuck out on the wing?
Malouda? Hmmm…Well unfortunately he’s having what very kindly might be called an ordinary season - He was French player of the year last season so I’m hoping that he hasn’t become “ordinary” overnight. No doubt he’ll come good next season but I can’t see him coming alive suddenly now.
Kalou? He can actually go past players surprisingly easily – only then to demonstrate poor decision making when he looks up and needs to release “that” pass or “that” cross.
Sinclair is another natural wide player but the youngster has been deemed “not ready” and loaned out yet again.
So, here we are with a system where one of the key factors are the wide men up front, and those wide men are Wright-Phillips, Joe Cole, Malouda and Kalou – are we to base this tail end, business end, pressure cooker part of the season around those players?
4-3-3 by all means. It gives us width and stretches teams and it has the advantage of converting easily into 4-5-1 when on the defensive…but let’s do it when we have the players to carry it off such as Quaresema and co.
As for the “No! We shouldn’t change things at this stage of the season!” argument, why not? Mourinho drilled most of the current squad to change formation almost seamlessly at the drop of a hat when necessary. Have they forgotten already? Ten Cate and Clarke are not incompetent – the exact opposite – so I don’t accept that argument.
I feel that we are wasting resources at the moment. We have two of the most dangerous strikers in Europe and what are we doing with them? Well we take turns to play one and leave the other on the bench!
How many times did we read about Anelka and Drogba saying how much they were looking forward to playing with each other? I’d suggest the combination of those 2 would frighten any defence in the world. I bet those two are yearning to play up front together!
I’m sure Drogba´s getting weary playing as a lone battering ram, constantly crowded out by defenders, clattering into him during every attack. “Well he gets paid enough! It’s his job!” Sure, but he’s also got other strings to his bow and I bet he’s not enjoying his football. He’s doing all the donkey work and usually making space for others to score and get the glory.
Drogba we know has quite an ego and I would suggest that for a striker of his quality there’s a case to pander to it sometimes. Just look at how Drogba played last season with Shevchenko in a 4-4-2 – and just look at how many goals he scored.
Anelka had enough of 4-5-1 at Bolton. Can you imagine how he would flourish playing off of Drogba? I’m sure the two would develop an incredibly potent partnership – a partnership which we seem unlikely to see at the moment - What a crime!
What about the midfield? Now 4-3-3 does convert into 4-5-1 when on the back foot but the wide players must drop back and act as midfielders. 4-4-2 already gives us 4 players in midfield – players of the type which we have coming out our ears! Makelele, Mikel, Essien, Ballack, Lampard, Joe Cole… 4-3-3 deprives us of one of these and instead we gain 2 wide men that aren’t wide men or not up to the job for one reason or another. We are quite simply wasting resources.
Let’s play to OUR STRENGTHS – not paper over the cracks using lesser material so that we may stick to a system! We can go 4-4-2 or even a 4-1-3-2 variant.
Example:
Cech
Ferreira Carvalho Terry A Cole
Makelele
J Cole Ballack Lampard
Anelka Drogba
Or:
Cech
Essien Carvalho Terry A Cole
Mikel
J Cole Ballack Lampard
Anelka Drogba
You know it makes sense!
A system like 4-3-3 can't be used week in week out. Some teams it will work against and others it won't.
I know everyone (or at least most) believes that England and English teams should play 4-4-2 each game, but I prefer a system that you haven't mentioned, yet is much more effective IMO.
3-5-2 This formation gives both attacking and defending options with little change to personnel.
I think with your squad you could easily play this way and even play attractive football.(shock, horror)
With this system you need a quality defensive midfielder and two hard working wide men.
Again, not always used against every team, but he's how your side could look when used.
Cech
Alex Carvalho Terry
J Cole Ballack Essien Lampard A Cole
(SWP) (Malouda)
Anelka Drogba
I dunno and some managers get how much a week?
Cudicini
A.cole JT Carvaliho Ferriera
Ballack Essien
Kalou J.cole
Anelka Drogba
Hilario
Alex
Mikel
SWP
Sheva
i am taking for granted that lamps and cech do not play
Quote:Captain Scarlet
Personally I don't think your side looks ballanced with Lampard, Ballack and either Mikel or Makelele.
A system like 4-3-3 can't be used week in week out. Some teams it will work against and others it won't.
I know everyone (or at least most) believes that England and English teams should play 4-4-2 each game, but I prefer a system that you haven't mentioned, yet is much more effective IMO.
3-5-2 This formation gives both attacking and defending options with little change to personnel.
I think with your squad you could easily play this way and even play attractive football.(shock, horror)
With this system you need a quality defensive midfielder and two hard working wide men.
Again, not always used against every team, but he's how your side could look when used.
Cech
Alex Carvalho Terry
J Cole Ballack Essien Lampard A Cole
(SWP) (Malouda)
Anelka Drogba
I dunno and some managers get how much a week?
Well I don´t agree that Ballack and Lampard can´t play together (ditto Lampard and Gerrard) and in fact the lat two games together have worked excellently.
Agree re Mikel and Maka - but it would always be either not both. Either would work very well imo with Ballack/Lampard as the makelele position enables either Ballack or Lampard to get forward as and when required.
I could live with your 3-5-2 as well becuase it would enable us to make greater use of the pool of midfielders we have and also gives you the pairing of Drogba and Anelka. However, with Chelsea the 3-5-2 would invariable drift into a 3-1-4-2 as Mikel or Makelele would end up patrolling across and in front of the defence on a prety fixed basis.
.
"It is born out of hypocrisy and fundamental insecurity. There have been two kids on the block for the past 12 years. Suddenly, there is a third and that one is threatening to be more successful than the others and they don’t like it." P Kenyon.
Lampard, in your formation would end up in the middle leaving gaps on the left.
I also wouldn't play Mikel and Makelele together. Defeats the object of playing this way.
With regards to 3-1-4-2 well thats what the defensive midfielder is there to do if needed.
3-5-2 is better all round. I can't understand why more teams don't adopt it.
.
"It is born out of hypocrisy and fundamental insecurity. There have been two kids on the block for the past 12 years. Suddenly, there is a third and that one is threatening to be more successful than the others and they don’t like it." P Kenyon.
Oops, thought you meant the two together.
![[:wor kid:]](/phorum-5.1.15/mods/smileys/images/13.gif "[:wor kid:]")
.
"It is born out of hypocrisy and fundamental insecurity. There have been two kids on the block for the past 12 years. Suddenly, there is a third and that one is threatening to be more successful than the others and they don’t like it." P Kenyon.