Thought I'd post it here and take in analytical observations of last nights game.

I was fortunate enough to have observe the Saudi's in training under Rijkard last week.

It was a session based on ball technique, small sided games, a tactical exercise in beating a flat back four with "killer Passes" "dummy runs" and Diagnal runs, finishing off with a restricted game.

The Saudi's early game was baed on 4-2-3-1 formation withe the Full backs pushing high and wide when in attack, the No. 12 being highly effective through out the game. The no. 14 acted as a screening or defensive midfielder.
You could see in the first half the Barcelona influence on playing style of the Saudi's.

The Australians lined up in a conventional 4-4-2 formation with North, Ogenovski, Neill, Spiranovic in defence.

I thought North struggled all night while Ogenovski and Neill in the first half looked shakey they stepped up in the second half having influential roles no doubt their experience is invaluble. But we can't afford to cop two goals at home in the next phase.
Spiranovic played Left Back he was up against the No. 12 who had speed and while Matt is solid centre back is for him.

Will post more soon have to get back to work.

Great stuff, Arthur.

I'm busy doing stats for the game, which I'll post when I finish.

Looking forwward to it. Hopefully Decentric has time to do his stats as well which are always a great read. The pass and move blogspot seems to have stopped at the moment which is a shame because I think he always did the socceroos games. The most curious selections for mine were the 5 centerback (and one of questionable ability) in the starting 11 especially against such a mobile side. Anyway I'll leave it to the experts to disect.

The Midfield lined up as Emerton at Right Mid, Bresciano Milligan in Centre and Troisi on the Left of Mid.
Again a storey of two halves, the instance on long balls by Schwarzer and Neil by passed the midfield making Bresciano and Milligan inefective while Emerton provided width and a threat, Troisi looked poor in this match. He failed to provide width and was not a consistent attacking option, this is definitley not his position.

Up front Kewell and Brosque provided a mobile attack force, and while Brosque scored from a header this was a chip cross to a free player and Kewell had a couple of aerial battles, the insistance in long bombing the ball in the first half was inefectual especially when you have fast mobile skillfull players.

Obviously at the half time break Holger must have had words to this effect as the Australian team kept the ball on the deck with fluid movements and better width. In this enviroment Bresciano was now able to dominate the midfield and the match.

Decentric I would love to know how many passes he had in the first half and secon half as well as his successful pass completion %.

Of course Thompson comming on for Troisi added a new attcking dimension to the Aussie game and the rest is history.

Australia must learn to keep the ball on the deck and dominate possesion, interestingly Neill and Schwarzer were poor offenders with this, maybe because of the British game they play.

I'm sure I counted a passing sequence of over 30 passes in the second half such was our dominance, in the first I think we just managed six passes in a row.

i thought it was quite a interesting game in regards to australias tactics. holger also said in the post match interview that it was the first time the players had played in this formation. I havent watched the game properly from a tactical point of view but here is what i noticed in the first viewing;

Rather than a flat 4-4-2 i thought we played more of a squashed diamond in the middle. A 4-2-2-2 in defence with miligan and breciano coming deeper then emmo and troisi.

In attack it was more of a 4-1-3-2 with milligan sitting deep. Emo and Troisi still played fairly centrally though with almost no crosses the whole game and all our goals coming through the middle of the park. The Saudi holding midfielders did a fairly bad job with most of our attacks/goals game through pathways they should of been screening (although they were outnumbered).

Playing so centrally in the midfield while playing 4 center backs seemed like a odd move. Usually the fullbacks would provide width in this formation but spira and north were very hesitant coming forward. On the other hand holger's thought may have been to sacrifice the wings to the saudis and try to overload the center of the midfield (4v3 which seemed to work, allowing bresc time to make those killer passes). This is where having 4 centerbacks would be beneficial as emmo and troisi could partially neglect their wide defensive duties knowing that north and spira would be sitting back providing cover.

First half the saudis were playing a full press (that Barcelona influence) which is why we struggled to move it out from defence. the socceroos found it especially difficult because north and spira were sitting quiet deep rather then high and wide. I think this resulted in a lot of long balls in the first half. In the second half the saudis seemed to tire, sit deeper and press less. Spira and north also pushed higher up the park.

I'm still at it. Looking for a break! It is hard work.

The game has shown up many interesting points up to the 30 minute mark. Looking at Bresciano and Milligan in depth, comparing them to Holman, Cahill, Jedda, Verieri and Kilkenny is interesting.

Kewell seems to be developing new strengths to his game.

Holger's approach is interesting - labelled in the German media as an old fashioned coach. His formations and training ground drills compared to Rijkaard's, Verbeek's and Baan's. I don't know if you've managed to observe a Socceroo session under Holger, Arthur?


It was good to see Australia forced to play against intense full pressing and squeezing at stages in the first half. Usually only Japan, Korea and Uzbekistan try this against Australia in Asia. Half pressing is the norm, giving Australia a lot of uncontested ball in defensive midfield and defence.

I wish, it was only coincidence that I saw Saudi Arabia and Rijkard, as my son was training on a nearby pitch at the same time.

It's as simple as it gets. 4-3-3 (Saudi) formation is too demanding on players fitness and leaves the team vulnerable up the middle, I've always said the dutch 4-3-3 is complete rubbish. 4-4-2 (Australia) was always going to come home strong as the formation does not burnout players, provides better player support and only requires patience to buildup to a goal.

On the negative side of things for Australia that second Saudi goal was from mistakes akin to rooballers and that is ball watching. It was something like 7 Aussie defenders V 2 Saudi attackers and not one of the 7 Aussie defenders marked the man who scored.

In a nutshell we were lucky that the Saudi's were playing a dutch style and not a very good side. If Australia played like that against germany or spain we would go down by 8 goals.

Australia didn't play that well. It was the fact the Saudi's were worse than us that we got away with the win.

Edited by Aussiesrus: 2/3/2012 12:55:19 AM

If what you say is true about the Dutch system being complete rubbish, why did Spain, Holland and Germany use 1-4-2-3-1, morphing into 1-4-3-3, successfully in the last World Cup? These teams came first , second and third.

Spain and France use 1-4-3-3 as a development system for juniors, as I think Germany currently does. Don't get me wrong, Aussiesrus, I agree with your opinions on many issues about football, but not this one. Possibly because i've had training in it and maybe I'm biased.

Having said that I thought Aussie's second half using the 1-4-4-2 was the best I've seen Australia play under Osieck. It was the best performance I've seen from Australia for some time, maybe even since I've been collating stats in the last four years.

However, I missed the first two WC qualifiers against Thailand in Australia and Saudi away. I also only saw the last 30 mins of the Oman fixture at home.

In the first half I thought Rijkaard's tactic of using aggressive squeezing and full pressing, as well as move the full backs up high, often to make a 1-2-4-3-1 or 1-2-4-1-3 was plausible.
Saudi outplayed Australia for much of the first half. It was interesting to see Australia cope with less of the ball than in most games in Asia where most teams defend deeper, using the half press, hoping to catch Australia on the counter.

I thought Australia would have been better served in the first half using a 1-4-2-3-1, to put more bodies in midfield. Bresciano, a great player, is not renowned as a player capable of breaking up attacks. To ask Milligan and Bresciano to cover a lot of the central midfield was a big ask.

I was impressed with Saudi's pressure off the ball. Rijkaard adopted a sound tactic.







Edited by Decentric: 2/3/2012 01:34:17 PM

I've only seen Bresciano play central attacking midfield twice. Once against Uzbekistan in Australia. We won 2-0 in our best performance against them. Bresciano was the best player on the pitch. Then I only recorded one versus one duels.

In the Saudi game again, Bresciano was outstanding offensively as an attacking mid.

He executed 16 defensive passes at !00% pass completion rate. (Outstanding).
He executed 32 attacking passes.
He completed 48 passes, a very goosd stat considering Saudi's aggressive pressing in parts of the first half.
He made two assists.
He made 12 difficult passes, ( defined as defence splitting, eye of the needle, made under close defensive attention). 12 is again outstanding.
His overall pass rate was 94%, which is outstanding for this position.

He lost 4 less one on one duels than he won. He is a physically weak player for an Aussie footballer. He rarely wins tackles.

He caused 8 turnovers for his team. Again outstandng and similar to the way Barca players defend from the front.
He played 2 very effective criosses.
He blocked 2 shots at goal.

His performances have been so good in this position, I would like him play here as the incumbent. He has incredible first touch, superb ability to one and two touch pass and to move for a return pass. Importantly almost the only player we have in this position who can execute killer passes that split defences.
I'd like to see him play in 1-4-2-3-1 as the attacking mid, with Milligan and Culina behind him to do a lot of the donkey work in a midfield triangle. Holman could play on either flank with Brosque on the other. Harry or Kennedy could play as central striker.

Bresc is a rare Aussie footballer - first and foremost a technician, who has great stamina, with less physical strength than most of his muscle headed teammates in the Socceroos and Aussie footballers in general. But importantly, he closes down enough gaps when the opposition defence has possession to create many turnovers for appreciative teammates further back on the pitch.

















Edited by Decentric: 2/3/2012 01:06:41 PM

agreed, to suggest 4-3-3 is complete rubbish is a complete rubbish statement. as decentric said, you only have to look at the best club and countries in the world at the moment and they all play some form of 4-3-3 as their primary formation.



Australia are always perform better when we play against teams using a attacking formation/tactics. The socceroos struggle to break down teams who sit deep and play on the counter (see indonesia as a perfect example) but excel against teams who play a open or attacking game. The best socceroo games of the last 4/5 years have come against teams who try play against us rather than sitting deep; ireland, wales, serbia (wc), saudi, qatar, uzbekistan.

I think this is due to our lack of game changing players/players who can take on other plays in a 1v1 situation. we need a messi....

Looking at the game for a second time, over many, many hours, painstakingly compiling stats, the formation the Saudi's appeared to play a 1-4-2-3-1. It sometimes evolved into a 1-4-2-4 in attack, or a 1-2-4-1-3.

Australia played as a flat midfield 1-4-4-2. It also played the 1-4-4-2 with a bowl shaped midfield, when as you point out, Emerton and Troisi were more advanced than Bresc and Milligan.
Australia also played as a 1-4-4-2 with the midfield 1:3 formation, when Bresc went forward and Milligan sat in front of the defence.

Australia also played a 1-3-5-2 when North went forwards and Spira tucked in to make a back 3.

I almost agree with you Decentric, I would make the formation:

Not sure who to have as the wing backs is all.

Even though I'm a big fan of stats like Asene Wenger, Sam Allardyce, Alex Ferguson, Valery Lobanovski, Mike Forde (Chelsea's performance director), one stat that didn't expose a player's weakness in this game was the case of Matt Spiranovic.

On paper Spira's stats looked good, even though he played out of position. In reality, Spira was outpaced a lot on the right wing. The Saudi player didn't dribble past him by wrongfooting him, if at all, but he got in front of Spira on the outside and managed to cross on too many occasions.

Spira struggled to prevent the crosses if his teammates further up the field didn't apply sufficient defensive pressure to prevent Saudi through balls down the wing.
Zullo would have been able to cover this. Zullo would be our quickest defensive player to recover, chase and change direction, along with Jason Culina, with Jade North marginally behind.

One massive problem is LB. Zullo has easily the most ability there long term, but he lacks experience. Behich may be another option, possibly Rose, but I haven't really scrutinised their defensive capabilities.

One option is:


Wilkshire.....Neill......Ogger.......Zullo

...............Culina...........Milligan

......................Bresciano

Holman...........Kewell..........Brosque


Subs:
Williams - puts great pressure on Wilkshire as RB, the central defenders and DMs. I'm not sure if he plays in a passing Championship side or a hoof ball one.
Herd - must start if he is playing regularly in the EPL, but I haven't sen him play yet. Could play instead of Milligan, or Culina if not fit.
Jedda -still has potential as a CB and midfield cover.
Kennedy- great pressure on Kewell, not as complete a player as Harry, but a big improver and maybe currently more clinical.
Emmo - great pressure on Holman, Wilkshire.
Spira- great pressure on CBs.
McKay - was our best Socceroo, but club football has stuffed him ATM.

In reality, all these guys will never be fit at the same time.

Could we try one of the right sided players as a LB?

True.

Harry committed a shocking back pass to gift Saudi plenty of attacking space in the wrong area.

I have a few concerns about Neill's tracking at times. Even communication with Ogger. I'm sure Neill would be the first to admit it.

The best we've had has been when Neill has played alongside Moore, with Grella screening them at DM, with Culina close by. That is, when they have all been fit.





Edited by Decentric: 2/3/2012 01:38:23 PM

Thanks for these excellent stats Decentric, it's nice when the stats backup your opinion.

Bresciano is truley a key player for this team.

Disappointed that Marrone wasn't given a crack as RB. I honestly don't think he could have done any worse.

Who knows we might end up with either Goodwin or Behich as the LB's at some point in the future.

You are welcome. I'm always excited to see the stats. At the end of the replay, it is pretty boring. Then doing all the mathematical calculations is a bit painful too.

One guy who had an outstanding game was Milligan. His performance is the best in this position since Grella's decline. Having said this, Culina is a different type of player who does a lot of graft spectators don't notice, but former elite players and current coaches do.

Jedinak, Valeri, Kilkenny have never performed as well as Milligan did against Saudi in any game I've analysed.

North is an interesting player. I believe the Australian football public, and the media, comprising writers who didn't perform at high levels, or with significant coaching background , look for scapegoats. Players are simplistically good, or bad. Heroes or scapegoats. To me it seems all players have strengths and weaknesses.

North, Holman, Garcia, have been popular scapegoats at different times.

North is an enigma. He seems to have struggled at club level in Korea, Norway and Japan.

Yet Osieck and Verbeek, have both seen qualities they need for the national team.

In the Saudi match he pulled off the tackle of the game. He had been wrong footed, but turned quickly enough to tackle with his left foot and win the ball. Anybody else would have been beaten. I think only possibly Zullo and Culina may have been able to do this of our defensive players.

North certainly played as well in the team context as most in the game against the Saudis.

He executed 32 passes, with 95% completion rate in defence and 92% overall . This is very good.

He lost the ball twice due to a poor first touch, which is bad.

He won 2 more one on one duels than he lost.

Few Saudi players crossed the ball from outside of him like on Spira's flank.

He caused 3 turnovers, which is good.

He rarely gives away free kicks in dangerous areas, conceding no fouls in the Saudi game, yet he won 2 excellent tackles and lost none.

He made 2 interceptions, which is good.

He blocked 2 shots/crosses.

He was also an effective ball carrier and made 2 decent crosses.

He seems to be able to fit into the national team quite well, when Archie, McDonald and Carle have often struggled.

North is an enigma.

He suggests that the players at FC Tokyo who have displaced him are quality national team players.

Maybe Marrone would have done well at RB? We will never know.

Actually I like to show 442 members have stats to support their views, rather than contradict them.

When watching a game live, I miss a lot.

Brian Clough didn't though.

Double check your stats on valeri then? That guy covers every blade of grass twice per half!

Milligan was clinical, but against better opponents, i think Valeri is the better choice.

I don't know if you pick this up on TV, as I haven't seen a replay yet, was Bresciano's passing ability in terms of positioning and pace of the ball compared to his team mates.

Bresciano's passes where at a slower pace, and place to the players feet in such a way as the receiver could easily perform a lateral touch to either side of his body. While some of Bresciano's team mates would execute passes that came straight to the body with pace, like a shot at goal, sometimes 10 or 20 cm above the ground making it difficult for the receieving player to execute a good first touch.

I had to think is it Bresciano's years in Italy compared to the other players years in Australia and the UK and the differing demands of each respective game style?

A closer look at Saudi Arabia's team would indicate to me that their players need to start playing in Europe to develop the match toughness and execution of high level tactical performance required at a day to day week to week basis.

They have some excellent players with good indivdual technique, just lack that professional edge.

No I haven't observed it. Maybe a bit of brilliance on your part, Arthur?=d>

What I have noticed is Bresc sometimes fakes as he is about to receive the ball, sending the opponent a little in the wrong direction.

We try to teach this on the training track, but Bresc is very good at it.

Although Aussiesrus raises some valid points about the calibre of Saudi compared to Spain and Germany, I am blown out by the performances of Kewell, Brosque, Bresc and Milligan against Saudi.

Yes I agree. Very good feel for the ball and very comfortable with their dribbling close ball control

As far as the full back issues are concerned I think we may see Emerton and Wilshere fill those roles for the big games.

Left back will be a problem short term whatever, I think.

Will be interesting to see if Culina can make a comeback worthy of getting his place back. I had written him out of the equation, but so had I for Bresh and now I can't imagine the next round of qualifiers without him.

I'm surprised that Milligan has received all of that praise without any criticism.
I thought he was largely responsible for the second goal, totally switched off and ball watching. Might have done better on the first as well all though I wouldn't hold it against him.
I'm sure it's a case of me focusing on the more defining moments of the game so I'm curious which particular stats earn't him so much praise? (Edit: nevermind, found em in your stats thread)


I try to watch as many Middlesbrough games as Foxtel will show and they attempt to play one touch passing football always from the back under Tony Mowbray. In my opinion Williams is an excellent distributor and passer for a defender. He can fill the void left by Neil when he's past it in many ways even including on-field leadership.
Very keen to see Williams get a chance to shine in one of his natural positions centreback or midfield.

On the very few occasions I've seen Herd play for Middlesbrough it's most definitely been long ball, bypassing the midfield. He's an excellent ball winner and a very hard worker though.


Edited by neanderthal: 2/3/2012 06:10:37 PM

Good point.

I can remember hearing/reading that Valeri just pipped McKay for the most amount of ground covered in the Asian Cup. He covers a lot of ground, but some coaches prefer players to have more prescriptive roles.

Essentially the box to box midfielder is something the English love. At Chelsea Hiddink was frustrated with Frank Lampard thinking he had to cover the whole ground, rather than specific areas. Lampard was influenced by his father, a former pro, who told him he needed to run everywhere to impress.

Hiddink told he had sufficient people behind him in midfield with the likes of Ballack, Essien et al, to give him the ball in an advanced position, rather than wasting energy going to get it. Hiddink saw him as more useful in an attacking role.

I've posted a huge post in Australian section about Valeri's strengths/ weaknesses sometime in the last year.

Valeri is not outstanding at anything, except maybe his stamina. Other midfielders,Holman, Jedinak, Culina, Grella, Bresciano, McKay, Cahill, have some outstanding qualities in some facets of play. Valeri doesn't. Having said that, unlike Carney, Kisnorbo, Nick Carle about 6 years ago and Musialik, he doesn't have any real weaknesses either.

Milligan may have statistically had a good game but personally I thought he was shocking. Partly culpable for both goals, more so the second, lacked any intent in his passing and just found him sloppy. Would much rather have a Jedinak/Valeri/Paartalu behind Bresciano[/quote]



Red Kat, I've just looked at the second Saudi goal again to check if Milligan was culpable.

Milligan was not culpable at all. Harry passed back to space, picked up by a Saudi player. The ball was then played out to the Saudi right wing. When the cross came in it was Ogger and Neill's collective fault the Saudi scorer was free.

I agree though, the first goal was due to Bresc and then Milligan being dribbled around, albeit slipping on a wet pitch.



Over the rest of the game Milligan, Bresciano and Harry were outstanding though. All sorts of things like tackles, if a player is dribbled around, crosses, assists, blocks, clearances , creating turnovers, number of defensive and attacking passes, percentage of accurate passes, shots, making intercepts, dribbling encounters, heading duels, poor ball control, mishit passes, making difficult passes under pressure or making eye of the needle and defence splitting passes, are recorded.

Milligan and Bresciano probably had the best games in midfield since I've been taking stats, other than Bresc's performance against Uzbekistan in Australia when they won 2-0 and Grella's defensive role against Japan, in Japan, when Australia drew 0-0.

The passing percentages of 97% defensively and overall for Milligan, are outstanding, particularly if a player passes the ball 62 times, which is an incredible amount of work.
LIke Bresciano they both made 12 passes under pressure, or made eye of the needle and defence splitting passes. Over four years I don't think anyone has equalled what they did. I could be wrong though. It was also a notable achievement because SA put a lot of pressure on time and space in parts of the first half.

Milligan also had won 12 more one on one duels than he lost. Usually Valeri, and even Culina, struggle to get in the positive in 1v1s, with Valeri in particular losing more one on one duels than he wins.
Over the years Ogger, Moore, Grella and Jedinak are our best ball winners. Ball winning may be a facet of the game where Neill is slipping, as he was up there with the others. Arsene Wenger considers as players get older their ball winning capacity diminishes, even though they continue to improve in distribution. His opinion is backed up by his assiduously compiled stats over 15 years or so.

From what I saw from the socceroos I think we are more suited to a 433 formation with Bresc playing as the No. 10 we do look alot more fluent that way, especially from what I saw in the second half

Decentric,

You cannot compare players from Germany, Spain etc to the socceroos. Completely different level.

You have to use the best system which suits your teams abilities. 4-3-3 system does not suit our style.

Recently MAN U (4-4-2) disposed of the top dutch side Ajax (4-3-3). A month ago Barcelona won the world club cup using the 4-4-2 system.

As I've said previously the 4-3-3 system has serious flaws in that when playing against a 4-4-2 formation the team playing 4-4-2 will pour through the middle of the opposition causing havoc in front goals and also owns the midfield. How did Australia score all their goals? They poured numbers through the midfield. The midfield is where games are won and lost. Simple 3 in the middle is not enough against 4 in the middle. If a defender pushes into the middle in a 4-3-3 scenario this morphs to a 3-4-3 which in turn by a 4-4-2 side can push a defender into the middle morphing into a 3-5-2. This equates to total control of the middle in every situation. At no stage does 4-3-3 outnumber a 4-4-2 formation in defence or midfield. And realistically 3-5-2 is not a sensible morph for a side playing 4-3-3 so should not be considered a formation thereof.

4-3-3 is ridiculous for Aussie football. Even Harry Kewell complained it caused too much field to be covered by the midfielders which in turn burns them out.

If your doing the statistics then I recommend you look at time in posession + effectiveness whilst in posession. The 4-3-3 causes more loss of posession than 4-4-2. If you don't have the ball you can't score. It's not rocket science.

In my opinion 4-3-3 is handicap. Australia proved this by using 4-4-2 against the Saudi's and pawned without our strongest side.

...X................X...............X.................X.....

................X........................X

............................X

....X.......................X.........................X


Here is a 1-4-3-3 with two screeners and an attacking mid in a midfield triangle.








....X...............X...............X................X


...X...............X...............X................X


................X..........................X


Here is a 1-4-4-2 with a flat midfield.


I read Kewell's comments about the Dutch system not being suitable for Australia, but at the time I thought he was frustrated because he wasn't starting in Pim's line ups because he wasn't quite fit. If he did he was deployed on the left flank where he had to track back more than he would have done as a target striker. I didn't read the comment about having to cover more ground in a 1-4-3-3 than the
1-4-4-2.

Professional players should be fit enough to play most formations. Harry may not have been fit enough for a left wide mid position in PIm's team, but many others probably were.

When I've seen these combinations up against each other, I always think the 1-4-3-3 has more bodies in central midifled and usually has more control of the game with similar quality players. I saw GCU deploy a 1-4-3-3 with the 3:1 formation in the defensive line against Magilton's Victory a few weeks ago at Launceston.
It was very easy to see Victory's 1-4-4-2 and they held their shape well, but they had little control in midfield, with Milligan and the other central midfielder having to do too much work.

Heart, Roar and Newcastle often deploy a 1-4-3-3 in the A League with considerable success. The same with Miron, but he often used the 3:1 in the defensive line.

I've seen Holland totally dominate England, with them using the 1-4-3-3 and England using a 1-4-4-2 with a flat midifeld four.

When I've watched Barca, they usually deploy a 1-4-3-3, but tend to rotate the attacking players, rathe than have a target player at the point of the attack.

You have a point that our players are not the same as those from Germany and Spain, but I think we beat Germany in a friendly under Holger.

Initially, when Holger took over from Pim , Australia were turning the ball over more than under Pim. We were a lot harder to break down under Verbeek.
In hindsight, Pim should have used Bresciano in the attacking mid/playmaker role like he did against Uzbekistan. He is a player capable of the killer pass and the sort of player we have struggled to produce.











Edited by Decentric: 3/3/2012 06:38:29 PM

I like your stats and analysis but Culina is stuffed and he won't be playing for Australia again.

Also, depends on things like the width of the pitch and other conditions. 433 might be more suited to wider pitches while 442 better in narrow pitches. I've always thought it's better to be a little flexible depending on the pitch conditions and available players. But ofcourse alot of managers want to gel their team into positions that they know so the players know what to expect from those around them.

In the end the 442 vs 433 debate doesn't yet have an objective winner proven to be generally better and should therefore be based on what best suits the current crop of players for the period in time IMO.


If we were to play an attacking passing game in the next round of qualifiers, keeping the ball in the oppositions half (bit of Spanish influence) this is what I would love to see:


Players follow their arrows when in attack.
Fullbacks pushing hard providing the width and Brosque and Holman coming inside where they are most effective.
Williams dropping back into more of a back three sweeper type where he has shown to be absolutely outstanding when doing this for Middlesbrough. Completely dictates the play when he's utilised like this and provides excellent cover for the centre backs (Many MOM awards when he plays like this).

If Culina makes an unexpected return to peak form then he should steal back the Mill/Jedi/Herd role.
Would require alot of ground covered by the fullbacks, which is why I put McKay as an option at LB.
On second thoughts, would need a more pacey centreback like Spira instead of Og.

Edited by neanderthal: 5/3/2012 04:23:15 PM

The 3:1 formation at the back is okay for narrower pitches with the 1-4-3-3.

One good thing about the 1-4-4-2 with the flat midfield it is about the easiest formation to coach players when they first play 11 v11. It is easy to hold this shape, but I think it relies to heavily on the two central midfielders.

Great diagram!

This is a pretty decent line up in suitable positions.






Edited by Decentric: 5/3/2012 04:38:06 PM

I'm just looking at the game for the third time.


In the first half Saudi played a midfield triangle with a back four. In the back four often one of the full backs pushed up to add an extra player in midfield.

It worked pretty effectively for Saudi in the first part of the game. It looked like a 1-4-3-3, morphing into a 1-3-4-3 in attack.

With the midfield triangles I've seen the 1-4-3-3 dominate possession against a 1-4-4-2 with a flat midfield at professional level. The 1-4-4-2 always has only two players doing the bulk of the work against three.

The narrow diamond shaped midfield in the 1-4-4-2 creates more problems for the 1-4-3-3, but then if one changes the 1-4-3-3 to a 3:1 defensive line, it creates more problems for the 1-4-4-2 diamond. Van 't Schip has been doing this in the A League and Miron's GCU created problems for Victory in Launceston by doing this.

Also, a 1-4-3-3 in attack withe the defensive midfield diamond can become a 1-4-2-3-1 in defence by pushing the two wingers further back in a line with the attacking mid..

Furthermore, a 1-4-3-3 in attack with the attacking midfield triangle, can easily become a 1-4-5-1 in defence in a 1-4-1-4-1 formation. The two wingers make a line of four by lining up with the two attacking mids in defence. Both defensive permutations of the two midfield triangles put a lot of bodies in compact shape in midfield.

Fair point.

Man U these days have so much of a bigger budget than Ajax the difference in calibre of players is often too great. Man U would probably beat the likes of Ajax with any formation. I doubt whether any Ajax players would be good enough to play in the Man U starting eleven ATM.

Mmm, the fact you have to dig that deep (such different quality squads) to find a 442 disposing of a 433 recently actually gives MORE credence to the 433. :oops:


Also Rooney plays quite deep nowadays, so much so that some people refer to him as an attacking mid now rather than a centre forward. The wingers also play further forward than the centre mids so it's somewhere on the blurry line between 442 and 4231.

Edited by neanderthal: 5/3/2012 11:00:32 PM

I've had a good look at this.

In the first half Bresc played a lot of deft and well -weighted passes, but I don't think it was deliberate to make it easier for other players to make a good first touch.

I've just been looking at Barca and they often hammer the ball straight at each other on the ground, but they still have a very soft first touch, often turning slightly away from their opponent.

While Barca pass with force they are taught to keep the pass on the ground so the reciever can control it better, if the ball is just 10cm off the ground this makes controlling the ball more difficult and less likely that the reciever can perform a lateral touch into space or to avoid a defender.

I think that Bresc's passing style is more due to his development in Italy and their requirements of him.