Ferguson's 442

  • Thread starter Deleted member 101472
  • Start date

Deleted member 101472

Guest
Based on players he managed against, what is the best version you can make of the 442 system he deployed in the late 90s, staying true to the philosophy of the team.

Here's my attempt

 
Ro-Ro up front to approximate Yorke-Cole! :)

 
I feel Ronaldo in these threads defeats the purpose of them, personally.

He's too otherwordly and does not need a team schematic or even a partner to be what he is.

What made Fergie's system so impressive was the way the parts created a superfluous chain who thrived off of each other. They all had unique strengths, which I think it's important are recreated in a replicated team - what I mean by that is you don't want players who could do more than the individuals they are replacing.

To the above: a supreme crossing and passing grafter like Beckham, as opposed to someone who could cross, pass but also dribble to a level far above Beckham. A dynamic, dribbling winger like Giggs whose crosses were hit and miss, and so forth. A skilful, goal adept CM with similar weaknesses to Scholes - if you don't have this, you're eering more to the '93-'94 4-4-2 of Ince and Keane, which had very different strengths and weaknesses to the '98-'99 iteration. Keane, well Keane's really difficult to recreate if you think about it as [the very few] players better than him are more multi-faceted and very probably change the team's manner by being even less restricted.

Yorke... good luck with finding a replacement for him.

It's a tricky challenge if you take out the world-breaking players.
 
Without using United players:

1724075_Dream_Team.jpg
 
I doubt Stoichkov fit that as it was a flexible formation and I prefer someone who can operate both flanks comfortably. Love Elkjaer/Seeler choices.

Perhaps Baggio - Seeler - Gullit ?

man-utd-chelsea-tactics-champions-leaguefinal-2008.jpg
or
man-utd-roma-tactics-2008.jpg

Who is more flexible then Stoichkov? Guy is deadly from both sides and in a fluid front three of a counter-attacking side i dont think he would be out of his depth in the middle. Gullit obviously works as well but opted for Hristo as he was more explosive and a better dribbler so was closer to Ronaldo then Gullit in terms of playing style. Dont see where would Baggio play in that side tbh
 
Last edited:
I feel Ronaldo in these threads defeats the purpose of them, personally.

He's too otherwordly and does not need a team schematic or even a partner to be what he is.

What made Fergie's system so impressive was the way the parts created a superfluous chain who thrived off of each other. They all had unique strengths, which I think it's important are recreated in a replicated team - what I mean by that is you don't want players who could do more than the individuals they are replacing.

To the above: a supreme crossing and passing grafter like Beckham, as opposed to someone who could cross, pass but also dribble to a level far above Beckham. A dynamic, dribbling winger like Giggs whose crosses were hit and miss, and so forth. A skilful, goal adept CM with similar weaknesses to Scholes - if you don't have this, you're eering more to the '93-'94 4-4-2 of Ince and Keane, which had very different strengths and weaknesses to the '98-'99 iteration. Keane, well Keane's really difficult to recreate if you think about it as [the very few] players better than him are more multi-faceted and very probably change the team's manner by being even less restricted.

Yorke... good luck with finding a replacement for him.

It's a tricky challenge if you take out the world-breaking players.

You make a fair point about Ronaldo, but if we're taking the Treble-winning side as a template then personally I think a proven, greater than the sum of it's parts strike partnership is a good idea to replicate that Yorke-Cole alchemy. Ronaldo-Romario as suggested by @Invictus is just about as good as it gets in that regard. Two of the very greatest strikers of all-time who thrived playing alongside each other. It still annoys me that we were denied the chance to see them on the big stage together at WC 98.

Taking it down a few notches I suppose Rebrov-Shevchenko would fit the bill, or maybe Butragueno/Sanchez or Mancini/Vialli.
 
Who is more flexible then Stoichkov? Guy is deadly from both sides and in a fluid front three of a counter-attacking side i dont think he would be out of his depth in the middle. Gullit obviously works as well but opted for Hristo as he was more explosive and a better dribbler so was closer to Ronaldo then Gullit in terms of playing style. Dont see where would Baggio play in that side tbh
ah ffs.

Stoichkov was a great crosser in his early CSKA days, on the right he played very rarely under Cruyff and still he was much in a free role then. When he's on the right wing he will either cut in and shoot or drag the ball back and pass it low in the box.

He wasn't comfortable with his right foot, think in a more recent interview he said that he has scored one goal from memory with his right bragging about that it was against Levski (CSKA Sofia domestic rival).

Stoichkov best came on the left and even in a free role his natural inclination was to go to the left(like 94' WC).
 
You make a fair point about Ronaldo, but if we're taking the Treble-winning side as a template then personally I think a proven, greater than the sum of it's parts strike partnership is a good idea to replicate that Yorke-Cole alchemy. Ronaldo-Romario as suggested by @Invictus is just about as good as it gets in that regard. Two of the very greatest strikers of all-time who thrived playing alongside each other. It still annoys me that we were denied the chance to see them on the big stage together at WC 98.

Taking it down a few notches I suppose Rebrov-Shevchenko would fit the bill, or maybe Butragueno/Sanchez or Mancini/Vialli.
Ro-Ro is my favourite 2-some strike tandem of all-time, but the problem is, that's a pairing that defies logic in some ways: 2 all-timers as individuals (one at the absolute peak of his young powers) who formed a short, but telepathic understanding and synergy for the brief stint they featured together (they really should have gone to the '98 WC, totally agreed) - I don't think: 'Fergie replicants' when those two come to mind, I think: strike-pairing to face the Mars xi.

The other thing with them as opposed to Yorke-Cole is their individual brilliance is such that taking on a backline by themselves or going through 2-4 men in a flash is an expectation not a once or twice a season occurrence. It begs the question of: what tactical construct do they need to even adhere to? Which, even at Yorke's ballon-level best, is some way removed from that partnership where a number of their goals could only come by way of the partnership.

Yorke, for my money, should have won the ballon d'or that season, such was his level, and if we're to truly recreate a partnership that imitates those two then the #10 has to be better than the #9 with similar attributes and impact. This is just my personal feeling on the matter if we are to truly recreate the '99 team. I'd just be wary of deviations that make it 'any old 4-4-2' rather than one with considerations of the source material.
 
Ro-Ro is my favourite 2-some strike tandem of all-time, but the problem is, that's a pairing that defies logic in some ways: 2 all-timers as individuals (one at the absolute peak of his young powers) who formed a short, but telepathic understanding and synergy for the brief stint they featured together (they really should have gone to the '98 WC, totally agreed) - I don't think: 'Fergie replicants' when those two come to mind, I think: strike-pairing to face the Mars xi.

The other thing with them as opposed to Yorke-Cole is their individual brilliance is such that taking on a backline by themselves or going through 2-4 men in a flash is an expectation not a once or twice a season occurrence. It begs the question of: what tactical construct do they need to even adhere to? Which, even at Yorke's ballon-level best, is some way removed from that partnership where a number of their goals could only come by way of the partnership.

Yorke, for my money, should have won the ballon d'or that season, such was his level, and if we're to truly recreate a partnership that imitates those two then the #10 has to be better than the #9 with similar attributes and impact. This is just my personal feeling on the matter if we are to truly recreate the '99 team. I'd just be wary of deviations that make it 'any old 4-4-2' rather than one with considerations of the source material.

Very good points. The bolded part makes it very tricky, certainly if we're looking for a proven partnership. I didn't really like my ButraguenoSanchez or Mancini/Vialli suggestions tbh as they were more typical creator/scorer partnerships than Cole and Yorke, where the second striker Yorke actually outscored the CF Cole in the Treble-winning season, as well as providing an insane amount of assists. Rebrov/Shevchenko still comes somewhat close, with Rebrov surprisingly scoring almost as many as Shevchenko during their two peak seasons as a duo. Doesn't quite hit the mark in terms of '#10 has to be better than the #9' though, for all Rebrov's brilliance before he moved away from Kiev.
 
Any love for Sheva/Villa duo up front instead of Yorke/Cole?

Both are pretty complimentary in their game and Villa being more of the creator would fill nicely in Yorke's boots whilst Sheva's link up game and movement could create pretty deadly duo. His heading ability and anticipation in the box would also be very useful addition being at the end of wingers crosses.
 
ah ffs.

Stoichkov was a great crosser in his early CSKA days, on the right he played very rarely under Cruyff and still he was much in a free role then. When he's on the right wing he will either cut in and shoot or drag the ball back and pass it low in the box.

He wasn't comfortable with his right foot, think in a more recent interview he said that he has scored one goal from memory with his right bragging about that it was against Levski (CSKA Sofia domestic rival).

Stoichkov best came on the left and even in a free role his natural inclination was to go to the left(like 94' WC).

He would be replacing Ronaldo not Beckham so it would be a free role where he would mostly "cut in and shoot or drag the ball back and pass it low in the box." so i dont see where is the issue. He is at his best on the left but he can also play in other areas of the final third if the role is right.
 
He would be replacing Ronaldo not Beckham so it would be a free role where he would mostly "cut in and shoot or drag the ball back and pass it low in the box." so i dont see where is the issue. He is at his best on the left but he can also play in other areas of the final third if the role is right.
For sure. He's proven right across the attack, can easily play as a free-roaming forward, and his exact deployment really depends on what you want him to do.
 
He would be replacing Ronaldo not Beckham so it would be a free role where he would mostly "cut in and shoot or drag the ball back and pass it low in the box." so i dont see where is the issue. He is at his best on the left but he can also play in other areas of the final third if the role is right.
That’s the thing tho. He would start nominally on the right but will cut in at every occasion. Hristo on the right is more of a free roaming SS that the winger / wing forward on the left. He would be a bit like Robben on the left or Messi on the left etc. He will pop up occasionally there and he isn’t as bad as Valencia on the other channel of course but he never loved to use his right on consistent basis.

If he’s on the right and the defender shows him the weaker foot you would lose his crossing ability which was top notch.

That will also make him more predictable defending against and you are losing some of his best abilities like stretching the play into space using his pace as he will naturally cut in from the right.

You would find plenty of other options on the right wing that would be better than him in that role.
 
For the 1999 style side I think I'd something like this:

------------Pele----Villa
Dzajic---Rikjaard--Sammer--Nedved
Maldini--Stielike----Kohler----Zanetti
----------------Chilavert------------

Not sure on the keeper. I can't think of another keeper who had big Pete's long throw ability who was also top notch at everything else.

I went for Stielike for Johnsen on the basis the latter played DM quite a bit from memory. Sammer is a great Keane replacement and would be excellent as a defensive box-to-box. Nedved for Beckham. Yorke was a creative second striker who scored loads in '99 so no better than that than Pele.
 
How about Dalglish and Rush for the Yorke-Cole imitation?
Like Henry - Bergkamp, a pair that shone in a similar set up but worked differently. Can’t think of a similar duo off the top of my head.

Müller-Seeler perhaps?
 
I'd throw Puskas/Kocsis in the discussion as well with Puskas playing the Yorke role
 
Taking it down a few notches I suppose Rebrov-Shevchenko would fit the bill, or maybe Butragueno/Sanchez or Mancini/Vialli.
Sánchez + Butragueño is a good shout because you can pair them with Míchel (fantastic crosser from wide midfield positions). Not the best stylistic swaps, but eh...slim packing and all.



Speaking of former Madrid players, Míchel Salgado would be a decent (and realistic) option at rightback — thought he and Gaz were on a comparable standing through the late '90s and early 2000s behind Cafú and Zanetti.
 
You would find plenty of other options on the right wing that would be better than him in that role.
What’s that even about? He replaces Ronaldo on the left as a free-roaming forward, no one used him on the right.
 
What’s that even about? He replaces Ronaldo on the left as a free-roaming forward, no one used him on the right.
Ronaldo was playing from the right channel more often than not, whilst Stoichkov is the other way around. I was commenting on Stoichkov being shunted on the right and playing as a RW rather than LW.

He can pop up there from time to time, but most often than not he will occupy his favorite left/inside left channel.
 
Ronaldo was playing from the right channel more often than not, whilst Stoichkov is the other way around. I was commenting on Stoichkov being shunted on the right and playing as a RW rather than LW.

He can pop up there from time to time, but most often than not he will occupy his favorite left/inside left channel.

think it was the other way around at that point, Ronaldo was mostly on the left and would roam centrally often so he spent least amount of time on the right.
 
think it was the other way around at that point, Ronaldo was mostly on the left and would roam centrally often so he spent least amount of time on the right.
from memory was the opposite. He switched flanks when he moved to Real.
 
In 07-08 he played on the right/inside right.
from memory was the opposite. He switched flanks when he moved to Real.

nah, he switched flanks long before the move to Madrid but he was switching sides and roaming more at United. Not sure when exactly he moved more to the left at United but i know he did and from the games i watched back recently he was more often on the left then he is on the right. Mind you, only watched big games so Hargo or Park would be always playing those so its only natural they are on the right.
But then again we should be replicating a team that played against the big boys and not teams that battered the likes of Wigan and co.
 
In 07-08 he played on the right/inside right.
from memory was the opposite. He switched flanks when he moved to Real.
He played a free role and actually started centrally more often than not. But at that point he was not a right winger. Rooney and Tevez were the ones who adapted to Ronaldo's movement — the same way Eljkær and Seeler will adapt to Stoichkov's movement in Sjor's team.

I think he played mostly on the right in 2006/07, but since then he appeared more on the left.

From zonal marking:
man-utd-chelsea-tactics-champions-leaguefinal-2008.jpg
man-utd-roma-tactics-2008.jpg

CL final and QF against Roma
 
nah, he switched flanks long before the move to Madrid but he was switching sides and roaming more at United. Not sure when exactly he moved more to the left at United but i know he did and from the games i watched back recently he was more often on the left then he is on the right. Mind you, only watched big games so Hargo or Park would be always playing those so its only natural they are on the right.
But then again we should be replicating a team that played against the big boys and not teams that battered the likes of Wigan and co.
Big games you might be right as we played in different formation and even as @harms showed against Roma we started without a typical CF and he was the complete "striker" in that game hovering around the final third.

He played a free role and actually started centrally more often than not. But at that point he was not a right winger. Rooney and Tevez were the ones who adapted to Ronaldo's movement — the same way Eljkær and Seeler will adapt to Stoichkov's movement in Sjor's team.

I think he played mostly on the right in 2006/07, but since then he appeared more on the left.

From zonal marking:
man-utd-chelsea-tactics-champions-leaguefinal-2008.jpg
man-utd-roma-tactics-2008.jpg

CL final and QF against Roma
Remember Rooney moving to the left from central position that season but it was Rooney/Tevez up front as a strike duo in Prem.


Manchester United’s 2008 double winning team was a combination of stunning attacking talents and rock-solid defenders. In the Premier League, Sir Alex Ferguson generally stuck to his favoured 4-4-2 formation with Rooney and Tevez as the main strikers and Ronaldo playing on the right. It is the Champions League where Ferguson showed his tactical nous(Some say it was Carlos Quieroz) as they destroyed teams on the counter-attack. A front three of Tevez-Rooney-Ronaldo was pacy,mobile and lethal in finishing off teams. As all three of them could play in a variety of roles across the pitch, teams had a lot of trouble in marking them.

One of United’s best performances in that season was away against Roma in the Champions League Quarter Final first leg as United won 2-0. Ronaldo played as the False 9 with Rooney on the left and Tevez sacrificed for Park who was on the right. Ronaldo capped the performance with a stunning headed goal as he arrived late in the box to meet a Paul Scholes cross.

The best part of that squad was that Ferguson had multitude of players who were specialists in performing specific roles. Park Ji Sung, Darren Fletcher, Anderson(Who had a very good season) and Owen Hargreaves were players who could play in multiple roles across the pitch but were brilliant tactically in executing exactly what was needed of them.
 
He played a free role and actually started centrally more often than not. But at that point he was not a right winger. Rooney and Tevez were the ones who adapted to Ronaldo's movement — the same way Eljkær and Seeler will adapt to Stoichkov's movement in Sjor's team.

I think he played mostly on the right in 2006/07, but since then he appeared more on the left.

From zonal marking:
man-utd-chelsea-tactics-champions-leaguefinal-2008.jpg
man-utd-roma-tactics-2008.jpg

CL final and QF against Roma
In CL he played in a more fluid front 3 with Rooney usually doing a bulk of the heavy lifting and dropping deeper, but in the league for most of the season it was Giggs on the left, Ronaldo on the right with Rooney and Tevez up front. It was obviously pretty fluid and all of them picked the ball deeper, we didn't have any #9 that stayed up front as such.
 
Sánchez + Butragueño is a good shout because you can pair them with Míchel (fantastic crosser from wide midfield positions). Not the best stylistic swaps, but eh...slim packing and all.



Speaking of former Madrid players, Míchel Salgado would be a decent (and realistic) option at rightback — thought he and Gaz were on a comparable standing through the late '90s and early 2000s behind Cafú and Zanetti.


Aye, Michel is about as close as it gets stylistically to Beckham for that RW slot imo, and I like the Salgado shout as well.
 
Fergie-formation-tactics.png


My take on it.

Falcao/Matthaus IMO is an upgrade to Keane/Scholes, but also keeps some of the common traits and general idea behind our 4-4-2. Gento is close as it gets in terms of Giggs replacement and Figo with his engine and crossing/creative ability is the natural successor of Becks.

We didn't have the most attacking full backs so Nilton/Lahm pair seems the most balanced and solid defensively pairing, whilst of course able to stretch the attack and bring the ball forward.

Scirea / Kohler is a non brainer - Kohler to act as the proactive stopper and Scirea to read the game and organize the defence from behind.
 
Fergie-formation-tactics.png


My take on it.

Falcao/Matthaus IMO is an upgrade to Keane/Scholes, but also keeps some of the common traits and general idea behind our 4-4-2. Gento is close as it gets in terms of Giggs replacement and Figo with his engine and crossing/creative ability is the natural successor of Becks.

We didn't have the most attacking full backs so Nilton/Lahm pair seems the most balanced and solid defensively pairing, whilst of course able to stretch the attack and bring the ball forward.

Scirea / Kohler is a non brainer - Kohler to act as the proactive stopper and Scirea to read the game and organize the defence from behind.

We didn't play with a libero in 1999 though, what about villa torres upfront?
 
We didn't play with a libero in 1999 though, what about villa torres upfront?

Late Scirea was more of a CB rather than a libero, when he lost a step or two.

Villa/Torres is a good shout I'd also have Rebrov/Sheva from his early days as an option as they also formed a telepathic partnership on their own at Kyiv.
 
Not the best version but in line with the philosophy


----------------- David Trézeguet
------------------------------------ Marco Simone
Laurent Robert--------------------------------------------- Pirès
------------------- Xabi Alonso ------- Makélélé