How was Alex Ferguson's 4-4-2 so successful?

[Cheesy]

A different era where 4-4-2 was more common. In later years he often adapted to a 4-3-3 and sometimes instead of pacey, direct wingers with excellent crossing ability like Giggs or Beckham we'd often utilise players like Park, Nani and shifted the likes of Rooney out wide when Ronaldo was still here...who himself was capable of a direct, pacey style, but was also rather nifty at scoring a ton of goals and playing just about anywhere along the frontline in his later years.

As @Gio says though, his 4-4-2's weren't always concrete and definitively rigid - we've used plenty of forwards who could drop back and influence the midfield, and had plenty of defensive minded midfielders who could help with defensive duties. Plus there was Keane, who was always going to be a force in any midfield battle irrespective of formation.

 

[TheReligion]

For the bigger games, we adapted to a system much closer to a 4-3-3 during his latter years. He only swore to a classic 4-4-2 in a time when most teams did.

Football was not so obsessed by ball possession as it is now + there was some top quality dms back then

Successful domestically but not at European level.

Shit changed in 2007.

That was then.

Athletico and Leicester both do well with 442 here and now.

 

[Tiber]

good players, great manager

Fergie would have won the league with our reserve team last year

 

[Ixion]

The Treble side at least had the perfect players for each position, the right kind of striker and deeper striker, the perfect mix of wingers, two incredible attacking and defensive midfielders, good attacking fullbacks that could cross. There was no shoehorning players into position, everyone played to their strengths and suited the role they were in.

 

[Minimalist]

Shit hot players.

This.

 

[WhoDaGOAT]

Athletico and Leicester both do well with 442 here and now.

Atlético have also lost more than they've won with the system.

It's a good system for certain situations. It requires an incredibly fit and mentally strong squad, though.

I'm not sure why you're quoting me, though. The OP isn't asking 4-4-2 today.

 

[Bwuk]

Let's buy half of Monaco and recreate it!

Dave
Valencia - Bailly - Rojo - Mendy
Mkhi - Fabinho - Pogba - Lemar
Rashford - Mbappe

Romero
Mensah - Smalling - Jones - Shaw
Mata - Herrera - Fellaini - Young
Martial - Lingard​

 

[prtk0811]

It was never pure 442 , it was flexible , unbalanced system with the best possible defense the midfeild and attack too, and his philosophy made it a success.

 

[prtk0811]

Let's buy half of Monaco and recreate it!

Dave
Valencia - Bailly - Rojo - Mendy
Mkhi - Fabinho - Pogba - Lemar
Rashford - Mbappe

Romero
Mensah - Smalling - Jones - Shaw
Mata - Herrera - Fellaini - Young
Martial - Lingard​

Grass always looks greener on the other side.

 

[Theafonis]

Let's buy half of Monaco and recreate it!

Dave
Valencia - Bailly - Rojo - Mendy
Mkhi - Fabinho - Pogba - Lemar
Rashford - Mbappe

Romero
Mensah - Smalling - Jones - Shaw
Mata - Herrera - Fellaini - Young
Martial - Lingard​

Mata would get absolutely exposed on the right wing.

 

[Bojan11]

Football was not so obsessed by ball possession as it is now + there was some top quality dms back then

And he had better CBs that didn't require massive protection.

 

[FootyballsL4]

There's no such thing as 'modern football'. Only good players in setups that suit their skillsets. That could just as easily be 4-4-2 as any currently fashionable system.

Yep. Inclined too agree

442 was for a long time but has become
More unfashionable than outdated in my opinion.

Flooding the midfield it's often seen as the answer but that's not necessarily the case. There are ways and means of getting around that and you are correct true striking partnerships seem too have died out and there is nothing more certain than if you have two guys getting 40/50 goals a season between them then whatever is going on behind them you will pick up a hell of a lot of points.

Coupled with the fact you had shit hot players and a top manager (not forgetting the keeper who was worth 10 points as season) it's not difficult how it was possible too do so well in my opinion.

Granted if your not on the ball (excuse the pun) and a 5 man midfield is ticking your going too struggle and get over ran but you were generally too good for that.

Not with standing you can always just lump it long too get yourself out of the shit if there is a two up front..I dare say you did a little bit of that on occasion too get you out of a hole or two.

Now after all them compliments I'm going to drink a large glass of bleach boil my head in strong acid and make my way too A and E

 

[Cliche Guevara]

It's eleven players on a pitch.

Football is not that complicated. Get eleven good players on the park, who know their role, and the formation and tactics become less relevant.

Simple.

 

[Lastwolf]

Formations even in FM aren't that important, roles, team instructions and players at your disposal often have a far greater impact.

Kinda the same in real life too.

 

[beergod]

By not being an ideologue and saying we must win with X tactic or Y formation and having a mentally strong and flexible squad that could adapt to the opponent in front of them.

 

[Cheesy]

By not being an ideologue and saying we must win with X tactic or Y formation and having a mentally strong and flexible squad that could adapt to the opponent in front of them.

Especially in Europe in later years where we were able to grind out some impressive result enroute to our three appearances/one win in the final.

 

[Adam_S]

4-4-2 worked so well in the treble winning team because the wide players - Giggs and Beckham were first choice - could also play in central midfield and were more than able to tuck in and give extra numbers in the middle. One of the strikers could generally drop back and pick up the ball in central midfield too.

In the 06/07 side, this on paper...

Ronaldo------Carrick------Scholes------Giggs

-----------Tevez------Rooney---------------

...often ended up looking more like this...

----------Carrick-------Scholes--------------

-----------------Giggs----------------------

----Ronaldo---------------------Rooney-----

------------------Tevez---------------------

In both teams a common theme is players with genuine quality who can move around and play in different roles on the pitch as required.

 

[broccoli]

In FM you nerd a fluid or very fluid shape to make a 442 work. In ensures players work as a cohesive unit and player mentality is spread across even. Don't expect mad possession stats though unless you tweak things according to opposition game.

 

[caid]

Our wingers played fairly deep and tucked in out of possession and generally worked their asses off.
He quite often would select a cb in one of the fb positions and they wouldn't really push forward.
He usually had one of the strikers playing a bit deeper and over the years they became more of a midfielder than a striker.

He also had stupidly good midfielders for a lot of his time here or just selected 2 dm's like carrick and fletcher.

Then a lot of teams would just hand us possession on a plate. Against teams that could actually hurt us it was more or less always a 451.

 

[Sereques]

Successful Really?

 

[Nighteyes]

It was very rarely an out and out 442 in the last decade or so. Someone (almost always Rooney) dropped back either to midfield or out wide to solidify the midfield. When we reached the final in 2011 the entire tactic revolved around Rooney and Giggs playing as a combination of CM and #10. The 90s team could afford to be a more conventional 442 because Keane was a monster of a player who provided great balance to the team.

SAF was a tactical genius.

 

[Insanity]

........

Can someone help me understand how his formation was so successful? Looking back to a few years ago with Hernandez and Rooney up front, they usually stayed forward.........

Rooney and Hernandez didn't usually stay forward. Rooney regularly dropped back in the midfield to help our aging and non-dynamic midfield. People have either forgotten, or choose to ignore it, but Rooney was our most important contributor post Keane. He provided the base that helped the more talented forwards to prosper and he helped shore up the midfield and provided stability. That is why every manager in the league had nothing but praise for him. He was the selfless warrior of the team.

As other have mentioned, to play the attacking 442 you are asking for (not the variety that Atletico play), you need dynamic midfield of the variety of the Keane-Scholes combo, a solid defense and wingers of the quality of Giggs and Beckham, who can provide width and crossing, and have the work-rate to do the defensive work and shore up the midfield, if needed.

The closest counter-attacking set-up of the type I have seen in the last few years was when Ancelotti played di Maria as the left sided attacking midfielder at Madrid to get the best out of di Maria, Ronaldo and Bale. It was a hybrid 442/433, where di Maria worked as the hard-working left sided midfielder, who became a winger in attack and allowed Ronaldo to move in almost as a second striker and tucked in when the opposition attacked. That team/set-up along with the Bayern under Jupp are two of my favorite teams of this decade. I wish United can play football like those two teams played football.

 

[RooneyLegend]

One of the wingers has to add some balance to the midfield 4. In essence a becks, Ribery, and Giggs in 08. Just the same way Monaco are playing with Lemar. It's absolutely pivotal to have a side midfielder who can help in transitioning the ball from the back, and while adding a body in midfield.

 

[Mike09]

I was playing football manager the other night and I was trying to create a 4-4-2 formation for my league championship side. But it almost was an impossible task, it's hard to counter a 3 men midfield or a playmaker exploiting the holes, its also hard to stop attacking full backs when your wingers are caught up high. Theres issues with the gaps that appear in midfield due to the spaces between attack and the middle/defense and the middle.

Can someone help me understand how his formation was so successful? Looking back to a few years ago with Hernandez and Rooney up front, they usually stayed forward. I always wondered why teams were unable to exploit them due to lack of numbers in the middle or why his teams were never caught out on the flanks because I don't recall wingers like Nani tracking back. With all the furor about defensive responsibilities from attacking players these days, it seemed like his attackers played without defensive restrictions but just kept their shape instead. Even Simeone's 4-4-2 tends to be defensively solid as the wide players are more like wide midfielders.

How exactly was he successful with a 4-4-2 with regards to player instructions, and how did he overcome a 4-3-3 (or any variation of it)?

How would his 4-4-2 stand up to a 3-5-2?

He doesn't stick with only 442. He rotates his formation depends on the opposition team. Talking about Hernandez and Rooney duo in 2010/2011, I do believe we failed massively in final CL because of that formation. We were being outrun by Barcelona's midfield. Although it worked against Chelsea multiple times, I guess Park-Giggs-Carrick-Valencia/Nani were really too good for Chelsea's 2010/2011 midfield. But if I'm not mistaken we didn't use 442 against City in that season.

But yeah it's incredible sometime when you think how good his 442 formation were. It's not a defensive 442 but more standard and offensive 442.

 

[vadimivich]

SAF's early teams won at least in large part because they scored feckloads of goals. Those 90s teams that played almost exclusively 4-4-2 would be considered wildly open in today's football, and while they were good defensively there weren't elite even in terms of the PL. The 93-94 double winning team conceded 38 goals in 42 matches, which was a good number. Blackburn conceded 36 and Arsenal conceded only 28. United scored 80 goals though, and that's why they won the league. They used to simply smash teams and demand that you score multiple goals to keep up. Giggs and Kanchelskis on the wings used to stretch teams so wide and young Keane was athletic enough to limit the damage defensively (Keane was a fecking monster and really made the whole thing work). Paul Ince was a damn good CM as well.

I do think the very attacking 4-4-2 was a bit naive in Europe and contributed to United's struggles in the 90s. SAF seemed to go to a more conservative formation after Kanchelskis left and never really played that purely attacking 4-4-2 in big matches after that ... though he would pull it out against smaller teams at home (or even away sometimes) in the league.