All the managers who have come in have played 4-2-3-1 when we haven't had many defensive midfielders in this squad. Now that we have a proper defensive midfielder in Casemiro, I think we should play a flat 4-3-3 starting this sunday. Some might argue that Eriksen is playing a lot forward since Casemiro was installed into the team but if you watch carefully, you will see that Eriksen drops deeper than Casemiro on many occasions to collect the ball from the defense which I think is unnecessary. Simply because Eriksen is an asset in attack and needs to be in front of Casemiro and receive to turn and dispatch world-class passes and through balls. He is definitely better than Bruno at that. I love Bruno but he loses possession so many times. I think Bruno and Eriksen should play alongside each other and the wide players can interchange quick passes with them and move into the opponents box.
Why don't we just play 4-3-3?
- Thread starter OleTheGreat
- Start date
This will simply not work because Bruno is no midfielder. He's miles better and more effective when free-roaming around the box. The only attribute he has to play that role is stamina. Making him play deeper is not a solution.
We can play 4-3-3 but obviously as long as Bruno plays (what is literally every game), we will play two man midfield.
I also think you can't play 4-3-3 without a striker who can play back to goal, what has been the case this season apart from 25min cameos from Martial.
What is this huge difference people allude to with 4-3-3?
We already had Eriksen playing higher than Casemiro against Everton. We already have Bruno doing whatever the hell Bruno wants. Nominally a midfielder but generally playing high. It's not as if 2 are glued to deep areas on the evidence of that game, but I suspect Eriksen's role depends on the competence of the opposition and how much he's needed to dig in and help us build up.
We already have 3 across the front.
We already had Eriksen playing higher than Casemiro against Everton. We already have Bruno doing whatever the hell Bruno wants. Nominally a midfielder but generally playing high. It's not as if 2 are glued to deep areas on the evidence of that game, but I suspect Eriksen's role depends on the competence of the opposition and how much he's needed to dig in and help us build up.
We already have 3 across the front.
Yer interim skipper can’t play there.
Bruno is a problem we're going to have to solve soon.
Two posts I have made in the last week.
I still think we're going to struggle to be as fluid as we want us to be if we continue playing a formation with a #10 and another #10 in midfield.
It's got nothing to do with the implementation of the tactics and everything to do with the areas that our players occupy and the options they have on the ball.
We've got a big issue on what we're going to do with Bruno, Eriksen is good enough to play as a CM, given that he's partnered with another CM and a DM behind them, but Bruno isn't, and as long as we're playing with a #10, we're going to struggle to play free flowing football.
I can't wait for the team to improve in possession and move the ball around quickly, once we do that, hopefully we can put him in 1v1 situations against the fullback more often. Right now, counter attacks aside, we don't move the ball quick enough, which is why when our wingers get the ball, they're already double teamed.
That's a problem with the 4231 that we play, we aren't able to overload the wings.
a 433 will enable us to have the RB RW and RCM close to each other interchanging passes and creating 1v1's for our wingers to take advantage.
Two posts I have made in the last week.
I still think we're going to struggle to be as fluid as we want us to be if we continue playing a formation with a #10 and another #10 in midfield.
It's got nothing to do with the implementation of the tactics and everything to do with the areas that our players occupy and the options they have on the ball.
We've got a big issue on what we're going to do with Bruno, Eriksen is good enough to play as a CM, given that he's partnered with another CM and a DM behind them, but Bruno isn't, and as long as we're playing with a #10, we're going to struggle to play free flowing football.
I can't wait for the team to improve in possession and move the ball around quickly, once we do that, hopefully we can put him in 1v1 situations against the fullback more often. Right now, counter attacks aside, we don't move the ball quick enough, which is why when our wingers get the ball, they're already double teamed.
That's a problem with the 4231 that we play, we aren't able to overload the wings.
a 433 will enable us to have the RB RW and RCM close to each other interchanging passes and creating 1v1's for our wingers to take advantage.
We pretty much are playing a 4-3-3.
Eriksen's role wouldn't really change in a 433. It's Bruno that would change, as he'd be dropping deeper and acting more as a midfielder than an attacker.
Do people think that if we say to players play a rigid 4-3-3, its going to change anything? If you look at the game, its become a game of varied formations now.
Even though we start the game with a base 4-2-3-1 formation on paper, when we are playing a deep block it becomes a 3-1-6 formation and 4-4-2 when defending.
When we play a good team we are defending in 4-2-3-1 and when we are pressing teams the formation is different because Anotny presses the LCB and Dalot is meant to press the LB.
Even though we start the game with a base 4-2-3-1 formation on paper, when we are playing a deep block it becomes a 3-1-6 formation and 4-4-2 when defending.
When we play a good team we are defending in 4-2-3-1 and when we are pressing teams the formation is different because Anotny presses the LCB and Dalot is meant to press the LB.
The difference is marginal but you can blame Bruno for that. He likes to play right next to the striker.
If the manager wanted to play 4-3-3 and not have Bruno higher up, he would have been told.
I dont get this nonsense about Bruno is playing the way he feels and is to be blamed for formations. That is what an agenda is.
Every player is been told where to play and what to do on the pitch, Ten Hag would hook them if they didn't follow, Bruno does not have some special dispensation to do what he wants to either.
It's not even an agenda. Bruno has never been that disciplined of a player and has a tendency to roam about the pitch (often higher up), the same way Rooney did. But it fecks us against higher pressing teams when in our build up from the back he prefers to play off of the striker instead of dropping into the hole to offer a 3rd midfield option. You can go back and find countless examples of us basically playing a 4-2-4 at times.
The way you said its his fault clearly shows an agenda. If the manager has a problem, he wont play him, if he thinks he is messing the whole system.
No top coach will let 1 player dictate how he plays, Ten Hag has shown us by dropping Ronaldo because he doesnt suit his style.
Yet some people think Bruno is doing things of his own back and the manager has no say.
I mean it's been hashed plenty of times that formations are all fluid anyways, a 4231 becomes a 433 if the 10 drops a bit deeper, and it becomes a 424 if he plays almost as a second striker. ETH dropped Ronaldo because he was ineffective and lacking fitness as well. He's not going to drop Bruno just because he has a tendency to drift positionally during the match, as ETH also uses him as a main forward presser defensively and doesn't have a better option there.
It's not black and white, he's not "letting a player dictate how he plays". But every player has tendencies and habits of where they like to receive the ball and play, and at a certain point in a player's career those become a bit more ingrained (especially if they have had success in the past).
To play 433, we need two quality no. 8s. We only have one.
Not true. It can also function with an 8, a 4 and a 6, traditionally. 2 8s might not be the most effective way to play given they occupy similar areas of the pitch. Chelsea have used Tiago, Essien and Ballack as a 6 in previous years, Ballack being a prime example of being an 8 but playing as a 6 to support the team.
That being said, as a previous poster has reiterated - formations are fluid and do not stay in a single shape throughout 90 mins. Potter has us switching between different systems throughout a game that aren’t as simple as 4-2-3-1 into 4-3-3. This whole idea of static systems needs to be binned. It’s not the 90s.
There's really not much difference. Even when we played 4-3-3 with Mourinho/Ole we had Carrick sitting, Herrera as an 8 and Pogba as an 8/10. For us, we would have Casemiro sitting, Eriksen still deeper controlling and Bruno trying to push up which is pretty much what we're doing already. If we had Bruno deeper one of the two 8s have to be good dribblers and neither of them are so it is better for Bruno to stay further ahead where he can just receive the ball.
It'll never look like 433 with Bruno playing.
Two 8s is too offensive imo would only work with a team that's exceptional in possession. A no 6 would balance it.
The idea that Ten Hag let’s Bruno do what he wants is hilarious. Like Ronaldo, he wouldn’t be on the pitch if that was the case.
I’ve liked the idea of a three man midfield for a long time, but we need to play to our strengths and that involves playing Bruno, Casemiro and Eriksen against most sides.
I’d love a De Jong type and clearly so would Ten Hag, but we don’t have one. Not yet, anyway.
I’d love a De Jong type and clearly so would Ten Hag, but we don’t have one. Not yet, anyway.
We play more 4141 than anything which is fine with me
Been waiting for long term focus on the 4-3-3 since Jose was playing it, then Ole came in and built his caretaker success on it too which felt great but ultimately we was sold a lie as he went to 2 dm's quite literally upon getting the full time job. That was primarily the reason i was ole out, it lead to some dreadful football putting Lingard/Pereira at the 10 only to be saved with bursts of individual performances from Bruno.
Edit: We have the players for it too it "just" requires dropping Bruno and finding a better solution up front. Its not like Bruno can't be an 8 or anything hes just undisciplined so there would be better options in a midfield 3, like McTominay or Donny.
Edit: We have the players for it too it "just" requires dropping Bruno and finding a better solution up front. Its not like Bruno can't be an 8 or anything hes just undisciplined so there would be better options in a midfield 3, like McTominay or Donny.
Last edited:
One simple name is why we don’t play a 4-3-3, Bruno Fernandes.
Only playing as false 9, or a winger. Bruno is a liability in a flat MF, probably worse than Fred who get bullied every 15min. If we are going to play 433, which we will have to against strong side, Casemiro, Eriksen + McTom prefer, Fred OK, even VDB might be a better choice than Bruno. It is the front 3 that need to give, Bruno or attacking player.
Because we have Bruno.
Exactly. Far to much emphasize is placed on the ‘formation number’. Modern day football is all about the old ‘total football’. The Eastern Europeans started it in the 50’s, became identifiable under the Dutch in the 70’s and perfected at Barca & Ajax from Cruijff’s doctrine. All about fluidity, positional play, pressing, defending on the front foot etc. All from a 433 system and EtH is certainly a disciple of the Cruijff doctrine. I think most teams play 442 or 433 or 352. All this 42121 etc bollocks is for the media.
We do play 4-3-3, we play with a 6/8/10. Eriksen sometimes drops deeper to pick the ball up from the defence because that's what 8's do and because ETH wants us to play through midfield and retain possession more.
Just because we only play with one 6 doesn't mean the other two midfielders should just primarily stay forward and not come deep to get involved with the build up.
Formations change regularly throughout the course of a match, it just doesn't really matter. Eriksen will operate behind, alongside and in front of Casemiro at varying points in the scope of a match.
that was still a 433 though, despite someone putting it in a 4231.
4231 is just a 433 variant with some different instructions. Not sure why people started treating it differently.
It’s 3-1-6 in build up, 4-1-4-1 when defending deep, 2-3-2-3 in positional attack, 4-4-2 when pressing high.
4-3-3 means 4 defenders, 3 midfielders and 3 attackers. It is not a formation per se, it is the way to describe balance of the team. Why people like to argue on everything?
4-3-3 means 4 defenders, 3 midfielders and 3 attackers. It is not a formation per se, it is the way to describe balance of the team. Why people like to argue on everything?
I think it's our striker options more than Bruno. We need that player behind the striker if it's Ronaldo or Rashford up top because they can get quite isolated.
Martial would be an improvement in that regard because he is better at holding the ball up and bringing others in to play, but his fitness is a problem.
Martial would be an improvement in that regard because he is better at holding the ball up and bringing others in to play, but his fitness is a problem.
The argument here, and whenever this topic is brought up, is whether we actually have 3 players in ‘midfield’ during the game or two, more often than not. Anyone can then have their respective opinion on that question - but that is the question. The assertion is that we build play with two in the middle, while Bruno is often up front.
Of course, players are not statues, and they move around, so people have contrasting views on this point.
Agreed. And there is also a strange habit to dumbify everything, everything is "simple".
Formations do matter, they are about how a team occupy and cover space. Two 433s can be vastly different, two 4231s can be vastly different, so to make the point that a 4231 is just a 433 is wrong on way too many levels. In pretty much all cases you need to look at teams individually.
I just checked Casemiro, Eriksen and Bruno heat maps on sofascore. Casemiro is a pure DM, Eriksen is box to box, Bruno plays as central attacking midfielder/mezzala (tends to be on the left half flank in a more advanced position) but not number 10 for me. Why not number 10? Because heat map doesn't display his presence in the box at all.
My point was why are we arguing when anyone can go and see their actual positions and call our formation/s whatever he or she likes.
P.S. Little bit off the topic but it is interesting. Bruno and Eriksen play mostly on the left flank. Heatmaps support the evidence of "Ten Hag overload" on the left flank and indirectly justifies $100M Antony deal. Eriksen and Bruno scare shit out of defenders on the left flank and no matter how good or how deep the opposition defends, Antony will have at least 3-5 moments in the game when he can do what he does.
Last edited:
I agreed with your point but one small thing, Bruno heatmap is one of a traditional 10. The box isn't their area, the area that they occupy is exactly the one he occupied against Omonia which is roughly between 16 to 35 meters from goal and very little presence around the halfway line and he is more likely to help deep than up. That's pretty much the difference between a 10 and a 9.5.
Now we are getting to the point. All these 433 vs 4231 battles miss the point - what is Bruno Fernandes? Please look at De Bruyne's heat map. He is an archetypal #8 by consensus, and "Pep plays 433" is holy as Bible. What do we see? Bruno drops even deeper than De Bruyne.
However, paradoxically you are right. Because Fernandes is #10 by his style. Not classic Riquelme or Aimar type, more like Lampard. Bruno is an ideal, perfetto #10 for a great counter attacking team. Prime Mourinho player. But he lacks technique and sense of rhythm to be a reliable advanced playmaker in De Bruyne mould.
So, the story not about 433 vs 4231. It is really hard to distinguish and depends on players. This debate is important for Man Utd fans only because of our chronic midfield problems for over 10 years now. Since Carrick legs gone.
Everyone is obsessed with 433 vs 4231 because 2 means McFred
Now we are getting to the point. All these 433 vs 4231 battles miss the point - what is Bruno Fernandes? Please look at De Bruyne's heat map. He is an archetypal #8 by consensus, and "Pep plays 433" is holy as Bible. What do we see? Bruno drops even deeper than De Bruyne.
However, paradoxically you are right. Because Fernandes is #10 by his style. Not classic Riquelme or Aimar type, more like Lampard. Bruno is an ideal, perfetto #10 for a great counter attacking team. Prime Mourinho player. But he lacks technique and sense of rhythm to be a reliable advanced playmaker in De Bruyne mould.
So, the story not about 433 vs 4231. It is really hard to distinguish and depends on players. This debate is important for Man Utd fans only because of our chronic midfield problems for over 10 years now. Since Carrick legs gone.
Everyone is obsessed with 433 vs 4231 because 2 means McFred
I don't think anyone sees De Bruyne as an archetypical #8, he is very atypical. Also City play an asymetrical system or at least they have mainly played one that is between 4141/433/4231 depending on the emphasis that they put in certain areas.
And Bruno isn't an ideal #10 for any system, his decision making is too flawed for that and he doesn't compensate with superior technique or athleticism. He doesn't have the smart of Lampard who was able to completely switch from almost playing like a second striker to playing like a traditional box to box depending on what his team needed and he doesn't have the game controlling, technical superiority of traditional #10 like Zidane or Riquelme. He is also not technically or mentality adapted to the hybdrid roles played by the likes of Del Piero, Totti, Rui Costa, Kaka or Seedorf.
Now it's not that gloom, individually he is a productive player but it is in spite and to the detriment of team considerations.