Why don't we just play 4-3-3?

[Borys]

Guess it depends on how we deploy 433. I feel like we have almost the perfect squad for it:
- Casemiro as DM / dlp (I don't like this label, but Case is so much more than pure DM)
- bunch of midfielders who can perform the #8 role, starting with Eriksen
- fullbacks who are good on the ball and can provide the width and crosses
- attacking players who are best at cutting inside from the wing

The obvious problem is what we do with Bruno, who doesn't fit in any of those roles. Any 433 with Bruno in the side will effectively be a 4231/442/424 as he can NOT do the job of a midfielder.

It's strange that we're "married" to 4231 or whatever you call it, a system in which:
- two attacking players are staying wide, what doesn't really suit any of them apart from Antony (who still looks good cutting inside)
- fullbacks are tucking in what seems to confuse both the opposition but also our players, and definitely isn't playing to our fullbacks strengths
- Eriksen is asked to play deep, now I think he's excellent there, but because of Bruno playing mostly detached from midfield he is actually asked to do quite a lot defensively (lot more than it should be)
- Bruno plays a free role, his movement provides space for others to run into, but it's so random/chaotic you can't really build a system based on that
- striker who in theory gets a lot of support from sides and from the back

I didn't include Martial in 433 for obvious reasons (as he's as good as you can get for a striker in 433), because the question I'm asking myself is: are we playing 4231 because we want to make best use of Bruno, or because any other system is asking too much of a Ronaldo, who seems to be our only striker?

I know Rashford looked good today but I feel like it's a travesty to put him up top. One thing for sure: we need to move away from the system that relies so much on Bruno. Not only because he's in poor form, but mostly because I believe there is no way to build any system / structure with so chaotic player in the center of things.

 

[TMDaines]

Bruno just needs to be 10-15 yards deeper, slightly to the left or right. Have Eriksen similar on the other side. Casemiro sits deeper between them. Worrying about Bruno's heatmaps are pointless, because he's surely been instructed to play there higher up. We need to ask what our players can do for our team, instead of trying to crowbar players playing their current or ideal roles into the team.

For matches where you need a bit more bite, drop one of Bruno or Eriksen, or play them in the front three, and put Fred or McT either side of Casemiro.

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.

I really don't think this is a good comparison. Lampard was incredibly gifted at arriving into the box or to the edge of it and scoring goals. Bruno isn't good at this, at all. If Bruno never entered the penalty area again, it wouldn't be much of a loss. I'd rather be the man on the ball outside of the box making the pass.

 

[cyril C]

It is never about what formation you play, it is about who you pick. The media used to say Fletcher started in a 442, really? Fletcher playing right wing as Giggs on the left, or CR on the right? In fact, Flecther right-wing is more than Beckham right-wing defensively. JS Park is about the only rare breed who can execute whatever instruction given, most players have their attribute written on forehead, the Manager should know better.

Liverpool just showed you what ETH should have started against City, they even park their bus at home until 70th min. To mirror Liverpool's tactics, we should have played 2 DM in the middle, supported by an AM that can share defensive duty, which is more likely to be Eriksen than Bruno. 3x fast attacker who can look after themselves.

Is this the formation against weaker side, probably not, then you look at your requirement on DM and/or switching for a #10.

 

[ThinkTank@Cafe]

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.

Bruno just needs to be 10-15 yards deeper, slightly to the left or right. Have Eriksen similar on the other side. Casemiro sits deeper between them. Worrying about Bruno's heatmaps are pointless, because he's surely been instructed to play there higher up. We need to ask what our players can do for our team, instead of trying to crowbar players playing their current or ideal roles into the team.

For matches where you need a bit more bite, drop one of Bruno or Eriksen, or play them in the front three, and put Fred or McT either side of Casemiro.


I really don't think this is a good comparison. Lampard was incredibly gifted at arriving into the box or to the edge of it and scoring goals. Bruno isn't good at this, at all. If Bruno never entered the penalty area again, it wouldn't be much of a loss. I'd rather be the man on the ball outside of the box making the pass.

I respectfully disagree with some statements here, reckon it is a matter of perception. I maintain that 433 vs 4231 is worthless debate until we start taking individual players into the context.

 

[ThinkTank@Cafe]

It is never about what formation you play, it is about who you pick. The media used to say Fletcher started in a 442, really? Fletcher playing right wing as Giggs on the left, or CR on the right? In fact, Flecther right-wing is more than Beckham right-wing defensively. JS Park is about the only rare breed who can execute whatever instruction given, most players have their attribute written on forehead, the Manager should know better.

Liverpool just showed you what ETH should have started against City, they even park their bus at home until 70th min. To mirror Liverpool's tactics, we should have played 2 DM in the middle, supported by an AM that can share defensive duty, which is more likely to be Eriksen than Bruno. 3x fast attacker who can look after themselves.

Is this the formation against weaker side, probably not, then you look at your requirement on DM and/or switching for a #10.

Fully agree. Bruno is in terrible form.

 

[JPRouve]

I respectfully disagree with some statements here, reckon it is a matter of perception. I maintain that 433 vs 4231 is worthless debate until we start taking individual players into the context.

And we agree with that, I said it multiple times.

 

[OmarUnited4ever]

It really depends on the coach's tactics and instructions, as some posters alluded to, formations aren't what matters the most, because there are literally only 2 base formations, back 3 or back 4, and then the rest is a just variation of either base formation (352 as base and then you have the 343 as a variation, 433 as a base then you have the 4231 as a variation of that).

and looking at formations alone, the only thing you can tell from it is the basic role of the player, a player in the CB position will have a role defending centrally, and a player in the RW position will have a role of attacking from the right flank, but we all know that not every player in the RW position play the same way, some cut inside, some run from the outside.

The point is, it depends how the manager sets up the team, what are the individual and team instructions, how the team defends, attacks, presses, sets tempo, and so on and so forth, formation is just a part of an overall tactical plan, not the whole thing.

 

[nakpodiareuben]

I thought what we have been playing is 4:3:3? We definitely dont play with 2 strikers.

 

[eire-red]

We didn't have a consistent CF to lead the line on his own, and I don't think Bruno is reliable or careful enough in possession to play that attacking No.8 role that KDB/Silva played under Pep.

433 is my favourite formation though, and I don't think it's any coincidence that the most successful teams of the past decade have played some variation of it. But you need a world class striker to occupy both CBs, or else you can't really create those overloads in midfield and wide positions.

 

[The Siege]

So I think we kind of do, but in transition-to-attack phases and not as a base tactic, and Eriksen is sort of key to that. I think Eriksen gets a lot of liberty to choose where he's playing in midfield because of the versatility of his passing and his understanding of the balance of the game. So when we're on the ball, if he tries to lie a little deeper to play balls forward for the runners, we take a very 4-2-3-1 shape. If Bruno's not being given any room, he moves forward to take that burden off a bit, and we play what sort of resembles a wide 4-3-3, and when we're being frustrated by a low block and trying to overload the attacking 3rd, both he and Bruno push up further to a 4-1-4-1 sort of formation.

Our off-the-ball formation will be a 4-2-3-1 for a while simply because we were very recently a soft team and easy to beat. The confidence building phase that we're in right now, it's important that the squad feels they're hard to break down. If we don't, we'll always go 2 steps forward and then 3 back.

 

[TMDaines]

That was much more of a 4-3-3/4-1-4-1 tonight. Looked so much better with Fred able to play his natural game, and Bruno surging from deeper and wider.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

That was much more of a 4-3-3/4-1-4-1 tonight. Looked so much better with Fred able to play his natural game, and Bruno surging from deeper and wider.

I agree. That was definitely 4-3-3 tonight with Cassemiro in the #6 and Fred and Bruno as #8's. And Fred looked so much better (as did Bruno). For me, he is much better as a #8/box-to-box midfielder. Same goes for McTominay. More of this please ETH...

 

[ayushreddevil9]

All we needed was Casemiro to find his groove. Gives freedom to others.

 

[Isotope]

We didn't have a consistent CF to lead the line on his own, and I don't think Bruno is reliable or careful enough in possession to play that attacking No.8 role that KDB/Silva played under Pep.

433 is my favourite formation though, and I don't think it's any coincidence that the most successful teams of the past decade have played some variation of it. But you need a world class striker to occupy both CBs, or else you can't really create those overloads in midfield and wide positions.

KDB is so good there, with his average 80% passing rate per game (while playing in dominating team).

 

[eire-red]

KDB is so good there, with his average 80% passing rate per game (while playing in dominating team).

A quick check online had KDB at around 84% passing accuracy during those seasons he was playing in that 3 with Silva and Fernandinho. Last season Bruno had 79%.

Not a massive difference in fairness, but probably the bigger difference was Silva and Fernandinho with 89% and 88% accuracy respectively. The sloppiness of our other midfielders maybe highlights Bruno more in that regard.

Anyway, I don't want to get too pedantic with stats as they don't tell the full picture, but to my eyes when watching football, KDB is much better tactically and positionally, and a lot more capable of retaining possession and controlling games than Bruno. He has been, IMO, the best midfielder in the prem for the past 5 seasons or so.

Not a negative against Bruno at all, but I think he's more of a second striker that thrives off of games where there's a bit more chaos and he can be unpredictable. Sometimes that's as much a negative as a positive. These are just my personal observations.