442

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

It seems to be taken as axiomatic on here that 442 is a doomed formation in the modern era.

One question.

Why are man city doing so well playing essentially a classic 442.

I am in no way saying 442 is the way forward. Just wondering why it is so maligned when the team that is likely to win the prem plays it.

Thoughts?

 

[SuperPav]

Because Man City's variant of the 4-4-2 has absolutely nothing to do with what we did yesterday.

And their squad is composed in an entirely different way.

Not a single of our attacking players are comparable in style to their starting 11.

 

[YiddoInPoland]

man city don't play a classic 442 because they don't use wingers to enforce the width of the play. Plus nasri and silva are very smart playmakers who can create and score.

 

[Huddlestone22]

It seems to be taken as axiomatic on here that 442 is a doomed formation in the modern era.

One question.

Why are man city doing so well playing essentially a classic 442.

I am in no way saying 442 is the way forward. Just wondering why it is so maligned when the team that is likely to win the prem plays it.

Thoughts?

Intelligent strikers with great link-up play, with playmakers galore. Even then defensively they're not great.

 

[DEFchenkOE]

People see Man C with 2 upfront and Silva and Nasri on the wings in formation graphics but if you watch the games or check their heat maps they are not running up and down the line putting crosses in. They're more playing a 4222. And so many people are against inverted wide players on this site but Nasri and Silva both play on their opposite sides albeit very narrow.

The closest thing we could get to matching what City do is

Walker-Kaboul-Verts-Rose
----Sandro---Capoue---
---Lamela - - - Eriksen---
-----Ade-----Soldado ---

Even then our players are not of the quality of theirs but it's the closest we could get. Playing 2 head down wingers getting down the line and putting hopeful crosses in is not what they do.

They occasionally have Naval to stretch the players but he's not been first choice, now Agüero is injured he'll probably play more and I suspect they'll revert to 4231 with Silva behind Negrero.

 

[michaelden]

It seems to be taken as axiomatic on here that 442 is a doomed formation in the modern era.

One question.

Why are man city doing so well playing essentially a classic 442.

I am in no way saying 442 is the way forward. Just wondering why it is so maligned when the team that is likely to win the prem plays it.

Thoughts?

errr NO

 

[KILLA_SIN]

Its not the formation, its the style and its execution, and frankly for a while now we have played with no discernible style what so ever.

 

[dondo]

442 4231 433 it does not matter is you cant defend long balls through the middle of the defence or high ball in our box. We have to get the basics right before we worry about formations

 

[FinnYid]

I hate the numbers game. Yesterday was hardly any classic 4-4-2 and you could call it 4-4-1-1 or whatever if you wanted. 4-4-2 tells pretty much nothing, well apart from two strikers/forwards. Then again was it really 2 stikers yesterday? Ade had pretty free role and worked all over the pitch.

 

[ItsBoris]

City's one is not a classic 4-4-2, but it is still a decent point. Imo they have top class players in every position and it wouldn't really matter what position they played in, what is really their great strength is the counter-attacking style that Pellegrini has created. Pellegrini prefers a formation with 2 strikers so for City it is a 4-4-2 that they play but I don't think that it means that formation is inherently better than any other.

 

[Gassin's finest]

Because City play with fantastic players, and we set up last night with average players. Not rocket science.