Serie A 2016/2017 (38 Viewers)
- Thread starter Azzurri7
- Start date
- Status
Don't think it tells much about the level of quality in the league.
Many teams have just tactically changed a lot from the years past as there are quite a few unconventional Italian and foreign coaches around at the moment. Playing attacking possession based football is the norm for many coaches in Serie A at the moment.
The only more traditional defensive minded coaches I can think of are Allegri, Del Neri and Maran. Perhaps we could add Martusciello and Nicola to that list too but it's hard to tell as both might be forced to play that way with the squads they have.
Many teams have just tactically changed a lot from the years past as there are quite a few unconventional Italian and foreign coaches around at the moment. Playing attacking possession based football is the norm for many coaches in Serie A at the moment.
The only more traditional defensive minded coaches I can think of are Allegri, Del Neri and Maran. Perhaps we could add Martusciello and Nicola to that list too but it's hard to tell as both might be forced to play that way with the squads they have.
It can definitely be a defensive system and we don't play 4-2-3-1. That's just the trendy way to label it.
We play an old school 4-4-1-1. The same that has been played in Italy (and in football) since forever).
We don't play an AM, we play an SS (Dybala). We don't play inside forwards, we play winger/side midfielders. We don't have a double pivot (DMs), we have central midfielders.
Its a 4-4-2 and its great for defense!
We play an old school 4-4-1-1. The same that has been played in Italy (and in football) since forever).
We don't play an AM, we play an SS (Dybala). We don't play inside forwards, we play winger/side midfielders. We don't have a double pivot (DMs), we have central midfielders.
Its a 4-4-2 and its great for defense!
Being a defensive minded coach doesn't mean you can't attack or play offensive football when needed. To me it means that the coach bases his game on defensive solidity and uses that as something to lean on when the going gets tough.
A formation really doesn't define how defensive or attacking a system is, it's defined by how the players approach the game. We've been a defensive minded team for as long as I can remember and Allegri has thankfully continued that legacy, don't see how that is disputable.
- - - Updated - - -
And this too.
A formation really doesn't define how defensive or attacking a system is, it's defined by how the players approach the game. We've been a defensive minded team for as long as I can remember and Allegri has thankfully continued that legacy, don't see how that is disputable.
- - - Updated - - -
And this too.
That's just not true. You see it when we line up during a game. Cuadrado and Mandzukic are always as high up the pitch as Dybala, while Khedira and Pjanic are clearly playing a deeper role. That's what defines formation: the position of the players. So we do play a 4-2-3-1.
Look at Dybala's second goal vs Barcelona here (starts at 2:10):
Do you know who you see running towards the goal? Mandzukic on the left, Cuadrado on the right, Higuain up front with Dybala right behind him. If that's not a perfect illustration of the fact Cuads and Mandzu do play higher up I don't know what is.
No we don't. The position of the players depends on the team we are facing, and the moment of the match. The formation we play, when talking about systems with similar positioning like these two, is defined by the roles the players play.
Mandzukic and Cuadrado do an outstanding amount of defensive work. We all always see them track back all the way to our box. Cuadrado himself is right footed and plays as a pure winger, up and down. Mandzukic plays as a LM. He doesn't run nearly as much into the box as Cuadrado, he doesn't have his speed to recover position so quickly so he plays it more conservatively. Given his characteristics, if he was a true inside forward he would camp on the final third a lot more, but he doesn't. He plays further back, something like Perotta did for Lippi.
Dybala does not play as an AM. He is the classic trequartista in this system.
Overlap this system with many of Lippi's formations and they match remarkably well. Why did we call it 4-4-1-1/4-4-2 back then and not now?
- - - Updated - - -
nope
Pick an archetype of these positions and compare them.
Alexis and Pedro at Barca were inside forwards. Cristiano at Madrid is an inside forward. Martial at United is an inside forward, etc. These players attack the box first and foremost and don't particularly contribute to the width of the team when compared to other classic wingers (like Cuadrado or Valencia). They also for the most part play inverted, so they can shoot at goal much easier.
Same with the AM situation. Dybala is not a midfielder. He is playing trequartista like so many other's before him in our league. His role and responsibilities are like Baggio's much more than they are like Ozil's.
For the thing about DMs, neither Khedira nor Pjanic are playing DM. Khedira has done it in the past (at Madrid) but now he is the midfielder that has more license to roam when compared to Pjanic. Pjanic stays further back, but he doesn't DM, he controls the tempo of the play. He is playing regista, not to the extreme of an older Pirlo, but its a similar role. We have no Gattuso or Cambiasso.
Mandzukic and Cuadrado do an outstanding amount of defensive work. We all always see them track back all the way to our box. Cuadrado himself is right footed and plays as a pure winger, up and down. Mandzukic plays as a LM. He doesn't run nearly as much into the box as Cuadrado, he doesn't have his speed to recover position so quickly so he plays it more conservatively. Given his characteristics, if he was a true inside forward he would camp on the final third a lot more, but he doesn't. He plays further back, something like Perotta did for Lippi.
Dybala does not play as an AM. He is the classic trequartista in this system.
Overlap this system with many of Lippi's formations and they match remarkably well. Why did we call it 4-4-1-1/4-4-2 back then and not now?
- - - Updated - - -
nope
Pick an archetype of these positions and compare them.
Alexis and Pedro at Barca were inside forwards. Cristiano at Madrid is an inside forward. Martial at United is an inside forward, etc. These players attack the box first and foremost and don't particularly contribute to the width of the team when compared to other classic wingers (like Cuadrado or Valencia). They also for the most part play inverted, so they can shoot at goal much easier.
Same with the AM situation. Dybala is not a midfielder. He is playing trequartista like so many other's before him in our league. His role and responsibilities are like Baggio's much more than they are like Ozil's.
For the thing about DMs, neither Khedira nor Pjanic are playing DM. Khedira has done it in the past (at Madrid) but now he is the midfielder that has more license to roam when compared to Pjanic. Pjanic stays further back, but he doesn't DM, he controls the tempo of the play. He is playing regista, not to the extreme of an older Pirlo, but its a similar role. We have no Gattuso or Cambiasso.
Of course they defend too. That doesn't mean their inherent position changes. Like in the example above, you can clearly see which of our players have offensive tasks. It's no coincidence that all four of them are involved. It's ludicrous to claim Cuads and Mandzu aren't playing as wingers, because the proof is right there.
You didn't read the post carefully, I said that they ARE playing wingers. That Cuadrado is a PURE winger. That's what he plays, NOT inside forward. Which what almost all 4-2-3-1 systems use. 4-4-2 uses wingers.
Compare to other successful uses of the system. Look at Mourinho's Inter.
Around Milito you have a pure attacking midfielder (Sneijder) and two inverted strikers. Left-footed Pandev cutting in from the right, and right-footed Eto'o cutting in from the left. Behind them you have Motta and Cambiasso. That's a 4-2-3-1, as clear as it gets. The player in the hole (Sneijder) has 1 responsibility and that is to spray passes to the strikers, who are all setup in a way that allows the to shoot at goal.
Cambiasso (a DM) then covered the flanks when Maicon or Chivu went forward to stretch teams, as they were almost entirely responsible with providing the width.
Look at Madrid's 4-2-3-1 too. Ozil in the hole. Cristiano right-footed coming from the left and Di Maria left-footed coming from the right.
We on the other hand play things differently. This team defends exclusively as a 4-4-2. Very clear 2 lines of 4 and a line of 2 when we are pushed back. Other 4-2-3-1 defend as a 4-5-1 as the player in the hole is one more midfielder and acts as such in the defensive phase.
Compare to other successful uses of the system. Look at Mourinho's Inter.
Around Milito you have a pure attacking midfielder (Sneijder) and two inverted strikers. Left-footed Pandev cutting in from the right, and right-footed Eto'o cutting in from the left. Behind them you have Motta and Cambiasso. That's a 4-2-3-1, as clear as it gets. The player in the hole (Sneijder) has 1 responsibility and that is to spray passes to the strikers, who are all setup in a way that allows the to shoot at goal.
Cambiasso (a DM) then covered the flanks when Maicon or Chivu went forward to stretch teams, as they were almost entirely responsible with providing the width.
Look at Madrid's 4-2-3-1 too. Ozil in the hole. Cristiano right-footed coming from the left and Di Maria left-footed coming from the right.
We on the other hand play things differently. This team defends exclusively as a 4-4-2. Very clear 2 lines of 4 and a line of 2 when we are pushed back. Other 4-2-3-1 defend as a 4-5-1 as the player in the hole is one more midfielder and acts as such in the defensive phase.
Yes. And ours doesn't. My point is that when someone writes down a formation, the formation refers to just how high up players are on the pitch. When you look at our team, Cuadrado, Dybala and Mandzukic are almost always higher up than Pjanic and Khedira. So it makes no sense to claim that we're playing a 4-4-2, because they're just not at the same level. Of course positions change during a game and wingers often have to track back. That doesn't change the fact that usually we are not in a 4-4-2 position.
I guess you could say we defend in a 4-4-2. But we definitely attack in a 4-2-3-1.
You got it wrong. In the defensive phase things are well organized in terms of positioning, and the players positions are clear cut. Our 3-5-2 brought 5 at the back and defended as 5-3-2. The 4-4-2 defends as 4-4-2. The 4-2-3-1 and the 4-4-3 usually defend as 4-5-1.
In attack positions are much less clear because it all depends on the moment of the match and where the ball is. Here its about player roles.
Just look at any 4-4-2 ever and you will find that the average positions of the wingers are always higher than the average positions of the midfielders. For that matter, the fullbacks are always more forward than the center backs. Should we call it a "back 2" instead of a back 4? If we label formations just with players positions then we should be talking more about things like 2-4-3-1 and other nonsense.
Use our own 4-4-2 of old and see. Was Camoranesi's position particularly different from that of Cuadrado's?
Lippi's 4-4-1-1 of the 06 world cup has very similar tactics to our owns. The only difference is that the 2 midfielders were more specialized (Gattuso and Pirlo) and ours are more well rounded (Khedira and Pjanic). Otherwise its very similar tactics all over the pitch. We have much more in common with that, than we do with any 4-2-3-1.
In attack positions are much less clear because it all depends on the moment of the match and where the ball is. Here its about player roles.
Just look at any 4-4-2 ever and you will find that the average positions of the wingers are always higher than the average positions of the midfielders. For that matter, the fullbacks are always more forward than the center backs. Should we call it a "back 2" instead of a back 4? If we label formations just with players positions then we should be talking more about things like 2-4-3-1 and other nonsense.
Use our own 4-4-2 of old and see. Was Camoranesi's position particularly different from that of Cuadrado's?
Lippi's 4-4-1-1 of the 06 world cup has very similar tactics to our owns. The only difference is that the 2 midfielders were more specialized (Gattuso and Pirlo) and ours are more well rounded (Khedira and Pjanic). Otherwise its very similar tactics all over the pitch. We have much more in common with that, than we do with any 4-2-3-1.
- Status