I agree that Nedved is often better in the middle, but the 4-4-2 does not have to be restricting. In Deschamps' formation, both Nedved and Camoranesi had the freedom to roam inwards as the pleased. It gave both players more effective ball-time down the middle, while still keeping enough width in the side. Besides, i'm also a fan of the 4-3-1-2, with Nedved in the position behind the forwards.
I think the the 4-4-2 is more solid defensively than a 4-3-3, with the latter the forwards are more advanced and it usually leaves the team fragile and exponsed on the wings, this was evident as early as the Newcastle game.
I think the the 4-4-2 is more solid defensively than a 4-3-3, with the latter the forwards are more advanced and it usually leaves the team fragile and exponsed on the wings, this was evident as early as the Newcastle game.
I didn't mind Deschamps' formation but then again it will be undone by counterattacks along the wings if Camo or Nedved get caught up the pitch. I mean, in all honesty, the straight 4-4-2 is not entirely secure unless you make sure your wingers back track all the time. If you allow them to have freedom to roam wherever they want, that's where it becomes risky. Nedved cutting inside, Camoranesi cutting inside and getting stuck up the pitch, etc, will leave us stranded on the flanks. 4-4-2 or 4-3-3, either way you have to sacrifice something.
