Tweet
Those of you stating all the time that playing 4-5-1 is defensive and will make us score less goals should read the article below... Itīs made by an Everton fan.. but nevertheless gives a very good view of the many attacking options a well played 4-5-1 formation gives compared to the more traditional
4-4-2 formation.
Sousa played 4-5-1 most of the time due to the fact that he (rightly in my opinion) meant this was the best formation to use with the players available for getting a result. He did also try (or perhaps he was told to do so...) to play 4-4-2 on some occations...Did we actually get many points and did we score a lot of goals in those games....? ....no, youīre right. we did not!
I am a football coach myself, and I strongly believe the 4-5-1 formation gives you a lot more attacking options than the 4-4-2 formation ,which is actually a more static formation. The main idea with the 4-5-1 formation is to get the right and left central midfielders to start deep and quick runs forward behind the opposing defenders. The ball can then be played towards them either from the fullbacks, the wide midfielders, the deep/holding midfielder, or a flick from the loan striker. These runs are more difficult for the defenders to deal with, compared to closing down to the more static strikers right in front of you like a 4-4-2 formation usually gives.
Why we didnīt score more goals than we did playing the 4-5-1 formations has more to do with the lack of quality runs from the central midfielders, than the quality of the loan striker.. If Sousa had been given money to get players in to fit his 4-5-1 formation and his system, I am sure he would become successful. The problem occurs when Paladini buys players not fitting into Sousaīs ideas of how to play....
Read the article below for more info on the benefits of playing 4-5-1 compared to 4-4-2:
http://www.soccerfanbase.com/blog/12...-4-2-vs-4-5-1/
ps..sorry about my english...itīs quite difficult trying to explain this matters in a foreign language... If we can speak norwegian I will give you a lot more details on the positives of playing 4-5-1
4-4-2 formation.
Sousa played 4-5-1 most of the time due to the fact that he (rightly in my opinion) meant this was the best formation to use with the players available for getting a result. He did also try (or perhaps he was told to do so...) to play 4-4-2 on some occations...Did we actually get many points and did we score a lot of goals in those games....? ....no, youīre right. we did not!
I am a football coach myself, and I strongly believe the 4-5-1 formation gives you a lot more attacking options than the 4-4-2 formation ,which is actually a more static formation. The main idea with the 4-5-1 formation is to get the right and left central midfielders to start deep and quick runs forward behind the opposing defenders. The ball can then be played towards them either from the fullbacks, the wide midfielders, the deep/holding midfielder, or a flick from the loan striker. These runs are more difficult for the defenders to deal with, compared to closing down to the more static strikers right in front of you like a 4-4-2 formation usually gives.
Why we didnīt score more goals than we did playing the 4-5-1 formations has more to do with the lack of quality runs from the central midfielders, than the quality of the loan striker.. If Sousa had been given money to get players in to fit his 4-5-1 formation and his system, I am sure he would become successful. The problem occurs when Paladini buys players not fitting into Sousaīs ideas of how to play....
Read the article below for more info on the benefits of playing 4-5-1 compared to 4-4-2:
http://www.soccerfanbase.com/blog/12...-4-2-vs-4-5-1/
ps..sorry about my english...itīs quite difficult trying to explain this matters in a foreign language... If we can speak norwegian I will give you a lot more details on the positives of playing 4-5-1
Comment