Tactical Formation

[City Slicker]

I will readily admit I'm probably not the best at tactics so I wonder if someone could explain the merits and demerits of 4-4-2 as opposed to 4-3-3 i.e is the one better suited as an offensive formation compared to the other or are they wholly suited to the individual strength of a particular team? And is the one formation a natural counterpoint to the other?

[pembroke allan]

I will readily admit I'm probably not the best at tactics so I wonder if someone could explain the merits and demerits of 4-4-2 as opposed to 4-3-3 i.e is the one better suited as an offensive formation compared to the other or are they wholly suited to the individual strength of a particular team? And is the one formation a natural counterpoint to the other?

Sure 442 is more defensive minded as usually got 2 players lying deep covering defence while other 2 push up! 433 tends to be 1 upfront with 2 wide men supporting him whilst having defensive duties as well! A lot depends in quality of players being used also managers tend to have their own favourite formation . I'm sure we tend to play 433 or at least start that way but then NW is a tactical genius usually.

[T1JMO]

4-3-3 you have wingers dropping into midfield when defending leaving 1 up top (4-5-1 really)... 4-4-2 you leave 2 up top when defending so have 1 less body closing down in front of the defence but you have 1 further up ready the counter attack and 2 proper strikers when crossing. It's a balancing act, 4-4-2 is slightly more risky IMO.

[Steve the Tea TM (c)]

The thing is for quite a lot of the season, and certainly recently, we've been playing a 4411 formation. At Brentford it was ...

Etheridge
Manga Morrison Bamba Bennett
Mendez-Laing Grujic Damour Hoilett
Paterson
Zohore

StT. <><