Formation and Tactics Discussion

[Spike 12,049]

Everybody and their cousin seems to creating hypothetical formations on TC and then debating them to death; so I took the initiative to create a thread that is used to discuss formations only. Forget speculation and hypothetical transfers as in this thread players are forgotten and focus is on formations and tactics.

Most people seem to believe that Robbie Di Matteo will employ the 4-2-3-1 tactic, but do we know that for sure? And how will his tactics compliment the formations? Counter-Attacks? Possession? High pressing? Man or Zonal marking? Crossing or through balls?

Here are some Formations I've created. Some are more plausible than others, but nonetheless...

Formation creator:

http://www.footballuser.com/post

There isn't any point placing GK in there because they are a given.

I think Di Matteo will play 4-2-3-1 using these basic tactics:

• Deep back four with the midfield pressing hard.
  
• The CF will act like a Poacher. Using pace and the ability to the offside trap to get one-on-one with the keeper.
  
• Fullbacks will push up high, adding width to the attack.
  
• The three Attacking MF will frequently change position with eachother, making the hard to mark.
  
• One CB will have a license to attack and go forward while the other will have to sit back and be more cautious in their approach.
  
• The double pivot will have an attacking minded player to link up play wit the fowards and a defensive minded player to disrupt play and change the tempo. Though both are expected to contribute a lot defensively.
  
• The ball will be played to the feet of the CF, by use of through balls.
  

[Kieran. 6,317]

4-2-3-1.

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

Someone created this exact topic earlier today and mods merged it to the "Future Chelsea Team" thread. And, people are discussing it there, so I guess just continue there since this will be merged or deleted soon.

[Spike 12,049]

Someone created this exact topic earlier today and mods merged it to the "Future Chelsea Team" thread. And, people are discussing it there, so I guess just continue there since this will be merged or deleted soon.

Huh, didn't see that topic. What are the odds of that happening?

[capriccioso 2,545]

A Libero? Impossible!

[Jase 43,479]

It will be interesting if we were to switch to a back 3 and play the 3-4-3 or 3-5-2.

[channing 8]

大家好 能发中文吗 试一试

[Ollie 4,400]

大家好 能发中文吗 试一试

Fully agree.

Personally i like good ol' 4-4-2, whether it being flat or diamond. I like to see 2 strikers, 2 wide men, 2 CMs and a solid back 4.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

大家好 能发中文吗 试一试

Exactly!

The way I see it, playing two strikers is no longer possible nowadays because you will practically be gifting the midfield to the opposition. The only viable formations (with four defenders) imo are 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 and by examining the signings we've made and are looking to make, we are most likely setting our team to play 4-2-3-1.

[Spike 12,049]

Exactly!

The way I see it, playing two strikers is no longer possible nowadays because you will practically be gifting the midfield to the opposition. The only viable formations (with four defenders) imo are 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 and by examining the signings we've made and are looking to make, we are most likely setting our team to play 4-2-3-1.

I think it can work but a Striker in a similar mould to Kevin Davies is needed. A Defensive Target Man as it were.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

I think it can work but a Striker in a similar mould to Kevin Davies is needed. A Defensive Target Man as it were.

It can only work if you resort to long aerial balls in which case you will need a Drogba.

[Jase 43,479]

Going 4-4-2 means you would also probably have to rely a lot on your wingers and not letting your midfield getting overrun like in the case of United.

[Spike 12,049]

Personally the 4-3-3 is my favourite formation but I don't think it is the correct formation for CFC. The personal just don't fit.

[Jase 43,479]

Personally the 4-3-3 is my favourite formation but I don't think it is the correct formation for CFC. The personal just don't fit.

Maybe only the striker. The rest fits the bill IMO.

[Spike 12,049]

Maybe only the striker. The rest fits the bill IMO.

I don't think Mikel fits well the formation, well he didn't in AVB's idea of a 4-3-3. Anyway I don't think Mata gels very well into the 4-3-3, so unless he is the midfield trio he will have to play out wide.

[Spike 12,049]

Maybe only the striker. The rest fits the bill IMO.

I don't think Mikel fits well the formation, well he didn't in AVB's idea of a 4-3-3. Anyway I don't think Mata gels very well into the 4-3-3, so unless he is the midfield trio he will have to play out wide.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

I don't think Mikel fits well the formation, well he didn't in AVB's idea of a 4-3-3. Anyway I don't think Mata gels very well into the 4-3-3, so unless he is the midfield trio he will have to play out wide.

Mikel (and arguably most of our players) did not fit AVB's tactics not the formation. I agree with the Mata part though.

[Jase 43,479]

I don't think Mikel fits well the formation, well he didn't in AVB's idea of a 4-3-3. Anyway I don't think Mata gels very well into the 4-3-3, so unless he is the midfield trio he will have to play out wide.

As CHOULO19 has said, it's more to do with AVB's style of play with the 4-3-3 rather than the formation itself. Regarding that 4-3-3, I was thinking more along the possibility of having Marin and Hazard playing as the wingers considering that Mata won't be available for us for awhile. Only problem is Torres. Not the type of physical and imposing striker that can hold up the ball and bring others into play.