The Problem in Chelsea 4-2-3-1 Formation

[communicate 2,703]

THIS!!!

'communicate' - he DID NOT track back on numerous occassions - Bosingwa went past him! Sodon't talk shit about Ramires being an excellent defender on the wing - the guy looks lost and completely fucking clueless out there... WHY - because it aint his natural fucking position!

Edit: added communicate's name in - to make post clearer

Edit2 : Dam I sound angry! Apologies...

I did not watch the 2nd half so I am not sure but I thought in the 1st half he played ok. I never said that he is a super defender but he is very disciplined in tracking back full back.

[SeB 1,281]

Ramires is very quick and can cover the full back (that's not litterally a covering but in that case, Ramires' speed is the slow defenders's positionning sense), he plays a huge part to maintain balance in midfield considering that the left flank is constantly out of position.

He's not at his best offensively on a flank because he's inconsistent (can do great suff or proper crap). But one just cannot deny his impact on the team balance

[communicate 2,703]

Ramires is very quick and can cover the full back (that's not litterally a covering but in that case, Ramires' speed is the slow defenders's positionning sense), he plays a huge part to maintain balance in midfield considering that the left flank is constantly out of position.

He's not at his best offensively on a flank because he's inconsistent (can do great suff or proper crap). But one just cannot deny his impact on the team balance

Good post. He is there to give us balance because rdm like to play more defensive.

Btw as far as your reply to me regarding mikel, I don't think team try to press mikel

[SeB 1,281]

Good post. He is there to give us balance because rdm like to play more defensive.

Btw as far as your reply to me regarding mikel, I don't think team try to press mikel

You're kidding right ?

That's what the teams we face do every game since 2010 and the start of Ancelotti's second season... Center backs are far away, there's only one player in the central zone... one'd be mad not to press him!

My answer was rather when he's going to distribute, not when he receives the ball in dangerous position by the way

[communicate 2,703]

You're kidding right ?

That's what the teams we face do every game since 2010 and the start of Ancelotti's second season... Center backs are far away, there's only one player in the central zone... one'd be mad not to press him!

My answer was rather when he's going to distribute, not when he receives the ball in dangerous position by the way

Maybe I am wwrong but I thought a Madrid and I think it was reading did not try to press mikel at all

[SeB 1,281]

Maybe I am wwrong but I thought a Madrid and I think it was reading did not try to press mikel at all

Guthrie has been played in Mikel's zone, in support of Pogrebnyak especially for that purpose

But that's not as clear in 4231 as in 433, in 433 he was really targeted

[YouNameIt 1,511]

if lampard is to be played in a 4-2-3-1 then he should be here:

Moses/mata - Lampard - Hazard

Torres

[kellzfresh 7,229]

true blue, you gave a very good analysis of the situation.

The real problem here is roberto di matteo's team selections.

teams that use the 4-2-3-1 successfully are bayern munich, madrid and mancity.

bayern munich have

schweinstiger-gustavo

robben-muller-ribery

gomez

madrid have

xabi alonso-khedira

dimaria-ozil-ronaldo

higuain

mancity have

yaya toure-rodwell

silva-tevez-nasri

aguero

the simillarities are that

1. they all have a long range passer in schweinstiger or alonso or yaya

2. the three behind the striker are ALL ATTACK MINDED.

1. We dont have any long range passer

2. we have a box to box player like khedira and yayatoure (ramires)

3. You are perfectly right, lampard is too attack minded to play there. he will fit better at the attacking midfield.

4. Lampard is an attacking midfielder not a defensive one what dimatteo is doing is like telling ozil to play alonso's position. he will always go foward because that is what he is used to.

5. Ramires is not playing well this season. Because he is out of position too. he plays CM for brazil and benfica.

6. Dimatteo is was defence minded against a relegation team qpr when manchester united will play nani, kagawa, vanpersie and valencia against such teams.

Di matteo knows this problem. He is not blind. He is just afraid of what happened to AVB with lampard. So unfortunately this problem is not going away soon.

I wish he could use this formation

azapuleta-luiz-terry-cole

mikel-ramires

mata-lampard-hazard

torres

This formation will solve dimatteo's problem first hand since i know he is a coward to tell lampard that he doesnt fit.

It will balance every thing back

This is what i really want

mikel-ramires

moses-mata-hazard

torres/sturridge

This formation is the best, ramires will stay back and keep the midfield mobile, mata and hazard will link up and switch positions often and moses will provide quality crosses like a true good winger. (Something chelsea lost when robben left us, some freakin width to provide energy in the flanks like man united's valencia)

This is the best formation for our group of players against smaller opposition(4-3-3)

oscar-mikel-lampard

mata- torres - hazard

1. This will give us the possession for sure. Few teams will out possess us not just ordinary teams like qpr did this weekend.

2. We will be back to or 4-3-3 which will perfectly fit oscar and lampard better

3. More midfield players = more control like barcelona

4. I just pray dimatteo can use dis

Oscar is a starter in brazil good enough to keep ganso and lucas moura out of the team. Why the **** is he not playin as a substitute at the very least. He reminds me of fabregas and he is even faster. We are freaking wasting a real talent here.

[dumps 284]

true blue, you gave a very good analysis of the situation.

The real problem here is roberto di matteo's team selections.

teams that use the 4-2-3-1 successfully are bayern munich, madrid and mancity.

bayern munich have

schweinstiger-gustavo

robben-muller-ribery

gomez

madrid have

xabi alonso-khedira

dimaria-ozil-ronaldo

higuain

mancity have

yaya toure-rodwell

silva-tevez-nasri

aguero

the simillarities are that

1. they all have a long range passer in schweinstiger or alonso or yaya

2. the three behind the striker are ALL ATTACK MINDED.

1. We dont have any long range passer

2. we have a box to box player like khedira and yayatoure (ramires)

3. You are perfectly right, lampard is too attack minded to play there. he will fit better at the attacking midfield.

4. Lampard is an attacking midfielder not a defensive one what dimatteo is doing is like telling ozil to play alonso's position. he will always go foward because that is what he is used to.

5. Ramires is not playing well this season. Because he is out of position too. he plays CM for brazil and benfica.

6. Dimatteo is was defence minded against a relegation team qpr when manchester united will play nani, kagawa, vanpersie and valencia against such teams.

Di matteo knows this problem. He is not blind. He is just afraid of what happened to AVB with lampard. So unfortunately this problem is not going away soon.

I wish he could use this formation

azapuleta-luiz-terry-cole

mikel-ramires

mata-lampard-hazard

torres

This formation will solve dimatteo's problem first hand since i know he is a coward to tell lampard that he doesnt fit.

It will balance every thing back

This is what i really want

mikel-ramires

moses-mata-hazard

torres/sturridge

This formation is the best, ramires will stay back and keep the midfield mobile, mata and hazard will link up and switch positions often and moses will provide quality crosses like a true good winger. (Something chelsea lost when robben left us, some freakin width to provide energy in the flanks like man united's valencia)

This is the best formation for our group of players against smaller opposition(4-3-3)

oscar-mikel-lampard

mata- torres - hazard

1. This will give us the possession for sure. Few teams will out possess us not just ordinary teams like qpr did this weekend.

2. We will be back to or 4-3-3 which will perfectly fit oscar and lampard better

3. More midfield players = more control like barcelona

4. I just pray dimatteo can use dis

Oscar is a starter in brazil good enough to keep ganso and lucas moura out of the team. Why the **** is he not playin as a substitute at the very least. He reminds me of fabregas and he is even faster. We are freaking wasting a real talent here.

/thread

[EskWeston 696]

if lampard is to be played in a 4-2-3-1 then he should be here:

Moses/mata - Lampard - Hazard

Torres

Yes, as both you and Kellzfresh have said Frank is an attacking midfielder and should be played there. The problem there is that Hazard, Mata and Oscar are ALL better options that him now. What we are doing (or more importantly what RDM is doing) is desperately trying to find a way to shoehorn Frank into the starting 11. I am sorry but i don't care who you are or what you have done, times move on and the best TEAM should always be sent out. We could very easily play in a team with Hazard, Mata and Oscar behind Torres in a similar way to the teams Kellzfresh posted above do, but we have to have right 2 midfielders behind them otherwise it is pointless. We are now taking away an attacking option to allow Lamps to play every game.

Just once would like to see Ramires or Romeu alongside Mikel and 3 proper attacking midfielders behind Torres.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Yes, as both you and Kellzfresh have said Frank is an attacking midfielder and should be played there. The problem there is that Hazard, Mata and Oscar are ALL better options that him now. What we are doing (or more importantly what RDM is doing) is desperately trying to find a way to shoehorn Frank into the starting 11. I am sorry but i don't care who you are or what you have done, times move on and the best TEAM should always be sent out. We could very easily play in a team with Hazard, Mata and Oscar behind Torres in a similar way to the teams Kellzfresh posted above do, but we have to have right 2 midfielders behind them otherwise it is pointless. We are now taking away an attacking option to allow Lamps to play every game.

Just once would like to see Ramires or Romeu alongside Mikel and 3 proper attacking midfielders behind Torres.

That;s not remotely it. If this were all about Lampard, RDM could easily switch to a 4-3-3 with Mikel, Ramires, and Lampard in the midfield and Hazard and Mata on the wings. He doesn't because he wants Hazard and Mata running things from the #10 spot.This is about RDM thinking that the 4-2-3-1 is the best formation for Chelsea and the team literally having no other options for the deep lying midfielder. That position requires creativity, vision, and long passing ability. Romeu and Ramires would be awful for that position. They have basically the opposite abilities for what is required from that position. This is a problem caused by Chelsea spending 80M pounds on three players who all want to be/should be playing right behind the striker. Because the squad is so imbalanced, RDM has limited options. This is also because Lampard played very well last season and for the past decade, has been man of the match two games in a row for England, so three mediocre to poor performances in the league doesn't make decent managers panic.

It's amazing that so many Chelsea supporters have bought the media conspiracy theories of last season. AVB was not fired because of Lampard and Terry being pissed off, He was fired because his ideas didn't work. He was fired because he couldn't communicate to his players. But most of all, he was fired because Chelsea were losing. Lampard is not playing because of some conspiracy, he's playing because RDM thinks he's the best man he's got for that role.

[EskWeston 696]

That;s not remotely it. If this were all about Lampard, RDM could easily switch to a 4-3-3 with Mikel, Ramires, and Lampard in the midfield and Hazard and Mata on the wings. He doesn't because he wants Hazard and Mata running things from the #10 spot.This is about RDM thinking that the 4-2-3-1 is the best formation for Chelsea and the team literally having no other options for the deep lying midfielder. That position requires creativity, vision, and long passing ability. Romeu and Ramires would be awful for that position. They have basically the opposite abilities for what is required from that position. This is a problem caused by Chelsea spending 80M pounds on three players who all want to be/should be playing right behind the striker. Because the squad is so imbalanced, RDM has limited options. This is also because Lampard played very well last season and for the past decade, has been man of the match two games in a row for England, so three mediocre to poor performances in the league doesn't make decent managers panic.

It's amazing that so many Chelsea supporters have bought the media conspiracy theories of last season. AVB was not fired because of Lampard and Terry being pissed off, He was fired because his ideas didn't work. He was fired because he couldn't communicate to his players. But most of all, he was fired because Chelsea were losing. Lampard is not playing because of some conspiracy, he's playing because RDM thinks he's the best man he's got for that role.

So Ramires and Romeu would be awful for that position and should not play there, but Lampard played well last season and for the past decade, been man of the match for 2 England games so SHOULD play there, even though he does not have the discipline to play the role. I am not slagging off Frank because he is one of our best ever players. But there is no getting away from the fact that he is not suitable for the role. Personally i think Romeu and Ramires would be better suited to the role. With 2 proper holding midfielders i see no reason why we cannot play a fluid 3 ahead of them.

I see many opinions of what the role should be, it seems that the only player to fit the profile is Pirlo which is silly, to my mid the club and RDM clearly wanted to play with 3 attacking midfielders which is why we have spent so much money buying them, behind them we need players to make the play tick, move the ball around and link up to the 3 attacking mids. The article at the start of this thread explains perfectly what is gong wrong.

RDM has PLENTY of options. Tons of them, but we have not seen any attempt to try anything other than switching to 4-3-3 on Saturday which worked much better in the end. The problem is (and it is something Chelsea do frustratingly often) is putting square pegs in round holes. We have so many attacking midfield options there is NO reason to play a left back or a central midfielder in those roles. To my mind there are 2 basic options, stick with the formation and take Lampard out the midfeild 2, or switch to a 4-3-3 to accomodate him.

[YouNameIt 1,511]

Yes, as both you and Kellzfresh have said Frank is an attacking midfielder and should be played there. The problem there is that Hazard, Mata and Oscar are ALL better options that him now. What we are doing (or more importantly what RDM is doing) is desperately trying to find a way to shoehorn Frank into the starting 11. I am sorry but i don't care who you are or what you have done, times move on and the best TEAM should always be sent out. We could very easily play in a team with Hazard, Mata and Oscar behind Torres in a similar way to the teams Kellzfresh posted above do, but we have to have right 2 midfielders behind them otherwise it is pointless. We are now taking away an attacking option to allow Lamps to play every game.

Just once would like to see Ramires or Romeu alongside Mikel and 3 proper attacking midfielders behind Torres.

I agree with everything you say, and lamps shouldnt be a regular starter. However, in some games his experience is needed. Plus we need to rotate our squad. And when he is to be played, then he should be used as a CAM.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

If we ended up changing to 4-3-3 I'd have Oscar over Lampard anyway. The bottom line is he should just not be starting anymore. The old guard has STILL not been phased out completely yet for god's sake. Ramires, Oscar, Mikel all offer something that warrants them starting over a seemingly past it Lampard.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

So Ramires and Romeu would be awful for that position and should not play there, but Lampard played well last season and for the past decade, been man of the match for 2 England games so SHOULD play there, even though he does not have the discipline to play the role. I am not slagging off Frank because he is one of our best ever players. But there is no getting away from the fact that he is not suitable for the role. Personally i think Romeu and Ramires would be better suited to the role. With 2 proper holding midfielders i see no reason why we cannot play a fluid 3 ahead of them.

I see many opinions of what the role should be, it seems that the only player to fit the profile is Pirlo which is silly, to my mid the club and RDM clearly wanted to play with 3 attacking midfielders which is why we have spent so much money buying them, behind them we need players to make the play tick, move the ball around and link up to the 3 attacking mids. The article at the start of this thread explains perfectly what is gong wrong.

RDM has PLENTY of options. Tons of them, but we have not seen any attempt to try anything other than switching to 4-3-3 on Saturday which worked much better in the end. The problem is (and it is something Chelsea do frustratingly often) is putting square pegs in round holes. We have so many attacking midfield options there is NO reason to play a left back or a central midfielder in those roles. To my mind there are 2 basic options, stick with the formation and take Lampard out the midfeild 2, or switch to a 4-3-3 to accomodate him.

The article at the beginning of this thread was terrible because it makes the same basic mistake in thinking that the double pivot is two defensive midfielders. It just isn't. Many teams play the 4-2-3-1 and the roles are almost always the same. One defensive midfielder, and one deep-lying playmaker. You can't play with two defensive midfielders because there's no bridge from the defence to the attack. Instead of freeing up the attackers to do more, what it actually does is require the attacking players to come further back up the pitch to receive the ball. So you have a team that has static movement and very limited creativity Also, I found the criticisms of Lampard kind of ridiculous. The biggest pproblem at Chelsea is that Lampard makes too many runs and that opens us up too much space? Chelsea have conceded 2 goals in the 3 games Lampard has started and neither of them were remotely caused by Lampard (One, brilliant header Cahill could have done better, one horrible error by Cech)? Why is something that has cost us zero goals this year suddenly the biggest problem with the team? (The criticism of him not being an ideal deep-lying midfielder is legitimate.) Also, the article is wrong about Lampard's positioning. It's not a debate. It's just factually wrong because we actual have Lampard's positioning data available. Look at Lampard's average position in his three starts and each game he averaged being right around midfield which is where he should be. He plays where Xabi Alonso plays and actually more defensively than Pirlo plays. He hasn't played well this season, but so much of the criticism of him is based on a lack of understanding of what his position is supposed to be and what he is responsible for.

[kellzfresh 7,229]

The article at the beginning of this thread was terrible because it makes the same basic mistake in thinking that the double pivot is two defensive midfielders. It just isn't. Many teams play the 4-2-3-1 and the roles are almost always the same. One defensive midfielder, and one deep-lying playmaker. You can't play with two defensive midfielders because there's no bridge from the defence to the attack. Instead of freeing up the attackers to do more, what it actually does is require the attacking players to come further back up the pitch to receive the ball. So you have a team that has static movement and very limited creativity Also, I found the criticisms of Lampard kind of ridiculous. The biggest pproblem at Chelsea is that Lampard makes too many runs and that opens us up too much space? Chelsea have conceded 2 goals in the 3 games Lampard has started and neither of them were remotely caused by Lampard (One, brilliant header Cahill could have done better, one horrible error by Cech)? Why is something that has cost us zero goals this year suddenly the biggest problem with the team? (The criticism of him not being an ideal deep-lying midfielder is legitimate.) Also, the article is wrong about Lampard's positioning. It's not a debate. It's just factually wrong because we actual have Lampard's positioning data available. Look at Lampard's average position in his three starts and each game he averaged being right around midfield which is where he should be. He plays where Xabi Alonso plays and actually more defensively than Pirlo plays. He hasn't played well this season, but so much of the criticism of him is based on a lack of understanding of what his position is supposed to be and what he is responsible for.

The article at the beginning of this thread was terrible because it makes the same basic mistake in thinking that the double pivot is two defensive midfielders. It just isn't. Many teams play the 4-2-3-1 and the roles are almost always the same. One defensive midfielder, and one deep-lying playmaker. You can't play with two defensive midfielders because there's no bridge from the defence to the attack. Instead of freeing up the attackers to do more, what it actually does is require the attacking players to come further back up the pitch to receive the ball. So you have a team that has static movement and very limited creativity Also, I found the criticisms of Lampard kind of ridiculous. The biggest pproblem at Chelsea is that Lampard makes too many runs and that opens us up too much space? Chelsea have conceded 2 goals in the 3 games Lampard has started and neither of them were remotely caused by Lampard (One, brilliant header Cahill could have done better, one horrible error by Cech)? Why is something that has cost us zero goals this year suddenly the biggest problem with the team? (The criticism of him not being an ideal deep-lying midfielder is legitimate.) Also, the article is wrong about Lampard's positioning. It's not a debate. It's just factually wrong because we actual have Lampard's positioning data available. Look at Lampard's average position in his three starts and each game he averaged being right around midfield which is where he should be. He plays where Xabi Alonso plays and actually more defensively than Pirlo plays. He hasn't played well this season, but so much of the criticism of him is based on a lack of understanding of what his position is supposed to be and what he is responsible for.

The main criticism is for roberto dimatteo and not lampard.

Lampard has played as an attacking or central midfield all his life and is not clearly suited for this role. Its like telling ozil to play in defensive midfield when he is not used to it. He will always go foward and leave spaces at the back, which good teams like athletico and juve will exploit.

The only way chelsea can develop a true system is to play lampard in attacking midfield where he belongs or change back to ancelloti's 4-3-3 with lampard and oscar in CM roles.

That is what dimatteo is not doing. He is not trying to find a system to develop our play. The first time he tried it was in the last 10mins against qpr. Before we started bossing them. If qpr holds 55% possesion against us then against mancity what will happen? 80%

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

The main criticism is for roberto dimatteo and not lampard.

Lampard has played as an attacking or central midfield all his life and is not clearly suited for this role. Its like telling ozil to play in defensive midfield when he is not used to it. He will always go foward and leave spaces at the back, which good teams like athletico and juve will exploit.

The only way chelsea can develop a true system is to play lampard in attacking midfield where he belongs or change back to ancelloti's 4-3-3 with lampard and oscar in CM roles.

That is what dimatteo is not doing. He is not trying to find a system to develop our play. The first time he tried it was in the last 10mins against qpr. Before we started bossing them. If qpr holds 55% possesion against us then against mancity what will happen? 80%

I get your point and I think it's a legitimate concern, but I'd like to see our team evolve some before making any big moves. One of the major reasons we didn't have much possession against QPR was playing Ramires are Bertrand. Neither are really possession players. (Also, Torres, couldn't keep possession up front.) I think with Mata back in the starting XI and hopefully moving out left more (the biggest imbalance for me has been the attacking third, it hasn't been sorted out yet and unlike the deep-lying midfield, there are tons of options there), we will be able to keep the ball more. We did have 72% possession against Reading after all. With a lot of new players, RDM has some definite tinkering to do. I'd rather he do it at his own pace than be forced into some ridiculous panicky changes that so many on here seem to want.

[╫rue Blue 47]

The article at the beginning of this thread was terrible because it makes the same basic mistake in thinking that the double pivot is two defensive midfielders. It just isn't. Many teams play the 4-2-3-1 and the roles are almost always the same. One defensive midfielder, and one deep-lying playmaker. You can't play with two defensive midfielders because there's no bridge from the defence to the attack. Instead of freeing up the attackers to do more, what it actually does is require the attacking players to come further back up the pitch to receive the ball. So you have a team that has static movement and very limited creativity

thats right, double pivot cant fiil with two defensive midfield

with two midfield cant distributed the ball and help attacking and too defensive minded

it still will be struggling against good and organise defence, that would be horrible

prime example, just look netherland in euro

their frontline is fill with all attacking minded player, good quality and technicall actually (not like us which still use 'wrong' player to attack)

but what happen, with their bad display from their double pivot

it makes a whole team doesnt work well

their team static, look like separated in their attacking-defence

opponent more easy to closing space and predicted how they try to attacking

and how you can still thinking RDM decision on our double pivot, is still right

the problem is we didnt have mobility and pace in midfield

if the double pivot playing badly which is this area is really vital aspect in 4-2-3-1 formation

it makes a whole team playing bad, even horrible

and makes it much worse with another problem/wrong decision by RDM

Also, I found the criticisms of Lampard kind of ridiculous. The biggest pproblem at Chelsea is that Lampard makes too many runs and that opens us up too much space? Chelsea have conceded 2 goals in the 3 games Lampard has started and neither of them were remotely caused by Lampard (One, brilliant header Cahill could have done better, one horrible error by Cech)? Why is something that has cost us zero goals this year suddenly the biggest problem with the team? (The criticism of him not being an ideal deep-lying midfielder is legitimate.) Also, the article is wrong about Lampard's positioning. It's not a debate. It's just factually wrong because we actual have Lampard's positioning data available. Look at Lampard's average position in his three starts and each game he averaged being right around midfield which is where he should be. He plays where Xabi Alonso plays and actually more defensively than Pirlo plays. He hasn't played well this season, but so much of the criticism of him is based on a lack of understanding of what his position is supposed to be and what he is responsible for.

yes, you right

lampard didnt cost us goal conceded

but, you are not blind isnt, you see it against milan, psg, even against wigan midfield

with lampard and mikel so far in double pivot

against good midfield, when our midfield get pressure

our midfiled very struggling and become non existent

so something wrong in our double pivot, isnt it

not just simlpy because ofform

and that would be madness, if RDM still keep doing that, or not find the way to highly improved

[YouNameIt 1,511]

Mikel - Romeu

Mata - Ramires - Hazard

Torres

Thats a decent way of having a strong defensive team but at the same time be set up for quick counters and a dangerous attacking force. That would be my choice against Juve if Romeu had actually played some games.

[communicate 2,703]

The main criticism is for roberto dimatteo and not lampard.

Lampard has played as an attacking or central midfield all his life and is not clearly suited for this role. Its like telling ozil to play in defensive midfield when he is not used to it. He will always go foward and leave spaces at the back, which good teams like athletico and juve will exploit.

The only way chelsea can develop a true system is to play lampard in attacking midfield where he belongs or change back to ancelloti's 4-3-3 with lampard and oscar in CM roles.

That is what dimatteo is not doing. He is not trying to find a system to develop our play. The first time he tried it was in the last 10mins against qpr. Before we started bossing them. If qpr holds 55% possesion against us then against mancity what will happen? 80%

If you want to really play 433 you should play ramires instead of Oscar. Oscar is a no 10 so he will have tendency to stay forward and play as no 10 and the formation is back to 4231