4-4-2

[Stevie]

I think football can be made too complicated at times.

4-4-2 is the tried and tested successful formula. 4-4-2 has been the general success story now for over 40 years, I don't think football will find another level of progression.

The 3-5-2 was introduced as the next big thing circa early 90's but the big boys eventually dumped it. I don't care what anyone says regarding the 4-5-1 being non-negative if used properly, IT IS NEGATIVE AND DULL AND BORING.

IMO you cant beat a proper 4-4-2, with 2 widish midfielders a holder and a more offensive middle man and a striking partnership.

As I say football is simple, I remember reading comments from Jim MacLean (Dundee U) saying words to the effect that forget about all the fancy stuff, the vast majority of goals come from a cross from the wing and a header from the big striker !

[Renegade]

I think football can be made too complicated at times.

4-4-2 is the tried and tested successful formula. 4-4-2 has been the general success story now for over 40 years, I don't think football will find another level of progression.

The 3-5-2 was introduced as the next big thing circa early 90's but the big boys eventually dumped it. I don't care what anyone says regarding the 4-5-1 being non-negative if used properly, IT IS NEGATIVE AND DULL AND BORING.

IMO you cant beat a proper 4-4-2, with 2 widish midfielders a holder and a more offensive middle man and a striking partnership.

As I say football is simple, I remember reading comments from Jim MacLean (Dundee U) saying words to the effect that forget about all the fancy stuff, the vast majority of goals come from a cross from the wing and a header from the big striker !

It's hard to say. Some say that future formations will be non-symmetrical and have arms on them, like this:

-----------------GK--------------

---RB----CB-------------CB---LB-

------RM--------CM--------LM---

--RW----------------------------

--------RF-----------LF----------

Another one could well be what Man U are doing now, with a 4-6-0, with an attacking front four which also pulls the defenders out of position. I still reckon that the 3-5-2 may still benefit ICT though, especially if a big centre-back a la Dods is signed in January.

[caley100]

As I say football is simple, I remember reading comments from Jim MacLean (Dundee U) saying words to the effect that forget about all the fancy stuff, the vast majority of goals come from a cross from the wing and a header from the big striker !

Thats it! we need a decent winger and a decent big centre forward, the complete inability of our team to get a cross/pass behind the opposing defence is our weakness, the times that we do manage it ie Dee utd / Midden games we score.

So really if we play 4 5 1 one of the 5 has to be a good, fast winger that can cross a ball, and at present we are getting rid of a player that can cross a ball and have an unproved player in Sutherland who aint getting a game.