England's obsession with 4-4-2

The 4-4-2 is a very English formation. Two hard-working box to box midfielders, which the English game has produced in abundance, 2 wingers who can cross the ball well and can also track back to help out defensively and 2 strikers who can link up well and hold up play excellently for each other. Add to that 2 wing backs who run up and down the touchline for the whole 90 minutes, and thus you get a well-drilled team.

England won the 1966 World Cup with a 4-4-2, so you’d expect a certain level of fascination with the formation and style of play with every subsequent English team. That has turned out to be dead true. Even foreign managers like Sven-Goran Eriksson and Fabio Capello have come and gone, but the 4-4-2 has always been an integral style of play and has never been ditched.

1966 World Cup winners

One would have atleast expected Capello to change the system, for Capello’s teams have always had the one striker alone upfront, being supported by an attacking midfielder/playmaker, a position in which England has always been found lacking. Paul Gascoigne was perhaps the last known English player of this kind. Joe Cole is perhaps his modern equivalent, but is way too inconsistent and beset with injuries that he has never been considered a serious contender for a permanent spot in the national side. Wayne Rooney plays this kind of a role for United domestically and is slated to play a similar role for England at the Euros, but is, for all intents and purposes, a striker first.

One would expect a similar dominance of the 4-4-2 system in the English domestic league also, but this is not the case, even for teams having a British manager. The success of the one striker system has caught on in the EPL as well. The presence of continental talent and managers of varied nationalities has meant that 2 strikers are rarely used in the game from the start.

Continental players have brought with them a finesse and a playmaking ability that have negated the need for a second striker and instead heightened the need for an auxiliary midfielder to provide the attacking thrust.

Thus, the 4-2-3-1 has gained prominence in the English game and is now the dominant style of play.

The evolution of the classical midfielder has also been a major reason for this change. Over the years, midfielders have evolved from being standard box-to-box runners to playing specific roles within the team. Thus, the emergence of the tough-tackling and ball-winning defensive midfielder and the creative goal-scoring attacking midfielder. Midfielders are increasingly encouraged to join in in the attacking third of the pitch and score vital goals. Thus, a steady supply of goals from the midfield has somewhat reduced the space for 2 strikers. The 3 midfielders in the middle of the pitch also give a further defensive cover against teams with technically superior flair players (Mata,Silva).

New age midfielders – Silva, Mata and Alonso

An analysis of the most successful team in the league reveals a preference for the lone striker.

Manchester United, for long exponents of the 4-4-2 with exactly the same characteristics that I described at the start of the article, have since incorporated elements of the continental game to enhance their record in the Champions League, a tournament in which they have arguably underperformed. Such an evolution of their game has thus wiped out their defensive frailities to a large extent, specially away in Europe and allowing them to dominate midfield with 3 central midfielders, the most crucial area of the field on a tight and tactical European night. We’ve also seen this trend replicated domestically and thus the emergence of a withdrawn 2^nd striker. Credit for this major tactical shift must go to former assistant manager, Carlos Queiroz.

This tactical change has thus allowed them to contest 3 European finals in 4 years and 4 domestic titles in 5 years (not considering this season).

Thus, it is safe to say that even Ferguson has realized the futility of playing with 2 strikers (and thus 1 midfielder less) against foreign teams with a host of flair players, and conceding the midfield to the opponents.

Similar logic should also apply to the national side.

Frankly, given the lack of striking talent at Roy Hodgson’s disposal, playing 2 strikers would be suicidal. Though a well-known fan of the 4-4-2 himself, Hodgson would be better advised to pack the midfield instead and go for a goal on the break or from setpieces. England should be willing and ready to win ugly, especially with the absence of Rooney for the 1^st 2 matches. The combined striking talents of Welbeck, Carroll and Defoe wouldn’t inspire much confidence in any English fan.

This tournament must finally signal the end of the 4-4-2 for England ,if they wish to go far in the tournament. It is high time that the English realize that they aren’t technically and tactically superior to the big European footballing nations and should stick to their strengths, that of playing a physical game, harrying and hassling the opponents. They can no longer depend on dominating teams in open play and would start as underdogs in most matches they play. Despite having the richest and most watched domestic league, the national team still finds it difficult to defeat 2^nd rate European teams like Norway.

Well, atleast the expectations and the hype surrounding the team is considerably low this time!