Watching older games on YouTube - 4-4-2 formation.

[albert_left_peg]

Spent a fair amount of time reliving some of our classic games from the 1990s to 2011 era and the one thing that stands out to me was how the success we had playing with 2 strikers.

I know it's a subject debated to death on here, but the we look so much more dangerous and direct rather than the turgid 4-3-3 we see week in week out.

Some of the striking play between Miller and Boyd as well in the 2nd Smith era was fantastic too...didn't realise at the time how good a partnership they were.

I long for the day of return of 4-4-2 in the league... to me the diddy teams find it much easier to counter a 4-3-3.

 

[big_blue]

The 4-3-3 system is effective if you have space to play. For the vast majority of games we play, especially at home, we don’t have that space.

I personally hate the 4-3-3 and have done since Warburton bored us with it.

Having two strikers occupying the centre halfs creates space for attacking midfielders and wingers.

I wish we would go back to that system for league games.

 

[pollokparkloyal]

This is the first I thought of tactics for a few weeks now.

Would be great to get back to a 4-4-2 in the new season (whenever that is). We have to wonder what players we will have next season. Few players coming in and out could change things up dramatically.

Lets hope everyone stays safe and sensible so we can get back to football and discuss at even more length our teams formation.

 

[thetoptier]

the best teams i've seen were 4-4-2

with 3 out and out midfielders and a winger

think Mccan-GVB-Fergie-Reyna for example

or Cooper with souness-durrant-ferguson etc.

and 2 up front

Only really seen Hateley and latterly morelos to a lesser extent able to play on their own

 

[albert_left_peg]

The 4-3-3 system is effective if you have space to play. For the vast majority of games we play, especially at home, we don’t have that space.

I personally hate the 4-3-3 and have done since Warburton bored us with it.

Having two strikers occupying the centre halfs creates space for attacking midfielders and wingers.

I wish we would go back to that system for league games.

Absolutely agree..... maybe to an extent I am bored to death with it now also.

It is a formation that suits us away from home in Europe but to me in our bread and butter games it should be two up top.

We used to create some amount of chances playing with 2 up vs. probably same tactics and same level of opponents as we face today.

 

[barcelonabear]

Football has probly changed more in the last ten years than it ever has, I like the idea of playing two up top but if it means playing two in centre mid then it’s a non starter

 

[Lizzy's 11]

It's not about having one system. It's about having a system that can change fluidly during a game to deal with different situations. Stick to one rigid system and once it's sussed we're done and we have no fresh ideas how to break a team down. We've seen that a lot in the last few years.

 

[Valley Bluenose]

I think we all watched the Lovenkrands Final the other day.

Midfield three of Ricksen-Ferguson-De Boer (slightly advanced) and a front 3 of Cannigia-Lovenkrands-McCann.

Seemed to work quite well against the Dhims midfield 5 (later changed to a 4 to no avail, we still dominated).

 

[Chinggis_could_I_khant]

Always use 4-4-2 in Fifa or PES. Just can't get used to any other formation.

 

[Graham89]

I'm not sure we have 2 centre mids who could control a game with 4-4-2. If we had 2 real quality centre mids then yes.

 

[Derek84]

Would like to see us try a 4-4-2 at some point.

 

[Thornliebank_Bear]

Football has probly changed more in the last ten years than it ever has, I like the idea of playing two up top but if it means playing two in centre mid then it’s a non starter

Has it ? so tell us how its changed then i used to watch motherwell crowd the penalty area and frustrate us and its still happening now. Maybe more teams do it and refs are bent but dont think the games changed all that much still lasts 90 mins and goalposts are in the same place.

I think the only thing thats changed is that fans watch so much more of european leagues and top managers and believe we must play the way pep or the top managers in europe do.

 

[SecondBestIsNothing]

Anytime he’s threw another striker on it hasn’t really worked. St. Johnstone away last season was the only time I remember it working and they played right into our hands. Personally would rather try 3-5-2 as we don’t have the personnel to try 4-4-2 but we need a CB who can move with the ball and step into midfield

 

[Thornliebank_Bear]

Anytime he’s threw another striker on it hasn’t really worked. St. Johnstone away last season was the only time I remember it working and they played right into our hands. Personally would rather try 3-5-2 as we don’t have the personnel to try 4-4-2 but we need a CB who can move with the ball and step into midfield

We dont have the players to play 4-4-2 where do you start with this stuff its just crazy.

And i thought the 2 strikers worked v Braga and Ross Co but i could be wrong there.

People do understand we play Hamilton, Motherwell, St m, St j, Hearts etc ?

 

[ek_loyal]

I would like to see us trying a variation of 4-4-2 or possibly a 3-5-2 against some of the 'lesser; teams in the league, as we really need to find an alternative to our current tactics which seem to be more effective in Europe and against the mhanks

 

[Der Berliner]

Well, in the ...

As Live: 1996 Scottish Cup Semi Final Rangers v Celtic

... game I noted that we actually played:

Goram

Cleland - Petric - McLaren - Brown - Robertson

McCall - Gascoigne

Laudrup - McCoist - Durie​

... and that was obviously against a rather attacking Celtic side. McCall to break up their mdifield, Gascoigne for the sublime, and Laudrup for the quality, with Durie and McCoist giving their defenders bother. So Sir Walter adapted to the opposition.

I would hope that we could slip out of our 4-3-3 (i.e. 4-2-3-1) no-matter-what formation when it is clear (and has been for 2 seasons at least) that one striker and two attackers are not enough for the Scotenaccio, not least when the fullbacks are not able to assist the attack, nor the "wingers" either side of the main striker weigh in with goals.

3 at the back, one DM/CM, 4 attack-minded midfielders and 2 strikers should be our norm against the likes of Killie, Hamilton, Livingston et al at Ibrox. Whether those "midfielders" include either Barisic or Tavernier remains to be seen, but the latter would have to show a certain rise in form to pick him ahead of a real winger.

 

[big_blue]

Well, in the ...

As Live: 1996 Scottish Cup Semi Final Rangers v Celtic

... game I noted that we actually played:

Goram

Cleland - Petric - McLaren - Brown - Robertson

McCall - Gascoigne

Laudrup - McCoist - Durie​

... and that was obviously against a rather attacking Celtic side. McCall to break up their mdifield, Gascoigne for the sublime, and Laudrup for the quality, with Durie and McCoist giving their defenders bother. So Sir Walter adapted to the opposition.

I would hope that we could slip out of our 4-3-3 (i.e. 4-2-3-1) no-matter-what formation when it is clear (and has been for 2 seasons at least) that one striker and two attackers are not enough for the Scotenaccio, not least when the fullbacks are not able to assist the attack, nor the "wingers" either side of the main striker weigh in with goals.

3 at the back, one DM/CM, 4 attack-minded midfielders and 2 strikers should be our norm against the likes of Killie, Hamilton, Livingston et al at Ibrox. Whether those "midfielders" include either Barisic or Tavernier remains to be seen, but the latter would have to show a certain rise in form to pick him ahead of a real winger.

I would have thought Brown would have been the defensive midfielder and Robertson would have been left back.

I don’t ever remember Davie Robertson playing in any other position apart from left back.

That’s me got an excuse for watching it back.

 

[Necro]

I really don't understand how or why there are so many people on here that think 442 is even remotely viable for Rangers.

It's a low block, counter attacking system unless you have the players that Atletico or Leipzig have at their disposal. We are already very good in matches where something like that is required.

Having another striker on the pitch doesn't equal more productive attacking play, it's actually quite the opposite when you consider that we play against 11 men defences. You're sacrificing a midfielder for someone to aim endless crosses at, that plays into the oppositions hands.

What we need is better quality runs in behind from the midfield 3, we end up retaining possession on the edge of the opponents box far too often because certain players(Davis) lack the vision to play intricate penatrative passes or there is nobody creating space in behind.

 

[big_blue]

I really don't understand how or why there are so many people on here that think 442 is even remotely viable for Rangers.

It's a low block, counter attacking system unless you have the players that Atletico or Leipzig have at their disposal. We are already very good in matches where something like that is required.

Having another striker on the pitch doesn't equal more productive attacking play, it's actually quite the opposite when you consider that we play against 11 men defences. You're sacrificing a midfielder for someone to aim endless crosses at, that plays into the oppositions hands.

What we need is better quality runs in behind from the midfield 3, we end up retaining possession on the edge of the opponents box far too often because certain players(Davis) lack the vision to play intricate penatrative passes or there is nobody creating space in behind.

Kamberi’s goal away to StJohnstone was a classic example of why we should play with two strikers.

The ball came to him when Morelos was occupying the two centre half’s.

As soon as he had the ball he hit it first time and scored. Only an out and out striker would have took that shot on.

Our midfielders and wingers would never take the shot first time.

We should always be playing with two strikers against the SPL duds.

 

[Necro]

Kamberi’s goal away to StJohnstone was a classic example of why we should play with two strikers.

The ball came to him when Morelos was occupying the two centre half’s.

As soon as he had the ball he hit it first time and scored. Only an out and out striker would have took that shot on.

Our midfielders and wingers would never take the shot first time.

We should always be playing with two strikers against the SPL duds.

Kamberi wasn't playing as a striker in that game until Morelos came off
though, he was playing as a left sided #10

 

[RFC_Champions]

4-3-3........?

Does anyone honestly think we play with three strikers/forwards?

We play with only one striker/forward whatever you want to call it.

Now and during Warburton’s time we’ve played 4-5-1 as supposed to 4-3-3 and to be quite honest - it’s criminal to play this way in domestic matches.

 

[Necro]

4-3-3........?

Does anyone honestly think we play with three strikers/forwards?

We play with only one striker/forward whatever you want to call it.

Now and during Warburton’s time we’ve played 4-5-1 as supposed to 4-3-3 and to be quite honest - it’s criminal to play this way in domestic matches.

The 4231 is the most popular system in world football and is used by the majority of elite level teams, by your incorrect standards that is also a 451.

 

[big_blue]

Kamberi wasn't playing as a striker in that game until Morelos came off
though, he was playing as a left sided #10

He was coming in from the left.

My point was that as he is an out and out striker he took the chance like only a striker would.

 

[Valley Bluenose]

He was coming in from the left.

My point was that as he is an out and out striker he took the chance like only a striker would.

Kinda like Kent did at the DhimDome. And neither does it often enough.

 

[blutos]

It's changed so that every team we face have at least 5 men in the centre of the pitch. Modern football is more about the middle of the pitch than ever. Sometimes against the ultra shitey wee teams their full backs and a deep striker act as midfields and give them 8 men there.

Even Walter's 4-4-2 was based around the right midfielder (Davis then Naismith) tucking in to the middle. The only way we can play 4-4-2 in our league currently is to do that: have a right or left wide mid who tucks in, and use an attacking full back for all our width. But, like Papac, by doing that you sacrifice your other fullback (Barisic) so that you can keep defensively solid without an extra midfielder who can help with cover.

Gerrard likes width. Often we've seen Tav and Barisic going wider than even our wingers on the overlap. 4-4-2 with our current attacking full backs would put us in an even more unstable defensive position.

So 3-5-2 sounds appealling then. But... then where do our wide(r) players fit in?

 

[Necro]

He was coming in from the left.

My point was that as he is an out and out striker he took the chance like only a striker would.

I disagree that only a striker takes chances like that, Hagi, Kent and Aribo are all more than capable.

In my opinion our problem is that all 3 of the guys mentioned above are given free roles rather than strict instruction and as a result are all over the place trying to make things happen

 

[SecondBestIsNothing]

We dont have the players to play 4-4-2 where do you start with this stuff its just crazy.

And i thought the 2 strikers worked v Braga and Ross Co but i could be wrong there.

People do understand we play Hamilton, Motherwell, St m, St j, Hearts etc ?

I just don’t think our CM’s control the game well enough to sit as a 2. It worked in the past because we used to go back to front quickly with high balls into big strikers or in the case of Boyd and Miller, have an intelligent, hard-working striker, who read the 2nd ball well.

It’s easy to look back with rose-tinted specs but remember the slow passing about the back before Weir/Cuellar/McCulloch/etc hit a high aimless ball up the park? I certainly do

 

[RFC_Champions]

The 4231 is the most popular system in world football and is used by the majority of elite level teams, by your incorrect standards that is also a 451.

My incorrect standards?

Either way, i suppose you think it’s working perfectly fine for us in this league. We’ve no issues with this team set-up! None whatsoever

 

[Thornliebank_Bear]

4-3-3........?

Does anyone honestly think we play with three strikers/forwards?

We play with only one striker/forward whatever you want to call it.

Now and during Warburton’s time we’ve played 4-5-1 as supposed to 4-3-3 and to be quite honest - it’s criminal to play this way in domestic matches.

It is poor tactics i dont think there is any doubt about that.

 

[Necro]

My incorrect standards?

Either way, i suppose you think it’s working perfectly fine for us in this league. We’ve no issues with this team set-up! None whatsoever

Considering our current shape to be a 451 just because there are 3 central midfielders and 2 wider players is incorrect, yes.

No, of course things could be better. I never said anything to indicate otherwise though. I just don't think the shape is the issue, it's the tactics within it

 

[SuffolkGer]

I would love to see a return of the 442 across football as well. Everything goes in trends, it was all 3 at the back for a moment, or 4231s, now it seems strictly 1 out and out striker per line up, so I hope sometime soon the trends get found out and the classic 442 can come back.

One thing I rate is that whenver a greatest xi is listed, everyone still puts it in as a 442.

 

[Necro]

I would love to see a return of the 442 across football as well. Everything goes in trends, it was all 3 at the back for a moment, or 4231s, now it seems strictly 1 out and out striker per line up, so I hope sometime soon the trends get found out and the classic 442 can come back.

One thing I rate is that whenver a greatest xi is listed, everyone still puts it in as a 442.

442 hasn't disappeared, it just isn't anywhere near as effective as other shapes when trying to play dynamic attacking football.

The English national team had arguably the strongest squad in the world not long ago and did absolutely nothing because of managers playing 442

 

[Thornliebank_Bear]

442 hasn't disappeared, it just isn't anywhere near as effective as other shapes when trying to play dynamic attacking football.

The English national team had arguably the strongest squad in the world not long ago and did absolutely nothing because of managers playing 442

whats that got to do with Rangers and scottish football ?

 

[Kaiserweiss]

Football has probly changed more in the last ten years than it ever has, I like the idea of playing two up top but if it means playing two in centre mid then it’s a non starter

How come mate? That interests me.

for example without debating defence.

Hagi Jack/Aribo Davis Kent

Morelos Kamberi/Defoe

Personally I think u need the players to be able to play 4-3-3 and we certainly don’t.

 

[RFC_Champions]

Considering our current shape to be a 451 just because there are 3 central midfielders and 2 wider players is incorrect, yes.

No, of course things could be better. I never said anything to indicate otherwise though. I just don't think the shape is the issue, it's the tactics within it

Micro analysing formations bud.

The main point is.... we don’t play with three players upfront (ie 4-3-3.... we play with one striker)

You’re mentioning shape and tactics together but can’t see 4-3-3 being similar to 4-5-1 depending on tactics/instructions being given to the “wide forwards”..... a bit contradictory.

Regardless of what works for elite teams, with elite players in elite leagues is irrelevant.

We need to find a way to make things work for our team in this league.

Quite a few years we’ve played with a similar formation we’ve been nowhere near good enough.

 

[Haining84]

McLeish won a treble playing 4-3-3.

 

[Kaiserweiss]

442 hasn't disappeared, it just isn't anywhere near as effective as other shapes when trying to play dynamic attacking football.

The English national team had arguably the strongest squad in the world not long ago and did absolutely nothing because of managers playing 442

It is coming back, Lazio and Atalanta seem to be successful with 2 up and they will be the new fad that people follow.

football runs in cycles as we all know and the cycle of 2 up is slowly coming back and u will see that cycle kick in again.

To be fair the peados are even reverting to it.

 

[Rich Uncle Skeleton]

We did pretty well playing 3-2-5 in the 1920s, why not give that a try?

 

[Kaiserweiss]

Micro analysing formations bud.

The main point is.... we don’t play with three players upfront (ie 4-3-3.... we play with one striker)

You’re mentioning shape and tactics together but can’t see 4-3-3 being similar to 4-5-1 depending on tactics/instructions being given to the “wide forwards”..... a bit contradictory.

Regardless of what works for elite teams, with elite players in elite leagues is irrelevant.

We need to find a way to make things work for our team in this league.

Quite a few years we’ve played with a similar formation we’ve been nowhere near good enough.

Prett my much word for word to what I would post.

it’s insane to think we have Morelos and Defoe at the club but never utilise it’s really even tried to get them working together

 

[barcelonabear]

How come mate? That interests me.

for example without debating defence.

Hagi Jack/Aribo Davis Kent

Morelos Kamberi/Defoe

Personally I think u need the players to be able to play 4-3-3 and we certainly don’t.

Because then your playing with two in the middle of the park more than likely against 3 sometimes 4 if a team plays a diamond. lose midfield battle and you ain’t controlling the game

 

[senefelder]

I'm delighted to see the return of the low block term.

 

[BigDGrant]

Big target man and a wee nippy guy up top.Always my favourite set up.433 is shite to watch a Rangers team %^*& up so many times like we did after xmas.Hate watching it.

 

[big_blue]

Big target man and a wee nippy guy up top.Always my favourite set up.433 is shite to watch a Rangers team %^*& up so many times like we did after xmas.Hate watching it.

It’s not just after Christmas. There were signs before Christmas when there were some poor performances.

It also happened last year after Christmas.

It happened right up until until Warburton was sacked in our first year back in the SPL.

Teams had also sussed out how to play against us around October/November in Warburtons first season.

Rangers playing 4-3-3 against weaker opposition who sit in is brutal to watch and has won us absolutely nothing.