Time for a new formation?

[Doctor DOOM]

Seems even those inside Iran have noticed this and are asking for rethinking the formation


چرا تیم ملی با دو مهاجم بازی نمی*کند؟


تیم ملی از زمان روی کار آمدن کی روش در بیشتر بازی ها با سیستم 1-3-2-4 بازی کرده و در بازی هایی که به گل احتیاج داشتیم و شکل بازی تهاجمی شده این سیستم به 3-3-4 تغییر پیدا کرده است.








به گزارش "ورزش سه"، پیش*تر بازی با این سیستم خیلی جای سوال نداشت چرا که باید در جام جهانی با تیم قدرتی و تکنیکی چون آرژانتین، نیجریه و بوسنی بازی می کردیم و اگر قرار بود در برابر این تیم*ها باز بازی می*کردیم شکست*های تلخی در کارنامه ایران به ثبت می رسید، کما اینکه نتیجه*ای که در بازی با بوسنی به دست آوردیم خیلی قابل دفاع نبود.


اما در حال حاضر بازی با سیستم 1-3-2-4 خیلی ضرورتی ندارد به خصوص که با ترافیک بازیکن در خط حمله مواجه هستیم و نشاندن آنها روی نیمکت جفا است. هم به آنها و هم به تیم ملی. سردار آزمون در نوک خط حمله بازی می کند و طبیعتا گوچی و کریم انصاری*فرد باید روی نیمکت بنشینند. دو مهاجمی که در لیگ برتر هلند و یونان مدام گل*های آنها به تهران مخابره می شود و تازه مهدی طارمی را هم داریم که با عنوان آقای گلی در اردوهای تیم ملی حاضر می*شود. البته در بازی با قطر کی*روش برای اینکه سه مهاجم روی نیمکت ننشاند از وجود مهدی در پست بال چپ بهره برد که اصلا خوب نبود!

چرا با سیستم 2-4-4 بازی نکنیم؟ چرا بازی با دو مهاجم نه؟ به*خصوص که ایران برای سیستم 1-3-2-4 پلی*میکر ندارد درحالی*که همه به*خوبی می*دانیم در این سیستم پست هافبک پشت فوروارد اهمیت زیادی دارد!


اتخاذ سیستم مبتنی بر توان و دارایی*های موجود بهترین تصمیمی است که کی*روش می*تواند بگیرد. نشاندن مهاجمان آماده*ای چون گوچی و انصاری*فرد روی نیمکت هیچ توجیهی ندارد درحالی*که اگر بازی با دو مهاجم را برگزینیم حداقل یکی از آنها بخت ورود به میدان را پیدا خواهد کرد و از همه مهم*تر تیم*ملی تهاجمی*تر می*شود.


نکته دیگر اینکه چون اشکان پیش*تر مدافع و هافبک راست بوده در میانه میدان که توپ می*گیرد اتوماتیک وار و ناخواسته توپ را به کنار می*برد و از دادن پاس*های عمقی غافل است و این به ضرر مهاجمان تیم*ملی تمام می*شود درحالی*که اگر با سیستم 2-4-4 بازی کنیم این مشکل به*نوعی کمرنگ*تر می*شود.

[Kiarash]

I don't understand why a 4-4-2 wouldn't be possible against Uzbekistan and South Korea:



Subs:

Dejagah in, Jahanbakhsh out
Hajsafi in, Torabi out
Rezaeian in, Ghafouri out

[Doctor DOOM]

That looks like a solid team, all around. In attack as well as defense. Especially for a home game where we need the three points

My only problem with this version of 442 is the lack of playmaker which gives you the option for attack from depth and center as an alternative to the wing attack here.

Its basic math. 3 is better than 2. Referring to the directions a team can attack and pressurize opponents' goal

[Taz]

A million issues:
1- whether a system is old or new or ... shd never be the criteria. If it works, then it works. As simple as that.
The present one hardly works if we demand something beyond keeping our goal shut. Lets not count lucky fluke goals as team tactics here.
2- you say the system is familiar to us. Putting aside the paper, judging from how the team moves and performs, i think the ''familiarity'' stops at paper and coach's board. Unless this system required ''hopeful lobs'' as its main mode of attacks.
Secondly, familiarity is one thing. Delivery of the tasks is another. And it's in delivery that we fall short.
3- strongest or toughest to defeat? The two may mean different things if we step beyond ''keeping our goals shut''.
4- I dont know. But I always thought ''the best out of us'' was a little more than hoofing balls up field from defense and pray some defender makes a mistake.
I always thought it'd mean an organized and systematic performance in 'transition followed by attack'', where players know where they shd be, what they shd do and where others are and the team moves in unision, not mere individual-based attacks that mainly rely on an individual's skills.
That is if we're talking about more than ''mere defending'' tactics.
5- flexibility? 4-1-2-1-2 is just as flexible, even if we keep its simplicity (a major plus) out of the discussion. It can turn into 4-3-3 or 4-5-1 or just about any combo. Lets not forget it's not numbers, it's people. And those people can be told to take such and such positions in such and such situations.
6- fullbacks are NOT exposed as there are RMs and LMs to help. In fact a 4-3-3 can leave them more exposed, if the midfield is bunched in the center, or leave the middle exposed, if it's kept wide.
As I said, 4-4:2 gives you pretty much everything.
7- team selection. In fact this is one major factor where 4-2-3-1 fails miserably short. For a system to work (beyond the papeer or board), you got to have the personel that can deliver. Delivering 4-2-3-1 (at least when we need to attack ) has fallen short because we dont have the tight kind of players. We shdnt care what france or ... does. They may have the players. We dont.
But for a 4-4-2? Absolutely we do.
8- well, not a million points. But 7 ought to suffice for now.
And finally, if someone watches the team's movement and display and still doesnt think its lacking in many areas of offense (defending is different), then we cant be even discussing such matters. For one to address an issue, first one has to recognize its presence.

1. These systems become outdated for a reason, because the sharpest tactical minds have developed effective counter-measures and improvements on them which is why 4-4-2 is rarely seen in world football these days. For the same reason you won't see teams play the 2-3-5 pyramid formation of the early years of the sport, the tactical thinking is something the top managers stay in touch with.

2. There's more to performances than the final result. Even ignoring the fact the results are all positive and that we are meeting our aims, we dominate the majority of games, we control possession and win the ball back quickly from sides because players know the system, when to press and when to drop, when to cover and when to drive forward. Everyone can see it, you don't need goals to witness this.

4. You seem to be trying to paint us out as some sort of primitive team who can only defend and hoof long balls. I suggest you re-watch games, not least against Argentina which was a masterclass in defending and using effective transitions to neutralise and threaten a far superior opponent. You can't just redefine CQ's team on the basis of a few failed crosses in our last match or whatever (not mentioning we still created plenty of chances and deserved the victory).

5. A 4-1-2-1-2 does not simply turn into a 4-3-3/4-5-1 just because you tell the players to go there, the 4-2-3-1 does because that's just the natural nature of the formation. By playing two out-and-out central strikers, you automatically lose one person from the midfield battle and this is a massive factor both in and out of possession. It's also the predominant reason 4-4-2 is a dying art.

6. The 4-1-2-1-2 is what would leave the fullbacks exposed as there are no wingers possible in that formation. The 4-4-2 would provide the fullbacks the cover but it would mean only having two central midfielders which means most teams would outnumber you in midfield and control the game from there as almost everyone plays three in the middle. The 4-2-3-1 provides both the cover for the fullbacks as well as the three in the middle.

7. Why do we have the players for 4-4-2 but not 4-2-3-1? Because our second-choice striker has looked good in a few games? I think it's fairly clear CQ knew how to get the best of the players he's had at his disposal so far and there's no basis to think he is no longer capable of that.

8. Ditto. You're in the minority if you think radical change is required in TM.

[Doctor DOOM]

1- As long as a formation works for a team, I say it matters very little how old it is.
The use of a formation is mainly for increasing the potential of a team for a given situation. Counter-measures will be there for ALL formations, new or old. You think there are no counter-measures against 4231? Absolutely. That can not be the criteria to drop something that may actually increase our potency.

2- I'm using your own words here: ''PERFORMANCE''. If we keep performance as an indication, then the kind of display seen by TM shd be enough to stress MY point. Unless you actually think we have a fine display of team tactics and movement. To which I can only say lets agree to disagree, coz even the die hard CQ fans admit our team doesnt move well.
Domination and possession can be explained rather easily. Dominating a fearful and weaker opponent isnt all that difficult, even if we actually dont play well.
Possession means nothing if majority of it is exchange of not-so-useful passes between the 4 defenders and the 2 DM's mostly in our own half. Does it?

3-

4- Not a primitive team. But I certainly have the right to expect more from a well know coach having been at the helm for more than 5 years.
Hoofing happens in every game. One may try to deny it. But unfortunately it is right there on the video. Bypassing the midfield is one ill of TM.
As for the masterclass example. One can use an example or any example to prove a rule/point ONLY IF IT HAPPENS WITH HIGH REGULARITY. And that hasnt happened. So such examples in fact become ''exceptions''.


5- Within Asia, i think we'd be fine if we had only 4 midfielders and enjoy better potency with two up. I'm sure when we meet the likes of brazil and germany nobody would mind reverting to the defensive formation. Until then, we can safely use a less scared formation against the likes of china and co. Afterall, isnt our asian rivals the main point of this thread?


6- there is a wide 41212 and a narrow one, where all are bunched together to block the central tunnels. The wide one has right and left Mids, who provide support for fullbacks. Certainly their support comes more easy and readily available for the fullbacks, than the support the further up placed wingers in 4231 can provide or hope for, as they are one line higher.


7- umm... I think i'll ask other players to answer ''getting the best put of player'' argument. Players like Taromi, Torabi, Hajsafi, even Dejagah, to name a few for the latest squad only, and leave the older ones out.


8- I say it because I watch the display of the team and not merely focus on the score board. Nobody is asking for his sacking. But that doesnt mean we dont see how ungainly and haphazardly the team moves. And more importantly, how we lose opportunities because we are not utilizing our maximum potentials. That is undeniable.

[inarsenewetrust]

I don't understand why a 4-4-2 wouldn't be possible against Uzbekistan and South Korea:



Subs:

Dejagah in, Jahanbakhsh out
Hajsafi in, Torabi out
Rezaeian in, Ghafouri out

exactly the same i have been asking for before the first round of started. Also, its not like were really giving up a Centre Attacking Mid, we dont even have a proper one anyways!

[Doctor DOOM]

^ Both Rafiei and Shojaeian are in form and ready to be used.
Rahmani also a fantastic CAM once he gets into form

[Iran_19]

I don't understand why a 4-4-2 wouldn't be possible against Uzbekistan and South Korea:



Subs:

Dejagah in, Jahanbakhsh out
Hajsafi in, Torabi out
Rezaeian in, Ghafouri out

Your line up lack playmaker

I would rather he try something like this

Beiranvand
Rezaeian-PAG-Hosseini-Milad
Ando-Saeid
JB-Torabi-Gucci
Azmoun

Gucci already played as winger/forward in Liège and Charlton. This line up can change into 4-4-2 during the game when we need more attack with Torabi as LW and Reza next to Sardar as target forward.

[sirvan]

Rubbish, if you have wingers use them! In a 4-4-2 your wingers are useless, everything will go through the middle, and when you lack creativity like we do it will make scoring much more difficult. Ideal is the 4-3-3 system with real wingers, but 4-2-3-1 is the next best thing for TM. Only thing this team lacks is a number 10, a creative midfielder. Rafiei, Mosalman, Mobali, Rahmani, Shekari ao are all options for this position. Dejagah should be used as a winger not CAM, Shojaei won´t cut it as number 10 either.

[inarsenewetrust]

^ Both Rafiei and Shojaeian are in form and ready to be used.
Rahmani also a fantastic CAM once he gets into form

was rafiei even on the last list? Or Rahmani? If CQ would rather play a 36 year old Masoud and a winger in dejagah at CAM over shojaeian, then maybe he doesnt trust him there.

[04041374]

was rafiei even on the last list? Or Rahmani? If CQ would rather play a 36 year old Masoud and a winger in dejagah at CAM over shojaeian, then maybe he doesnt trust him there.

Rafiei went to Italy with TM, but was crossed off later on. Rahmani is out of shape and was even benched in Esteghlal's last game.

[inarsenewetrust]

Rafiei went to Italy with TM, but was crossed off later on. Rahmani is out of shape and was even benched in Esteghlal's last game.

well then...they obviously arent viable options. Lets just use leicester as an example, there are many more. Leicester had two defensive midfielders in the middle last year (drinkwater and Kante), and still flourished. Their main creativity source was Mahrez, and we have Alireza. They played albrighton, a defensive player with good crossing on the left wing. We can actually have a much more offensive player here in dejagah or torabi. We have speed up front in Sardar, and a clinical finisher in Reza, who can retain possession well and link up with Azmoun. I dont see why we shouldn't try it, the current formation isnt working. We were lucky to beat Qatar and didnt create even close to enough clear cut chances against china

[perspolis#1]

4-4-2 only works with players that are super fit. Ando cant carry being a CM in a 4-4-2.

Leicester had Kante basically act as three players. Drinkwater could pass centrally. Ezzatollahi is a destroyer and Ando an anchor. Not even comparable. Alireza could act as Mahrez if he chose to cut in more.

Azmoun isnt Ali Daei. He can head but that isnt his only strength in my opinion. His best strength is reaction time and poaching up loose balls in the box. If Jahanbakhsh cuts in and shoots, if there is a rebound Azmoun will get to it before the defense 95% of the time.

[dcpp]

Our midfield will get raped against Korea if we go for 4-4-2. In 2006 maybe it would have made sense with a younger ando and nekounam.

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk