Forums / Arsenal
Order: Newest / Oldest
Should Arsenal Revert To A 4-4-2 Formation?
Jetlifari (Arsenal) 4 years ago
With the glut of midfielders and the coming of Maruoane Chamakh as well as the possible (but I believe unlikely) departure of Cesc Fabregas, should Arsenal consider changing from a 4-3-3 formation to a 4-4-2 formation? Let me know what you think fellas! Would it be beneficial or detrimental to our team?


Oh2bagunner (Arsenal) 4 years ago
I think if Cesc moves on I. E a deal is made.... I guess we probably get yaya then it'll be worth taking a risk going back to it.... But guys like walcott might have to play out of position and I donn think that'll be good for them or neither us.... Tough question but for the moment I think i'll stick with the 4-3-3...
RonanKnows (Arsenal) 4 years ago
I would rather see this formation up-front:    Arshavin-Chamakh-van Persie
RonanKnows (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Oops, replied to the wrong post
Ahmadillomon (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Why would walcott be out of place? If you're saying nasri and arsha on the wings then hmm yea but isn't walcott the 'traditional' winger?
Filsuf (Arsenal) 3 years ago
Walcott is a striker-winger, not a traditional winger who's job is to deliver crosses
M4rsenal (Arsenal) 4 years ago
I think it's better to mantain our current formation. Walcott will be more attacking on the right outside, Van Persie still center and Arshavin on the left. Chamakh will be fighting for Van Persie's replacement, our new signing doesn't mean that he'll suddenly start in the first XI, so neither the plans have to be changed.
Song plays really good as a holding midfielder, I like the current lineup
RonanKnows (Arsenal) 4 years ago
I would rather see this formation up-front: Arshavin-Chamakh-van Persie
Arsenal718 (Arsenal) 3 years ago
Almunia/mannone   Sagna koscielny vermaelen clichy   Cesc song   Theo arshavin   Chamakh RVP
[account-removed] 4 years ago
Assuming fabregas DOES NOT leave:

I like the lineup we have right now in the 433, but the problem lies in the center of midfield - outside of fabregas and song. We need a more defensive minded midfielder there.

If we don't find one, then one of either denilson or abou diaby needs to develop their game to prove they belong here, and the rest of the team needs to press more effectively.

I like diaby to perform the third CM role because:
A. Height/physical power
Be. Dribbling ability
See. Makes great runs and combination in attack

I don't like these things about him:
A. Careless short passing
Be. Clumsy defending
See. Lackadaisical positioning - he won't bust his gut to get back if the ball passes him.

I just think he's sooo close. His problem has to do with effort, not talent.

We needed to be more defensive when fabregas was there, because he rarely tracked back effectively. The lineup would look like so:

NewGK
Sagna NewCB Vermaelen Clichy
Song Fabregas Toure/Diaby
RVP Chamakh Arshavin







Assuming fabregas DOES leave:

It might mean a reversion to 442 is in the cards. It would be like when we had adebayor in the side playing alongside van persie.

If we were to revert, I see the formation as something like this:

NewGK
Sagna NewCB Vermaelen Clichy
Walcott Song Nasri Arshavin
RVP Chamakh

A formation like this would be way too biased towards attacking. Song would have to stay back almost the entire game with the number of bodies we'd be committing forward.

We'd also have no use for toure and see diaby, denilson and ramsey all have a much smaller role in the team becaues there would be one less CM spot for them to fill.
Riglore (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Your assessment of Diaby is exactly right. I think he has the potential to be such a tactically adept player for us one day
Riglore (Arsenal) 4 years ago
The dynamics of a 4 3 3 are more conducive to the passing game arsenal plays. The passing triangles it sets up work well for possession football and I think is therefore are most powerful formation. In a 4 4 2 we have the plus of having a little more striking depth because we currently have a players like eduardo who can't really play as a lone striker but can probably still play as a second striker in a 442. Chamackh is more of a depth signing so that we can rest RVP for big matches and have cover for when he is injured. Chamackh might start on the right wing at times as well but I think the CF spot is all van persies now
RonanKnows (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Keeping our player's recent form, this is the formation I'd like to see:
BS WG TV GC
AS
CF AR
TW AA
RP
RonanKnows (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Bah, I typed it up all nice a neat. You get the idea
Ahmadillomon (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Well, the 433 is actually my favourite and it prlly favours arsenal too, more than teams like man you. But anw, I think the 442 shouldnt be our main formation. A 433 should still be deployed, after all, it fits the team nicely. However we can certainly do with the 442 for some games. Those games where the midfield is heavy, or those like Man UTD where the counterattacking is fast


But I can't really say that too because it still depends on the game philosophy we have, how many players we commit etc etc.

Because a 442 can be attacking like XERO but I can also forsee one that will involve alot of wingplay, maybe something like man city's or real. With the two CM is one DM and one deep playmaker. Walcott and arsha would have to work their magic with the FBs working to give in crosses too, and crosses would be nice because atm no one is there to convert em but now there's chamakh too.

But then again this might not work as there would be too little central attacking players.

What do you guys think of a 41311 or a diamond?

And the 442 would also mean RVP plays the bergkamp role which means awesome!

So in other words, this would be our plan be
Ahmadillomon (Arsenal) 4 years ago
I kinda use this in games don't know if its still used

---------gk---------
Sagna-CB-verm-clichy
-------song---------
Walcott-fab-arshavin
--------rvp---------
------chamakh-------

In attack it will be

---------gk---------
Sagna-CB-verm-clichy
-------song---------
--------fab---------
Walcott-rvp-arshavin
------chamakh-------

It should be flexible if not its quite hard. What do you guys think? Too little in midfield? Or maybe in this formation nasri can play instead of walcott so he'll contribute more in the midfield role, like ow arsha can do too
Ahmadillomon (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Come to think of it, if in attack, to prevent from being counter attacked when we lose the ball, cesc can stay flat with song and itll look like a 4231 abit
Charliehenry (ryo miyachi) 4 years ago
I think we should switch to 4-3-1-2

As the team is currently

---------Almunia------------
-Sagna--Gallas-Verma--Clichy
---------------Song-----------------
----Fabregas-----Denilson--
------------Arshavin---------------
-----Chamackh----RVP---------

1. We have two CF which helps players we have like Eduardo
2. Also it leaves Arshavin to be free to roam
3. Less likely to be countered as we have more back to cover Clichy + Sagna
Ahmadillomon (Arsenal) 4 years ago
This one really reminds me of chelsea's diamond. CMs at the side of the diamond, I use this too in games too. Really nice IMO complements the players' abilities.

However, I wonder, does it mean our play is narrow and through the middle? Does that mean that wingplay is done mainly by the full backs?
Riglore (Arsenal) 4 years ago
We are in the lucky position that both RVP and Chamackh have played in that wing like position before. Both could also slip back into a wing position while the other plays as a CF for a little while throughout the game. Could be a great formation for a plan be if Wenger does stick with a 4 3 3 (which I kinda expect) and I really hope they do try it out. Nice plan
Charliehenry (ryo miyachi) 4 years ago
Riglore answered that one you can switch them to the wings any time you want RVP left foot and Cham right.... Perfect!
Ahmadillomon (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Wow then its a whole yes!
NerazurriGunner (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Hmmm.... Might not work, Arsenal use a lot of width and this formation doesn't give that much. But hey, who m I to say that!?
Charliehenry (ryo miyachi) 4 years ago
We never score from crossing anyway we should be more direct
Riglore (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Width does really suit or style but Chamackh and Van persie can drift wide and we've got great full backs who can help us with width a lot. It seems like the Plan be we really need to me.
Hopefully we score more from crosses with a header like Chamackh in the team CharlieHenry
Ahmadillomon (Arsenal) 4 years ago
Chelsea had this diamond formula. Apparently they changed the width from time to time. Lampard at times could play wide and joe cole was subbed in that place too. Yea, besides what riglore said, if box-to-box running midfielders are used, it could be wider and naturally would.

For example if nasri played in that CM role, he'd naturally drift out. If the other side is the same, itll turn out to be 4132 or 4231 arsenal's quite flexible anyway. But yea.

I might be wrong, sometimes I think I think too much
Thinkboomdelic (Arsenal) 3 years ago
No
GoonerXi (Arsenal) 3 years ago
4-3-3 is fine and fluid and helps our midfield keep smaller teams five man midfields under wraps
Nkrumah (Arsenal) 3 years ago
How will that work
Nkrumah (Arsenal) 3 years ago
I think a 4-4-2 is prefect

Vito Mannone
Bacary Sagna Thomas Vermaelen Sebastien Squillaci Gael Clichy
Theo Walcott Cesc Fabregas Jack Wilshere Denilson
Robin van Persie Marouane Chamakh
Charliehenry (ryo miyachi) 3 years ago
Denilson.... Is that a joke?
Cloudst 3 years ago
For some reason 4-4-2 with arsenal just doesn't look right idk it could be me but it doesn't work to well either
Sjsung (Arsenal) 3 years ago
It's so obvious that a 4-2-3-1 should be the lineup when our players are ALL FIT.

But they aren't.

A 4-4-2 brings the best out of Bendtner, Denilson, Diaby, and more. A team that isn't centered around Cesc, Robin, and Song should play a 4-4-2. For example, if we play a 4-4-2, we could utilize a team like this:

GK
Back 4
Nasri Ramsey Wilshere Rosicky
Bendtner Chamakh

The idea is that it would not hurt Wenger to add the 4-4-2 to Arsenal's repetoire, so that we can play 2 strikers up front when we're losing and depending on player availability.

So should we revert to a 4-4-2? NO.
Should we use it from time to time? YES
Gunning4Glory (Arsenal) 3 years ago
Although 4-4-2 would favour some of our players, adapting to another formation isn't easy. It would make our passing game harder and lead to us being out numbered in the middle of midfield. Plus most our midfielders are to attacking when compared to Vieira and Gilberto



   
Kick4Life - changing lives through football