Register To Comment
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
  1. #1
    JJohns's Avatar
    First Team Player

    Status
    Offline
    I was reading up on Wikipedia on team formations (not always the most trusted site of course, but found this one interesting).

    Quote from Wikipedia on 4-6-0 formation:

    A highly unconventional formation, the 4𤖪 is an evolution of the 4𣇽1 in which the centre forward is exchanged for a player who normally plays as a trequartista (that is, in the 'hole'). Suggested as a possible formation for the future of football,[19] the formation sacrifices an out-and-out striker for the tactical advantage of a mobile front four attacking from a position that the opposition defenders cannot mark without being pulled out of position.[20] Owing to the intelligence and pace required by the front four attackers to create and attack any space left by the opposition defenders, however, the formation requires a very skillful and well-drilled front four. Due to these high requirements from the attackers, and the novelty of playing without a proper goalscorer, the formation has been adopted by very few teams, and rarely consistently. As with the development of many formations, the origins and originators are uncertain, but arguably the first reference to a professional team adopting a similar formation is Anghel Iordănescu's Romania in the 1994 World Cup Round of 16, when Romania won 32 against Argentina.[21][22] The first team to adopt the formation systematically was Luciano Spalletti's Roma side during the 200506 Serie A season, mostly out of necessity as his "strikerless" formation,[23] and then notably by Alex Ferguson's Manchester United side in the 200708 Premier League season (who won the Premier League and Champions League that season).[24] the formation was unsuccessfully used by Craig Levein's Scotland vs Czech Republic to wide spread condemnation.[25] Recently, South Korea has rigorously tried the strikerless-4-6-0-formation since their new head coach, Cho Kwang-Rae arrived in Autumn, 2010.
    Could you even imagine Spurs playing a 4-6-0?


  2. #2
    rossdfc's Avatar
    Legend !

    Status
    Offline
    Yeah, Scotland did against Czech Republic recently, still lost

    Stupid formation, it doesn't give you any opportunity to hold the ball up so you end up defending in your own box for 90 minutes and against any decent team you'll be punished for that.

    The best defensive formation is 4-5-1 because you can still play with 10 men behind the ball, but with someone to clear it to upfield when you do win the ball.

  3. #3
    deejbah's Avatar

    THTV Donator

    Status
    Online
    4-6-0 is not necessarily a defensive formation though. You can argue that successful teams have used it, eg. Barcelona have no real out and out striker and prefer to sit three or four across the defensive line and play through balls or triangles through a disjointed line as the forwards pull their player out of position. The reasons for not adopting it as an attacking formation are outlined in the wikipedia post - it takes a lot of coordination, skill and interchangeability between players, which many teams don't have.

  4. #4
    Iconic Drei's Avatar

    I am the Drei of all the Icons

    Status
    Online
    Quote Originally Posted by rossdfc View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, Scotland did against Czech Republic recently, still lost
    Is this where Scotland's manager provided a terrible post match interview by getting angry and not answering any of the questions?

  5. #5
    melbourne_spur's Avatar
    Legend !

    Status
    Offline
    Well Australia used this formation against Germany in their first world cup match, failed miserably, lost 4-0 as well.

  6. #6
    rudi's Avatar
    Legend !

    Status
    Offline
    Sctland played a 5-5-0 though, didn't they? Now that IS a defensive formation...

  7. #7
    Tott_BeBop's Avatar
    Legend !

    Status
    Offline
    im prettyu sure i read somehwhere that some of the original line ups were 5-6-0, and that the systems was still being used before they brought in the offside (and updated) offside rule.

  8. #8
    Rev John Ripsher's Avatar

    Moderator

    Moderator

    Status
    Online
    Spurs played a 4-4 defence last season sometimes it would change into 5-4 , the midfield were VERY mobile though but it WAS so good to see so many players behind the ball against the better teams , the key to our 4TH place methinks ?

  9. #9
    rudi's Avatar
    Legend !

    Status
    Offline
    Quote Originally Posted by T.K. Massive View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    im prettyu sure i read somehwhere that some of the original line ups were 5-6-0, and that the systems was still being used before they brought in the offside (and updated) offside rule.
    Nah, the early line-ups were very heavy in the forward line; the most popular was the 2-3-5, I kid you not.

  10. #10
    rossdfc's Avatar
    Legend !

    Status
    Offline
    Quote Originally Posted by Iconic Drei View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Is this where Scotland's manager provided a terrible post match interview by getting angry and not answering any of the questions?
    Yeah - he always tries to be a complete smart arse in interviews, embarrassing really.

    Quote Originally Posted by rudi View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Sctland played a 5-5-0 though, didn't they? Now that IS a defensive formation...
    Nah it was 4-6-0...either way though, still shocking.

  11. #11
    stroud_jm's Avatar
    Moderator
    Moderator

    Status
    Offline
    Quote Originally Posted by rudi View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Nah, the early line-ups were very heavy in the forward line; the most popular was the 2-3-5, I kid you not.
    Yep, according to Jonathan Wilson, when England played Scotland in the first ever international in 1872, England played a 1-2-7 against Scotland's cynical, stodgy 2-2-6.

    We think of the 4-4-2 as a time-honored formation, but those old inverted pyramid formations survived much longer.

    RE: United's strikerless formation: as mentioned above, it was by no means defensive- it was conceived as the only way to accommodate Rooney, Ronaldo, and Tevez, none of whom are pure number 9s, in the same XI.

  12. #12
    edmonds44's Avatar
    Legend !

    Status
    Offline
    Quote Originally Posted by T.K. Massive View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    im prettyu sure i read somehwhere that some of the original line ups were 5-6-0, and that the systems was still being used before they brought in the offside (and updated) offside rule.
    playing without a goal keeper is pretty brave if you ask me

  13. These users say thanks for this post

    rossdfc (29-03-2011),rudi (29-03-2011)

  14. #13
    Rev John Ripsher's Avatar

    Moderator

    Moderator

    Status
    Online
    Within the history of football , anything other than 2-3-5 is relatively new .

  15. Who Thanked this post

    rudi (29-03-2011)

  16. #14
    luminoir's Avatar
    Legend !

    Status
    Offline
    Roma played 4-6-0 2 seasons ago. I did propose a 4-6-0 for us since our strikers were so Shi+ replacing them with krancjar vdv sandro bale Lennon & hudd as the 6

  17. #15
    alex3's Avatar
    Banned !

    Status
    Offline
    barca kind off play 4-6-0
    with messi up top coming deep

Tottenhamhotspurs.tv is in no way authorised by or connected with Tottenham Hotspur [insert appropriate acronym] or the official club website. Tottenhamhotspurs.tv is solely an unofficial supporters club website and has no connection with Tottenham Hotspur in ANY capacity. The views and opinions expressed within this site are those of the specified authors. Externally linked content is the property of the relevant copyright holder.
tottenham facebook tottenham twitter