A debate is raging on another article about the merits or otherwise of 4-4-2 and 4-4-3. What is indisputable is that when we played 4-3-3 last season, we struggled and found ourselves in the bottom four, with relegation looking a real possibility, despite being in the top 6 when Zola assumed control. Playing 4-3-3 we slumped to seventeenth in the table and questions started to be asked about Zola's suitability to manage a Premiership side. Then we changed to 4-4-2 and a string of results saw us pull away from trouble.
During this period, Zola lost patience with Etherington and dropped him, before selling him to Stoke. He couldn't understand why the left footed Etherington was uncomfortable on the right side of a 4-3-3 formation. Rather than play Etherington in his correct position, Zola dropped him and shipped him out. Since then, Etherington has starred in a Stoke team who are 7 points ahead of us in the table and has been mentioned as an outside bet for the England team. Stoke picked him up for £2.1m in what must be one of the bargains of the last few seasons.
This season, Stanislas and Collison have suffered in a similar way to Etherington. Played either on the wrong flank or as part of a 4-3-3 formation, they have looked increasingly less effective, probably, in large part, down to loss of confidence. Even Hines was forced into the 4-3-3 corset, rather than allowed to sit on the shoulder of Cole / Franco. Zola, meanwhile, buggered around with Jimenez, a player patently unsuited to the Prem but who happened to be the right shaped piece of the jigsaw from Zola's point of view. The trouble is, Zola was building the wrong bleeding jigsaw, just as last season! Remember how Jimenez was preferred against Everton instead of Diamanti? What happened? After wasting 60 minutes, Zola had to accept he was wrong and replace the less than hot Chilean! Remember what happened when we went from 4-4-2 to 4-3-3 against Burnley? 5-0 became 5-3! I could go on!
So what has now happened? Well, as with last season, Clarke has won the tactical argument. During the 4-3-3 experiment, a number of people commented on how Clarke was no longer at Zola's shoulder during games. The Scot seemed to stay on his arse all game, keeping his own counsel. Zola was in the spotlight, looking anxious, looking devoid of ideas. That hasn't been the case so much recently. Clarke is back in the spotlight, back directing affairs from the dugout, back, it seems to me, in control of who plays where and how.
Clarke is a safety first coach. When Zola was allowed his head, we shipped goals all over the place; now Clarke is back in control, we are looking much more watertight. Remember those 0-0 draws at Liverpool and Chelsea last season? Those points were secured with defensive banks of four, those points were squeezed out by the tight arsed Scot who said "bugger 4-3-3, lets play 4-4-2 and pull Bellamy or Di Michele back into midfield when we don't have possession".
I expect to see something similar at Old Trafford on Tuesday, with Franco coming deep if he plays to make up a midfield 5, which becomes a conventional 4-4-2 when we have the ball. Clarke is back in control of tactics and that is why things are suddenly looking more optimistic!
20 comments:
I agree and certainly hope you're rightas I said earlier a great coach adapts his style to suit the players at his disposal not the other way round
HF,
I don't think we had the personnel to play the conventional wing system in that we hardly ever had two first choice strikers fit. The difference is, now we do. I don't think Clarke's position has changed and I certainly do not believe he has resumed control over selection. His body language, in particular his brace with Zola yesterday, indicates as such, and that things are normal.
I also feel that it was largely a 4-5-1 rather than a 4-3-3 we played and this period was our safety first approach rather than the 4-4-2 we are now playing. With one striker up top, the ball kept coming back meaning we had to defend. Two up top means the ball stays up longer and we have more time to get players up whilst giving the back 5 a breather.
The other factor, which was obvious to me in our two wins, was no Noble. His inadequacies (euphemism) in midfield meant that we had to play 5 there to cover because we were so weak. This I do blame Zola for. He showed too much favouritism and patience with him.
Nevertheless, I believe we should always try to play 4-4-2. I said previously that when Zola has the right tools to work with, we will judge him because then he will have no excuse. He has the right tools now and you can see the burden off his shoulders because he knows this.
@stani army 16:09 - absolutely correct sir - go to the top of the class as for Fanno a C for you again old son - must try harder.
I think 4-4-3 sounds like a great idea. Not sure we'd get away with it though.
LOL I've done it again!!!! Bloody hell!
You do talk alot of old twaddle. Zola has been forced into playing players and playing styles because of the injuries, our form actually took a real dip after Luis Boa Morte got injured even though people like you said we should get rid of him, you also in the past slated Ethrington saying he wasnt good enough, we should get rid of him cos he didnt like challenges?? the only thing in your comment that currently rings true since Zola took over is constantly playing Collinson out of position and if clark is in charge ( absolute bollocks) then why collinson still on wing against hull, in my view now we have fit players collinson should be loaned out, we have the central midfield covered, I'm not saying collison isnt any good, he's an exceptional young talent who can only get better, but he should be loaned out for now as we have too many quality central midfielders, now the injured played are coming back and the only player who should be on the left side of midfield is Laza with Parker and K in the middle an Behrami on the right
Kovac in the middle is classic Clarke! I was a fan of Etherington until he lost his way under Zola actaully. I advocated using Etherington wide left and Faubert wide right, knocking in crosses for Cole and Ashton before the 2008/2009 season kicked off, saying we would be a massive handfull on that basis. Four of our first 6 goals at the start of that season came from Faubert crosses which many seem to have forgotten.
Ermm Etherington left because he owed the club hundreds of thousands of pounds and was playing absolute rubbish due to his debt problems.
Fresh start, fresh mind, better displays, still nothing special.
And Clarke is a 4-3-3 coach, remember Chelsea under Mourinho?
You actually don't know anything about football. Which is a shame, because I'm sure you are trying really hard! :-) Good luck!
Clarke is a pragmatist and you are an idiot if you think he would stick to one formation irrespective of the personnel. He adapted to suit different managers at Chelsea. It is you who knows nothing my friend!
Etherington was doing just fine until he started betting on us to win games with a 4-3-3 formation!
Not everyone is disagreeing with your points about the formation.
My main gripe with the article was that we won and you decided to criticise Zola for his previous mistakes rather than praise him for changing things around and getting us the points.
I don't want a manager learning his trade here either, but whilst he is in charge we have to get behind him and support his decisions.
They may not always be right, he will make mistakes, but we need to be UNITED at this difficult time and your constant negative articles are not helping.
fanno: take a rest mate - you're really starting to mug yourself off old son - reckon you want to get off the sugar substitutes as it's starting to rot your brain.
@20:45 too true A+
@22:18 F- you're getting worse
You really do post bollox dont you HF.
This is zolas team, zola's formation, and zola's tactics. Clarke has helped the defence, but you can't take away the set up of this team and it's intent from zola. If it was clarke's, do you really believe that we'd have seen mido and ilan coming on once we were ahead?
Now i remember why i give this site the swerve.
i look on newsnow a lot and have taken the bait of ur headlines so many times. This really is a terrible blogg. Sorry if it offends u but u do waste a lot of peoples time.
Not sure why people find it within themselves to bash the writer of this blog. I for one enjoy reading some of the articles written. My only one criticism, is Hammersfan sometimes finds it difficult to avoid confrontation “Clarke is a pragmatist and you are an idiot”. Unfortunately when writing articles, it is always prudent to keep your personal opinions off the keyboard and be ready to accept the criticism and delete the abuse! That said, it does amuse me!
Keep up the good work Hammersfan, this comment a reference to your writing and not your defensive posts :-)
GREAT RESULT FOR THE HAMMERS!!!!
faupart scored a goal ! so what he is still rubbish, get rid of him he is a weak link, we often play better without noble, get rid and cash in on him in the summer, overated. Our stle of play is because of personnel nothing else, now we have strikers we can play 4-4-2 and chop and change as we see the game progressing.The only player i see who is underused is stanislas, he makes a difference every time he comes on.
anonymous 10:57
why do you have to behave like a total idiot, come on and have your say, read comments and leave constructive critisism, there is no need for what you just said, you cocksucker (that was justfied)
You are such a sad sack. Please stop churning out this garbage and do something more productive. You are jamming up the internet with your headlines and guff. Why not get a job with the Daily Mail or the Mirror, they love this kind of crap and are easier to ignore.
There appears to be only person on this blog who actually understands football.
And thats the writer of the article. I said similar to this last november, could see it coming. I got slagged off as well, and told not to panic. We were very close to panic before G&S took control of the tactics ?
Post a Comment