There are teams that have tried a 4-6-0 formation?

Discussion in 'Team Formation' started by JJohns, Mar 27, 2011.

  1. JJohns Active Member

    JJohns
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +54 / 0 / -0
    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:

    Could you even imagine Spurs playing a 4-6-0?
  2. rossdfc Well-Known Member

    rossdfc
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,294
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +3,242 / 1 / -0
    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. deejbah Well-Known Member

    deejbah
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Messages:
    4,594
    Location:
    South Australia
    Ratings:
    +2,005 / 0 / -0
    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. Iconic Drei I am the Drei of all the Icons

    Iconic Drei
    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,878
    Location:
    Hertfordshire
    Ratings:
    +1,638 / 0 / -0
    Is this where Scotland's manager provided a terrible post match interview by getting angry and not answering any of the questions?
  5. melbourne_spur Well-Known Member

    melbourne_spur
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,295
    Location:
    Melbourne, Aus
    Ratings:
    +287 / 0 / -0
    Well Australia used this formation against Germany in their first world cup match, failed miserably, lost 4-0 as well.
  6. rudi New Member

    rudi
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    3,629
    Location:
    I'm stood right behind you
    Ratings:
    +1,961 / 0 / -0
    Sctland played a 5-5-0 though, didn't they? Now that IS a defensive formation...
    rudi,
  7. Tott_BeBop Well-Known Member

    Tott_BeBop
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    1,980
    Location:
    1882 Bill Nicholson Way
    Ratings:
    +421 / 0 / -0
    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. Rev John Ripsher Moderator

    Rev John Ripsher
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    11,223
    Location:
    London , England
    Ratings:
    +4,670 / 13 / -0
    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. rudi New Member

    rudi
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    3,629
    Location:
    I'm stood right behind you
    Ratings:
    +1,961 / 0 / -0
    Nah, the early line-ups were very heavy in the forward line; the most popular was the 2-3-5, I kid you not.
    rudi,
  10. rossdfc Well-Known Member

    rossdfc
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,294
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +3,242 / 1 / -0
    Yeah - he always tries to be a complete smart arse in interviews, embarrassing really.

    Nah it was 4-6-0...either way though, still shocking.
  11. Lilywhite74 Moderator

    Lilywhite74
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,725
    Location:
    US
    Ratings:
    +4,230 / 8 / -0
    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. edmonds44 Well-Known Member

    edmonds44
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,837
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +785 / 3 / -0
    playing without a goal keeper is pretty brave if you ask me :001_005:
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Rev John Ripsher Moderator

    Rev John Ripsher
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    11,223
    Location:
    London , England
    Ratings:
    +4,670 / 13 / -0
    Within the history of football , anything other than 2-3-5 is relatively new .
    • Like Like x 1
  14. luminoir Well-Known Member

    luminoir
    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2008
    Messages:
    1,730
    Location:
    Singapore
    Ratings:
    +736 / 0 / -0
    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
  15. alex3 Banned !

    alex3
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,262
    Location:
    england,london
    Ratings:
    +97 / 0 / -0
    barca kind off play 4-6-0
    with messi up top coming deep
  16. thornton3 New Member

    thornton3
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    227
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +45 / 0 / -0
    Unless Almunia's your keeper, in which case you're better off ;)
    • Like Like x 2
  17. ABlindGuy New Member

    ABlindGuy
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2010
    Messages:
    214
    Location:
    Middletown, CT
    Ratings:
    +112 / 0 / -0
  18. JJohns Active Member

    JJohns
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +54 / 0 / -0
    Haha, I have to agree with this. Almunia is a bit dodgy.

    As to the 4-6-0... You would think Spurs play this setup, as this time we have no out-and-out proven striker this time around, with more goals coming from non-strikers. Still have faith in the guys that they'll get on form sometime.

    The 2-3-5 formation, would that be considered insane in todays game? Wouldn't the back two and the goalie have to be amazing to get along well with that setup? I don't know much about classical football, that's why I ask.
  19. Rivron these are small those cows are far away

    Rivron
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    10,739
    Location:
    Reading
    Ratings:
    +5,211 / 42 / -0
    Well if you believe our next? manager Spurs played an 11-0-0 against the Chavs some years ago?
  20. JJohns Active Member

    JJohns
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +54 / 0 / -0
    Funny enough, I made this thread before I saw this: Tottenham Hotspur And The 4-6-0: Taking A Page Out Of Luciano Spalletti's Book - Cartilage Free Captain

    The author of that article says, given the form of our strikers, we should try out the 4-6-0. He even has his a little map visual depicting the lineup at the article, somewhat depicted below if you don't visit the article (excuse my terrible drawing below):

    -------- Gomes -------

    Charlie - Gallas - Dawson - BAE

    --------- Sandro ------
    -- Huddlestone --Modric --
    Bale--------------Lennon
    -----------VdV

    I actually kind of like it, to be honest. I'd be sad to see Crouch/Pav/Defoe not playing, though.
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2011
  21. StPaulSpur Well-Known Member

    StPaulSpur
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,691
    Location:
    Lincoln, NE, USA
    Ratings:
    +1,690 / 0 / -0
    The main problem with that set up, [MENTION=7178]JJohns[/MENTION], is that we'd have a very hard time sustaining any possession on the attacking half. Bale and Lennon need to make runs down the flank and cross, VDV plays quick touches... you're relying on Luka to maintain possession and hold the ball up. That's risky. It's a classic problem of the difference between playing your best 11 individuals and your best 11 formation. Honestly, none of our strikers are even in our top 15 individuals on form this year, but I don't see us working without playing one of them. Sadly, that means either Sandro or Hudd is going to have to sit out and Sarge's playing time is going to drop off a ton.
  22. JJohns Active Member

    JJohns
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +54 / 0 / -0
    I'll agree with you on some points (especially the strikers form and starting 11 point), but I have to say, I still love contemplating these wonky setups.
  23. rossdfc Well-Known Member

    rossdfc
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,294
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +3,242 / 1 / -0
    Yeah well said, fully agree.

    BTW nice avatar [MENTION=6563]StPaulSpur[/MENTION] :001_302:

Share This Page