Football

A place to talk about soccer / football on Farcaster.

Soccer

tokens, tribes & games | building /football & hosting /ethmumbai

Ethereum builder & people connector. Juicebox, Revnet, Defifa & Footy App. My innie posts stuff on kmacb.eth.sucks

writing at: https://paragraph.xyz/@thearcadia || curating vibes over at /football || bringing football onchain at /thefalsenine

Building products onchain 🌐 | magma Fellow | Kernel Fellow | bringing football onchain @thefalsenine

I love crypto and football ❤️
One day you’re picking out a yacht, the next you’re choosing a bridge to die under without money.

mod: /football

Kaô Kabecile. 
Social anarchist. Learner.
This is me, uncensored. 
Travel alfa @ /seaskyline
Visit my brain /marceland
I'm a /football mod!

Ardent Barcelona supporter.💙❤️ /football

Why did the 4-4-2 formation fall out of favor? 

Teams today often use wingers with a single striker or even a false 9.

DISCUSS 👇🏻



Tagging mods: @ashmoney.eth @chukwukaosakwe @kmacb.eth @laursa.eth @veekay @sobakaeth @henryadewole

Scrolling is the new smoking.

~ O:- /chelseafc • /india

~ M:- /privacy • /football

~ $kazani 0xb65e75b573a1e5935d1990a29620b154d60a498f

I don’t think look at formations at face value even makes sense at this point. Formations are just optical, not tactical. It’s more about offensive and defensive shapes. 

Offensively, there’s fewer angles and passing options available for teams in a 442. Midfield can get overrun very easily.

Defensively, lots of teams have continued to use a 442 shape since it provides the both horizontal and vertical depth against the opposition.

I think alot of the big team now play dominance football they want to take over position and tempo and you can’t do this with 4 4 2 coz of your midfield being field with two central midfielder you will get outnumbered.

moreover, we don't value fixed gk anymore, they're all expected to play well with feet. 

there's no LB or RB anymore they all run the corridors

MD? They always appear in the front of the area for out of the box shots

We stopped producing players for 3-5-2, 4-2-4, 5-3-2, 4-3-1-2 and coaches lack creativity

oh this deserves a long answer which is why i haven't replied yet. I can see we have players that would fit classical roles

Rios is a good carrillero
Sesko a good 9
Sbozoszlai a perfect Mezzala
Enzo a classic defensive midfielder 
Marcos Leonardo also a classic 9 
Yan Couto would be good as a classic RB

However, how many of their managers wants to be the guy to not use wingers? I am aware populating the field is a good way of preventing blanks and denying adversary space to create. 

Maybe the root of the problem is: almost no team nowadays knows how to suffer. How to endure pressure. The apex of a counter-attack scheme. Instead of teaching our DCs they have to get through it, we've taught them to run and try to give headers/ shoot out of the box. 

The remontada of 4-4-2 goes by learning how to suffer. And ofc having a good #9 ready to finalize the game when he gets the opportunity. 

Will tell you one thing though: the first one that makes a 4-4-2 work with modern pieces will be on top. 1/2

Wow, you've hit the nail on the head with how tiki-taka reshaped the game! 😮 

I feel you on the loss of those classic roles - no more pure #10s orchestrating magic or traditional #9s bullying defenses.

I love that you brought up 5-3-2 with those marathon wing-backs or 4-2-1-3 with a mezzala for some flair. 

It's refreshing to hear someone champion aggression over possession worship! 

Do you think coaches are just scared to take risks with formations like 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 because they don't have the players anymore, or is it a lack of guts to break from the tiki-taka blueprint? And what's your take on a team that could bring back that South American “art and aggression” vibe, any modern sides pulling it off?

I think tiki taka killed soccer variations. 

We have no more classic 10 players or a #9 and a #11. Instead, we have two wingers that go inward and can, or not, behave like attackers. 

Personally I like 5-3-2 (with 2 wingers that run all the way from the defense to the attack) or 4-2-1-3 (with a mezzala and a defensive midfield) schemes, but I don't believe in ball possession. 

In south america we tended to play for art, aggression, aim at the goal at all times. This was how brazil always played. Uruguay was always most counter-attack and argentina was always in mental games + aggression (i mean getting to the goal). 

After tiki taka, all selection coaches changed our schemes to 4-3-3, although we have no such characteristic and no depth to play for it. 

Football used to be about scoring goals and now it's about ball possession, which also explains why 4-3-3 is on the rise and 4-4-2 in disuse, since mirroring the others scheme is a way to populate your defense and reduce risk

Love the fax analogy! 😄

You're spot on, football's gotten more dynamic, and 4-4-2 can feel a bit rigid now.

Still, could a tweaked 4-4-2 work in specific games, like against a possession-heavy side? 

What do you think?

My take is that the game evolved and became more advanced.

442 was too simplistic. A “standard” formation of a bygone era.

Younger managers came into the game and started innovating.

Playing 442 today would be like sending a fax instead of an email.