FC Bayern Forum

[Commodore]

It's time for some Commodore mantras again. Formations are NOT tactics!

The (nominal) differences between a 4-2-3-1, a 4-3-3 and a 4-1-4-1 are minuscule. It is HOW you employ these nominal formations that make up the system you are playing. Our nominal 4-2-3-1 from last year, if we just look at how the players lined up at any given moment on the pitch, was very rarely an actual 4-2-3-1. In defence, more often than not we pressed in a 4-4-2 or a 4-4-1-1. Yes, sometimes in a 4-2-3-1, too.

In offense our double pivots usually had exactly defined roles which made our formation look a lot more like a 4-3-3 than anything else. With Schweinsteiger pushing up, Kroos making way and moving into the channels, what about this situational formation could not have been called 4-1-4-1 or a 4-3-3?

Dogmatically defined formations are mainly pretty graphics for the TV stations. And unless two formations are vastly and inherently different from one another (e.g. a back-three vs a back-four formation), I couldn't care less which formation will be shown for our team in the pre-game graphics.

[FCBayernMunchen]

It's time for some Commodore mantras again. Formations are NOT tactics!

The (nominal) differences between a 4-2-3-1, a 4-3-3 and a 4-1-4-1 are minuscule. It is HOW you employ these nominal formations that make up the system you are playing. Our nominal 4-2-3-1 from last year, if we just look at how the players lined up at any given moment on the pitch, was very rarely an actual 4-2-3-1. In defence, more often than not we pressed in a 4-4-2 or a 4-4-1-1. Yes, sometimes in a 4-2-3-1, too.

In offense our double pivots usually had exactly defined roles which made our formation look a lot more like a 4-3-3 than anything else. With Schweinsteiger pushing up, Kroos making way and moving into the channels, what about this situational formation could not have been called 4-1-4-1 or a 4-3-3?

Dogmatically defined formations are mainly pretty graphics for the TV stations. And unless two formations are vastly and inherently different from one another (e.g. a back-three vs a back-four formation), I couldn't care less which formation will be shown for our team in the pre-game graphics.

This is why I like the 4-2-3-1. It's a very balanced structure which makes it flexible. Like you said it easily changes intoa 4-3-3 or 4-1-4-1 or even some variation of a 3 man backline sometimes.

Maybe you are right that this will be the same with a 4-1-4-1. I certainly hope so.

[tflags]

Could I just think out loud for a moment and ask: Does it make sense to practice with a single pivot when you will recover soon two of the best around and your forward lineup (plus two very nice full-back overlappers) aren't that shabby at all?

(PS: I am not questioning the guy, just want to know the tactical approach to this.)

[MUTU]

The reality is that there are too many midfielders.

[Commodore]

I don't know about you guys, but I am salivating at the thought of one of the many possible formations we could field, which only utilizes one nominal pivot.



And again guys. Schweinsteiger pushed further up the field than his partner (Gustavo or Martínez) in almost every game anyways last season. So, in effect, we were already playing a 4-3-3 last season, just the TV stations chose to label it 4-2-3-1. Yes, I realize there are differences. For example, we could see yesterday that Højbjerg almost always fell in between the two CBs during buildup, forming a situational back-three. That was an option for us last season under Heynckes, too, but if yesterday is any indication of what we should expect our system to look like this year, this situational back-three during buildup seems to become more of an obligation now under Guardiola, not an option.

[walter]

I think it's too risky to move away from our two pivot system considering that we have perfected that system. If something gave me confidence going into a CL game was having Schweinsteiger and Martinez (or Gustavo) in the engine room. I was always thinking before the games that the other teams were not gonna be able to win the battle in midfield because of our world class double pivot and that's typically what happened.

[FCBayernMunchen]

We need to see more of this new formation. My concerns about it mentioned yesterday are still there but if we keep playing a style similar to the one we used in this game, I can see why it would be a superior formation to last season's. We need more games to judge, but I might end up loving this one.

What I love about our old formation is that in its proper structure, any player will always have at least 3 options for short passes (disregarding the covering of the opponents). This means that even with the opponents' covering you will usually have at least one option. With the 4-1-4-1 it is even better because in the offensive positions it is usually up to 4, and the same is true for Commodore's inverted triangle. The main problem is whether that one holding midfielder can cope on his own, but as Commodore mentioned the formation easily changes into a 4-2-3-1, a 4-4-2, or even a 5-4-1. So the choice between one holding midfielder or two comes down to the importance we give to short passes in our build up play. It seemed to me yesterday (especially early in the game) that there is a noticeable increase in that regard. As long as our play remains direct and doesn't become too obsessed with passing for passing's sake (like modern Barca) I am delighted with that.

I think that if we opt for the one midfielder then the tracking back of the wingers and pushing forward of the fullbacks will be more important than ever as it would mean we will mostly have two players in line with the 1 midfielder. This ties in with Commodore's idea of the 3 man backline in a way, which admittedly I did not notice. This would make a lot of sense if Martinez is going to be that holding midfielder. It would also mean that most of the game (when attacking) we will actually be seeing more of a 3-3-3-1, 3-4-3, or 3-5-2.

Base 4-1-4-1:

Spoiler: show

3-3-3-1:

Spoiler: show

3-4-3:

Spoiler: show

3-5-2:

Spoiler: show

or Alaba and Kroos switching positions, probably with Ribery moving the centre.

There is also the question of pressing. Probably the idea is to press very high up the pitch. In the base form we will have 5 players on the opponents side, probably more than enough to win the ball back. If they fail the players immediately track back creating a more defensive structure, like we saw this season. All this would also fit in with Pep's comment that he wants more attacking football.

It's a daring tactic to say the least, but after one game it has me excited. It is an uncommon formation and that will make it harder for our opponents, unlike the 4-2-3-1 which is the most common formation in the Bundesliga. It will take a long time to perfect it, but if we do I believe it will makes us deadlier than ever. It has my support for now, I think Pep is right that it is one of the few ways to improve this team. We'll see whether he convinces me otherwise.

[Firefox1234]

I have never been worried about the change to 4-1-4-1 since Jupp played that way when the situation called for it. I swear throughout the season i think i saw Bayern play in almost all forms of 4-3-3

[FCBayernMunchen]

As a strict base 4-1-4-1, Loew has experimented with it in the past, so Bayern switching to it could be beneficial for the NT as well.

[Bazi]

As Pep Guardiola himself said. The system is totally unimportant because no matter the formation, the automatisms and the way the players have to behave in offensive/defensive/transitional situations are key. That's what Pep Guardiola is actually training right now. Not a 4-1-4-1 or 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 or whatever.

[lau03143]

As Pep Guardiola himself said. The system is totally unimportant because no matter the formation, the automatisms and the way the players have to behave in offensive/defensive/transitional situations are key. That's what Pep Guardiola is actually training right now. Not a 4-1-4-1 or 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 or whatever.

Hardly a new concept.

The Netherlands perfected that in the 70's with their "total football".

[Firefox1234]

Okay......since there are not any significant tactical changes anyone have something else to talk about

[FCBayernMunchen]

Okay......since there are not any significant tactical changes anyone have something else to talk about

THESE TACTICS SUCK WHY HAS PEP NOT WON US THE CL!!!!????? PEP RAUS!!!

[Commodore]

As Pep Guardiola himself said. The system is totally unimportant because no matter the formation, the automatisms and the way the players have to behave in offensive/defensive/transitional situations are key. That's what Pep Guardiola is actually training right now. Not a 4-1-4-1 or 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 or whatever.

Hardly a new concept.

The Netherlands perfected that in the 70's with their "total football".

And Cruijff brought it to Barca. Now guess who the coach was who pulled Pep from Barca B into the first team?

[MoFattal]

Thiago's impending transfer will make this thread chaotic