The 4-5-1 ââ?¬Ë?Anti-Footballââ?¬â?¢ Myth

[Frankie 8,146]

There has been a fair amount of debate recently regarding the formation and tactics deployed by Walter Smith as he attempts to be competitive both domestically and in the Championsââ?¬â?¢ League. Thus, is 4-5-1, described as ââ?¬Ë?anti-footballââ?¬â?¢ by Lionel Messi the spawn of the devil or is that far too simplistic a way to look at it?

 

Firstly, I think itââ?¬â?¢s important to look at the context of when and why this formation is deployed. Obviously a game (home or away) against the cream of European opposition is different from a game against stuffy, well organised Scottish outfits. Thus, while 4-5-1 against Barcelona is exactly that ââ?¬â?? a defensive strategy to try and contain the oppositionââ?¬â?¢s attacking players - a 4-5-1 against Dundee Utd could and should be more attacking in its set up.

 

So far this season Rangers have employed three different variations of this system: 4-5-1 per se with 3 central holding players and only one real attacking midfielder which allows for our strong defensive nature (eg v Barcelona); 4-1-4-1 which is still very defensive but with a strong central spine capable of attacking quickly on the counter (eg v Lyon); and 4-2-3-1 which is a solid unit much more offensive in its outlook (eg v Stuttgart). Moreover, in the majority of our games we have actually seen every one of these sub-formations depending on the in-game situation.

 

Therefore, it�s easy to see that while the 4-5-1 formation may be the parent system, it is extremely flexible in situ and hence far too empirical to label it is as defensive outwith the most difficult of games. The formation also fits our current squad very well and we have players capable of playing many roles within it. Even the likes of Kris Boyd can fit into this style as long as the selected players support him properly (see Livorno last season as well as other games).

 

ââ?¬Ë?Whatââ?¬â?¢s the problem then?ââ?¬â?¢ I hear you ask!

 

Well, where this breaks down is the actual choice of players on the day and, indeed, this is where Walter Smith had made the odd error this season resulting in needless dropped points. For example, while it may be agreeable to play 3 holding players against the likes of Barca (Thomson, Hemdani and Ferguson usually); it�s not necessarily required against Dundee Utd or Hibs. Recently Smith opted for Thomson, Faye and Ferguson against Utd and because Ferguson isn�t consistent in the striker-supporting role we struggled to retain possession in the first half. He then dropped deeper and deeper; the midfield became too congested and chances were few and far between.

 

Add to that the many SPL teams who will also use the same system against us, that then places a lot of onus on our wider players. We know the attacking qualities of Hutton and Beasley but Papac and McCulloch are not so creative and we lose a fair amount of balance in games. The result? We�re easy to read, lop-sided, one-dimensional and unimaginative in our play.

 

As such, this is where the ââ?¬Ë?anti-footballââ?¬â?¢ accusations come in. When we do struggle in games we quickly resort to bypassing the congested midfield and look for the strength and aerial threat of McCulloch and Cousin. Ergo, while the direct route may not be the most attractive of strategies sometimes it has to be used to grind out results. Indeed, this typical British style has helped our teams not just at home but in every European competition. Liverpool, Man Utd, Rangers and most recently Celtic have utilised the traditional route one style to bully opponents not always used to physical threats ââ?¬â?? playing some good stuff along the way.

 

Is this 'anti-football'? Of course not!

 

Football is a sport which changes in style throughout the years but some things never change. Is there a more defensively natured team that the current Italian World Champions? Do German teams achieve success through exciting attacking football or strong, solid team-play? Is English football based on skill and pace only? I think we all know the answers to those questions.

 

Of course teams need to score goals to win matches but without a strong defence, exciting attacking play wonââ?¬â?¢t assure success ââ?¬â?? ask Spain and Holland! We all want to watch such football but I think every football fan would temper their expectations with realism generally. The simple fact is that almost every team at all levels will set their stall out to frustrate on occasion. Rangers are no different.

 

Similarly, while such strategies may at first sight appear negative, it�s not always the case. Neither do they necessarily promote a less attractive style of football. The variation of 4-5-1 we played against Lyon showed stout defensive properties but the 3 goals we scored and some of our general footballing play was first class. Such tactics should not be the antipathy of good football but just one more positive example of the game.

 

Walter Smith came back to a Rangers team struggling on many fronts. With a few shrewd transfers, by shoring up a leaky back-line and by giving a physical competitive edge to our midfield heââ?¬â?¢s managed to turn things around to a decent degree. Some results and performances have been excellent ââ?¬â?? some not so good. Generally the team is doing well and with a bit more flexibility, a bit more consistency of attacking personnel and some more time for the younger new players to settle, weââ?¬â?¢re not far off where we want to be.

 

If that means continuing with 4-5-1 for another wee while until we do gel enough to have the kind of attacking understanding that confidence and consistency brings then so be it. That isnââ?¬â?¢t negative or ââ?¬Ë?anti-footballââ?¬â?¢ ââ?¬â?? just common sense and playing the percentages to maximise our chances of winning games.

 

Isn�t that what the game is about?

[Jon 0]

Great analysis Frankie....

[nokiss 0]

I accept that playing the 4-5-1 in the CL is in our best interest. Like you said Frankie, the quality of the opposition is top drawer and making ourselves that little bit more solid is a necessary evil(for want of a better word).

 

What also helps is having a squad with genuine pace, strength, craft and experience. WS has done particularly well(IMO) in the transfer market in that regards.

 

If we are going to go with the 4-5-1 domestically, which i'm not in favour of. Walter has to start getting his tactics and team selections right. If were going to play three in the middle of the park, it has to be two attacking and one holding. The tempo has also got to be higher. If we play a nice high tempo and play on the front foot, there's not a team in the SPL that can live with us(IMO). The game against the scum proved it perfectly.

 

IMO WS has been over-cautious in too many games so far this season. The game against the arabs was the perfect example. 4-5-1, two holding and one striker and a low tempo. We would have been better served by playing Naismith or Novo up beside cousin to get under the feet of Wilkie and Dodds, instead of playing to their strengths and pumping the ball up to a lone striker. To me, that should be a no-brainer for somebody with WS's experience.

 

4-5-1 in the CL? Yes. In the SPL? No, but if WS continues with it in the SPL, he's going to have to do better in regards to team selections and tactics.

[bmck 117]

frankie, i thought your analysis was excellent. i also enjoyed nokiss' riposte. it might be an idea to newsnow his response, and you provide a response again yourself - build up a sort of dialogue for people to take (amicable) sides on.

 

just an idea.