🔗 Share this article

SCertain matches seem out of place. Perhaps it’s just about imaginable that, if events had unfolded a bit differently in the 1970s, Terry Venables or another manager leading their team behind the Iron Curtain for a shot against the legendary cybernauts, but a match between Dynamo Kyiv and Crystal Palace is still a clash that provokes a second look. It feels like a mismatch: how is it possible that those two clubs possibly be in the same competition?

But this is the contemporary era. Ukraine is battling conflict, its sides diminished. The English top flight is incredibly rich. And the Eagles are coached by among the rising talents of the continental game. They not only play each other on Thursday, but they triumphed with a degree of comfort. It was their third straight victory, their 19th straight match without defeat.

Managerial Speculation and Next Steps

Therefore, because no team of their stature can even just be allowed to savor a winning streak, all the talk is of which club the Austrian manager could move to. His contract ends at the conclusion of the campaign and he has declined to sign an extension. He is fifty-one; if he is going to lead a top team with the possibility of an long tenure in charge, he lacks a great deal of opportunity to secure a move. Might he then be the answer for Manchester United? He does, after all, utilize the same formation as the Sporting coach, just significantly more effectively.

Strategic Formation and Cultural Background

Which raises the issue of the reason a system that has drawn so much scepticism at United works so effectively at Selhurst Park. But it’s not only about the setup, nor is it the situation – generally speaking – that one formation is intrinsically better than a different one. Instead specific formations, in combination with the manner they are implemented, prioritise certain elements of the game. It is, at the very least, intriguing that since Harry Catterick’s Toffees claimed the title in the 1962-63 season with a W-M formation, only one side has won the Premier League playing with a back three: the Italian’s Blues in 2016-17.

Antonio Conte’s Chelsea won the championship in that season with a back three and effectively two attacking midfielders.

Even that was a bit of a rare occurrence. The London club that campaign had no continental commitments, keeping them fresher than their rivals, and they had players who fit the formation virtually freakishly well.

N’Golo Kanté, with his stamina and reading of the game, is almost two players, and he was functioning at the base of midfield alongside either steadying influence of Cesc Fàbregas and Nemanja Matic, among the most penetrating passers the Premier League has seen. That offered the platform for the dual playmakers: the Belgian wizard, who revelled in his free role, and the Spanish forward, a master of the run into the box. Every one of those players was improved by their partnership with the others.

Systemic Reasons and Tactical Challenges

Partly, the relative lack of success for the three-man defense, at least in terms of winning championships, is cultural. Few teams have won the league playing a back three because not many clubs have played a three-at-the-back system. The World Cup win in the 1960s cemented in the national mindset the effectiveness of zonal marking with a four defenders.

This remained the standard, almost without question, for the two decades that ensued. But there could also be more specific strategic reasons. A three-man backline gets its breadth from the wingbacks; it may be that the intense high-energy nature of the British football makes the requirement on those individuals excessive to be maintained regularly.

However the 3-4-2-1 poses particular difficulties. It is solid, providing the compact structure – a trio of central defenders protected by defensive midfielders – that is commonly acknowledged as the most efficient way to defend against rival counterattacks. But that is just a single phase of the game. If they push forward from the cover of the three defenders, given the prevalence of setups with a central trio, two central midfielders will tend to be outnumbered without support from elsewhere – unless one of them has the outstanding abilities of Kanté.

The striker rejoices after netting his team’s additional strike versus the Ukrainian side.

Advantages and Limitations of the Approach

The inherent stability of that tight defensive shape, meanwhile, although an benefit for a side aiming to absorb attacks, becomes a potential disadvantage for a side that aim to take the game to the rival. Its greatest asset is also its greatest flaw. The rigid nature of the system, the way the midfield is split into holders and attack-minded players – all defensive mids and attacking mids in modern parlance, with zero No 8s – means that without a individual to move across lines there is a danger of being read easily; once more, the Blues had the ideal player to fill that role, the Brazilian defender frequently striding forward from the back three to become an extra central presence.

Divergent Approaches at Selhurst and United

Palace don’t care about that. They have the second-least possession of any side in the top division. It’s not at all their role to have the possession. And that is the main reason why a direct contrast with United’s struggles is challenging. United, by tradition and by expectation, can not be the team with the second-worst possession in the Premier League.

Although they opted to play on the break against other top clubs, the majority of their games will be against opponents who sit deep and could be happy enough with a tie. In the bulk of games there is an onus on them to dominate the ball.

Maybe a progressive side can play a 3-4-2-1 but it requires very particular personnel – as the Italian coach had at Stamford Bridge. Glasner’s success with it has arrived at Lask and the German clubs, where he has been able to have his side sit deep and attack at pace.

They have beaten West Ham and Aston Villa, because the majority of teams struggle at the present, frustrated the Blues, and torn Liverpool to pieces on the counter. But they’ve also drawn at home to Nottingham Forest and Sunderland, and struggled to beat the Norwegian side. Sit deep against them and they struggle for creativity.

Adjustment and Future Scenarios

Would Glasner adapt were he to go