🔗 Share this article

Some matches just don’t sound right. Maybe it’s almost conceivable that, had things gone a bit differently in the 1970s, Terry Venables or another manager leading their team beyond the Soviet Bloc for a shot against the legendary cybernauts, but a match between Dynamo Kyiv and Crystal Palace is still a clash that elicits a second look. It feels like a category error: how can those two clubs possibly be in the same competition?

However this is the contemporary era. Ukraine is battling invasion, its teams diminished. The English top flight is incredibly rich. And Crystal Palace are coached by one of the rising stars of the European football. They didn’t just play each other on the matchday, but they won with a notable comfort. It was their third consecutive win, their 19th consecutive game without defeat.

Managerial Speculation and Future Steps

Therefore, because no team of their stature can simply be allowed to savor a winning streak, all the discussion is of which club the Austrian manager might move to. His contract ends at the end of the season and he has refused to agree to an renewal. He is fifty-one; if he is going to take over a major club with the possibility of an extended spell in command, he lacks a huge amount of time to secure a move. Could he then be the answer for Manchester United? He does, after all, utilize the identical formation as the Sporting coach, just significantly more effectively.

Strategic System and Historical Background

Which brings up the question of why a approach that has attracted so much scepticism at Old Trafford functions so well at Selhurst Park. But it’s never just about the setup, nor is it the case – generally speaking – that a specific system is intrinsically superior than another. Instead certain formations, in combination with the style they are enacted, emphasize certain aspects of the game. It is, at the very least, fascinating that since Harry Catterick’s Toffees won the championship in 1962-63 with a W-M, only one side has won the English league title using with a three-man defense: Antonio Conte’s Chelsea in the 2016-17 season.

The former Chelsea manager’s Chelsea clinched the championship in 2016-17 with a three defenders and effectively two No 10s.

That success was something of a black swan event. Chelsea that campaign had no continental commitments, keeping them fresher than their competitors, and they had squad members who suited the formation almost remarkably perfectly.

N’Golo Kanté, with his endurance and understanding of the game, is practically two players, and he was functioning at the back of the engine room alongside the calming influence of Nemanja Matic or Cesc Fàbregas, among the most penetrating passers the division has known. That offered the platform for the two No 10s: the Belgian wizard, who revelled in his free role, and the Spanish forward, a expert of the run into the penalty area. Every one of those players was improved by their combination with the others.

Systemic Reasons and Tactical Difficulties

To an extent, the relative absence of success for the three-man defense, at least in terms of claiming titles, is systemic. Few sides have won the league playing a back three because few clubs have adopted a three-at-the-back system. The global tournament win in 1966 reified in the English football consciousness the efficacy of defensive organization with a four defenders.

This remained the standard, almost without challenge, for the twenty years that followed. But there could also be particular strategic explanations. A back three derives its breadth from the wide players; it may be that the extreme high-energy nature of the English game makes the requirement on those individuals excessive to be maintained consistently.

But the system poses particular difficulties. It is stable, providing the trapezoid defensive shape – three central defenders protected by two holders – that is widely recognised as the most efficient way to defend against opposition fast breaks. But that is only one phase of the match. If they push too far from the protection of the three defenders, given the common use of formations with a central trio, a pair of midfield players will often be outmanned without support from elsewhere – except if one of them has the outstanding gifts of the French dynamo.

Eddie Nketiah celebrates after netting his team’s second goal against the Ukrainian side.

Advantages and Weaknesses of the Approach

The inherent solidity of that compact 3-2 block, additionally, although an advantage for a side aiming to absorb pressure, becomes a possible disadvantage for a team that aim to go on the offensive to the opposition. Its biggest asset is simultaneously its primary weakness. The blockish structure of the formation, the way the center is split into holders and attack-minded players – exclusively defensive mids and No 10s in modern terminology, with zero No 8s – means that without a individual to step between lines there is a danger of predictability; once more, the Blues had the ideal player to do that, David Luiz often advancing ahead from the back three to become an additional central option.

Divergent Styles at Selhurst and Old Trafford

Crystal Palace don’t care about that. They have the second-lowest ball control of all teams in the Premier League. It’s not their job to have the ball. And that is the primary reason why a straightforward comparison with Manchester United’s struggles is challenging. The Red Devils, by history and by demand, can not be the team with the second-lowest possession in the Premier League.

Even if they chose to play on the break against opposing top sides, the majority of their matches will be against rivals who sit deep and would be content enough with a tie. In the bulk of fixtures there is an onus on them to dominate the play.

Maybe a attacking-minded team can play a three-at-the-back system but it requires extremely specific players – as Conte had at Chelsea. Glasner’s achievement with it has come at Wolfsburg and Eintracht Frankfurt, where he has been able to have his team sit deep and attack at speed.

They have beaten West Ham and West Ham, because the majority of sides struggle at the present, held Chelsea, and ripped Liverpool to pieces on the break. But they’ve additionally drawn at Selhurst Park to Sunderland and Nottingham Forest, and found it hard to beat the Norwegian side. Defend deeply against Palace and they struggle for creativity.

Adaptation and Prospective Possibilities

Could the manager adapt if he moved