🔗 Share this article

SCertain matches just don’t sound right. Perhaps it’s almost conceivable that, if events had unfolded a bit differently in the 70s, Terry Venables could have been leading their team behind the Soviet Bloc for a shot against the legendary cybernauts, but Dynamo Kyiv against Crystal Palace remains a clash that elicits a double-take. It seems like a mismatch: how can those teams possibly be in the identical tournament?

However this is the contemporary world. Ukraine is battling conflict, its sides diminished. The Premier League is incredibly rich. And Crystal Palace are coached by one of the rising talents of the continental game. They not only play each other on the matchday, but they won with a degree of comfort. It was their third consecutive victory, their 19th consecutive game without loss.

Managerial Speculation and Future Moves

And so, because no team of their stature can simply be allowed to savor a winning streak, all the talk is of where the Austrian manager could move to. His contract ends at the end of the season and he has refused to sign an extension. He is 51; if he is going to take over a top team with the chance of an long spell in charge, he lacks a great deal of time to secure a transition. Could he then be the answer for Manchester United? He does, ultimately, utilize the identical 3-4-2-1 as Ruben Amorim, just significantly more effectively.

Tactical Formation and Historical Context

This raises the issue of the reason a approach that has drawn so much doubt at United functions so well at Palace. But it’s not only about the formation, nor is it the situation – within reason – that one formation is inherently superior than another. Instead certain formations, in combination with the manner they are enacted, emphasize certain aspects of the game. It is, at the very least, fascinating that since Harry Catterick’s Toffees won the title in 1962-63 with a W-M formation, only one side has secured the English league title using with a back three: Antonio Conte’s Blues in 2016-17.

The former Chelsea manager’s team won the championship in that season with a three defenders and in practice two No 10s.

That success was something of a black swan event. Chelsea that season had no European football, allowing them fresher than their rivals, and they had players who fit the system virtually freakishly well.

N’Golo Kanté, with his endurance and reading of the play, is almost two players, and he was functioning at the base of midfield together with the calming presence of Nemanja Matic and Cesc Fàbregas, one of the most incisive passers the Premier League has seen. That offered the foundation for the two No 10s: Eden Hazard, who thrived in his free role, and Pedro, a expert of the run into the box. Every one of those players was enhanced by their partnership with the teammates.

Systemic Reasons and Tactical Difficulties

To an extent, the comparative absence of success for the three-man defense, at minimum in terms of claiming titles, is systemic. Not many teams have secured the title playing a 3-4-2-1 because not many clubs have played a back three. The World Cup win in the 1960s reified in the national mindset the efficacy of zonal marking with a four defenders.

That stayed the standard, almost without question, for the twenty years that ensued. But there could also be particular tactical reasons. A three-man backline derives its breadth from the wide players; it could be that the extreme high-energy nature of the English football makes the demand on those players excessive to be undertaken consistently.

However the system poses specific difficulties. It is solid, offering the trapezoid defensive shape – a trio of center-backs shielded by two holders – that is widely recognised as the most effective way to defend against rival fast breaks. But that is just a single phase of the game. If they push forward from the protection of the three centre‑backs, considering the common use of formations with a central trio, a pair of midfield players will often be outmanned without support from other areas – except if a single player has the outstanding abilities of Kanté.

Eddie Nketiah rejoices after scoring his side’s second goal versus Dynamo Kyiv.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach

The inherent solidity of that compact 3-2 block, additionally, although an advantage for a side looking to absorb attacks, becomes a potential disadvantage for a side that aim to go on the offensive to the opposition. Its greatest asset is also its greatest flaw. The blockish nature of the system, the way the midfield is divided into holders and creators – exclusively defensive mids and No 10s in current parlance, with zero box-to-box midfielders – means that without a individual to move across bands there is a risk of being read easily; once more, the Blues had the ideal player to fill that role, David Luiz often striding ahead from the defense to become an additional central presence.

Contrasting Styles at Palace and United

Crystal Palace aren’t concerned about that. They have the second-lowest ball control of any side in the Premier League. It’s not their role to have the ball. And that is the primary explanation why a direct comparison with United’s struggles is difficult. The Red Devils, by history and by demand, can not be the side with the second-worst ball retention in the league.

Even if they opted to counterattack against opposing top sides, most of their matches will be against opponents who defend deeply and would be happy enough with a draw. In the bulk of games there is an onus on them to control the ball.

Maybe a progressive team could play a three-at-the-back system but it demands very particular players – as the Italian coach possessed at Stamford Bridge. The Austrian’s success with it has come at Lask and the German clubs, where he has been in a position to have his side sit deep and break at speed.

They have defeated Aston Villa and Aston Villa, because the majority of sides do at the present, held the Blues, and ripped the Reds apart on the counter. But they’ve also tied at home to Sunderland and Nottingham Forest, and found it hard to beat Fredrikstad. Defend deeply against them and they struggle for creativity.

Adjustment and Future Possibilities

Could Glasner adapt were he to go