🔗 Share this article

Some matches just don’t sound right. Maybe it’s just about conceivable that, if events had unfolded slightly otherwise in the 70s, Malcolm Allison could have been coaching their side behind the Iron Curtain for a shot against Valeriy Lobanovskyi’s cybernauts, but a match between Dynamo Kyiv and Crystal Palace is still a fixture that elicits a second look. It seems like a mismatch: how is it possible that those two clubs possibly be in the identical competition?

But this is the modern world. The nation is fighting conflict, its teams diminished. The Premier League is extremely wealthy. And Crystal Palace are coached by among the emerging stars of the European game. They didn’t just face off on Thursday, but Palace won with a degree of ease. It was their third straight win, their 19th straight game without loss.

Managerial Rumors and Next Steps

And so, because no mid-size club can even just be permitted to enjoy a good run, all the talk is of which club Oliver Glasner might go next. His contract ends at the end of the season and he has declined to sign an renewal. He is fifty-one; if he is planning to lead a top team with the chance of an extended tenure in command, he doesn’t have a huge amount of time to secure a move. Might he then be the solution for Manchester United? He indeed, after all, utilize the same 3-4-2-1 as Ruben Amorim, just significantly more successfully.

Strategic Formation and Cultural Background

Which raises the issue of why a system that has drawn so much doubt at United functions so well at Selhurst Park. But it’s never only about the formation, nor is it the case – within reason – that one formation is inherently superior than another. Rather certain formations, in conjunction with the style they are enacted, emphasize particular elements of the game. It is, at the very least, intriguing that since the manager’s Everton claimed the championship in 1962-63 with a W-M formation, just a single team has secured the English league title playing with a back three: the Italian’s Chelsea in 2016-17.

The former Chelsea manager’s team clinched the title in that season with a three defenders and in practice two attacking midfielders.

Even that was a bit of a black swan event. Chelsea that campaign had no continental commitments, allowing them fresher than their rivals, and they had squad members who suited the system almost remarkably perfectly.

The French midfielder, with his endurance and reading of the game, is practically two players, and he was operating at the back of midfield together with the calming presence of Nemanja Matic and Cesc Fàbregas, among the most incisive playmakers the Premier League has seen. That offered the platform for the two No 10s: the Belgian wizard, who revelled in his unrestricted role, and Pedro, a expert of the run into the penalty area. Each of those individuals was enhanced by their partnership with the teammates.

Cultural Factors and Strategic Difficulties

Partly, the comparative lack of titles for the three-man defense, at least in terms of claiming championships, is cultural. Few teams have secured the title playing a 3-4-2-1 because few sides have played a back three. The global tournament win in 1966 reified in the national mindset the efficacy of defensive organization with a back four.

That remained the default, almost without question, for the twenty years that ensued. But there may also be more specific tactical explanations. A back three derives its breadth from the wide players; it could be that the extreme hard-running style of the English football makes the demand on those players excessive to be undertaken consistently.

However the 3-4-2-1 poses particular challenges. It is solid, offering the compact structure – a trio of central defenders shielded by defensive midfielders – that is commonly recognised as the most effective way to defend against rival counterattacks. But that is only one phase of the game. If they advance forward from the cover of the triple centre‑backs, given the prevalence of setups with a central trio, two midfield players will tend to be outnumbered without backup from other areas – except if a single player has the outstanding gifts of the French dynamo.

The striker celebrates after scoring his team’s additional goal versus Dynamo Kyiv.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the System

The inherent stability of that tight 3-2 block, additionally, while an advantage for a team looking to absorb attacks, turns into a potential disadvantage for a side that seek to go on the offensive to the opposition. Its greatest asset is also its primary flaw. The rigid structure of the formation, the way the midfield is divided into holders and attack-minded players – all defensive mids and attacking mids in modern parlance, with zero box-to-box midfielders – means that without a player to step across bands there is a risk of being read easily; once more, Chelsea had the ideal player to do that, David Luiz frequently advancing ahead from the back three to act as an extra midfield presence.

Divergent Styles at Selhurst and United

Crystal Palace don’t care about that. They have the second-lowest possession of all teams in the top division. It’s not their job to have the possession. And that is the main reason why a direct comparison with Manchester United’s difficulties is challenging. The Red Devils, by tradition and by expectation, can not be the side with the second-lowest ball retention in the league.

Although they chose to counterattack against other elite sides, most of their games will be against rivals who sit deep and would be content enough with a tie. In most games there is an onus on them to control the ball.

Perhaps a attacking-minded side can adopt a three-at-the-back system but it demands very particular players – as Conte had at Chelsea. The Austrian’s success with it has come at Wolfsburg and the German clubs, where he has been able to have his team sit deep and attack at pace.

They have beaten West Ham and Aston Villa, because the majority of teams do at the present, held Chelsea, and ripped the Reds to pieces on the break. But they’ve also tied at home to Sunderland and Sunderland, and found it hard to beat Fredrikstad. Sit deep against them and they struggle for invention.

Adaptation and Future Scenarios

Could the manager adjust if he moved