🔗 Share this article

SCertain encounters just don’t sound right. Perhaps it’s almost imaginable that, if events had unfolded a bit otherwise in the 70s, Malcolm Allison or another manager coaching their side behind the Soviet Bloc for a crack at the legendary tactical masterminds, but Dynamo Kyiv against Crystal Palace is still a fixture that elicits a second look. It seems like a category error: how is it possible that those teams possibly be in the identical competition?

But this is the modern world. The nation is battling conflict, its sides weakened. The English top flight is extremely wealthy. And Crystal Palace are managed by one of the emerging talents of the European football. They not only face off on the matchday, but they won with a notable ease. It was their third straight victory, their 19th consecutive game without defeat.

Managerial Rumors and Next Moves

And so, because no mid-size club can simply be permitted to savor a good run, all the discussion is of which club the Austrian manager could go next. His deal ends at the end of the season and he has refused to agree to an renewal. He is fifty-one; if he is planning to lead a top club with the chance of an extended spell in charge, he doesn’t have a huge amount of opportunity to secure a move. Could he then be the answer for Manchester United? He indeed, after all, utilize the same formation as the Sporting coach, just significantly more successfully.

Strategic Formation and Cultural Context

Which brings up the issue of the reason a system that has attracted so much doubt at Old Trafford functions so well at Palace. But it’s never only about the setup, nor is it the case – within reason – that a specific system is intrinsically superior than a different one. Instead certain tactical shapes, in combination with the style they are enacted, emphasize particular elements of play. It is, at the minimum, fascinating that since Harry Catterick’s Everton claimed the championship in the 1962-63 season with a W-M, only one side has secured the English league title using with a three-man defense: Antonio Conte’s Chelsea in the 2016-17 season.

Antonio Conte’s team clinched the title in 2016-17 with a back three and effectively two No 10s.

That success was a bit of a rare event. Chelsea that campaign had no continental commitments, keeping them more rested 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 almost a duo in one, and he was functioning at the base of the engine room together with either calming influence of Nemanja Matic or Cesc Fàbregas, one of the most penetrating playmakers the division has seen. That provided the platform for the two No 10s: the Belgian wizard, who thrived in his unrestricted position, and Pedro, a expert of the dart into the penalty area. Each of those players was improved by their partnership with the teammates.

Systemic Reasons and Strategic Challenges

Partly, the relative absence of success for the back three, at minimum in terms of winning titles, is cultural. Not many sides have won the title playing a back three because not many clubs have played a back three. The global tournament victory in 1966 reified in the national mindset the efficacy of zonal marking with a four defenders.

That remained the standard, almost without question, for the two decades that followed. But there may additionally be particular tactical reasons. A back three derives its width from the wide players; it could be that the intense high-energy style of the British football makes the demand on those individuals excessive to be maintained consistently.

However the 3-4-2-1 presents specific challenges. It is stable, providing the compact structure – three central defenders protected by defensive midfielders – that is widely acknowledged as the most effective way to guard against opposition counterattacks. But that is just a single phase of the match. If they push forward from the cover of the triple defenders, considering the common use of formations with a central trio, a pair of central midfielders will often be outnumbered without backup from other areas – unless one of them has the exceptional abilities of the French dynamo.

Eddie Nketiah rejoices after netting his team’s second goal versus the Ukrainian side.

Advantages and Limitations of the System

The inherent stability of that compact defensive shape, meanwhile, although an benefit for a team looking to absorb attacks, turns into a potential disadvantage for a side that aim to take the game to the opposition. Its greatest asset is also its primary weakness. The blockish structure of the formation, the way the center is split into holders and creators – all No 6s and No 10s in current terminology, with no No 8s – means that without a player to move across bands there is a danger of predictability; once more, Chelsea had the perfect player to fill that role, David Luiz frequently striding ahead from the back three to become an extra midfield presence.

Divergent Approaches at Palace and United

Crystal Palace don’t care about that. They have the second-least possession of any teams in the Premier League. It’s not at all their role to have the ball. And that is the primary explanation why a straightforward contrast with United’s difficulties is challenging. United, by history and by expectation, cannot be the side with the second-lowest ball retention in the league.

Even if they chose to play on the break against other top sides, the majority of their matches will be against opponents who defend deeply and would be happy enough with a tie. In most fixtures there is an onus on them to dominate the play.

Perhaps a progressive side can adopt a three-at-the-back system but it demands extremely specific players – as the Italian coach possessed at Stamford Bridge. Glasner’s achievement with it has arrived at Lask and Eintracht Frankfurt, where he has been able to have his team sit deep and break at pace.

Palace have beaten West Ham and Aston Villa, because most teams do at the moment, held the Blues, and torn the Reds apart on the counter. But they’ve additionally drawn at home to Sunderland and Sunderland, and found it hard to beat the Norwegian side. Defend deeply against Palace and they have difficulty for invention.

Adjustment and Future Scenarios

Would the manager adjust if he moved