🔗 Share this article

SCertain fixtures just don’t sound right. Perhaps it’s just about conceivable that, if events had unfolded slightly differently in the 1970s, Malcolm Allison or another manager leading their side behind the Iron Curtain for a crack at the legendary cybernauts, but Dynamo Kyiv against Crystal Palace remains a clash that elicits a second look. It feels like a mismatch: how can those two clubs even be in the identical tournament?

However this is the contemporary world. The nation is battling conflict, its teams weakened. The Premier League is extremely rich. And Crystal Palace are managed by among the rising talents of the European game. They didn’t just face off on the matchday, but they won with a notable ease. It was their third consecutive win, their 19th straight game without defeat.

Coaching Speculation and Future Steps

And so, because no mid-size club can even just be permitted to savor a winning streak, all the talk is of where the Austrian manager could go next. His contract ends at the conclusion of the season and he has refused to sign an extension. He is 51; if he is planning to lead a major club with the possibility of an extended tenure in command, he lacks a great deal of time to secure a move. Could he then be the answer for the Red Devils? He does, after all, play the same 3-4-2-1 as the Sporting coach, just rather more effectively.

Strategic Formation and Historical Context

This brings up the question of the reason a system that has attracted so much doubt at United functions so well at Selhurst Park. But it’s never only about the formation, nor is it the situation – generally speaking – that a specific system is inherently better than another. Rather specific tactical shapes, in conjunction with the manner they are enacted, emphasize particular elements of the game. It is, at the very least, intriguing that since the manager’s Toffees claimed the championship in the 1962-63 season with a W-M, just a single team has secured the Premier League playing with a back three: Antonio Conte’s Chelsea in the 2016-17 season.

The former Chelsea manager’s team won the title in 2016-17 with a back three and effectively two attacking midfielders.

Even that was something of a black swan event. Chelsea that campaign had no continental commitments, allowing them more rested than their competitors, and they had players who suited the formation almost remarkably well.

The French midfielder, with his endurance and understanding of the game, is almost two players, and he was functioning at the base of the engine room together with either steadying influence of Nemanja Matic and Cesc Fàbregas, among the most incisive playmakers the Premier League has seen. That offered the foundation for the two No 10s: the Belgian wizard, who revelled in his unrestricted position, and the Spanish forward, a expert of the dart into the penalty area. Each of those players was enhanced by their partnership with the teammates.

Cultural Factors and Tactical Challenges

To an extent, the relative lack of titles for the back three, at minimum in terms of claiming championships, is cultural. Not many teams have secured the title using a back three because not many sides have adopted a back three. The World Cup victory in 1966 reified in the national mindset the efficacy of zonal marking with a four defenders.

That stayed the default, almost without challenge, for the twenty years that ensued. But there may additionally be particular tactical explanations. A back three derives its width from the wide players; it may be that the intense high-energy nature of the British game makes the requirement on those players excessive to be undertaken regularly.

But the system presents specific challenges. It is stable, offering the trapezoid defensive shape – three central defenders protected by two holders – that is widely recognised as the most efficient way to defend against rival fast breaks. But that is only one aspect of the game. If they push too far from the cover of the three defenders, given the common use of formations with a central trio, a pair of central midfielders will often be outmanned without support from elsewhere – except if a single player has the outstanding abilities of the French dynamo.

The striker rejoices after scoring his team’s second goal against the Ukrainian side.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the System

The inherent solidity of that compact 3-2 block, additionally, while an advantage for a side aiming to absorb pressure, turns into a potential drawback for a team that aim to go on the offensive to the opposition. Its greatest asset is simultaneously its greatest flaw. The blockish nature of the formation, the way the midfield is split into holders and creators – all defensive mids and No 10s in modern terminology, with no No 8s – means that without a individual to move across lines there is a danger of predictability; again, the Blues had the ideal man to do that, David Luiz often advancing forward from the back three to act as an extra midfield option.

Contrasting Styles at Selhurst and United

Palace don’t care about that. They have the second-least possession of all teams in the Premier League. It’s not at all their role to have the possession. And that’s the main explanation why a straightforward comparison with Manchester United’s struggles is challenging. United, by tradition and by demand, cannot be the side with the second-lowest possession in the Premier League.

Although United opted to counterattack against opposing top sides, most of their games will be against rivals who defend deeply and would be happy enough with a tie. In the bulk of games there is an pressure on them to dominate the ball.

Maybe a attacking-minded team could play a 3-4-2-1 but it demands extremely specific personnel – as the Italian coach had at Stamford Bridge. Glasner’s achievement with it has come at Wolfsburg and Eintracht Frankfurt, where he has been able to have his side defend compactly and attack at speed.

Palace have beaten Aston Villa and West Ham, because most teams do at the present, held the Blues, and ripped Liverpool to pieces on the break. But they’ve additionally tied at home to Sunderland and Nottingham Forest, and struggled to overcome the Norwegian side. Defend deeply against them and they struggle for invention.

Adjustment and Prospective Possibilities

Could the manager adapt if he moved