

Calcio Debate: 3-5-2 vs. 4-4-2
By: Neil | November 25th, 2008It seems that almost every Napoli fan wants the team to change from the 3-5-2 we’ve been using for more than two years to an orthodox 4-4-2. In the past I’ve argued that the 3-5-2 hasn’t hurt us, but now I am beginning to change my mind. I want to hear from both Napoli fans and fans of other teams: If 4-4-2 is a better system, how has Napoli been so successful using a three man defence? After the jump I will debate the pros and cons of each system.
Basically the theory behind the 3-5-2 is that you don’t need four defenders to mark two strikers. A lot of games are won and lost in midfield, though, and it makes sense to put an extra player in midfield and sacrifice some defensive strength. The five man midfield, in theory, should also do a better job of protecting the weaker three man backline, and with two defensive midfielders you’re not losing much from a four man backline with one defensive midfielder.
The problem with a three man backline is that if the attacking team does manage to bypass the midfield there is more space for them to work with, and if one of the three defenders is beaten one on one it creates even more problems. Or else teams can simply get around the five man midfield by plaing long balls straight to the strikers, and with attacking midfields coming up and joining the play it forces the 3-5-2 team to scramble. Also if a team gets a player sent off, it’s harder to fix, especially if the player is a defender Santacroce.
Napoli’s problems seem to be that we haven’t always had the right players for a 3-5-2. In a 3-5-2 the key players are the three defenders, and the two wingbacks. The defenders need to be good all around players who aren’t error prone. Of Napoli’s three starting defenders, only Santacroce and Cannavaro fit that description. But even Cannavaro sometimes has an off game – there’s a lot of pressure on the center defender, and I would rather see Canna out on the left and someone better play in the middle. As for the wingbacks, until we got Mannini and Maggio there were a lot of problems there. You need real two way players who are fast and can get accurate crosses in going forward, but can also get back and mark a midfielder out of the game. Both Maggio and Mannini meet that criteria, but now that Mannini is playing on the left he struggles to get good crosses in.
Playing 4-4-2 is much safer defensively, but you lose a lot of offence generated by the five man midfield. The solution seems to be using one of the outside defenders for starting the attack, and sometimes getting crosses in. If he gets caught upfield, there are still three defenders back plus a holding midfielder as cover. It’s more flexible than a 3-5-2 because when you have only three defenders, none of them should really go upfield, and therefore the shape of the team doesn’t change all that much.
I think that despite all the success Napoli has had in using the 3-5-2 – recall wins over Inter, Milan, Juve, and Fiorentina last season, plus some impressive results this season – we should change to a 4-4-2. For me the X factor is Lavezzi. This year he is creating goals all by himself, and Napoli can now sacrifice some of the offense created by our midfield to add a fourth defender. If you look at the goal Cagliari scored in the 95th minute that cost us two points, it shows that our current system leaks unnecessary goals. It’s happened before, and it will likely happen again. However, when we don’t leak any bad goals, we’re an amazing team who can play with anyone in Europe.
I can think of three realistic options for Napoli:
1) Don’t change anything! The 3-5-2 has us tied for third and if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.
2) Change to 4-4-2. It doesn’t put as much pressure on the defenders, and it’s a better option for long term success.
3) Start with the 3-5-2. Until we’re leading, keep the five man midfield. But if we take the lead, change to four at the back in the second half to close out the game.
What do you think? What system should Napoli use? I believe Genoa is the only other Serie A team who use three at the back, and Gasperini is hailed as one of the best up and coming Italian managers.
I look forward to hearing people’s opinions.
| Serie A Match Schedule | Discount Travel to Naples | |||
| Napoli Results | Stadio San Paolo information & hotels |
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share
![]() |
Comments
-



I think that 3-5-2 can be a beautiful system but as you said, Neil, its simple- you need those three defenders to be of great strength. This would mean we need more defenders of these attributes- perhaps canna sr. could offer us that this christmas.
until then, i would like to see us play a system in which we seamlessly changed from 5-3-2 to 3-5-2 in which maggio/mannini (although we are linked with emiliano papa at left back this could be good) essentially start as standard fullbacks but have more license to go forward than a player in that position normally would. so basically a compromise.Posted from
United Kingdom

-



what you should go for is pasqual in january and loan out vitale. and go with a 4-2-3-1
iezzo
maggio-santacroce-paolo-vitale/pasqual
gargano-blasi
lavezzi-russotto-hamsik
deniswith lavezzi, russotto, hamsik all interchanging it would give any defence a headache basically like roma and man utd. add criscito, fabio cannavaro, borriello/quagliarella (maybe nocerino marino says he would have bought him if he hadnt come to us) and maybe a keeper like akinfeev? then this team would be truly amazing and have good depth but obviously thats one for the future
Posted from
United States

-



I just think over a long haul Serie A season, and with Lavezzi in a free role behind the striker, we should go with a 442. It would keep us tighter at the back, and keep us balanced. No world class team uses 3 at the back and their is good reason. Playing top class opposition you need 4 at the back. Use the two fullbacks to overlap at times when on the offensive. If Sir Alex, Lippi, Don Fabio, Mourinho, Scloari, etc use a four man defence, I think it somes it up.
Posted from
United States

Comments are closed












