Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Brazil vs Germany semi-final Watch

  • View Poll Results: Who will win Brazil vs Germany?
    Brazil to win
    14
    26.42%
    Germany to win
    39
    73.58%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Brazil did nazi that coming
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    The ratings on sky sports for Brazil man :lol:

    Julio Cesar -3
    Maicon -3
    Dante -3
    David Luiz -2
    Marcelo -1
    Luis Gustavo -3
    Fernandinho -1
    Hulk -2
    Oscar -4
    Bernard -2
    Fred -2
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rickfloss)
    when you got £20k to bet, its nothing

    i dont celebrate when i make £5k
    Boss, sit down.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by asr11)
    The ratings on sky sports for Brazil man :lol:

    Julio Cesar -3
    Maicon -3
    Dante -3
    David Luiz -2
    Marcelo -1
    Luis Gustavo -3
    Fernandinho -1
    Hulk -2
    Oscar -4
    Bernard -2
    Fred -2
    Is that -2 for David Luiz.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zürich)
    There is actually very little difference between a 4-2-3-1, a 4-5-1 or a 4-1-4-1 or even a 4-3-3

    What matters if how the 2 CMs play within the system in terms of discipline, work rate and energy
    I disagree on that notion.

    I know formations are fluid and in the defensive phase you usually either end up with two flat lines of four, or a line of 4 and a line of 5 when you're standing off but on the ball there is a clear difference in the tactics. 4-2-3-1's you have the wide players tucking in and the CMs being restricted, for 4-3-3 you get a narrow formation, wingers are wider, fullbacks push up more.

    Take for example Chelsea's 4-3-3 formations, they're not actually 4-3-3 but 4-1-4-1s. The striker is isolated, the wingers aren't in advanced positions most of the time and they're pretty much in line with the midfield players.

    They're small differences tbf though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I can't be the only one that finds Hummels insanely attractive
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cleveradam)
    4-2-3-1 is not a flawed formation.
    The right manager with the right players with the right tactics with the right balance can easily make it work.
    The formation wasn't the problem. Scolari played the wrong players.
    Marcelo is not a defender.
    Bernard is essentially a handicap player - no height, no strength and no power and cannot drop back.
    Playing Fred is playing one man less.
    David Luiz is not a leader and cannot defend unless with Terry/Silva telling him what to do.
    Scolari's best team would have been
    Hulk
    Willian - Oscar - Ramires
    Fernandinio-Gustavo
    Luis-Luiz-Dante-Maicon
    (not sure if Filipe Luis or Miranda were even in the 23 man squad despite conceding fewest goals in La Liga nearly making history with Atletico)

    SAF or Mourinho wouldn't have thought twice about going with a similar team like above in this match. Maximum defensive solidity and lightning speed on the counter.
    With Willian and Ramires dropping back constantly whenever required and creating 2 walls of four.

    Scolari lost the plot but this German side arguably played the best football any national team has played in 90 minutes since the Brazil of the old.
    tbh a lot of your post is correct, but it doesn't stop 4-2-3-1 being a flawed formation. Of course it works alright if the other team is pretty bad or also plays 4-2-3-1 (which seems to be the way most teams go nowadays). But the shape makes absolutely no logical sense if you're wanting to play fluid football. In fact describing anything as '4-x-x' in top class football is pretty inaccurate nowadays.

    Full backs push so far forwards, which means one player needs to sit back and either sit in front of the CB's or between them (where it essentially becomes a 3-4-3/3-5-2). Having 2 players sit in front of the CB's doesn't work. Firstly it means there is no connection between midfield and attack, so forward play is not as effective. Secondly, there is no natural way for the 2 sitting players to sit in and guard. If they sit directly in front of the CB's, then there is no protection of the wings. If they move wide to protect the wings, then it essentially becomes a back 4 and defeats the whole purpose of having wing backs push forward. Either way, the 2 sitting midfield players can not adequately provide passing options for the attacking players, or join the attack themselves. If one of the sitting players does play more forward and try to provide, then it becomes horribly imbalanced is easily exposed.

    Whereas playing a 4-3-3 or a 4-1-2-1-2 has one player sitting in front of the CB's. The centre backs move wider to accommodate him, and the full-backs can push forward. The 2 CM's and 2 FB's essentially form a midfield 4 (in a 3-4-3 or 3-4-1-2), where they are essentially all box-to-box players, who can provide for the attacking 3 but also give some defensive cover. It's fluid and where one goes forward, the other covers him and provides passing options. It's such a more natural system. When defending, the full backs sit back, allowing the DM to step up and sweep up in front of the back 4.

    (Original post by Numan786)
    Hmm I'm intrigued so explain it if u don't mind
    As above. There's so much more to it, I'm only touching the surface here, but the major thing is that full-backs are extremely attacking in modern football, which completely messes up the shape of a 4-2-3-1. When the formation first became popular, full-backs weren't quite so forward thinking so it worked better, but that's not the case anymore.

    (Original post by jam278)
    I don't think 4-2-3-1 is a flawed formation, Real have played it many a time. Bayern Munich won the CL using that formation, Dortmund got to the CL final with that formation.

    That's not a problem, especially when you consider that Gustavo and Fernandinho have played in 2 man midfields before.

    Problem is that they simply didn't use the right tactics and the player they rely on to play Brazils football don't change. It was simple what Brazil had to do before the game. It makes no sense to not use the likes of Filipe Luiz and Miranda against them.
    As I said in reply to someone else, if everybody else is playing 4-2-3-1 too, it kinda negates the defects, and the best players will come out on top.

    Essentially everybody who tried a different formation against Bayern and Dortmund in their run had significantly worse players.

    Agreed that they chose the wrong defenders, but it doesn't explain everything.

    It's no coincidence imo, that Mourinho will always go with a 4-3-3 when playing a top team (and therefore Mata failed to impress).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It's a shame we can't see who voted for Brazil to win.

    Spoiler:
    Show
    ****ing idiots.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ggmu!)
    Is that -2 for David Luiz.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Probably
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by asr11)
    Probably
    Can't for PSG to realise they've bought a dud.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jam278)
    I disagree on that notion.

    I know formations are fluid and in the defensive phase you usually either end up with two flat lines of four, or a line of 4 and a line of 5 when you're standing off but on the ball there is a clear difference in the tactics. 4-2-3-1's you have the wide players tucking in and the CMs being restricted, for 4-3-3 you get a narrow formation, wingers are wider, fullbacks push up more.

    Take for example Chelsea's 4-3-3 formations, they're not actually 4-3-3 but 4-1-4-1s. The striker is isolated, the wingers aren't in advanced positions most of the time and they're pretty much in line with the midfield players.

    They're small differences tbf though.
    It really depends on the players within the system.

    4-2-3-1 can like many different formations depending on the the CMs and even the attacking players.


    As you say, it depends on the players. Oscar in the 3 is a very different system to say Ozil in the 3 and depending on the how disciplined the players are. Take Bayerns hammering of Barca, Schweinsteiger and Martinez played as the 2 like in any other game, but the system was very different to their normal game in how they broke and how they inter-reacted with their attackers. So I think there is more variation within formations than between them.

    I couldnt actually tell you what formation Arsenal play tbh for this reason, I'd say its a 4-5-1 if anything but you hear anything from 4-2-3-1 to 4-3-3.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by asr11)
    The ratings on sky sports for Brazil man :lol:

    Julio Cesar -3
    Maicon -3
    Dante -3
    David Luiz -2
    Marcelo -1
    Luis Gustavo -3
    Fernandinho -1
    Hulk -2
    Oscar -4
    Bernard -2
    Fred -2
    I wonder if Oscar only got that for scoring
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Had Argentina or Netherlands been in Brazil's situation, they wouldn't have capitulated.
    Argentina would have looked at Messi and Aguero restarting from center and that alone would have given them the hope and confidence to come back in the game. Likewise with Netherlands who have the players, experience and heartache of the last world-cup.

    All players and Scolari are to blame but Marcelo and Luiz were lunatics. After going 1-0 down Luiz was playing like a CM and Marcelo was playing like a left-winger/left forward.

    Even had it been 3-0 to Germany at half-time, Brazil could have taken inspiration from Liverpool 9 years ago and maybe gotten back in the second half.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Manchester United)
    It's a shame we can't see who voted for Brazil to win.

    Spoiler:
    Show
    ****ing idiots.
    I did waste.

    says the man u fan, save yourself embarrassment.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missfats)
    I did waste.

    says the man u fan, save yourself embarrassment.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You dont have a scooby

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zürich)
    There is actually very little difference between a 4-2-3-1, a 4-5-1 or a 4-1-4-1 or even a 4-3-3

    What matters if how the 2 CMs play within the system in terms of discipline, work rate and energy
    can't say I agree. 4-3-3 and 4-1-4-1 are just more precise descriptions of a 4-5-1. 4-2-3-1 though is a lot different and closer to 4-4-1-1 or even 4-4-2 or 4-2-4, but again can be claimed to be a 4-5-1. It may not sound like big differences, but the shape of that midfield 3 is so vital and must be balanced right. This is something Hodgson failed to understand.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cBay)

    As I said in reply to someone else, if everybody else is playing 4-2-3-1 too, it kinda negates the defects, and the best players will come out on top.

    Essentially everybody who tried a different formation against Bayern and Dortmund in their run had significantly worse players.

    Agreed that they chose the wrong defenders, but it doesn't explain everything.

    It's no coincidence imo, that Mourinho will always go with a 4-3-3 when playing a top team (and therefore Mata failed to impress).
    That makes sense. You're assuming that everybody attempts to play a 3-4-3. 4-2-3-1 is flawed for England and for Liverpool because Gerrard plays as a half back. Chelsea e.g. when they attack usually use a defensive 6 and an attacking 4. It makes for a lack of cohesion tbf. So we struggle to dictate the game. If we decide to use Matic as the sole holding player though then possibly you've got a point of it being a flawed formation for Chelsea e.g.

    4-2-3-1 is generally a more cautious formation imo as you have 2 people protecting the defence compared to 1 player and 4 midfield players pushing high up the field behind the striker(e.g. at Bayern initially under Pep)

    When we play the bigger teams it's usually a 4-5-1 or 4-1-4-1 anyway, the wingers drop quite deep and leave the striker isolated(Atletico first leg, Arsenal at emirates, Liverpool away e.g.). Aim is to concede as little space as possible. It's a formation used to just avoid conceding, it works for Chelsea because we're pretty good at defending and our midfield is pretty energetic. Would the 4-3-3 variant Mourinho uses against big teams work for Arsenal or Liverpool e.g. I don't think it would.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Manchester United)
    It's a shame we can't see who voted for Brazil to win.

    Spoiler:
    Show
    ****ing idiots.
    Guess they're feeling pretty 'Low' right now.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    The irony that the programme "seven wonders of Brazil" is on bbc two right now...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kenan and Kel)
    Yes. Brazil are going all the way to the final. Germany will bottle it in the Semis, again.

    lmfao u look like a bit of a knobhead now
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.