Top Stories

Tactical formation switch changes USMNT’s fortunes against Argentina

USMNTHCS20110326014

Photo by Howard C. Smith/ISIphotos.com

By AVI CREDITOR

Ever since the World Cup, the script for Bob Bradley has been relatively the same.

Experiment with a five-man midfield. Revert to the more customary 4-4-2 formation for the second half. Watch the team's fortunes improve.

After starting with Michael Bradley and Jermaine Jones in holding roles and Maurice Edu in an advanced attacking role, Bob Bradley subbed off Jones at halftime for Juan Agudelo, pairing the New York Red Bull with Jozy Altidore up top.

The result was a more balanced second half in which the Americans maintained more possession, managed an equalizer and fought off Argentina's waves of attacks in a more efficient manner.

"When you look at the way they play, they don't only have four or five guys in the midfield," said Landon Donovan, who put in a bunch of time providing defensive cover throughout the night. "Sometimes they have six or seven. Sometimes a centerback comes into the midfield and plays. Their forwards are rarely up high, so they've got guys running all over the midfield. The idea was to make sure we had enough numbers in there to counter that."

The United States had plenty of numbers in the midfield and in the back, often having as many as eight players in the box, with Donovan acting as a makeshift fullback at times.

It didn't seem to matter. 

Lionel Messi, Angel di Maria and Ezequiel Lavezzi had their way in getting forward, picking apart the U.S. defense while the hosts looked to steal and dump as opposed to securing possession. 

Michael Bradley, Jones and Edu struggled to maintain shape in the center while feeling out their roles. Despite Jones having relative success and being the catalyst for the most dangerous counterattack the team had in the first half, the coaching staff recognized the need for a second forward to help bail out the defenders who were playing long balls to empty space scores of yards down the field.

"We didn't have enough going forward in the first half," Donovan said. "The change to bring Juan on was very good, and it gave us an opportunity to finally get out of our defensive end when we did have to play some balls forward."

With the four-man midfield, spacing was more even, midfielders and defenders had a better idea of where to position themselves on the field, and a more productive 45 minutes was the end result.

Even so, Bob Bradley didn't seem to hint that a permanent change to a 4-4-2 was in the cards, and he suggest that he's still into seeing the Bradley-Edu-Jones triumvirate through for a bit longer.

"Sometimes we're going to need to go in between both of those (formations)," left back and captain Carlos Bocanegra said. 'We started with a 4-5-1, a version of it anyway, then we went back to little bit more of a 4-4-2 in the second half, and it seemed like we had a few more outlets up front. We need to have the ability to bounce between both of those."

Added Altidore: "I think just for our team in general, whoever is playing up front, I think 4-4-2 we work better, but we've got to try different things, because I think we have a lot of very talented midfielders, so you've got to try and get everybody on the field."

——————

Which formation would you rather see for the USMNT, 4-4-2 or 4-5-1? Do you think Bradley should stick with one or continue to experiment?

Share your thoughts below.

Comments

  1. Either we play the hunted or we become the hunter! Ignorance comes in all shapes and forms. Let’s play and take it to them. Only Messi messed with us really. Great player but not having our guys really play is ignorant. Playing it safe is not a great game plan and that is all we did in the first half. We win by scoring goals, which is an offensive skill helped upon our defensive qualities but if we don’t take risks, goals will never come.

    Reply
  2. With Chandler,Agudello,Donovan,Dempsey,Altidore,you had a much more offensive USA.All of these players working together were able to go forward more and create some chances.They balanced the game more.The first half they were on their heels,always defending.

    Reply
  3. Holden isn’t a playmaker. He is a destroyer, like Bradley, only much better at it. He does make himself available for constant link up play with the forwards and defensive, he does get forward during the game for an occasional shot,… but he’s no Xavi.

    Reply
  4. Hopefully we can scrap the 4231 until we get Holden back. Bradley was supposedly the one with the attacking qualities of the three, which made playing Edu up farthest puzzling.

    That’s what makes the formation switch frustrating. When we didn’t have a second striking option it was 442, but now when we might have options up top we switch?

    Reply
  5. Altidore was frequently “lost” on the field, always tracking back to “help” the midfield. You cannot do this in a lone forward position. He also didn’t move around or get behind the defenders and then move up to keep them guessing about his whereabouts. In short, Altidore doesn’t yet know how to play the lone forward role. He frequently outpaced his support by moving up the filed too quickly and not letting the play build from behind. Yes, Donovan and Duece were doing a lot of defensive work, but when they had the ball, there was no outlet to Altidore because he was all to often out of position for a link up.

    Reply
  6. Connor Casey at least had experience playing the lone forward at Mainz. I am not sure the US has ANY forwards who are now capable of that role now that Brian McBride is retired.

    Reply
  7. Bradley had a solid game defensively in the second half, helping contain Messi, but his passing is still rough. In any case, there’s little question he’ll be starting in the middle, especially with Holden injured. Bob Bradley has to give the team a better chance of winning the Paraguay game, though, by starting Agudelo up top with Jozy. He’s shown he has the skill, poise and knack for scoring at this level and obviously isn’t phased by the high-pressure environment.

    People keep invoking the specter of Freddy Adu as a reason for holding him back, but his play speaks for itself, two goals and a drawn PK in his first three caps on the sr. U.S. team. And scored an impressive goal in his first MLS game this season. Given the need the U.S. has a the striker position, keeping one of the team’s best talents on the bench doesn’t make sense any longer.

    Reply
  8. A couple of points in response. I agree with you, Jack, Bradley played really well last night in tough circumstances; Messi runs around and past a lot of defensive midfielders, but Bradley often tracked back and made some nice plays, particularly in the second half. And yes, him playing well in the last World Cup still matters: that shows he can step up in big international matches.

    Bob is going to be faced with some difficult decisions: a 4-4-2 seems to be our best formation, so two of our really talented defensive midfielders are going to have to sit. Also, Jones has yet to show me that he should just be slotted in to central midfield. If you argue that Bradley is having problems at the club level, you have to do the same with Jones; he was cast off from his German club, and Blackburn is not exactly ripping the EPL apart right now.

    In conclusion, Charlie Davies almost died in a car accident and suffered physical and, most likely, mental trauma that a lot of people would never recover from. That is why he is not playing for the National Team at the moment. If he continues to play well for D.C. United, trust me, he will get another chance in the future.

    Reply
  9. I agree that they’re wasting their breath, but not because he was one of our best players at the World Cup (which he was). I don’t know if I was watching a different game from some of the commenters on here, but I thought that Bradley was the best out of the center midfield. Both Edu and Jones looked lost in the first half. Edu got better one we reverted back to the 4-4-2. You can complain all he want about nepotism, but he had some good tackles and was we needed out of a CDM last night.

    I thought that starting the 3 CDMs was also a bit odd, unless he meant for one of them to take on a more attacking role–which they didn’t. Also agree with your comments about Spector. Between Cherundolo, Chandler, and Lichaj, I just can’t see him getting a starting spot at RB for much longer. Chandler injected a lot of energy (the kid has a good burst of speed–I remember being impressed by how he powered down the right flank a few times), and Lichaj also is good on the attack and a solid defender. I would like to see Specs tried out in some other position, even if it’s just as a sub.

    Reply
  10. It was the same Argentina team in both halves of the game. We defended better in the 2nd half. We also kept more possession out of the back.. in the 2nd half. I think they are related. How is that a vacuum?

    Reply
  11. Villa actually has a really talented roster that is generally heavy on midfield types, so it comes as no surprise he hasn’t been able to crack the starting line-up yet. He came in with Makoun, Reo-Coker, Pires, and Captain Petrov all ahead of him in the pecking order. They are struggling because of a porous defense, squad discontentment, and poor tactics. Personally, I think Edu/Jones/Bradley are interchangeable and could care less which one or two starts.

    Reply
  12. Because MB was one of our best players at the world cup?? Like Adu was one of “THE” best players at the U-20 and U-23 world cup (first player to score a hat-trick in both competitions)?? Like CD9 proved to be one of our best no.9’s yet??? But I don’t see them on the pitch because of pass plays. The point is all that was passed glory and happened when….June 2010. So far he’s been benched by Gladbach and coming on as a second half sub when the club was trying to battle out of relegation….you are on loan to a club like Villa (that are in disarray) and you can’t even come on as a second half sub!! Adu had 11 appearances in the early stages for Benifica (2007-2008) and was told he needed more playing time and consistency. As the coach’s son without playing full 90 mins of a club for a while you are still a starter for the USMNT, going full 90 mins and are kept on the pitch over a player that, not only had a better first half with the failing 4-5-1 formation but is a major contributor and starter of a club in the EPL. Did I hear double standards?? I think so….

    Its not a matter of if Bradley played well because he had his moments, it is the fact that someone could have played his spot a lot better which jones prove he could but still got taken out.

    Reply
  13. What a surprise, the “Bradley nepotism” knives are out in force. I don’t think the result would have changed that at all. The fact is Jones apart from one or two moments did NOT have a better first half than Bradley, and once the switch to the 4-4-2 was made Bradley looked better in the second half. I think we could beat Brail 4-0 with Bradley getting all the goals and there would still be whiny Bradley haters flapping their gums.

    Reply
  14. It makes no sense to say Agudelo would be better than Jozy in a 4-5-1. That’s pure insanity. You need a target player in that formation and Jozy is miles ahead of Juan in that regard. Juan is NOT a target forward. It isn’t the ideal role for Jozy either but he has the size, strength, turn moves and body control to vause problems for defenders in that role. Juan would be helpless as a lone target. That’s not his forte and a waste of his talents. I am not sure what you expect Jozy to do with 3 guys draped all over him and no support in sight. I thought he did as well as can be expected in the firsr half and was extremely danherous in the second. The only weaknesses in jozy’s game are workrate and finishing at pace.

    Reply
  15. People arguing for a midfield not containing Michael Bradley are wasting their breath. One, Bob is going to start him in the big matches. Two, he deserves to start, considering he was one of our best players at the World Cup. The only thing I would argue is that Bob runs the poor man into the ground; we have the depth and options to NOT have to start him every match and NOT have to play him the full 90 every time out, even without Holden.

    Another point about the 4-5-1 that Bob experiments with. I wonder if it sends the wrong message to the team. There is only one reason why you start three defensive midfielders and one forward: you seem to be praying that you can weather a storm. The only problem is, there is no outlet for the constant pressure, and the whole machine eventually falls apart. Also, when the passing out of the back four was as bad as it was for us in the first half, disaster is imminent.

    Finally, people talk mostly about Agudelo, but I think Chandler made a bigger impact on the game. Spector was not necessarily awful, but he did not bring the tools to the match that Chandler did; the entire attacking dynamic was changed in the second half because of him. Honestly, I would like to see Spector tried in the center of the park, either as a defensive mid or a central defender; otherwise, he is now obsolete.

    Reply
  16. I’ve been quick to criticize Altidore over the last several months too, but I have to agree with mike. Jozy’s options were severely limited each time he got the ball. Plus, he looked much better in the second half, and even set up a potential goal-scoring opportunity will a nice chip pass into the box.

    Reply
  17. Jones will be suspended after the second match. He is a yellow/red card waiting to happen. He picks them up at an astounding rate.

    Reply
  18. I think Agudelo actually showed more discipline in his decision-making than Altidore. When Altidore received the service and was out-numbered, what did he do? Put his head down and try to out-run or run-over the opposition. Agudelo would pick up his head and knew when to hold the ball for support.

    Reply
  19. A 451 is still worth experimenting with, especially once holden is fit. But realistically, our central midfield talent is redundant.

    Holden, jones, edu and bradley are excellent players, but they’re all at their best in a 442. A lot of folk on the board have annointed holden the “creative playmaker,” but he’s never played that role for club or country.

    Reply
  20. If any of you bothered to watch the EPL games in which our mids featured, you would know that the obvious choice for attacking mid is SPECTOR. Yes he is a defensive liability and a poor choice for R back, but it’s quite obvious how much he enjoys going forward and how good his late runs are. Bradley, Edu, and Jones are very defensive and easily interchangeable. Watch his West Ham games this year.

    Reply
  21. Up until halftime, Bradley was playing better than both Edu and Jones. I completely understand the decision to substitute Jones, and he could just as easily subbed off Edu. But this wasn’t a case of nepotism. Bradley’s work rate exceeded that of his counterparts, even if his passing didn’t.

    Reply
  22. Sorry but the 4-2-3-1 has been a disaster every time we try. Donovan and Dempsey are pushed back too far defensively trying to help cover the overrun fullbacks, and cannot transition to offense fast enough. But the biggest problem is we have no one on the roster capable of playing the attacking center mid. And honestly we are deluding ourselves if we think Holden can magically change this into a winning formation. Sorry, but has anyone watched him play with Bolton? He plays the DEFENSIVE centermid, and plays it damn well, better than our other options there really. But he is not a playmaking CAM or center forward! Furthermore we don’t have a striker capable of the hold-up role. It’s really tragic how Jozy is so misused in our system, he needs SOMEONE ELSE to be the hold-up man in order to be effective.

    If Bob keeps using these same players, then its back to the 4-4-2 or get embarrassed like the first half last night. To have a real chance with the 4-2-3-1, new players will have to be brought in the system, ones that are creative, attack-minded, and possession-oriented.

    Reply
  23. Does it not occur to anyone that this was a tactical choice. Absorb pressure get the other side complacent then add offense?

    Reply
  24. The formation should be 4-4-2 with or without Holden. I’m not sure where the notion of Holden being a fulcrum of the attack comes from. He goes from box to box winning balls and providing link-up play very well. He does that well at Bolton, but they traditionally play a 4-4-2 and recently it morphs into a 4-3-3 when they play Elmander out wide.
    Also, I don’t understand why BB feels it necessary to try to cram the “best” players into an alignment the players are clearly uncomfortable with. So what if 2 of Edu/Bradley/Jones end up on the bench. Furthermore, I don’t think Edu,Bradley, and Jones are all that good and playing them together just makes it all the more noticeable.

    Reply
  25. This is whiny twaddle that is completely ignorant of context. We were not out there scrimmaging our B team out there, we were playing a team that lives in the top 5 rankings of the world year in and year out, who also happens tobave the most potent attackingplayer since Pele in their starting lineup. Seriously, stop being so ignorant.

    Reply
  26. The reason we were defending so much was because it was ARGENTINA. Honestly, so many of these posts are written in a vacuum.

    Reply
  27. I still want to know why Jones was the one subbed off. The article’s reasoning isn’t sound. Jones was the “catalyst” for the one attack we had in the first half and had “relative success”, but still gets subbed. While Edu looked lost in his more advanced position. Makes no sense. We did fine without him, but honestly, I’m not sold on Edu. Jones has bite, and we are going to need that in the Gold Cup.

    Reply
  28. Unless you mean having Dempsey as a withdrawn forward in the formation and Jones as a true DM, that won’t work. Dempsey is not a CM.

    Reply
  29. I’d like to see Benny or Sacha there. Or I move LD or Deuce there. Both have played the position before and move Chandler to the wing. He looked like his skill set would be better served in the midfield. But I wouldn’t be upset if Spector was used there – I agree with your thinking.

    Reply
  30. I disagree. Bradley looked good in the second half. He did well to track Messi on several occasions. And, I thought Edu looked lost in the first half (I know he was playing out of position), and Jones looked solid and tried to keep shape and account for Bradley’s rovering style.

    Reply
  31. 4-5-1 with Holden or more attacking midfielder paired with 2 of the three CMs from last night and (I can’t believe I’m saying this) Agudelo up top. Jozy, who I have no problem with by the way, is not a lone striker. Juan can be more dangerous using his speed to get all over the pitch as the lone runner.

    Jozy seems to thrive playing next to guys like Charlie and Juan. He turns into the player we all want to see – dynamic and confident. If we are going to commit to the 4-5-1 then Jozy’s role should be the guy off the bench to provide more offense by pairing him with another forward or subbing in for the other forward to play a more of a hold up possession type forward to kill of games.

    Really want to see more of Chandler. Sehr gut gemacht!!!

    Reply
  32. Very insightful post. Something else nobody here has noted is that Dempsey was so totally gassed in the second half that he should have been subbed out. I was at the game, sitting 12 seats up from the midfield line. Dempsey was right in front of me most of the half, and he spent the majority of it walking around like a slug. Also, he really blew his one goal scoring chance in the first half…too many touches before shooting.

    Reply
  33. IF Bob Bradley wants to keep looking at a 4-2-3-1 vs. Paraguay:

    Jonathan Spector does pretty well for West Ham in the role Edu played in the first half. Maybe a Bradley-Jones or Edu-Spector midfield vs. Paraguay? Hell, I’d like to see a Jones-Edu-Spector midfield…not likely to happen, though.

    Reply
  34. I thought that, up to halftime, Michael Bradley and Edu had played better than Jones. So, based solely on performance in the first half, it made sense to pull Jones rather than Bradley.

    After halftime, Bradley made some very strange decisions which I attribute to fatigue–he isn’t getting club games, so his fitness isn’t what it should be.

    Reply
  35. I hear what you’re saying, Matt. But the US was just so much better when they changed formation and were able to attack. The first half was dreadful. It is a friendly, after all, so why not try to show the US can play?

    A few observations: Chandler was quite good and made a real difference on that wing. Gooch scares me anytime the ball is near his feet. Agudelo’s movement off the ball is as impressive as his other skills.

    And NJ transit is a joke. 2-1/2 hours to get to Brooklyn via their “more convenient and efficient” light rail system. All these years of big crowds going to the Meadowlands and they still don’t know what they’re doing.

    Reply
  36. I think even though BB started with the 4-5-1 and we spent most of the time chasing the ball it did show one thing…..that our back line stood up to the best team in the world!!!! The second half doesnt really show the character of our D like the first half (when it was raining light blue and white) because the pressure wasn’t as one sided.

    The plays seemed sloppy and they appeared to be scrambling for the most part but after the first half the score was only ARG 1 and US 0.

    We all know for a fact our back 4 have been battle tested against a fiercesome attack lead by Messi(and only conceded a goal), we all know Chandler has the speed and ball control to play at the highest level(imagine the constant pressure if he didnt have to track all the way back to RB), we know now that the 4-4-2 formation is good, even against a power house like Argentina, we all know Jones had a relatively successful first half, like IVES said, when things were at there worst, we all saw Altidore become a better player with Agudelo playing up top and that attack was affective against Argentina.

    you put all that DATA together and it reads:

    ———–ALTIDORE———AGUDELO———

    –DONOVAN—-JONES——DEMPSEY—CHANDLER–

    —-BORA—GOOCH——-DEMERIT—-SPECTOR—

    —————–HOWARD———————

    Reply

Leave a Comment