🔗 Share this article

Some fixtures seem out of place. Maybe it’s almost conceivable that, had things gone a bit otherwise in the 1970s, Malcolm Allison could have been leading their side beyond the Iron Curtain for a crack at the legendary cybernauts, but a match between Dynamo Kyiv and Crystal Palace remains a fixture that elicits a second look. It feels like a mismatch: how is it possible that those teams even be in the same competition?

However this is the contemporary world. Ukraine is battling invasion, its sides weakened. The English top flight is incredibly wealthy. And the Eagles are coached by one of the rising talents of the European game. They didn’t just face off on Thursday, but they won with a degree of comfort. It was their third straight win, their 19th consecutive game without defeat.

Coaching Rumors and Future Steps

And so, because no mid-size club can simply be permitted to enjoy a good run, all the discussion is of where Oliver Glasner might move to. His contract expires at the conclusion of the season and he has refused to sign an extension. He is fifty-one; if he is going to lead a major team with the chance of an long tenure in charge, he lacks a huge amount of time to make a transition. Might he then be the answer for Manchester United? He indeed, ultimately, play the same 3-4-2-1 as the Sporting coach, just rather more successfully.

Tactical System and Historical Background

Which brings up the question of why a approach that has attracted so much doubt at Old Trafford works so well at Palace. But it’s not just about the formation, nor is it the case – within reason – that a specific system is inherently better than a different one. Instead certain tactical shapes, in conjunction with the style they are enacted, emphasize certain aspects of the game. It is, at the minimum, fascinating that since the manager’s Everton claimed the championship in 1962-63 with a W-M, just a single team has won the Premier League playing with a three-man defense: the Italian’s Chelsea in the 2016-17 season.

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

That success was a bit of a black swan occurrence. Chelsea that campaign had no continental commitments, keeping them fresher than their competitors, and they had players who fit the formation almost freakishly 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 the steadying presence of Cesc Fàbregas and Cesc Fàbregas, among the most penetrating playmakers the Premier League has seen. That provided the platform for the dual playmakers: Eden Hazard, who revelled in his free role, and the Spanish forward, a expert of the dart into the penalty area. Every one of those individuals was improved by their partnership with the teammates.

Systemic Reasons and Strategic Challenges

Partly, the relative lack of titles for the three-man defense, at minimum in terms of winning championships, is cultural. Few teams have secured the league using a back three because not many sides have adopted a three-at-the-back system. The World Cup win in the 1960s cemented in the national mindset the efficacy of defensive organization with a back four.

That remained the default, almost without challenge, for the two decades that ensued. But there may additionally be particular tactical reasons. A three-man backline derives its width from the wingbacks; it could be that the extreme high-energy nature of the English football makes the demand on those players excessive to be undertaken regularly.

However the system poses specific challenges. It is solid, providing the compact defensive shape – a trio of center-backs shielded by two holders – that is commonly acknowledged as the most effective way to defend against rival counterattacks. But that is just a single aspect of the game. If they push too far from the protection of the three centre‑backs, considering the common use of setups with a midfield triangle, a pair of central midfielders will often be outnumbered without support from other areas – unless one of them has the outstanding gifts of the French dynamo.

The striker celebrates after netting his side’s additional strike versus the Ukrainian side.

Advantages and Weaknesses of the System

The inherent stability of that tight defensive block, meanwhile, while an benefit for a side aiming to withstand pressure, becomes a possible drawback for a team that seek to go on the offensive to the rival. Its biggest asset is simultaneously its greatest flaw. The rigid structure of the system, the way the midfield is divided into holders and attack-minded players – all defensive mids and No 10s in current terminology, with zero box-to-box midfielders – means that without a individual to move across bands there is a risk of predictability; again, the Blues had the ideal man to fill that role, David Luiz frequently striding forward from the back three to become an additional midfield presence.

Divergent Styles at Palace and United

Crystal Palace don’t care about that. They have the second-least ball control of any side in the Premier League. It’s not their role to have the ball. And that’s the primary reason why a direct comparison with Manchester United’s struggles is challenging. The Red Devils, by tradition and by expectation, can not be the team with the second-lowest ball retention in the league.

Although United chose to play on the break against opposing elite sides, most of their games 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 control the play.

Maybe a progressive team could adopt a three-at-the-back system but it demands very particular personnel – as the Italian coach had at Chelsea. The Austrian’s achievement with it has come at Lask and the German clubs, where he has been able to have his team sit deep and break at speed.

They have beaten Aston Villa and Aston Villa, because the majority of teams struggle at the moment, frustrated the Blues, and ripped Liverpool to pieces on the counter. But they’ve also tied at Selhurst Park to Nottingham Forest and Nottingham Forest, and found it hard to overcome the Norwegian side. Defend deeply against them and they have difficulty for invention.

Adaptation and Future Scenarios

Would Glasner adapt were he to go