🔗 Share this article

Some encounters seem out of place. Perhaps it’s just about imaginable that, had things gone a bit otherwise in the 70s, Malcolm Allison could have been coaching their team beyond the Iron Curtain for a shot against Valeriy Lobanovskyi’s tactical masterminds, but Dynamo Kyiv against Crystal Palace is still a fixture that elicits a double-take. It feels like a category error: how can those teams even be in the identical tournament?

However this is the modern era. Ukraine is battling invasion, its teams diminished. The Premier League is extremely wealthy. And Crystal Palace are coached by among the rising talents of the European game. They didn’t just play each other on Thursday, but they won with a notable comfort. It was their third straight win, their 19th straight game without defeat.

Managerial Speculation and Next Steps

And so, because no mid-size club can even just be permitted to savor a good run, all the talk is of where Oliver Glasner could go next. His deal ends at the end of the season and he has refused to agree to an renewal. He is 51; if he is going to take over a top club with the possibility of an extended tenure in command, he doesn’t have a huge amount of time to secure a transition. Might he then be the answer for Manchester United? He indeed, after all, play the identical 3-4-2-1 as the Sporting coach, just significantly more effectively.

Strategic Formation and Cultural Context

Which raises the issue of why a system that has drawn so much scepticism at Old Trafford functions so effectively at Selhurst Park. But it’s never just about the setup, nor is it the situation – generally speaking – that one formation is inherently better than a different one. Rather specific tactical shapes, in conjunction with the style they are enacted, emphasize particular elements of the game. It is, at the very least, fascinating that since the manager’s Toffees claimed the title in the 1962-63 season with a W-M, only one side has secured the Premier League using with a back three: Antonio Conte’s Chelsea in 2016-17.

The former Chelsea manager’s Chelsea won the title in that season with a back three and effectively two No 10s.

Even that was something of a black swan occurrence. Chelsea that season had no European football, allowing them more rested than their competitors, and they had players who fit the formation virtually freakishly perfectly.

The French midfielder, with his stamina and reading of the play, is practically a duo in one, and he was functioning at the back of the engine room together with either steadying presence of Cesc Fàbregas and Cesc Fàbregas, one of the most penetrating passers the division has seen. That offered the foundation for the two No 10s: the Belgian wizard, who thrived in his unrestricted position, and the Spanish forward, a expert of the run into the box. Each of those individuals was enhanced by their partnership with the others.

Cultural Reasons and Strategic Difficulties

To an extent, the relative lack of titles for the back three, at least in terms of winning titles, is cultural. Not many teams have secured the league playing a 3-4-2-1 because few clubs have adopted a three-at-the-back system. The global tournament victory in 1966 cemented in the English football consciousness the efficacy of zonal marking with a back four.

This remained the standard, nearly without question, for the two decades that ensued. But there could additionally be particular tactical reasons. A back three gets its width from the wide players; it may be that the intense high-energy nature of the British game makes the demand on those individuals too great to be undertaken consistently.

However the system presents particular challenges. It is stable, providing the trapezoid defensive shape – three center-backs protected by defensive midfielders – that is commonly recognised as the most efficient way to defend against rival fast breaks. But that is only one phase of the match. If they advance too far from the protection of the triple centre‑backs, considering the prevalence of formations with a central trio, two central midfielders will tend to be outnumbered without backup from other areas – except if one of them has the outstanding gifts of the French dynamo.

The striker rejoices after netting his side’s additional strike against Dynamo Kyiv.

Advantages and Weaknesses of the Approach

The very stability of that tight defensive shape, additionally, although an benefit for a side aiming to absorb pressure, turns into a possible drawback for a side that seek to take the game to the rival. Its biggest strength is also its primary weakness. The blockish nature of the system, the way the midfield is divided into holders and creators – all No 6s and attacking mids in current parlance, with no No 8s – means that without a player to move between lines there is a danger of predictability; once more, Chelsea had the perfect man to do that, David Luiz often advancing forward from the defense to act as an extra midfield option.

Contrasting Styles at Selhurst and Old Trafford

Crystal Palace aren’t concerned about possession. They have the second-lowest ball control of any teams in the Premier League. It’s not at all their role to have the ball. And that’s the primary explanation why a direct contrast with United’s difficulties is challenging. The Red Devils, by history and by expectation, can not be the team with the second-worst ball retention in the league.

Even if they opted to counterattack against other elite clubs, the majority of their games will be against opponents who defend deeply and could be happy enough with a draw. In most fixtures there is an onus on them to dominate the ball.

Maybe a attacking-minded team can adopt a 3-4-2-1 but it requires extremely specific personnel – as the Italian coach possessed at Chelsea. The Austrian’s success with it has come at Wolfsburg and the German clubs, where he has been in a position to have his team sit deep and break at speed.

Palace have defeated West Ham and Aston Villa, because the majority of sides struggle at the moment, held the Blues, and ripped Liverpool apart on the counter. But they’ve also tied at home to Sunderland and Nottingham Forest, and struggled to overcome Fredrikstad. Sit deep against Palace and they struggle for invention.

Adaptation and Future Scenarios

Would Glasner adjust were he to go