🔗 Share this article

Some encounters just don’t sound right. Perhaps it’s almost imaginable that, had things gone slightly differently in the 1970s, Terry Venables or another manager coaching their side beyond the Iron Curtain for a shot against 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 can those two clubs even be in the identical competition?

However this is the contemporary world. Ukraine is fighting conflict, its teams weakened. The English top flight is incredibly rich. And Crystal Palace are coached by one of the rising stars of the continental game. They didn’t just face off on Thursday, but they won with a degree of ease. It was their third consecutive victory, their 19th consecutive game without loss.

Coaching Rumors and Next Moves

Therefore, because no mid-size club can simply be allowed to enjoy a good run, all the talk is of where the Austrian manager might move to. His deal ends at the end of the campaign and he has declined to agree to an renewal. He is fifty-one; if he is planning to take over a major team with the chance of an long spell in command, he lacks a great deal of opportunity to secure a move. Might he then be the answer for Manchester United? He indeed, after all, utilize the same 3-4-2-1 as the Sporting coach, just significantly more successfully.

Strategic System and Historical Background

Which brings up the issue of the reason a system that has drawn so much scepticism at United works so well at Palace. But it’s not only about the setup, nor is it the situation – generally speaking – that a specific system is intrinsically superior than a different one. Instead certain formations, in combination with the manner they are implemented, prioritise certain aspects of play. It is, at the very least, fascinating that since the manager’s Everton won the championship in the 1962-63 season with a W-M formation, just a single team has secured the English league title using with a back three: Antonio Conte’s Chelsea in the 2016-17 season.

The former Chelsea manager’s team clinched the championship in that season with a three defenders and effectively two attacking midfielders.

That success was something of a black swan occurrence. The London club that season had no continental commitments, keeping them more rested than their competitors, and they had players who suited the system virtually remarkably perfectly.

N’Golo Kanté, with his endurance and reading of the play, is practically a duo in one, and he was operating at the back of midfield together with the calming influence of Cesc Fàbregas and Nemanja Matic, among the most penetrating passers the division has seen. That offered the foundation for the dual playmakers: the Belgian wizard, who revelled in his unrestricted position, and Pedro, a expert of the run into the box. Each of those players was improved by their partnership with the teammates.

Systemic Factors and Tactical Difficulties

To an extent, the relative absence of titles for the back three, at minimum in terms of winning championships, is systemic. Not many teams have won the title playing a back three because not many clubs have adopted a three-at-the-back system. The global tournament victory in the 1960s reified in the national mindset the efficacy of zonal marking with a back four.

This remained the default, almost without question, for the two decades that followed. But there may also be particular tactical explanations. A back three derives its width from the wide players; it could be that the extreme high-energy nature of the English football makes the demand on those players excessive to be maintained regularly.

But the 3-4-2-1 poses specific difficulties. It is stable, providing the compact structure – three center-backs shielded by two holders – that is widely acknowledged as the most efficient way to guard against opposition fast breaks. But that is only one aspect of the game. If they push forward from the cover of the three defenders, considering the prevalence of setups with a midfield triangle, two central midfielders will tend to be outnumbered without backup from elsewhere – except if a single player has the outstanding abilities of the French dynamo.

Eddie Nketiah celebrates after netting his team’s second strike versus Dynamo Kyiv.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach

The inherent stability of that tight 3-2 shape, meanwhile, although an benefit for a side looking to absorb pressure, becomes a possible drawback for a side that seek to go on the offensive to the opposition. Its biggest asset is simultaneously its greatest weakness. The rigid structure of the system, the way the center is split into defensive players and attack-minded players – all No 6s and No 10s in current terminology, with zero No 8s – means that without a player to step between bands there is a risk of predictability; again, the Blues had the ideal man to do that, the Brazilian defender often advancing forward from the back three to become an additional midfield option.

Divergent Styles at Palace and United

Palace aren’t concerned about that. They have the second-lowest possession of any teams in the Premier League. It’s not their role to have the possession. And that is the primary explanation why a direct contrast with Manchester United’s struggles is difficult. The Red Devils, by tradition and by expectation, can not be the team with the second-lowest ball retention in the Premier League.

Even if United opted to play on the break against other top clubs, most of their games will be against opponents who defend deeply and could be content enough with a draw. In most games there is an pressure on them to dominate the ball.

Maybe a attacking-minded team can play a 3-4-2-1 but it requires very particular personnel – as Conte had at Stamford Bridge. The Austrian’s achievement with it has come at Lask and Eintracht Frankfurt, where he has been in a position to have his side sit deep and attack at speed.

They have beaten West Ham and West Ham, because most sides struggle at the moment, held the Blues, and ripped the Reds apart on the counter. But they’ve also tied at Selhurst Park to Sunderland and Nottingham Forest, and found it hard to overcome the Norwegian side. Defend deeply against Palace and they struggle for invention.

Adjustment and Future Scenarios

Could the manager adjust were he to go