The Ultimate Defensive Structure
I’ve been researching for a fair amount of time looking at what is the best defensive structure to implement when coaching a team. My first point of action was looking at how the best managers in the world set their teams out when they don’t have the ball.
José Mourinho and Diego Simeone were two managers that sprung into mind. Both are elite managers, who specialise their defensive structures within their respective teams. Mourinho, has been renowned for “parking the bus” — which is basically just defending deep in a tight and compact block. Whereas Simeone, has really made a name for himself over the last 6–7 years.
There’s certainly some very clear similarities between the two’s style but one common element, is their choice of system when defending; the 4–4–2. Who would’ve thought, that the most traditional system in football would be able to stop modern systems from excelling in the attacking phase.
When I looked at how both used the 4–4–2 when defending, I analysed two key matches were both coaches found this system to work perfectly for them; for Mourinho it was the 0–0 draw against Liverpool in the 2017/18 season with Manchester United and for Simeone it was Atletico Madrid’s 2–0 victory over Juventus in the first leg of the Round of 16 in the Champions League in the 2018/19 season.
Below are some of my notes, which I will then collate into my final points as to how a 4–4–2 defensive structure is one of the best in modern football right now.
Liverpool 0–0 Manchester United
United lined up in a 4–2–3–1 on paper but shifted to a 4–4–2 without the ball. Here, Mourinho was particularly clever, as he allowed Liverpool to have the ball, as the home side had 63% possession. This was done on purpose, as he wanted to frustrate Liverpool’s ability to build possession or create meaningful chances.
This screening process was a consistency throughout the match, which really slowed Liverpool’s play down.
United would also look to crowd space in the middle, particularly when the ball was circulated out wide. This way, influential players like Coutinho can’t have space and time on the ball, nor can they create any real chances.
This process made progression really frustrating for Liverpool but easy for United to defend against. There were many occasions where Liverpool were forced to undertake predictable ball progressions in order to try and make a dent in United’s defensive shape.
Liverpool would at times resort to shots from distance, as Mourinho instructed his wingers to drop back and create a back 6, a common element from his “park the bus” strategy.
Also, United wouldn’t shy away from making fouls in order to stop Liverpool but also to halt momentum and frustrate Liverpool even more. Manchester United conceded 13 fouls to Liverpool’s 7, but in many occasions as stated before, this would halt Liverpool from creating any dangerous actions.
Overall, United’s 4–4–2 structure was excellent. Liverpool have a lot of attacking threat from many angles, however the fact that they were restricted to just 5 shots on target from 19, proves how successful Mourinho’s shape was in preventing Liverpool from getting anything meaningful from this game.
Atletico Madrid 2–0 Juventus
The Colchoneros lined up in their usual 4–4–2 system and again, as usual in big games, they chose to have less of the ball by defending for prolonged periods of time and then exploiting space on the transition.
Juventus struggled to break down the home side, despite having 63% of possession. Through Atletico Madrid defending in their medium block, as well as their staggering of defensive lines, it created a structure which Juventus had limited options to bypass it.
When they pressed the ball, most of the time, it would be very aggressive in wide areas as the ball is being played. The midfielders were very proactive in their shape, and often would anticipate a pass being played to a Juventus player, where they would step out to press.
Another interesting point, was the positioning of Koke and the support of the other Atletico Madrid midfielders during the pressing action. Koke could press at speed in the direction of Bentancur, as he had the full confidence of his midfielders to provide sufficient depth and cover behind him.
A key feature of this match, was for the majority, Atletico Madrid were not passive with their press and positioning. They defended with ultimate focus and concentration, as they kept their shape and reduced the Bianconeri to just 2 shots on target, from a total of 14 attempts.
Conclusion
Despite my sample size being quite small of two games, what was clear in both was the teams not conceding any goals. However, what made up this fact was the positioning, movement and ultimately the proactivity present within the teams.
Rarely would there be any passive actions from either side, as both Manchester United and Atletico Madrid defended with a lot of intensity and energy to deny any meaningful chances created from their respective opposition.
Therefore, if a team was to use a 4–4–2 system when defending, as long as the team is proactive, focussed and athletic, the system will most likely result in minimal meaningful chances created by an attacking opposition.