The 4-4-2 diamond formation is a shape which hasn’t been used so frequently, particularly in recent times for a number of reasons. In this analysis I will aim to pick out certain features in this formation as well as taking a closer look at the variations it holds.
Out of Possession
One of the strengths of the 4-4-2 diamond formation is the variation it offers, this is no different in terms of defensive structure. The formation has two different systems which are the most commonly used. The first of these which I will look at is a flat 4-4-2, while the second relies on remaining in the standard diamond shape.
The flat 4-4-2 shape in defense is one which we are seeing used more commonly across Europe, following a few years long trend of avoiding the shape as it was seen to be incompetent in defending the centre of the field. Ways to combat possible overloads in the centre have been developed and enhanced though, two recent examples of this being a successful method is Diego Simeone’s Atletico Madrid and Claudio Ranieri’s Leicester. The way to defend the centre is to play as narrow as possible, to restrict space and block passing lines into otherwise vulnerable areas.
When defending in the flat 4-4-2, it is possible to press high up the field or as seen more often, defend in a deep block, with a focus on compactness. When defending in the flat 4-4-2, it requires the player at the tip of the diamond to have good physicality as he will have to retreat from his 10 position into 8 or even 6 to defend. This was an aspect of Arturo Vidal’s game which was excellent and allowed him to play this position very well in his final season at Juventus.
One team which excelled defending in a deep block with the flat 4-4-2 was Juventus under Antonio Conte in the 2014/15 season. Below we can see them defending in a deep, horizontally and vertically compact flat 4-4-2.
The second defensive shape is a diamond. This shape rarely changes from the standard 4-4-2 diamond which has both it’s positives and it’s negatives.
One of the main downsides to defending in this system is that it can be difficult to maintain vertical compactness due to the midfield being staggered. This leaves space either side of the 6 and sometimes the 10. These spaces can be very dangerous as the space left either side of the 6 can be exploited by the opposition 10, who then has the ball in a halfspace, the most dangerous area for a creative player to have the ball. Space either side of the 10 is dangerous too, as it allows opposition centre-backs to move into midfield to create an overload in build-up, also these areas are easy to penetrate from, meaning a deep midfielder, who can penetrate lines relatively well has lots of space to do this from. Another weakness of this system is that unless the strikers move many metres away from the position they are most dangerous in, the opposition full-backs have lots of time and space in build-ups. Although building through the full-backs is not the most effective method, if they have so much time and space to carry the ball forward easily, they are probably your best option in that situation.
Despite there being a couple of problems, there are positives to this system. Although there were some problems in the wide areas when the opposition are building-up, when defending the wide areas in your own half, there is more success. Due to the shuttlers primarily defending the halfspace they are in a good position to back-up the full-back when an opposition player is in possession on the wing. Liverpool used this method in the 2013/14 season, here is an example below of Jordan Henderson- the right shuttler, defending the halfspace while Jon Flanagan- the right-back defends the wing.
This is very useful for cross prevention as if the winger is defended well enough on the wing, and forced to beat the full-back on the wing, the shuttler can then easily press the ball. Having a player in the halfspace is also very effective in preventing cutbacks.
There are obviously many other possibilities when defending, though far too many to cover all of them, therefore I have covered the two most common. Other possibilities include a 4-3-3, where the strikers defend the wings/halfspaces and the 10 pushes forward to press the centre-backs. Similarly a 4-3-3-0 can be used, where the strikers drop in line with the 10 and defend narrowly. This is very useful in limiting the opposition space in the second line of build-up.
In the Build-Up Phase
One of the most exciting features of the 4-4-2 diamond formation is the variability it offers in the build-up phase. This is largely down to having a single pivot and a 10, two players whose movements make build-ups very smooth if intelligent.
Due to having two 8’s ahead of him, the pivot is free to move almost anywhere within the first two lines of build-up, as the central zones will always have at least two players occupying them. One possibility in the build-up is for the pivot to drop between the centre-backs. By doing so, he offers stability in the backline which then allows both full-backs to move into more advanced areas, perhaps in line with the shuttlers, which then gives the back-three lots of space to build as the two centre-backs will split and move into the halfspaces. This will create a shape not too dissimilar to a 3-4-1-2, a very flexible formation. There are lots of possible variations from here, depending on movement, mostly by the 8’s.
For example here is one possible system focused around the 3-4-1-2.
We can see here that if the pivot moves a few metres to the left, this would open space for the RCM to drop into the first line of the build-up. If the 10 then took up an 8 position, this would create a very stable 4-4-2. By dropping players into deeper lines in the build-up, this may disorientate the opposition press and open lots of space in behind their first line of pressure, especially if they are man-orientated.
This positional play is very alike to that of Barcelona under Pep Guardiola.
Another possibility in the build-up is to create a 4-2-2-2. This is a very realistic idea and one that could be moved into without too much difficulty. The 4-2-2-2 would be focused on penetration from deep, particularly the centre-backs, meaning you need a particular type of centre-back, one who can play laser passes. Examples of this are Hummels, Boateng and Sakho. In this shape it is very important that players move intelligently as vertical passing lanes must be open from the centre-backs.
In this image we can see how intelligent movement by the RCM has opened a passing lane to the 10 who has shifted a few metres to his right. This image also shows that this 4-2-2-2 has potential to be very effective against a high-pressing lone striker. This is due to the striker having to arc his run to block a pass to the LCB or 6, meaning he isn’t able to block the lane when pressing. This gives the blue team access to the 10 space by breaking the lines as well as the option for a lay-off pass to the RCM if he moves forward with the pass.
Despite the 4-2-2-2 seeming very effective against a lone striker, perhaps in a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, a team who are horizontally compact and close passing lanes well may not be so easy to penetrate. A 4-4-2-0 with narrow wide midfielders would be extremely hard to penetrate through as passing lanes in the halfspaces would be closed by the wide midfielder and centre-midfielder having so little distance between them.
Another downside to the 4-2-2-2 is that due to it relying on quick movement with almost perfect timing, if the movement wasn’t made correctly, a player(most likely a full-back)could be isolated without any passing options with a high possibility of being caught in possession. We can see how this may occur below.
In the scenario above, the RCM and/or the 10 have not moved close enough to the full-back quickly enough. This has allowed a well organised opponent to spring into a pressing trap with the full-back now at a high risk of losing the ball. This shows that if the team doesn’t have players who can move intelligently, the 4-2-2-2 will be pretty ineffective in possession.
Attacking Play in the Final Third
In attack, the team must make up for the lack of natural width by moving into areas which open up space for others. If there isn’t enough movement by the front five, the pitch will become congested and there will be no room for the creative players to create chances.
One common pattern we see from a 4-4-2 diamond formation in attack is for the two strikers to drift into wider areas, opening up space for the attacking midfielder to surge forward, often into the box.
This method requires three players it’s the correct skillsets to play these roles however. The two forwards, who will be drifting wide must be very mobile with a bit of pace, as well as having good link-up play and being an attacker who is intelligent, particularly with his movement. The false 10 must be quick and able to time his runs very well, having good shooting is also a bonus for him.
One team who used this tactic with some success is Liverpool under Brendan Rodgers in the 13/14 season. With Sturridge, Suarez and Sterling, Liverpool had three players who perfectly fitted the three forward roles. More recently, Lyon used this approach with Lacazette, Benzia/Ghezzal and Fekir, also three ideal player profiles.
A second option which is possible if the 10 is mobile and positionally flexible is for the 10 to make lateral movements onto the halfspaces and wings, to create overloads with the full-backs.
This can be useful as quick movements towards the flanks by the 10 can be difficult to track meaning he or the full-back may get a lot of space. There are downsides though, as due to the 10 spending a lot of time away from the centre, his full skillset isn’t taken full use of, as he will be more reliant on pace and being very direct with ball, rather than playing intricate passing, dictating the play, which is what he’d be able to do in the centre. Mesut Özil excelled in this role while at Werder Bremen, while Spain have experimented similarly with Juan Mata, though with far less success.
The third and final offensive variation allows the shuttlers to live up to their name. This method sees the two outer centre-mids(also known as shuttlers)move into wide areas depending on the side the ball is on. By moving onto the wing, this make the shuttler the main provider of width. This tactic, like any other, has both it’s strengths and weaknesses. One strength is that it can allow the team to be very strong defensively, as the full-backs don’t need to push up so far to provide width. This tactic also makes the team very strong on the counter attack as either shuttler has the freedom to simply drift wide and stretch the opposition’s bare defence.
One possible weakness is dependent on the tactical awareness of the shuttlers. If both shuttlers move onto the flanks this has a negative impact both offensively and defensively. Firstly I will speak about the negative impact it has in attack.
If both shuttlers drift wide when a central player is in deep possession, this means no one is occupying two of the most valuable spaces(either halfspace in the middle third)on the pitch. With no one occupying the halfspaces, this makes penetration very difficult as the ball would have to travel a long distance to reach the strikers, almost impossible without playing a long ball. Without being able to play any effective vertical passes, the team are then forced to play horizontally and build through the ful-backs. Here is a very relevant quote by the great Johan Cruyff on why this is not ideal.
As well as having a negative impact offensively, the shuttlers moving wide can potentially have a bad affect defensively as well. Again, if both shuttlers incorrectly move wide, this means they are further away from ‘base’. This means if their team lose the ball they have a long distance to cover to get back into their defensive position. This can also leave the pivot exposed and often overloaded, which is a very dangerous situation.
Again, this system requires particular types of players to work. The shuttlers must be very good runners who are positionally flexible, as well as being competent defensively with the ability to create chances from wide areas in attack, usually by crossing. The defensive midfielder must be mobile as he will probably need to move laterally to cover quite often, he must be very good defensively as there is a chance he will be exposed at times. One team today who have players ideal for this would be Arsenal who have Ramsey, Elneny, Wilshere and perhaps even Iwobi and Sanchez, as potential shuttlers, with Coquelin as 6.
Benfica won the 2009/10 Portuguese league using Angel di Maria and Ramires as shuttlers, these are two perfect examples of players who fit the profile of their roles.
Weaknesses of the Formation
Although I have went through some weaknesses for each specific shape, there are some general weaknesses to the formation itself.
The first if fairly obvious, if the shuttlers/8’s do not fulfil their defensive duties effectively by covering the halfspaces, the flanks can easily be overloaded which then leaves the full-back exposed. Even if an overload isn’t created, yet the opposition have qualitative superiority in a 1v1, this is a very dangerous situation and one which must be prevented by the shuttler.
Another weakness of the formation is the congestion that can occur, particularly in build-up, if movement isn’t good enough. Obviously if movement is good enough, then this makes the build-up more clean, and easy, though if the opponent is well organised it can still be extremely difficult. If the opponent presses high(ideally with a front two)with good vertical compactness, this can make it almost impossible to escape the press as there is almost no space in behind the first line of pressure to escape the press.
Theoretical Teams Using the Formations
With the 4-4-2 diamond apparently going out of fashion, it is unlikely that we will see many top European sides using it in the coming years. The only hope it seems, of seeing the formation become more commonly used again would be for Juve’s success with the formation to continue, and other managers to follow trend.
Anyway, as we probably won’t see many top sides lining-up in the formation, we can dream! Here is a few theoretical teams lined-up in their own specific 4-4-2 diamond.
As you may be aware, the club’s I used above were chosen by people on my Twitter, so thanks to all you guys that replied. I’ve tried not to choose teams that have played a midfield diamond recently(Inter, Juve, West Ham)as that wouldn’t be as fun. I’m aware I’ve not went through each team in any sort of depth, though if you want to know more about how I would really set each team up, then feel free to contact me on Twitter(@boxtoboxcb)as I’d be more than happy to discuss!
Conclusion
The 4-4-2 diamond formation is a very interesting one as perhaps the biggest plus point to it doesn’t lie in the shape itself but instead the flexibility to move into other shapes depending on the phase of play.
Personally I feel defending in a 4-4-2 diamond is not a viable defensive approach and is understandably the reason many coaches are reluctant to use the formation, even despite their love of central dominance, which can be easily achieved in the formation. Though exposure on the flanks can be easily avoided, by having a smooth transition into a flat 4-4-2. This system does require particular players in each position, but it is still achievable through good coaching. In the attacking phase, I feel playing with a midfield diamond, two forwards and two wing-backs is an almost perfect attacking formation. It offers such flexibility and fluidity of movement, which is an absolute nightmare to defend against.
Despite the formation being unlikely to be seen commonly in any of Europe’s big leagues in the next few seasons, as tactical analysis evolves and enhances, alongside tactical coaching, perhaps the formation will be an option for some of Europe’s top coaches.
boxtoboxcentreback 
Any more quotes about this formation from famous players? I have an assignment due and some quotes would be very helpful. This web page is great. Thank-you 🙂