4-4-2? I’m not so sure.

Yesterday’s 1-1 draw with Morecambe gave Imps fans plenty to be excited about, even if the outcome wasn’t quite right. Prior to the game we appeared to be lining up 4-4-2, with Rheady and Matt Green up front. Having watched the highlights again, I suspect that the lines between 4-4-2 and 4-2-3-1 are becoming blurred, and that could work to our advantage as the season gets underway.

Having watched the game closely it looked to me as if Rheady had dropped into the middle of a bank of three behind the sole striker. On the face of it we played a two-man midfield of Bostwick and Woodyard, and usually if we go with the newer formation the third man is Billy Knott. I wonder if Danny is looking for a way to get Rheady in the team, but make up for his lack of mobility, something previously seen in the mid nineties with Matt Le Tissier and Southampton.

I’ve been laughed at before comparing Rheady and Le Tiss, but I stand by that comparison. Okay Rheady is bigger and more of a target man, but his touch is sublime, and yesterday one little flick with the heel that set Nathan Arnold free reminded me so much of the former Southampton man. As Le Tiss aged Southampton built a team around him, and far from Rheady finding the Football League too much, he appears to be thriving on coming up a level. Now Danny is left with the issue of fitting him in, but not losing pace from up top which is perhaps the single biggest difference from the National League. We got away with having slower forwards last season, this year we will not.

If he is able to drop into the heart of the three behind the striker he’s perhaps more likely to benefit from the direct ball we sometimes utilise to find him. If he’s receiving it deeper it gives the two wide players a chance of picking up his flick, or the two midfielders playing behind him. Last season he was advanced and often looking just for Theo Robinson or whoever was playing off him, but it makes sense for him to play deeper and increase his options. It also means his lack of mobility isn’t so much of an issue, because rather than spear heading the attack he is at the heart of it, with players all around. Matt Green is clearly a mobile and thrusting centre forward, and with him doing Rheady’s running the big man looks much more comfortable dictating play when he gets the ball.

It also gives the opposition a real problem, because seeing the team sheet may not offer any hints as to how we’re going to set up. Rheady and Green doesn’t necessarily mean a big man / quick man combo, and if Rheady is dropping deeper it means a defender has to go with him. Teams that double up on him will be leaving gaps in the channels, and we saw yesterday Matt Green will exploit those all day long. This means the opposition full backs have to tuck in to cover the channel and the flank, and that gives space for the likes of JMD or Nathan Arnold. As we spread the ball from side to side those defending players have an awful lot to consider now, there’s so many dimensions to our attack.

Of course if we’re chasing a game it isn’t hard to simply push Rheady forward, or bring him off for Ollie Palmer, and with very little cosmetic change we go to a traditional 4-4-2. That means the opposition have to readjust quickly to the new line up, and in an unorganised defence it could cause chaos.

Even if it isn’t Rheady playing the flexible role, we still have the option to change things at the drop of a hat. Billy Knott showed he has finishing amongst his vast array of talents, and Elliott Whitehouse played as a striker for England C. Both players could appear on the team sheet, and until we started pushing forward the opposition manager wouldn’t know if we’re 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2. It looks very much to me as if we’ve been developing two formations which bring markedly different outcomes, but are only a chromosome or two away from each other. It does place a lot of emphasis on the running of Matt Green, and that is why we do need a second pacey and mobile striker like Jordan Slew (to answer your question on leaving the ground Dad.)

I think this is the situation Danny has been trying to get to for a few months now, maybe since he took over. The 4-2-3-1 was first used at North Ferriby I think, with Jack Muldoon doing the running. Back then I think the limits of some of the squad were tested, but players like Matt Green, Michael Bostwick and even Neal Eardley have brought experience and perhaps a new level of ‘know-how’ to the side. Bostwick was a steady seven for me yesterday, at the lower end of the overall team score whilst still playing well. He’ll be crucial if we’re to continue to flit between two formations, and even more so if we do end up losing Sean Raggett to whoever (pick any Championship club, they’re probably watching him). He could easily drop into the back four, but that would make 4-2-3-1 tougher to play. I think Danny sees Bostwick as a midfielder and not a defender, and he’ll only drop right back if we’re desperate. If Raggett stays then it is the industry of Bostwick and Alex Woodyard that will allow us to keep pressure on in the new formation, because if the ball to the number ten doesn’t come off, they’re the players needing to win a turn over and distribute out wide to the flanks.

All this sounds perfect, but it’s success relies on a number of things. We know we like to press the ball, but if opponents start to press us high up the pitch it could make it tough for Rheady to thrive in his ‘Le Tiss’ role. He loves a ball into him at height, his unique ability to bring it down and play it with almost any part of his body is nullified if we’re being pressured high. It’s okay if he’s drawing a couple of defenders to him, but if he’s getting dominated in the air (which is rare), or being fouled and it’s being ignored (very common) it can lead to him looking frustrated. Yesterday was one of the times he got no protection, so often we had to utilise the option of coming out wide. Now, here is problem two.

When we break down the wings and attack at pace, it is beneficial to have two strikers in the box, one near post and one far, to ensure maximum chance of converting the cross. Given the pace on our flanks it looked at times as if Rheady, playing deeper, was struggling to then make the run into the box as play moved forward so quickly. We whipped more balls over than I’ve seen in a long time, but often it was left to Matt Green to attack it, or three defenders were dealing with two forwards. To counteract this our wide players often check back, or play little triangles with their supporting, and although this allows us to load the box, it also allows our opponents to compose themselves and get bodies back.  I don’t think I’m being unfair to Rheady when I say once a run is made, he finds it tough to go backwards and fight for a ball, especially if a player is bringing it away at pace. I’m not being critical of him at all, it is common knowledge he isn’t as mobile as 99% of other players, but he is still a key player for us which hopefully (if he reads this) he’ll see as a massive compliment.

One option, and I think we saw it a bit yesterday, is for Michael Bostwick to overtake Rheady in the middle of the park and become the second man in the box, leaving Alex Woodyard as the holding midfielder and allowing Rheady to prowl the edge of the area picking up any potential second ball. If the big man has a second to think with the ball at his feet, he can produce the sort of pass that opens up a defence like a tin of soup, and perhaps given his natural instinct for the outrageous or extravagant, he would be better deployed on the edge, rather than having him commit to a header and, if he misses it, being taken out of the game while he regains position. I’m not talking about withdrawing his aerial threat completely, that would be ludicrous, but when play breaks quickly I think it is an option. If the box is loaded with bodies then it stands to reason he is one of the players up there, because of our forwards he is still the best header of the ball we have.

It is all very interesting from a tactical point of view, our recruitment has thrown up so real possibilities regarding how we set up and break teams down. Towards the end of last season we won games by constantly knocking on the front door until it was either opened or we kicked our way in. This season if we knock twice and nobody answers then we’re going down the sides, over the top or through the windows. We poured forward from all angles yesterday, and if we keep that up all season we’ll hit a couple of teams for five, with Matt Le Rhead playing just as crucial role as he has for the last two seasons.