David Moyes - What will
his United team look like? by @manutdtactics (Michael and Ian)
It is a summer of
speculation. As ever much of this is
about transfers, but this year there is plenty of speculation about another
subject; how will David Moyes’ United side take shape?
In truth this can only be
speculation. The new season will be a trip into the unknown for us all, as for
the first time since 1986 someone new will be steering the ship. Summer transfer activity may give us a clue
about what lies ahead, but we can’t know for sure until the new season gets
underway. Moyes’ tactical approach at Everton is another clue, but it would be
wrong to draw definitive conclusions.
It is worth considering
how his Everton sides have played however, as in many ways Moyes is Sir Alex’s
tactical twin. Perhaps this is one of the reasons Sir Alex chose him as his
successor and a significant change in his approach would be a surprise. Many
commentators have focused on the similarity in the two managers’ background and
character. Both are working class Glaswegians; they even have links to the same
Junior Football club, Drumchapel Amateurs FC.
Both are renowned for being driven, hard workers with an appetite for
great detail. But maybe the similarities in their tactical approach to the game
are more pertinent. All managers have
tactical traits; maybe Sir Alex sees similar traits to his own in David Moyes.
So what are the
characteristics of a David Moyes team? Moyes’ Everton sides have in recent
years used the same 4-4-1-1/4-2-3-1 shape favoured by Sir Alex, but there were
differences in the way these shapes were used. These differences were subtle,
but significant for what might lie ahead.
David Moyes has an
obsession with the retention of team shape. This is especially so after transitions; that
is, when possession passes from one team to the other. At this point he
requires his side to form up in the prescribed shape instantly. There are many
stories of Moyes’ work on this in training. He adds additional line markings to the
training pitch to ensure players develop a heightened sense of their own
on-pitch orientation, dividing the pitch into lines or squares so that players
are always conscious of their position in relation to each other and the
general pitch shape. United’s use of the 4-4-1-1/4-2-3-1 shapes has been more
fluid than Everton’s with players more likely to interchange and to make
diagonal runs.
What will this mean at
United? Well, Moyes likes his teams to retain their width, especially
when attacking. His exercise in adding lines down the length of the pitch is
aimed at encouraging the wide players to stay wide. His attacking full- backs
therefore rarely make diagonal runs when they move up field. The aim is to try to stretch the opposition’s
central players out across the width of the pitch, but the added benefit is that when the ball is lost, attacking
full-backs have less distance to run back to regain a defensive position, the
diagonal being a longer distance than a line parallel to the side of the pitch.
Evra and Rafael take note.
Moyes favours two hard
working midfield players as the central pivots. Generally he follows the
usual convention here, with one of these players being more static, able to
pick passes, whilst the other will be a shuttler who will look to press the
opposition. Since Arteta left Everton
the emphasis has been on work rate rather than creativity in these areas, but
it would be wrong to assume that this was by preference as Arteta was a feature
of Moyes’ Everton for quite some time. For Arteta read Carrick, but it is no
surprise that there is currently much speculation about who might be brought in
to reinforce United’s central midfield area.
With hard working players
in central midfield, Moyes has looked to other areas in recent years for
creativity. Generally he has favoured wide midfield players rather than out
and out wingers. This might not be so much of a change for United, as the
form of United’s wide players has been poor in recent years. Nani is perhaps
the closest to an attacking winger, Valencia is a defensive winger and Young is
really a wide midfield player. Where
would Wilfred Zaha fit with this? Moyes’ teams work very hard on overloading
in wide areas. The wide midfield player will push forward, supported by his
fullback, often overlapping and the nearest pivot will also seek to get close
to the ball. In so doing Moyes looks to create a 2 v 1 or a 3 v 2. His hope is
that the opposition will be drawn towards the ball and his side will look to
switch the emphasis of the attack immediately to the opposite side. Expect
plenty of switching of the play. If players don’t move diagonally the ball
probably will.
Perhaps the single biggest
difference between Sir Alex and David Moyes’ use of the 4-4-1-1/4-2-3-1 is the
second striker. Moyes has usually favoured a midfield player behind his most
advanced central player as the second forward; in recent years that player
has been Fellaini. Sir Alex has
generally picked a deep lying forward, for example Rooney. At United the deep lying forward is still a
forward, so his movements and instincts are generally attacking. This means
goals from the forward line, which is just as well as the return from United’s
midfield players is relatively low. This
all seems to point to reinforcements in the midfield.
At Everton, Moyes has used
a target man centre forward whose role is to hold the ball up and knock it
back for the advancing midfield players, be it Fellaini or deeper or wider
players. The consequences of this are that Everton’s goals return from midfield
is high, but the goals return from a central striker is low.
On transitions Everton are
known for attempting to get the ball into the opposition’s half as soon as
possible. This has led, perhaps a little unfairly, to accusations that they are
a long ball side. Rather they are a side that has looked to hit opponents on
the break. Much of their play will be
channelled quickly through the deep lying forward, (Fellaini), but the emphasis
is always on getting an early shot in. At
United, where opponents will sit deep and look to defend, there is much recycling of the attack through
the pivots, and the redirection of the attack across the pitch via the central
players in an attempt to break down two banks of four. We are often left wondering if United are
trying to walk the ball in and whether they are ever going to shoot. Moyes’ teams will shoot at the earliest
opportunity.
In summary, based upon how
Moyes’ Everton approached their games, we might expect a more structured formation
with less fluid play; wide attacking, plenty
of switching of the play with moves culminating in an early shot on goal. If he does adopt a similar approach, we would
expect more goals from midfield with the inclusion of an extra midfield player
in place of an attacker. Below we set
out a typical recent United team shape and a speculative formation to
illustrate how Moyes’ United might be subtly different.
Chalkboard 1 – Typical
United shape 2012-13
Chalkboard 2 – Potential United shape under Moyes
There have been a number
of criticisms of Moyes’ approach during his time at Everton. He is known as the manager in the division
who most frequently scouts the opposition. He seeks to adapts his team’s tactical
approach and tailor it to counter the opposition’s strengths. This has led to
accusations that his approach is negative and that he focuses too closely on
the opposition rather than his own team’s strengths. But this is a harsh
criticism: all clubs scout their opposition and regularly make adaptations to
their approach. In any case his approach
is similar to Sir Alex’s because United regularly changed tactically to counter
opponents. For years they have gone to
Arsenal with a 4-3-3 rather than their usual shape, to great effect. Perhaps it is just that Moyes does his scouting
in person whereas other managers delegate this task. This method of altering tactically to manage
the threat of an opponent is often cited as the reason for Everton’s poor
record against ‘top four’ sides, but is it not more likely that the quality of
the opposition is simply better?
Another criticism of Moyes
as a coach is that his teams rarely perform well across a whole season. They
either start well and fade or start poorly and improve. Of course, this criticism
ignores the fact that Everton have had a smaller squad than many of the Premiership’s
better sides and so the core players at Everton are required to play more
games. Where fatigue may have played a part in Everton fading, it should not be
an issue at United, with its large squad of more evenly matched quality
players.
The final criticism of
Moyes is that he hasn’t won anything.
This ignores the fact that success is relative. Everton are a big proud club,
but of all the traditionally bigger clubs they are perhaps the one that has
adapted least well to the Premier league era. They have simply been left behind
and as a consequence Moyes and Everton have not had the resources to compete. Everton are victims of Heysel and Hillsborough
perhaps more than their arch-rivals from across Stanley Park.
Heysel prevented the best
Everton side of recent decades from competing in the old European Cup; who
knows how they may have moved forward as a club if they had that opportunity in
the late eighties? Goodison Park is a charming, old atmospheric ground, but
with the post-Hillsborough requirement for an all-seated stadium, it is simply
too small to generate the kind of revenue that could lead to a cycle of
success, sponsorship, access to Premiership-era riches and further success.
Moyes could not overcome this obstacle, but he achieved success in building
Everton sides that were regularly able to finish in the top eight throughout
his tenure. He did this through hard work, intelligent management and attention
to detail. These are qualities to be valued, ones that we have benefited from at
United these last 27 years.
What
will all this mean? We can only speculate; who knows? Maybe the new manager will
have a few surprises up his sleeve. Only time will tell.
Images have been created by the owner
