There have been a number of interesting tactical trends at this World Cup, and one of them
is the general absence of two man striking teams.
Edinson Cavani and Luiz Suarez of Uruguay constitute probably the only pure team of
two strikers in the tournament.
While 4-4-2 has made something of a comeback from its heyday at the standard tactic in
football well in to the 2000s, this is largely as a defensive measure.
The 4-4-2 allows two compact banks of four for defence, as shown by Iceland, Burnley,
or Athletico Madrid, and gives good coverage of the whole pitch.
However, many of these 4-4-2s are more like 4-4-1-1s, with one genuine striker, and a
shadow striker or attacking midfielder playing off them.
Increases in pressing and the fitness of teams meant that withdrawing a second striker to
more of a playmaker role makes sense, because it increases a team’s defensive solidity.
This means that while the low block looks like there are two men playing up top, only
one of them is a genuine striker.
The other player is there to provide a creative transition from the low block, to carry the
ball into wide areas on the counter and look for the ‘genuine’ striker, and fill back
in midfield if required.
Other 4-4-2s, such as that used by Roy Hodgson at Crystal Palace as they rallied to secure
Premier League status, or Senegal under Aliou Cisse, defend as a 4-4-2 but use players who
are not classic strikers in the two front roles.
Hodgson used Wilfried Zaha and Andros Townsend, while Cisse dropped Mame Biram Diouf, himself
more of a defensive forward who chases and presses and creates room for others, in favour
of M’Baye Niang playing up front alongside Sadio Mane – Niang is most regularly used
as a winger in Torino’s 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, while Mane is a wide forward in Liverpool’s
4-3-3.
This means that the two strikers and the two wide players have greater positional fluidity
– while they defend as a 4-4-2, the players skill set means that they can drop off, break
wide, and swap in with wide players that can attack from deep to confuse opposition markers.
Of course, many teams only use one striker anyway.
The 4-2-3-1 is still very popular, even if its limitations against low blocks have been
exposed at this World Cup, as has its reliance on a really good, energetic, and tactically
aware defensive midfielder in the double pivot.
4-2-3-1 gives teams a variety of attacking options, and only requires one striker who
can hold the ball up to bring others in or, in the case of Timo Werner at Germany, run
beyond the playmaker.
The three playing behind are there to create and cut inside, and so while they get into
striking positions, generally they are not strikers.
There is the odd exception, like Mario Mandzukic playing wide at Juventus, but these are rare
and don’t generally imitate the two man striking team.
This system is supposed to give greater defensive solidity, too, as the attacking three can
fall back into a 4-4-1-1 or a 4-5-1 easily.
These same considerations apply to a lot of three man defensive line teams.
The 3-4-3 uses one striker and two wide players; the 3-5-2 can have two pure strikers, but
generally tends to see at least one dropping off to play more as an attacking midfielder.
A good example is England’s fluid 3-5-2, which effectively sees one ‘pure’ striker,
Harry Kane, playing with Raheem Sterling, who drifts wide or drops off, ahead of two
attack-minded midfielders.
The aim is to create space through movement, or to create overloads between the lines to
allow quick exchanges and putting players through on goal.
This movement, as well as the defensive considerations of more players who can drop off, is the key
to why two strikers tend not to be selected.
Much attacking play now consists of this creation of movement and space, and two strikers can
be too static.
Similar players don’t tend to work so well together and are more easily marked by centre
backs.
The old pairing of one large striker to win knock downs for a smaller poacher is redundant
when pressing can cut down on crossing and physically strong, quick centre backs can
mark players so well.
Teams now try to attack by working in the spaces between lines, hence the idea of a
false nine striker dropping off and allowing movement from inside forwards towards the
goal, and attacking midfielders getting into the box beyond one main striker.
Given all that, the reason that Uruguay have persisted successfully with Cavani and Suarez
is largely down to their qualities and their extraordinary work-rate, as well as that of
the midfield that plays behind them.
Oscar Tabarez’s system requires both strikers to track back and press and they do this brilliantly;
the work of Lucas Torreira and the rest of the Uruguay midfield also means that they
can still play with solidity, and leave at least one of the two strikers free for counters.
But players like this are rare.
It’s little wonder that both Suarez and Cavani have over one hundred caps, and both
play elsewhere in systems that require them to drop off and create space as well as act
as a lone focal striker.
Most teams prefer to use one striker and create movement around them, making runs beyond the
defence from deep and creating confusion, while maintaining a defensive system using
at least four or five standard midfielders.
It’s rare to have two strikers that can also fit this, and that’s why Uruguay are
the exception at this World Cup, not the norm.