The dawn of a new manager often comes with infinite possibilities. If Chelsea followed the trend towards 4-diamond-2, how would it work?
Football is a game that is constantly evolving. More and more, teams feature attackers that exploit space rather than men. Teams now use wide players not as a main route of attack, but as an outlet to release pressure on the main route of attack. Everyone is looking to create overloads and underloads to exploit the opponent and players can no longer specialize in positions. And few players are locked into a single role anymore.
These developments have seen a recent resurgence of a 4-diamond-2, occasionally referred to as a 4-3-1-2 or a 4-1-2-1-2. Regardless of which what the numbers shake out, the point is the same: to create more passing triangles centrally while leaving space ahead.
Mauricio Pochettino used it frequently last season. Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s best results have come with it. And of course, Zinedine Zidane won three Champions Leagues with it. With the formation having a renascence, it may be worth considering how Frank Lampard would possibly follow the trend.
Now, Lampard has so far been very much a 4-3-3 variant type of manager. A back four, three center mids, and a lone. On paper, a 4-diamond-2 appears to be much different, but in practice it could be very similar. With it being hard to categorize Lampard after only one season, he very much could opt to play around with a new squad.
More or less, the back seven remain mostly the same as a 4-3-3 would have them. The fullbacks overlap and act as outlets as is common in the modern game and the two wider centermids frequently rotate with their winger. The other centermid is either a playmaker or a true holding mid.
But there are no wingers in a 4-diamond-2. At least not permanently. The “wings” pop up in other ways, often unexpectedly, which is where the potential in a 4-diamond-2 lies.
The player in behind the strikers can stay central and play make in the hole or they could swing wide to create width. The wider center mids could also overlap and create width with the near side fullback covering for them. If a third player joins the front two, one striker could become a “winger” while the other stays central. Alternatively, they could both stay put to overload one side of the field leaving the other open.
The Blues has several players that would excel in these floating roles. Christian Pulisic, Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Pedro, Callum Hudson-Odoi, Willian, and Ross Barkley all have their own blend of movement that would make any 4-diamond-2 unique in to itself. The two hardly needs to be two actual strikers (in should have one though) so the lineup could also change the tactics greatly.
Defensively, Spurs show cased how well a diamond can work against Chelsea no less. When Spurs used the diamond against Maurizio Sarri’s Chelsea, they were forced to advance in the wide areas or try a long ball not knowing if their teammate could hold on to it. A diamond is involved on defense as that midfield four has to shift back and forth laterally across the pitch, but it can disrupt the opponent.
It is on defense where the idea of a 4-diamond-2 is less appealing simply because of how involved it needs to be while pressing and containing. Not to mention that the fullbacks would be the only true wide players which opponents could exploit if they are quick about it.
Overall, the idea of a 4-diamond-2 seems to have caught the eye of many young managers in part because of its tactical flexibility. It is also a stone’s throw from a 3-5-2, another favorite of young managers looking to exploit fluid players.
Lampard has not used a 4-diamond-2 yet but that does not mean he will never use it. It is a trick formation to utilize, but if done properly, it can exploit many of the things opponents try to do in the modern game. As with any formation, it will shuffle the problems of a best XI around, but the 4-diamond-2 holds promise.