Chelsea: The differences between a 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1

Fans having been wondering if Frank Lampard will use a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 with this Chelsea squad. The differences are small but could be important.

Formations are ultimately just numbers used to describe something complicated in a simple way. The differences between them are often arbitrary and ill defined. For instance, what makes a 4-3-3 different than a 4-5-1? Or a 4-2-4 different than a 4-4-2?

The answer is “nothing really”. Formations are by their nature fluid. But they can hint at certain aspects of play due to the shape. That is why the 4-3-3 versus 4-2-3-1 debate is happening in parts of the Chelsea sphere.

The main structural difference is the shape of the midfield three. In a modern 4-3-3, that three is almost always one deeper player and two more advanced players creating an upside down pyramid shape. A 4-2-3-1 has a midfield three that has two deeper players and one advanced player as a pyramid shape is made. The combinations of players that can be used in those three spots vary greatly between the two.

But think of the midfield as a sort of funnel towards the opposition goal. In a 4-3-3, the wide end of the funnel is pointed towards the opponent’s goal, so the ball naturally drifts into wider areas as it advances. In a 4-2-3-1, it is the opposite, the narrow end is pointed towards the opponent’s goal so the attack is pinched in centrally.

Furthermore, if the possession needs to retreat, the players behind the ball matter. 4-3-3 will usually have a line of three behind with the two fullbacks joining the deepest midfielder. A 4-2-3-1 has a line of four to better stretch the field.

So why does any of this matter? Well, a 4-3-3 is a very good formation for lots of possession. That is why it is the go to shape for Pep Guardiola and Maurizio Sarri. A 4-2-3-1 has a more natural “springy” quality to it that allows it to create space higher up the field at the expense of possession. That is why Jurgen Klopp likes it when he wants his side to focus on attacking quickly.

Think of those deepest midfielders as a magnet. If there is only one, the pull is less than it would be if there are two. So a 4-2-3-1 invites the opponent to come out more, leaving space in behind. A 4-3-3 pushes them back, allowing for the team on the ball to have more control.

Both have their place and both will require different types of players. Sarri famously believed Jorginho could not play in a 4-2-3-1 (and the evidence of pre-Sarri Napoli supports that). But Mateo Kovacic seems custom made for the shape because of how he can drive forwards. Tiemoue Bakayoko would be a more extreme defensive option.

A 4-3-3 also requires that midfield three to all support each other defensively. So whereas a 4-2-3-1 could allow for one of those midfielders to be incredibly attacking, a 4-3-3 requires a balance. Ruben Loftus-Cheek has shown he can do both and Mason Mount will surely do the same. But Ross Barkley lacks defensively and may have no spot in a 4-3-3 going forward. He needs that extra protection behind him.

Defensively, both shapes can (and often do) turn into a 4-4-2. The 4-3-3 often leaves a winger up high as opposed to a midfielder (as is the case in 4-2-3-1). 4-3-3 can also fall back into a 4-5-1 to be even more defensive, something that would be unusual for a 4-2-3-1 to do.

The press can also change between the two. If a 4-3-3 loses the ball, the nearest winger and the striker can begin a press. In 4-2-3-1, the attacking mid can also join in. The expense is that of one body if the press does not work the first time.

Both shapes have their positives and negatives and depending on the players the line between the two will be very blurred. Overall, it mostly comes down to a few “this or that” questions. Is the opponent weak centrally or wide? Is it easier to attack by drawing the opponent out or pressing them in? And what type of defensive shape works best?

Frank Lampard flipped between the two formations with Derby County primarily based on the players he started in the midfield. He will likely go back and forth between the two at Chelsea as well as he looks for the best use of the squad.