Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Rip Van We Go Again on November 29, 2010, 10:54:57 AM
-
A good friend of mine who frequents the site, but hasn't joined, has asked me for your thoughts on Downing and Ashley not doing the necessary graft in midfield, thus leaving the middle 2 exposed.
Your opinions please.
-
I think if were play 2 out and out wingers we'd be better with 3 in the centre of the park. Especially when Reo-Coker is available.
More of a 4-3-3 than a 4-5-1. But, we also need the right striker to link it all together, which, I don't think Carw is.
I thought they worked hard enough but we were just over-ran on Saturday.
-
I see no problem with Young or Downing's work rate.
-
I think they both graft, but it's usually having to help the fullback out, rather than the middle men. The trouble is, that neither Clarke or Bannan are a destroyer. When Reo-Coker is back I think our results will improve.
What annoys me most about our wide men is their insistance on playing on the wrong wing. Downing is crap on the right.
-
What annoys me most about our wide men is their insistance on playing on the wrong wing. Downing is crap on the right.
Couldn't agree more. Young needs to stick to the right & downing to the left.
Other clubs seem to be sticking wide players on opposite wings these days. Adam Johnson gets stuck out on the right wing for City when he plays too. Same for Brunt at Baggies & Arshavin at Arsenal. TBF some times it works, depends on how good the opposition full back is.
-
It depends on what they are being told by the manager. If they are told to stay out on the flanks then they will do. You can see the tactical set-up when the opposition have the ball. Its not a case of trying to close down in the middle but more keeping your shape and staying with the plan that you have. With us you can see that we aren't looking for our wide men to narrow the midfield as they stay wide to give us width to enable us to use the one seeming strength we have, and that's our counter-attacking.
The biggets problem is that the central-midfield don't protect the back 4 enough. That is to do with the players age and lack of experience. There's not a great deal that can be done about that because of the amount of injuries that we have. The problem with youngsters is that they are inconsistent and some times will play well, and sometimes not. When you have a team not winning then confidence will be a major destructive influence on them and their performances.
We just have to keep going through this stage. Yes, there have been problems with the team, yes the back 5 are looking dodgy. But, until the central-midfield can offer the protection any back 4 need in any standard of football by experienced players - even just one would do, then we will be in this situation. The merits of Downing and Young really are irrelevant in this and we don't need them trying to come inside to cover others. Time Stephen Ireland stood up.
-
Nothing wrong with either Downing or Young as regards to work rate. I didn't see a lot wrong with Villa in the 2nd half on Saturday. The problem was that Houllier cocked up the team formation to accomodate Pires and as a result, the damage was done in the 1st half.
As soon as Fonz came on with Young and Downing working the flanks, we began to worry Arsenal. We were undone with sucker pucnches when we were chasing the game.
-
When we're playing one striker the onus is on the widemen, and the furthest forward of the central three, to support the striker. If they're doing that it will mean they can't get back as often or as quickly as we would like. This should be compensated for by the two holding players, but as someone above says we've got kids in there and that lack of experience is showing. It's a tactical problem, but not sure there is a solution until either NRC or Petrov is fit.
-
I know one thing... Fonz needs to play, he embarrased carew ..
-
If you have two wide players, like many have said, you're going to leave a central two exposed just because of sheer geography. If you want to play two wide players, you have to have three central players in some fashion - 4-5-1, 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 or whatever else you can think of - just because of literal space issues.
-
My thoughts are there is nothing wrong with our widemen we need to have Gabby back and drop pires and get NRC in there then we should be ok.
-
No problem with the widemen for me either, my problem is with the so called senior players!
Carew, Friedel, Young L, Warnock, Collins & Dunne
-
If you have two wide players, like many have said, you're going to leave a central two exposed just because of sheer geography.
You see, this is a point I just don't get. It was a debate we often had under MON as well. I think it CAN work, but it needs two key elements:-
1. A proper defense midfielder.
2. All the other players to work very hard.
Think of the Man Utd treble winning side and the midfield of Giggs, Scholes, Keane and Beckham. OK, we haven't got playes of that ability, but when we played 4-4-2 under MON I think the problem wasn't wide, but central. Pertov lacked energy to get around and was better in a 3. Had we played NRC instead with Milner I think we would have seen a better balance. If we look at our current squad, a central pairing of NRC and Bannan with two of Albrighton, Ash and Downing wide could be very effective in a 4-4-2.
-
No problem with the widemen for me either, my problem is with the so called senior players!
Carew, Friedel, Young L, Warnock, Collins & Dunne
I don't think the two in bold have done all that much wrong this season!
-
Downing and Young are both best on the left hand side. That's a problem right there.
That 2nd striker role has offered us nothing, whoever's played there. Ash had a couple of decent games up there, but on the whole, he's still more useful on the left. We got something out of it with Heskey up top because of his hold up play, but by the same token, Ash isn't scoring enough to make up for Heskey's, or indeed any of our strikers shortfalls.
As for our central midfield. It's not so much being exposed, as not having two decent solid central midfielders on our books to play the system GH wants. At best we'd be playing Nigel and Petrov, but that's not good enough for where we aspire to be. We need new blood.
Until that time we need to play 3 in midfield.
-
I'd play Downing on the left. Albrighton on the right and Young up front.
-
For me, the key is Albrighton. When he is fit, there is balance, and the 451 works. Downing is in the right position on the left, and Young can play the off the striker role better than anyone else, judging by the games played this season. We need to go 442, like we did in the second half and get back to basics to get some points on the board.
-
If you have two wide players, like many have said, you're going to leave a central two exposed just because of sheer geography.
You see, this is a point I just don't get. It was a debate we often had under MON as well. I think it CAN work, but it needs two key elements:-
1. A proper defense midfielder.
2. All the other players to work very hard.
Think of the Man Utd treble winning side and the midfield of Giggs, Scholes, Keane and Beckham. OK, we haven't got playes of that ability, but when we played 4-4-2 under MON I think the problem wasn't wide, but central. Pertov lacked energy to get around and was better in a 3. Had we played NRC instead with Milner I think we would have seen a better balance. If we look at our current squad, a central pairing of NRC and Bannan with two of Albrighton, Ash and Downing wide could be very effective in a 4-4-2.
To me this is a bit of an anathema - the 'defensive' midfielder. A midfielder is a midfielder so they should be able to sit and get forward as and when required. The players have always done the job - suchas des bremner - but its only int he Prem era that we believe that it has been newly created. Of course certain midfielders have strengths and weaknesses in different areas - the creative midfielder, the tackling midfilder. Just a bugbear of mine. No disagreement as to the point.
-
Of course certain midfielders have strengths and weaknesses in different areas - the creative midfielder, the tackling midfilder....
...the defensive midfielder.
-
If you have two wide players, like many have said, you're going to leave a central two exposed just because of sheer geography. If you want to play two wide players, you have to have three central players in some fashion - 4-5-1, 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 or whatever else you can think of - just because of literal space issues.
Monty, thats all very well and good when we have the players to play those systems, but unfortunately, some of our key players are missing through injury. I would also point out that I would rather watch us playing 442, as in the second half against Arsenal, and also the last 15 minutes against Blues, and have a go, rather than try to over complicate the tactis and watch dire football.
-
No problem with the widemen for me either, my problem is with the so called senior players!
Carew, Friedel, Young L, Warnock, Collins & Dunne
I don't think the two in bold have done all that much wrong this season!
I'd blame Friedel for two goals saturday and both at Blackburn, Its not a whole season but the errors are creeping into his game same for Collins
-
Of course certain midfielders have strengths and weaknesses in different areas - the creative midfielder, the tackling midfilder....
...the defensive midfielder.
Not such a thing.
-
If you have two wide players, like many have said, you're going to leave a central two exposed just because of sheer geography.
You see, this is a point I just don't get. It was a debate we often had under MON as well. I think it CAN work, but it needs two key elements:-
1. A proper defense midfielder.
2. All the other players to work very hard.
Think of the Man Utd treble winning side and the midfield of Giggs, Scholes, Keane and Beckham. OK, we haven't got playes of that ability, but when we played 4-4-2 under MON I think the problem wasn't wide, but central. Pertov lacked energy to get around and was better in a 3. Had we played NRC instead with Milner I think we would have seen a better balance. If we look at our current squad, a central pairing of NRC and Bannan with two of Albrighton, Ash and Downing wide could be very effective in a 4-4-2.
To me this is a bit of an anathema - the 'defensive' midfielder. A midfielder is a midfielder so they should be able to sit and get forward as and when required. The players have always done the job - suchas des bremner - but its only int he Prem era that we believe that it has been newly created. Of course certain midfielders have strengths and weaknesses in different areas - the creative midfielder, the tackling midfilder. Just a bugbear of mine. No disagreement as to the point.
I know what you mean, but taking the Man Utd example I used Keane was a different player at Forest and took turns getting forward when playing with Ince. It was when Scholes came in that he became the 'defensive midfielder' I refer to him as. But then if you look at NRC, he's failings are the attacking side of a game, so you have a point.
An all rounder in geat, but player that give you both excellent defensive and offensive qualities are few and far between and generally out of our price range. So we need to concentrate on the defensive qualities as that's where we are lacking in the midfield right now.
-
Albrighton's presence means that Downing can play on the left where he's most effective. Ashley seems to prefer the left hand side, 'cos he likes cutting in.
As "glasses" said above, we're missing the boy 'brighton most of all right now.
-
No problem with the widemen for me either, my problem is with the so called senior players!
Carew, Friedel, Young L, Warnock, Collins & Dunne
I don't think the two in bold have done all that much wrong this season!
I'd blame Friedel for two goals saturday and both at Blackburn, Its not a whole season but the errors are creeping into his game same for Collins
Friedel hasn't been impressive for a while now, and attacking players seemingly find it all too easy to get Collins to commit himself, then leave him stranded and out of position. Friedel, Dunne and Collins should be the bedrock of our side at the moment, but instead they're the weak link.
-
I think L. Young & Warnock are poor as of late. As well as Dunne.
-
Of course certain midfielders have strengths and weaknesses in different areas - the creative midfielder, the tackling midfilder....
...the defensive midfielder.
Not such a thing.
Yes, there is.
A player who plays in the midfield whose duties are almost exclusively devoted towards but not strictly limited to: defending. They may also be screening midfielders that dictate play from a defensive or withdrawn position. Otherwise known as a deep lying playmaker or "quarterback".
See also: Makelele, Mikel, Mascherano, Gago, Reo Coker, Toulalan, M'Vila, Essien, Palacios, Diarra, Huddlestone, Vieira, Souness, Redondo, Mathaus, Rijkaard, van Bommel, Veron, Gattuso, Deschamps, Dunga, ...etc.
-
Friedel hasn't been impressive for a while now, and attacking players seemingly find it all too easy to get Collins to commit himself, then leave him stranded and out of position. Friedel, Dunne and Collins should be the bedrock of our side at the moment, but instead they're the weak link.
Friedel's form is pretty much an accademic argument right now as he's got very little time left on his contract and needs replacing due to age. Maybe he has slowed down this season, but I think he's been better than the defense in front of him. Dunne has been poor and needs to sort himself out. Yet when it comes to Collins I think he's been our best defender so far this season.
-
Friedel hasn't been impressive for a while now, and attacking players seemingly find it all too easy to get Collins to commit himself, then leave him stranded and out of position. Friedel, Dunne and Collins should be the bedrock of our side at the moment, but instead they're the weak link.
Friedel's form is pretty much an accademic argument right now as he's got very little time left on his contract and needs replacing due to age. Maybe he has slowed down this season, but I think he's been better than the defense in front of him. Dunne has been poor and needs to sort himself out. Yet when it comes to Collins I think he's been our best defender so far this season.
Collins does lots of good things, but too many times he comes thundering out, only to make a hash of things which then leaves Dunne trying to shift his carcass at pace back to cover. Warnock's even worse.
-
Of course certain midfielders have strengths and weaknesses in different areas - the creative midfielder, the tackling midfilder....
...the defensive midfielder.
Not such a thing.
Yes, there is.
A player who plays in the midfield whose duties are almost exclusively devoted towards but not strictly limited to: defending. They may also be screening midfielders that dictate play from a defensive or withdrawn position. Otherwise known as a deep lying playmaker or "quarterback".
See also: Makelele, Mikel, Mascherano, Gago, Reo Coker, Toulalan, M'Vila, Essien, Palacios, Diarra, Huddlestone, Vieira, Souness, Redondo, Mathaus, Rijkaard, van Bommel, Veron, Gattuso, Deschamps, Dunga, ...etc.
Ah, players of yore. Shows how you clearly missed the point. Yes, there have been players that have done the job throughout history - you've also missed the 'water'carrier' Deschamps. The point is that the term 'defensive-midfielder' has only come into vogue in the Prem years. The players, and the job, have always been there. Midfielders aren't expected to do just one thing - defend, attack, create --but all of them. That's why they are midfielders. its just that some have particular strengths in particual areas.
-
Oh dear. I didn't miss out Deschamps, that water carrier that won practically everything. And many of those players are still playing although what relevance that is to whether such a position exists is anybodys guess. I mentioned "greats of yore" to emphasise the point that the position does exist.
And what point did I miss?
You said there's no such thing as a defensive midfielder and then go on to say that the job has always been there. Eh?
I agree though, its nothing new. A job once called sweeper, anchorman, holding player and of course, defensive midfielder.
A winger or wide midfielder is a midfielder with a specific job. Is that role a figment of peoples imagination too?
Modern football is often played with holding midfielders and dedicated attacking midfielders now and often one striker. It used to be 4-4-2 with two central midfielders with similar roles. Not so much the trend now though.
And of course, just because a player is an attacking midfielder, it doesnt mean he doesnt help out in defence but its not his dedicated role. Thats why there are such terms as attacking midfielder, defensive midfielder, playmaker, winger, striker and tactics to utilise them. It defines their roles rather than having 11 autonomous players on the field.
-
If you have two wide players, like many have said, you're going to leave a central two exposed just because of sheer geography. If you want to play two wide players, you have to have three central players in some fashion - 4-5-1, 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 or whatever else you can think of - just because of literal space issues.
Monty, thats all very well and good when we have the players to play those systems, but unfortunately, some of our key players are missing through injury. I would also point out that I would rather watch us playing 442, as in the second half against Arsenal, and also the last 15 minutes against Blues, and have a go, rather than try to over complicate the tactis and watch dire football.
In general I'd agree with the initial point that a standard 4-4-2 leaves too many gaps in the modern game. But Tottingham and Liverpool both gave a first class example yesterday as to why the formation still has merit.
As always, it's about the personnel.
But I'm quickly coming round to the idea that it wouldn't matter what formation we play at present with the current form of our defenders.
You could argue that they're more exposed because of the kids but that doesn't explain rank bad and stupid individual errors, of which there have been plenty since about the Newcastle game onwards this season.
-
You could argue that they're more exposed because of the kids but that doesn't explain rank bad and stupid individual errors, of which there have been plenty since about the Newcastle game onwards this season.
In some ways it can.
If teams are 'getting at' our back 4 then that means they have more to do and sometimes it's make or break challenges. If Collins or Dunne lunge in then that's their error, but the fact they had that problem was the opposition run not being held up by a midfielder knowing where he should be.
Not saying the defence is playing well, but I wouldn't be surprised to see their form improve once Petrov and/or NRC are back fit and in the side.
-
Tottenham seem to be disproving the theory that 4-4-2 is dead, and with the strength we have in the wide areas they are a side we should be trying to emulate, it's not like their full backs are particularly strong, and they haven't got their first choice centre halves fit at present either.
Perhaps the reason we seem to be exposed is the fact that we are playing too deep, worried about the relative lack of pace we have at the back, Curtis Davies could be an answer to that if he has worked out how to clear a ball without slicing it.
-
Oh dear. I didn't miss out Deschamps, that water carrier that won practically everything. And many of those players are still playing although what relevance that is to whether such a position exists is anybodys guess. I mentioned "greats of yore" to emphasise the point that the position does exist.
And what point did I miss?
You said there's no such thing as a defensive midfielder and then go on to say that the job has always been there. Eh?
I agree though, its nothing new. A job once called sweeper, anchorman, holding player and of course, defensive midfielder.
A winger or wide midfielder is a midfielder with a specific job. Is that role a figment of peoples imagination too?
Modern football is often played with holding midfielders and dedicated attacking midfielders now and often one striker. It used to be 4-4-2 with two central midfielders with similar roles. Not so much the trend now though.
And of course, just because a player is an attacking midfielder, it doesnt mean he doesnt help out in defence but its not his dedicated role. Thats why there are such terms as attacking midfielder, defensive midfielder, playmaker, winger, striker and tactics to utilise them. It defines their roles rather than having 11 autonomous players on the field.
I referred to the term. That is only a modern Prem day thing. The player has always been there to do the job. I've said it enough times, inculding in the original post. Roles get changed throughout the history of the game and where they are supposed to be tactically, but a midfielder is still a midfielder. Those in the centre and those wide. Wingers are very rarely that anymore as they are expected to be up and down the flank all day like a 100 meter sprinter, but there is no such thing as a defensive midfield position.
When watching many a game its amazing to see people think, and some lower standards sides play with the 'attacking' midfielder standing in front of the 'defensive' midfielder and thinking that's how the position is meant to be played. Its not. The shape is the same but the name is different for the job that you described above.
-
You could argue that they're more exposed because of the kids but that doesn't explain rank bad and stupid individual errors, of which there have been plenty since about the Newcastle game onwards this season.
In some ways it can.
If teams are 'getting at' our back 4 then that means they have more to do and sometimes it's make or break challenges. If Collins or Dunne lunge in then that's their error, but the fact they had that problem was the opposition run not being held up by a midfielder knowing where he should be.
Not saying the defence is playing well, but I wouldn't be surprised to see their form improve once Petrov and/or NRC are back fit and in the side.
Only problem with that was both of those two were involved when we played Newcastle and Stoke away. This dodgy spell defensively predates their absence.
-
For me when fit I would play a 4-5-1 with Clark, Bannan and Reo Coker in the centre of midfield, and Downing left with Young right. Then when fit, I would bring Albrighton into the mix, rotating with the other 2 wingers. One thing is certain though, Ashley Young needs to pull his finger out or we need to sell him before his value plummets. He looked sullky on the left and innefective down the middle against Arsenal, while Downing always looks much better on the left than the right. Young just does not seem to have the youthful exuberance to trick players as much as he once did, and look half the player he did 18 months ago.
-
So peter, and I cant quite believe I'm still engaging you in this nonsense, how would you describe a central midfielder who is tasked to screen the back 4, to limit his attacks in order to cover against counter attacks and/or to track the oppositions "attacking" midfielders or forwards who are dropping off in front of the defence (the hole)?
-
You could argue that they're more exposed because of the kids but that doesn't explain rank bad and stupid individual errors, of which there have been plenty since about the Newcastle game onwards this season.
In some ways it can.
If teams are 'getting at' our back 4 then that means they have more to do and sometimes it's make or break challenges. If Collins or Dunne lunge in then that's their error, but the fact they had that problem was the opposition run not being held up by a midfielder knowing where he should be.
Not saying the defence is playing well, but I wouldn't be surprised to see their form improve once Petrov and/or NRC are back fit and in the side.
Only problem with that was both of those two were involved when we played Newcastle and Stoke away. This dodgy spell defensively predates their absence.
NRC didn't start the game actually and came on for Carew once the damage was done - our starting central two were Petrov and Ireland. As it goes I don't think we can read anything into that game as it was an bit of a freak result.
-
Of the top of my head they were involved and playing CM in both of those games I mentioned plus Tottenham (where Dunne was caught ball watching) and Sunderland away (where Dunne scored an OG).
If we had been looking like a solid, competent side up until the Fulham away match and only started slipping up when the likes of Bannan and Clark were in midfield the argument would have a bit more merit. But we were getting rolled over long before the absence of Petrov and NRC.
Maybe the sheer volume of goals v Newcastle was a freak. Nobody can say for certain yet as we're less than halfway through the campaign. If we're hit with a few more 4 goal/6 goal reversals between now and the end of the season then it would be hard to argue it was a blip, a bad day at the office.
What wasn't a freak occurrence that day is a shoddy defensive performance.
24 goals against already this year, almost on a par with the likes of Wigan and West Ham.
It's a definite achilles heel at the moment and it needs to be addressed.
-
It's not so much an Achilles heel as an Audley Harrison face.
And I think Dunne is largely to blame. His form has been wretched and his mind seems to be on Carew Island, which unfortunately is nowhere near Villa Park.
Christ, we need an overhaul and soon. Whilst he signed some good players, a lot of the fat from MONs era needs to be trimmed off.
-
It's not so much an Achilles heel as an Audley Harrison face.
And I think Dunne is largely to blame. His form has been wretched and his mind seems to be on Carew Island, which unfortunately is nowhere near Villa Park.
Christ, we need an overhaul and soon. Whilst he signed some good players, a lot of the fat from MONs era needs to be trimmed off.
I agree Maz. A massive overhaul is needed, and I wouldn't be averse to seeing any or all of our current back four moving on. Young, Collins, Dunne and Warnock have all been making mistakes for far too long now.
-
Speaking to some Citeh fans I know they say motivation has been an issue for him in the past.
When he'd fired up and raring to go he's an asset, as we seen last year. I don't know how much of that good form was down to proving a point to Garry Cook and co. but he had obviously wanted to give it a go at Citeh even with all their big new names on board and arrived back for pre season 09/10 in good shape. We benefited from that.
This summer he arrived back and looked a mess. How much of that being down to motivation or how much of it was down to being restricted in what he could do because of the re-emergence of a longstanding knee injury I'm not sure.
In fairness he looked a bit better in the game v Blackburn and wasn't directly at fault for the four goals Arsenal ran up. But as a team we have become used to not winning, the momentum for that coming from our start to the season when Dunne was all over the shop and directly responsible for a fair few of the goals we shipped.
-
I'd at least blame him for the Chamakh goal. But as much Friedel too, who also looks like that bit of sharpness that you cant help but lose when you age is departing him. A new keeper is becoming more of an issue.
I'd keep Luke Young and Warnock around but look for first choice fullbacks soon and I'd keep Collins around as cover and make Cuellar first choice as soon as he's fit again. Dunne might be first of the defenders on his way out and will need replacing. With Davies or perhaps a new player.
Beye can go too and Lichaj should be first reserve fullback cover.
It sounds a bit drastic perhaps but I cant help but feel that a new era is upon us and a new impetus is required.
More revolution than I had previously thought required but it makes sense under scrutiny. A lot of these players have been here a few years now and are a bit stale so it needs freshening up.
I dont know how far the resources can stretch to make that happen or even if Houllier agrees although I suspect he might.
By next summer I think the sqaud will have to be something like:
*New #1 keeper*, Friedel, Guzan, Parish or Siegrist as #2 and #3.
*New right back*, L Young, Lichaj, *New left back*, Warnock, Lowry.
*New centre half, Cuellar, Clark, Collins, Davies? Williams.
Albrighton, Downing, A Young, Carruthers, Bannan, Delph, Gardner, *New defensive midfielder*, Reo Coker, Johnson, Petrov, Ireland?
*New powerful striker*, Agbonlahor, Heskey, Delfouneso, Weimann
So goodbye to: Carew, Beye, Dunne, possibly Davies, Sidwell, possibly Ireland if he doesnt get his act together, Pires, Salifou, Osbourne, (dont know about Hogg and Herd yet but have my doubts).
So out go the likes of Carew, Beye, Dunne, Friedel (as first choice).
So that's six as a neccessity as I see it. Before any of the other players feel they have to move on. Will Warnock accept the challenge? Is Petrov still fit to start and would he stay if not? etc.
We'll probably get half of them in January.
-
It's amazing - and rather alarming - how many stalwarts of last season suddenly look vulnerable and with futures that are less than clear at the Villa. I'd like to be able to blame our current deficiencies in midfield on the number of defensive mistakes - ie, defence being put under pressure because we've got an inexperienced midfield at present - but actually, there are some very basic mistakes being made.
It's no exaggeration - well, perhaps a slight one - to say, with some justification, that we could almost need a new first choice back five come next season. If the current lot don't perk up.
-
Luke Young and James Collins should still be part of our long term plans.
It might surprise a few that Collins is still only 27. He looks (and moves) like a player 35+
Warnock and Dunne should be concerned. A player or two signed this Jan could provide the competition and kick up the arse that pair need.
Shawcross has been mentioned and I like the sound of that. Might have a job prising him away from Stoke but if we see the position as a priority we shouldn't be scared at paying the kind of price it would take to secure him -or anyone else- for what is a key role in the side.
I also like the look of Taiwo at Marseille. 6ft+, built like a brick outhouse and has a booming left foot shot on him. Usually plays left back but can play Left sided CB and wide left.
-
Tottenham seem to be disproving the theory that 4-4-2 is dead, and with the strength we have in the wide areas they are a side we should be trying to emulate, it's not like their full backs are particularly strong, and they haven't got their first choice centre halves fit at present either.
I don't think VDV could ever be considered a striker in a traditional 442.
In addition, they employ Modric and a destroyer (Palacious/The Hud/Jenas) as holding players. Despite Modric being considered an attacking player yet he sits very deep in their team, kind of in the quarterback position Mazrim referred to.
In my opinion their formation is a 4411, similar to us when young plays behind the striker.