I have been in a musing sort of mood this week pondering over those things that seem to have come and gone from the beautiful game.

Things like the little flags on the half way line, the magic sponge and bucket of water – the essential tools of physios in the past – and the moustache, once the face furniture of choice amongst the world’s elite but now limited to the odd manager and South American second division defender.

But, more worryingly than all of those, there appears to be something else that is rapidly fading into football history, and that is the classic 4-4-2 formation. For decades this has been the first choice line-up, four at the back, four in midfield and two up front. Solid, reliable, attack-minded and exciting.

Yet today’s game is moving away from this formation at a frightening speed. Although it would be wrong to suggest the 4-5-1 or 4-4-1-1 line-ups are a new invention, it is only this season have we seen them effectively taking over as number one preference.

Of course some teams have the players to pull off the 4-5-1 while still remaining attacking and forward thinking. Manchester United, for example, can play Giggs and Duff in the wide positions while Chelsea have Cole, Robben and Duff. In both those cases the 4-5-1 can easily and legitimately be construed as a 4-3-3.

However, for the lesser team the 4-5-1 formation is purely defensive, little more than a spoiling tactic aimed at crowding out the midfield and making it hard for the opposition to score while hoping their lone striker can sneak a goal.

It is, in a word, boring. It makes for some tedious matches where the ball is almost eternally locked in a midfield mess that often resembles a school ground kick-about, only with sponsors.

One of the most glaring examples of just how bad this system can make the sport from a spectator’s point of view came last month when Leicester took on Blackburn, with both sides opting to play the lone striker and pack midfield.

It made for a dour encounter that was so tedious it even prompted the supporters who had paid good money to watch bad football start to chant for the return of 4-4-2.

However, while I think the 4-5-1 formation may be ruining the beauty of the game, it can’t be denied that it is effective. Everton, for example, have built an entire season on the formation, realising their limitations and deciding to play one striker in just about every match they have started.

If they end up behind or heading for a draw they throw on another forward, traditionally Duncan Ferguson, and start to play attacking football which is actually worth watching.

Playing this system may have prompted many people to turn off their televisions on a Sunday afternoon but it has also taken them to fourth in the table and within spitting distance of a Champions League spot.

In my mind the main reasons behind this plague of lone strikers are two-fold. Firstly the lesser teams see the more successful ones doing it and decide it must be worth a try, failing to realise that they simply don’t have the players to handle it.

The second, and more worrying reason, is that the gulf between the top sides and lower ones is now so great that teams have little option other than to try and stifle the game and strangle the life out of the midfield in order to avoid heavy defeat. No thoughts of victory, just of steering clear of annihilation.

But no matter how successful or even adequate this currently fashionable lone striker system may be, it is certainly no substitute for the real thing. 4-4-2. Two strikers forming a formidable partnership and taking the game by the scruff of the neck.

I, for one, don’t watch football to see effective, efficient and dull teams play out boring games. I want the excitement and thrill of goals. So let’s start a campaign to bring back 4-4-2, or even 4-2-4 before only fans of the two teams concerned can be bothered to watch matches thus signalling the death of the neutral.

Contact James on: [email protected]