Ex nihilo nihil fit is a Latin pronouncement which translates to ‘from nothing, nothing comes’. It is the underpinning principle of the first law of thermodynamics, which states that matter or energy can be neither created nor destroyed. What exists at any point in time can only be a reconfiguration of previous material forms.
The development of football formations over the decades captures the ex nihilo nihil fit maxim. Formations have not been designed in an ideational vacuum; they have been constructed in response to the strengths and shortcomings of previous configurations. Changes are not spontaneous, but arise as amendments from pre-existing formations. For example 3-5-2 was a mutation from 4-4-2 and allowed for greater domination in midfield. 4-3-3 then arose which countered 3-5-2 by allowing for an even match-up in central midfield but enabled more presence on the flanks. Organisms interacting within their environmental niche via cooperative and competitive enterprises thus form mutable patterns.
This perspective aligns with worldviews that perceive history as a cyclical process. Pantheistic religions, which view God as an intrinsic feature of the natural world, tend to embrace a cyclical notion of nature. Humans are considered an embedded feature of the world and are not exempt from the ebbs and flows of its recursive processes. History is not following some human-inspired path of progress to an ideal form of society – or perfect football formation. In his book ‘Inverting the Pyramid’ Jonathan Wilson highlights how formations have changed over the years: when football began as an organized enterprise, a 2-3-5 (with only two defenders) was the favoured formation. At the present point in history, this structure has to some degree been inverted with formations skewed towards defensive security. But the cyclical worldview suggests that the trend will eventually flow back to the previous attack-weighted approach.
This contrasts with the view, presently associated with what can be considered the Western worldview, that human society is following a linear path of progress towards one ideal model of social organization. This notion is argued by political writer John Gray to be a secularized version of Christian thought. Under a monotheistic religion such as Christianity, God is transcendental and separate from the natural world. Human beings are designed in God’s image and have dominion over the natural world, and are thus also partially distinct from nature. Ex nihilo nihil fit is less central to this worldview, as God created the universe ex nihilo. It is also perceived that humans, aided by science and technology, can control and subjugate natural processes, which can thereby help them to create hitherto unseen global harmony. The Western belief in linear human progress would suggest that football formations are developing towards an ideal type of on-pitch configuration. Eventually this perfect formation will be realised, providing an ultimate expression of football organization. At the moment, on this progressive continuum, 4-2-3-1 is the optimum model.
But perhaps a midway point which can accommodate both of the opposing worldviews is preferable. England should recognize that human progress will not lead to the perfect formation, but neither should they remain an inert feature of a cyclical process. They should therefore expedite the cycle and adopt a 2-3-5 formation – several decades before it is likely to become fashionable again!
England: 2-3-5
Apart from Heskey, that formation doesn’t look too bad!
I’d have swap Defoe and Heskey round and use Heskey and Crouch as a ‘Pillars of Hercules’ pairing to provide knock downs for the ‘Poseidon’s Trident’* attack trio of Defoe, Rooney and Bent.
*Instead of a ‘Poseidon’s Trident’ Fabio could play Rooney, Defoe and Bent in a three-headed ‘Cerberus’ system, with the obvious benefits and drawbacks that system provides.