The complete soccer coaching experience SOCCERCOACHING

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

subscribe to

T h e c o m p l e t e s o c c e r c o a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e

SOCCERCOACHING

I n t e r n a t i o n a l

The complete
soccer coaching
experience

Magazine – Website
Video exercises – Exercise database

Exercise editor – Player Tracking System

and more …

W W W . S O C C E R C O A C H I N G I N T E R N A T I O N A L . C O M

FFOORRMMAATTIIOONNSS

In association football, the formation describes how the players in a team are positioned on
the pitch. Different formations can be used depending on whether a team wishes to play more
attacking or defensive football.

Formations are described as the number of players in each area from the defensive line (not
including the goalkeeper). For example 4-4-2 describes the formation as having: 4 defenders,
4 midfielders and 2 forwards. Conventionally, the formation can be described with 3
numbers, although 4-numbered (e.g. 4-4-1-1) and 5-numbered formations (e.g. 4-1-2-1-2) can
be used. The numbering system was not present until the 4-2-4 system was developed in the
1950s.

The choice of formation is often related to other tactical choices, such as the choice of
playing style. Formations can be deceptive in analysing a particular team’s style of play, e.g.
one team could play 4-4-2 and work defensively, whereas their opposition using the same
formation could play much more attacking football.

Formations can be altered during a game, but this requires adaptations of the players to fit in
to the new system. This can be due to a team wishing to change their offensive or defensive
strategy, or even due to the loss of a player. Some formations also lend themselves to
dynamically changing as players move up and down the field, e.g., the Brazilian 4-2-4 could
effectively become a 2-4-4 during a match.

Formations are used in both professional and amateur football matches. However, in amateur
matches these tactics are sometimes adhered to less strictly due to the lesser severity of the
occasion. Skill and discipline on behalf of the players is also needed to effectively carry out a
given formation in professional football. Formations need to be chosen with the players
available in mind, and some of the formations below were created to address deficits or
strengths in different types of players.

EEAARRLLYY DDAAYYSS
In the football matches of the 19th century defensive football was not played, and the line-ups
reflected the all-attacking nature of these games.

In the first international game, Scotland v. England on 30 November 1872, England played
with seven or eight forwards in (1-1-8 or 1-2-7) and Scotland with six (2-2-6). For England,
one player would remain in defence picking up loose balls and one or two players would
hang around midfield and kick the ball upfield for the other players to chase. The English
style of play at the time was all about individual excellence and English players were
renowned for their dribbling skills. Players would attempt to take the ball forward as far as
possible and when they could proceed no further they would kick it ahead for someone else to
chase. Scotland surprised England by actually passing the ball among its players. The
Scottish outfield players were organised into pairs and each player would always attempt to
pass the ball to his assigned partner. Paradoxically, with so much attention given to attacking
play, the game ended with a 0-0 draw.

CCLLAASSSSIICC FFOORRMMAATTIIOONNSS

22–33–55 ((TTHHEE PPYYRRAAMMIIDD))
The Pyramid FormationThe first long-term successful formation was first recorded in 1880.
However in “Association Football” published by Caxton in 1960, the following appears in
Vol II, page 432:

“Wrexham … the first winner of the Welsh Cup in 1877 … for the first time
certainly in Wales and probably in Britain, a team played three
half backs and five forwards …”

The 2-3-5 was originally known as the Pyramid with the
numerical formation being referenced retrospectively. By the
1890s it was the standard formation in Britain and had spread
all over the world. With some variations it was used by most
top level teams up to the 1940s.

For the first time a balance between attacking and defending
was reached. When defending, the two defenders (fullbacks)
would watch out for the opponent’s wingers (the outside
players
the midfielders
(halfbacks) would watch for the other three forwards.

The centre halfback had a key role in both helping to organize
the team’s attack and marking the opponent’s centre forward,
supposedly one of their most dangerous players.

It was this formation which gave rise to the convention of shirt numbers [1] but can appear
confused when applied to the classic 4-4-2 line up, i.e.:

the attacking

line); while

in

01 – Goalkeeper
02 – Right back
03 – Left back
04 – Centre back
05 – Centre back (‘Libero’)
06 – Defensive midfielder
07 – Right winger
08 – Centre midfielder
09 – Centre forward
10 – Offensive midfielder, Playmaker
11 – Left winger

Teams that used this formation

– Uruguay, 1930 World Cup winner
– Argentina, 1930 World Cup runner up

TTHHEE DDAANNUUBBIIAANN SSCCHHOOOOLL
The Danubian School of football is a modification of the 2-3-5 formation as played by the
Austrians, Czechs and Hungarians in the 1920s, and taken to its peak by the Austrians in the
1930s. It relied on short-passing and individual skills.

Teams that used this formation

– Austria, 4th at the 1934 World Cup

MMEETTOODDOO
The Metodo was devised by Vittorio Pozzo, coach of the Italian national team in the 1930s. It
was a derivation of the Danubian School. The system was based on the 2-3-5 formation,
Pozzo realized that his halfbacks would need some more support in order to be superior to the
opponents’ midfield, so he pulled 2 of the forwards to just in-front of midfield, creating a 2-3-
2-3 formation. This created a stronger defence than previous systems, as well as allowing
effective counterattacks. The Italian national team won back-to-back World Cups in 1934 and
1938 using this system.

TTHHEE WWMM

The WM system was created in the mid-1920s by Herbert Chapman of
Arsenal to counter a change in the offside law in 1925. The change had
reduced the number of opposition players that attackers needed between
themselves and the goal-line from three to two. This led to the introduction
of a centre-back to stop the opposing centre-forward, and tried to balance
defensive and offensive playing. The formation became so successful that
by the late-1930s most English clubs had adopted the WM. Retrospectively
the WM has either been described as a 3-2-5 or as a 3-4-3.

TTHHEE WWWW
The WW was a development of the WM created by the Hungarian coach Márton Bukovi who
turned the 3-2-5 WM “upside down”. The lack of an effective centre-forward in his team
necessitated moving this player back to midfield to create a playmaker, with a midfielder
instructed to focus on defence. This created a 3-5-2 (also described as a 3-3-4), and was
described by some as an early version of the 4-2-4. This formation was successfully used by
fellow countryman Gusztáv Sebes in the Hungarian national team of the early 1950s.

33–33–44
The 3-3-4 formation was similar to the WW with the notable exception of having an inside-
forward (as opposed to centre-forward) deployed as a midfield schemer alongside the two
wing-halves. This formation would be commonplace during the 1950s and early 1960s. One
of the best exponents of the system was the Tottenham Hotspur double-winning side of 1961,
which deployed a midfield of Danny Blanchflower, John White and David Mackay. FC Porto
won the 2005-06 Portuguese national championship using this unusual formation (coach: Co
Adriaanse).

44–22–44
The 4-2-4 formation attempts to combine a strong attack with a strong defence, and was
conceived as a reaction to WM’s stiffness. It could also be considered a further development
of the WW. The 4-2-4 was the first formation to be described using numbers.

While the initial developments leading to the 4-2-4 were devised by Márton Bukovi, the
credit for creating the 4-2-4 lies with two different people: Flávio Costa, the Brazilian
national coach in the early 1950s, as well as another Hungarian Béla Guttman. These tactics
seemed to be developed independently, with the Brazilians discussing these ideas while the

Hungarians seemed to be putting them into
motion. However the fully developed 4-2-4 was
only ‘perfected’ in Brazil in the late 1950s.

Costa published his ideas, the “diagonal system”,
in the Brazilian newspaper O Cruzeiro, using
schematics as the ones used here and, for the
first time ever, the formation description by
numbers as used in this article. The “diagonal
system” was another precursor of the 4-2-4 and
was created to spur improvisation in players.

Guttman himself moved to Brazil later in the
1950s to help develop these tactical ideas using
the experience of Hungarian coaches.

The 4-2-4 formation made use of the increasing
players skills and fitness, aiming to effectively
use 6 defenders and 6 forwards, with the
midfielders performing both tasks. The 4th
defender increased the number of defensive
players but mostly allowed them to be closer together, thus enabling effective cooperation
among them, the point being that a stronger defense would allow an even stronger attack.

The relatively empty midfield relied on defenders that should now be able not only to steal
the ball, but also hold it, pass it or even run with it and start an attack. So this formation
required that all players, including defenders, are somehow skillful and with initiative,
making it a perfect fit for the Brazilian player’s mind. The 4-2-4 needed a high level of
tactical awareness as having only 2 midfielders could lead to defensive problems. The system
was also fluid enough to allow the formation to change throughout play.

4-2-4 was first used with success at club level in Brazil by Palmeiras and Santos, and was
used by Brazil in their wins at 1958 World Cup and 1970 World Cup, both featuring Pelé,
and Zagallo who played in the first and coached the second. The formation was quickly
adopted throughout the world after the Brazilian success.

Teams that used this formation

– Brazil, 1958 FIFA World Cup Winners
– Celtic FC, European Cup 1966-67 Winners “The Lisbon Lions”
– Brazil, 1970 FIFA World Cup winner

CCOOMMMMOONN MMOODDEERRNN FFOORRMMAATTIIOONNSS

The following formations are used in modern football. The formations are flexible allowing
tailoring to the needs of a team, as well as to the players available. Variations of any given
formation include changes in positioning of players, as well as replacement of a traditional
defender by a sweeper.

44–33–33
The 4-3-3 was a development of the 4-2-4, and was played by the
Brazilian national team in the 1962 World Cup. The extra player in
midfield allowed a stronger defence, and the midfield could be
staggered for different effects. The three midfielders normally play
closely together to protect the defence, and move laterally across the
field as a coordinated unit. The three forwards split across the field
to spread the attack, and are expected to “tackle back”. When used
from the start of a game, this formation is widely regarded as
encouraging defensive play, and should not be confused with the
practice of modifying a 4-4-2 by bringing on an extra forward to
replace a midfield player when behind in the latter stages of a game.

A staggered 4-3-3 involving a defensive midfielder (usually numbered 4 or 6) and two
attacking midfielders (numbered 8 and 10) was commonplace in Italy, Argentina and
Uruguay during the 1960s and 1970s. The Italian variety of 4-3-3 was simply a modification
of WM, by converting one of the two wing-halves to a libero (sweeper), whereas the
Argentine and Uruguayan formations were derived from 2-3-5 and retained the notional
attacking centre-half. The national team which made this famous was the Dutch team of the
1974 and 1978 World Cups, even though the team won neither.

In club football, the team that brought this formation to the forefront was the famous Ajax
Amsterdam team of the early 1970s, which won three European Cups with Johan Cruyff.
Chelsea used this formation to great effect under José Mourinho in the time he was at the
club. While getting his team to constantly press the opposition when defending, he also likes
the two wingers to come back to create a 4-5-1 formation.

At the 2006 FIFA World Cup Spain and The Netherlands played both a variation of 4-3-3
without wingers. The three strikers would interchange positions and run the channels like a
regular striker would.

Teams that used this formation

– Greece national football team, winners Euro 2004
– Brazil national team, winners 1962 FIFA World Cup
– Feyenoord in winning the 1970 European Cup
–
Juventus F.C., Serie A winners and UEFA Champions League Winners 1995/96
– Rosenborg B.K., in their 13-in-a-row league wins & 10 seasons in the UEFA CL
– All the teams coached by Zdeněk Zeman
– Chelsea F.C., Premiership Winners 2004/05 2005/06
– Olympique Lyonnais, Ligue 1 Winners 2001/02 – 2006/07
– FC Barcelona, La Liga Winners 2004/05 2005/06, UEFA Champions League 2005/06
– Chelsea F.C., UEFA Champions League 2007/2008 runner-up
– FC Zenit Saint Petersburg, UEFA Cup Winners 2007/08

44–44–22

This adaptable formation is the most common in football
today, so well known that it has even inspired a magazine
title, FourFourTwo. The midfielders are required to work
hard to support both the defence and the attack: one of the
central midfielders is expected to go upfield as often as
possible to support the forward pair, while the other will
play a “holding role”, shielding the defence; the two wide
midfield players must move up the flanks to the goal line in
attacks and yet also protect the fullback wide defenders. It is
a very popular formation in Britain especially.

Teams that used this formation

– Brazilian National Team during 1994, winners of

the 1994 World Cup

– Manchester United F.C., Treble Winners 1998-99
– Arsenal F.C., Unbeaten Season 2003/04

44–44–22 DDIIAAMMOONNDD OORR 44–11–22–11–22
The 4-4-2 diamond (also described as 4-1-2-1-2 ) staggers the midfield. The width in the
team has to come from the full-backs pushing forwards.

Teams that used this formation

– Argentina – Probably the team that uses it more often, although
in the 2006 FIFA World Cup coach José Pekerman alternated
between 4-1-2-1-2 and 4-2-2-2. Carlos Bilardo’s team is a
clear example with Diego Maradona being the offensive
midfielder. This position is known as enganche and is a key
position for Argentine football. This player often has more
freedom than the rest and is considered the creative player, the
playmaker, which can ‘break’ the formation and move freely
along the offensive field. Other examples are Ronaldinho,
Juan Román Riquelme, Rivaldo, Gheorghe Hagi, Zidane,
Kaká, and Totti. The defensive midfielder is key for getting
the ball back and covering the spaces left by the fullbacks or
other players, being some sort of “midfield sweeper”. This position is key for the 4-3-1-
2 formation because of the recuperation of possession and several times this player
distributes the ball to the teammates. Some examples include Dunga, Torsten Frings,
Fernando Redondo, and Makelele.

– Germany – With the speciality of two Full Backs who are also capable of playing like
good wingbacks, which is more offensive (Philipp Lahm, Marcell Jansen) – if there is a
counter attack, the defensive midfielder will come to help the two centre backs.

– England National Team – the so-called “Wingless Wonders”, winners of World Cup 1966
– AC Milan winner of the Champions League 2003, 2007 and the 2004 Scudetto (coached

by Carlo Ancelotti)

– FC Porto winner of the Champions League 2004 (managed by José Mourinho)
– Real Madrid 2001-2002 champions league winners in final
– The Czech Republic used this formation for the Euro 2004
– Boca Juniors winner of the Copa Libertadores 2000 and 2001 (managed by Carlos

Bianchi), and 2007 (managed by Miguel Angel Russo).

44–44–11–11
A variation of 4-4-2 with one of the strikers playing ‘in the hole’, or
as a ‘second striker’, slightly behind their partner. The second
striker is generally a more creative player, the playmaker.

Teams that used this formation

Italy, 2006 FIFA World Cup Winners:

–
– Greece, European champion 2004
– Finnish national team
–
Juventus during 2001/2002 and 2002/2003
– Manchester United F.C. during 2006-07 season
– Fenerbahçe S.K. 2006/2007 season Turkish League

champions.

44–33–22–11 ((TTHHEE ”CCHHRRIISSTTMMAASS TTRREEEE” FFOORRMMAATTIIOONN))
This is another variation of the 4-4-2, commonly described as the ‘Christmas Tree’ formation.
Another forward is brought on for a midfielder to play ‘in the hole’. so leaving two forwards
slightly behind the most forward striker. Terry Venables, first brought in this system
throughout England’s Euro 96 campaign. Glenn Hoddle then used this formation during his
time in charge of the England national football team since then the formation has lost its
popularity in England.

Teams that used this formation

– AC Milan, 2007 Champion’s League Winners:
– FC Barcelona during the 2004–05 and 2005–06 seasons when not playing 4-3-3 with
Ronaldinho and Ludovic Giuly (or sometimes Lionel Messi during 2005–06) playing
behind Samuel Eto’o.

– Fenerbahce S.K., Turkish Super League and UEFA Champions League in 2007/2008
– Egypt national football team during 1998 African Cup of Nations
– France national football team champions of 1998 FIFA World Cup

55–33–22

This formation has three central defenders (possibly with one acting
as a sweeper.) This system is heavily reliant on the wing-backs
providing width for the team. The two wide full-backs act as wing-
backs. It is their job to work their flank along the full length of the
pitch, supporting both the defence and the attack.

Teams that used this formation

– Germany adopted this formation between 1990 and 1994,

– Celtic FC, during their 2001 treble winning season and run to

winning the 1990 World Cup

the UEFA Cup Final in 2003