Soccer coaching forum
and-again soccer forum
Register  |   |   |  Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
BOSS

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 120
Reply with quote  #1 

I think that 4-2-3-1

you can control in center and control other team possesion and speed.

 

.............O............

.............X............

...........................

X...........X............

........X........X.......

............................

.............X.............

..X.....X.......X.......X

kidscoach

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,162
Reply with quote  #2 
For early development in 11 aside I like 4-3-3.  It gets more players involved in the attack and the shifting is very easy.
GA_Coach

Registered:
Posts: 261
Reply with quote  #3 

The best formation is the one that suits your own team qualities.


__________________

Brianm

Registered:
Posts: 1,905
Reply with quote  #4 

GA coach said it right. You have to match the team formation to your teams players. You don't match your players to a formation you match formations to your players. Now tell us about your players and then we can tell you what would be best for them.

WillieB

Registered:
Posts: 5,650
Reply with quote  #5 

As WvH would say

1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1

 

 


__________________
A wise man once told me never argue with an idiot as bystanders may not be able to tell the difference.
CoachRuss

Registered:
Posts: 1,012
Reply with quote  #6 

I like the 4-4-2.  It provides the depth, spacing and width both defensively and attacking.  The attack can be easily support by the backs as the opportunties present themself, and it seems to ease the pressure on the defensive in comparison to a 3-4-3 or 4-3-3.

 

It seems to have more balance in the attack and defense.


__________________
Coach Russ, Out!
WillieB

Registered:
Posts: 5,650
Reply with quote  #7 

Aaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

These are only numbers, they mean F*** ALL

 


__________________
A wise man once told me never argue with an idiot as bystanders may not be able to tell the difference.
CoachRuss

Registered:
Posts: 1,012
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillieB

Aaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

These are only numbers, they mean F*** ALL

 

 

You are right.  These are just ways to identify fundamental positioning on the field (usually at kickoff) and fundamental field responsibilities.  The formation is a very fuild thing during the game.

 

Don't you have to start somewhere?

 

I mean.  If you don't identify some basic form to start, you would probably have everyone chasing the ball without regard to space and coverage.

 

What the alternative method to teach? (as I see supporting of attacks and covering for defense as actions taken by the players during the game..)


__________________
Coach Russ, Out!
WillieB

Registered:
Posts: 5,650
Reply with quote  #9 

I'm not going to get involved in this post as I've said my piece so many times in the past but just to make a point.

 

I like to play 4-4-2

 

Now is my 4 at the back a Flat Four?  Or is it a Flat 3 with Sweeper?  Are the 3 central or are the 2xFB and CB? or maybe I use a Sweeper Stopper system?

 

Is my four mids a Diamond Mid?  or maybe (and I've seen this on the forum recently) a flat mid?  or is it a square mid? 

 

Are my two at the front twin strikers?  or maybe a single striker and a withdrawn striker?

 

Where do I get my width from?  Is it two of the mids who play wide?  or maybe my full backs are expected to morph into wingers?  or does one of my strikers occupy a wide position?

 

And so on and on and on...........

 

Now if I can do this with a 4-4-2 I can also do it with a 4-3-3 or a 3-4-3 so first of all maybe you need to define what you mean by formation because so far no one has.  Or maybe no-one understands the question.

 

Sermon over.

 

 


__________________
A wise man once told me never argue with an idiot as bystanders may not be able to tell the difference.
Tino

Registered:
Posts: 114
Reply with quote  #10 

WillieB-  You are right, of course, but there can be different levels of this discussion and I think you are getting hung up thinking everybody has to answer the question at the most detailed level.  For example, my girls recently switched from a 4-4-2 to a 3-4-3 formation.  I think I can discuss this with coaches here by saying the reason we switched is because I have on the team 3 awesome defenders that give up less than 1/2 goal per game average and if would be better for our team to move the extra player up front.  Do I really need to get into a discussion of whether I am playing a flat back or deep sweeper plus 2 markers, if my midfield is flat or diamond, whether I play with a target player, and what the attributes of each player are that lead me to that decision in order to have the discussion in general terms with coaches here?  By the way, since the switch we have scored 27 goals and given up only 1.  I really think a few here have taken this formation discussion a bit far to prove a point that is not necessary.  But I say that with no disrespect to theirs or your soccer knowledge.

-Tino

 

By the way Mick, way to go fishing

Maddog

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,090
Reply with quote  #11 

With questions like this one can you really be shocked Italy won 3-1 over our U20's. Exactly where the problem lies, lack of critical thinking. Formations are a starting point and effect the game little if your players can't read and react to the ebb and flow of the game.

I'm with WvH again 1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1.

 

WillieB

Registered:
Posts: 5,650
Reply with quote  #12 

Tino, I'm not going too far to make a point.  The question was "What is the best fomation and why".  The answer is, "There isn't one"

 

My final word on this topic is

 

Your team plays 3-4-3, my team plays 3-4-3.  Ignoring factors such as the skill levels and ability of individual players and assume an even playing field answer this question. 

 

Does the fact we are both playing 3-4-3 mean our teams will be similar in the way we play the game, the roles of the players, who does what? 

 

The only way for the num,bers to be meaningful in a discussion such as this is to provide more detail


__________________
A wise man once told me never argue with an idiot as bystanders may not be able to tell the difference.
coachkev

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 14,627
Reply with quote  #13 

The BEST FORMATION is one where ALL your players are playing in the correct direction

 

1-3-4-2

1-4-4-1

1-5-2-1

1-6-3

1-2-4-2

1-4-1-4

2-3-3-2

2-4-1-3

2-5-2-1

2-5-1-2

2-6-2

3-5-2

3-4-3

3-1-4-2

3-2-1-4

4-4-2

4-3-3

4-2-4

4-5-1

4-1-4-1

4-4-1-1

4-2-3-1

 

Take away the number you first thought of...and the answers 11

 

SYSTEMS FIT INTO PLAYERS - PLAYERS DO NOT FIT INTO SYSTEMS

 

The key is the coaches skill to 'architect' a sculpture from the block of stone they acquire to begin with and 'form'

CoachRic

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 371
Reply with quote  #14 
I prefer the term of roles over formation, although players playing in the roles that suit them will staticly lay out on a field (at the start of each half and restart after goal) looking like some type of formation. Early on, when I first started coaching (having come over form Refereeing pointy football for 11 years, I was caught up in formations and numbers. It was easy to get caught up in it as pointy football and it's short plays and quick restarts are based on formations and limited responsibilities within each formation or play.
As I have come full turn, I now start to see things from Willie's POV. I have had teams that defend better with only three in the back, but even within those three there have been different roles depending upon their strengths and weaknesses.
Just a rookies point of view.
kidscoach

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,162
Reply with quote  #15 

Why not change the topic to pros and cons of each theoretical formation? 

Any idiot knows that it is the best formatiom if it 1. best fits your players and 2. best addresses what the opponent is doing at the time. 

BOSS

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 120
Reply with quote  #16 

ok, what is the best formation it in your opinion, it doesn't fact.

 

-I think that in 4-2-3-1 you have depth in the center and this is the key to  the win.

 

-by the way, what is the key to the win? tactics, psychology, discipline, defense, center field? what do you think?

 

 

 

coachkev

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 14,627
Reply with quote  #17 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOSS

ok, what is the best formation it in your opinion, it doesn't fact.

 

-I think that in 4-2-3-1 you have depth in the center and this is the key to  the win.

 

-by the way, what is the key to the win? tactics, psychology, discipline, defense, center field? what do you think?

 

 

 

The key is to score more than your opponents

All the rest are tools to get there

RickG

Registered:
Posts: 346
Reply with quote  #18 

Here is another perspective. The best formation is the one you know the best and can teach your players with the least confusion.

 

For example, I "know" the 3-4-3, and 3-4-1-2 well, along with the classic German 3-5-2 (single defensive mid)because I've used variations of these systems on many youth teams over the past several years and I've forced myself to write out descriptions of the systems to hand out to the assistant coaches, so we are all on the same tactical page and teaching the same stuff.  I haven't done this with 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 (although I'm thinking of a 4-4-2 for my U13 boys team next year). I simply don't know these systems as well and wouldn't be able to teach them as effectively.

 

In any case, in the past, I've usually looked at my players and picked one of the 3 systems above for my youth teams. For example, I have a 'special' -- very gifted -- dribbler and playmaker on my U17 girls team. She was made to play as a withdrawn striker/ attacking mid. I also have a tall (5' 10''), fast, physically dominant centre back and some smaller, really quick fullbacks who play well in a zonal back 3. I also have a couple of fast, fit, outside mids who can run all day. So for the girls we have played 3-4-1-2 with great success for several years.

 

But on my U12 boys team last year -- small and lower level -- we used a 3-4-3 due to the balance on the field, the attacking orientation, and simplicity of teaching the system. But, in many games, last season against better teams, I switched to 3-4-2 and used a dedicated 'man-marker' to mark the other team's best player. So, the key is -- can you teach your base system well enough so that the kids understand the nature of the adjustments you sometimes need to make. A formation is a template -- but the actual game is fluid. So, naturally, the template is only your starting point in any game. The best teams often play several different ways in the same game.

JeffS

Registered:
Posts: 1,004
Reply with quote  #19 

If we are talking about the youth game isn't "the best formation" the one that allows us to teach our players what we want to teach them?


__________________
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.
Bill Cosby
MrMartin

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 936
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffS

If we are talking about the youth game isn't "the best formation" the one that allows us to teach our players what we want to teach them?

That's the spin I'd put on this, too.

 

I feel most comfortable teaching soccer via a 4-4-2.  It allows me to teach certain concepts I think are important, like forwards moving creatively, midfielders joining the attack and reading opportunities, and backs feeling free to take opportunities to attack.  I feel most comfortable teaching those concepts from a 4-4-2.

 

I tolerate the 4-3-3 and can teach OK in that setup, too.  But I find it very hard to teach creative movement from a 3-player front.  I know it can be done, but I'm not so good at it.

 

I find it very difficult to teach from a 3-5-2.  The requirements seem too rigid, and the players seem to need to be more specialized than I like to have them at U11 or U12.  For example, the wing midfielders in a 3-5-2 absolutely need to be very fit, fast, and hard-working to handle the amount of space they must cover; that limits WHO I can play there.  But I suppose a different coach with a stronger grasp of the 3-5-2 or simply more experience with it, would not have the problems I have in teaching from that setup.

 

So, I suppose it's a blend of what RickG and JeffS wrote:  1) A formation that you are comfortable with and knowledgable in, since better understanding helps you convey concepts better, and 2) a formation that assists you with the concepts you think are important, again helping you teach better.


__________________
U13 Barracudas
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

COPYRIGHT @ 2004 - 2016 AND-AGAIN, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED