Tweet
Formation (association football)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The choice of formation is often related to the type of players available to the coach.
[edit] Nomenclature
Formations are described using the number of players in each sector of play (not including the goalkeeper).
[edit] Early days
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.
[edit] Classic formations
[edit] 2-3-5 (The Pyramid)
The Pyramid Formation
The first long-term successful formation was first recorded in 1880.[1] 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 in the attacking line); while 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[2] but can appear confused when applied to the classic 4-4-2 line up, i.e.:
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.
[edit] Metodo
The Metodo was devised by Vittorio Pozzo, coach of the Italian national team in the 1930s.[3] 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.
[edit] The WM
WM Formation
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.
[edit] The WW
The WW was a development of the WM created by the Hungarian coach Márton Bukovi who turned the 3-2-5 WM "upside down".[4] 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.
[edit] 3-3-4
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).
[edit] 4-2-4
The 4-2-4 Formation
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[5].[4][6] 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.[5] The "diagonal system" was another precursor of the 4-2-4 and was created to spur improvisation in players.
Guttmann 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 defence 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.
[edit] Common modern formations
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.
[edit] 4-3-3
4-3-3 Formation
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. Quite simply, it is a more attacking 4-5-1. The extra player in midfield allows 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 may be 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. Most teams using this formation now use the specialist defensive midfielder; Chelsea F.C. and F.C. Barcelona are the most famous recent examples.[7]
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.
[edit] 4-4-2
4-4-2 Formation
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: typically 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.[8][9]
[edit] 4-4-2 diamond or 4-1-2-1-2
4-4-2 Diamond Formation
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 forward.
[edit] 4-4-1-1
4-4-1-1 Formation
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.[10]
[edit] 4-3-2-1 (the 'Christmas Tree' formation)
4-3-2-1 Formation
The 4-3-2-1 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.
The Christmas Tree formation is considered a relatively narrow formation and depends on full-backs to provide presence in wide areas. The formation is also relatively fluid. During open play, one of the side central midfielders may drift to the flank to add additional presence.
[edit] 5-3-2
5-3-2 Formation
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.[11]
[edit] 5-3-2 with Sweeper or 1-4-3-2
5-3-2 Sweeper Formation
A variant of the above, this involves a more withdrawn sweeper, who may join the midfield, and more advanced full-backs.
[edit] 3-4-3
3-4-3 Formation
Using a 3-4-3 the midfielders expected to split their time between attacking and defending. Having only three dedicated defenders means that if the opposing team breaks through the midfield, they will have a greater chance to score than with a more conventional defensive configuration, such as 4-5-1 or 4-4-2. However, the three forwards allow for a greater concentration on attack. This formation is used by more offensive-minded teams.
[edit] 3-5-2
3-5-2 Formation
This formation is similar to 5-3-2 except that the two wingmen are oriented more towards the attack. Because of this, the central midfielder tends to remain further back in order to help prevent counter-attacks. It differs from the classical 3-5-2 of the WW by having a non-staggered midfield. It was used for the first time at international level by the Argentinian coach Carlos Salvador Bilardo[12]. Many teams also use a central attacking midfielder and two defensive midfielders, so the midfielders form a W formation.
[edit] 3-6-1
3-6-1 Formation
This uncommon but modern formation obviously focuses in the ball possession in the midfield. In fact, it is very rare to see it as an initial formation, as it is better used to keep results. Its more common variants are 3-4-2-1 or 3-4-3 Diamond, which use two wingbacks. The lone forward must be tactically gifted, because he is not only focused in scoring, but to play back to the goal to assist with back passes to his teammates. Once the team is leading the game, the tactics focuses even more in ball control, short passes and time wasting. On the other hand, when the team is losing, at least one of the playmakers will play more often in the edge of the area to add depth to the attack. Guus Hiddink is one of the few coaches who has used this formation when coaching Australia, in the 2006 World Cup
[edit] 4-5-1
4-5-1 Formation
4-5-1 is a defensive formation; however if the two midfield wingers play a more attacking role it can be likened to 4-3-3. The formation can be used to grind out 0-0 draws or preserve a lead, as the packing of the centre midfield makes it difficult for the opposition to build-up play. Because of the 'closeness' of the midfield, the opposing team's forwards will often be starved of possession. However, due to the lone striker, the centre of the midfield does have the responsibility of pushing forward as well. The defensive midfielder will often control the pace of the game.[13]
[edit] 4-2-3-1
4-2-3-1 Formation
This formation is widely used by Spanish and French sides: it is a defensive formation which is quite flexible, as both the side midfielders and the fullbacks may join the attack, usually on the counter. In defence, this formation is similar to the 4-5-1. It is used to maintain possession of the ball and stopping opponent attacks by controlling the midfield area of the field. The lone striker may be very tall and strong to hold the ball up as his midfielders and fullbacks join him in attack. The striker could also be very fast. In these cases, the opponent's defence will be forced to fall back early, thereby leaving space for the offensive central midfielder. This formation is used especially when a playmaker is to be highlighted.
This formation is also currently used by Brazil as an alternative to the 4-2-4 formation of late 50's to 1970. Implemented similarly to how original 4-2-4 was used back then, use of this formation in this manner is very offensive, creating a 6-man attack and a six-man defence tactical layout. The front 4 attackers are composed as wide forwards and playmaker forward in support of a target striker in front.
[edit] 4-6-0
A highly unconventional formation, the 4-6-0 is an evolution of the 4-2-3-1 in which the centre forward is exchanged for a player who normally plays as a trequartista (that is, in the 'hole'). Suggested as a possible formation for the future of football,[14] the formation sacrifices an out-and-out striker for the tactical advantage of a mobile front four attacking from a position that the opposition defenders cannot mark without being pulled out of position.[15] However, owing to the intelligence and pace required by the front four attackers to create and attack any space left by the opposition defenders, the formation requires a very skilful and well-drilled front four. Due to these high requirements from the attackers, and the novelty of playing without a proper goalscorer, the formation has been adopted by very few teams, and rarely consistently. The formation was first professionally adopted by Luciano Spalletti's Roma side during the 2005-06 Serie A season (mostly out of necessity) as his "strikerless formation",[16] and then notably by Sir Alex Ferguson's Manchester United side in the 2007-08 Premier League season (who won the Premier League and Champions League that season).[17]
[edit] 5-4-1
This is a particularly defensive formation, with an isolated forward and a packed defence. Again however, a couple of attacking fullbacks can make this formation resemble something like a 3-4-3.
[edit] Incomplete formations
When a player is sent-off (after being shown a red card), the teams generally fall back to defensive formations such as 4-4-1 or 5-3-1. Only when a draw is not an option (e.g. in a playoff or knockout match) will a team with ten players play in a risky attacking formation such as 4-3-2 or even 4-2-3. When more than one player is missing from the team the common formations are generally disbanded in favour of either maximum concentration on defence, or maximum concentration on attack.
[edit] Future formations
This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (June 2008)The thinking about the future of football formations is that, with the increase in fitness of players, the normal, symmetrical formation is out of date. Variety is needed in teams; so a pacey, direct winger might be deployed with a slower, more creative player on the other flank. An example can be seen with the Argentina national team playing "one armed" with Juan Riquelme attacking from the left, or the Manchester United F.C. team of the 1990s with Ryan Giggs making attacking runs from one wing with David Beckham playing crosses from deeper on the other, or currently as Cristiano Ronaldo makes attacking runs and Ryan Giggs provides the crosses. Another example is Celtic FC, who employs the explosive Aiden McGeady down one flank, and the less explosive Shunsuke Nakamura down the other.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The choice of formation is often related to the type of players available to the coach.
- Narrow formations. Teams with a surfeit of central midfielders, or teams who attack best through the centre, may choose to adopt narrow formations such as the 4-1-2-1-2 or the 4-3-2-1 which allow teams to field up to four or five central midfielders in the team. Narrow formations however depend on the full backs (the flank players in the "4") to provide width and to advance upfield as frequently as possible to supplement the attack in wide areas.
- Wide formations. Teams with a surfeit of forwards and wingers may choose to adopt formations such as 4-4-2, 3-5-2 and 4-3-3, which commit forwards and wingers high up the pitch. Wide formations allow the attacking team to stretch play and cause the defending team to cover more ground.
- Change to attacking formations. When chasing a game for a desirable result, teams tend to sacrifice a defensive player or a midfield player for a forward in order to chase a result. An example of such a change is a change from 4-5-1 to 4-4-2.
- Change to defensive formations. When a team is in the lead, or wishes to protect the scoreline of a game, the coach may choose to revert to a more defensive structure by removing a forward for a more defensive player. The extra player in defence or midfield adds solidity by giving the team more legs to chase opponents and recover possession.
[edit] Nomenclature
Formations are described using the number of players in each sector of play (not including the goalkeeper).
- 4-4-2 refers to: 4 defenders (referred to as the back four), 4 midfielders and 2 forwards.
- Four-numbered (e.g. 4-4-1-1) and 5-numbered formations (e.g. the midfield diamond, or 4-1-2-1-2) are also common. In 4-4-1-1, the latter 1s refer to a playmaker and a centre forward. In 4-1-2-1-2, the 1s refer to a defensive midfielder and attacking midfielder.
[edit] Early days
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.
[edit] Classic formations
[edit] 2-3-5 (The Pyramid)
The Pyramid Formation
The first long-term successful formation was first recorded in 1880.[1] 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 in the attacking line); while 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[2] but can appear confused when applied to the classic 4-4-2 line up, i.e.:
- 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) / Second striker
- 11 – Left winger
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.
[edit] Metodo
The Metodo was devised by Vittorio Pozzo, coach of the Italian national team in the 1930s.[3] 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.
[edit] The WM
WM Formation
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.
[edit] The WW
The WW was a development of the WM created by the Hungarian coach Márton Bukovi who turned the 3-2-5 WM "upside down".[4] 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.
[edit] 3-3-4
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).
[edit] 4-2-4
The 4-2-4 Formation
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[5].[4][6] 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.[5] The "diagonal system" was another precursor of the 4-2-4 and was created to spur improvisation in players.
Guttmann 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 defence 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.
[edit] Common modern formations
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.
[edit] 4-3-3
4-3-3 Formation
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. Quite simply, it is a more attacking 4-5-1. The extra player in midfield allows 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 may be 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. Most teams using this formation now use the specialist defensive midfielder; Chelsea F.C. and F.C. Barcelona are the most famous recent examples.[7]
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.
[edit] 4-4-2
4-4-2 Formation
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: typically 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.[8][9]
[edit] 4-4-2 diamond or 4-1-2-1-2
4-4-2 Diamond Formation
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 forward.
[edit] 4-4-1-1
4-4-1-1 Formation
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.[10]
[edit] 4-3-2-1 (the 'Christmas Tree' formation)
4-3-2-1 Formation
The 4-3-2-1 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.
The Christmas Tree formation is considered a relatively narrow formation and depends on full-backs to provide presence in wide areas. The formation is also relatively fluid. During open play, one of the side central midfielders may drift to the flank to add additional presence.
[edit] 5-3-2
5-3-2 Formation
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.[11]
[edit] 5-3-2 with Sweeper or 1-4-3-2
5-3-2 Sweeper Formation
A variant of the above, this involves a more withdrawn sweeper, who may join the midfield, and more advanced full-backs.
[edit] 3-4-3
3-4-3 Formation
Using a 3-4-3 the midfielders expected to split their time between attacking and defending. Having only three dedicated defenders means that if the opposing team breaks through the midfield, they will have a greater chance to score than with a more conventional defensive configuration, such as 4-5-1 or 4-4-2. However, the three forwards allow for a greater concentration on attack. This formation is used by more offensive-minded teams.
[edit] 3-5-2
3-5-2 Formation
This formation is similar to 5-3-2 except that the two wingmen are oriented more towards the attack. Because of this, the central midfielder tends to remain further back in order to help prevent counter-attacks. It differs from the classical 3-5-2 of the WW by having a non-staggered midfield. It was used for the first time at international level by the Argentinian coach Carlos Salvador Bilardo[12]. Many teams also use a central attacking midfielder and two defensive midfielders, so the midfielders form a W formation.
[edit] 3-6-1
3-6-1 Formation
This uncommon but modern formation obviously focuses in the ball possession in the midfield. In fact, it is very rare to see it as an initial formation, as it is better used to keep results. Its more common variants are 3-4-2-1 or 3-4-3 Diamond, which use two wingbacks. The lone forward must be tactically gifted, because he is not only focused in scoring, but to play back to the goal to assist with back passes to his teammates. Once the team is leading the game, the tactics focuses even more in ball control, short passes and time wasting. On the other hand, when the team is losing, at least one of the playmakers will play more often in the edge of the area to add depth to the attack. Guus Hiddink is one of the few coaches who has used this formation when coaching Australia, in the 2006 World Cup
[edit] 4-5-1
4-5-1 Formation
4-5-1 is a defensive formation; however if the two midfield wingers play a more attacking role it can be likened to 4-3-3. The formation can be used to grind out 0-0 draws or preserve a lead, as the packing of the centre midfield makes it difficult for the opposition to build-up play. Because of the 'closeness' of the midfield, the opposing team's forwards will often be starved of possession. However, due to the lone striker, the centre of the midfield does have the responsibility of pushing forward as well. The defensive midfielder will often control the pace of the game.[13]
[edit] 4-2-3-1
4-2-3-1 Formation
This formation is widely used by Spanish and French sides: it is a defensive formation which is quite flexible, as both the side midfielders and the fullbacks may join the attack, usually on the counter. In defence, this formation is similar to the 4-5-1. It is used to maintain possession of the ball and stopping opponent attacks by controlling the midfield area of the field. The lone striker may be very tall and strong to hold the ball up as his midfielders and fullbacks join him in attack. The striker could also be very fast. In these cases, the opponent's defence will be forced to fall back early, thereby leaving space for the offensive central midfielder. This formation is used especially when a playmaker is to be highlighted.
This formation is also currently used by Brazil as an alternative to the 4-2-4 formation of late 50's to 1970. Implemented similarly to how original 4-2-4 was used back then, use of this formation in this manner is very offensive, creating a 6-man attack and a six-man defence tactical layout. The front 4 attackers are composed as wide forwards and playmaker forward in support of a target striker in front.
[edit] 4-6-0
A highly unconventional formation, the 4-6-0 is an evolution of the 4-2-3-1 in which the centre forward is exchanged for a player who normally plays as a trequartista (that is, in the 'hole'). Suggested as a possible formation for the future of football,[14] the formation sacrifices an out-and-out striker for the tactical advantage of a mobile front four attacking from a position that the opposition defenders cannot mark without being pulled out of position.[15] However, owing to the intelligence and pace required by the front four attackers to create and attack any space left by the opposition defenders, the formation requires a very skilful and well-drilled front four. Due to these high requirements from the attackers, and the novelty of playing without a proper goalscorer, the formation has been adopted by very few teams, and rarely consistently. The formation was first professionally adopted by Luciano Spalletti's Roma side during the 2005-06 Serie A season (mostly out of necessity) as his "strikerless formation",[16] and then notably by Sir Alex Ferguson's Manchester United side in the 2007-08 Premier League season (who won the Premier League and Champions League that season).[17]
[edit] 5-4-1
This is a particularly defensive formation, with an isolated forward and a packed defence. Again however, a couple of attacking fullbacks can make this formation resemble something like a 3-4-3.
[edit] Incomplete formations
When a player is sent-off (after being shown a red card), the teams generally fall back to defensive formations such as 4-4-1 or 5-3-1. Only when a draw is not an option (e.g. in a playoff or knockout match) will a team with ten players play in a risky attacking formation such as 4-3-2 or even 4-2-3. When more than one player is missing from the team the common formations are generally disbanded in favour of either maximum concentration on defence, or maximum concentration on attack.
[edit] Future formations
This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (June 2008)The thinking about the future of football formations is that, with the increase in fitness of players, the normal, symmetrical formation is out of date. Variety is needed in teams; so a pacey, direct winger might be deployed with a slower, more creative player on the other flank. An example can be seen with the Argentina national team playing "one armed" with Juan Riquelme attacking from the left, or the Manchester United F.C. team of the 1990s with Ryan Giggs making attacking runs from one wing with David Beckham playing crosses from deeper on the other, or currently as Cristiano Ronaldo makes attacking runs and Ryan Giggs provides the crosses. Another example is Celtic FC, who employs the explosive Aiden McGeady down one flank, and the less explosive Shunsuke Nakamura down the other.
Comment