Obviously premier league tactics won't work in amateur soccer. Which is why ball movement and Arsenal's way of playing will NEVER be played in a lower level league.

However; every team needs a formation. Saying you don't need one is like saying a car doesn't need wheels.

Like it or not; you have to have a formation because the formation gives you a system to move the ball around and allows you to plan and counteract. The cruncher is finding a formation which works with the players you have.

So you don't have players with the stamina to play 4-4-2 with wingers. So; why don't you play 4-4-2 without wingers? It's also known universally as the "christmas tree"?

Also; don't underestimate the power of the aerial threat. As long as you've got good setpiece takers; you've always got a chance. I've scored a couple of headers playing as a goalie against teams which underestimated the potency of the aerial power in the lower leagues. All you need is experience and timing.

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 01:44 PM

of course every team needs a formation. what i am saying well known formation such 442 or 433 or 451 doesn't work for ametuer soccer.

I played formations such as 14221 which work very well. And i dun believe you could play in higher lvl competition.

one of the key reason y a formation is vital is to know where you teammates are without having to look at them.

Of course we do not underestimate the potency of aerial threats. It is just very easy to counter.

1. let them cross at line instead of deep.
2. gk catches the cross.

Sounds so easy but is the truth. even national level junior players are unable to produce nice cut back crosses further more an ametuer player. why? crossing at line means you be sprinting. to turn ur ankle 45 degrees can easily twist ur ankle to take the kick. so usually they will end up hitting 30 degree crossing closer to the gk.
A good gk would easily catch the ball.

So you don't have players with the stamina to play 4-4-2 with wingers. So; why don't you play 4-4-2 without wingers? It's also known universally as the "christmas tree"?

Also another popular choice.

This post has been edited by ponomariov: Jan 2 2008, 01:57 PM

Formations like 1-4-2-2-1 if you strip it down's basically a christmas tree with a sweeper; and a christmas tree's basically derived from a basic 4-4-2. The 4-4-2's basically the model for almost all modern football formations. Saying that a 4-4-2 is irrelevant in the lower leagues while advocating a 1-4-2-2-1's basically saying that the son is not related to the grandfather? And what's the difference between a 1-4-2-2-1 and a 5-4-1; then?

Ermm; taking a swipe at my ability to play's kind of taking things on a personal note without being relevant to this conversation right? Do we really want to head down that road?

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 01:56 PM

Instead of taking a swipe, I believe he meant the formation

I certainly hope so. Besides; I did mention that i'm a naive noob who likes attacking football. I never said I liked to win.



You mentioned that a good gk can catch the cross; but in truth you fail to understand that it's not that simple. Even premier league goalies still tend to struggle with catching crosses once in a while.

Also; with newer balls, cross-catching becomes complicated 'cause the balls are lighter and tends to pack a swerve. And we're not even talking 'bout winds and ground conditions yet.

Playing an aerial game is always a game of numbers; You pump large amount of balls in in the hope that a couple find their targets and ultimately; the goal. You do this because this is the last option you have with the players at your disposal.

So the "Christmas tree" is popular? But it's derived from the 4-4-2. Thus would mean that they DO employ 4-4-2-based formations in the lower leagues?

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 02:07 PM

This is nothing personal. I was saying of the formation. you cannot use 1-4-2-2-1 in higher level of competition. Of course it is good that there teams able to play 4-4-2 formation. or the regular formations.
But from what i experience this wasn;t the case.

1-4-2-2-1 is not derive from 4-4-2 it is from 5 4 1. What the difference?

5 4 1 means the defence and mid field will reach back the same depth across the line.

5 4 1 means 2 players from the side will run up to support the stricker from the wings.

1-4-2-2-1 means the defence and midfield would not reach back to the same depth of line.

top 3 players usually conserving their energy to attack during counter attack from the middle of the field.

Other words. this formations are more define and giving less coverage areas to players. Playing tighter and more compact soccer.

the other 7 is more defensive players


formation is one thing. This must accompany with the choice of playing. short passes, long passes.

for aerial balls .. yes.. gk not easily can catch it when come to crosses but. Chances to score are slimmer if wingers are crossing from the line rather from deep.

Chrismas tree formation alwiz have problem against formation with wingers. giving your full backs awfully lots of work to do. if you got good stamina full backs. yes . 442 christmas is playable. but cramping the ball in the middle and attacking through middle can easily be countered with a sweeper style play.

This post has been edited by ponomariov: Jan 2 2008, 02:16 PM

To conclude again; isnt playing 1-4-2-2-1 equivalent to playing a christmas tree with a sweeper? Thus why it's derived from the 4-4-2. To be precise; it's derived from the 4-4-1-1; which is derived from the 4-4-2. Anyway; even if the 1-4-2-2-1 as you claim; is derived form the 4-5-1; doesn't it prove AGAIN my earlier point that 4-4-2 and 4-5-1 is also used in the lower leagues?

What is nothing personal? That And i dun believe you could play in higher lvl competition. is not personal? Pray tell; which part of it isn't.

---

Added on January 2, 2008, 2:19 pmAnd once again you contradict your earlier statements. You fail to understand why people play long balls in the first place. As an alternate plan or when they realise their team's not good enough to play using another style.
1-4-2-2-1 has similiar problems as the christmas tree. Plus you've got to use 2 defensive midfielders meaning your going in front has a lack of support.

And thus; this proves yet another point. That formations are all a part of a strategy to win a game. Saying you don't use particular formations at a certain level is just being ignorant. You use a particular formation in order to COUNTER your opponent's formation. A coach wouldn't hesitate to use a 9-0-1 if he would win 100% of the time; would he? But in reality?

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 02:21 PM

I'm lost here with all the numbers. 4D anyone?

Yes it is derive from - but doesn't mean the idea or concept of play is the same.

To me it is totally different

442 wing .. 442 .. 442 christmas ... 442 defensive. all is totally different.

When you say 442- i just assume start 442 like england or arsenal.

zone covered by a player is also bring alot of impact during a game.

Player without stamina must cover less area. player with stamina can cover more but total coverage are must be the same. so the staggering of each player would bring very much impact.

I think you've got to buy 10D.

Obviously the playing styles are different. You can't expect to play like Arsenal when you've got big, strong and slow lads in your team right?

Hence why the formations used in the lower leagues are DERIVED from the mainstream formations? It doesn't mean that the original formations cannot be used; they just have to be tailored to suit the team or situation. Anyway; this has gone far too long already.

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 02:25 PM

What is nothing personal? That And i dun believe you could play in higher lvl competition. is not personal? Pray tell; which part of it isn't.

i was refering to the formation. you can't play that formation in higher lvl coz each player covers less area.

I never said I intended to play that formation competitively. It's just for f*cks sake and for 'bit of fun.

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 02:26 PM

The problem is formation is one thing. style of play is another.

442 433 or any formation you could play long ball or short passess.

As I know if you are playing long ball .. there is no point keeping players in the midfield area as they gonna see a tennis show.

---

Added on January 2, 2008, 2:28 pm
QUOTE(ponomariov @ Jan 2 2008, 02:23 PM)
What is nothing personal? That And i dun believe you could play in higher lvl competition. is not personal? Pray tell; which part of it isn't.

i was refering to the formation. you can't play that formation in higher lvl coz each player covers less area.
*


I never said I intended to play that formation competitively. It's just for f*cks sake and for 'bit of fun. tongue.gif

This post has been edited by glozz: Today, 02:26 PM


--------------------
user posted image

Doesnt matter if you did or not.. just saying it is quite not practical using it in higher leagues.

This post has been edited by ponomariov: Jan 2 2008, 02:28 PM

Obviously I know it's not practical. I stated all my disclaimers early.

True; but 1-4-2-2-1 playing only 1 striker is also risky as they can easily crowd him out; no? And playing a man-to-man marking with their midfielders will effectively close down your attacking mids. Again; it all depends on situation lorr. Anyway; we can debate this until the dog comes out and rolls over and dies and it'll still not conclude anything.

We'll just agree to disagree; aye?

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 02:31 PM

I once told a group of friends when they wanted to play against a strong team

If you want to win. it is impossible
If you wan to draw is still possible.

Take the ball to the your own penalty box and and surround it with 10 players and gk instead the circle. GK hands nearly touching or covering half of the ball. do that for 90 minutes.

Doesn't work. Tried that very early in my life; ask Mike. We were thrashed 5-0 with that 9-0-1 formation.

Obviously I know it's not practical. I stated all my disclaimers early.

True; but 1-4-2-2-1 playing only 1 striker is also risky as they can easily crowd him out; no? And playing a man-to-man marking with their midfielders will effectively close down your attacking mids. Again; it all depends on situation lorr. Anyway; we can debate this until the dog comes out and rolls over and dies and it'll still not conclude anything.

We'll just agree to disagree; aye?


True.. You can man to man mark them out.
Unfortunately this formation is for counter attack. We will be passing in our own halves until your midfield and striker chase down till the defenders.

If you midfield dun press.. the ball doesn't cross half line
If you midfield press and defence dun go up there is alot of hole in the midfield.

3 attacking players would cluster near one side which ever has the weaker full back. This was how my ex team use to play. patience and dun mind drawing.

one of the most brilliant strategy i ever seen by jose morinho with the same concept of play with 4-3-3 strategy, he instructed his players to lob the ball to the edge of the penatly box towards the throw in line.
So there is X cross field lob where super fast wingers get the ball and cross low ball into the mid.

---

Added on January 2, 2008, 2:44 pmWhy 9-0-1????
Why not 10-0-0???
What for need the 1 person on top which can't do anything. If you give up to win. just commit to it.
Discipline would be a number one priority. play in ur own penalty box.

This post has been edited by ponomariov: Jan 2 2008, 02:50 PM

Well; we were young that time; eh Mike? Who came up with that wonderstroke of a formation anyway eh? We actually thought if we left my brother up alone we could snatch something on a counter. heh. How wrong we were.

Ah; counter attack. There's a very easy way to stop counter-attacking formations and strategies. Don't attack. Which is why I wonder why teams that play MU bother to attack. One of those things you'll never understand; I've concluded.

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 02:48 PM

MU wants to win that y they play attacking game all the time

Chelsea just wanna play attacking individual soccer against lower teams and counter attack against strong opposition.

Arsenal wanna heck pass the ball into the net all the time.

Newcastle just like sacking their managers

Liverpool like to try all sort of formation and end up being 2nd anyway. well... they are not too bad except inconsistent

Wah, formation war.

Yeah, the 9-0-1 was funny. This was back in sec. school. Story was... we could afford to lose the game 4-0 and STILL win the tournament because we had picked up enough points and goals from the previous game. We were against a very, very strong team (relatively lah, coz we were mostly crap), and we stood no chance of beating them - so our tactic was damage limitation! It worked well, first half was only 1-0 but then we conceded the fifth goal in the final minutes and they celebrated like mad.