Anybody here with coaching / managerial experience to share some input on football strategies & tactics?

I once had a glance thru Jose Mourinho's biography at the bookstore some months back, and was very interested when he talked about strategies during games. About how an opposition manager once sent in a speedy winger during a game, and JM countered by doing the same, so that the winger would have to track back and defend the same flanks, thus reducing his effectiveness!

I'd like to learn how different formations can effect the play of a team, 4-4-2 vs 4-5-1? Why and when do teams use them? How does it change depending on the type of players that a team has? How do coaches even know what to employ?

I'm very interested in learning the finer points of the game, which I believe will help us look at football differently rather than just paying attention to scoring goals. Then, we'd have more appreciation of the game, even if it ends 0-0!

Wow Mike, now you're into tactics and formations. Way to go dude!

See you this Thursday! Will pay up my membership fee on that day.

Hahaha yeah, I've always been interested in it since a long time back but have never had any coaching before so it's hard to learn sometimes. Seeya Thursday!

try play fooball manager 2008 lar

Walau FM08 also come out.. I think easypeasy can help.

already out so long ahem version

I know. I mean arrowhead asked for tactics, but you suddenly drag to fm.

Since we are talking about tactics and strategies

can anyone give me an idea on how to beat the defender

i think thats the main thing im having problems with

You need skills. Or play one two with the nearest players. If you calm enough, check his leg position. If his leg open too big, lubang him. If his leg open, but can't fit the ball through, then cut him.

faking ?? drop ur shoulder on 1 side then go another.. if u release defenders always show u a way on the weaker side.. unless if they stand right infront u can always go sideways.. if ur 2 footed.. just shift the ball then pull the trigger..^.^ its no always bout beating the defender is how u get ur shot off ^.^..

Tactic and formation as my experience totally depence on the squad.
There two aspect to built at team. Defensive or attacking.

To built an attacking squad. The emphasis is the combining the strength of each player and synergise it as like alex ferguson, arsene wenger, keegan, any brazilian coach and etc

To built a defensive squad, it is more likely countering each of the opponent key players. Example Jose, trapparoni, ancelotti, capello.

Of course ideally is to match speed with speed. brute strength with brute strength. And you give a 50-50 chance. So what exactly makes the difference other than individual skills?

What I learn from so games I have played.

1. You have to understand the players you have.

eg based on ametuer football.

Some players are tall but not fast -
there few options.
if ball control is good - striker- they will be able to hold the ball... then your should be getting goals from you AMC or FC or thru set pieces.

if ball control is not that good. Defensive midfield.

some players are fast but can't pass.
- I suppose ppl might think this is natural for a winger.
For me , i will use them as flank backs.

Reason - for ametuer soccer, if they are playing up, they won't look back. and nobody infront to pass to.

some players can pass but can' stop the ball confidently.

I would use them at the side as winger or midfield but not in central position.

That is few examples you could take into consideration. For higher level, semi-pro level or profesional level. this is not applicable neither i have experience to comment. I wasn't paid to pay soccer.. muahaha,.. the most was a cup of teh.

where i can get that JM biography?interested to read his strategies during games

there many situations to beat a defender.

1. 1 vs 1 dribbling past a defender

if you are faster than him kick the ball ahead where no ppl then kick back to the direction you wanna go.
Reason. first you get him out of position then you are ahead of him with a good distance with a sudden switch of direction

If you are slower than him.
no chance if you are not experience. and if you are experience you won't be asking this question. so answer is no chance.

2. 2 vs etc

Play one two with you friend.

I thought the talk is about tactics & strategies, how come there are talks about skills / technics? Very different you know, a player with limited technics / skills like me but with better tactical awareness would do well compare to a player with a bundle of skills but no tactical knowledge who would always run into a blind alley. A very good example would be Jamie Carragher who is a limited player by EPL standards, almost no skills of note, but with much much superior awareness and tactical nous, he'd come up on top almost every time because of his reading of the game.
Another would be C*** Ronaldo (sorry, couldn't resist the dig) in his early days in the EPL, very skillful, but wiht almost no tactical or strategy and awareness, resulting in him doing countless of stepovers and not being able to produce the end result of a cross or a pass or a goal.
A player with both would be the likes of Kaka & Xabi Alonso, they can read the game well and have the skills to beat the player or to put the pass to where it hurts the team most. That is a rarity, that is why they are rated so high by the respective teams and supporters. Just my two cents. Will talk a bit more about tactics later, as I am interested in tactics and how to make the team work.

i think fabregas and carrick read games very good as well ..

They do, I am merely pointing out examples of a few, plus I think they need to do it consistantly in EPL and in Europe to be able to justify that tag.

Tactics are dictated by the players in the squad and the opponent. I like 4-4-1-1 formation myself, as it's adaptable while the game is in progress. 2nd striker can drop deeper to stiffen-up the midfield and play higher once you're attacking.

I am a firm believer in diagonal balls as well IF you have a great passer of the ball in the holding midfield roll, allowing your attacking players to run into space and drag the defenders out of position. Damn i am talking about Benitez's tactics!

Okay, we'll see Jonno's tactic this Saturday!

Basically; 4-5-1's a packing the midfield strategy. A formation's purpose is determined by the strategy and the players used. 'nuff said. For example; you use slower; stronger players and a 4-5-1 formation is often considered as a more diplomatic way of saying "park the bus please". A 4-5-1 with faster players will result in a more dynamic interplay to rush forward in numbers and overwhelm the opposition to submission. That was Chelsea's way of playing (albeit termed as a '4-3-3'). Ferguson tried; in his 4-5-1 days, to play a fast 4-5-1 but he only had slow, strong players to fill up the middle of the park. Which led them to being neither here nor there and they had to resort to playing long ball and boring their opponents into submission. The adoption of a lone striker is generally seen as a gamble because you'll either have good days (ala Chelsea scoring > 2) or bad days (Chelsea the rest of the time).

4-4-2's a more generic formation and is more flexible than you think. Despite being seen as more attacking oriented; teams like Blackburn and Everton frequently employ a 4-4-2 with 2 defensive midfielders or 1 defensive and 1 attacking midfielder to help protect the defense, especially against stronger teams. Obviously a 4-4-2 formation is more balanced as you've got 'lots of room to play with; depending on what you want. This is why the 4-4-2's arguably the most popular formation in the world. You can mix and match to conform with what you want.

As for the strikers; most managers would go with a big-and-small combo or a fast-and-slow combo for variety, but we've seen in recent times; the modern striker's becoming a fusion of both. Players like Drogba, Podolski, Klose and the like are putting an end to the days of Hartson, Hutchinson, Koller and the like.

Personally; I've always liked a modified form of a 4-4-2. Basically; it's a 3-5-2 in which you've got 3 central defenders (which you can probably form with a sweeper), 2 wingbacks who'll roam into midfield, a defensive midfielder to shield the back 3 and 2 attacking minded midfielders to provide firepower for the 2 strikers. In order for this to work; you've got to have good fast technical players who can pass the ball quick. You can also easily switch between playing 3-5-2 to attack and playing 5-3-2 to defend by adjusting the wingbacks.

Having said that though; you can only talk 'bout playing formations if you've got players who're disciplined enough who're willing to play as a team. Even professionals make mistakes with regards to formation discipline and positioning.

This is a very risky formation though; but then again, i'm just a naive noob who likes good, attacking football.

This post has been edited by glozz: Jan 2 2008, 01:37 PM

I believe you cannot take premier league tactics to play on ameteur soccer.
Their ability and technical superiority is totally different.

one of the examples.
Headers - headers from cross a virtually not a threat. ametuer soccer has very little aerial threat. During warm up , you could see 10 players attacking 1 ball. and yet they can't head the ball in either due to bad delivery or miss chances.

Dribbling - there are players which dribbles and totally have no ability to pass. Simply because they can't play short passes. Why, running means speed. to control the speed for short passes during dribbling is harder rather than crossing the ball. however 50% of them will tire off after running half the field. so bad delivery into the box.

Ball stopping- Alot of ppl mistaken long ball or counter attack is good to play against stronger opposition. however this is only true if your striker is have good ball control. If your striker unable to trap the ball well. you w0n't get to possession of the ball long enuff to make a counter attack.

Stamina - we cannot play a 4-4-2 wing system .. Y? nobody got the stamina. those 2 defensive midfield not going to last the whole game. Single striker would be better as the wingers would have tendency not to come down in time after an attack.

I am saying this based on my experience in the ametuer leagues.

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.

u all frens ar.>??? u all sound like friends ....

so mike, this Saturday morning what formation we playing? Wanna try the 9-1 formation again?

Hahaha well since we've over 30 players, we can try out a brand new 5-4-3-2-1 X'mas tree formation.

15 players, sounded like rugby to me, someone call monstar...

problem of playing 9-0-1 without playing ultra unsporting. including. putting the ball at the side line. bring to corner flag. playing in triangles. Is stamina.

You can't defend for 90 minutes.. I mean let ppl attack for 90 minutes.

This is crazy. they are using less energy passing the ball while all 9 of you are chasing the ball. That y second half you are all too tired to defend.

Or Duke, he can take out a few by himself

mikey oh mikey, planning to become a football coach now?
haha. or is this a new hobby for year 2008?
play more football manager!

I'm tempted to join this Saturday's session if we were to play 9-0-1 formation. Sounds cool.

Come lar giotto, i join your team in white!

This post has been edited by JonC: Jan 2 2008, 05:48 PM

Nope; we hate each other to the death.

glozz we hate each other so much next time i play for your team i score own goal against you in goal!

You hate me or your team; eh?

I thought the attacking side used a lot more energy than the defending side.No? There are lots of team played 9-0-1 a.k.a bus parking stratergy especially when the play the like of arsenal, Manu,chelsea etc

Attacking side if you heading towards a wall there no point countering so, you won't be required to sprint up.
Instead if you play short passes, it would be sufficient to play monkey that way.

Actually; most parking busses strategies are a 4-5-1 formation. With a 9-0-1, there's no midfield.

isn't it 5-4-1?

5-4-1 is not good for defence.. The number of defenders is more but idea is different. If you centre backs sitting so deep.. A sweeper will be useless. Therefore with 5-4-1 , you be playing flank backs.

4-5-1 would be better as most ball are won in the middle of the park.

4-5-1? heks. look at liverpool last night. fruss!

hey me got at least 5 years experience with Arsenal, Barcelona and AC Milan....not in real life of cuz....FM...haha

o.O ..... FM08 damn so long nvr get to play managerial games

Well, for me, a packed midfield is the best tactic, so, I would choose 4-5-1 or 4-4-1-1... why? The reason is rather simple, these tactics can virtually stops the ball from getting to defenders which means can virtually stops opponent to score a goal...

About 4-4-1-1, you always see a lone striker that get the ball upfront but blocked by a packed defense, in the situation, the lone striker can pass back the ball to the other striker (the one at behind) for him to just shoot from distance...

I for one prefer 4-4-2 Arsenal way(i know we have been using a lot of 4-4-1-1 lately but its ok as long as we get the results). Its one of the most balance tactic offensively and defensively.

for me, defensive midfield is a must and the DM must stay at back all time....
4-1-3-2

I would go for a 4-4-2 formation but one of the striker drops back a bit to give more support to the midfielder...kinda of like how Arsenal use to play in their "unbeaten era"......

Only if you can do like how Arsenal did. If no then no point craping here. Football isn't easy like what we think.

Play the FULL game to a good level 1st then talk strategies o/w no point - how to run before walking ?

problem with 1 striker is the striker needs to be vr cool and is a good finisher. and must be rajin as well. chances wont come easily so when u get presented with it, u must be expected to convert it. look at inzaghi. he's not the fastest of players or one who cud dribble past player. heck i dun even think he cud get past player in the first place. but he has good positioning and finishing and knows the whereabouts of the goal he shud target to.

I'm new here. What I understand that lone striker is to do holding, it has to be strong body, good on air and find pace... No need to get fast player striker, as long as you got good winger which can score and cross the ball is enough..
Actually, what i see 4-4-2 is more defensive formation. I prefer 4-5-1 can shift to 4-3-3..