This is a tactic i created, i like to call it: Box Bullying.
The players i chose are the ones most ideal for each of the position and role, but you can obviously find a workaround for it, if you don't have players of such quality
I have noticed how gegenpressing and pressing in general is all the rage in football nowadays, it's the reason dribbling, wingers aren't that efficient anymore, it's the reason players like Tsunaldo or Hazard are worthless nowadays, they constantly get pressed and get cornered with no options.
So the main philosophy of this tactic is to ditch the wingers all together.
GK: Pretty much the norm, but it wouldn't help for him to have a decent idea about passing so he can make the distribution to wing backs a lot easier and faster RWB and LWB: These two are our new playmakers, you need players who can constantly run, and run fast, their role is to run down the wings and have a good cross about them so they can constantly send balls into the box, and they need to be fast enough to be able to track back aswell, if not, well, keep reading. CB's: Once again, basic stuff, a big guy for crosses, and an agile guy with good reflexes for interceptions DM's: Their role is not only to cover the CB's but also to spread on the side on which the wing-back has not yet been able to track back, once again, decent pace needed AM: All he has to do is to stand in his position and distribute the ball to the wing back who has less pressure on him and can cross with ease, and to get the ball from the under-pressure wing-back so he can switch it on the other side for the other wing-back to cross 3 ST's: Nothing special needed here, just 3 tall strong guys to be on the receiving end of the constant crosses, a team like WBA still couldn't cope, even with their tall CB's, because they would be outnumbered
So, what could go wrong here?
Brody Gomez
because you have a non-existent midfield and would get dominated
Brandon Barnes
the 3 strikers can track back too you know
Eli Davis
So just the hoofball tactic every club uses when they're down and have to score ? Just throw tall blokes into the box.
>Didn't read lol
Logan Kelly
Clop would gegenfuck you
Hudson Powell
GOAT post Im just waiting for the replies
Jacob Collins
Clop would gegenpress you to oblivion, get a new job
Mason Williams
>The players i chose are the ones most ideal for each of the position and role
I disagree
Levi Martinez
There is no anchor between the defence and the attack and crosses are inefficient as fuck.Also a team in 4-4-2 could cut any real threat. Shit/10
Sebastian Evans
the wing-backs have to be your best players in the team, that's all, they need to be fast, have constant energy and to have a good cross, the other roles are not so focused, you can have a front three like that with the likes of adebayor, crouch and arnautovic and still have results
Hudson Adams
>So, what could go wrong here? Literally everything. Stop playing so much FM.
Matthew Martin
what if the line shifts with your teams movement and doubles on your wing-backs.......where is your god now?
Blake Richardson
I suggest 1 striker, add xavi-esque(tip top) players
Thomas Morris
you need to press higher up the pitch, this formation would out you under too much pressure
Matthew Barnes
>what could go wrong both teams park the bus = boring shitty game
Kayden Fisher
>Aspiring manager And you're gonna keep being an aspiring manager with those shit tactics. 2/10 for the effort you putted into it. If you wanna see why it doesn't work to have no fucking midfield at all watch the last 2 matches Chile played.
Charles Fisher
A football game has 4 phases:
>You have possession and are in your offensive formation, while the opponent is in his defensive formation >You lose the ball and are trying to switch to your defensive formation, while the opponent switches to his offensive one >The opponent has the ball and is in his offensive formation, while your team is in its defensive formation >Your team wins the ball back and transitions into its offensive formation, while the opponent transitions to his defensive formation
You need to come up with a way that explains how your team will work in each and every phase of the game.
So offensively you are planning a 2-2-1-5 with a focus on wing play. That's fine and stuff, but how are you going to deal with a team that doubles or even triples your FBs? how are you going to deal with pressing traps on the flanks? What happens if you can't break through with your FBs? Is a single creative outlet in the centre enough? Who is going to link the flanks to the centre?
You also didn't really provide any explanation on the defensive system you're planning to use. But from what you've drawn there, it appears that you're favouring a narrow 4-3-3, with a focus on directing the opponent to the flanks, winning the ball back there and then breaking forward.
Now defensive transitions might be a bit problematic here. You basically have 3 dudes standing in the box, so you're effectively defending with 9 men. Your FBs are too high up the field and can't contribute so you essentially have your 3 midfielders, which are terribly stretched vertically. I don't really see this working 2bh.
How I'd play against such a system: >Get a pesky, annoying DM and have him man mark your offensive midfielder >Double/triple the FBs >??? >profit!
Hunter Evans
>Aspiring manager here Still laughing at this desu
Isaiah Garcia
Shut up Habib.
Dominic Jones
>So, what could go wrong here? Your star midfield and captain slipping.
Xavier Nguyen
>dat non-existant midfield
lol, you would very quickly get EXPOSED
Josiah Long
Your DMs would have to have great stamina, pace and passing ability as well as being good at defending for this to work.
And the formation is basically just a small 4-3-3
Caleb Kelly
The joke about your "wingers are useless" tactic is that it would get destroyed by the very wingers you think are useless. Your width would be your downfall, and fast wingers would feast on your corpse. God help you if you're playing on a particularly wide pitch too. You're having 1 player covering each sideline, forcing them to play extremely high, and are responsible for playmaking. Literally the only player that is good enough to be at least some what effective in a role like that is Gareth Bale, and he would still get blown out because of the sheer amount of work and responsibility he'd have to shoulder.
Interesting concept, try again.
Thomas Bailey
There's more to being a manager than tactics.
Jordan Russell
Kek I used to play 3 strikers on pes on the Wii (most hilarious footy game ever, shaking the controller to shoot).
Jordan Hernandez
>flag >topic
jk I wish I knew enough about soccer to participate in strategery discussions. It's not like soccer was the only sport I played or anything
Jacob Martin
>thinking tactics matter
Christopher Jones
How do I into tactics and understanding football Cred Forums? I've only been watching football weekly for the past year - grew up without a father etc. I enjoy watching but I still can't quite work out why a team loses and why the other wins other than the winning team having better shots and players or whatever.
Cooper Cook
Become autistic.
Adrian Clark
Watch more football.
Jack Sanders
Not even autistically I just can't even discuss football to any real extent other than "oh he should've scored that!" etc
Lincoln Edwards
From your tactics id say don't bother mate your a Mong
Michael Rodriguez
I remember when I thought crosses actually mattered, they don't
Carson Collins
>no holding mid >two DM
You gonna need two DMs who can do high passes to your RWB and LWB.. Without another holding mid your mid can be over run by opponent's and the 3 strikers up high wont have the chance to press and track back. All i need to do to counter your tactics is to use 3-5-2 very high possession and counter because your RWB and LWB are creating more space.
Michael Nguyen
Go to bed Antonio.
Oliver Diaz
This so much, man management is the most important thing and that usually requires the manager to not be an autist.
Josiah Wright
>ditch wingers >make your fullbacks be wingers
are you going to have 4 first team quality fullbacks who have the pace and creativity to do this? because they're going to pick up injuries and need to be rotated just to keep them alive because of the sheer amount of work you expect them to do
Justin Bell
>tl;dr I did a 4-3-3
Nigga, thats standard stuff right there. All you're doing is focussing on physicality in the opposition box a la Pulis' Stoke. It would have the same issues other teams have, you lmaonomidfield tactic would mean your strikers have to drop back to defend, which would just lead to teams cycling possession through their CBs (if strikers press them, goes through to midfielders.
Your wing backs would be useless offensively if a team just put a wide forward in that hole they leave and told him not to track back; if the bomb forward the guy has free roam to run at your CBs (if your DM is covering, again; giant midfield hole). If the WB stays with his man, no width which would mean you are now stuck with 3 barely mobile strikers who thrive through the middle and are useless anywhere else (pretty much telling the opposition to play 2 DMs.)
So, in short, a standard 4-3-3 would own your shit. The key to beating high press teams is quick passing and having CMs who can dribble. Thats why Arsenal always tended to be a fair match for peak Dortmund; they had Cazorla playing CM and he can wiggle past 3 guys like nothing, plus they tend to be confident passers.
Gabriel Clark
No they wouldn't. One striker would use his strength to dispossess the midfielders via kicking the ball far to their own box and the tight-knit defence of Kante, Busquets, Shawcross and Stones would recycle the ball to Bellerin/Alba who would pass to Ozil, who would know where he would need to make the run left or right depending on which wingback obtains the ball.
If its Bellerin, he would run right and Giroud would receive a simple ball which would then be passed to Costa, who scores.
If its Alba, he would run left and Costa would receive the ball and then pass to Giroud, who scores.
The midfield, especially the central midfield, is completely nullified by this tactic.
Lucas Moore
hi Pulis
Blake Sanders
play soccer video games
Isaiah Morgan
>2-5-3 Literally table football.
Lolno, you can have my word on this one.
Carson Miller
wish top level managers would try crazy stuff like this. would love to hear commentators losing their shit over a team lining up in a 2-1-2-1-1-3 to play against a 3-2-1-1-1-1-1 desu
James Mitchell
>gegenpress >Germans inventing tactical terms and tactics.
Yeah, no. We did that shit ages ago, long before Germany was any good or relevant.
Connor Myers
Yeah, I wish the gegenpress meme would die already
Carson Green
If you want to beat pressure, have really physical and strong DMs, AMs who can distribute the ball and wingers who can work with the midfielders through rapid passing. You have an interesting idea but it would get owned by >hoofball >the negro runs >goal
What you propose is pretty much a 4-3-3 with more fullback mobility. You can do the same thing but better if you just have a 4-4-2, send the RWB and LWB up to get crosses in/work with the winger and AM, all while the DM lowers his position and becomes a central defender to make up for the lack of fullbacks in the offensive moments.
Luis Evans
Would lose to a standard 3-5-2 imo
James Richardson
being a good manager is essentially the same as being a good boss. treat players right and they'll do their best for you.
Easton Williams
Can't really see how it would work.
First off unless you were managing a club with unlimited resources you would have to find scrub versions of all those players. Is there a wing back as fast as Bellerin who can cross? Nope. Also if you had those resources you wouldn't need a gimmick formation.
As for 3 strikers in the box, are you just planning on scoring all your goals from headers? Theres no space to play the ball on the ground in the box, remember most teams play 4 at the back and the full backs probably wont need to go out wide as their midfielders will cover your wing backs more often than not, so you essentially have 6 or 7 players in the box plus a goalkeeper...
Next you seem to be trying to play a counter attacking style, however the natural way to set up against that formation would be to park the bus and counter YOU...so how are you going to get counter attacks!?
Gimmick/10
Nolan Davis
Potential flaws:
1. The positioning of the players leaves too much space for the other team when you lose the ball
2. Not having proper wide players to stretch the field means over crowding in the center
3. Having your team split like that means problems for distribution from one side of the field to the other.
4. Relying on just 3 players to play make means your ability to attack and maintain possesion is hindered
5. No passing triangles.
6. You eluded to it yourself that your DMs need to be fast, basically forcing players to play out of their natural position by having fullbacks as play makers/wingers and DMs as fullbacks at times. In your example someone like Busquets would easily be rounded on the wing he's much more suited to breaking up play in the center with out players around him.
7. Being outnumbered in key areas.
Austin Evans
Why only 10 players?
Juan Cooper
Learn formations and watch how they shift throughout a match, with and without the ball.
Try to watch different leagues because the difference in style can be quite obvious; english hoofball, spanish triangles, german counter attacks etc.
History is important, football tactics have developed a lot and for very specific reasons.
Hell even looking at fifa stats, they attempt to show the strengths and weaknesses of players and teams?