Modern football tactics.

[die Mannyschaft]

For those over 60 who have no understanding of modern football this may help. Not sure what formation Saints tried in the 1st half v Pompey.

Some web searching but was looking for coaching manual as cant believe side to side back side respect as required is in a FIFA coaching manual.

Modern football tactics emphasize flexibility, aggressive high pressing to regain possession quickly, and positional play to exploit space, moving away from rigid formations. Common tactics include the fluid 4-3-3 with a front three and lone holding midfielder for width and possession control, and hybrid shapes like the 3-4-3. Data analytics are used to refine strategies by analyzing player performance and opponent tactics, influencing approaches to build-up play, and the development of new patterns to bypass high defenses. 
Key Tactical Concepts
• Flexible Formations: Instead of fixed shapes, teams use hybrid systems and formations that can shift during a match to adapt to the different phases of play. 
• High Pressing: Teams press aggressively from the front and even during goal kicks to win the ball high up the pitch and launch quick attacks. 
• Positional Play: Focuses on controlling space and creating passing lanes through intelligent movement and positioning to progress the ball up the field. 
• Data-Driven Decisions: Analytics provide detailed data on performance and opponent tactics, allowing coaches to make precise adjustments to player positions and movement. 
• Exploiting Half-Spaces: Attacking midfielders and forwards drop deep or move infield to receive passes in the space between the opposition's midfield and defense, creating chances. 
Common Formations
• 4-3-3: A dynamic system featuring a back four, a single defensive midfielder (CDM), two central midfielders (CMs), and a front three (two wingers and a striker). This provides a strong midfield control and width in attack. 
• 4-2-3-1: A popular system that creates numerical advantages in possession and can transition quickly from defense to attack, often involving advanced midfielders and wingers. 
• 3-4-3: A hybrid formation that offers defensive solidity while also providing attacking width, a popular example used by coaches like Antonio Conte. 
Tactical Trends
• Build-Up Play: With defenses adapting to playing out from the back, teams are developing new ways to build play, often involving longer passes or specific patterns to bypass aggressive presses. 
• Individual Battles: As a result of the pressing, the game is often characterized by individual battles across the pitch as teams fight to win possession. 
• Exploiting Defensive Adaptations: When the opponent presses high, teams look for space behind the midfield line or exploit wider areas by stretching the opposition's back


The 4-4-2 formation isn't used as much because modern tactics, especially the rise of three-man midfields, can easily overrun a two-man central midfield, leading to a loss of possession and control. The 4-4-2 can be too rigid, struggling to create chances compared to more fluid formations like the 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, which offer more passing options and attacking freedom. While still effective defensively, its central midfield weakness makes it vulnerable to teams that can exploit it with quick, vertical passes and fluid movement. 
Reasons for its decline:
• Three-Man Midfield Dominance:
The fundamental weakness of the 4-4-2 is its two central midfielders, which are easily outmatched by teams playing a three-man midfield. This allows opponents to control the game's tempo and possession. 
• Lack of Fluidity and Creativity:
The 4-4-2 was often seen as too rigid and flat to create chances against more modern, fluid formations. It lacked a dedicated #10 or playmaker, making it harder to create passing triangles and secure the ball in advanced areas. 
• Demand on Wide Players:
To compensate for the two central midfielders, the wide midfielders in a 4-4-2 had to do a tremendous amount of defensive work, often doubling up on opposing wingers. This strenuous demand can be exhausting and negatively impact stamina over a full match. 
• Shift in Possession-Based Football:
The early 2010s saw a growing emphasis on ball possession, particularly with the success of Spain's short-passing, possession-based style of play. The 4-4-2 was not well-suited to this approach, which required more midfield numbers and technical players to maintain possession and create overloads. 
Modern adaptations:
• Defensive Shape:
Some teams still use a 4-4-2 as an effective out-of-possession shape, providing good pitch coverage both horizontally and vertically. 
• Flexible Versions:
The formation is not entirely dead and can be adapted, sometimes appearing as a 4-2-4 when on the front foot, or used to surprise opponents with its traditional structure. 
• Not a "Death":
The formation isn't entirely gone but has become a less common primary tactic at the highest level. It's now a specific tool used for certain situations or players, rather than a default system for all teams. 

[skintsaint]

5 minutes ago, die Mannyschaft said:

Not sure what formation Saints tried in the 1st half v Pompey.

4-2-3-1

A very static version of it.

[Whitey Grandad]

22 minutes ago, die Mannyschaft said:

For those over 60 who have no understanding of modern football this may help. Not sure what formation Saints tried in the 1st half v Pompey.

Some web searching but was looking for coaching manual as cant believe side to side back side respect as required is in a FIFA coaching manual.

Modern football tactics emphasize flexibility, aggressive high pressing to regain possession quickly, and positional play to exploit space, moving away from rigid formations. Common tactics include the fluid 4-3-3 with a front three and lone holding midfielder for width and possession control, and hybrid shapes like the 3-4-3. Data analytics are used to refine strategies by analyzing player performance and opponent tactics, influencing approaches to build-up play, and the development of new patterns to bypass high defenses. 
Key Tactical Concepts
• Flexible Formations: Instead of fixed shapes, teams use hybrid systems and formations that can shift during a match to adapt to the different phases of play. 
• High Pressing: Teams press aggressively from the front and even during goal kicks to win the ball high up the pitch and launch quick attacks. 
• Positional Play: Focuses on controlling space and creating passing lanes through intelligent movement and positioning to progress the ball up the field. 
• Data-Driven Decisions: Analytics provide detailed data on performance and opponent tactics, allowing coaches to make precise adjustments to player positions and movement. 
• Exploiting Half-Spaces: Attacking midfielders and forwards drop deep or move infield to receive passes in the space between the opposition's midfield and defense, creating chances. 
Common Formations
• 4-3-3: A dynamic system featuring a back four, a single defensive midfielder (CDM), two central midfielders (CMs), and a front three (two wingers and a striker). This provides a strong midfield control and width in attack. 
• 4-2-3-1: A popular system that creates numerical advantages in possession and can transition quickly from defense to attack, often involving advanced midfielders and wingers. 
• 3-4-3: A hybrid formation that offers defensive solidity while also providing attacking width, a popular example used by coaches like Antonio Conte. 
Tactical Trends
• Build-Up Play: With defenses adapting to playing out from the back, teams are developing new ways to build play, often involving longer passes or specific patterns to bypass aggressive presses. 
• Individual Battles: As a result of the pressing, the game is often characterized by individual battles across the pitch as teams fight to win possession. 
• Exploiting Defensive Adaptations: When the opponent presses high, teams look for space behind the midfield line or exploit wider areas by stretching the opposition's back


The 4-4-2 formation isn't used as much because modern tactics, especially the rise of three-man midfields, can easily overrun a two-man central midfield, leading to a loss of possession and control. The 4-4-2 can be too rigid, struggling to create chances compared to more fluid formations like the 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, which offer more passing options and attacking freedom. While still effective defensively, its central midfield weakness makes it vulnerable to teams that can exploit it with quick, vertical passes and fluid movement. 
Reasons for its decline:
• Three-Man Midfield Dominance:
The fundamental weakness of the 4-4-2 is its two central midfielders, which are easily outmatched by teams playing a three-man midfield. This allows opponents to control the game's tempo and possession. 
• Lack of Fluidity and Creativity:
The 4-4-2 was often seen as too rigid and flat to create chances against more modern, fluid formations. It lacked a dedicated #10 or playmaker, making it harder to create passing triangles and secure the ball in advanced areas. 
• Demand on Wide Players:
To compensate for the two central midfielders, the wide midfielders in a 4-4-2 had to do a tremendous amount of defensive work, often doubling up on opposing wingers. This strenuous demand can be exhausting and negatively impact stamina over a full match. 
• Shift in Possession-Based Football:
The early 2010s saw a growing emphasis on ball possession, particularly with the success of Spain's short-passing, possession-based style of play. The 4-4-2 was not well-suited to this approach, which required more midfield numbers and technical players to maintain possession and create overloads. 
Modern adaptations:
• Defensive Shape:
Some teams still use a 4-4-2 as an effective out-of-possession shape, providing good pitch coverage both horizontally and vertically. 
• Flexible Versions:
The formation is not entirely dead and can be adapted, sometimes appearing as a 4-2-4 when on the front foot, or used to surprise opponents with its traditional structure. 
• Not a "Death":
The formation isn't entirely gone but has become a less common primary tactic at the highest level. It's now a specific tool used for certain situations or players, rather than a default system for all teams. 

Thanks for this. There are parts that need clarification for me.

"The 4-4-2 formation isn't used as much because modern tactics, especially the rise of three-man midfields, can easily overrun a two-man central midfield"

How does a three-man midfield overrun a four-man midfield?

[BarberSaint]

• Flexible Formations: Instead of fixed shapes, teams use hybrid systems and formations that can shift during a match to adapt to the different phases of play. 

 

You mean like in every game of football where it's continuously adapting like, er, cause, um, that's actually how the game is played?

[chiknsmack]

8 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Thanks for this. There are parts that need clarification for me.

"The 4-4-2 formation isn't used as much because modern tactics, especially the rise of three-man midfields, can easily overrun a two-man central midfield"

How does a three-man midfield overrun a four-man midfield?

The (default, flat) 4-4-2 doesn't have a four-man midfield. It has a two-man midfield and two wingers. Variants of the 4-4-2 like the 4-box-2 (Ralph's 4-2-2-2) or 4-diamond-2 (with two CMs playing narrow and FBs providing the width) do. The line you quoted also specified a "two-man central midfield".

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

I've been interested in how the likes of Brentford and Bournemouth would play considering how much change they've seen.

My take so far is that they are utilising fast transitions from defence to attack with a mixture of quick passes or over the top and its working.

Does help if you have fast,  strong players who know how to play through the lines or on the last man.

Saints slowing down of the ball doesn't work. Its similar with Man Utd. They recycle the ball too much hence being so shit all the time.

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, chiknsmack said:

The (default, flat) 4-4-2 doesn't have a four-man midfield. It has a two-man midfield and two wingers. Variants of the 4-4-2 like the 4-box-2 (Ralph's 4-2-2-2) or 4-diamond-2 (with two CMs playing narrow and FBs providing the width) do. The line you quoted also specified a "two-man central midfield".

As opposed to a three-man central midfield?

As others have pointed out, it's all a lot more fluid than that. 4-4-2 could have a four-man midfield effectively and still have two up top.

It's no wonder that modern football is so tedious and boring if the poor players have got to spend all their time worrying about their formation instead of simply 'playing'.

[beatlesaint]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

As opposed to a three-man central midfield?

As others have pointed out, it's all a lot more fluid than that. 4-4-2 could have a four-man midfield effectively and still have two up top.

It's no wonder that modern football is so tedious and boring if the poor players have got to spend all their time worrying about their formation instead of simply 'playing'.

Absolutely. Football is a simple game complicated by twats like Russell Martin

[stfrancisofbenali]

What I'm astounded by is our lack of willingness to shoot from outside, or even from the edge of, the box in open play. Matsuki's goal V Northampton is significant because we were all so surprised that he'd even attempted such an outrageous act. Attempts like this used to be commonplace but we've become so conditioned to patient, ball-retention and not conceding possession. This was highlighted starkly for me on Sunday when Pompey brought on a reserve keeper who has played most of his football at Braintree Town and Hartlepool Utd. Surely any midfielder or attacking player would immediately be thinking about having a pot shot at such an inexperienced keeper. Not to test him at all in 64 mins of football was criminal. Are today's players just overcoached, only able to play one way and just unable to, quite literally, think outside the box?

[saintant]

5 hours ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

I've been interested in how the likes of Brentford and Bournemouth would play considering how much change they've seen.

My take so far is that they are utilising fast transitions from defence to attack with a mixture of quick passes or over the top and its working.

Does help if you have fast,  strong players who know how to play through the lines or on the last man.

Saints slowing down of the ball doesn't work. Its similar with Man Utd. They recycle the ball too much hence being so shit all the time.

Agree, I like the new players we signed but once again we have failed to introduce a couple of big, fast, strong, powerful types and we continue to look too lightweight for my liking.

[saintant]

6 hours ago, chiknsmack said:

The (default, flat) 4-4-2 doesn't have a four-man midfield. It has a two-man midfield and two wingers. Variants of the 4-4-2 like the 4-box-2 (Ralph's 4-2-2-2) or 4-diamond-2 (with two CMs playing narrow and FBs providing the width) do. The line you quoted also specified a "two-man central midfield".

Yeah, if you read up on 442 the weakness continually highlighted is being outnumbered in midfield. You'd think it could be adapted so that the two wide players in the four are told to work back and forward but I'm assuming it's too big a workload unless you have the right athletes who can cope - we don't.

[stevegrant]

4 minutes ago, saintant said:

Yeah, if you read up on 442 the weakness continually highlighted is being outnumbered in midfield. You'd think it could be adapted so that the two wide players in the four are told to work back and forward but I'm assuming it's too big a workload unless you have the right athletes who can cope - we don't.

You would essentially end up with the Hasenhuttl 4-2-2-2 out of possession, but something a bit more expansive in possession. Theoretically doable but you'd be exhausting your wide players who would need to be able to operate centrally too.

[saintant]

1 minute ago, stevegrant said:

You would essentially end up with the Hasenhuttl 4-2-2-2 out of possession, but something a bit more expansive in possession. Theoretically doable but you'd be exhausting your wide players who would need to be able to operate centrally too.

I guess it's why the formation pretty much went out of fashion.

[stevegrant]

53 minutes ago, saintant said:

I guess it's why the formation pretty much went out of fashion.

Think it would be doable if you had enough players with the right qualities, as you'd then be able to make use of the fact you can sub half your outfielders if you so choose and have four players going full pelt for 45 minutes each.