3v3 Tactics

Discussion in 'Youth & HS Soccer' started by MANU4LIFE, Oct 11, 2006.

  1. MANU4LIFE

    MANU4LIFE Member

    Feb 6, 2006
    Does anyone know of any sources for 3v3 tactis.My u12 son is going o play some tournaments this winter and none of the boys have ever played this before.
     
  2. loghyr

    loghyr ex-CFB

    Jul 11, 2006
    Tulsa
    http://www.decatursports.com/drills/3v3strategy.htm

    We did the 3v3 KickIt over the summer. 20 minute games with 6 players max.

    With that format, you are tempted to take 3 or 4 kids. Take all 6. Rotate the kids in every 2 minutes.

    I'd also eliminate the coach talking to the players on the field.
     
  3. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    The good teams pretty consistently play 1 in the back, 2 at forward. The back player is always conscious of the goal. Doesn't mean he can't get forward ... he can, with caution. But he always must be positioned between goal and the ball if the opposing team has possession, so they can score a cheap goal from a long shot.

    The defense is zonal. Ball is one the wing, one defender man marks, the other two defenders seek to cut off the passing lanes, with of course the final defender always guarding against that long shot. Savvy teams will pick their spots for the double team in this situation, but carefully, oh so carefully. Pressing against good teams can be very dangerous.

    If the opposition seeks to take the ball up the middle against your defense, the two forwards pinch inwards and deny the penetration, forcing the pass wide.

    Offensively, don't make turnovers unless you are very near the opposing goal! Easiest way to lose in 3v3 is get stripped of the ball and concede a cheap counterattack goal. So be careful with the ball until you are close enough to the opposing goal where all 3 opposing defenders will be back, so they can't hit you with the counter.

    Having a strong dribbler who can unbalance the defense is very helpful offensively. Against good teams, it's tough to crack them simply by passing the ball.

    Enjoy. It's my kid's favorite game, without question.
     
  4. CVAL

    CVAL Member

    Dec 8, 2004

    Pretty much got it
     
  5. SoCalSun

    SoCalSun Member

    Manchester United
    United States
    May 18, 2004
    Southern California
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Having a strong dribbler who can unbalance the defense is very helpful offensively. Against good teams, it's tough to crack them simply by passing the ball.

    Enjoy. It's my kid's favorite game, without question.[/QUOTE]

    We play 3v3, 4v4 and other larger variants. Dribblers move too slowly, and are negated easily. We find one-touch passing and "follow your pass" is a winning method. Obviously 2 up front and one in the back is good, following the pass allows fluid movement and avoids an unproductive "back".
     
  6. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    Please recognize, I'm not talking about naive, solo dribbling. I'm talking about moving the ball quickly to create a 1v1 situation where the defender lacks support, then having the attacker break the defender quickly to create a 3v2 situation.

    Passing is good, but teams that try to score on passing alone will eventually lose to teams that also move the ball well, but which have a solo artist to deliver the coup de grace. That has been my observation, for the younger ages, that is U9 - U13. I suspect that it holds equally true at older ages but I have no direct knowledge of that game.
     
  7. SoCalSun

    SoCalSun Member

    Manchester United
    United States
    May 18, 2004
    Southern California
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    We disagree, how surprizing! We've been doing this for three years and only lost one game. We don't really have a clinical finisher, mostly "big field" backs and mids, just blazing speed of play, one touch passes and flowing attack, all three or four players participate because of the method. All players score about equally...ages u12 - u14 (3years)
     
  8. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    Ah, now I see your secret for winning 3v3 matches! ;)

    Interesting. I can tell you authoritatively that nobody in East/Midwest succeeds like that at my son's age group (currently U14), because he played on a team this January that advanced for the 3rd year in a row to national finals, at Disney. So they saw everybody along the way.

    Too bad you SoCal types never travel, I would enjoy seeing your team in action.
     
  9. janhm

    janhm New Member

    May 29, 2009
    Club:
    Juventus FC
    I must say I John R is right and SoSunCal is wrong. A great Dribbler is a must against good teams. By dribbling one man/woman you have basically gotten rid of the whole defense and can shoot against the goal with only the back man to beat. Its absurd to think you can always pass your way around. That is impossible against a good defense. I have played this format for 11 years. In particular after a while when teams are tiring the great dribler is worth his value in gold, this cannot be underestimated. But don't misundertand. Great passing is also exceptionally helpful.
     
  10. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    Now I'm completely stretching the point, but what the hell ... Barca has one playing in Messi who will destroy a defense's shape by dribbling at will, and nine guys who will yes take on a somebody 1v1 when the situation warrants, but who basically play within a passing structure.

    I like that formula, for any size soccer match -- a team filled with smart, unselfish, skilled players who pass & move, plus one guy who has the rare additional ability to dribble successfully against multiple defenders. That gets goals.
     
  11. janhm

    janhm New Member

    May 29, 2009
    Club:
    Juventus FC
    Absolutely, but it doesn't hurt with more dribblers in a team then one single player, manmarking becomes less of an option with many good dribblers. Barcelona has iniesta, henry and eto' as great dribblers of the ball as well as messi. Milan has ronaldinho, kaka, seedorf, pato, players that can make anyone look stupid.
     
  12. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    A team that assigns positions in 3v3 does not meet my definition of "good."
     
  13. Kaka22Milan

    Kaka22Milan New Member

    Dec 23, 2007
    NJ
    Club:
    AC Milan
    Nat'l Team:
    Italy
    Me and my friends did the Kick it 3v3 last year and we came in 1st place.

    We just played a 1-2. The defender seriously wouldnt go past half field and the two up top need to be running all over the place.
     
  14. bigredfutbol

    bigredfutbol Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 5, 2000
    Woodbridge, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I would assume that the players can rotate at will; just be sure to rotate back when the '1' takes the ball forward. IMHO.
     
  15. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    The 3v3 format forces at least one player into a defensive role, otherwise the opponents will play 2v3 on defense, send a quick pass over the top after blocking your shot, and will score on a tap-in. They will stop you 2v3 much more often than you will stop them 0v1, which is approximately "never."
     
  16. jeffenbauer

    jeffenbauer Member

    Jul 17, 2002
    dallas, tx
    Yes but it doesn't require it to be the same player in the defensive role the whole time, which is what I think rca is getting at.

    I just finished a 3v3 tournament and what I noticed was a strong tendency to rely on passing without encouraging players with the ball to take on the defender 1v1, and even less emphasis on moving without the ball.
     
  17. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    Meaning, we have no argument, as I never said these roles were permanently attached to a player. Just saying, the typical approach is a triangle with 2 players high and wide, and the third deeper and central -- the defender. The shape will change as required, either by movement on the attack, or responding to the opponent's forays defensively, and the players may be interchanged, but that is the basic "formation," so to speak.
     
  18. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    I gather that you didn't see much scoring, then. ;)
     
  19. ranova

    ranova Member

    Aug 30, 2006
    Maybe we mean the same thing, maybe not. To me, each player in 3v3 has the same role: attack and defend. What you call the need for a player to have a defensive role, I call principles of play such as the need for depth attacking and cover defending. Those priniciples apply to the team and only have meaning in the context of group play. I think a 3v3 game is an excellent way for midfielders to learn to work together as a unit in attack, transition and defense, in addition to being great at skill development. If you break down the 3 man team into different positions, you restrict play and thus retard development in both skill and decision making. Restrictions also make your team more predictable and therefore easier to beat.
     
  20. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Jun 23, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    This sounds like a slogan, as opposed to the reality that with no goalkeeper, a 3v3 team must always guard against the opponents lobbing a ball into space for the runner on transition. Indeed with the older players the threat of the counter is so potent, that the teams become very careful about overcommitting on the attack, and the result is a bit of a dull chess match. I don't think the format works very well by the mid teens -- the reality is that lack of a goalkeeper alters the game too much, makes it less than soccerlike.
     
  21. ranova

    ranova Member

    Aug 30, 2006
    We really do disagree. Through passes and direct attacks after a transistion are part of the full sided game too. The only difference between a field player and a keeper is that the keeper can play the ball with his arms and hands inside the penalty area. The lack of a keeper is compensated for by using small goals. In my view it is the small size of the goals that make the game play so different. (And to a lesser extent the lack of an offside rule.) Instead of the wide danger area in front of the goal in the full game, you get with the small goals a triangular danger area that funnels attackers into a narrower space as they close with the goal. This gives an advantage to the defense not present in the full game. (Attacking width is less valuable and defensive cover is easier to provide). In drills coaches can compensate for this by using multiple goals in 3v3 to increase the size of the danger area making attacking width valuable again and defensive cover harder to provide.

    The triangular danger area is why players gravitate to a 1-2 triangular shape on defense. It matches the shape of the danger area.
     
  22. jeffenbauer

    jeffenbauer Member

    Jul 17, 2002
    dallas, tx
    That is what I hoped to show. I didn't think you said, or implied as such.
     
  23. kopiteinkc

    kopiteinkc Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jun 1, 2000
    Shawnee
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I am bumping this six month old thread as my girls U-14 team will start 3 v 3 again on Saturday.

    Certainly the triangle 1-2 approach worked well for their first time at it last winter.

    Of course we play no goalies and each team has to cross a 'red line' before they can shoot -- which eliminates the hopeful long shot.

    Any other tactics/strategies out there to improve our teams experience/success.
     
  24. SoccerDad6

    SoccerDad6 New Member

    Sep 11, 2007
    I purchased Mick Smith's book "Attacking With Three Players." It's a 3v3 strategy book. If you go watch enough good teams play 3v3, you'll quickly see how the game is best played. I essentially agree with John R. You play a triangle, with one player in the back and two up top. I don't like to refer to the back player as a defender. I just tell the kids he/she is the "back player." When you attack, the back player must come up to midfield and be a threat. In my opinion, the back player should be your "best" player. It should be someone who is tough and fast, but also someone who is comfortable with the ball.
    There was discussion about whether the kids need to be able to beat the opponent off the dribble. Of course that's helpful, but it has to be done together with the quick passing. Generally, a player who can beat his defender opens the door for someone else, and a good pass takes advantage of that opening.
    We all know that the smaller the space, the more important it becomes that the player is confortable with the ball in that small space. Fast kids with terrible touch will get eaten alive in 3v3 (unless they play against slow kids with terrible touch).

    I absolutely love the 3v3 game. Every kid is important to the play at all times. It really helps teach discipline, teamwork, passing, toughness, etc.
     
  25. DutchMethod

    DutchMethod Member

    Sep 20, 2006
    Club:
    AFC Ajax
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
    Sorry, 3 v 3 stinks. It teaches nothing, can be a very static game, and has little triangulation when compared to 4 v 4 that is played in diamond configuration. There is no such thing as 3 v 3 in Holland, and many other strong soccer meccas such as Argentina. It's 4 v 4.

    There used to be a Bibo tournament, 4 v 4, there was some great soccer.
     

Share This Page