Roundtable Discussion: Pep Guardiola and Team Tactics

Discussion in 'Coach' started by rca2, Dec 10, 2016.

  1. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    Question: Does anybody have any ideas or comments about specific tactics to accomplish the build up phase objectives?

    I wanted to start the discussion of team tactics with 3 of Guardiola’s tactical concepts briefly discussed in Pep Confidential by Marti Perarnau: 1) Back line positioning to prevent breaking the line by through passes in the seams, 2) Combination passing in the middle third to create a good team shape while pulling apart the opponent’s shape, and 3) on losing possession immediate close marking of the most dangerous threat for a counterattacking pass. This last point means you pressure the first attacker AND also the biggest threat for the next pass like the opposing CAM or second striker playing in the gap in front of the back line

    No. 2 is where I want to start because it is a component of total soccer and Cruyff’s coaching too. No. 2 is the buildup phase in a slow deliberate attack as opposed to a quick counterattack.

    While there are lots of variations out there, I talk about attacking in three phases. First advancing the ball from the defensive third into the middle third, e.g., playing out of the back. Second the build up phase in the middle third. Finally the final approach and finishing in the attacking third. Why is the build up phase in the middle third instead of the final third? It is much, much more difficult to break down a bunkered defense in front of its own goal, and, when you do, there is no gap left to exploit in front of the keeper. Why wait to get into the middle third to begin the buildup? Because a counter attack beginning in the defensive third is much more difficult to defend against.

    Keeping in mind the level at which Pep is coaching, Pep says it is impossible to destroy the opponent’s shape while maintaing your teams shape with less than 15 passes after winning the ball. Pep says that the purpose behind the passing is what is important, and not the number of passes or whether it is 1-touch passing or not. The necessary techniques are “fast, tight, focused passing.” (Perarnau at page 105). One word: Rondos.

    Unlike USSF which uses a 3-channel tactical view of the field, Pep uses a 5-channel grid.

    interiores_grid2_0.jpg

    He wants the possession to be in the opponent’s half of the field and the objective of the build up phase is to enter the final third with one of his most dangerous attackers on the ball in one of the shaded channels with space to play. For old farts like me, this looks just like a 235 system with the shaded channels corresponding to the inside forwards, which are today’s second strikers and attacking midfielders.

    What is not clear is the details of build up movements. From other second hand sources and watching matches, Pep has built attacks around two different methods, one is using a false 9 to disrupt the cues that CBs typically use and the other is using wingers that cannot be stopped without cover.

    Generally speaking you can pull apart the defensive shape in two ways: Player movement and ball circulation. Rotational movement is a method of player movement that does not change team shape. Ball circulation has the twin advantages of speed and less fatigue over player movement.

    My coaching and playing experience has always been playing direct with combination passing and runs to create numbers up situations by through passes. We finished our chances rather than played safe to maintain possession. As teams got older, passes got longer, runs got shorter, and tactical speed increased, but the direct attacking style remained. So I don't have any experience or training to bring to the discussion.

    Although I have steered the discussion one way, feel free to talk about any aspect of coaching team tactics.

    Thanks for reading.
     
    Wolfbeatseagle repped this.
  2. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    #2 rca2, Dec 11, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2016
    How Pep coached Bayern is more useful for US coaches than trying to get US players to play like Spanish or Brazilians who grew up playing futsal. In 2013 this is how Pep described what he was doing at Bayern:

    "I just want [Bayern] to start off moving forward together for a few metres so that, if we lose the ball, the opposition can't take advantage of our lack of unity. Every team in Germany is capable of mounting a counter-attack before you've had the chance to even breathe and if we lose our unity it gives them a chance to break through and make chances."

    "The only thing I want is that if Dante hits a long, diagonal ball to Robben, he doesn't attempt it from in or around our own penalty box, but from a position around the centre of the field, once we've played up there. If Robben then loses the ball we are all there relatively close to him and we can win it right back without a problem. But if Dante launches the ball too soon and Robben loses it when we are all straggled out and--pam! pam!--the opposition will certainly hit us with an effective counter-attack...."

    "Once they've moved as a unit to the middle of the field, that's when I want them to be more Bayern than ever. I want them to dig into that DNA, let themselves go, run, liberate themselves. That's where they excel....Let them open up the wing play and cross into the box. Not necessarily to hit the goal every time on the volley--that's hard to achieve--but so that we can take advantage of rebounds off the keeper, of the second ball--that is where we create most danger....the defenders are wrong footed and on the turn while we are running on to the [rebound]." --Pep Guardiola as quoted at pages 126-7 of Pep Confidential by Mari Perarnau.

    Pep wanted two phases of runs: the first in the box to finish the cross and the second positioned and timed for rebounds. He didn't simply want to flood the box with attackers.

    Pep's view of the game is reflected in his defensive organization. His teams defend higher than other teams because he wants to prevent the opponent from crossing the half line in good shape with the ball.

    Pep was using Cruyff's approach. Cruyff's improved Barca's play rather than wanted them to play like Dutchmen. Pep improved Bayern's play rather than wanted them to play like Spaniards. There is a message there from two generations of coaches.
     
    Wolfbeatseagle repped this.
  3. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    "15 passes"

    I don't know the basis for why I believe this. Maybe I read it, maybe it clicked in my head...

    From a positional sense, your shape is different when you defend vs when you attack. So when you recover the ball, especially, if your guys are trying to recover the ball withiin six seconds, they will be out of their optimal attacking shape. So 15 passes allows your guys to drift back into that optimal attacking shape.

    Imagine a scenario, 3 players close down the ball and win it back. Two of them simply can't sprint back to their spots now that they've won the ball. They can make a few short passes to maintain possession and allow themselves and teammates to get (big picture) organized.
     
    rca2 repped this.
  4. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    #4 rca2, Dec 12, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2016
    I think of the need for 15 passes differently. It is the second point of three in the first post. I didn't use the 15 passes phrase because I thought it was misleading. Shifting positions during a transition typically only takes 2-3 seconds. Each player is only moving a short distance. The 15 passes are the minimum time it takes to break 2 lines and move into the opponent's half without opening up gaps between the lines and then unbalance the opponent's zone defense.

    If the team counterattacks from their defensive third with a long pass from the back to a winger for example, the team shape becomes very stretched as forward line races up field and attempts to play the ball in front of the recovering opponents in order to maintain a number advantage where the ball is. That is the essence of a quick counterattack.

    The quick counter inherently does 2 things. 1) Since the attack has numbers up around the ball, then the defense has numbers up everywhere else. 2) The team's shape is stretched horribly as the forwards race away from the other two lines. If the opponent wins the ball, the number of opponents in the stretched space favor the counter attack.

    So the twin purpose of the 15 passes is to advance the whole team in a relatively compact shape into the middle third and pull the opponent out of balance to create space on the weak side. Pep is saying that it takes at least 15 passes against well trained professional teams to accomplish both purposes. Typically to do this requires breaking both the opponent's forward and midfield lines in order to penetrate across the half line. The objective is not to make 15 passes and it is not an attacking concept to Pep. To Pep it is a defensive concept in that the whole team is well balanced with the lines in supporting distance to protect against a future counter attack. This is also one of the characteristics of Dutch style play. Once the team occupies the middle third, the attack can aggressively penetrate with long passes or whatever else it wants without fearing a counterattack close to its own goal.

    What Pep looks for initially is aggressive attempts to break through the lines in contrast with knocking the ball from one side to the other around the back in a U shape pattern as is often seen on TV. After the lines are broken and the team occupies the middle third, he looks for unbalancing the opponent's zone, numbers up around the ball, and the weakside winger wide in space to receive a switch.

    As to shape, Pep sees the team shape as concentrated with players around the ball with only 1 or 2 players remaining wide on the weak side for switching the attack. So in his view the numbers up around the ball before winning it will carry over after winning the ball. In his view you dominate the ball by having superior numbers around the ball in every moment of the game. He always wants the weak side winger to stay in the outside channel to provide a target for the switch, so he doesn't give his wingers freedom to roam in the middle third of the field. The details are in the 5 channel tactical view of the field and how he wants the players to move. These details, however, is what he keeps close to him.

    Taking your example of 3 players winning the ball. If the ball had been won by only 1 player and 2 other players were not already nearby, Pep would want 2 players moving immediately into space nearby to support the ball winner by forming the first triangle for short passing. At least that was what Pep wanted at Barca. I need to watch some Bayern games under Pep.

    Other than knowing that Pep spends much time studying opponent's and coming up with game plans, I can find none of the details of how the general objectives are accomplished. That is the point at which the books and articles end and I have to watch matches to learn more.

    I am not sure if this is what you are talking about, but on the high press I think Pep only wants the forwards to pressure to a short time, like 4 seconds. This rest is me filling in the blanks. I think what the forwards try to do is isolate the first attacker to create a temporary 2v1 or 1v1 and try to win the ball back immediately. The rest of the team forms at the planned line of confrontation where the team will fight to prevent penetration across the half line. If the first attacker breaks out of pressure by the forwards, the forwards recover to their planned positions. This whole battle takes less than 4 seconds and even if the ball is not won, it provides time for the rest of the team to prepare for the counter.

    At this high level of play the different aspects of the team tactics are usually going to flow together like a well- conducted orchestra's symphony rather than appear as disconnected strategies.
     
    Rebaño_Sagrado repped this.
  5. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    I suspect that "positional play" is not the best translation of Pep's tactical view of the game. I suspect "shape" is a better word to use. My view of what Pep is saying is that the game is a contest of shape. He trains his teams to keep a good shape throughout the match and to force the opponent into a bad shape.

    For example defending high compresses the field that the opponent has to attack. Starting the direct attacks from the middle third maintains space behind the opponent's back line to exploit, and compared to a bunkered opponent makes the field that the team is attacking larger. Add to that the concept of superior numbers around the ball in every moment. Superior numbers in defense might only be 2v1. And in attack like the rondos he uses, he is going to want a minimum of 3 players forming triangles.

    That is how I fill in the missing details.
     
    Rebaño_Sagrado repped this.
  6. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    #6 rca2, Dec 12, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2016
    I thought of another way to explain Pep's tactics. In Pep's view there are two ways to win a match: control the space or control the ball.

    My understanding is Jose Mourinho tactics are about controlling space. His teams play conservatively and are strong defensively. This is a common approach to team tactics. The typical "attacking shape" defined by the players assigned locations on the field is a Jose Mourinho approach. For 11v11 the field players form a large circle, the diameter of which is determined by the width of the field, with a couple of CMs in the middle darting about into space trying to find a way to break the opponent's lines .

    Pep's approach in contrast is about controlling the ball. To accomplish that he wants to have superior numbers around the ball and his team's shape, movements and passing are intended to control the game and score by dominating the ball in all moments of the game. He doesn't care about controlling space generally, only so far as it is required to dominate the ball. In practice he wants to control the middle third of the pitch as its important as the base to his team's attack and defense.
     
  7. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    #7 rca2, Dec 15, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2016
    I am just over half way through Pep Confidential by Marti Perarnau. It is well written, but it is not an American translation. So you have a Spanish author, a former Olympic high jumper, who admittedly didn't understand or follow a lot of Pep's tactical discussions, translated by someone who is probably not a technical writer. Despite the filters the book contains some valuable insights about Pep's coaching. I highly recommend it for any coach.

    For what it is worth (3 cents with inflation), I have attached a copy of my notes so far in a PDF file. To get the full size image, click on the thumbnail and then click on the arrow in the upper right corner to expand the image to full size..
    pep confidential.jpg
     
  8. CoachP365

    CoachP365 Member+

    Money Grab FC
    Apr 26, 2012
    rca2 repped this.
  9. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    #9 rca2, Dec 15, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2016
    @CoachP365 Thanks for the link. It was immediately helpful because it explained that "3rd man" doesn't mean "3rd man" and bears no relation to the way the USSF uses "3rd." I think the best translation is "open man."

    Great link. Lots of information there. Too much to quote or even summarize. It reinforces my conclusions that positional play is not about formations or special tactics but rather its about space. I like that, because learning about space is tactics in its most fundamental sense. (In my view space is time and time is space. So space is a 4-dimensional concept, i.e., dynamic. The ultimate objective is to get the ball to meet a player in space to make the next play. Sounds simple. Yeah, right :rolleyes: as simple as keep-away games.)

    Having said that, I think what sets Pep apart is his soccer knowledge, ability to analyse a match, and his attention to detail is as good as anybody's and better than most. The magic is in the details not in the philosophy. And details are different for every match.
     
  10. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    My u11s play 6v6, when I coach them we play a 3-1-1, and the fullbacks move up to provide width. When the ball is in the other end, making it a 1-1-3. It's effective because, to your point, we have spacing, shape, and movement. Most teams play a 2-1-2 which, IMO, is restrictive on movement and provides poor shape and support (unless the ball is with the CM or the GK is actively playing with his feet).

    But they get good at it because we train with that transitional rondo in basically a 3-1-1. It's a nice segue to out door 9v9. Add two wingers and a another CM and you have our 3-2-3.
     
    rca2 and cleansheetbsc repped this.
  11. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    I like that very much. The organization also fits with my notion that there are four field player skill sets (positions): CB, CM, CF and flanker. I don't like the 9v9 3-2-3 for lack of a CB pair. I don't think it will lead to the kinds of movements I would want to see because it is too balanced.

    I would be tempted to try at (9v9) 2-2-2 down the spine with a flanker on the sides. The movements would be very similar to the 3-1-1. Conceptually it would be 422 or 242. (Think attacking shape.) What you would be doing is adding a partner at each of the 3 central positions mimicking the 442. To mimic 433 team tactics with 3 CMs you could use a 4-1-3 or 4-3-1 but the later would make the fullbacks run too much. With the 4-1-3 you have the CM position and could work on moving a back into the midfield in possession and moving 1 or both wingers into the midfield out of possession. So the CM would always have partners, just not the same ones constantly. And your 433 system would be complete with the addition of 2 more CMs the next year.

    While not obvious, the 4-1-3 is also balanced in the sense that there is 4 wide players and 4 central players. If you use Pep's 5 channel tactical view of the field, having 2 flankers on each side is essential to the basic tactics on the flanks.

    Of course the system can be varied depending on what you are trying to teach during the match.
     
  12. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Good observation and very true. Because we don't have the full 11 yet, the #6 becomes a very important role in the 3-2-3. He has to be play a hybrid #4/#6/#8 combo. Or if you don't mind making your 7 and 11 work, the other thing we do is a pendulating back line. Back three shifts to the strong side and the back side winger drops and connects with the back three.

    As always, the attacking formation doesn't have to be the defending formation. So on attack we are 3-2-3, defending we can be 4-3-1
     
  13. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    #13 rca2, Dec 20, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2016
    That is useful for the women's game where 343 is common and 442 is typically not used until the senior game. The Anson Dorrance system does the same thing with the front line while attacking. You could do that too.

    You just made me realize that the 3-2-3 would promote Pep's and the Spanish style of play using the Pivot. So the lack of a CB pair is not actually an issue as you have the pivot-CB pair to work with. But I have seen few teams in the US (the LA Galaxy being one) playing that type of organization in the back. And I don't recall any teams trying to dominate the ball like the Dutch and Pep's teams. Most teams defend areas of the field and only try to dominate the ball when chasing the game, not as a defensive tactic.
     

Share This Page