Old school 3-2-5 formation. How did this work?

my 1st grade soccer team used to play 3-2-5.

 

W-M formation:

Center forward flanked by wing forwards.

Behind then are a square in the midfield (the lower parts of the W + upper parts of the M).

Then a 3 man backline.

The neat thing about this formation was that every player was matched up one on one.


This WC All-star link shows which formations have been in favor over time: http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Park/8885/wcAllstars.htm

 

BTW, you might enjoy this:

(from http://www.rsssf.com/rssbest/short98.html):

======================================================
Subject: Re: Libero vs. Sweeper - An Off Topic Story
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 16:08:33 -0600
From: Paul Mettewie (panino@ix.netcom.com)

Marco Paserman wrote:
> But who invented the libero? In the 30s and 40s most teams played
> either the "W" (2-3-5) or the W-M (3-2-5) formations. The center-half
> would mark the opposing centerforward, the two full backs would mark
> the inside forwards or the wings, and the half backs would mark
> the other two attacking players.

Those famous old 5-man attacks!!!

A funny story about that (I need to smile now)
was at the American School of Milan, an American and
multinational high school in Italy (that me and Massa
Sugano - many years later for Massa - went to while
living in Milano.) I was playing goalie for the soccer team.

Our coach, an older American man whose previous
experience with soccer was probably a college course
and two old textbooks, called us in for the first team
meeting of the season (and this was in the seventies)

He drew what appeared to be a 5-3-2 on the board
and then placed me on the wrong side of it. I stood
up and pointed out that I hoped that I would not be
playing in front of the attackers (and so did the
attackers, including my best friend who said I only
dribbled well when eating.)

Yes, I was a wiseass.

(Some things never change.)

He said with a surprised expression that I was
behind the two defenders where all keepers belong.

We stared at one another. My best friend cussed
under his breath in Italian. The room was very
quiet. No one could belive it, except for a couple of
newly arrived Americans who were only out for
the soccer team because their girlfriends were
soccer cheerleaders (yes, we had cheerleaders...
which we didn't mind because they travelled with
us on road trips to Switzerland and such....)) )
Our Brasilian winger, an advocate of attacking
soccer, was even shocked. He kept punching me
in the arm and giggling, saying

"You had better wear two cups this year, Paul!"
And an American football helmet, too. hee hee."

Of course, being a troublemaker from the start, I
stood up and asked him if we were really going to
play five attackers. My best friend stood up and
said that he (a future Division I player in the USA),
and the Brasilian and a small fast American could
handle the attack just fine.

The coach said that the formation was proven (but
didn't say *when* it was proven) and we would
use it in our first game against the International
School of Milan. And he also told Eric to shutup
and sit down (in more polite terms, because this
guy was very soft-spoken.)

NO! Not those bastards! We had a bitter rivalry
with them and they would feast on a two defender
back line!

Well, we practiced the next week with a 2-3-5
against our reserves. They even scored on us,
(the first stringers) something that they NEVER
did. I had to bear the misfortune of being scored
on by some of the worst soccer players to ever
to pretend to be that on a pitch in Milano.
Humiliating. And this was just practice (Hmmm...
sounds like a certain Italian Cup game but I
digress from my digression.)

So the game against the International School
came. The only moment I can really remember
was the stunned look on the face of the tall
German that played center forward for the
International school when he saw five players
from the American school lined up on the mid-
field line. That shocked look changed to a smile
within minutes though.

I remember lying on my side at lot, coughing out
dust from the worn area in front the goal. I also
remember screaming a lot at my paltry defense
to get back (they WERE all back, it's just
that there weren't enough of them there to really
be called a defense.)

Anyway......6-1 loss.

And the sad thing was, the coach stayed with
formation for another three games, before the
principal suggested to him (and the principal
was hardly a soccer fan) that he try another
formation (I think some dads did some talking
here...).

We went to a 1-3-3-3 (the catenaccio style
that was in vogue in Italy then) and played
much better the rest of the year. At least I got
a chance to stand up now and then anyways.....

-Riff"A shellshocked keeper (and fan)"Ster

 

Good story, and well written. I didn't realize Amis ever got to play overseas 'back then' -- even on prep school teams.

Interesting thing about the 2-3-5: back in the early decades of the last century, the FA tinkered with the offside rule, probably because too many goals were being scored(!) Two defenders had to be between the most advanced attacking player and the goal keeper, read the new rule.

So one of the two fullbacks became what might be called a designated stepper. He would simply take one or two steps foreward as the opposition approached, and put the foreward in an offside positition. It worked too well; the goal scoring dried up, and the offside rule was re-tinkered to what we had up to the last tinkering. Now, if the foreward is level with the last defender when the ball is played, he is onside.

Question re:

I suppose she is, too. Times have changed, indeed.

 

Funny 1-2-3-5 was the way everyone played before and after WWII. It didn’t start to change until about the 50’s.

……………………1
….….….…..3……………2
..…..…6………….5……………4
11……..10……….9……….8……….7

This was also in the pre-sub days and your shirt number was the position you played in for the full 90 minutes.
Example:- If you played left back you wore number 2, always.
The main striker was the centre forward, number 9.
The forward line could be played in a W or an M. The W dropped the inside forwards back.
The M would play the inside forwards up as a 2 striker team with the wingers hanging back and the centre (#9) as target man and feeder for them. The 2 wing halves (4 and 6) would move up and down in support of attack or defense, the centre half (#5) could drop into a 3 man back line or play stopper.
Lots of variations on the theme.

 

Actually,a modern 4-4-2 fullback plays not unlike the old-style winghalves,except for pulling in farther on the defensive side (due to a lack of true wingers in the modern game).In the 1950 WC decider,Brazil played the 2-3-5,and Uruguay countered with what we would now call 4-2-4.Brazil gradually developed the 4-2-4 throughout the 50s.

Another point to consider is that formation never means as much as how players play it.An attacking minded-team will attack now matter how they are supposed to line up.

 

great story...thanks

 

Although the "W" had been abandoned by the 1930s, it was the first formation I ever played in youth soccer...in 1973!!

Obviously, our local library only had a really old book for our "coach" to look at.

 

Aah, Scotland. No scoring unless sheep are involved.

great story rtung