I've just taken over coaching the 3rd XI (U18) soccer team at the new school I'm working at. First impressions are that the boys are enthustiastic but limited. There are no outstanding players (it is the third eleven) and certainly they need lots of work on technique. On the plus side, they are keen and reasonably fit. The big minus is that last year they lost 12 of 15 games only scoring 4 times. The head coach tells me that they could do with some organisation at the back! So in training we are doing drills working the 2nd defender and lots of ball retention exercises. The first games are in January - so lots of time. I also think they could benefit from an easy to understand formation and game plan. Any ideas? Cheers
My typical response, without knowing what players you would plan on playing where, is that the simplest, most easy to understand formation/game plan is the one you know best. I presume your third 11 is going up against other team's third 11s, so you are getting kids who have some passing familiarity with soccer, but are playing it for fun and school pride. Which is as good a reason as any to play soccer. So play what you know. I grew up with, and played, the 4-3-3 with a sweeper, so that is what I typically play until I can evolve the kids into something else.
Thanks Val - your assumptions are dead right that the boy's are playing for pride, but there is an expectation (especially from parents) that they show an improvement. I get the strong impression that a repeat of last year's results would not be appreciated. Taking on board your suggestion, I grew up with 4-4-2 with a flat back four, high pressure midfield defence and direct passing (can you tell I'm English just from that?). I'm not sure that I want to coach that way though.
For a team that is learning the skills and the movement of the game a 4-3-3 is probably your best bet because the roles for each position are fairly easy to grasp. A flat-back four is great if they can learn it...but if marking is a challenge then they'll probably need a sweeper, IMO. And not to suggest a "negative" formation but one advantage of a 4-3-3 is it can become a 4-5-1 very easily by coaching the wing players to hang back a bit..not that they can't attack but they can play long diagonal balls up to a forward or make diagonal runs with the ball from deep positions and unsettle some teams. Have fun!
I agree that its best to start with the 433. My reasoning is that its easier to teach wing play with designated wingers. I think its a lot harder to play a 442 if you don't understand wing play first. You end up with very predictable wing half play running up and down the line. To have the 442 work best on offense, you want all of the (non-holding) midfielders and forwards to be able to play on the wing. I think that once they understand the 433, its easy to convert to a 442 by withdrawing one of the forwards into the midfield. The players will be able to understand then how the two systems relate and how to get width into the 442 attack by having a midfielder take the third forward role. In a 433, you can still have 8, 9, or even 10 field players defending. You can make the forwards work both ways. Brazil at one time played 433 with the left winger dropping back into the midfield to defend. I normally tell the striker or best passer to withdraw into a central midfield defensive position if I want 8 defending. You could also say the forward closest to the ball defends. The point being you don't have to play the 433 as a defensively weak system. I like to point out that properly played that all formations should ultimately have the same shape on offense and defense during the course of play. The shape is more dependent on how many players should defend and should attack. On the flat back four vs. sweeper. If all your defenders are of equal ability, then there is no advantage to sweeper. You could go flat back four. But going with a sweeper allows you to position your best defender to cover the weaker defenders. In a flat back four, there is no where to hide a weak defender. Height is somewhat a similar consideration. If some of your defenders are short, the flat back four will not allow you to keep them wide where the lack of height is less important.
I think it's easy to hide athletic, non-soccer types at fullback. If you're shifting properly and covering well, you'll always have 2 defenders between a pressuring fullback and the goal. That's a much better scenario than a sweeper. Plus, the fullback plays closer to the touch and is afforded the confidence to attack the ball w/o severe consequences. I often find that my fullbacks progress more than any other player on the pitch over a period of time in a flat-back four.
Diamond back (sweeper, two marking backs, and a stopper) with 4 across mids and 2 across forwards, as easy and generic as it gets, yet productive.
Check out the formations page on the training ground of UEFA.com, http://www.uefa.com/trainingground/index.html#34002, Good information to start with. Good luck.
I agree with the others. A 4-3-3 with a sweeper/stopper can help reinforce those deficiencies in the back. And the stopper can help support the midfield.
Thank you all for the suggestions. I will try out the 4-3-3 formation with a "diamond" back four. The back four would be a sweeper filling in and covering behind 2 markers, with a stopper whose main role will be to pressure the man with ball and cut out passes. The midfield will be two wider players who'll funnel back in to the full back positions when defending and support the wingers in attack. They'll also be asked hold in midfield and provide the 'easy pass' opporunities. The central mid will be expected to get past the main striker to create chances and obviously get back to defend (I need Roy Keane!) In attack, I would expect to put a central striker with 2 wingers who'll have to run to the centre to support him. The wingers will also drop back to support the midfield. I have a couple of questions. Have I understood how wide areas are covered using this defence? Should I ask the boys to play direct/long-ball tactics given their limited skills or is it better to try to play football? If you have any other suggestions, I would really appreciate them.
It depends on if you want to win some games or if you want to develop the players' skills. Hit-and-hope will keep you out of trouble but they may never develop the confidence to use the skills you trained them in? My two cents...
Often the back four is three marking backs across with a sweeper covering. If you are facing only 1 or 2 fowards, then two marking backs should be okay. The role for the stopper is what normally varies. Two common ideas are he can have a central zone, or be assigned to mark someone man to man, such as the opposing playmaker or a particularly dangerous forward. On offense, one of the 4 backs usually should be moving up into a supporting midfield position during the attack to give the attack more numbers. Normally your opponent will be defending with all but two forwards, so three backs should not have a problem covering them on a sudden transition. Having three forwards gives the attack early width. Getting the ball to the forwards early lets them exploit that width, but early does not mean send long low percentage balls. Early just means getting it to the forwards before the defenders have time to recover. Through balls are ideal. Penetration is what you want. If the through pass is not happening, then they should slow the attack down, changing fields often helps, and build it from there. Find or create space and penetrate until you get a shot. With your midfielders, they are going to have to track back into the defense with opposing midfielders trying to flood a zone. Ideally you have three midfielders capable of playing any role so the attack is unpredictable (each playing an even 50/50 role attack/defense). If the attack always flows through the same midfielder, its predictable. Remember also that the ball is normally advanced along a side rather than up the middle. So having two wide holding midfielders would slow the attack. The three midfielders need to be aware of their shape and one of them needs to be sure there is depth to link with the back line. One solution is to have the wide mids share the responsibility for the holding role with one of them keeping a bit behind (and a bit central) for depth should there be a transistion and quick counterattack. With your forwards, the more freedom you give them to move around the more dynamic and unpredictable the attack will be. Which player is located where is not really important. As with the midfielders, the forwards need to be aware of their shape relative to each other.
No, I wouldn't. With long-ball/long-passing play you need to key ingredients: (1) Accurate passing, (2) Competent receiving, which means trapping techniques and good positioning. Since the boys aren't a skilled or technical team, there needs to be more training before this will work. (If you think they are strong in the above two areas, then go for it.) Instead, it has been my experience to create success with "lesser" teams to focus on possession, 1v1 skills, passing, and shooting. Successful teams are teams that keep possession of the ball and attack. I would only worry about shoring up the defense if they already attack well. Too many "unskilled" teams focus so much on defense the youth never learn how to attack. Without learning to attack they will never win a game, never build the confidence they need when they are in a shooting situation, and soon you see the entire team on the defensive half because all they know well is defending. Don't worry about how many goals the opponent scores, instead focus on how many goals your boys can score. Show them tapes of Brazil or other "flare" teams and get them into an idea of creative attacking with an emphasis on individual skill and good team support.
Not mentioned so far, so thought I would mention it. In addition to your backs, a key component is team defense. It will be very helpful if you can get not only your midfielder but also forwards to back tackle. By this pressuring the ball after they have lost it. Also, if you have a good sized squad it might be helpful to play high pressure especially by your forwards. Most teams will have their less skilled players in the back. And for the most part they aren't going to be used to feeling a lot of pressure. And it will help from keeping the pressure off your own back. I'm going to try and post some links to a pretty good coahcing site that I found. They have a lot of drills and matieral that should help you. Here's a couple of links to some good information. Overall site http://www.dprsports.com/drills.htm Defensive exercises http://www.dprsports.com/drills/defensive.htm
You are very correct. The 4-3-3 would be my suggestion also, but one of the biggest problems with the 4-3-3 is finding a 2-way midfielder. You might struggle with this. Some midfielders are great in the attack but can’t play defense. You will soon notice this huge gaping hole in your defense right down the center of the field and the score will get real ugly, real fast. Another defensive problem to control is a center-mid who drifts to the ball too much when it is on the wing. Again, you will have this big hole in the center of the field that will be filled up with the other team’s attacking players and your guys will feel helpless to stop them. Other center-mids will be great defensively but may not be able to contribute offensively. I concur with the suggestion to use a 4-3-3 with a diamond sweeper/stopper on the back line. It should help define and simplify the defensive 1st, 2nd defender roles. If you can find an athletic fast kid who doesn’t mind playing sweeper, it could help your defense a lot. And if I may make a coaching suggestion. Since you have the 3rd XI, try to have as much a lot of fun during practice. Good luck. Let us know how it goes.