[Poll] What is the best formation

Everything related to tactics, coaching and refereeing
Futbolstud
Veteran Member
Posts: 314
Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 20:25
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Post

my team plays a 442 with a diamond on defense and offense its really fun to play becuase you can be creative especially if u play my position. offensive midfield
X..X...X...X
......X.......
..X......X...
......X.......
...X....X....
Image

Pele158
Senior Member
Posts: 101
Joined: 15 Sep 2005, 20:39
Location: North Carolina

Post

Thank you for showing what the diamond 442 was. I was confused
"Sometimes I even amaze myself, and sometimes I do things that make me want to punch myself in the face." Freddy Adu

ratherton
Veteran Member
Posts: 2872
Joined: 29 Oct 2005, 18:41

Post

The best formation is the one that suits the players you have. You have to find a way to play that everyone is comfortable with. If you say, "Right, we are playing 3-5-2" but no-one understands their job then it's a bad idea.

A good team can play a couple of different formations based on the opposition. If you are a good side, I believe you should go out and impose yourselves on the game by playing what naturally suits you. If you are playing a better side then maybe you need to pick a system that would help you stop the other team player.

For example, if they are stong in midfield, you may want to play 3-5-3 which would give you an extra man and also crowd it a bit so they don't have as much room to play

RG900
Veteran Member
Posts: 403
Joined: 12 Jun 2005, 03:04

Post

well i think 4-4-2 well because in my school before our formation used to be 4--3-3 wich was a bad formation by our coach because our midfield wsa bad they got tired so easily we had no transition defense we jsut had offense no defense, but the year after we had a formation of 4-4-2 and u can really see the difference more movements on midfiled on defense and offense and we started winning more games so i have to say 4-4-2 :wink:
RAMI 07
Image

arsenalrools
Senior Member
Posts: 138
Joined: 03 Oct 2005, 08:57
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post

i play in a seven a side team, so my formation is 3-2-1 andf the oly offence being me... its not recomended, because you ususally get alot defenders on ur a**, if u get wat im saying....

lolz..

but it gets u a lot of rep, if u pass all the ddefenders.
'Coaches can teach you to be smart, but no-one can teach you to play' -Henry

Image

Check Out Ma First Vid: Click Here

Piccadilly
Senior Member
Posts: 213
Joined: 02 Aug 2005, 14:49
Location: st.paul mn usa

Post

actually, what i mean by a diamond defense is that there are two wing backs, one sweeper and one stopper which is a bit like a defensive mid but he strictly stays near the defensive side of the field. it looks like this....

................X........X...........
Forwards------------------------

....X..........X.........X........X
Midfield--------------------------
....................X...................

...........X.................X.........

....................X...................
Defense-------------------------
Goalie X
12-2-1 with 4goals and ten assists

cfrealmadrid
Veteran Member
Posts: 1921
Joined: 19 Feb 2005, 04:00
Location: Pittsburgh

Post

when you say the word "best" in a question, you're pretty much asking me to step in and provide a complicated answer, so here it is :lol: . there really isn't a "best" formation. you've got to take into consideration what your teammates' strengths are, as well as the style of play you're trying to get out of them. factor those two together, and then add the style of your opponent(s), and you'll get the correct formation. and in each formation you've got sub formations. in the midfield, assuming you've got 4 players, i can think of 3 main ways of positioning your men. you can have the straight line across, with 2 wingers, and 2 cenral mids; the diamond, with 2 wingers, and and attacking mid and a defending mid; or the brasilian square style with 2 attacking, and 2 defending. and even those formations can be broken down. i know you were asking for opinions, and just one answer, but i have to elaborate on this to get my point across. here's my pros and cons of some common formations.

4-4-2 - good overall, but depends on the opponent. more and more teams are using different formations. it leaves a lot of room in the midfield, and still allows the defense to do its job. the only real problem i see is that pretty much any other formation, when well used, can beat it at the back, as the defense many times has gaps where the opposition's strikers are positioned.

3-5-2 - a good counter to the common 4-4-2. pretty much a good all around formation. it takes a lot of skill to pull this off successfully, but if you've got the personnel, it works wonders. the only real flaw is the 3 at the back. it leaves a ton of space to work with for the opponent, and you need good defending transitional midfielders to work it well.

4-3-3 - the 4-4-2's weird cousin formation. take one out of the midfield and put him up on striker, and you've got a deadly combo of counter attacking ability and defensive strength. the weakness is the lack of players in the midfield. the other team is likely to exploit this and get a ton of room to make plays. again, it depends on how you use it.

3-4-3 - the 3-5-2's close relative. it's a more attacking approach to the traditional 3-5-2. you need a ton of defensive skill to execute it, but it works wonders. the main weakness is the lack of defenders, again.

so that's pretty much it. i know ratherton made a great post in this earlier, but i needed to get my thoughts in the mix.
Hala Galacticos

breakinankles
Sophomore Member
Posts: 36
Joined: 23 Apr 2005, 19:56

Post

It also depends on how you play those formations. On my team when we play the 4-4-2 on the attack our midfield plays in a diamond and our forwards play side by side where we play more of a 4-1-2-1-2. When you play like this you have at least five people attacking without the wingbacks moving forward.

On defence the midfield and defense we play flat and one of the forwards drop back to play more of a 4-4-1-1. We also play zonal defending which works wonders....

And when you play the 3-4-3 if the ball is on the right side you three defenders shift to the right and the left winger drops back to play the fourth defender and vice versa. This worked for us this season we only allowed 6 goals and scored 31.

My 2 cents....
Signature goes here

cfrealmadrid
Veteran Member
Posts: 1921
Joined: 19 Feb 2005, 04:00
Location: Pittsburgh

Post

that's an interesting strategy with the 3-4-3. actually it's more than interesting, it's brilliant. maybe i sound naive for never having heard of this before. who taught you that? just your coach, or did you have a camp or something?
Hala Galacticos

breakinankles
Sophomore Member
Posts: 36
Joined: 23 Apr 2005, 19:56

Post

My coach. We use the 3-4-3 when we are down or tied late in the game. We tend to stick with the 4-4-2 though.

Yeah this coach that I have this year has really opened my eyes to a lot of things about the game. When we play we may say we are playing a 4-4-2 but it transforms into a lot of different looking things when we play its amazing.
Signature goes here

cfrealmadrid
Veteran Member
Posts: 1921
Joined: 19 Feb 2005, 04:00
Location: Pittsburgh

Post

same with my team. we generally play a 3-5-2, with 2 defensive mids, 2 wingers, and an attacker. when we're trying to equalise late in a game, we move the defensive mids up to central, and the attacker moves up to play striker in between the two existing ones. i know what you mean about the formation turning into things while you play. it's great to watch, and it's also very effective
Hala Galacticos

refused_743
New User
Posts: 23
Joined: 11 Jan 2006, 10:20
Location: SK

Post

Sweeper5 wrote:
*~El Maestro~* wrote:I think that it depends on your teams playing style and what you are trying to accomplish.
you can have either more attack minded formations or more defensive ones
it just depends on your team and what you want to do. is it score as many goals as you can? or is it score one and lock the game? its up to you
I think that you should always keep attacking and keep trying to score more goals, if you just lock up the game and try to win 1-0 then the soccer is really boring

couldnt agree more, but if you're 1-0 up, you can wait for the opposition to come out and play a counterattack. and well yeah, it might not be the preetiest way to win, but it seems to work perfectly for chelsea. =/

milanese
Veteran Member
Posts: 317
Joined: 12 Mar 2006, 07:05
Location: Canada

Post

I love this one

--------------keeper----------------
----------CB----------CB------------
---RB--------------------------LB---
------------DMF----DMF-------------
--------------------------------------
---------------OMF------------------
----RWF--------------------LWF----
----------------CF-------------------

Might not be drawn quite right right, but that's roughly right. Attacking SB's, attacking wingers. A havic causing CF, a creative OMF, two DMF's to give balence and win balls.

In general I like an attacking 4-4-2. Nobody even considering 5-3-2 type formation...

tonymahony
Junior Member
Posts: 64
Joined: 02 Aug 2006, 07:11

Post

In the words of Eric Cantona off of www.nikefootball.com. Joga TV section.


4-4-2, 5-3-2, I say boring. How about 1-2-7, or 1-1-8.
Without the risk there is no genius.

I personally have watched tons of Korean soccer and based on their speedy but less stronger physique Guus Hiddink put them in more forwardy beefed up formations. hey i dont know if im right or anything but hey, korea rocks!

Dick Advocaat used 3-4-3 and 2-4-4.

I would like a 1-4-5 or a 1-3-6 or something like that. Guus Hiddink with australia used formations like 2-5-4 and the such.

Uh sorry about the freaking long post

~Dynamic_Dinamo~
Senior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: 02 Aug 2006, 18:28
Location: Canada

Post

I think the key to a good formation is to have as many passing options available at any one time as possible. This is where adding diamonds and staggering lines helps. I personally like 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 lined up like this (but with the defensive line staggered of course) :wink: :

......X...... ~~~~ Striker(s) ~~~~ ..X......X..
..X......X.. ~~~~ O. Mids ~~~~~ ......X......
......X...... ~~~~ Mids ~~~~~~~ ..X......X..
...X.....X.. ~~~~ D. Mids ~~~~~ ......X......
.X..X.X..X ~~~~ Defenders ~~~ .X..X.X..X.



These are just rough ideas but its also important to note left and right dont have to always be symetrical to each other depending on your teams strengths and weaknesses as well as the other teams. Also when adding diamonds most formations will look very similar to each other kinda like these ^^2^^You could also call it a 4-2-1-2-1 or 4-1-2-1-2 instead of 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 but the basic idea is there.

Post Reply