So what you are asking is will a 3-5-2 beat 4-3-3, am I wrong?
Chile was playing 3-3-1-3, not exactly a 3-5-2 but close enough. They didn't come close to beating Spain and their 4-3-3.
Of course, one might argue that Spain has better players and Chile did not have a fighting chance.
in theory 3-5-2 is not the formation that you want to play against 4-3-3. this is why:
1)it will be really hard for your three backs to play against the three attackers becouse they are placed wide and they are faster
2) this means that you will have to bring Pereira and Coentrao back to mark the oposing team's wingers.
3)This will give the opposing team's fullback open space to go forward or at least one of them could go forward and the other fullback could stay in defense as third central back
As a result of this you will be outnumbered in the midfield (4v3), outnumbered on the sides (2v1) and be verry vulnerable when your side will go in attack becouse there will be a lot of space for the opposing winger to go in counter-attack if you lose possesion
You right Yoles , but what formation should i use in your opinion? oh and against the 4-4-2 what should i use?
I think it would not work, because defenders would be in the unprotected.
you can destroy 4-3-3 with 4-3-1-2 like mourinho's inter against barcelona...
@Zola: Spain was playing lopsided 4-2-3-1, the double pivot. Some might argue that was 4-2-2-2, because of Villa's and Iniesta's cutting to the inside. But it had nothing to do with 4-3-3.
@fatpass: when the opponent is playing 1/3 forwards - you need 4 man defence, otherwise you'll collapse. That's why Bielsa adjusted a little bit his formation for a match against Spain, regarding his 3 man defence.
Oh and btw, formations do not destroy other formations, they might only make it a little bit easier to defeat an opponent.
