ericd2 full-backs and a sweeper, 2 defensive mids, three mids across with center-mid leaning towards forwards as a play maker and two forwards.

3 mids press on offense and d-mids pick up the trash one at time (one stays back to support defense. Weak side players press the goal and open up for crossing passes. back-passes and crosses with mids to set up plays, while weak side forwards play the crease.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

01.10.2008

hchoThat's a rather unusual formation. Having the sweeper ahead of full backs may cause you problems in offside traps. Sweepers generally manage the line of defense and they have to have a commanding position over their team mates.

Another possible short coming of your formation is aerial weakness. Full backs tend to be shorter and more vulnerable in the air. If the oponent manages to get 2 of their forwards between your defensive line and play the ball long, you might start leaking goals.

01.10.2008

ericdThanks, hcho,

I see your point, the sweeper will not play forward of the fullbacks all the time, will generally be the first challenge at the mid field and be fast enough keep upwith the other teams forwards (so too must the other 2 Defenders), D-mids will hustle back to spport the D, full-backs and Sweeper must be fast, strong and steady. D-mids should be strong runners with stamina and be play makers, 3 forward mids must get back on D, too and also on O be good passers, and accurate shooters.

I think this will allow for good ball movement, a balanced, strong attack and with the right players, provide defense enough to handle most situations as long as the D players run hard and stall the fast breaks until the mids get back to fill in on D.

02.10.2008

RedrebelI do not think this formation has been used in professional football. This formation has a lot of problems. First of all you do not have center-backs. Full-backs and center-backs are not the same thing. Full-backs protect the sides and center-backs protect the center. If your team is on attack and loses the ball there is a 78 percent chance it is going to be goal. Here is an example. Your team is going against a team using the 4-4-2. You got nobody to mark the strikers because you have no center-backs, and a sweeper is supposed to be free that is why it is called a "libero" so the sweeper is not going to mark nobody so the strikers are unmarked. If you argue the full-backs are going to mark the strikers who is going to mark the outside midfielders if they cross the midfield. They will have so much space to do what they want and if the full-back goes to mark the outside midfielder you are going to leave a striker unmarked. You might argue the defensive midfielders might help out, but what would they do if the teams central-midfielders attack too. They way to solve your problems with your formation is to put 3 center-backs and your formation would work.

02.10.2008

ericdRed,

Thanks for the comments and I see the points you make. I think I did not explain the positioning of the sweeper (player 3 above) In this scheme he is basically a center=back with room to roam and make the first challenge. Also, the 2 d-mids, players 4 & 5, should lean into the attack only one at a time, the weak side should be back closer to the center line to cover the middle on a turnover. If the turnover quickly escaltes, the a fast break, three fast defenders I wager will slow the play long enough to have the 4-5 mids get back. Also, on a fast break if the center back make the first challenge, the the strong side back can shade to middle to cover a pass while also watching the back of the first challenge.

02.10.2008

RedrebelI see what you mean and yes you are right, but you never have two full-backs and one center-back. You have 3 center-backs or 2 center-backs and one sweeper.

02.10.2008