RedrebelThis formation is very solid defensively. A lot of you are going to argue that this formation does not work because it doesn't have a back 4, but when the opponent attacks he first will have to go through a very solid midfield. Offensively this formation can also be very effective. The attacking midfielders can act as forwards and attack without worrying about protecting the midfield. Also this formation has been used in profesional football which means it must work. What do you guys think?
25.11.2008
Robert O'CarlosIt's a decent set up. I've read somewhere before that this formation leaves a lot of space for the opposition around the centre circle. Can't be too much of a problem if the team plays close together though, right?
Also, I've noticed you don't usually use a back 4 in your formations and often have a little dig about using 4 defenders in your comments - take it you're not a fan of a back 4 then? ;-) Just interested is all.
26.11.2008
ZolaOh, that's just the video games generation. They axe one from defense and get another man to attack and hey it works...
But anyone who knows something about football knows that defending is a delicate matter and there's really no room for experimenting. Would you really want your team to play against Torres, Rooney, Carew, Zaki, Drog etc etc with just one central defender?
26.11.2008
RedrebelRobert, you said that this formation leaves a lot of space for the opposition around the centre circle. I don't understand what you mean. But, the center circle is surrounded by 6 players. Two outside midfielders on the left and right, two defensive midfielders below the circle, and two attacking above the circle. So, I don't think there would be much space. You also said that I don't use back 4s, and you are right I am not a fan of the back 4. Everybody uses a back 4, but it takes skill and courage for a coach to employ a back 3. Using a back 3 is as safe or even better than using a back 4 if you know how to work it.
26.11.2008
RedrebelDear, Zola what do you video games generation have to do with this formation. You are right defending is a delicate matter, but there is always room for experimenting. If there was no experimenting than football would be like when it first started, just kicking the ball the furthest you could, and than making your team mates chase it. You also said if I would like to try this formation using one center-back against those strikers you mentioned, but the thing is, this formation has 3 center-backs.
26.11.2008
Robert O'CarlosRedrebel, just to clarify. It wasn't me saying there was a problem with the formation around the centre circle. I was merely repeating something I'd read about this formation. If it's tight enough from back to front I can't see too many problems with it.
Zola, with a back 3 the wide defenders usually tuck in depending on which side the play is coming from so it's always as though you would be playing with 2 centre backs and a full back. Personally I'm dubious about 3 at the back, I prefer 4, but I can see how it could work if it's done right. As far as only video gamers using it as a formation, Croatia often play with a back 3 as do Fiorentina, Udinese and a few others. Not having a pop at you there, m8, just letting you know it is used by some teams. ;-)
26.11.2008
RedrebelOk, Robert thanks for clarifying and you are also right about what you said about a back 3. When theres an attack on the flank and the outside midfielder or wing-back don't get back one of the center-backs goes to the side and acts like a fullback and it leaves two center-backs left.
26.11.2008
