It should be regarded as a great sign for football in this country that both the direction and formation used by the national youth teams are so hotly debated.
These days not only is the notion of playing, say one or two strikers cause for heartburn, but so too are the nuances that comprise the ever-popular 4-3-3 formation.
Australia has indeed come a long way where the world game is concerned, so quickly that hearing such debate concerning tactics is akin to suddenly discussing the virtues of Chekhov or Borges having previously relied on a reading diet confined to Twitter feeds and Facebook posts.
Where Australian football is concerned no issue gets tongues wagging more than the direction of Australia’s youth teams and particular what tactical formation they adopt.
The national mandate established by the FFA and endorsed by technical director Han Berger is that all representative youth teams in this country make use of the 4-3-3 template.
The rationale is that this formation – most popular in the Netherlands in the 70’s, but employed so brilliantly by the Barcelona in recent years – is the most sophisticated and reliable where maintenance of possession is concerned.
It is the formation which allows the greatest degree of midfield flexibility and interchange, while also being the system most conducive to playing with width.
The defence plays arguably the most important role in such a formation, called upon to set up attacks through precise ball movement from the back, rather than panicked clearances which inevitably finds the ball returned moments later.
Doubtlessly the biggest criticism of the formation is when the opposition is dominating possession. At such times a team’s wingers are required do their fair share of defending, leaving the sole striker quite isolated when and if possession is won back.
When things are not going right in the 4-3-3, a striker’s life can be hopelessly lonely and terrifically frustrating.
Throughout both youth World Cups this year coach Jan Versleijen has been loyal to the formation, though not always to the letter based on personal and the prevailing match situation. After all the man is a coach, not a robot.
In the Young Socceroos final match at the Under-20 World Cup in Colombia and needing nothing less than a win against the all conquering Spaniards, Versleijen threw the 4-3-3 out the window.
He selected the most attacking team he had at his disposal along with a formation incorporating two strikers.
With Australia’s hopes of salvaging some pride from a tournament gone wrong, Versleijen’s move was both brave and commendable. Ultimately however, he’ll lose his job for it.
The young Australians were crushed 5-1 by Spain, having shipped all five within the first half hour of play. It made for a dismal end to a poor tournament.
The convenient excuse for Versleijen’s chop will be the radical deviation of a tactics and ignorance of the FFA mandate.
One wonders however what would have happened had Versleijen actually pulled it off? What if Versleijen showed the FFA that there’s a much bigger world outside of the indisputably admirable 4-3-3?
The ripple effect would have indeed been enormous. Instead of Versleijen being made to look like the incompetent rebel, questions may have been asked of a system steadfast in its unwavering faith in a formation which frankly failed both teams in Mexico and Colombia.
It failed because in Colombia particularly, with this crop of players, the 4-3-3 was not the most ideal for them. And it’s a genuine shame as this group was perhaps a once-in-a generation type squad, despite the results suggesting otherwise.
To commit to a 4-3-3 and put so much strain on the defence – clearly the team’s Achilles heel throughout – was foolish.
To not utilise the brilliance of Mustafa Amini in a meaningful and consistent role, and to starve Kerem Bulut of opportunities to shine were highly regretful.
To select a team with virtually no defensive midfield cover for Ben Kantarovski was particularly harmful.
To be sure, Football Federation Australia will have every right to look elsewhere regarding its next youth coaching appointment.
However, I sincerely hope the move is based on how unacceptable the results were along with the squad’s composition, rather than a very brief deviation away from the vaunted 4-3-3.
In the same way the next coach of the Melbourne Football Club should identify just how integrated the ‘Demon legends’ are at the club, the future Australian youth coach should know precisely how much his coaching will be dictated and determined by a fixed formation from the sport’s governing body.
For coaches throughout the world and in any sport to be forced to do their job under a prescribed mandate is akin to telling a chef there’s only one way to make chicken soup or a comedian that there’s only one way to tell a joke.
The beauty of sport is that each game is vastly different to the previous with a plethora of different factors prevailing.
To be married to one fixed idea or formation is simply wrong.
rip enke
Guest
I do like 4-2-3-1, but.players need to be able to change as needed, rigidity breeds predictability._ I really enjoyed reading about the dude and his mate coaching the under 14's. I also think the technical skills are most important for youth and think a good dose of indoor / fusbal is great, ever seen a fusebal premier league match? The skills of the young players is pretty good, holding the ball, passing and control seem to be learnt at.a great rate.
Subrasub
Roar Guru
As much as the adoption of a system, it is the philosophy that ultimately picks the system. You mention barca and their 4-3-3 which is a perfect example of their approach to the game where they value possession and interchanging of positions where the likes of Villa,pedro and messi as well as iniesta all find themselves in different positions of the front and middle 3 which is part of their philosophy. A team such as Inter who play with a number 10 in an advance postion in Sneijder with 2 out and out strikers in Eto'o and Pazzini and milito playing without much width but a narrow direct style will mean they will play a christmas tree or 4-3-1-2. As for the Aussies if we want to play with a burley target man, sure play that 4-5-1 or 4-1-1 but if we aim to play with fluidity and a bit of sophistication whether we succeed or not then we play 4-3-3. Its rather simple, but managers these days are too afraid of the chop and are way too pragmatic to stick to one formation
Realfootball
Guest
I think we are looking at a 10 year span to change the culture to any appreciable degree. That was how long it took in Germany, and we are starting from much further back in the stone age. But it can be done. My son had belt it and run coach until this year (he's 13) when I and a friend of mine, both us of knowledgable ex-players and keen students of the game, took over the coaching. It was pretty rickety at first, but we've had them doing drills followed by small sided games of various formats twice a week, week in week out (the small sided games are 75% of the time), and it is really starting to show in their 11 a side match day performances. They have a prodigious goal difference and lie second on their table after being near bottom last year. The culture change in this one team of 13-14 year olds in just a couple of months has been remarkable - far greater than I had hoped for when we took over the coaching. The really interesting thing for me has been how the possession game makes the ordinary players look better than they really are, because they don't have to hold the ball - they move, pass and move. It is so simple, in essence. My view is somewhat more optimistic than yours. I think change is happening in junior coaching faster and more positively than you believe - but of course that is only an anecdotal, personal impression.
Realfootball
Guest
The best tactical system for Australia is one that doesn't involve Jan Versleijan.
tribina
Guest
Foz's line "Spain did not start to play mesmerising tiki-taka football because they had the players to do so, rather they developed the players to do so by playing mesmerising tiki-taka football". Pretty much sums it up for me. The pressurised and exposing system forces change and eventually moulds the technique for that system, so over time you eventually create that technical player required to play that system.
nordozzz
Roar Guru
well said ... it really is a waiting game for such a massive shift in how players are developed. Some more reactionary followers of the game will want heads to roll, 'apologists' silenced, etc etc ... its just an endless cycle though. Sure the system needs to be adapted as it goes along and new influences brought in, but i don't agree that this Dutch methodology is worth casting aside just yet. And broken record time ... once we have 10 (or more) solid youth systems bringing players through to the A-League ... the national youth program won't be as critical. 10 different approaches, all individual to each club ... feeding talent through to the national team which then also has its own approach. Thats the end goal and specific youth tournaments along the way are like you say just 'snapshots in time'. Perhaps the resources being spent on coaching the national teams is better directed at club level for the next decade? Thats the main change that i think is needed.
Qantas supports Australian Football
Guest
Ben----"Changing to suit a system to suit players is a terrible idea". Here is a hypothetical for you. What if your best striker is a Scott McDonald and there is no one else as good? Do you persist with a one striker formation or do you change the system to accommodate that player who needs a lesser strike partner player to support him in a partnership up front. Come Wednesday night we might see Holger try something new with Scotty and Timmy playing up front together.
Johnno
Guest
I think we need to have clear separation of coaches at junior/youth level up to under 20's and senior level. There seems to be a clear levels in skill levels and job requisites regarding player man management, coaching adult men and coaching players up to 20. So FFA should start employing coaches with high level under 20/s experience to coach under 20/s, and vice versa employ coaches with senior experience.
Vicentin
Guest
Hey I think we're in agreement but you're a better editor. Cheers
Ben G
Guest
A few points: 1) Constantly changing a system is not going to benefit anyone. 2) The system itself is not important. It's about finding a system that requires technical ability to execute. 3) The last two tournaments were a great success because they showed that our players were not technically adequate to execute the system. Now we have something to work towards. Changing a system to suit the players is a terrible idea. We can just go to parking 5 players at the back, get physical and celebrate that we can get out of a group stage at Youth level. We'll then spend the next 10 years wondering why we aren't producing any results. Our best ever results was in '99 and look what came out of that mob. We need to push our youth, even if it means growing pain.
Vicentin
Guest
4-3-3 is fine ...better than fine. It is not a failure of the system. While it's easily arguable that the current crop of players (or part thereof) don't really have the skills to play it properly, or that it hasn't been taught very well by Versleijen, there's a lot of merit in the system and we shouldn't be dropping it just because we aren't up for it yet. This is really just a "snapshot in time" and it doesn't mean we won't be successful with it in the future with more technically proficient next-gen players and better managers. Once everyone understands that this is the mandated system there will (hopefully ...and this is where my optimism struggles a bit) be a cultural change in the kind of junior players we are scouting, valueing, and trying to develop (at all levels) ie not just the strongest, fastest, fittest, but the smartest, most technically sound and adaptable footballers....alright no harm in having a couple of big lads etc to add a bit of steel but only if they can play a bit too! Our failure to make this system work for us at this point in time should now be used as a positive (yeah, I know) and to emphasise the areas where we need to re-focus. We should be looking at the countries that changed their football culture - including Spain, and see that this doesn't happen overnight, but everyone must work together. Still think there's some decent players in this team, and the U17s, and the overall standard of our footballers is only going to get better and there'll be a much larger pool of them to choose from in a few years too. 4-3-3 is part of the solution even if it is (a bit of) a problem for some at the moment. Be happy! Cheers
Midfielder
Guest
Just to break in guys the Herald Sun is saying Harry will sign tomorrow with MV... Also the new ad for the coming season amongst other football things is discussed by the four diegos and Kyle P... click on the link with Kyle picture for the podcast ... http://www.fourdiegos.com ... i.e. the play arrow at the bottom of the screen
real football 99
Guest
your article is brilliant, i didnt miss the point and sorry if i sounded like i did but its just frustrating to see how the formation debate has turned football in this country a mess and the main arguement and focus around the country.
Futbanous
Guest
Whilst its simplistic what QsAF states is undeniable "improve individual technique". Whats the old saying" take care of the pennies & the pounds will look after themselves". Hence improve individual technique(,read comfort on the ball) & it will fit in with the Australian psyche. Whilst other countries are more advanced than us in showing how to improve technique they cannot show us how to play Australian. That comes from within.
mintox
Guest
I partly agree with what your saying, systems are only a starting point. A 4-4-2 Diamond is very similar to a narrow 4-3-3 and there are different ways to defend in a 4-3-3, you can leave one winger up and have one winger drop into the midfield on defence to make what is effectively a 4-4-2. I don't believe that individual technique is at fault, we're quite capable of playing with the ball under pressure (maybe the back line could do with some work in that regard). What was wrong with the coaching is the way we implemented our formation (and this is the same problem with many coaches who coach 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 3-5-2 in Australia). In particular we coach players to play in static positions rather than to move off the ball and create better angles and interchange positions. We kept failing to get the ball out of the back because our opposition knew our defensive midfielder was going to stand in the same spot every time and it made it easy to close down this option. All our positions were like this, static and easily pressured. This has a lot to do with how the players are taught and for this reason Versleijen has to go. I have no problems with the ideas, the formation but I cannot understand how we have a talented team playing in such a static way.
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
Nice article, james! And, as you've observed, discussing & debating tactical formations is clear evidence of how far we've evolved as a football nation.
Qantas supports Australian Football
Guest
I'm not so sure what is more important, the system or the individual ball skills of players? I think we are getting too carried away with systems. Although every system starts with a decent back four to form a foundation of a strong defence. That given everything else above it should be adjusted to the type of players your are forced to play with, some are slower then others, some with better ball skills then others, and so on. How can one system fit all with so many different type of players that go around. One thing has become every clear to me watching our guys who played Spain. Count the number of completed passes made by Spain. Count the number of force errors made by our guys compared to Spain's. Count the number of times we turned over the ball compared to Spain's. Therein lies the answer, of what we need to improve..... INDIVIDUAL TECHNIQUE !!!!
Slippery Jim
Guest
Excellent article James Rosewarne, very well written.
james rosewarne
Roar Guru
I think you just re-hashed my article mate, yet began my by sighting mine as the problem in the debate. I certainly don't advocate any set formation and believe strongly that the players should indeed shape the chosen formation. Not sure how you missed that??
real football 99
Guest
hey sorry but its articles like this thats whats wrong with aussie football, so many systems, opinions and critics, everyones arguing, no wonder everyones confused, including the players. Whatever happened to playing the system that suits the players and talent you have, for example Gus Hiddink came in had a look at his weapons and chose the best formation and style to suit what he had available, and it worked. now the stupid FFA is trying to force a system upon everyone because other countries are doing it, well Barcelona and spain do it so wonderfully well because they have the talent to execute it brilliantly. All these systems and forcing it upon players is ruining the reputation of brilliant work done by Les Sceinflug and Raul Blanco who produced brilliant players with individual technique and skill on a minimum budget, replaced with over-priced and over-rated coaches. How about we start enjoying the game again at international level, like it used to be, funny how all i hear is its about the performance and how they play the 4-3-3 system and not caring about the results and getting embarrassed by tiny nations like costa rica. we are turning into bigger whingers than the English, and their whole nation is behind football its an obsession!