How football's 4-3-3 formation works

Not being an expert by any mean (an energetic but limited central defender), I learned a lot from both the article and the comments. Thanks all.

4-3-3 is the best development formation, which is the why the FFA have chosen this system as the development tool, unfortunately too many don't understand why we are teaching our kids this formation. 4-3-3 unlike other formations is the most flexible and develops players tactical and game intelligence in a more effective way, but many get confused and often coaches follow it brick by brick as they don't have a strong enough knowledge base to go beyond the formation and teaching of it. I hear a lot of we are teaching our players to be robots or we over coaching the kids creativity and game ID and so the players are clueless which is not true. If this formation can work in the world's best football nations why it work here? I hope the new Belgian TD can improve in this department.

Thanks for the article, and all the helpful comments. It is good for us to talk more about tactics and how they might apply to grassroots clubs.

Vocans = following the development of the "numbers game" in football is not so easy for that development has been going on unabated for at least 90 years and brings into the picture "occurences" all around the world but is widely recognised that the "experimentation" began around the 1920's in England when a manager at Arsenal moved his centre-half (note the description, he was ostensibly the middle half back,one of three) back to play in a position between the 2 fullbacks thus creating a 3-2-5 line up or it's more widely accepted name the WM formation, the 2 letters, when super imposed on a playing pitch, giving a rough description as to the formation being used by his team.This manager reasoned that it would be harder for 5 forwards to get past 3 men than it would be 2 for until that time the accepted way for a team to line up had always been 1-2-3-5. So the genie was let out of the bottle and the "numbers game " began. You have to understand that at that time football teams were "run" under a completely different structure than what we know today usually a somewhat dictatorial figure was given a "managers" job and.his task was more dependent on keeping his charges playing well rather than experiment in differing formations. However there were at that time a group of "rebels" who began to investigate how the game was being played and the names Hogan and Meisl (an Austrian) began to question how a ball could be manipulated around the field if players were used in different areas of the field and these men are actually credited with being the "fathers " of tactical football as it is played today. The widely accepted areas of "difference "are usually credited to surpisingly (1)Scotland,who due to the social structure in that country appeared to produce players who were smaller and more skilled in ball control and movement that their at that time "old enemy" England, Hogan an Englishman had actualy been ostracised in his own country for daring to suggest his country's teams should copy the Scottish styleof play. (2) Hogan moving to the continent (Europe).where he teamed up with Meisl in Austria and later on Hungary,where his teachings fell on fertile ground. The Austrian team of pre World War 2 were recognised as the best in the world everywhere but in England and it was there that the next change appeared for Meisl experimented with a "withdrawn" centre forward so that the formation could now be described as 3-2-1-4, Then ideas emerged from behind the political barriers of communist Europe and we saw the emergence of "position swapping" as used by the Moscow Dynamo team of 1945 and the more flexible sytem as used by the great Hungarian side of the early fifties who incorporated the deep centre forward with 2 fast "fetch and carry" wingers, so giving a flexible 4-4-2 formation when defending and 3-3-4 when in possession of the ball and attacking. By now the "numbers game" began to take hold all around the world and it is widely acceptedin coaching circles that the Brazilians,gifted with many great players,intoduced what became known as 4-2-4 and 4-3-3 into the coaching manuals.That brings us to the 1970's when Holland,using a mixture of what had gone before, played what pundits named "Total Football" which in itself was a misnomer for their tactics were a combination of what the Austrians,Russians and Hungarians had developed In contrast ,and as further proof that the "numbers game" was now a worldwide phenomenon, the Italians had gone in a completely different direction embracing completely the defensive set-ups designed to win games at all costs, this having been copied from a theory developed in Switzerand. So you see Vocans,we are living in a constantly changing football world and who knows when it will stop,for as long as we have these highly paid "chessmasters" running our top teams in international and club football we will see their thoughts on how to use players transposed on to the playing fields of the world. Hope this is of some help. Cheers jb.

I don't claim to be an expert on football (soccer), but would suggest everything has to start somewhere, & teaching 4-3-3 is a basic starting point. But teams will vary from this formation due to a host of reasons, tactical, quality of players & their best structure, so on & so on. When I select all-time or periodic teams for example, I opt for a 4-4-2 while acknowledging this is merely a starting point. But it allows me the flexibility of attacking & holding midfielders, for example.

Good one Harrison. Now give us the way to break the formation down. I'm interested and a lot of others here will no doubt contribute. Good stuff.

Completely agree jb. I have to say I am quite surprised by the article and comments on this thread as it seems that what I experienced wasn't the norm everywhere (and I naively though it was). I think it probably depends on what system was 'fashionable' then in the region you grew up (so location and era are keys perhaps). I played football as a kid/teen in the late 80s and 4-3-3 was the 'natural' football system for all amateur teams in france and even a majority of the pro ones. Even the NT played it until in the mid 80s Luis Fernandez became indispensable hence the 'forced' move towards 442 to accommodate Fernandez-Tigana-Giresse and Platini in the midfield. But imo 4-3-3 has always been 'the natural way' to play football and the positions we use in French reflect that. I think one of the main differences between anglos and south continentals though, is that we called our central defenders 'stopper' and 'libero' and they had 2 very distinct roles. But they were still part of a 4-man defence. But as you say I have never heard a coach tells us 'guys, lets play this or this system". I think tactics should come much later in people's football life.

I would be interested to know what formation the olyroos were playing! What was that! And what formation was venables playing when we lost to Iran on that crappy day. By the way back in the day in North Queensland we were taught 334 where the back 3 never ventured over halfway (lol) and defenders had to be very fast. The current a-league is littered with slow fullbacks.

Your 4231 is a 433 variation mid.

Waz, fully agree and as we live in volunteer land it is hardly surprising. What is disappointing though is the vacuum between the decision makers and grassroots in somfar as they seem to believe that by saying something needs to happen, that means it will. I have enough problems getting people to undertake a basic grassroots coaching course never mind anything more challenging and as we all know, momey and resources traditionally domnot flow in a downward direction!

Yoongy -Your 2 cents worth is pure,pure 18 carat gold.If we could only get that knowledge into where it is needed most. Cheers jb

JB I said played .... maybe its just me but sometimes playing a system gives you an insight people who have not played do not have.

Firstly, Andrea Pirlo is not a defensive midfielder but rather a deep lying playmaker. He transitioned from his trequartista role when he moved from Inter to AC Milan and thrived under Carlo Ancelotti's 4-1-2-1-2 formation with Gattuso playing as the ball winning midfielder, Seedorf as the attacking midfielder and Kaka completing the top of the diamond as the trequartista. The key to formation depends on the type of players at your disposal. No point playing 4-1-2-1-2, 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 if you don't have the right players for it. The key elements in soccer are passing and off the ball movement. Academies should teach players how to pass the ball correctly; pass to feet or pass to space. Off the ball movement wins game as you can launch a direct counter attack with the right through ball pass without getting caught offside. Another key aspect is defending; when to commit to a tackle, when to jockey a player. Soccer is a very technical game but the first step is to get the basics right. Learn to pass and learn to move into space. Regardless of the formation, a good passing team with players that can move into space generally wins the game. Young players should be thought how to read the game. That's my 2 cents worth.

Mid - Cant believe you did not know what 4-3-3 was if you are over 59. In 1974 ( you would have been 17) the Socceroos played lined up in such a manner,4-3-3. Where did you play your junior or youth football,the Simpson Desert.??? Coming from a heartland of the game in Australia I still find your claim amusing if not incredulous. Cheers mate jb.

Buddy, "... but there is a huge gap in training and coaching" .... this has nothing to do with 4-3-3 and is a problem full stop, the new edict (same in QLD) just highlight the problem.