Why the change in formation?

[Andy Durman]

Yesterday I went and watched a team who my amateur team plays on Wednesday. I worked a strategy to beat them. I notice that their wings backs were fast and their centre backs dominant in a 2v1 situation. They also play 2 holding midfielders in a 4-4-2 system.

 

If you play a single striker against 2 centre backs. They will have him in their pocket. What you do is instead play a false 9 or a number 10. Meaning that the centre backs either have to push up to mark or have nobody. Centre backs rarely go forward. Now add 2 wide players, playing on the shoulders of the full backs and you end up with 1v1 and stopping the threat of the full backs. You basically get a 4 defenders against 2 attackers. But 1v1 on the flanks. The diamond then gives you a 4v2 overload in the centre of midfield, with the holding midfielder marking their No. 10. This starves the delivery.

 

It's my opinion that the 4-diamond-2 is a brilliant system and my analysing of the next opponents has logically developed the this natural system.

 

I won't tell the player tomorrow that we are playing 4-diamond-2, but by telling them their jobs in the team, then it naturally becomes that system.

[verlaine1979]

Yesterday I went and watched a team who my amateur team plays on Wednesday. I worked a strategy to beat them. I notice that their wings backs were fast and their centre backs dominant in a 2v1 situation. They also play 2 holding midfielders in a 4-4-2 system.

 

If you play a single striker against 2 centre backs. They will have him in their pocket. What you do is instead play a false 9 or a number 10. Meaning that the centre backs either have to push up to mark or have nobody. Centre backs rarely go forward. Now add 2 wide players, playing on the shoulders of the full backs and you end up with 1v1 and stopping the threat of the full backs. You basically get a 4 defenders against 2 attackers. But 1v1 on the flanks. The diamond then gives you a 4v2 overload in the centre of midfield, with the holding midfielder marking their No. 10. This starves the delivery.

 

It's my opinion that the 4-diamond-2 is a brilliant system and my analysing of the next opponents has logically developed the this natural system.

 

I won't tell the player tomorrow that we are playing 4-diamond-2, but by telling them their jobs in the team, then it naturally becomes that system.

 

If the opposition are playing 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 doesn't one of the DMs just drop back to mark your false 9, leaving the CBs to double up with the full backs on your wide attackers when the ball is on the flanks?

[Andy Durman]

Maybe, but my midfielders right and left of the diamond are then free. It creates overloads, but requires a high level of condition to sufficient numbers forward to support the attack.

 

I'll tell you how we get on Thursday

[Saint-Fred]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1442556-breaking-down-the-4-1-2-1-2-diamond-formation-when-to-use-it-and-why

 

This is reasonably interesting..I can't see it's an every game formation as teams can counter it being so narrow but get it right and it works.

 

https://earlyshower.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/analysis-4-2-3-1-vs-4-4-2-diamond/

Edited 21 August, 2016 by Saint-Fred

[Webby]

Maybe, but my midfielders right and left of the diamond are then free. It creates overloads, but requires a high level of condition to sufficient numbers forward to support the attack.

 

I'll tell you how we get on Thursday

 

I think it works quite well in defense but in transition to attack those wide men need to tuck in and find space between the fb and CB. This can obviously cause confusion as to who's picking up who. Up to now I've only seen the wide forwards staying out wide, mostly. Only in the last 15 when the games gotten a bit ragged as well as our shape have I seen decent positions taken up by our forwards.