It all Starts with Hopping the Fence: How to Disrupt a 4-4-2 with a 3-2-5

Inspired by Pep Guardiola’s 4-3-3 that shifts into a 3-2-5 in possession, I’ve been very interested in unraveling some of the dynamics that unfold when building out of the back with this formational structure. Defensive lines of 3 in possession have become increasingly popular due to the modern fullback’s attack-focused renaissance that’s pushed them higher and higher up the field. For teams lining up with a back four, this development leaves only two often-mediocre ball players to initiate every controlled attacking sequence. It’s easy to see why that might be disadvantageous.

It’s also important to note that the heightened importance of cross-functional utility in wide defenders has allowed for more creative shape shifting. Conventional deployment tells us that these players are destined to defend, but examples like Dani Alves or Marcelo encourage us to believe that widebacks can shine on the dribble. Others like Trent Alexander-Arnold can thread crosses in from deep, serving as a deliveryman for target number nines. Even more intriguingly, fullbacks have occasionally been instructed to tuck inside during bouts of possession, rather than the standard “bomb forward”.

Football Made Simple published a YouTube video around a year ago, outlining how Guardiola has cleverly deployed Kyle Walker, and previously Fabian Delph, as RBs and LBs that transition into CDMs as the ball is knocked around. This shift is one of the core elements of the 3-2-5. Enjoy the explanation, below.

With so much tactical tinkering and possibility, it goes without saying that the modern fullback is expected to be more of a Swiss army knife than ever before. This added versatility opens up a world of opportunities for overloading the opposition in favorable regions high up the field, wreaking havoc as the oncoming defense seeks to understand your team’s positional strategy. Per Jonathan Wilson, generations of top-heavy football have been left behind by “inverting the pyramid”, but this new-school ideology has catalyzed a restored return to vintage structure. The more men we’re able to hold high, while maintaining balance down low, the more lethal our goal-scoring efforts will be. The 3-2-5 is footballs current solution to this optimization problem.

A Single Bite about Juego de Posicion

Before diving into our build-up theory, I feel compelled to devote a few sentences to the formative womb that gave birth to the 3-2-5. As previously alluded to in other articles, “Pep’s 20-Zone System”, or its origins known as JdP or “Positional Play” refer to a spatial structure that enables teams to use possession to manipulate the opposition, while providing geometrical tools for individual positioning with respect to one’s teammates. The concept and its application are highly effective, and have been widely regarded as a total reinvention of how to play football. The core of the idea is to divide the playing field into subsections–vertical and horizontal zones–with specific instructions regarding the maximum number of players that are allowed to occupy each area. I’ll certainly dedicate some time to write an entire piece on the framework, but know that the gist of these rules is to provide players on the ball with optimal passing lanes to maintain control of the ball. Though Pep began his career coaching “possession for the sake of possession” through the fabled Tiki Taka, he’s evolved into a more pragmatic, albeit still ball-dominant, approach. JdP has provided the crucial environment for his various methods at Barcelona, Bayern Munich, and Manchester City to thrive, and his usage of the concept across all three fronts is demonstrative of its flexibility despite its ostensible geometric rigidity.

One key principle born from JdP is the importance of diagonal passing–something we’ll briefly synthesize later on in the article.

Defensive Considerations of the 3-2-5

When we examine the 3-2-5, the base guidelines for positional play are observed, namely having no more than 3 players in any horizontal zone, or more than 2 in any vertical strip. As such, the advantages of opened passing lanes and a stretched opposition are conveniently benefited from. Furthermore, with a wealth of attacking options forming a thin W, high up the pitch, the opposition backline will find themselves spread wide by touchline wingers, and consistently forced into marking decisions by the creative midfielders operating inside the halfspaces.

The compact defensive shape in possession means that the only spot susceptible to counters is out in the channels, but by having three centerback role-players behind the ball (instead of just the two that we’d have at our disposal in a back four), we fancy our chances under those circumstances. If we’re lucky enough that the opponent counterattacks down the side that our fullback shifted into a third CB, we’ll be grateful to have a comparatively quicker player to stymie any attempted onslaughts. If the opponent sprays a ball down the other flank, we will hope that our fullback-CDM still has the wheels to catch up to them, or that the CB that was pushed out wide has sufficient pace to cope, too.

It is, perhaps, strategic to cultivate a system in which these counterattacking moments are considered and directly influence the lineup selections–i.e. the centerback that’s quicker on his feet starts on the side that will end up as the LCB or RCB, while the slower, more aerially dominant one ends up rotating into the central role. The choice regarding which fullback tucks into the midfield, and which sits deep, may also depend on various qualities like height, distribution ability, comfort playing under pressure and with their back to the field, etc.

Terminology: Pinning Back the Opposition Using “Magnetism” or “Gravity”

We’ll also use pinning to our advantage in the 3-2-5. This concept comes from the suggestion that players tend to have a gravitational effect on others, when taking up positions in close proximity to them. Decoy runs work because they suck a defender into a certain space to guard a presumable threat, yanking them out of position like a positive pole might do to a negatively charged one, and opening up true opportunity beyond them. A striker that hangs goalside of the defense and makes runs in behind will gradually unsettle the CBs, and incentivize a lower offside line so the CBs can better see his movement. As such, he’ll tug the opponent using his “gravitational pull”. If wingers have chalk on their boots, the opposing fullbacks will be hesitant to stay tucked inside, for fear that they’ll be too exposed in the channels. Thus, they too will be drawn into the width to cover. This is a fundamental idea that we can exploit across the board, especially when looking to maintain our numerical superiorities through build-up, and avoid the opposition from condensing our space too much. We use the notion of magnetism to draw the defense into certain regions, spreading them out, and granting us more room to work with.

Observe how the striker pushing high occupies two central defenders, the wingers spreading wide take one each, and even the creative midfielders pushing up and into the halfspaces carries a little weight on the opposing CDMs’ positioning.

This analogy to “attractive forces”, however, isn’t perfect. In introductory physics, we learn that gravitational force is proportional to r², with r referring to the distance between the two bodies. This, effectively, suggests that the effect of one’s “pull” on another does not vary linearly with distance, but “intensifies” as we get closer. We may observe a vaguely similar effect in soccer, but the comparison loosens a fair bit. When we apply this concept of magnetism, to the field, we are relying on a player’s eyes to capture the existence of other bodies and urge us towards them. Two particles have no pupils; it is their mass that drags them together. Our eyesight is quite excellent, and though I’m unaware of how it deteriorates with respect to distance, it seems unlikely that it would vary with the same squared relationship. Thus, we might claim, to a certain degree, that the closer that we are to a moving player, the more likely we are to feel their “magnetism”–but a corner kick taker might notice a bombardiering opposition winger from 30 yards away and feel obliged to sprint back to catch them from scoring the counter. Even though he is far, his eyes still “pick up” the stimulus. Therefore, distance does matter, but in a much hazier and harder-to-define manner than with celestial bodies.

It is also important to clarify that the term “magnetism” is a bit of a misnomer here–the equations defining electricity and magnetic effects are totally different than what Newton is describing with Universal Gravitation. “Magnetism” is a colloquial idea that people tend to intuitively understand. It’s also highly used in modern literature. It’s a convenient synonym to “attraction”, and so on, but only for our purposes. I’d be remiss if I suggested that the true physics concept had anything to do with the stated formula, above. Just know that these are nuanced words that we’re simplifying–but I digress.

When it comes to strategizing our pinning methods, we observe that it is even more advantageous if we can manage to occupy n opposing players with <n of our own. For instance, by pushing our striker high up the field, and right between the two CBs, neither of them can reasonably neglect his presence. If the LCB dismisses our forward, he can attack the space left behind, and the same goes for the RCB. Both defenders must be attentive to his actions, and will likely both be sucked into his gravitational field.

This means that we can pin the position of two defending players with only one attacker–a huge tactical advantage. Since the outfield players are otherwise matched up 10 v 10, this double occupation inherently means we’ll have overloads in other areas of the pitch; this 1 v 2 leaves a favorable 9 v 8 elsewhere. If the number nine is able to maintain this over time, it’ll be even easier to find the free man as we build.

Terminology: Cover Shadows

Another vital concept to define pertains to coverage when a player isn’t necessarily man-marked. When an opponent positions themselves between a ball-carrier and a potential passing option, their body shape and angle determines the “shadow” they effectively cast onto the field. These spaces can then be blocked off by their presence, enabling various coverage tactics. See a body-cam example, below, from Rashid Abdul Rahiman’s YouTube channel.

Observe how the defender confronts the man on the ball, albeit somewhat chaotically, using his body shape to restrict the passing lane in behind him to the orange runner. The triangle his body defines is known as his “cover shadow”. The cameraman has to dribble around to pass over it, such that the defender can’t obstruct his delivery.

• 

• 

We see these ideas used all over the pitch–but especially in pressing sequences. One tactic many coaches instruct their players to incorporate involves using a cover shadow to prevent “return balls”, for instance. If a backline is passing the ball around, and a lone striker is trying to knick it off of them, he must insert himself between the lines as he presses from one player to the next. By utilizing his cover shadow to cut off the pass directly back to the original player, he’ll leave the receiver with fewer options. A striker that fails to do this will become tired quite easily. It’s a nuanced concept, so here’s a more visual comparison between both approaches:

Here, we see a striker failing to cut off the return pass. They’re toyed with repeatedly, and get run ragged through the sequence. In the second animation, the player shrewdly inserts themselves and prevents that easy return option, using their cover shadow.

Again, this is a simple example of a concept seen all over the field. We’ll be using these little black triangles to help illustrate coverage limitations as we build out of the back. Here’s a pertinent example of blue covering white players, from later on in the article:

Terminology: Line of Confrontation

A glimpse of the final term worth explaining can also be seen in the preview above. A line of confrontation speaks to the height on the field that a team must surpass to engage the opposition. Many teams will define such a line as a pivotal element of their pressing strategy. Low-press teams will have a line of confrontation closer to their own goal, allowing the opponent to possess the ball high up their side of the field. A high-press moves that line much further into enemy territory–suggesting that the barrier can be broken much earlier, and defensive actions are to be taken deeper in the opposing half. On the left, see a sample high line for blue, while the right depicts a low one. The line of confrontation is typically the first step in defining any squad’s pressing style.

• 

• 

With these ideas in our back pocket, let’s begin to analyze some specific situations.

Foundational Principles and Dynamics

We start with, arguably, the most ideal formation to come up against, when playing in our 3-2-5 system: the boxy 4-4-2.

One of the first things scouts are told to analyze when it comes to a team setting up in a 4-4-2, is how the group deals with the space between such discrete lines. Our two halfspace 10s will greatly thrive in this gap, while our defenders will also enjoy numbers up as we build, with only two opposition forwards to press, rather than three. With two opposing wide midfielders whose defensive positioning may be somewhat ambiguous, we will benefit from these numerical superiorities.

Low Line of Confrontation, 4-4-2

One effort that we may immediately see employed against us is lowering the aforementioned line of confrontation. The spaces between the lines are a 4-4-2’s most vulnerable regions, since they generate the greatest ambiguity as to whose job it is to mark those that reside within them. They’re also two geometrically simple plots of unoccupied land to roam in. Thus, to reduce the negative effects of this, a team may step off of our defense, and establish an engagement barrier at the half. In doing so, they’ve given us very comfortable possession of the ball, deep, and with three players to work it around. The opponent is more than happy with that, so long as we’re stroking the ball with all 11 of their men behind it. They’ve compressed our valuable space, and that’s what matters to them.

Here, we might start by probing. We pass the ball across our back line to see whether any openings are available–but this may not prove fruitful if the opponent is well-coordinated in their movement and coverage. This progression can become tiresome, quickly. If the defense shifts accordingly, it may appear daunting to try to penetrate these more compact lines with passes. Furthermore, defenders with limited dribbling abilities may feel anxious going forward and into the territory of so many enemy soldiers. Parking the bus has physical defensive implications, but it’s also meant to deter players psychologically, with the intimidating sight of so many men to beat. This is, however, exactly what we must do.

What we must imbue in our players, here, is that if the opposition holds off so much, these ostensibly “risky” moves or passes pose little risk at all. We must have the courage to overcome the overwhelming sight of enemy lines to recognize this.

If the other team regains possession with a CM, for instance, they have no outlet high up the field to punish us quickly. Even if we play a pass between the lines, and it’s intercepted, we still have a highly favorable position behind the ball, and with huge numbers up. Without a longball option for the opponent, we’re challenging them to a footrace, and we’re meters ahead. If we’re able to counterpress effectively, we’ll force the opponent into the wide channel–where they might think there’s more room to exploit us–and we will nullify their efforts with ease. With numerical inferiority, they’ll struggle to beat our backline with the sideline limiting their options. Thus, the possibility of an effective counterattack against us is low; we should be encouraged to be adventurous and aim for medium-risk medium-reward actions, rather than comfortably continue to pass the ball around the back three. An example of such a progression is shown below.

So if the consequences of mistakes are minimal, we should be fearless in our approach to breaking down this low block.

In this 3-2-5 formation, our game model is to primarily find our creative players in pockets that cause problems for the opponent. To do so, we must play them into these regions–but sometimes, our deep-lying personnel might not possess the precision to deliver these needle-threading passes. As such, if we’re unable to directly find the 10 between the lines, we want our 6 to carry the ball into the playing field and link up, instead. They’re likely to have sharper vision when it comes to connecting these plays.

The challenge with our current configuration is that both of our central defensive midfielders are marked tightly by the opposition forwards. We can envision a situation in which we continue to pass the ball around the back, in hopes that we can find a seam to play them into, but they aren’t quite able to free themselves of the gnats buzzing around them. In the likely case that this happens, we must design a way to spread apart the opponent’s first line. Such is the art of dismarking and creating the free man.

With the confidence that the risk of adventure is low, it all starts with hopping the fence.

We break our humdrum infinite passing loop by instructing our wide centerbacks to make an attacking move and cross the “barrier” the opposition have set. It’ll be shrewd for us to observe their responses to certain stimuli throughout the opening minutes of the match, to pin down exactly where they’ve placed it. Once we know, we can deliberately break it to draw out the opponent.

Stepping over this line will alert the nearest players; as alluded to previously, “low press” is never in reference to the intensity, but rather, the position on the field in which a team looks to regain the ball. As soon as we take break that barrier, a well-drilled team will pounce on us like sharks. Do not fear, however, as we have the tools to successfully harpoon them.

In the case that the wide mid steps to press our centerback (a possibility that’s reasonable, given the feeling of anxiousness that might accompany their otherwise isolated defensive deployment), we have a quick and easy solution. Our winger will drop deep to provide a passing angle outside the pressing man’s cover shadow, we’ll find him in the width, unmarked, and the 10 will join in the flanks for a 2v1 that exploits the now much-more-open space between the lines.

Remember, if their goal is to compress this region, and we’re able to pry it open, that’s a success. Observe how the blue shaded region above has been enlarged by this simple movement.

If the fullback steps on our LW’s heels, they’ve resisted our efforts by keeping their lines compressed, but they’ve given us access to a much more valuable region of the pitch: in behind. Here, our focus shifts away from finding balls between the gaps, to pumping one deep for our 10 to run onto. With one simple execution–breaking the line of confrontation on the dribble–we’ve managed to yank the opponents’ two wide players out of position and find two strong options for our build-up.

But what if the wide mid stays put? Another alternative is the central midfielder claiming responsibility for our penetration and coming to mark us. In the case that this happens, we ask our 10 to be the one to shift positions accordingly.

With the blue CDM now dragged out of position, we’ve opened up that crucial space between the lines again (note the shaded quadrilateral). His cover shadow marks our 10 out of the play, but if our creator moves outside of the cast coverage, he may receive the ball with time to turn and exploit another 2v1 out wide.

The 10 may also receive the ball and penetrate inwards, if the wide midfielder comes deep to press, nullifying the numerical superiority in the flanks. If this is the case, we’d expect our striker and other 10 to make runs as depicted below. If the blue RCB covers the striker’s run in behind, we’ve opened up a big central gap for both 10s to perform their magic.

Either way, we’ve transitioned the ball into favorable regions and created opportunities from it.

But what happens, now, if neither midfielder presses? We wanted to crack open their sturdy walnut of a defense, but we’ve been somewhat unsuccessful. The opposition’s lines of four are positionally disciplined and refuse our temptation. Instead, their striker peels off and begins a kamikaze streak towards us, looking to make the first impact. Here is where the beauty truly begins.

Under circumstances in which the opponent uses their cover shadows effectively to rule out our 10 and winger, with a striker bounding towards us to minimize our time on the ball, we can maneuver a nifty passing sequence to circumvent them. Briefly, however, we must touch upon the defensive vulnerability of our new arrangement.

If we were to haphazardly lose the ball in this region, now we are in trouble. Before, we were losing possession much deeper in their half, with defenders positioned behind the ball such that we could easily corner and fizzle out a feeble counter. Now, a striker has beaten our first defender already, and has a huge opening to attack. This is a threat we must avoid.

Therefore, the first component to a successful and safe breakage of the opponent’s barrier is proper defensive shifting on our part. Our central centerback and RCB will adjust laterally to provide negative passing outlets as well as protect against potential losses of possession on the ball side. This is a super simple detail that can often be overlooked–but must become second nature with this formation. When you’ve got such few defenders behind the ball, they need to be well-coordinated and in constant communication for adjustments like these. Lapses in concentration can lead to devastating counters for the opposition that might hurt our confidence and discourage our future attacking explorations. The onus is on white to keep momentum.

Now we know to make this accommodation. Let’s stay optimistic and say we retain the ball; the opposing striker applies pressure but doesn’t steal it. The opposing defensive lines cut off forward passing lanes. What’s the next step? It almost seems like we’ve cornered ourselves.

Enter the second element to a successful barrier siege: dropping the free man, our newly unmarked 6.

Right as we’re about to applaud the opponent for their rigid pressing strategy, we realize that our move has actually poked a critical hole in their system. Whereas previously, both of our talented 6s were closely marked by their forwards, we’ve now peeled one off like a banana skin, leaving one of our best passers on the field open, and with much more space than before. Our move leftwards and into their territory forced them to adjust marks, leaving him in a lovely pocket. The only issue is finding him outside of the opponent’s cover shadow.

To combat this, if the barrier breaking run by our LCB is matched with an onrushing striker, this will automatically trigger our 6 to preemptively recede into a negative passing lane. I say negative, here, because a square ball with such a high line is precarious. A lost ball, here, is pretty plausible if the striker reads the LCB’s body shape right, leaving a 2v2 counterattack with a few of our players chasing. Again, the name of the game here is to set up such that risk is low. Therefore, we drop the 6 deeper than the LCB to make this pass less of a turnover possibility.

While our 6 pulls back, this is also a trigger for the other 6 to begin to spread wide. This will give us several possibilities to discuss later, based on what the other forward does in response.

If he recognizes the potential for a switch, and goes wide to cover him, we’ve really opened up the middle. If he charges the ballnear 6 as he breaks the line, again, we’ll have a RB turned 6 open on the weak side, another advantageous position for us.

First, let’s assume that the wide-stretching RB/6 is covered by blue forward, as he anticipates the full-field reversal. We’ve wedged a pile driver down the center and have acres with our name on them. We’ll discuss the alternative in a bit.

In this new, spread-out configuration, we now have found our freed 6. He’s split the opposing forwards with our disguised fullbacks spreading wide, and he has a variety of options up the field. From here, our fate is determined by the positioning of the ballnear CDM in front of us.

The passing lane directly into the striker may be open, providing what may feel like a direct threat–so they might look to pinch inside and regain compactness while blocking off that entry way. The route to the white maestro 10 may also feel dangerous, meaning that they may be compelled to pull wider to cover him, especially if they’re confident in their CBs holding off our number 9. In either scenario, we’re ready to pick them apart.

Let’s say the midfielder pinches in. The 4-4-2 defensive setup would prefer that we not attack them right down the zipper, as it poses the most immediate goal scoring angles, so they squeeze. In doing so, we might expect the two forwards to begin a similar tightening process, as our 6 has officially snipped the red tape and invited an inward compression. We might think, “no! they’re closing everything up again!”, but this actually serves to our advantage.

Imagine, now that we find our 10 with his back to goal, having emerged from the cover shadow of the opposing 6 and roughly equidistant from the four surrounding defenders.

Of course, a certain option in this situation would be to coach the 10 to receive the ball sideways-on, opening up their view of the field. With such positioning of the hips, they might be able to deftly swipe the ball across their open body to attack the centerback head-on. This is an ideal situation that would cause the four around him to make a marking decision, none of which would prove particularly effective for any of them. David Silva is a true expert at these types of plays.

However, let’s say we’ve already done that a few times in the match and they expect it. Or perhaps the 10 moved extremely quickly into the seam and hasn’t had a chance to rotate their shoulders to turn. Maybe the CB has run up right behind him and is blocking any potential, sharp swivels. For all intents and purposes, our 10 is facing the “wrong direction”. How can we solve this one?

See the animation below. Once our 6 has broken the barrier and the opposing forwards start to close him down again, they’ve left our LCB catalyst open, yet again. Once our 10 finds space between the CDM and RM and receives a delivery, our LCB is in prime position to receive a diagonal layoff, and play a third-man into the space behind the departed opposing CB. Up back and through.

Diagonal sequences like these are so terribly difficult to mark because they possess the advantages of both horizontal and vertical passes, woven into one. Passing sideways serves to shift the opposition and generate new angles for passing between them; playing the ball up and down the pitch allows us to advance through these gaps. A diagonal ball means the opponent must shift laterally, as well as deal with a dagger into their fort. Moreover, a team that obeys the laws of Juego de Posicion will find these options organically open, more often than not. It all comes down to geometry. Thus, when an attack forces a defense to cope with such problems, especially in such rapid succession, we are privileged to see attacking football at its best.

Furthermore, these zig-zag sequences mean each player can play the way they’re facing, increasing the speed of buildup and decreasing time per passing action. It also decreases the likelihood that they’ll attempt a move without directly seeing the space it’ll unfold in (i.e. turning with their back to goal). For the most part, positioning is a skill that allows us to remove this kind of blindness from our style of play, but when we find ourselves in the dark, it’s always best to play simple.

By providing connecting options that vary in both x and y, while allowing our players to distribute the ball one touch and in the direction they’re facing, we enjoy an electric transition from patient probing to lightning fast incision.

The Purported Perils of Rigidity

So we’ve got a few options–excellent. But one of the pitfalls that comes with outlining patterns of play for your team is the rigidity that it tends to imply. Luis Enrique has made the rounds on Twitter recently for training the Spanish National Team with unopposed passing sequences, a method that has both supporters and strong critics.

Muy fan de las evoluciones técnico/tácticas pic.twitter.com/z9XzBQdQ7N

— LUISMI PATIÑO (@LUISMIPAT) September 2, 2020

No, it’s not particularly gamelike, but the objective is to provide the team with a toolbox of solutions for common problems–i.e. building out of the back when our 6s are totally marked out of the game–from which they can improvise build upon themselves. It can be a strong visualization tool. But as one eloquent boxer once said,

The challenge appears when things don’t go according to plan. What happens if the opposition doesn’t react as we predict? What if they come up with something we haven’t seen before? How can we prevent our team from freezing in these circumstances?

Here is where we, as instructors, as educators, as coaches, must learn to model our ideas around Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Bloom’s Taxonomy: Skills Rather than Content

Benjamin Bloom, an educational psychologist, designed a hierarchy of learning objectives that can be divided into varying levels of complexity. The committee he assembled to devise the taxonomy created three sub-components: the cognitive, affective, and sensory regimes. Here, we’ll focus on the cognitive facet, as depicted in the image above.

The overarching concept behind Bloom’s Taxonomy revolves around how to best teach skills, rather than content. This framework is often cited in my University’s engineering lectures, as a way to encourage students not to pigeonhole their studies, but to practice and advance through the various stages of actualization. Young people that study with this hierarchy in mind, will invariably become more versatile scholars and more sought-after professionals. Unfortunately, in many classical educational systems, the focus is on facts and figures, memorization and regurgitation, rather than applied understanding. When we examine our patterns of play, as drawn out above, we realize that we run the risk of only working with our players inside the first few degrees of effective learning. This is certainly not ideal!

By rehearsing a certain “play”, we confine ourselves to the purple circle: Remembering. We go over the sequence several times to see whether our players can replicate what we’ve illustrated. Under perfect circumstances, and with perfect execution, we might be able to pull something like this off in a real match–but with such narrow tolerances, is it even worth it? How likely are we to find such a precise moment in a game to exploit this one, highly specific idea? It seems all too fragile.

Thus, we’re urged to climb the ladder a bit. Our next stage would take us to Understanding, a platform upon which our players grasp the rationale behind each moment in the sequence, and can explain the embedded logic. Rather than simply being pawns on a grassy chessboard, our players will be better equipped to tackle these situations if they know why we’re doing what we’re doing. Instead of simply breaking the barrier, we want our LCB to comprehend why what he’s doing is effective. Our 10 should study and consider the dynamics of his positioning on where we might route our passes, not simply follow a blueprint.

If we hope to continue improving our skills, we must then ascend into the region of Applying. Here, our players develop the ability to take one idea and use it varying contexts. For instance, coaching the concept of breaking the opponent’s line of confrontation need not be restricted to this specific pattern–it’s an incredibly useful idea that ought to be utilized whenever applicable situations arise. If the opponent sits deep and we can’t draw them out–try it.

We might also encounter opportunities to use these building block ideas across the pitch, in even more diverse environments. Perhaps we begin to appreciate how advantageous diagonal passing is, compared to horizontal and vertical alternatives. Maybe this encourages our team to play fewer square balls in precarious places on the field. If we focus on the fundamentals, and teach out team how to employ them across the board, we expand the horizons of our potential successes.

What about the next stage? Analyzing builds on our constructed basis and empowers our players to think critically. Now, we hand the problem over to them, and see what they can draw up, themselves.

In the sphere of engineering, Elon Musk has highly popularized the First Principles approach, a method of problem solving that allows complex challenges to be broken down into their fundamental parts. Instead of assuming things others have claimed, Musk encourages his teams to rid themselves of all pre-conceived notions and focus on the core of any problem, instead. This model enables his companies to devise some of the most unique, effective, and revolutionary solutions to the worlds’ most pressing challenges. We might not be sending re-usable rockets to Mars, here, but we can certainly employ First Principles in our coaching designs.

You may not have noticed, but my approach in unraveling the up-back-and-through sequence above started by defining the primary objectives. Soccer’s fundamental first aim is to score more than the opposition (or concede fewer, if you’re a half-glass empty type of reader). In our 3-2-5, we can generate strong chances to do this if we get our most creative players on the ball, and in space. If our 10 is that guy, and the location is between the lines, the challenge in our example was how condensed they’d become. If we can’t find these players directly, we must look to manipulate the positioning of the opponent to pry them open. Football is an eternal battle of control; if we can influence the opposition like a puppeteer does his marionette, we’ve all but won. It is at this final stage of deconstruction that we’ve crafted our solution.

Now, as we return to Bloom’s cognitive domain, it’s one thing if we can analyze as coaches, but if we can create an environment in which our players do this, we’ve transcended a certain boundary. Encouraging thoughtful discussion, demanding careful observation of their surroundings as they execute drills, and curating pointed questions that can blossom our players’ imaginations are all efficacious methods to achieve this. One idea I’ve always found useful in this regard is to set a precedent that players will be put on the spot to share their ideas. Calling students out in class can be frowned-upon, but so long as your intentions aren’t malicious and with the hopes of embarrassing individuals, I consider it to be extremely effective. Once the group is made aware that they may be summoned, at any time, to evaluate a given structure or moment, they’ll start paying much more attention. If you’re able to cultivate an aura inside which ideas are respected and not ridiculed, your team will start to find pleasure in this constant state of analysis. They’ll also start to discover genius solutions, themselves. 30+ heads are unequivocally better than 1.

If we take this elevated headspace one stage further, we evolve into Evaluation. Not only can we interpret and think critically, now but we’re able to form arguments and defend them. Dutch locker rooms of the Cruyff era were often deemed hard to govern by the onlooking press–but the coaching staff strongly advised that each player constructively criticize the program’s methodology. These weren’t robots, but people, and the Ajax setup was one of the first to applaud contradiction instead of blind following. It wasn’t disagreement, but effective collective thinking. If we allow our players to hold their ground as they take creative stances that might differ from ours, we construct inclusive conditions for their development. This builds agency and a sense of contribution. One who stands valorously in the face of jeering spectators, has learnt a lesson born deep in the raging penetralia of our modern stadia, and far eclipses the white paint that speciously defines it.

While players are on the bench, ask them specific questions regarding what they see on the field, and probe with follow-ups until they can no longer answer. This will promote depth of thinking. Inside drills, strategically pull players aside to hear their interpretations, and ask them for suggestions. If someone proposes an enticing concept, you might even evolve the drill then and there, to show them that their opinions are valued. We must find ways to push our players to verbalize and justify their asseverations.

The hope is that, eventually, they’ll begin to perform this on their own, and in real time–studying the opponent as they react to various stimuli on the field, like a defender breaking a barrier–and serve as mini-coaches as they play. In a team where they’re encouraged to study the game, they’ll then transmit this information to their fellow teammates, becoming one unified and formidable brain that’s committed to understanding the opposition. I’d be worried if I had to play such a high-functioning unit.

The final, highly-interwoven cherry atop our sundae serves as the highest rank within Bloom’s Taxonomy: Creating. Once we’ve surpassed all the previous stations, we arrive the the destination that unshackles our players’ imaginations. Our people know the sport like the backs of their palms and can paint across a field like a canvas. The game’s top artists reside in this domain.

I feel obliged to mention that designing an atmosphere in accordance with this progression requires incredibly meticulous molding. You can’t teach a man to analyze or evaluate in a single exercise–it’s a mode of operation that must be nurtured over time. This structure is ever-changing and requires maintenance, too.

What we can do, as coaches, is let it guide our creation of learning culture. If we understand that outlining just one example, like the zig-zag sequence above, might be insufficient, we’ll be in a better position to instruct our team. We must find angles that allow them to understand, to adapt, to apply, to create, and so forth. Don’t just stop at stage one.

Sometimes, however, the route to climbing this tall ladder counter-intuitively begins with providing a host of seemingly stiff examples. A shrewd engineer begins his understanding of static equilibrium, for instance, by trying out several force-balancing problems in class. They then execute more on homework. Ambitious disciples may pursue more practice through textbooks, online mediums, or professor office hours. When the exam comes, they’ll have worked through so many sample instances, that they’ve organically developed and progressed through Bloom’s stages. Over time, what started as a specific route to success, simply added another idea to the learner’s toolkit. If we can discourage memorization, and instead help our students hone skills instead of consume content, we’ll guide them most effectively.

It is this very mentality that’s earned Spanish coaches like Guardiola and Enrique such high praise. Sure, the problem might not appear exactly the same on homework as it will the test, but with enough training, and with a teacher mindful of Bloom’s Taxonomy, the player will be ready.

In any case, make of this ideology what you will. I find the system behind Bloom’s Taxonomy to be both inspiring and profoundly poetic, so I felt impelled to share it with you, too. Interdisciplinarity is one of the pillars of my coaching philosophy. Any time I’m able to rope in ideas from different areas of life, I quite enjoy it. Sometimes soccer, alone, has a frustratingly limited arsenal of metaphors.

Additional Variations

Let’s table the philosophical discussion for now, but use this last key idea, in particular. In the words of Andres Iniesta, we’re assembling a catalog of “so many solutions”, and there are still plenty of unanswered quandaries. What other permutations of our build-up might we encounter, and how can we solve them? Let’s delineate every possible outcome.

A reminder, let’s recap what we’ve just executed. Here’s the zig-zag move and it’s main spatial components, summarized. By circulating the ball around the helpless opposing forward, and causing distress by hopping the fence on multiple occasions, we can find our free man in the center, leading to a picturesque triangulation up the field. With shrewd movement by our midfield halfspace artist, we can draw the opposing CB out, and find a winger run in behind that leaves this compact low block all but torn to shreds. Well done, lads.

But what happens if, before pass #2, the CDM marks our 10, instead? We mentioned, before, that this was highly plausible, too. Instead of giving us the lane into our most technically gifted player, they trust their CBs to outnumber our target man and instead choose to cover the halfspace. How can we break that down?

Well, if this happens, the gut will be more vacant. Though a 2v1 against a pair of dogged CBs might be an initial deterrent, our goal won’t be to penetrate through them, but instead access the space directly to their sides, and in behind. In order to make those regions available, we must first use magnetism to draw out one (or both, if we’re lucky and they’re overzealous) from the defensive line, and coordinate a run in beyond them.

In the case that their CDM pulls into the halfspace, we’ll need our 9 to recognize the situation and drop deep in the pocket that’s just opened up. From here, he’ll receive a pass from our sharp 6, which will ideally draw one of the two centerbacks to press. Whichever one chooses to stick tight to his back will be the one we play in behind to our 10, who’s now broken into the final third.

In the case that the opposition 6 sees this run and covers negatively, we’ve now performed yet another successful manipulation: entangling our opponent’s lines. What began as an organized set of rigid connections, has now been twisted, leaving two players somewhat covering for each other–and even so, drawn out of position. As disorder increases, so does their level of discomfort. The opponent’s CDM and CB have been forced into unfamiliar roles, when their aim was to be highly organized. Now they’re muddled, and our RB-turned-6 can drive straight into their open right halfspace.

What if we pivot to yet another possibility, early on before our 6 hopped the fence? Instead of guarding our RB/6 out wide, perhaps ST #2 might come press us upon entering their half. If this occurs, we don’t have as wide-open of a gap down the middle, but rather, a pressing strike partnership brushed off to the side. We can attack it by playing diagonally negative once more, to our RCB and to escape the presser’s cover shadow. We proceed to find our RB/6 in a large pocket, not dissimilar to the previously discussed configuration. Easy peasy. The only caveat: the opponent is comparatively more organized than when their lines were jumbled. Regardless, we’re well-equipped to try a few things in this space.

One of such options involves playing our 10, sucking in pressure from various defenders, and playing in behind to an on-running striker. As the trequartista, we could also exploit a 2v1 in the flank, play our winger in behind (if the fullback steps to press), combine a wall pass with our striker to get in ourselves, and so forth. Plenty of options, here. The first example is animated, below.

What if none of these options are on? Let’s say the opponent is able to compact our maestro’s space very quickly and effectively. Let the thought experiment continue!

No problemo. Blue may have cornered white in a 3v1, but we can advance our second line to regain possession (diagonally and negative), officially bypassing their strikers. This collective shift must be made as the ball is initially played into our 10. It’s almost as if the territory between blue’s midfield line and striker duo was up for grabs. If we organize an effort to plant a flag in it, together–we’ve taken over.

We’ve now cut out their front lines and have entered enemy turf with aplomb. Sure, we were outnumbered in this small region, but as soon as we recirculate and reposition our midfield line, we’ll find ourselves with numbers up, centrally, having effectively leapfrogged the opponent. The pressing strikers have been eliminated from play, while the four wide players are far from the action. With enough training in 6 v 4 scenarios, our odds look pretty good here.

Once in this space, we have ample room for creativity in combination. Numerical superiorities always let us devise clever ways of getting teammates in on goal. See two such ideas, here.

The possibilities continue. There are undoubtedly situations that I’ve failed to cover here, but that’s the nature of coaching these types of things. We devise the most pertinent examples–the ones that might cover the broadest handful of possibilities–and go over them in training. If we set our sights of listing every single supposed possibility, we’d be deluded and misleading our players. Instead of proclaiming an exhaustive list of solutions, we provide a large, curated, and varied collection that makes up our “so many solution” catalog. We must be thorough without losing touch with reality. Naturally, if we hand pick these moments and are confident enough in our judgement, our players will, in fact, encounter them in matches. Steady build-up phases occur often if you coach a ball-dominant team, so even within a single game, you might find ten instances where these ideas can be put to good use. If even one of them results in a promising chance, or even a goal, that’s something to motivate your players with. It’s also a sign of encouragement for your tactical methods.

In my experience, the best way to calm nerves in tricky situations, is to assure your players that they’re better prepared than the opposition. In order to be able to say that, you must put in the necessary effort to ensure that your words are truthful. If a team comes up against an obstinate opponent, but has practiced how to draw them out and hop the fence, they won’t be so anxious as a one that’s afraid to break the barrier and take “ostensible risks”. A group that knows how to shift their defensive line to be best-positioned in the case of a counter, will give those on the ball much more confidence as they penetrate the lines. This applies everywhere.

As a coach that’s had my season ended by a low block 4-4-2, I’ve seen how frustrated a team can get without this type of preparation. It’s painful to watch your players squirm and stubbornly play the ball across the backline, over and over, as the last 15 minutes of your title hopes slip away. An impactful manager will predict these likely circumstances, and walk through them with his/her team. Over the course of a season, the group will begin to develop an understanding of the game model that’s second to none. It’s not just a starting formation, or style of play that matters, but specific phases and patterns that can be elucidated and ultimately lubricate the gears of our well-oiled machine.

Sure, everyone’s got a plan until they get punched in the face–but a student that enters the exam room without their glasses is destined to fail every time. It’s our job to show players these practice problems, prepare them to the best of our ability, and give them the courage to improvise when things don’t fall precisely into place. As they ascend through Bloom’s Taxonomy, iterating through the stages of remembering, understanding, analyzing, and so forth, they’ll begin to truly embody the system. The more homework they complete, the more tools they unlock for their toolbox. These instruments of inspiration are much handier in the trenches than a one-size-fits-all blueprint. A starting eleven of fully armed soldiers is a formidable sight for even the strongest opposition.

Best of luck, lieutenant.

Till next time.