Are we living at the end of football systems? These are 4-3-3, 3-5-2, 4-4-2, etc. an outdated approach to football that today relies more on speed and overlapping players rather than fixed positions on the pitch?

Most soccer players today may have certain qualities, if not skills, but it has been a long time since football was no longer static, with defined player positions and fixed responsibilities for the full 90 minutes for each player depending on where they were on the pitch. .

After the total football revolution of Ajax and the Netherlands national team in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the lines between each team’s lines on the pitch began to blur and have now virtually disappeared. A team manager may have the ideal lineup in mind, but the demands of constant movement, pressure, and positioning have all but eliminated the simple or complex 3-5-2 or 4-2-3-1 formations that used to be a headache for football players, fans, and journalists.

However, a system that meant one thing to one player could mean something very different to another: as Bologna coach Thiago Motta points out, a defensive system with three defenders and five midfielders (3-5-2) can be more offensive than the traditional 4 -3-3, as “the position of the players on the field says little about their intentions in the match.”

Thus, full-backs can take organizational-attacking initiative by often alternating and cooperating with the full-back in front of them (overlapping) and turning 5-3-2 into 3-5-2 or even 3-4-3 with the center medium advancing. To paraphrase the title of Darrell Huff’s book How to Lie with Statistics, we can say that “how to mislead your opponent with systems.”

The truth is that the great strides that have been made in international football over the past decades, with the dramatic acceleration of the game and the shift in focus from technical training to fitness, have rendered the 4-4-2, 4 system almost ineffective. 2-1 etc.

Today’s football is more like a choreography of well-trained and synchronized players tasked with running all over the place in accordance with each other’s movements, as suggested by the coach, rather than something static with predetermined positions. Only the goalkeeper remains in place.

In previous decades, from Arrigo Sacchi’s Milan to Pep Guardiola’s Barcelona, ​​the direction the coach gave in training was very specific, with choreographed movements that we call “training work.” The emphasis was not on where the ball was, but on immediate lighting and creating space on the pitch both defensively and offensively. But these systems were quickly deciphered, addressed and copied.

Teams like Barcelona, ​​City or Liverpool create a game model that takes advantage of each player’s special abilities.

Now teams like Barcelona, ​​Guardiola’s Manchester City or Jurgen Klopp’s Liverpool seem to be looking for a direction, a game model that will take advantage of each player’s special abilities. But it seems that the best system is… no system. We live, one might say, in the postmodernism of football.

It looks like the future belongs to teams and managers willing to be more flexible and systems that are little more than a platform for well-paid and well-trained players to improvise on.

After all, it was the successful model of recent years at Real Madrid, controlling certain periods of matches rather than the entire match, using the quality of some of the best players in the world.

Now, however, this model seems to be being followed with impressive success by teams with lesser-known players who can run and create on the pitch as they see fit. That’s how you can see Luciano Spalletti’s Napoli playing this year in a liberal style, who doesn’t treat ballads like Khvitsa Kvaratskelija and Victor Osimen like puppets, but encourages them to act on the grass as they see fit.

At the heart of this change, which overturns traditional systems, is the belief that each player’s performance is determined not by his position on the field, but by the timing and inspiration of the moment, which, combined with excellent physical condition and technical ability, will play a decisive role. able to give the maximum result for the team.

Fernando Diniz, coach of Brazil’s Fluminense team, also gave a name to the style, calling it “athetic”, that is, playing without positions (Jogo Aposicional), which draws inspiration from the country’s football temperament, with which the king charmed Pelé. in 20th century.

Let’s see how he explains it: “Because I like to have the ball, people associate me with [Πεπ] Guardiola. But not yet. His style of ownership is the opposite of mine. In Guardiola’s teams, two minutes is enough to see that the players obey the order to the position. Those on the right stay on the right, those on the left stay on the left, and the ball reaches their spot. Of course, Guardiola is making changes, so full-backs like [Ζοάο] Canselu, they go ahead. The way I see it now is almost immoral. Players change their positions near the ball. It’s a freer game and it has more to do with our football culture.”

Thus, an unpredictable outcome is not only a mystery to the opponent, but also a bait for the spectator, who also leaves his seat – to celebrate.

“Coaches are now also investing in the unpredictable”

Kostas Koukulas

In recent years, a new football reality has been taking place on the fields. The popular sport is redefining its core competitive principles and PAOK Academy Head of Analysis Yiannis Vlachos was invited by K to talk about the effort. “Now the formations really take second place and compared to previous years, I can say that we are entering an era of modernizing the sport. If we emphasize that Guardiola’s Barcelona brought their changes, now we have another one in front of us. When Pep created this team, almost everyone then tried to copy his style of play. Lots of passes, high pressure and, of course, an absolute return to the system. However, over the years, an antidote has also been found. In training, besides having the ball, the coaches also work on what to do when we don’t have the ball. How to stop your opponent from doing what he wants. We watch him and study him, and in the end he becomes predictable, as happened with Liverpool.
Thus, we are entering an era when coaches, especially in the attacking part, begin to invest in unpredictability. For example, Real Madrid, where Benzema – when the team has the ball – spends more time outside the opponent’s zone than inside it. Coaches now leave the initiative to their players to read the game and decide. For this, it is not necessary to have top players. But he himself must have the intelligence to adapt the attacking part of his game to the characteristics of the players he has.

It is true that now the schemes are more visible from the center and towards the defense of each team. With possession of the ball, they shoot at goal in turn, the best example being Pep’s Manchester City, where in attack we see the 2-3-5 system that teams used in the 1950s. Martins when he was at Olympiacos compared to Simeone at Atlético. The one that the Portuguese had was attack-oriented, the one that the Argentine had was clearly defensive. Right now in football we are trying to find solutions to the problems that coaches have for themselves.”