DO YOU JUST HAVE TO HAVE THE "RIGHT" FORMATION TO BE SUCCESSFUL?

HOW IT WORKED FOR CHELSEA UNDER ANTONIO CONTE!

The danger with just following “trendy” formations and thinking that the formation is the “be all and end all”!! I think this is often just “lazy” management

​

Choosing a formation that is “en vogue” or “trendy” is not clever management. All successful managers have, throughout history, and still today, looked at their resources, their situation and chosen a team to suit their team!

In the 90s Manchester United ruled English football with a 4-4-2, copied by many teams but without the same success; not because 4-4-2 is a poor formation, but because other teams did not have the same personnel.

​

Likewise the Mourinho managed Chelsea team of 2004-2007 were successful with a three man midfield (based on having Claude Makele to complement Essien and Lampard) but they also had one of the best genuine “sole striker’s” in Didier Drogba!
 

MORE RECENTLY ANTONIO CONTE TACTICALLY EVOLVED CHELSEA MID SEASON (ALLOWING THEM TO WIN THE LEAGUE), AND YOU CAN DO THE SAME WITH YOUR TEAM, BUT DON’T JUST COPY A FORMATION (AS MANY MANAGERS DID, BY GOING 3-4-3, WHEN IT DIDN’T SUIT THEIR OWN TEAMS!)

Chelsea went from winless in three to winning the title.

They went from one clean sheet in the opening seven matches to four consecutive clean sheets, during the season.

​

You can also do this with your team by using a system that maximises the abilities of each player to the benefit of the team!!

A crucial part of this is for players and manager to trust, and understand, each other!

Whilst you need leaders on the pitch, you should demand that they do not act as "lone cannons" or think they know better than you (even if they do!!) but reaffirm that any player is free to discuss things calmly and rationally with you off the pitch - and you MUST listen!!

So, not going taking any chances and instead putting all of your trust in the cliched “form is temporary,class is permanent” argument, you be prepared to plan changes (just tweaks really)
 

At the start of the title winning season Chelsea initially lined up in a 4-2-3-1 (or 4-3-3) system with Nemanja Matic, big money signing N’Golo Kante and Oscar as the midfield three behind an attack of Diego Costa, Eden Hazard and Willian.

This tactic worked to an extent with Chelsea winning their opening three games of the season, but they were far from convincing in the 2-1 victories against both West Ham and Watford.
 

Many grassroots teams, over the years, play a 4-4-2 shape, usually as that is "what the players know"!!

But, to be honest, this often is “putting square pegs in round holes”, especially against stronger sides in your league!

It's fine doing it against the lower league teams of this world, but can get exposed when you play the stronger teams, whose play is often different to others in your league.

This approach truly should not be seen as a criticism of your players, or their performances but merely says you cannot just rely on excellent performances by players.

However it is a case of having a good structure/system; and by putting both together (and having full teams) could see you win more often than not!
 

It happened, at Chelsea, Conte rekindled his love affair with the 3-4-3 formation and the Chelsea team instantly started to reap the rewards.
 

Your team could do the same, whatever formation suits your team best, if you practice AND everyone knows (and understands) their roles in the team!
 

Some felt Conte went into safe mode and put more players behind the ball but the Italian manager wanted to give his side solid foundations.

You can do the same, without taking away your attacking flair!
 

The fact Conte acknowledged the 4-3-3 wasn’t working and so changed it early on in the season should be applauded.

Many others, in his place, would have simply persisted with it and carried on with the inconsistent performances, citing that the team had clear potential before reeling off the wins they’d had that season.

 

Equally, you could "rest on your laurels" and just finish close and settle for some occasional big wins against poor sides, but your team probably deserves to be playing in, and challenging in, a competitive league week in/week out!!

You may not have a BEST team (plus you manage a squad, not just a team!), but to assist, and for illustration, you could choose a “well known” side to base your team upon and tell your players to study the player in their position and do the same things they do (not just technically, but also their positioning, work rate, psychologically and communication)
 

SO, BY WAY OF EXAMPLE, ADVISE YOUR PLAYERS TO WATCH THE CHELSEA PLAYERS, FROM THIS TEAM, WHO PLAY IN THEIR POSITION, TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE THINGS YOU WANT FROM THEM (POSITIONALLY)
 

DEFENDING

Victor Moses and Marcos Alonso were the wing-backs (if you play with wingbacks) with Cesar Azpilacueta, David Luiz and Gary Cahill as the three centre-backs (in your case, your centre backs).

Chelsea also had N’Golo Kante and Nemanja Matic shielding the defence (your centre midfield), so Chelsea were not only compact, they were also narrow, which suffocated the opposition of any space centrally.

​

As opponents looked to work the ball to create an opening Chelsea brought NINE outfield players back into their own half meaning the spacing from centre-back to strikers was approximately 20/25 yards. They kept Diego Costa (your centre forward) up front, ready to breakaway!!
 

They were suffocating the space that opponents wanted to play in (the middle of the pitch).

David Luiz (your sweeper), the middle centre-back of the three, stepped up and almost acted as a defensive midfielder behind Matic (your centre midfield) and Kante (your other centre midfield)

 

This nullified the space the opposition player (between the two Chelsea midfielders) would usually have, and meant that the player in possession was reluctant to attempt a "penetrating" pass because it was unlikely they’d retain possession, with the Chelsea side having positioning three players that area.
 

It also meant that, despite their opponents being in Chelsea’s final third, they still had to play through four lines of Chelsea defence to get in on goal.

The first line of defence was the attackers - Hazard and Pedro (the two non central attackers), then they had central midfield - Matic and Kante, then a rogue David Luiz and finally the back four (two centre backs and two wing backs defending). So, it was difficult to break down!!
 

When play was progressed and opponents were attempting to work the ball into the attacking area.

Chelsea had that line of five defenders with the two screens in Matic and Kante screening them meaning Chelsea had almost two players for every one opposition player.

There were going to be no easy chances there.
 

MIDFIELD

The midfield duo of Matic and Kante seemed to be working. It’s like a pair were part of a "rotisserie" (one goes forward and one drops back) and it’s almost natural for one to cover the other.

In one attack Kante would be advanced and looking to press the opposition. Matic swept behind.

But then in a second attack, Matic pressed and won back possession and was the furthest of the two forward.

As soon as Matic regained the ball Kante was looking to fill in and plug the space centrally.

​

Based on the individuals (Matic & Kante) many pundits would have called them both CDM's bit they were much more than this, in this system

​

ATTACKING

The change in formation wasn’t just aiding the defence, it also had an impact on Chelsea in an attacking sense.

 

When Eden Hazard (one non central attacker) was in possession of the ball, with Diego Costa (Centre Forward) and Pedro (the other non central attacker) in line or ahead of him;

Victor Moses and Marcos Alonso (the wing-backs) were in acres of space, as the opposition defence and midfield looked to stop the narrow Chelsea attacking trio.

But, because the movement was so fluid, opponents were stretched despite having numbers back.

 

With many teams this is a perfect system as often your top scorers are harder to mark, and play out wide!!
 

As play progressed Hazard often went past opposition players and got a shot in at goal which worked the keeper.

However, if the Belgian was a little less selfish Pedro was usually in a lot of space on the edge of the area, and Diego Costa’s runs took the defender away from goal, as a result Moses (your right wing back) had the entire right hand side free.
 

Nothing had drastically changed.

 

Chelsea weren’t ceding control of games before the change to 3-4-3, they averaged 552 passes per 90 minutes with an 85% pass success rate.

 

After the change to 3-4-3 Chelsea averaged 514 passes per 90 with an 85% pass success rate.

 

It’s on average 40 passes fewer per 90 minutes, but could that not possibly be because Chelsea weren’t having to play as many passes to create each chance, as they had more players supporting the attack?

 

It’s easier to create overloads and triangles with more men forward.

 

Antonio Conte deserved a lot of credit for turning it around at Chelsea.

 

He gave them added security defensively and sturdy foundations, to go alongside having players like Hazard and Pedro getting even closer to Diego Costa, so the team had more of a goal threat.

 

REMEMBER - THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU CAN DO, THIS RELATES TO 3-4-3, BUT, IF YOUR TEAM SUITS ANOTHER FORMATION (AND THAT IS THE MANAGERS CALL AND WHERE THEY “EARN THEIR CORN”) THEN FIND A TEAM AT THE TOP LEVEL AND DO THE SAME AS ABOVE AND GIVE YOUR PLAYERS A “ROLE MODEL” IN THE SAME WAY!