Team Formation and Play
-
Hi guys, as we have all mentioned at one point or another, Reds FC has really come a long way from our days of court soccer. It is quite evident that we have more or less settled into a very direct style of play with a 4-4-2 formation. I believe the next step for us would be to change our style of play or formation if necessary. However, this can only be effective if the entire team is clear on what to do and what to expect from each other. Thus, it will be essential for each individual to have a clear understanding for any style or formation.
I know this topic was discussed to a certain extent previously and I think now is a good time to really look into this topic. As this topic can be very subjective, it will be good to hear your respective views on this. -
Looks like I'll be the first to contribute.
Although we have more or less settled for a 4-4-2 formation, we have to agree that there are several shortfalls. They are as follows:
1. Lack of pacy wingers - our current wingers are unfortunately not fast at all. Even players ike jimmy, who is often thought to be fast is not really fast enough due to his stature. He may look like he is running fast but he is simply not covering enough ground with his strides to be effective.
2. Poor quality of crosses - This is evident from the fact that although we have played 4-4-2 for so long, there simply aren't many goals resulting from a cross. I have more mis-kicks than actual crosses, most of my services to the strikers are mainly long passes from deep or square passes.
3. Poor positioning of our strikers - Our strikers with the exception of Russell, are often poorly positioned to meet any crosses. Most of our strikers thrived on through balls or direct passes. They are also often caught off-side.
4. Players not suited for formation - The 4-4-2 formation requires much discipline from all the players and there is seldom room for individual play. The play is simple, release the ball early to the flanks. This obviously will not work well as we have several players who enjoys running with the ball. The only players who should be running with the ball in this formation is the wingers.
As such I am proposing that we try out a new formation which allows our players to play to their strengths.
SC
AML AMC AMR
DMC DMC
LB DC DC RB
SC - We will play a lone striker up front. likely candidates will be Alvin Ang and Russell.
AMC/R/L - In this formation, the three attacking midfielders can indulge in their dribbling, short passes, beating of players etc. Likely candidates are Damien, Jimmy, Boon, Alvin Chia, Robin Yap and Derrick.
DM - The two defensive mids will have to be very discipline and refrain from any movement further up-field. They will have to cut out any counter attacks from the middle and provide cover for the defence if need to. Likely candidates, Robin Goh, Alvin Chua, Bernard.
The defenders should see no changes. -
i fully agree that 4-4-2 doesnt seem to be the best formation for us.
Maybe we should try 4-3-3 or a formation like wat bara point out.
when we play 4-4-2 out centre 2 midfielders somehow or rather becomes DM resulting in our teams becoming rather defensive.
Our centre midfielders and defenders will pass the ball to the strikers in a bid to break the offside trap.Therefore the wingers will have a lack of service and becomes somehow insolated.
i urge the team to try a formation like wat bara suggest.Only thing is we are on a winning patch so is it wise to change a winning formation? -
I just want to highlight one thing.....in any formation that we play, it is most important to play to the Instructions and Requirements of that particular formation.
Many a times, some of us are guilty of playing our OWN game
despite changes and specific instructions to do otherwise (such as drifting from position, not playing to their Primary role etc) . If we can play to the requirments of the formation, we will be a better TEAM. 
Formation is dependant on a few factors like strength of opponents, size of field etc.
For a regular formation suited for our team, we have been quite ok with the 4-4-2. Even though we are on the winning streak, no harm taking that step to experiment other things, provided that everyone understands their role before we start playing the game. -
Being the camera man on the last match. i managed to observe how our team and every individual players play. Basicallty its kinda of a shocker to see the way the Reds loses the ball so Very easily. Our long passes may "look good" but usually supplied to strikers at 50-50 chances. Some players are not comfortable wif the ball. lacked confidence. As if the ball is a "bomb" and the next thing is to get it off as soon as possible.
The opposition, looks much betta. short passing, off-the-ball running etc.
however the score is 0-0. sometimes, even then we play diz way, we still wins.
Reason? to me .... its becos our players are defensive minded. seldom u see opp strikers left free, unmarked for too long.
we play the italian style. lose possession easily, but, we pack the defence. strikers cant take proper shots at goal. at times when we
lose possession, the player who loses it.. will usually back track and build up numbers in defence. or another player will do so.
Qn: But then we can only defend. how come we can win games?
my reason... becos we soak up the attack, the opp starts to lose their ideas and starts to tire. their defenders will wana join in the attack. push up their off-side trap or even shag themselves by joining the attack, tinkin dat we are incapable of scoring against them.
this leaves gap behind.... and the chance for our strikers, who usually doesnt do much defending ( except russell) and are still packed wif energy to slip into the gaps and score.
guys if u ever realised, most.... in fact almost all of our goals are either thro counter attack or set pieces.
wat i'm trying to say here is dat we are playing effective italian football. little possession, but we can win pyschologically and the game. overall speaking, despite limited endurance (fittness and stamina) and skill level, our team players are generally well disciplined and seldom plays out of team instructions. We're in fact playing as a team and we knows the limitation of our teammates and ourselves. if not, there's no reason why our team can remain unbeaten for so long. its rather flattering if u ask me....
(most of the teams we played against possess better passing and ball skills than us)
Short passing game... currently i tink we may not be ready for it. to me, short passing requires good skills ( one touch is not easy esp when the pitch is lousy) and confidence. and most importantly good overall fittness from the team. cos it requires alot of off-the-ball running as every player has to try make themselves available to receive a pass.
i wittness on sunday's match dat khai, bernard and jimmy trying to do short passes. however... it broke down very soon as there are limited options around. most are waiting for 50-50 long ball passes.
i believe our winning formula is our current conservative style of play. i guess we shld only try short passing when we are atleast 2 goals ahead. where there is more confidence in our players to explore their skills. -
Once again, it's good to see the views of some of our players. I have to say I personally agree with most of the views highlighted above. Keep it up!
As I have mentioned in previous threads and topics, there are many different ways to play a formation, even the tried and tested 4-4-2. As such, I have noticed that some of our players are not playing the way which is expected by those around them. This is the first issue I want to address. What I will attempt to do is to give specific instructions to our individual players before a match, what others are expecting of him and what to expect of others. Hopefully this will be able to set our team in the right direction. Feel free to share your views with me, or you can also post it in here. -
Different formations should be used for different situations and aim.Most importantly is the players must know their role and thats where Russ and Robin comes in.The prep talk should consists of giving out specific instructions to players so they dun get too lost in the game,especially if we face a strong team and trail by two or more goals,then everyone starts panicking and play their own game.
Another issue is our passing.We really have to work on that.If we have the chance,its better to pass to the feet,instead of always trying a 50-50 long pass.Against a good defence,most balls would be cut out,thats why we have trouble against certain teams.Our direct play has proven effective at times but our strikers can be really quiet in other matches.
We should try out new formations at every chance possible,and see which ones work best against which kinds of opponents,as long as the whole team has an idea of how the game is going to be played and stick to their positions. -
Being an upfront player, I would prefer the midfielders to pass the ball to us so that we can control the ball rather than the hit-and-run type. I would not say I am a good player but I personally think that with the ball pass to us, we have the options of either pass the ball to the flanks or if not, we could then at least take a shot from there.Originally posted by Shadow_R:Once again, it's good to see the views of some of our players. I have to say I personally agree with most of the views highlighted above. Keep it up!
As I have mentioned in previous threads and topics, there are many different ways to play a formation, even the tried and tested 4-4-2. As such, I have noticed that some of our players are not playing the way which is expected by those around them. This is the first issue I want to address. What I will attempt to do is to give specific instructions to our individual players before a match, what others are expecting of him and what to expect of others. Hopefully this will be able to set our team in the right direction. Feel free to share your views with me, or you can also post it in here.
Robin have ask the strikers to take shot whenever possible, I would definetly love to do that, but most of the time, I do not have the ball to my feet, so it is not possible to take shot.
From my observation, the midfielders first instinct is to log the ball and expect the strikers to be Carl Lewis. At times, this might be effective but in order for us to improve our game, I think I prefer the passing option so that maybe the fianks would be more effective, and crosses could appear from this suggestion.
-
When we play a 4-4-2, our midfielders will be playing too wide for an effective passing game. Even when we do, most of it is confined to the left. I guess this is because the central mids find it easier to pass with the inside rather than the outside of their feet(most of our players are right footed).
We are also not getting enough crosses in and sadly, I am especially guilty of this. I simply forgotten how to. Although, Jimmy and Alvin Chia seems to be doing a pretty decent job on the flanks. Also, for flank play to be effective, much switching between the flanks is required and we are simply not equipped for it.
I would really urge the managers to try out the formation I suggested. Players like Derrick, Khairul, Boon, Damien, Jimmy, Bernard, Robin Yap and Alvin Chia are more suited for a close passing style. We are not utilising their strengths with our current formation.
With the formation I've suggested, we would effectively split the team into two groups, the offensive players and the defensive ones. Allow the offensive players the freedom to indulge in their own playing style leaving the rest to concentrate on the defence. However, we need very disciplined players for the Defensive mid positions. The DMCs should refrain from joining the attacks. With the kind of small pitches we play in, they will actually operate more like stoppers. This should give us a fairly decent defence even without the support of the attacking mids.
The question is, with Robin Goh being a natural choice, who else can fill the DMC positions? -
It was good to see that the new 4-2-3-1 formation smoothly executed by our team in the 2nd half. We can try out this formation again in future games and we can figure out how this new formation can fit into our game tactically (e.g. as the default or alternative formation?). Suggestions are most welcomed!
I would just like to reiterate that the DM's primary role in this formation is to defend the centre and cut off our opponents attack. While it is natural to drift occasionally with the flow of the game, it should not be the case where a DM is alongside or in front of the AM for half of the time!
As we try out new formations in games in future, it is very important to maintain a certain level of tactical discipline. Failing which, it may be difficult to judge the effectiveness or suitability of the formation.
In time to come, we will also be looking at other formations that we can adopt tactically. -
It was good to see that the new 4-2-3-1 formation smoothly executed by our team in the 2nd half. We can try out this formation again in future games and we can figure out how this new formation can fit into our game tactically (e.g. as the default or alternative formation?). Suggestions are most welcomed!
I would just like to reiterate that the DM's primary role in this formation is to defend the centre and cut off our opponents attack. While it is natural to drift occasionally with the flow of the game, it should not be the case where a DM is alongside or in front of the AM for half of the time!
As we try out new formations in games in future, it is very important to maintain a certain level of tactical discipline. Failing which, it may be difficult to judge the effectiveness or suitability of the formation.
In time to come, we will also be looking at other formations that we can adopt tactically. -
I felt that we were playing in the new formation quite comfortably with the additional "help" that our opponents were not as strong.Originally posted by Shadow_R:It was good to see that the new 4-2-3-1 formation smoothly executed by our team in the 2nd half. We can try out this formation again in future games and we can figure out how this new formation can fit into our game tactically (e.g. as the default or alternative formation?). Suggestions are most welcomed!
I would just like to reiterate that the DM's primary role in this formation is to defend the centre and cut off our opponents attack. While it is natural to drift occasionally with the flow of the game, it should not be the case where a DM is alongside or in front of the AM for half of the time!
As we try out new formations in games in future, it is very important to maintain a certain level of tactical discipline. Failing which, it may be difficult to judge the effectiveness or suitability of the formation.
In time to come, we will also be looking at other formations that we can adopt tactically.
As for the point on DM and any other positions, I agree that we should play to the Primary role as I have emphasised in my earlier postings. As there are going to be 2 DMs for the formation, both DMs would have to stick to the Primary role which is to defend and cut off opponents attack in the midfield.
In any instance, one DM should only be allowed to drift if need be. It should NOT be a case that one DM drifts up all the time, leaving one DM behind. If that is going to happen, no point putting 2 DMs as the DM who drifts is already playing as an offensive mid position instead of a DM. The DM who drifts have to paddle back to cover his original position and assist to DEFEND (Primary role).
All DMs have to be clear of such details. It's a thin line to decide if one is drifting too much even as you cover back to your position. I would think that it would be more appropriate and effective to address the inadequacies on an individual basis to be more clear. DMs are the link between the defence and the attack line thus the tactical discipline of playing the position has to be there.
My personal view: DMs have to very hardworking, display the necessary Aggression and Pressure on opponents. If DMs loses the ball, we must pressure as hard to win the ball back. It should not be an instance where we just stop pressurising in getting the ball back from the opponents or stop where we are. Play like Roy Keane (but not his current form).
I will leave it to Russ in deciding who to play in what position. As for this formation is concern, I guess the real test is when we meet a tougher opponent. That will be the time when we can assess better. For the time being, I feel that we are adapting well, in a comfortable pace to the new formation. -
Apart from the minor confusions about the duties of the DMs, I feel that we did very well for the new formation. It was really quite a sight when I see our AMs and Strikers play their natural game up front. If our finishing was better, we would have gotten a greater scoreline.
As we progress, and if the communication between the DMs and the backline improves, we can encourage the fullbacks to do some over-lapping runs. -
I feel that the new formation is quite good,and the DMs played well in their role.Some of them were over enthusiastic and too attack minded but i guess they only did that to take advantage of the weak midfield and attack of the last opponent.Against a more potent strikefoce,the DMs have to be disciplined enough to stick to their roles.
-
We may encounter a slight problem if we play in bigger pitches than the one we played on last week. With bigger pitches, there may be huge gaps in the midfield, especially after a huge offensive movement. With our attacking players all pushed up, there may be large undefended areas in the midfield.
However, if the DMs were to play their roles right, even if there is only one at the back, we will still have a five man defence(which I think is more than enough to cope with any attacks from our opponents). Furthermore, if we win back the ball, it will be quite a counter-attack. -
Robin has mentioned that the opponents for the next match are quite strong. As such, it'll be a much better test of the new formation.
-
with the comments i got on the field, can't help feeling that i probably was the one who didn't play the DM role the way you guys wanted..
personally, i think we don't have many players in the team who can fit into that role but now that we need 2 DMs at any one time, maybe we can try Russ out in that position since he can win tackles and headers -
As this was a new formation, I honestly was not expecting everybody to play their roles well (although almost all of them did), thus it's not suprising if anybody did not play the way they could have. As I mentioned before, the main role of the DM is to cut off attacks, win the ball and play the ball to the AMs. What is really of importance is the work rate of the DM (e.g. Bernard). As long as you understand your role, I believe you can perform it quite well. Of course we only tried this formation once, thus there will most probably be changes to it in the future.Originally posted by kai28:with the comments i got on the field, can't help feeling that i probably was the one who didn't play the DM role the way you guys wanted..
personally, i think we don't have many players in the team who can fit into that role but now that we need 2 DMs at any one time, maybe we can try Russ out in that position since he can win tackles and headers -
i understand clearly the role of a DM..the problem is i'm not comfortable with it..can't figure out why u want to try me out in this position when it's clear that defending and ball-winning is not exactly my strong points..maybe it's becoz i suck so bad at attacking??Originally posted by Shadow_R:As this was a new formation, I honestly was not expecting everybody to play their roles well (although almost all of them did), thus it's not suprising if anybody did not play the way they could have. As I mentioned before, the main role of the DM is to cut off attacks, win the ball and play the ball to the AMs. What is really of importance is the work rate of the DM (e.g. Bernard). As long as you understand your role, I believe you can perform it quite well. Of course we only tried this formation once, thus there will most probably be changes to it in the future.
honestly speaking, i like playing at centremid but i hate it when my movement is restrained especially now that the DM is part of the "defence party".
i'm not asking for much, juz requesting to be played in a position where i can be of better use to the team..i thought i've had decent games as a forward or as an attacking-mid but i guess i am wrong.
dun take this wrongly, juz my honest views..disappointed that evrytime the team decides to change formation i'll be the first to be moved. -
In my very own opinion, kai; the reason why u are being moved whenever there is a formation change is becos the manager believes dat you haf the experience, skills, ability and adaptability which is better than most in the team. Most of the others may take longer to adapt to the role or may cock it up.
Manager may only wana test out the formation first. And would not like a misfit into dat position to cause a defeat to the team and prove the new formation useless.
I guess putting u in dat position is juz a temporary measure. then when the formation is proven useful and the rest of the team have settled in it, another person will be trained or tried in dat position other than the proven Robin.
if i were the manager, i may haf done likewise becos u are the safest bet on dat position for the time being. no means of not trying to maximise your ability.
i guess russell will agree with me la...
-
From what I read, it appears that you do not want to play the DM role because you do not want to have a defensive role. I hope you are not one who thinks that there are positions in the team which have NO defensive duties.Originally posted by kai28:i understand clearly the role of a DM..the problem is i'm not comfortable with it..can't figure out why u want to try me out in this position when it's clear that defending and ball-winning is not exactly my strong points..maybe it's becoz i suck so bad at attacking??
honestly speaking, i like playing at centremid but i hate it when my movement is restrained especially now that the DM is part of the "defence party".
i'm not asking for much, juz requesting to be played in a position where i can be of better use to the team..i thought i've had decent games as a forward or as an attacking-mid but i guess i am wrong.
dun take this wrongly, juz my honest views..disappointed that evrytime the team decides to change formation i'll be the first to be moved.
One of the reasons why I decided to place you there is that Robin has mentioned that you have played that position before and played it well. I know you can play it well... if you want to.
Another reason why I placed you there was for the balance of the team. In case you didn't notice, there were 2 players in each attacking position in the 4-2-3-1 formation. My selection was based on my personal view of what is the "best fit" for the team. The role of the DM is an important one, thus it was to my opinion that you could have done a better job... if you wanted to. I have to say that I am quite surprised by this reaction by you, as you did volunteer to play as full-back if it was for the benefit of the team. I realise that I might have misintepreted what you meant.
I also need to point out that many players have been playing in different positions and you are definitely not the "first to be moved". In fact Jimmy and Boon are the ones that have actually been "moved around" more often. I am glad that Ian was able to point out that I move a player simply because I think he can perform in another position, for the benefit of the team.
I assure you that I am taking your suggestion of me playing the DM into serious consideration and I will gladly do it if I decide it's for the benefit of the team. Funny thing is that I have actually been putting myslef in the CM role in previous games and before the last game, you were actually one of those who have highlighted that I am more suited upfront.
I regret to see that I have disappointed you with my team selections. If you have any suggestions which are for the benefit for the team, I will be most open to them.
Oops... late for work... -
I myself had went through several positions. I started out as a striker, moved to right mid and now defensive mid(notice the trend?). Looks like I'll have to pull up my socks and make this position work for me or the manager may just decide to make me our third choice GK
I believe whatever decisions Russell and Robin had made, it was after much deliberation on their part. Of course it is only right for us to voice our individual views and I am sure the managers had and will continue to give all feedbacks their due considerations. -
it's not that i don't want to have a defensive role or juz want to play in a "glamorous" attacking role, i'm juz pointing out that given my physical stature and playing style, i may not be suitable to play in that DM position.Originally posted by Shadow_R:From what I read, it appears that you do not want to play the DM role because you do not want to have a defensive role. I hope you are not one who thinks that there are positions in the team which have NO defensive duties.
One of the reasons why I decided to place you there is that Robin has mentioned that you have played that position before and played it well. I know you can play it well... if you want to.
Another reason why I placed you there was for the balance of the team. In case you didn't notice, there were 2 players in each attacking position in the 4-2-3-1 formation. My selection was based on my personal view of what is the "best fit" for the team. The role of the DM is an important one, thus it was to my opinion that you could have done a better job... if you wanted to. I have to say that I am quite surprised by this reaction by you, as you did volunteer to play as full-back if it was for the benefit of the team. I realise that I might have misintepreted what you meant.
I also need to point out that many players have been playing in different positions and you are definitely not the "first to be moved". In fact Jimmy and Boon are the ones that have actually been "moved around" more often. I am glad that Ian was able to point out that I move a player simply because I think he can perform in another position, for the benefit of the team.
I assure you that I am taking your suggestion of me playing the DM into serious consideration and I will gladly do it if I decide it's for the benefit of the team. Funny thing is that I have actually been putting myslef in the CM role in previous games and before the last game, you were actually one of those who have highlighted that I am more suited upfront.
I regret to see that I have disappointed you with my team selections. If you have any suggestions which are for the benefit for the team, I will be most open to them.
Oops... late for work...
yes i've played as a centremid for Robin in our police team before this, but back then he has never restricted my movements or instructed me to concentrate juz on defending. i was very flattered he had such faith in me and gave me a lot of playing time considering the number of better players he had in the team. also, u can't make direct comparison between that team and Reds coz these are 2 very different teams with different types of players and playing style.
i do remember volunteering to play as a fullback but given we are short of players..i was hoping that at times when we do have a full squad i wld be given the chance to play in the position that i'm most comfortable in.
the reason i fought for you to be kept upfront is becoz i noe u r most comfortable playing as a striker and if u r doing well there, why move u?? i was hoping that you'd have similar considerations for me..
right now, as ian had mentioned, we dun have that many players that can play in a DM role..perhaps only robin and jem. so it's pretty surprising that u chose to play this formation. i juz feel that it's better to see what type of players u have and then choose a formation which can accommodate your players rather than choose a formation and then force players to play in positions which they are not familiar with. after all, we are a social team and we juz wanna have fun rite? -
Khairul, for the sake of the team, I will be very frank and objective with what I am going to say. Since you seem more comfortable talking about this in here rather than after debriefs, I will accommodate to your preference. This is nothing personal and is only based on what I have seen with regards to the team.
Your experience of playing under Robin in your police days clearly differs from what Robin has mentioned to us, but I do not see a need to dwell on that.
Pat, Robin, Ang and Bara were all right midfielders/ wingers coming into the team. Kudos to them on their willingness to take on unfamiliar roles for the sake of the team and even excelling in them. The same can be said of Ian, Kelvin, Jimmy, Boon, Chia, Yap... the list goes on. The attitude of most of our players towards this social team can only be described as exemplary. I have to highlight that your repeated refusal to play to your position and the team formation has been very frustrating to those playing around you on the field. We have always encouraged players to state their preference for certain positions and we will try to accommodate to their preference, as long as it is not disruptive to the team.
As you have stated your preference to play in a more attacking role, I assure you that it has been noted. This, however, brings me to another issue. Right from the beginning, we have said that any player who joins Reds FC, will have to commit to this team. We respect your past decision to leave the team and commit to a more competitive team. Due to your past contributions, we will always welcome you to come and play for us when you are available and feel like doing so. However, as far as I am concerned, this puts you on the same level as our guest players. To be fair to the rest of the team, it is only right that the teamÂ’s preferences and playing time are placed before yours.
There are many other issues that I would actually like to touch on, but I really think it is more appropriate to do so in the presence of the team. While I cannot say that the things I have brought up represents the entire team, I do know that it does reflect the opinions of some of those who are concerned for the team. -
I was very happy with our performances during yesterday's match. It felt good to see all of us playing to their roles and more like a team. Reds, keep up the good work!!
We are less than a year old and we have matured in many ways in just a couple of months. I certainly hope to see us growing and improving on our games as a TEAM. We may have individual skills and abilities but it becomes nothing if we don't play like a team and piecing the big picture together. Soccer is a team game.
There are times when some of us have to play in positions that we are not comfortable with. However, if it's for the benefit of the team as a whole and that the management feels that you have the ability to leave up to the requirements of the position. I certainly hope that you would try your best in fulfilling that new role. In any case, do feel free to speak to us if any of you have some opinions on certain issues and hopefully, we can work out a win-win situation. Do remember that it's difficult to accomodate the wishes and desires of all our players. The management will be objective and make decisions based on the benefit of the team. The team comes first.
See ya guys on coming Sun. Cheers.