There have been a few messages on rss recently that seem to have incorrect information about how tactics have evolved. Or, who knows?, it might be my understanding of how tactics have evolved that's wrong.

So I thought I'd set the record straight, by writing my understanding of how tactics have evolved. Hopefully, it will educate some of you; and if I have got anything wrong, hopefully somebody will correct me and educate me too.

Before about 1930, I think teams played with as many as 8 forwards, with 1 midfielder and 1 defender.

By about 1930, most teams played the W formation, with the 5 forwards forming a W: I might as well attempt a diagram:
LW CF RW
\ / \ /
IL IR
LH CH RH
\ / \ /
LB RB

and the midfielders and defenders forming another W.

Then the centre-half became a central defender and instead of the W formation (2-3-5), teams started playing the W-M formation (3-2-5). Apparently this is why central defenders are sometimes referred to as centre-halfs.

Then in about the late 1950s, 4-2-4 became popular; then in the 1960s 4-3-3 became popular, and then 4-4-2.

By 1990, the 4 most popular formations were 4-4-2, 5-3-2, 4-5-1, and 3-5-2. The latter came about as a result of the fact that very few teams played with more than 2 forwards anymore, so teams started playing with 2 defenders to defend against the 2
forwards, with a sweeper to cover the gaps or something. Argentina were one of the first teams to play 3-5-2, at the 1986 World Cup.

I’m not very sure how tactics have evolved since then. 3-4-3 seemed to replace 4-5-1 in that list of 4 most popular formations. 4-3-3, in spite of being described as obsolete by World Soccer magazine, seems to have made a comeback.

Then since maybe around 2010?, 4-2-3-1 has been the most common team formation I think.

That's my understanding of how tactics have evolved. Please feel free to correct anything I've got wrong, and to fill in any gaps; particularly the gaps before 1930 and since 1990 which I'm unsure about.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2022-11-06 04:34, Mark wrote:

These are formations, which technically would fall into the realm of
strategy rather than tactics, no ?

When you start looking at the type of player deployed in these
formations, and what they have been instructed to do, then it starts to
venture into the world of tactics. There is a world of difference
between having someone like Beckenbauer playing as sweeper (Libero is a
more accurate description and not the most direct translation) and a
common or garden variety central defender taking the role of a sweeper.

There have been a few messages on rss recently that seem to have incorrect information about how tactics have evolved. Or, who knows?, it might be my understanding of how tactics have evolved that's wrong.

So I thought I'd set the record straight, by writing my understanding of how tactics have evolved. Hopefully, it will educate some of you; and if I have got anything wrong, hopefully somebody will correct me and educate me too.

Before about 1930, I think teams played with as many as 8 forwards, with 1 midfielder and 1 defender.

By about 1930, most teams played the W formation, with the 5 forwards forming a W: I might as well attempt a diagram:
LW CF RW
\ / \ /
IL IR
LH CH RH
\ / \ /
LB RB

and the midfielders and defenders forming another W.

Then the centre-half became a central defender and instead of the W formation (2-3-5), teams started playing the W-M formation (3-2-5). Apparently this is why central defenders are sometimes referred to as centre-halfs.

Then in about the late 1950s, 4-2-4 became popular; then in the 1960s 4-3-3 became popular, and then 4-4-2.

By 1990, the 4 most popular formations were 4-4-2, 5-3-2, 4-5-1, and 3-5-2. The latter came about as a result of the fact that very few teams played with more than 2 forwards anymore, so teams started playing with 2 defenders to defend against the 2

forwards, with a sweeper to cover the gaps or something. Argentina were one of the first teams to play 3-5-2, at the 1986 World Cup.

I’m not very sure how tactics have evolved since then. 3-4-3 seemed to replace 4-5-1 in that list of 4 most popular formations. 4-3-3, in spite of being described as obsolete by World Soccer magazine, seems to have made a comeback.

Then since maybe around 2010?, 4-2-3-1 has been the most common team formation I think.

That's my understanding of how tactics have evolved. Please feel free to correct anything I've got wrong, and to fill in any gaps; particularly the gaps before 1930 and since 1990 which I'm unsure about.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 9:15:18 PM UTC, MH wrote:

On 2022-11-06 04:34, Mark wrote:

These are formations, which technically would fall into the realm of
strategy rather than tactics, no ?

Are team formations tactics or strategy? There's a question. I'd say tactics. I suppose it is debatable though.

When you start looking at the type of player deployed in these
formations, and what they have been instructed to do, then it starts to venture into the world of tactics. There is a world of difference
between having someone like Beckenbauer playing as sweeper (Libero is a
more accurate description and not the most direct translation) and a
common or garden variety central defender taking the role of a sweeper.

What's the difference between a libero and a sweeper? I always thought they were the same thing.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2022-11-08 05:52, Mark wrote:

On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 9:15:18 PM UTC, MH wrote:

On 2022-11-06 04:34, Mark wrote:

These are formations, which technically would fall into the realm of
strategy rather than tactics, no ?

Are team formations tactics or strategy? There's a question. I'd say tactics. I suppose it is debatable though.

Strategy for sure.
4-4-2, 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 etc are just numbers to describe the approximate positions of player. It becomes tactics when you start to describe the
type of players deployed in those positions (3 fairly defensive
midfielders ? forwards who hug the touchline as wingers, or who
interchance ? Fullbacks who attack all the time ?) and the instructions
given to them.

When you start looking at the type of player deployed in these
formations, and what they have been instructed to do, then it starts to
venture into the world of tactics. There is a world of difference
between having someone like Beckenbauer playing as sweeper (Libero is a
more accurate description and not the most direct translation) and a
common or garden variety central defender taking the role of a sweeper.

What's the difference between a libero and a sweeper? I always thought they were the same thing.

Well for a lot of positions, the meaning changes with era. A fullback
in the early era, or W-M era is not what we understand by a fullback
today.

But my impression when sweeper started to be used in the UK was that it
meant either a defender who had no specific marking task, and player a
bit behind the defensive line, mopping up loose and through balls. Not a
huge role going forward. Sometime, perhaps a mistaken usage, I saw it
refer to a purely defensive player who played in front of the back line,
with no specific marking tasks.

In continental Europe, and perhaps especially in Germany, the Libero was
seen as a more positive role - no specific marking tasks and freedom to
move into midfield, with an expectation that the player would be an
excellent passer and control the tempo of the game to some extent. Best epitomized by Beckenbauer, of course, once he moved back from midfield.
Sammer was similar.
Germany had a fixation with Liberos for a long time, and most of them
were converted midfielders who were often quite small and would not
necessarily be considered for a back 4 (or 5) role in other countries - thinking of Thon, Matthäus, Stielecke. It was a very prestigious and
much sought after role in the W. German national team for a long time. Ironically, for the 1990 WC, Beckenbauer as coach used Augenthaler, a
much more conventional central defender, as the nominal Libero, but in
their back 3 (5 when defending) he did not really look any different
from the other central defenders.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)