Soccer/Football Tactics | 7vs7 (U9-U10) | Advantages of the 1-2-3-1
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 มิ.ย. 2024
- For coaches looking for tips/ideas on the advantages of the 1-2-3-1 in 7vs7 youth soccer.
For similiar videos check out our Building out from the Back video:
• Soccer/Football Tactic...
Please check out and support the Ball Chat Sports Podcast for Sport related discussion and opinion:
Spotify : open.spotify.com/show/4XSC4fg...
Anchor : anchor.fm/ballchat-sports
Google Pod : www.google.com/podcasts?feed=...
Follow us on social media:
Twitter : BallChatSports
Insta : ball.chat.sports.podcast
#soccertactics #soccer #youthsoccer #football #footballtactics #formations #analysis #tactics #defensiveshape #defending #soccersystems #soccerformations #klopp #liverpool #mancity - กีฬา
About to start coaching a youth team and this helped so much, thank you! ⚽️
Glad that it has been of use!
This is brilliant thank you
Good video. I don't disagree with a lot of what you say but I do think there are certain limitations on this system (as I suppose there are with all systems). I would say 95% of teams I have come up against play this way or a variation on it and because of that there are certain issues with it.
Firstly, if you come up a better group of players you're going to find yourself doing a lot of running and often being pressed back into a 4-1-1. The formation is very reliant on having wingers with a good engine and if your mids don't track, you've got big problems.
Secondly, and this is more of a back two issue, any team attacking with width leads to your back two getting split or dragged to one side and leaving you vulnerable to a quick switch ball as there are gaps in the middle or at the back post.
Also if your wide men get too far forward and you lose the ball you can get ripped on the counter.
Equally if they're too wide and a team play two CMs, or the striker likes to drop, your CM can get isolated and struggle to keep the ball.
My team have a smaller pool of players to the others in our league and tend to - but not always - have to punch above our weight. The easiest way to counter the 2-3-1 is with a 3-2-1. Go man for man with the wingers and striker and drop two in on the CM. Again has its limitations going the other way but can frustrate the hell out of a team of better players.
When I coached a team with much better players we always used 2-3-1. My best side had a really slow striker who was extremely good on the ball - basically a number 10. He'd drop off the back two and create mayhem by feeding balls into our pacey wingers with a more holding CM so when we attacked it was more of a 2-1-1-2. I also like using inverted wingers when I have them in this system. Tend to get more central control as they drift in and they get closer to the striker and get a better angle for shooting.
Please, thank you for your information. Coach can contact you so that I can benefit from you
Well done great vid. I like the way you bring it back to real world as a coach myself of under 10s. Agree with you 100%. Our plan is low and medium blocks of 3 when defending but get to 2-1-2-1 ASAP when ball is won. Keep it central. Wingers not essential at this level with so few options to cross to.
I find the hardest thing at the age is the positional/tactical understanding. Still far too much ball watching!
I agree to an extent but you can use width to shift or split the back two and create space in the middle or other side. Playing so centrally if the other team have wingers then you end up either getting your midfield split leaving the centre exposed or overloaded to one side and vulnerable to a quick switch.
Excellent video
One midfielder would be helpful in 7v7 who can play as defensive & attacking midfielder. One centre half and two wing backs and two attackers.
Brilliant we play 7v7 and I believe 1-3-2-1 is the best set up for are team we have really good players and also some need more guidance . but we mix everyone together we are as one and I like going into a game with a positive set up which I think this is we lose some win some . But it’s always fun and like to give the players the best chance of attacking instead of sitting back.
what age group do you coach Mark? I think its great coaches using different ideas at this level as its kind of their first foray into the tactical aspect of the game!
I coach a youth team (currently U10) in the UK (midlands) and I'm sorry, but a lot of the top tier teams attack down the wings. The 2-3-1 is popular. But it's not the best formation, because it wastes 1 player. No need for 2 defenders as this is not often needed, and the lack of that player further forward leads to teams that play 2-3-1 playing deeper than necessary cos they can't retain posession up front. Most effective 7-a-side formation is 1-2-3. It's counter-intuitive, but the pressure it creates on other teams eventually wins out.
would you drop the 2 mids in when building from the back? Also do you play your best player as the single defender? For me to play this system with my U10s I would need a physically dominant and good ball-playing centre-back to be able to play this system because if a team can break through that first two lines of pressure I would leave myself exposed. Interesting take on it though thanks for sharing
@@absoccercoaching8328 Thanks for a great reply. You're right. It depends on the players you have. I'm lucky to have a physically dominant and good ball-playing centre-back. So yes, I play him as a sole CB. In terms of the 1-2-3, we've stopped playing out from the back, now preferring a gk&cb combo to tee-up & volley the ball out from goalkicks. Controversial but legal. Realised that the fad for "playing out" is exactly that - a fad. In practice in youth football, it adds minimal value in terms of territorial advance, bcos all teams now press rapidly from kick-off (another fad) and for the minimal available benefits, "playing out" carries more risk than reward.
So with a tee-up and volley kick-off, we bypass the press and halve the pitch size, allowing a statistically higher chance of posession recovery in the opposition half, and then as a short-passing specialist team, we are able to link more passes with a higher reward probability in the opposition half.
Once teams understand that pressing is useless and will only give up space for my team to exploit from the tee-up volley goalkick, they stop pressing, which then gives us the choice, time and freedom to then play-out now that they're not expecting it.
Also, for the 1-2-3, the players who top our bleep-test fitness charts play wide and variously change the formation fluidly by moving up and/or down the wings through the different phases of play. So these 2 players simultaneously play as wingbacks, wide midfielders and wide forwards. So the formation morphs fluidly between 1-2-3, 1-4-1 and 3-2-1 (attack to defence) and back. So yes, the 2 wide players drop down and push up depending on the phase of play, while the diamond spine of 1CF + 2DMs + 1CB stay in position to thwart attacks down the middle and force opposition attacks down the wings where the momentum either stalls or they have to cross the ball in, which itself lowers the chances of conversion.
But it all depends on the players available. I like to recruit 3 types of players: Strong CB types, Fast winger/wingback types, and Ball playing DMs. Weakest players then play as a central CF with the job of holding up the ball to the wing attackers and/or just to play in a position where loss of posession carries the least risk.
@@pu.2665 thanks for sharing this, very interesting. Sorry if this is a stupid question but can you please explain the gk & cb combo tee up a volley kick off?
@@nickoxley2746 Not a stupid question at all. Basically, 99.999% of 9yr old goalkeepers can't get the power & elevation needed on a traditional goalkick. So, we came up with an idea...what if the GK flicks the ball up and the CB volleys it into the opposition's half? We tried it, and it was very effective as well as being legal (no rule against this). It A) mirrors a traditional goalkick, B) stopped opposition teams from bothering to press passed goalkicks, C) halved the pitch & allowed us to press the ball in the opposition half, and D) reduced possession loss (and opposition goals from these) in our own half. This method of goalkick was contested by a qualified referee who had to concede that there's no rules against it. But sadly, parents complained that it was a weird form of goalkick. So we stopped using it, and have since started conceding goals from goalkicks once again. So, I'll be bringing back this form of goalkick. Goalkeeper flicks it up, CB volleys high into the opposition area. Crude but effective with a progressive justification behind it. Hope that answers your question.
Philippe Ugochukwu brilliant thank you very much and a great idea. I appreciate the insights. You sound like a great coach.
I coach a girls team under 10's 9 a-side and I have been strict in keeping them rigid in their lines so this is great to give me new ideas. I have found some coaches have attackers "goal hang" due to there being no offside rule. What can I do in this situation?
Hey Daniel, do you play with a breakout line currently? In the league's in NY we usually played with that up until 9-a-side so that seems difficult if still playing without an offside rule at that level. My solution in that case would be to put your strongest defender in charge of marking their attacker. If they are doing it with 2/3 girls then you should have the advantage when out of possession so an alternative would be to press very high from opponent goal kicks and to try and win the ball back as high as possible before they have a chance to move the ball forward into your half
👍
Suses selalu
How about a 3-1-2 . The two forwards playing a little wide
This is what I'm trying next season. 3-2-1 is great for being tough to beat but you tend to end up very deep and having to defend for long periods. Next year I'm going to try two really high and wide to try drag and split the back 2 as every other team plays a 2-3-1. Dunno if anyone else has tried this or has any thoughts?
1:17 sure if you are gonna draw lines round them like that you should call it a 2-1-3 instead of a 2-3-1. Personally I call it a 2-3-1
Music is a bit loud
The beast is 3.2.1
If you're trying to counter a better team playing 2-3-1 definitely. Does leave you very deep and retaining possession can be harder.
2-3-1 best System for 7v7
inclined to agree with you. Although in recent weeks have tried reverting to a 1-1-2-3 as we kept on getting caught on the counter-attack because of the midfield 3 pushing up too high leaving the 2 sitting defensive players exposed. So experimenting with a player that can essentially play a "sweeper" position has been effective with my u9 boys.
Not if you're playing against a team of better players.