Tactics: Which formations are en vogue and why? | OneFootball

Although formations vary amongst teams and leagues, different managers view each one differently and tailor it to their liking. In over one hundred years of football, the number of players forming a team has remained unchanged at eleven. And yet no two variations of how they line-up and play are equal, thanks to rule changes, technology and great minds in every generation.  Today, we will examine four formations that are driving soccer into its next era.

4-2-3-1: The Swiss Army Knife

Among Europe’s elite, most adopt a 4-2-3-1. Its popularity stems from its versatility—it borrows the best qualities from both the 4-4-2 and 4-3-3. Should the attacking midfielder push forward, it resembles a 4-4-2; if they drop deeper, they complete a midfield triangle like the 4-3-3.

In Attack: The 4-2-3-1 excels at attacking in units of five. The two holding midfielders provide a security blanket, giving full-backs the freedom to bomb forward and provide supporting width. On paper, players are positioned to cover all zones: centre-backs with holding midfielders in the half-spaces, wide forwards stretching the pitch, and three players centrally. This coverage is vital in the modern era of positional play, where players try to create overloads across the pitch.

In Defense: The formation can defend effectively in a midblock, with the ability to shift as a unit and trap opponents on one side of the pitch. One holding midfielder may move across to press wide, while the other covers central space. However, when defending deeper, the 4-2-3-1 has a vulnerability: if the ball is moved quickly to the opposite flank, a large gap can open up if the wide midfielder or centre-back cannot react in time.

4-4-2: The Defensive Workhorse

The 4-4-2 is not often used to attack, but to defend. It’s the formation of choice for teams looking to sit deep and counterattack.

In Attack: Since the 4-4-2 lacks a natural presence in the center of the pitch, teams using it tend to exploit the half-spaces and wings. When the formation splits, it becomes two units of five separated by the center circle, giving it an advantage in wide attacking transitions. The two strikers provide a focal point for passing and quick counters.

In Defense: The formation is balanced for defensive solidity, with eight players spread from box to box forming a compact block. The easiest shape to create is a square, with groups of four across the pitch—ideal for stopping opponents’ triangular passing patterns and denying space in central areas.

3-5-2: The Moneyball Special

One evolution of the 4-4-2, the 3-5-2, has become immensely popular among data-driven clubs. Union Berlin, Brentford, Lens, and Atalanta, for instance, have all found success with this formation. It’s particularly associated with Scandinavian football—especially Norway, where the shape has been used a combined 335 times since the 2023 Eliteserien season.

In Attack: The shape often forces direct play due to limited natural passing patterns in advanced areas. Playing with two strikers is now rare, but it gives defenders something else to think about. Typically, one forward acts as a target man, bringing the ball down for their more clinical partner. Wing play is the bread and butter—wingbacks are the principal width bearers, and most teams using this formation have specialists in crossing or 1v1 dribbling to compensate for the lack of central passing options.

In Defense: This shape can give top teams a massive headache. Eight players can camp in the center of the pitch, with the combination of three midfielders and three centre-backs creating a rectangular block that’s extremely difficult to penetrate. While it shares similarities with Italian defensive systems—sitting deep and looking for counter-attacking opportunities—the Norwegian variant can also be used to aggressively press opponents. Two strikers occupy central areas while one of the three midfielders steps up to block passing lanes.

3-4-3: The High-Intensity Press Machine

The 3-4-3 shares plenty with the 4-3-3—the only difference on paper being an extra midfielder for a defender. But this small change has big implications.The 3-4-3 shares plenty with the 4-3-3, the only difference on paper being an extra midfielder for a defender. Along the wide areas and half-spaces, the 3-4-3 has a diamond shape, which is useful for creating space behind the opposition defence with long balls from the centre-backs. Like the 4-3-3, every zone of the pitch is covered across three lines and short distances, optimal for an instant high press once the ball is lost.

In Attack: Along the wide areas and half-spaces, the 3-4-3 creates a diamond, useful for generating space behind the opposition defense with long balls from centre-backs. Like the 4-3-3, every zone of the pitch is covered across three lines with short distances between players, making it optimal for combination play and quick transitions.

In Defense: The formation excels at implementing an instant high press once possession is lost. The three forwards and four midfielders create a front seven that can suffocate opponents in their own half.

Weakness: The 3-4-3 requires you to have many specialists, particularly a ball-winning midfielder and/or someone with an outstanding engine in the middle of the park. When a side lacks players with those attributes, defenders’ stamina suffers. With only three centre-backs, the gaps between them become much larger compared to a line of four. This often leads to one centre-back being dragged wide, leaving the other two covering too much ground and exposing space at the back post.

Animation credit and article editing credit: Adwaieet Bhide