I've been coaching for 4 years U10, I have some success with a 1-2-1-2 formation. Stopper, 2 defensive mid fielders, 1 attacking midfielder, 2 strikers.
My team runs a 3 1 2, 2 wings and center striker,1 center mid and 2 full backs. We are 5-0. We have scored 42 points and only had 7 points against. My outside wings do a great job bringing the ball up the side lines and cross into the box and the striker or opposite wing and even the center mid score lots of goals. All of our opponents seem to be heavy on defense and try to score up the center...
I currently have two teams where one is 3-2-1 and the other 2-3-1. I personally like the second formation to give my players the idea to press more with options on the wide space, but the execution is not met. With my team using 3-2-1 they’re playing more safe because in truth to win games is by excellent defending and that’s what they’ve achieved. When we press high, I encourage my full-backs to move up their space creating a 1-2-3 system, and when it’s time to be defensive, they return back to the Christmas tree formation. Not just that, it all depends where the ball is. For example, when ball is at the left channel of the field, I tell my right back to take the space in the midfield to create a temporary 2-3-1 leaving my other two defenders as acting center defense. Same goes vice versa on the left back. That’s why I’m going with a 3-2-1 system for my second team. I also get what you mean for development, spacing and patterns for the 2-3-1 but I see the Christmas tree formation does the exact same where later in years can the team use a 3-2-3 for a spare of two years and 4-2-3-1 for years on. I could go in full detail on who would go where but it would be too much to say. There are subs at our 7v7 level, and when they level up into later 9v9 and 11v11 formations - the subs can be put on the spot to play together instead of sharing. Much like two center defenders are sharing 4 spot in a 3-2-3 but when they enter a 11v11 they could rather play together where one is 4 and the other is 5.
Добрый вечер, извините за беспокойство, я тоже тренер, мы можем с вами по ближе познакомиться и общаться по работе. Я работаю в ФК КРАСНОДАР. Заранее благодарен
Your channel is a treasure! I only wish you also did youth basketball as well. Keep up the great work. A ton of valuable information here and I hope your channel blows up!
@@CoachRorySoccer no problem. It’s very good content. I’m actually trying to get more into coaching so I’m digesting your stuff like crazy. Already learning a ton and I love your approach.
You need a legit baller at the striker position for 2-3-1, but it does train your def-backs to use their decision making at an earlier age (when to play it into the middle vs the wings vs booting it to the striker straight on). And of course 2-3-1 starts training the goal keeper to be field commander very early which is needed. Futbol is deep man! Legit deep.
My problem with 3-2-1 is that the D is strong but you literally lack offensive fire power. I switched early on to a 2-3-1. Yes, you concede more goals but we always outscored the opponent if both teams were at the same developmental level. I also agree that it is far easier to transition to 9v9 as you dont have to teach new positions. All it takes is to get the 2 wide midfielders to think a bit more defensively. Again, great video. Am learning so much, keep it up!
@@CoachRorySoccer first off thank you for your videos as they are very informative at this level of play. I’ve been a coach for 6 years now from U6 to now U10 with my girls mostly playing up a year. I have for the most part focused on the 2-3-1 formation not only for development but understanding my players abilities. I feel as if formations are based on the opposing team as adjustments are sometimes needed depending on the situation. Whats your thoughts on training the team for “Situational Formations” ? For instance if We’re up a goal or two I usually switch to 3-2-1 with my speedy players at mid and striker and my more physical players playing defense to kill time and also make the opposing coach fear switching to a 2-3-1 formation. Again thank you for your insight!
Coach Rory - your tutorials are wonderful and I appreciate you sharing your knowledge with young/new coaches. I have been pretty consistent with a 2-3-1, though last season I actually did shift to a 1-4-1 (curious your thoughts) because the team had difficulty scoring. I trained them rigorously on team defense and the mid-fielders supporting the attack and defending on reversals. I used a strong defender and good goalie rotation to anchor the back-end. I designated one center mid to be more defensively oriented, but allowed to attack. The strongest players were placed in the middle primarily (L/RCM, S and D). The team went from GF/GA appx 16-16 in the first half of the season to 28-4 in the second half of the season and nearly undefeated. I share your views on the 3-2-1 and 3-3. Thank you again.
Thanks! In terms of a 1-4-1 I guess I would find it hard to build out in that formation. Some teams will attack like that and if the ball is on the right flank for example and your playing a 2-3-1 they encourage the right CB to join and the left CB slides over. The problem there however is it leaves you vulnerable to counters.
I play 2-3-1 but my center mid has wide latitude to press into the opponent's half or, if facing a strong opponent, drop back and act as a center back. I like this perspective though. Never thought of it this way.
My son U11 is playing that formation as a striker and waiting for the ball. This frustrate him as coach tells him to hold up the ball and wait for the wingers . He likes to take turns and run towards a goal. I think that position is under developing him I think. They are physical team.
I’ve used a lot of different formations at this age but I’ve enjoyed the 2-1-1-2 the best. For me it teaches the kids the most about movement off the ball and interchanging positions. Strikers constantly working on when to become wide if the play is on their side. Attacking mid working on when to drop in and when to to make forward runs. Triangle in the defense to work on build up play with two defenders and a defensive mid
@@CoachRorySoccer yes sir. If the ball is on the left side of the pitch, the left striker moves wide and shows for the ball in a LM position, CAM shifts, shows as the top of the diamond and is looking to make runs in behind once the ball goes wide. I like this better bc the players are moving into space out wide to create separation from defenders. When I played with wide players it was really easy for defenders to just sit on them at this age and the team would just get stuck moving the ball forward and backwards. Now with that separation my players are having more success in getting the ball wide, then playing forward on the half turn. When teams start just man marking the strikers running wide it just creates space for my CAM to run into and exploit. If they start picking that up then my DM has more space to receive the ball and drive at the backline. Of course they are young so still make a lot of mistakes but think it makes them push on understanding interchanging positions instead being so stuck in the mud
@@nofurtherwest3474 really depends on your definition of a ST. Have to remember these are younger kids and not a 11v11 pitch. Also only only one striker pulls wide and the other ST stays up top depending on what side the ball is on. When talking about formations I always go off of starting position, bc in attack a lot of teams change shape to create overloads. Prime example is Wilder old system at Sheffield United, his RCB and LCB would overlap and become a RM or LM in attack, doesn’t mean they aren’t the teams RCB or LCB, just means they have license to advance in different areas when in the attacking phase
@@dlo11794 It seems it's more of a 2-2-2 that you are using. 2 defenders, 2 mids, 2 forwards. Calling it a 2-1-1-2 just sounds kind of odd. But I can see a 2-2-2 working out ok. I get that you want one mid to be more offensive and one defensive. Not sure how relevant that is on a small pitch (approx 60x30). Frankly, the pitch is so small that the sometimes seem unncessary as oftetimes the balls goes right from the defenders to the forwards. There is just very little space.
Hi Rory, Thank you for your effort. I have couple of questions: 1.) How many sessions do you have per week with your U8/U9? 2.) How does your training plan looks like? How long does your period last until you repeat the circle? If you can give me an example of what you do in general in sessions during the week period. How much time do you spend doing motor skills? How much time do you spend doing basic techinqual elements like passing and shooting ? 3.) Do you think that your are killing their creativity by giving them paterns? 4.) In your experience, how much time is needed for average team U9 to pick up a particular patern? Thank you for your work and for your answers
1.) Two 1.5 hour sessions per week 2.) I have a video on the channel that goes over how I run most of my U8/9 sessions. ruclips.net/video/BSobYW-sDHE/видео.html As a general rule, I don't do any technical work in my sessions. 3.) The patterns are meant to be guides. Once they master the patterns, there are multiple opportunities for creativity etc. 4.) So I would say with a brand new U9 team usually a season (like a whole fall or spring) of doing the three building out of the back patterns usually by then they are starting to get them. But you gotta be patient and stick with it. At first it will look terrible. Thats part of the process.
Hello, I am coaching an u12 team in Turkey. In our country, this age-old game is played by 8 people. So 1 Goalkeeper 7 Players. Last year, when I was competing in u11, I trained the 331 formation and the kids adopted it too. Unlike your 3-man defense formation and the tasks you gave, I wanted my right defender to be in line to use the ball in front of the goalkeeper during the goal kick and to be a valve in possible pressure. I wanted the middle stopper to ask for the ball at the left junction of the penalty area line, and when there was pressure, I wanted my left stopper to press the left line. My goalkeeper could find him by making it long. At the same time, my front players moved to the left with them and we played by trying to be crowded where the ball was. In fact, I would like to ask you to reconsider this idea. What do you think of our plan?
I think it just depends how you conceptualize the formations. You mentioned in the 2-3-1 the 2 wide players becoming the FBs when transitioning to 9v9 and 11v11. For me, I view the 3-2-1 as the midfield 3 and the 3 forwards of an 11v11 team. So the CB is the holding mid and the 2CMs are the attacking mids. and the wide players in the 3-2-1 are more like wingbacks then strict defenders.
Understood. For me the 321 at 7v7 has too many problems creating width. It’s very difficult to get players that age to manufacture width and that’s essentially what you have to do. 231 it’s built into the formation.
@@CoachRorySoccer fair! In that case I just tell the wingbacks in the 321 that they are responsible for creating the width. On goalkicks, I have the CB drop and pick up the ball. In that case it resembles more of a 141.
3-2-1 is better for rec in my experience. In 2-3-1 the wide players stay wide and the 2 defenders are static. With 3-2-1 you can teach the outside backs to be fullbacks. And you do not need 2 amazing defenders and a dynamite midfielder
It does depend on personnel. I also prefer the 2-3-1, but I have had teams where that just isn't a viable option. Like most things in life, you just can't afford to be too dogmatic about anything.
Really helpful, thank you. In Germany you couldn’t find videos like this because the common sense here is that young players must not concerned with tactics. Just basics and then let the kids play. But I don’t agree with you in one point: the 3-3 formation. You said this is for lacy coaches or for coaches they don’t know much about soccer. But that’s not the only reason possible to play this formation. My reason to play this formation is my players. My players are young and inexperienced. Things like change your position depending on the current game situation seems too difficult for many of my players. They just don’t know what to do in the different situations. You have to chose a formation depending on what players you have. What you think?
I prefer 2-3-1 as well for many of the reasons you've outlined (I like natural wing play), but I think you're approaching buildup shape incorrectly in the 3-2-1 which is exacerbating the issues. I don't think positioning the centerback on the edge of the box makes sense when you've already got two central midfielders helping bypass a central press. I would much rather bring the centerback into the box where he can face the press and essentially form the same back 4 shape of the 2-3-1, but utilizing your keeper as the 2nd centerback. You shift the keeper from restarting centrally to cheating all the way to one side of the goal box, you have the CB across the goal on the other corner of the goal box or perhaps a bit wider but well inside the penalty box and then you can push the fullbacks all the way to the sideline creating a 4-2-1 buildup shape that includes the keeper. As you move up the pitch, you're going to lose your line of 4 so this doesn't solve your natural width issues for chance creation, but it should allow you to build out using wide spaces and then transition to overlapping width rather than natural width in attack.
Great video! What do you think about the 2-1-2-1. My biggest worry about the 2-3-1 is a gap in the middle on defense, so the 2-1-2-1 has a defending midfielder that only goes up about 2/3rds of the field to support the striker and outside midfielders, but knows his role is to drop back on defense. Meanwhile the two midfielders stay wide supporting the striker and dropping back on defensive when needed and for build outs.
Yeah the issue with that is similar to the 321 in that you will have to coach and manufacturer width. Which is fine but especially in younger ages harder to coach.
Our U8 coach did a 2-1-3. What do you think of that? It worked really well. Our teams was quite good at all facets of the game for their age. We played out of the back decently well and possessed the ball well. But perhaps it's just semantics as he would expect the wingers (7 and 11) to drop and help defend, so perhaps in actuality they were more like outside midfielders, or wingbacks. I personally like the 2-3-1 the best. To me it is similar to a 3-4-3 in pro soccer. I like wingbacks who work the flanks, rather than having 2 fullbacks do it and leaving just 2 defenders back, which my team (Tottenham) got exposed on several times when Mourinho was doing that back in 2020. Now they do a 3-4-3 and it works better for them. But of course the 4-3-3 works very well for many teams. Anywho - yes 2-3-1! It works well to build out and I think mentally if you call kids at that age midfielders then mentally they know they have to both defend and attack. But if you call them wingers then mentally they think too offensively and don't see themselves as having to drop and defend. We also pressed the same way you do. The 9 always presses. But, now, our U9 coach isn't really keeping them as organized as the U8 coach did. He gives them far less direction, far more leeway. Is not guiding them on how to play out of the back so they are getting sloppy and just blasting it. What should I do about this as a parent?
@@CoachRorySoccer Thanks. He keeps them someone organized during the match in terms of keeping shape. But he just doesn't guide them to play out so they end up booting it. Frustrating to watch. They were playing out better at U8 then now at U9.
It all goes down to who you have in the team. We did a 2-3-1 and we was getting over run but in a 3-2-1 we can build up more from the back and have the left back and right back bring the ball forward and we get some good passing going on but there isn't 1 golden formation so find what fits your team.
That's happening to us in 2-3-1. What kind of players / skill level dispersion do you have on the team? Wondering if switching to 3-2-1 would help us too.
@@ai79 yes this has literally been our problem this entire season. Im coaching a new group of 9 year olds, and I implemented the 2-3-1 only to find out the kids are unable to execute the formation. Our centre mid doesn't understand his role to support the wings, rather he sprints to the front and attempts to score. Now I have transitioned to the 3 - 2 - 1.
@@markhamilton50 what ended up being productive for us is putting our strongest players in counter attacking wingback positions in 3-2-1 where one of them build out the attack with his wing, and continues the play as the center-mid, while the other hangs back to support the center-back.
@@markhamilton50 So in our 3-2-1 formation, our back line consisted of 2 wing-backs and a center-back. We played our two best players at wing-back. Let's say the goalie plays the ball to left wing-back. After left wing-back advances the ball up to the left wing, he follows the play and becomes center-mid for the attack. The right wing-back stays on defense with the center-back. So essentially the two best players end up playing both defense and offense, one at a time.
This season we changed to the 2-3-1 formation with Initial success then had to change to 3-1-2 formation bc we then played stronger opposition the build up patterns helped immensly. We played very good in 312 with higher fullbacks At the end of the season we changed to 2-3-1 again. The issue before in 231 was that our pressing was not coordinated so the opposition had a lot of space. Now with better pressing and techniaclly good developed players we recently won our first tournament In 9 vs 9 we are going to play 323
Coach what do you think about the 2-2-2? We have been at 2-3-1 but on our team we have a couple of strong stickers and would like to keep them on the field together. Thoughts?
My main issue with that is how you get width. For example, in build up you would have to manufacture it by moving the mid's wide, which could really make you susceptible on the counter.
I am new to your channel and really enjoying it. I especially like that you are building up the kids for the next level. I help coach a first grade 6v6 no goalkeeper team. What formation would you recommend? Most teams are leaving one kid to stay behind and block the goal as we are. Also, what skills should we be focusing at this age. Thanks and keep up the good work.
Hey thanks! 6v6 with no keeper is certainly different. Easier question is skills. Definitely ball at their feet as much as possible. Dribbling, 1v1 skills and general comfort on the ball is the best at that age. I have a video on younger rec practices I run you might find helpful. Formation at 6v6. Hmmm. I mean I’d probably just run it 231 with no keeper. Maybe not the best in terms of “winning” but at that age who really cares. The other option would be 1-3-1-1.
Thanks. Watched the rec video and it is excellent we will definitely use it for practices. I watched the defending video too - another amazing video. I have a defending question that I will posted on that video thread. I feel like I found a gold mine!
What if you do not have the athletes to play midfield and the players cannot get up and down the field? Either your defense or offense will eventually suffer. I have tried 1-2-2-1. A sweeper so we are never caught short handed on defense. When building out, the two midfielders start out wide on the end lines. The forward starts in the middleman’s waits to see what side the ball is kicked to. The defenders are on each side of the ball like in your video. Once the sweeper plays a ball to the defender, the forward will move to that side of the field while the midfielder on the opposite side moves towards the middle. The defender will dribble now and have a choice to pass to the midfielder who is on the line or the forward who is moving to that side of the field. I have found this to cause diamond formation to give two passing options to the person with the ball. In my mind, playing 3 midfielders and expecting them to run up and down will exhaust them and cause either the offense or defense to be caught short in numbers. This is my first year coaching and could be wrong but the payers get tired very easily.
Interesting. I look at 7v7 and those ages as opportunities to develop. So yes in the 2-3-1, you will give up goals more than if there are 3 in the back or if you have a sweeper as you suggest. I feel that the shape of the 2-3-1 gives the backbone needed in possession especially that I am looking for. But your point is well taken. Thanks for coaching! Its not easy!
With the 3/2/1 I played the 4 to be next to the GK take the 2 and 3 out wide and the 6 where the 4 that makes natural width giving your 4 the most passing options out of the back and not making you predictable
@@dougsanchez800 Yes I have seen/coached that approach as well. Totally makes sense. My preference is to develop the paired CB-CB relationship from an early age. Not just for build-out, but also for pressure/cover, counter pressing, and defensive shape.
@@CoachRorySoccer It’s ok,! I like what you’re doing. I’ve been coaching 7v7 for the last 6 years. And I love information. I’m currently doing 2/3/1 because the club I coach for has asked me to play that, years prior I played 3/2/1 because I find that it’s easier to teach kids to play forward from the 2 and 3 in attacking knowing that they’re starting position is further back than asking them to start higher and drop back in defense with a 2/3/1 what I get is them just watching the 4 and 5 while they look. Any advice for that ?
I am doing MS boys soccer. We just joined a league where it’s 7v7 we’ve been 11v11 so very different than what we r used to. The league says we can’t slide tackle, no headers, and no offsides. Smaller field and goals. With no offsides the 2-3-1 is epic! 10 goals in two games for us. Yet we haven’t won 😤🤦♂️
I'm going to throw the 1-4-1 at you. I originally settled on a 231 for all the same reasons that you have outlined not only here, but also in a few of your other videos. I am 99% in agreement with you on most of the fundamentals of play. You definitely want natural width. You definitely want structured build outs. Etc... The only thing I don't like is that you're putting a ton of responsibility on your CBs and your 6. Having coached a 231 myself - I think you need a minimum of 3 kids (more likely at least 4) that both get what you're trying to do AND don't mind playing defense all the time. That can be a tough ask. And so I shifted to a 141 that works functionally almost exactly the same as your 231, but it swaps the pair at the back for a stopper/sweeper arrangement. I call the CB a sweeper and I establish the midfield as having an attacking mid and a defending mid. (our stopper - though I dont call it that...) The obvious disadvantage is the fact that you're not building a partnership at CB. But it has many advantages. It is useful for teaching first and second defender concepts. It also takes some of the responsibility off of the 6. In buildout you just pick left or right and leave the other side empty. This is better for beating a press. Overloading to one side makes the opponent thirsty, and they never anticipate a switch to the opposite FB. You really only need to train one CB plus one backup (as opposed to 2 CBs plus backups for each) You also only need to train one 6 (plus one backup). Your attacking mid position becomes more of a luxury spot. You can play your best player there when you're on the front foot, but you can also hide your worst player there without hurting your structure.
Very interesting. Would love to play with this concept a bit. You are correct the 2-3-1 needs strong players up the middle. And you are going to concede goals early in development, but for me its a long term approach to playing 9v9 and 7v7
@@nofurtherwest3474 both answers are the same as 231. The main advantage of the setup is that its simpler to explain to kids. The main disadvantage is that the stopper/sweeper arrangement is vulnerable against more advanced attacking patterns. You would only teach the 141 to very inexperienced players, and you'd want to transition to a 231 as soon as they're ready. If you're worried about not having a defender on both sides during a goalkick, the 141 is meant to prevent passing across the front of the goal, and it also gives you an additional vertical option. But if you're not comfortable with how to explain your ideas then it wont work. I think you're going to have the most success with whatever setup makes the most sense to you. If the 141 version of the 231 doesn't make sense to you then you shouldn't do it.
@@illinest Thanks. I don't coach now, I coached my kid's U6 and U8 indoor team. My kid's U8 outdoor comp team had a very good coach and he did a 2-1-3. We were the best U8 team in our city by far.
My u10s use this formation and building out from the back is still very much possible. What we do it we ask one of a CMs to come collect the ball and rather than pass it with encourage them to drive until someone engages him, usually his good enough to take it pass one the players trying to press him, which opens space for our other CM. Also if he needs he can play it back to the CB, who can play it out wide. Or even both our CMs are good enough to go direct. This 1-4-1 also allows us to dominate midfield. Also out of possession we encourage one of our CMs to drop into defence, so when can still have the benefits of having two defenders. In all honestly I think the 2-3-1 is a little Rigid while other formations we have tried including 1-2-3 (which we used and went 9 games unbeaten and only conceded 6 goals in that time ) allowed our boys to learn so much new things and keeps things fresh and exciting for them
@@CoachRorySoccer Since I see them as very interesting, can you send me the relevant links? Nice to meet you, I'm Daniele, I'm writing to you from Italy and I train 10 - 11 year olds
Coach, if you have 3 players that are significantly less skilled and less athletic than the rest of the rec team, where do you place them in a 2-3-1 formation? Assuming that one or two of them are on the field at any given time.
What formation should I run with U9 when half the kids are playing in the dirt, don’t engage unless the ball runs into them, and don’t move from their spot…ever?
Shots fired on 3-3. Good luck getting rec kids to do what youre asking, practicing 1 day per week. Maybe im just an inexperienced soccer coach, but getting drubbed every week will violate your first rule of having fun.
@@CoachRorySoccer that's the exact situation I'm facing: rec u9 team with 1 practice per week and a wide dispersion in skill level. Do you think a 3-2-1 might make more sense if you only have 3-4 skilled players on the team?
@@CoachRorySoccer So you might keep a player at center back (or center and one other) for the entire season at U9/U10? Here in Ohio the seasons are maybe 3 months long. I typically move them all over until U11 and then start paring down to 1-2 over the course of that year and by the end of U12 they typically have a home. I love the idea of pattern play and use it for 9v9 and beyond but since I don't have set positions it makes it tough for the girls (my team is U10) to remember all the options. Love the videos by the way!
@@cnldad6076 Thanks! Yeah, I usually keep players at 1-2 positions for an entire season. Unless I see a player who obviously is struggling in one spot, or is excelling at a different position in training. I think it's important for consistency and pattern recognition to keep players in set spots. I am planning a video on how to select players for specific positions as well.
I've been coaching for 4 years U10, I have some success with a 1-2-1-2 formation. Stopper, 2 defensive mid fielders, 1 attacking midfielder, 2 strikers.
My team runs a 3 1 2, 2 wings and center striker,1 center mid and 2 full backs. We are 5-0. We have scored 42 points and only had 7 points against. My outside wings do a great job bringing the ball up the side lines and cross into the box and the striker or opposite wing and even the center mid score lots of goals. All of our opponents seem to be heavy on defense and try to score up the center...
I currently have two teams where one is 3-2-1 and the other 2-3-1. I personally like the second formation to give my players the idea to press more with options on the wide space, but the execution is not met.
With my team using 3-2-1 they’re playing more safe because in truth to win games is by excellent defending and that’s what they’ve achieved. When we press high, I encourage my full-backs to move up their space creating a 1-2-3 system, and when it’s time to be defensive, they return back to the Christmas tree formation.
Not just that, it all depends where the ball is. For example, when ball is at the left channel of the field, I tell my right back to take the space in the midfield to create a temporary 2-3-1 leaving my other two defenders as acting center defense. Same goes vice versa on the left back.
That’s why I’m going with a 3-2-1 system for my second team.
I also get what you mean for development, spacing and patterns for the 2-3-1 but I see the Christmas tree formation does the exact same where later in years can the team use a 3-2-3 for a spare of two years and 4-2-3-1 for years on. I could go in full detail on who would go where but it would be too much to say.
There are subs at our 7v7 level, and when they level up into later 9v9 and 11v11 formations - the subs can be put on the spot to play together instead of sharing. Much like two center defenders are sharing 4 spot in a 3-2-3 but when they enter a 11v11 they could rather play together where one is 4 and the other is 5.
Добрый вечер, извините за беспокойство, я тоже тренер, мы можем с вами по ближе познакомиться и общаться по работе. Я работаю в ФК КРАСНОДАР. Заранее благодарен
Your channel is a treasure! I only wish you also did youth basketball as well. Keep up the great work. A ton of valuable information here and I hope your channel blows up!
Hey thanks!
@@CoachRorySoccer no problem. It’s very good content. I’m actually trying to get more into coaching so I’m digesting your stuff like crazy. Already learning a ton and I love your approach.
You need a legit baller at the striker position for 2-3-1, but it does train your def-backs to use their decision making at an earlier age (when to play it into the middle vs the wings vs booting it to the striker straight on). And of course 2-3-1 starts training the goal keeper to be field commander very early which is needed. Futbol is deep man! Legit deep.
My problem with 3-2-1 is that the D is strong but you literally lack offensive fire power. I switched early on to a 2-3-1. Yes, you concede more goals but we always outscored the opponent if both teams were at the same developmental level. I also agree that it is far easier to transition to 9v9 as you dont have to teach new positions. All it takes is to get the 2 wide midfielders to think a bit more defensively. Again, great video. Am learning so much, keep it up!
Thanks! 100% agree with you here on all points.
@@CoachRorySoccer first off thank you for your videos as they are very informative at this level of play. I’ve been a coach for 6 years now from U6 to now U10 with my girls mostly playing up a year. I have for the most part focused on the 2-3-1 formation not only for development but understanding my players abilities. I feel as if formations are based on the opposing team as adjustments are sometimes needed depending on the situation. Whats your thoughts on training the team for “Situational Formations” ? For instance if We’re up a goal or two I usually switch to 3-2-1 with my speedy players at mid and striker and my more physical players playing defense to kill time and also make the opposing coach fear switching to a 2-3-1 formation. Again thank you for your insight!
Coach Rory - your tutorials are wonderful and I appreciate you sharing your knowledge with young/new coaches. I have been pretty consistent with a 2-3-1, though last season I actually did shift to a 1-4-1 (curious your thoughts) because the team had difficulty scoring. I trained them rigorously on team defense and the mid-fielders supporting the attack and defending on reversals. I used a strong defender and good goalie rotation to anchor the back-end. I designated one center mid to be more defensively oriented, but allowed to attack. The strongest players were placed in the middle primarily (L/RCM, S and D). The team went from GF/GA appx 16-16 in the first half of the season to 28-4 in the second half of the season and nearly undefeated. I share your views on the 3-2-1 and 3-3. Thank you again.
Thanks! In terms of a 1-4-1 I guess I would find it hard to build out in that formation. Some teams will attack like that and if the ball is on the right flank for example and your playing a 2-3-1 they encourage the right CB to join and the left CB slides over. The problem there however is it leaves you vulnerable to counters.
I play 2-3-1 but my center mid has wide latitude to press into the opponent's half or, if facing a strong opponent, drop back and act as a center back. I like this perspective though. Never thought of it this way.
My son U11 is playing that formation as a striker and waiting for the ball. This frustrate him as coach tells him to hold up the ball and wait for the wingers . He likes to take turns and run towards a goal. I think that position is under developing him I think. They are physical team.
I’ve used a lot of different formations at this age but I’ve enjoyed the 2-1-1-2 the best. For me it teaches the kids the most about movement off the ball and interchanging positions. Strikers constantly working on when to become wide if the play is on their side. Attacking mid working on when to drop in and when to to make forward runs. Triangle in the defense to work on build up play with two defenders and a defensive mid
So do you allow your strikers to come down wide on build out? For me this would be difficult to produce width
@@CoachRorySoccer yes sir. If the ball is on the left side of the pitch, the left striker moves wide and shows for the ball in a LM position, CAM shifts, shows as the top of the diamond and is looking to make runs in behind once the ball goes wide. I like this better bc the players are moving into space out wide to create separation from defenders. When I played with wide players it was really easy for defenders to just sit on them at this age and the team would just get stuck moving the ball forward and backwards. Now with that separation my players are having more success in getting the ball wide, then playing forward on the half turn. When teams start just man marking the strikers running wide it just creates space for my CAM to run into and exploit. If they start picking that up then my DM has more space to receive the ball and drive at the backline. Of course they are young so still make a lot of mistakes but think it makes them push on understanding interchanging positions instead being so stuck in the mud
If your "strikers" are dropping wide to receive balls from your defenders then they aren't really strikers. fyi
@@nofurtherwest3474 really depends on your definition of a ST. Have to remember these are younger kids and not a 11v11 pitch. Also only only one striker pulls wide and the other ST stays up top depending on what side the ball is on. When talking about formations I always go off of starting position, bc in attack a lot of teams change shape to create overloads. Prime example is Wilder old system at Sheffield United, his RCB and LCB would overlap and become a RM or LM in attack, doesn’t mean they aren’t the teams RCB or LCB, just means they have license to advance in different areas when in the attacking phase
@@dlo11794 It seems it's more of a 2-2-2 that you are using. 2 defenders, 2 mids, 2 forwards.
Calling it a 2-1-1-2 just sounds kind of odd.
But I can see a 2-2-2 working out ok.
I get that you want one mid to be more offensive and one defensive. Not sure how relevant that is on a small pitch (approx 60x30). Frankly, the pitch is so small that the sometimes seem unncessary as oftetimes the balls goes right from the defenders to the forwards. There is just very little space.
Hi Rory,
Thank you for your effort.
I have couple of questions:
1.) How many sessions do you have per week with your U8/U9?
2.) How does your training plan looks like? How long does your period last until you repeat the circle? If you can give me an example of what you do in general in sessions during the week period.
How much time do you spend doing motor skills?
How much time do you spend doing basic techinqual elements like passing and shooting ?
3.) Do you think that your are killing their creativity by giving them paterns?
4.) In your experience, how much time is needed for average team U9 to pick up a particular patern?
Thank you for your work and for your answers
1.) Two 1.5 hour sessions per week
2.) I have a video on the channel that goes over how I run most of my U8/9 sessions.
ruclips.net/video/BSobYW-sDHE/видео.html
As a general rule, I don't do any technical work in my sessions.
3.) The patterns are meant to be guides. Once they master the patterns, there are multiple opportunities for creativity etc.
4.) So I would say with a brand new U9 team usually a season (like a whole fall or spring) of doing the three building out of the back patterns usually by then they are starting to get them. But you gotta be patient and stick with it. At first it will look terrible. Thats part of the process.
Great insight!
Thanks!!
Gracias por el video, Coach.
Hello, I am coaching an u12 team in Turkey. In our country, this age-old game is played by 8 people. So 1 Goalkeeper 7 Players. Last year, when I was competing in u11, I trained the 331 formation and the kids adopted it too. Unlike your 3-man defense formation and the tasks you gave, I wanted my right defender to be in line to use the ball in front of the goalkeeper during the goal kick and to be a valve in possible pressure. I wanted the middle stopper to ask for the ball at the left junction of the penalty area line, and when there was pressure, I wanted my left stopper to press the left line. My goalkeeper could find him by making it long. At the same time, my front players moved to the left with them and we played by trying to be crowded where the ball was. In fact, I would like to ask you to reconsider this idea. What do you think of our plan?
8 a side I prefer to play a 232. But as long as you are consistent and train it the specific formation is less important
I think it just depends how you conceptualize the formations. You mentioned in the 2-3-1 the 2 wide players becoming the FBs when transitioning to 9v9 and 11v11. For me, I view the 3-2-1 as the midfield 3 and the 3 forwards of an 11v11 team. So the CB is the holding mid and the 2CMs are the attacking mids. and the wide players in the 3-2-1 are more like wingbacks then strict defenders.
Understood. For me the 321 at 7v7 has too many problems creating width. It’s very difficult to get players that age to manufacture width and that’s essentially what you have to do. 231 it’s built into the formation.
@@CoachRorySoccer fair! In that case I just tell the wingbacks in the 321 that they are responsible for creating the width. On goalkicks, I have the CB drop and pick up the ball. In that case it resembles more of a 141.
I appreciate the knowledge
I like the 3-2-1 best bc with a weaker players, I feel like we need extra help at the bottom of the field.
Where do you play your weaker players?
i‘d also prefer the 2-3-1 simply for the fact that i could use the two wing players as a rb&lb
100%
@@CoachRorySoccer im currently prepping for a school tournament for the u10‘s and i’ve been binge watching your vids.
@@loiteringrambler1268 awesome! Good luck!
3-2-1 is better for rec in my experience.
In 2-3-1 the wide players stay wide and the 2 defenders are static.
With 3-2-1 you can teach the outside backs to be fullbacks. And you do not need 2 amazing defenders and a dynamite midfielder
Agree to disagree.
It does depend on personnel. I also prefer the 2-3-1, but I have had teams where that just isn't a viable option. Like most things in life, you just can't afford to be too dogmatic about anything.
In what positions do you play your weaker players in 3-2-1?
Really helpful, thank you. In Germany you couldn’t find videos like this because the common sense here is that young players must not concerned with tactics. Just basics and then let the kids play.
But I don’t agree with you in one point: the 3-3 formation. You said this is for lacy coaches or for coaches they don’t know much about soccer.
But that’s not the only reason possible to play this formation. My reason to play this formation is my players. My players are young and inexperienced. Things like change your position depending on the current game situation seems too difficult for many of my players. They just don’t know what to do in the different situations.
You have to chose a formation depending on what players you have. What you think?
Fair. Point well taken. I would only say that even inexperienced players can play more complicated formations but I get what your saying.
I prefer 2-3-1 as well for many of the reasons you've outlined (I like natural wing play), but I think you're approaching buildup shape incorrectly in the 3-2-1 which is exacerbating the issues. I don't think positioning the centerback on the edge of the box makes sense when you've already got two central midfielders helping bypass a central press. I would much rather bring the centerback into the box where he can face the press and essentially form the same back 4 shape of the 2-3-1, but utilizing your keeper as the 2nd centerback. You shift the keeper from restarting centrally to cheating all the way to one side of the goal box, you have the CB across the goal on the other corner of the goal box or perhaps a bit wider but well inside the penalty box and then you can push the fullbacks all the way to the sideline creating a 4-2-1 buildup shape that includes the keeper. As you move up the pitch, you're going to lose your line of 4 so this doesn't solve your natural width issues for chance creation, but it should allow you to build out using wide spaces and then transition to overlapping width rather than natural width in attack.
Understood. Just a bit unnatural for me. But get your point.
Great video! What do you think about the 2-1-2-1. My biggest worry about the 2-3-1 is a gap in the middle on defense, so the 2-1-2-1 has a defending midfielder that only goes up about 2/3rds of the field to support the striker and outside midfielders, but knows his role is to drop back on defense. Meanwhile the two midfielders stay wide supporting the striker and dropping back on defensive when needed and for build outs.
Yeah the issue with that is similar to the 321 in that you will have to coach and manufacturer width. Which is fine but especially in younger ages harder to coach.
Our U8 coach did a 2-1-3. What do you think of that?
It worked really well. Our teams was quite good at all facets of the game for their age. We played out of the back decently well and possessed the ball well.
But perhaps it's just semantics as he would expect the wingers (7 and 11) to drop and help defend, so perhaps in actuality they were more like outside midfielders, or wingbacks.
I personally like the 2-3-1 the best. To me it is similar to a 3-4-3 in pro soccer. I like wingbacks who work the flanks, rather than having 2 fullbacks do it and leaving just 2 defenders back, which my team (Tottenham) got exposed on several times when Mourinho was doing that back in 2020. Now they do a 3-4-3 and it works better for them. But of course the 4-3-3 works very well for many teams.
Anywho - yes 2-3-1! It works well to build out and I think mentally if you call kids at that age midfielders then mentally they know they have to both defend and attack. But if you call them wingers then mentally they think too offensively and don't see themselves as having to drop and defend.
We also pressed the same way you do. The 9 always presses.
But, now, our U9 coach isn't really keeping them as organized as the U8 coach did. He gives them far less direction, far more leeway. Is not guiding them on how to play out of the back so they are getting sloppy and just blasting it. What should I do about this as a parent?
Yeah that’s really tough. Keeping kids organized is really a sign of a good coach. Unfortunately so many coaches don’t get this concept.
@@CoachRorySoccer Thanks. He keeps them someone organized during the match in terms of keeping shape. But he just doesn't guide them to play out so they end up booting it. Frustrating to watch. They were playing out better at U8 then now at U9.
It all goes down to who you have in the team. We did a 2-3-1 and we was getting over run but in a 3-2-1 we can build up more from the back and have the left back and right back bring the ball forward and we get some good passing going on but there isn't 1 golden formation so find what fits your team.
That's happening to us in 2-3-1. What kind of players / skill level dispersion do you have on the team? Wondering if switching to 3-2-1 would help us too.
@@ai79 yes this has literally been our problem this entire season. Im coaching a new group of 9 year olds, and I implemented the 2-3-1 only to find out the kids are unable to execute the formation. Our centre mid doesn't understand his role to support the wings, rather he sprints to the front and attempts to score. Now I have transitioned to the 3 - 2 - 1.
@@markhamilton50 what ended up being productive for us is putting our strongest players in counter attacking wingback positions in 3-2-1 where one of them build out the attack with his wing, and continues the play as the center-mid, while the other hangs back to support the center-back.
@@ai79sorry can you explain that again?
@@markhamilton50 So in our 3-2-1 formation, our back line consisted of 2 wing-backs and a center-back. We played our two best players at wing-back.
Let's say the goalie plays the ball to left wing-back. After left wing-back advances the ball up to the left wing, he follows the play and becomes center-mid for the attack. The right wing-back stays on defense with the center-back.
So essentially the two best players end up playing both defense and offense, one at a time.
I like to play 3-3 with my left back pushing up. So technically its a 2 4/2 3 1
As long as my left is tactically astute it works
Understood. It can be tough to teach kids that age to flex 3 in the back defending and two attacking but i get it! Keep up the good work coach!
why would only want your left back to push up?
@@nofurtherwest3474bc i want 2 players at theback for build up and my left back is really fast
This season we changed to the 2-3-1 formation with Initial success then had to change to 3-1-2 formation bc we then played stronger opposition the build up patterns helped immensly. We played very good in 312 with higher fullbacks
At the end of the season we changed to 2-3-1 again. The issue before in 231 was that our pressing was not coordinated so the opposition had a lot of space. Now with better pressing and techniaclly good developed players we recently won our first tournament
In 9 vs 9 we are going to play 323
Coach what do you think about the 2-2-2? We have been at 2-3-1 but on our team we have a couple of strong stickers and would like to keep them on the field together. Thoughts?
My main issue with that is how you get width. For example, in build up you would have to manufacture it by moving the mid's wide, which could really make you susceptible on the counter.
Choo Choo! :)
I am new to your channel and really enjoying it. I especially like that you are building up the kids for the next level. I help coach a first grade 6v6 no goalkeeper team. What formation would you recommend? Most teams are leaving one kid to stay behind and block the goal as we are. Also, what skills should we be focusing at this age. Thanks and keep up the good work.
Hey thanks! 6v6 with no keeper is certainly different. Easier question is skills. Definitely ball at their feet as much as possible. Dribbling, 1v1 skills and general comfort on the ball is the best at that age. I have a video on younger rec practices I run you might find helpful.
Formation at 6v6. Hmmm. I mean I’d probably just run it 231 with no keeper. Maybe not the best in terms of “winning” but at that age who really cares. The other option would be 1-3-1-1.
Thanks. Watched the rec video and it is excellent we will definitely use it for practices. I watched the defending video too - another amazing video. I have a defending question that I will posted on that video thread. I feel like I found a gold mine!
What if you do not have the athletes to play midfield and the players cannot get up and down the field? Either your defense or offense will eventually suffer. I have tried 1-2-2-1. A sweeper so we are never caught short handed on defense. When building out, the two midfielders start out wide on the end lines. The forward starts in the middleman’s waits to see what side the ball is kicked to. The defenders are on each side of the ball like in your video. Once the sweeper plays a ball to the defender, the forward will move to that side of the field while the midfielder on the opposite side moves towards the middle. The defender will dribble now and have a choice to pass to the midfielder who is on the line or the forward who is moving to that side of the field. I have found this to cause diamond formation to give two passing options to the person with the ball. In my mind, playing 3 midfielders and expecting them to run up and down will exhaust them and cause either the offense or defense to be caught short in numbers. This is my first year coaching and could be wrong but the payers get tired very easily.
Interesting. I look at 7v7 and those ages as opportunities to develop. So yes in the 2-3-1, you will give up goals more than if there are 3 in the back or if you have a sweeper as you suggest. I feel that the shape of the 2-3-1 gives the backbone needed in possession especially that I am looking for. But your point is well taken. Thanks for coaching! Its not easy!
With the 3/2/1 I played the 4 to be next to the GK take the 2 and 3 out wide and the 6 where the 4 that makes natural width giving your 4 the most passing options out of the back and not making you predictable
@@dougsanchez800 Yes I have seen/coached that approach as well. Totally makes sense. My preference is to develop the paired CB-CB relationship from an early age. Not just for build-out, but also for pressure/cover, counter pressing, and defensive shape.
@@dougsanchez800 Sorry that response was from me but from another channel I am developing!
@@CoachRorySoccer It’s ok,! I like what you’re doing. I’ve been coaching 7v7 for the last 6 years. And I love information.
I’m currently doing 2/3/1 because the club I coach for has asked me to play that, years prior I played 3/2/1 because I find that it’s easier to teach kids to play forward from the 2 and 3 in attacking knowing that they’re starting position is further back than asking them to start higher and drop back in defense with a 2/3/1 what I get is them just watching the 4 and 5 while they look. Any advice for that ?
I am doing MS boys soccer. We just joined a league where it’s 7v7 we’ve been 11v11 so very different than what we r used to. The league says we can’t slide tackle, no headers, and no offsides. Smaller field and goals. With no offsides the 2-3-1 is epic! 10 goals in two games for us. Yet we haven’t won 😤🤦♂️
Good luck!
Do you have any videos on how to teach kids this young the formation and how to play it? Certain drills to drive it home?
Several. What age?
@@CoachRorySoccer u12 and u10. We don't have u9 or u11 so we're talking 7 yo in the fall for u10
coach, how about a 3-1-2? we're teaching our fullbacks to move back and forth during transitions but struggle with the buildout
At young ages I've found it tough anytime there are three in the back to get spacing down right, especially in the wide areas.
I'm going to throw the 1-4-1 at you.
I originally settled on a 231 for all the same reasons that you have outlined not only here, but also in a few of your other videos. I am 99% in agreement with you on most of the fundamentals of play. You definitely want natural width. You definitely want structured build outs. Etc...
The only thing I don't like is that you're putting a ton of responsibility on your CBs and your 6. Having coached a 231 myself - I think you need a minimum of 3 kids (more likely at least 4) that both get what you're trying to do AND don't mind playing defense all the time. That can be a tough ask.
And so I shifted to a 141 that works functionally almost exactly the same as your 231, but it swaps the pair at the back for a stopper/sweeper arrangement. I call the CB a sweeper and I establish the midfield as having an attacking mid and a defending mid. (our stopper - though I dont call it that...)
The obvious disadvantage is the fact that you're not building a partnership at CB. But it has many advantages. It is useful for teaching first and second defender concepts. It also takes some of the responsibility off of the 6. In buildout you just pick left or right and leave the other side empty. This is better for beating a press. Overloading to one side makes the opponent thirsty, and they never anticipate a switch to the opposite FB.
You really only need to train one CB plus one backup (as opposed to 2 CBs plus backups for each) You also only need to train one 6 (plus one backup). Your attacking mid position becomes more of a luxury spot. You can play your best player there when you're on the front foot, but you can also hide your worst player there without hurting your structure.
Very interesting. Would love to play with this concept a bit. You are correct the 2-3-1 needs strong players up the middle. And you are going to concede goals early in development, but for me its a long term approach to playing 9v9 and 7v7
I don't see how a 1-4-1 can help kids learn to play out of the back.
And it seems like it would be very easy to press.
@@nofurtherwest3474 both answers are the same as 231. The main advantage of the setup is that its simpler to explain to kids. The main disadvantage is that the stopper/sweeper arrangement is vulnerable against more advanced attacking patterns. You would only teach the 141 to very inexperienced players, and you'd want to transition to a 231 as soon as they're ready.
If you're worried about not having a defender on both sides during a goalkick, the 141 is meant to prevent passing across the front of the goal, and it also gives you an additional vertical option.
But if you're not comfortable with how to explain your ideas then it wont work. I think you're going to have the most success with whatever setup makes the most sense to you. If the 141 version of the 231 doesn't make sense to you then you shouldn't do it.
@@illinest Thanks. I don't coach now, I coached my kid's U6 and U8 indoor team.
My kid's U8 outdoor comp team had a very good coach and he did a 2-1-3. We were the best U8 team in our city by far.
My u10s use this formation and building out from the back is still very much possible. What we do it we ask one of a CMs to come collect the ball and rather than pass it with encourage them to drive until someone engages him, usually his good enough to take it pass one the players trying to press him, which opens space for our other CM.
Also if he needs he can play it back to the CB, who can play it out wide. Or even both our CMs are good enough to go direct.
This 1-4-1 also allows us to dominate midfield.
Also out of possession we encourage one of our CMs to drop into defence, so when can still have the benefits of having two defenders.
In all honestly I think the 2-3-1 is a little Rigid while other formations we have tried including 1-2-3 (which we used and went 9 games unbeaten and only conceded 6 goals in that time ) allowed our boys to learn so much new things and keeps things fresh and exciting for them
HI
any tactics for 7vs7 game?
Check out some of my other videos. Have lots of stuff.
@@CoachRorySoccer Since I see them as very interesting, can you send me the relevant links?
Nice to meet you, I'm Daniele, I'm writing to you from Italy and I train 10 - 11 year olds
In 2-3-1, the #6 has to be the most skilled player ?
6 and the two CB are key
Coach, if you have 3 players that are significantly less skilled and less athletic than the rest of the rec team, where do you place them in a 2-3-1 formation? Assuming that one or two of them are on the field at any given time.
What about 4v4 formations that will translate to a 2-3-1? I do a 1-2-1 currently.
Yes diamond. 1-2-1.
What formation should I run with U9 when half the kids are playing in the dirt, don’t engage unless the ball runs into them, and don’t move from their spot…ever?
Sounds like your at a rec level. Maybe 33?
Shots fired on 3-3. Good luck getting rec kids to do what youre asking, practicing 1 day per week. Maybe im just an inexperienced soccer coach, but getting drubbed every week will violate your first rule of having fun.
Oh for sure. A rec team one day a week is very much a different situation. Keep going! Thanks for coaching those kids!!
@@CoachRorySoccer that's the exact situation I'm facing: rec u9 team with 1 practice per week and a wide dispersion in skill level. Do you think a 3-2-1 might make more sense if you only have 3-4 skilled players on the team?
@@ai79 could be. Depends on where you place them etc. also what goal is long term.
what about a 3 1 2? what do you think of this formation.
I have a hard time seeing the spacing in a 312. You’d have the central defender in the same vertical space as your center mid.
@@CoachRorySoccer thank you
Te best formation. Funny, offensive, and offers a great formation for the young players of the game.
how long do you leave players in position before rotating them? i only get games every 2 weeks.
I usually keep my players at 1-2 positions for months before moving them around.
@@CoachRorySoccer So you might keep a player at center back (or center and one other) for the entire season at U9/U10? Here in Ohio the seasons are maybe 3 months long. I typically move them all over until U11 and then start paring down to 1-2 over the course of that year and by the end of U12 they typically have a home. I love the idea of pattern play and use it for 9v9 and beyond but since I don't have set positions it makes it tough for the girls (my team is U10) to remember all the options. Love the videos by the way!
@@cnldad6076 Thanks! Yeah, I usually keep players at 1-2 positions for an entire season. Unless I see a player who obviously is struggling in one spot, or is excelling at a different position in training. I think it's important for consistency and pattern recognition to keep players in set spots. I am planning a video on how to select players for specific positions as well.
What about 2-2-2?
Yeah not for me. It is played but you have a built in issue with width.
2-2-2?
Don’t see that as frequently. But yes that is another one.