Football Tactics

Right, so as you all know I analyse everything around me all the time, and the other day I was listening to some music and got thinking about football tactics.

It seems to me that there are two schools of thought when it comes to football tactics, and then within one of them another two ways of executing the specific style. The two main approaches are Reactive and Proactive.

Reactive

The Reactive style of football is a very 'organic' style of football, where the players go where the ball goes, and rather than having a specific method of attack, the players attack by passing a lot and waiting for openings, and simply defend where ever the opposition take the ball. It's a very Brazilian style of football, and requires the team to work as a single unit, with a lot of flexibility and just pushing forward as much as possible.

It's almost as if there is no structure to this style, and usually the team is set in a standard formation like 4-4-2 or 4-3-3. I suppose it also requires a fairly high work rate because the players end up running around a lot.


Proactive

This seems to be the more favored style of football, with players in specific positions within a formation, and playing with a specific attacking and defensive method. Within this style there are two approaches I have noticed.

Player Influence

This approach is used by Manchester United, and in this style there is a standard formation and a standard attaching method used for pretty much every game, but specific players are chosen to play within the formation because of their style of play.

So in Manchester United's case, they always play 4-4-2. But when they need to defend, they play more defensive players in midfield, and when they need to attack they play more attacking players in midfield. Their formation never changes, and their method of attach never changes. They always attack down the wings, but depending on what is required they will change who plays in central midfield, or on the wings or upfront or whatever the case may be.


Formation

This approach is favored by Chelsea, and requires specific players in every position, but relies on tactical changes for attacking and defending, primarily through formation changes. It is similar to the 'Player Influence' approach because it requires specific players to play differently in specific positions on the field, but is more tactically 'correct' and more structured.

So, in Chelsea's case they play a very direct style of football, which requires the players to be very strong and fast, but also to stay in their specific position. Chelsea have always played different variations of the 4-3-3 formation, but depending on if they need a stronger midfield, a wider style of play, or a more aggressive style of play they will play 4-1-4-1, 4-1-3-2 or 4-1-2-3 respectively.

But irrespective of the formation, each player is required to do a specific job within his position in the formation, rather than just playing his style of football.


None of these approaches are wrong, they just work differently for different clubs. Every club has a different style of play, and they buy players accordingly. Because they players are there, it doesn't matter if the manager changes the style of play won't change [hence Scolari's failure at Chelsea].


Anyway, this is just my own opinion based on my limited observation, I could be wrong. Tell me if you think I am, and tell me why. Otherwise just bugger off...