3 man defence

Hi,

I am a fan of Italian football and I have recently been thinking about the number of teams there that have a back 3 instead of a back 4. I can think of Udinese, Genoa, Sampdoria and Napoli off the top of my head. Now I was wondering why this is more popular in Italy than in say England. I was wondering if anyone had any ideas of why this is? whether its cultural, historical or maybe due to the pace of italian football. If anyone could shed some light on the reasons behing this it would be nice to hear.

Regards

I play 3-1-3-2-1 up the middle because my nation cannot cross the ball for... well anything

Sorry to be picky, but Udinese played a back 4 this season. They played a 3 in 2007/08 though.

Don't know why a few Italian sides are playing with a 3-man defence though. Certainly its worked brilliantly for Genoa this season. Could be because Italian defenders are generally more cultured than English ones, and with the extra freedom an extra centre back brings another centre back can bring the ball out of defence knowing there's more cover in the middle.

Criscito at Genoa certainly likes to get forward with the ball from a left sided centre back position.

Then again it could be something as simple as the players available to the respective coaches.

On FM I've never played with a back 3, and my only real rule in tactics is a back 4. I always find a back 3 easy to exploit down the flanks.

I played 5 years with three defence and got many success. This link includes my tactic and screenies. With fast defenders I really enjoy 3-1-3-2-1 tactic.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=115850&highlight=galatasaray

try this page for information

If your talking about real football it's simply because English players are not technically good enough. How many Dutch, French and Spanish players do we see playing around the top leagues in Europe and South America. Whereas the English players - supposedly good enough to win the World Cup - and play in any leagues hardly ever play outside England.

Talking technically Italians, French, Germans, Dutch, etc. etc. are better than us English.

Rant over

If your talking about real football it's simply because English players are not technically good enough. How many Dutch, French and Spanish players do we see playing around the top leagues in Europe and South America. Whereas the English players - supposedly good enough to win the World Cup - and play in any leagues hardly ever play outside England.

Talking technically Italians, French, Germans, Dutch, etc. etc. are better than us English.

Rant over

I think it is more cultural than talent that prevents English players from playing outside the English league. Beckham has done well at Real Madrid and Milan and I would expect that Gerrard, Lampard, Ferdinand etc would do well in Europe. I think other factors such as the strength of the English league, the money in the English league, the lack of quality English players has led to most English players staying in the country and the large influx of foreigners. But that is off topic.

Did Udinese not go back to a 3 man defence when Zapata and Felipe were fit at the end of the season?

Im thinking that the tactical focus of the Italian game may mean that the 3 man defence is able to work reliably, whereas tactics seem for most managers (excepting Benitez, Wenger etc.) in England to be less important. I don't see why players with poor technical abilities can't fit into the system, if they are tactically and positionally aware.

well it certainly isn`t for the pace of italian football.

Did Udinese not go back to a 3 man defence when Zapata and Felipe were fit at the end of the season?

I watched their 3rd last game against Milan and they were definitely playing 4 at the back with Zapata and Felipe in the middle.

Back onto the main debate and it's no secret that Italian coaches are more skilled than English ones, and can be more flexible in approach. I guess the same can be said of the players as well as 3 at the back requires more flexibility from the centre backs and wide players.

When England played 3-5-2 under Steve McClaren the performance was horrible. During the last World Cup though Marcello Lippi used more than one system and his players adapted to that perfectly and of course won in the end.

Genoa, despite playing an adventurous 3-4-3 also have the 5th best defence in the league which is impressive, proving that the system can have defensive strength as well as attacking threat. I put that down to tactical skill of their coach.

Simple reason why 3 man defences have gone out of fashion is that teams no longer play two up front. So you're left with 3 men in defence with only 1 attacker to mark. Your free player could move up into midfield - but if they're going to do that, why not play a midfielder there anyways and in any case, what about those two opposition fullbacks who are giving extra width to the opposition while your wingbacks mark the opposition's wingers?

3-5-2 became popular because it nullified a 4-4-2 by retaining possession in the centre of midfield. When you play it against a 4-2-3-1 (which has been popular since the late 90s at least, even if notation has taken longer to catch up) then you don't have the man extra in midfield unless a central defender steps up and you're going to have problems down at least one wing as the free opposition fullback can go there, or step into midfield. On top of all that, to play 3 at the back successfully, you need two wingbacks who are exceptional at their level in terms of stamina. As the game speeds up, those players become increasingly harder to find.

I know Liverpool still train with 3-5-2 as part of their 'default' formations under Benitez. Last season they played it to some effect against Portsmouth away.

My best formations are a variation of either a 3-4-3, 3-6-1, or 3-5-2