| Possession Soccer: Its Evolution and Decline |
By Jay Martin
Is the concept of possession fast going the way of juggling and the Coerver moves? In the early 1970s, after Brazil won the World Cup in Mexico, Pelé introduced the American soccer world to juggling. His films depicted him juggling a grapefruit, a bundle of rags and, of course, a soccer ball.
Every coach in the country had his or her teams practice juggling in every training session. The players juggled until they could not juggle any longer. Juggling became the end, not the means to the end. Players did not learn how to play the game, but they did learn how to juggle.
In the late 1980s, Weil Coerver introduced a series of exercises intended to make players comfortable with the ball. Every coach in the country introduced Coerver moves to the team. The players performed Coerver moves until they could do so no longer. Players did not learn the game, but they did learn how to perform Coerver moves. These moves became the end, not a means to an end. In fairness, the latest effort by Coerver is far more game-related and a bit more practical than was juggling.
Historically, American coaches have tended to latch on to concepts and practice them with their teams at the expense of teaching players how to play the game. American coaches have an inferiority complex that motivates them to try anything from another soccer playing country that they hope will work. We imitated Pelé, we imitated Coerver and now we possess. Are we possessing at the expense of playing the game? Has possession become the end or is it the means? Is possession obsolete? Is possession going the way of juggling and Coerver moves?
Tactics in soccer usually are a direct result of a reaction to the demands of the game at a particular time in soccer history. Creative and innovative coaches find ways for their team to play to take advantage of the current trend in tactics. These coaches constantly are searching for time and space on the soccer field. As a result, tactics change. Coaches change tactics for a variety of reasons: the game, the opponent, the weather, the field, the venue, the defense, the importance of the game and the tactics of the opposing team.
For example, before 1960 soccer was primarily a dribbling game. The Hungarians, with the great Puskas, changed the way teams played by introducing a highly effective “passing game” and by moving their players into space created by the WM system used by most opposing teams. This system was so effective that Hungary beat England at Wembley in 1953 by a 6-3 margin and later 7-1 in Bucharest.
That change in tactics — from dribbling to passing — changed the game forever and started a chain reaction in soccer that continues today. Possession is a part of that chain reaction. Has the chain passed American coaching?
The impact of World Cup Play
World Cup finals historically have dictated the latest tactical innovations. The trickle-down effect led teams in many countries to emulate the latest World Cup champions. And why not?
If the best do something, it is good enough for my team. For example, the 1958 champion Brazilians played an innovative 4-2-4, and that became the formation of choice for teams all over the world. Similarly, Sir Alf Ramsey and England used a 4-4-2 to defeat Germany in 1966. Again that changed the way many countries played.
The term “possession” did not even enter the soccer lexicon until the 1970s. The German and Dutch teams of the 1970s introduced us to possession. We still possess. In fact, we think possession is equivalent to “good soccer” or “pretty soccer.”
Has the game changed? Is possession as played in the ’70s and ’80s really the best way to play?
Three major tactical influences
Three major tactical changes influenced soccer before 1960. Until that time most teams played a dribbling game and used a 2-3-5 formation. Herbert Chapman, the coach of Arsenal in the 1920s, offered the first major change with the introduction of the WM formation. With this formation, he introduced the concept of triangles and support on the soccer field.
That concept is still important today. The WM system had players in positions that afforded built-in triangles and support. In addition, the concept of shape and balance came from this formation. There were solid defensive positions and the formation allowed multiple ways to attack. This tactical formation ruled the soccer world for the next 30 years.
The second change was the aforementioned change by Hungary in the 1950s. Hungary changed its strategy from a dribbling to a passing game. The brilliant center midfielder, Nandor Hidegkuti, used deft through passes to inside forwards Puskas and Kocsis. This could not have occurred without changing the formation of the Hungarian teams to exploit the space allowed by the WM system. They did this by pulling attackers back toward the midfield and away from the defenders.
The third major tactical change can be credited to Brazil. In 1958, Brazil won the World Cup in Sweden with four defenders. That was the first time a major team played with four backs. That concept is here to stay. While coaches have used different numbers in the midfield and on the forward line, the four-back concept remains an important part of tactics today.
While most teams in 1958 still used the WM system with strict man-to-man marking, the Brazilians decided to use a zone defense with four backs. This allowed the six Brazilian attackers to attack with some freedom and find space against the three backs of opponents in the WM formation.
It is important to remember this evolution into the four-back system, because four in the back was an important factor leading to possession. To have four backs possess against two or three forwards was the very foundation of possession. In addition, a patient team that could possess against four in the back could pull the opposition’s other players out of position if they opted to come forward to win the ball.
The 1966 World Cup
Most soccer historians suggest that tactics really became important during the 1966 World Cup. Until that time, tactics were secondary to the role of the players on each team. From the 1960s to today, tactics have made a significant impact on the game. Sir Alf Ramsey used a 4-3-3 formation until a tour of South America saw the English defeated in Rio by Brazil, 5-1. He immediately changed to a 4-4-2 and introduced the “wingless wonders” to the soccer world.
With that formation, Ramsey led England into the final against Germany. The 1966 final was a good game. Both Germany and England played a very positive style of soccer. There were long passes that produced goals and there were short, square and back passes that allowed possession. What we think of as the direct, over-the-top British style was not seen in that game. This World Cup presented soccer with hard-working, versatile, two-way midfielders, players designated only for defense and the beginning of the overlapping fullback, but with no possession and no “over the top” direct play.
A tactician’s dream cup
The 1970 World Cup was a soccer tactician’s smorgasbord. Many believe this was one of the best World Cups ever. Although Brazil defeated Italy by a 4-1 score in the final, a number of teams made long-lasting contributions to soccer tactics. During this tournament, the English, a great but aging team, introduced the very long direct pass and overlapping became an integral part of their game.The Brazilians, the best collection of technical soccer players, emphasized technique, attacking and an increased emphasis on fitness. The Italians, the third truly great team in this tournament, gave
us a look at the sit in (Catenaccio) and the cleaver counterattack tactic.
But it was the emerging great German team that really began the tactical revolution that led to possession. The Germans began to use specialists (the attacking back, playmaker, etc.), they switched fields quickly to move the four backs in their zone, they probed the opponent’s defense and they began to possess the ball. Using a 4-3-3, they possessed with the back seven and tried to pull the opponent’s backs out away from the goal and then make the play. These tactical developments were a direct response to the Cup holder, England, and their 4-4-2.
Possession became a tactic in soccer. Possession had a purpose. And the purpose was not just to possess the ball; by being patient, a team could find holes in the opponent’s back eight.
The Netherlands
Although the Dutch did not play in the 1970 World Cup finals, they were quietly building a very good national team and a style of play that emphasized possession. The 1974 World Cup demonstrated that possession was becoming the standard in international soccer. The finalists — Germany and Holland — were the two best teams in the world at possessing the ball. In fact, the Dutch team scored first after making 16 consecutive passes and not allowing the Germans to touch the ball — that’s possession!
It was with this World Cup that the confusion between “pretty soccer” and “effective soccer” began. Although they lost, the Dutch arrogantly proclaimed that they played the “best soccer.” The newspapers in Germany and Holland charted each touch made by the teams and actually charted the time of possession. Possession became synonymous with “good” or “pretty” soccer. The outcome was of secondary consideration.
The Dutch continued to be the team of the 1970s (they were losing finalists in Argentina in 1978 as well) and they won by possessing the soccer ball. In addition to these two national teams, Ajax Amsterdam and Bayern Munich ruled European club soccer. These clubs possessed the ball as well as any teams in the history of the game. So possession became an important part of soccer history.
Possession was not the only tactic that evolved from Germany in 1974. The Dutch talked about “total football” and total players. Defensive strategies, like pressing and double-teaming, became an important part of the game. But it was possession, switching fields, using the counter to “get in” before the defenders were set and probing opponents’ defenses that emerged as the lesson of 1974.
Possession impacts U.S. soccer
In the 1970s and ’80s, there was not much international soccer on American television. As a result, it took a few years for the lessons of the 1970s and possession to become a part of the American soccer culture. But possession did become a part of American soccer. Possession games became standard in training sessions. Clinic sessions that emphasized possession and building from the back proliferated.
Americans decided that possession was good soccer and direct soccer was simply bad soccer. Any team that could not string a few passes together was inferior. As possession became the American standard, the rest of the international soccer world moved on. Tactics changed to make teams who adopted possession tactics struggle. In the meantime, the American soccer culture continued to possess.
Spain, 1982
The 1982 World Cup in Spain brought the soccer world the concept
of “evolving defenses.” The Italians defeated Germany by using a 5-3-2 and some new and different defensive concepts. The Italians used game situations to change the defense. For example, the Italians might double team or “press” after throw-ins or corner kicks. They used defensive changes to dictate the pace and rhythm of the game. Sacchi was an assistant coach on the Italian team during this World Cup and influenced how the team played defensively.
This Cup gave us an increased number of midfield players, increased team compactness, an increased emphasis on double-teaming and an increase in counterattacking soccer. But it was the concept of pressing that really began at this time and changed soccer tactics. As unsuspecting teams began to build from the back and possess, the Italians would press. This caused havoc with teams and prompted coaches to look for counters to these tactics.
Mexico, 1986
The defensive concept of pressing forced teams to change tactics again for the 1986 World Cup in Mexico. The tactical change necessary to relieve the pressure from pressing simply was playing the ball forward quickly. This World Cup saw teams playing long forward passes to target forwards, who then played the ball back to the midfield players. The Germans introduced the soccer world to increased numbers in the midfield and decreased numbers in the back. The 3-5-2 was born. The three backs could take care of the two forwards and the five midfielders could now move forward quickly and get involved in the attack and still provide a release for the backs or goalkeeper if they were under pressure. Possession was slowly giving way to more direct play. Not over-the-top direct play, but controlled play with forward passes of 20-30 yards.
European club soccer at this time saw the Italians continue to make serious tactical changes. Sacchi and Lippi talked about implementing a refined Dutch system of the 1970s. These Italian coaches reintroduced collective play in training (i.e., small-sided games), the offside trap, the double team, increased support play (players around the ball) and pressing. This pressing was done to disrupt possession and regain possession as soon as possible. These coaches wanted to impose their style of play on the opponents. When their teams lost the ball, they would press to get it back. This totally disrupted teams who tried to possess and continued to force a more direct style of play.
An emerging French system
The French success in the 1998 World Cup and Euro 2000 may have surprised some, but most followers of the game understood what was going on. The French instituted their National Soccer Academy program in 1970. Success was not immediate, but the French did play well in the 1982 World Cup, won the 1984 European Championships and were a favorite in Mexico in 1986. Some believe they would have won that Cup if it had been played in Europe.
Even while not winning, France began to contribute to the international soccer picture. They had an aggressive attacking attitude and, as defenders shut down attackers, they began to emphasize attacking with their midfield players. They played the ball forward quickly and would try to possess in the attacking third of the field. That is what they do today.
No one could consider today’s French side a possession team in the same way the Germans and Dutch possessed in the ’70s. France brought us attacking backs and midfield players, a “strength down the middle” philosophy, a flexible interchange of formations (4-3-3> 3-4-3> 4-4-2> 4-5-1), a faster, up-tempo game and more direct, lofted balls. The French will try to possess in their attacking third. This is very difficult and will be successful only with players with exceptional technique and a high level of fitness. Statistics support this tactical change. From World Cup ’94 to World Cup ’98 there was a significant increase in goals scored by midfield players.
European Cup 2000
The trend toward a more direct style continued during Euro 2000. All of the teams (except Germany, Italy, Slovenia and Turkey) played with four in the back, but the “build up” from the backs to attackers was gone. As the speed of play increased, the long pass over or through the midfield became a very important part of attacking. In fact, many of the best teams in Euro 2000 used the goalkeeper as part of the attack by relying on quick, long forward passes to forwards. This change necessitated a return of the target player/forward. That player’s job was to win the long pass, hold the ball or lay it off and go forward quickly. France again possessed the ball in its attacking half of the field — and was very successful.
Lessons for American coaches
The impact of these tactical changes on American soccer in this decade should be a change in “possession philosophy” — teams should possess with a purpose. Possession for the sake of possession or to play “pretty soccer” must be abandoned. This does not suggest that technique be forgotten. On the contrary, possession in the attacking half demands better technique, fitter athletes and faster play.
As the ball moves forward, time and space decrease. Coaches must demand that their players look forward and play the ball quickly. This new possession emphasizes an attacking mentality, which is what American soccer players want. Jerry Smith, the head coach of NCAA Division I women’s champion Santa Clara University, admitted in a recent article in Soccer America that he was tired of playing “good soccer” and losing games.
American coaches must develop an open mind and watch for tactical changes at the highest levels. American coaches in other sports consider change each season and are very innovative. That is how “American” sports (i.e. basketball, football, etc.) change and improve yearly.
American soccer coaches must become innovative and creative. Look at the problems and find the solution. Watch World Cup 2002. What are the tactical changes? How can American soccer and coaches learn from these games? Is possession a part of this year’s World Cup? Are American coaches ready to stop reacting to other countries and become innovators? Are American coaches ready to play effective soccer and forget the term “pretty soccer”?
Editor’s Note: Jay Martin, men's soccer coach at Ohio Wesleyan University, is one of American collegiate soccer’s all-time winningest coaches. He is the current editor of Soccer Journal. This article originally appeared in the March-April 2002 edition of Soccer Journal.
|
|
| The Technical Area, NSCAA eNewsletter |
 |
|
|
 |
| Soccer Journal - Published seven times a year in print and once annually online, Soccer Journal is the Official Publication of NSCAA and is one of the few publications in the world produced exclusively for soccer coaches. learn more |
| Insurance - Members in the United States automatically receive $1 million in professional liability insurance, providing coverage for most soccer-related activities. learn more |
| Academy Programs - The benchmark of soccer coaching education is the NSCAA Coaching Academy program. learn more |
| Convention - The NSCAA Convention is "The World's Largest Annual Gathering of Soccer Coaches." Held each January learn more |
| Awards and Recognition - The NSCAA administers an outstanding awards and recognition program which includes Coach of the Year, All-America, long-term service and special recognition awards, designed to recognize excellence in soccer, academics and service to the game. learn more |
| Licensed Apparel - A full line of distinctive coaching gear sets you apart as a member of the NSCAA through our licensed apparel program with adidas. learn more |
| For more details, please proceed to the Benefits of NSCAA Membership Page |
|
|
