Old School Formation.

[Guest Night Owl]

 

 

Afternoon Gentlemen,

 

Listen I'm a bit of a history nerd at times and I like my Football tactics, so I've always been fascinated with a lot of the older formations and philosophies.

 

Are any of you, with respect, old enough to remember the above formation ? If so I'd appreciate the info. I've read a few articles online about the games that featured the 2,3,5 but they don't really tell you much other than it was engineered to be more geared towards team work instead of individual flair.

 

I'm hoping to replicate it on the up coming Football Manager 14, but before that I'm going to need some of the roles explained to me etc etc.

[Super_Ally 0]

Looks like a formation Brazil would favour with their "you score 5 we'll score 6 mentality". But I'm too young to have seen it.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

You will lose every game about 15-0 in FM with that.

 

If you turn it upside down it looks like something we would play in Europe.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

The earliest formations that I watched were more a 3-2-2-3; with a right and left back either side of the centre half (back) and then the two half-backs further forward. In my youth, the full backs were Shearer and Caldow and Bill Patterson was the first centre- half that I can recollect. Patterson's predecessors in that position were Willie Woodburn , who was suspended sine die in 1954 and the legendary George Young. I think that CH's of that era would have taken great exception to any suggestion that they needed help from another CB!

 

Harold Davis and Willie Stevenson were the half backs, with Jim Baxter taking over from WS in 1960.

 

This formation developed into 4-2-4 which is originally credited to two different people: Flávio Costa, the Brazilian national coach in the early 1950s, as well as another Hungarian Béla Guttman.

 

In the Rangers team of the day, Davis played a more defensive role and Jim Baxter played further forward with Ian McMillan initially and then Sandy Jardine or Andy Penman.. When John Grieg came into the team in the early sixties, he partnered Ronnie McKinnon in central defence.

 

Having said all that, I think this is the answer you really want, before my time I'm pleased to say.

 

2–3–5 (Pyramid)

 

The first long-term successful formation was first recorded in 1880.[1] However, in "Association Football" published by Caxton in 1960, the following appears in Vol II, page 432: "Wrexham ... the first winner of the Welsh Cup in 1877 ... for the first time certainly in Wales and probably in Britain, a team played three half backs and five forwards ..."

 

The 2–3–5 was originally known as the "Pyramid", with the numerical formation being referenced retrospectively. By the 1890s, it was the standard formation in England and had spread all over the world. With some variations, it was used by most top level teams up to the 1940s.

 

For the first time, a balance between attacking and defending was reached. When defending, the two defenders (fullbacks), would watch out for the opponent's wingers (the outside players in the attacking line), while the midfielders (halfbacks) would watch for the other three forwards.

 

The centre halfback had a key role in both helping to organise the team's attack and marking the opponent's centre forward, supposedly one of their most dangerous players.

 

It was this formation which gave rise to the convention of shirt numbers.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formation_(association_football)

[Guest Night Owl]

Thanks for that BH.

 

For a bit of fun and just for an idea could you possibly put todays Rangers side into the formation you are referring to ? I know our boys aren't up to the standard of the old guard but just to give me an idea of the style and type of player that goes in each position, like Templeton etc.

 

And how did these formations play ? was it wing play , through the middle ? long ball ? etc etc , that would be a great help.

 

thanks again for a reply, I love the idea of a central defender thinking he's so good and hard that he doesn't need help, a truly different era.

[Super Cooper 0]

I was an inside right in primary school.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Thanks for that BH.

 

For a bit of fun and just for an idea could you possibly put todays Rangers side into the formation you are referring to ? I know our boys aren't up to the standard of the old guard but just to give me an idea of the style and type of player that goes in each position, like Templeton etc.

 

And how did these formations play ? was it wing play , through the middle ? long ball ? etc etc , that would be a great help.

 

thanks again for a reply, I love the idea of a central defender thinking he's so good and hard that he doesn't need help, a truly different era.

 

No problem, I'll try to do that later, might be tomorrow night though. Maybe you should try a Mr A McCoist about what current players go in what position in the formation but what would he know?

[Guest Night Owl]

I was an inside right in primary school.

Inside right, that would be like a Steven Naismith kind of role no ? not quite a striker but not quite a winger ?

No problem, I'll try to do that later, might be tomorrow night though. Maybe you should try a Mr A McCoist about what current players go in what position in the formation but what would he know?

 

Much appreciated BH, It would be cool to see if we can get it to work.

 

I did a search for the pyramid you mention and it displayed this.

 

 

looks about right....

 

yet another interesting formation.

 

look forward to it.

[Gribz 919]

I always have had a thought that the formation should be balanced out over the pitch, 3-4-3 being the most obvious. Wigan showed in spells last season that when playing it right its effective.

[Darthter 542]

 

Now, who to play where???