The Foundations of a 1-3-2-5 at U18s

For the past two seasons (2022/23 and 2023/24) myself and co-manager Mike have used a 1-3-2-5 formation with our U18s which has seen good development in our players’ adaptability. Whilst it’s often a formation or shape that is used more by positional coaches, I’m still a bit of a Stan for a box midfield where all 4 players can move freely whilst still maintaining a good balance.

Like everything our system is based on our individual player profiles and what we want to see from each position within the formation, but are flexible when it comes to what the structure looks like at any one time during the game. Whilst, for example, a 1-3-2-5 under Roberto De Zerbi during his time at Brighton was (in my opinion) too rigid at times we have been able to develop a fluid style with our girls that suits us and allows them to play within a structure but without definite instruction from the sidelines - “see the attack”.

For me it all begins with that box midfield; 2 CDMs and 2 CAMs. The profile of our players in those spots is such that they can all play at CDM or CAM so that when the game requires it any can move into the attacking third/opposition penalty area whilst the others play the role of “the pessimist” ready to prevent counters. In this way the box can also shift into a diamond to play between lines, or become more of a 1-3-4-3/1-3-box-3.

The profile of one of our starting CDMs is very much that of “the smasher” or “the pessimist” in that her mentality is more focused on defending the counter more than progressing in the attack. This gives us a bit more stability and can shift the box to a diamond as mentioned above but also gives our second CDM licence to roam knowing that we have an anchor who is single-minded in stopping the opposition should we lose it high up the pitch. As a result, the other CDM position has been filled by numerous players with different skillsets in order to challenge them in a new role, but also to provide an extra dynamic to how we attack - players capable of shooting from distance, players who carry the ball well and like to exploit half spaces, players who like to find line-breaking passes early: we have flexibility.

The foundation of the system is the back four - our keeper is active and strong so isn’t afraid to latch onto balls played beyond and “return to sender” with some interest in order to scupper any quick counters but also exploit if we have numbers in attacking areas. Unfortunately for us and for her, a shoulder injury kept her out of most of the 2023/24 season and so we had to rotate a number of the squad in goal throughout the season but whilst they didn’t possess our permanent keeper’s strength the assignment remained the same: react to anything played quick and long and send it back.

In front of the keeper is very much a fixed back three - fixed in as much as they’re completely fluid. Oxymoron I know! But they’re not two Wide Centre Backs with a central anchor, all three are tasked with being Ball Playing Centre Backs able to receive short if required but also to defend and cover each other with licence to move into midfield and beyond if they want. In some moments the right-sided CB has defended in the left half-space and allowed her unit to recover. Similarly one has also pushed to join the CDMs and defend the ball with extra numbers allowing the other two to narrow off or drift left or right depending on where the final attacker is. In other words, they are free to react to the game situation and play how they see fit, with full risk and reward being their choice. The recent Men’s Euros showed this in one of my favourite CBs Calafiori with his contribution to Italy’s 90+8 equaliser against Croatia. Full risk, but ultimate reward.

Again the profiles of our defensive players allows us to be able to play this way, with every player who has been in the back three also playing at CDM, R/LW and in an 8 role. It is always interesting to see how they solve the issues themselves; in training they become quite press-resistant, turning the press and carrying the ball out, but in matches at the weekend they ask the “what ifs” - but this player is quick so what if I’m out of position, they have an extra attacker so what if I need help, etc. It’s nice that we’ve developed an open environment where they know they can play with the ball and try things, but that they’re pragmatic enough to question and ask what is the “correct” thing to be doing in any one moment.

Often when we have new players join the team this is the reason we begin them playing in these back three roles as it gives them a real view of as many game moments as possible and develops them into well rounded players who can then contribute in other areas of the pitch in a way that is fluid, creative, exciting and FUN! But it also gives them responsibility early which is important, yes you can do all of this and we encourage you to do so but does the game you’re currently in encourage it? You have to make that choice and if you need help we’re here for you to ask. As a result we’ve never turned away a girl who wants to come and play for us, regardless of football age or ability. If they leave us as better players than they joined us, well then I’m a very happy coach.

The whole “defend with five, attack with five” idea of the 1-3-2-5 is well trod and I think highlights why it has become so popular, but I also feel that within the very phrase lies its failings. Firstly if we’re using it as writ, then we “defend with six” - our keeper is such a vital part of how we do it and shouldn’t be ignored. But secondly it’s also incorrect as outlined above - we “attack with eleven”. Counters triggered by our keeper, the back three resisting pressure and progressing, our CDMs playing the “what ifs” and counter pressing all contribute to a positive control of the ball in order to score. I was going to look into our 1-3-2-5 as a whole but I think focusing on the “defend with five (six)” lot is enough for a post in itself.