Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sweeper/Stopper vs Flat Back 4

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Sweeper/Stopper vs Flat Back 4

    A comment on one of the other threads reminded me of this "dilemma". I prefer a flat back 4 vs sweeper/stopper, but sometimes I can't come up with a lot of good reasons why. Here's an attempt at verbalizing those reasons and to get some comments. By the way, my men's team plays with a sweeper, as does my daughter's HS team. Both my kid's club teams play a flat back 4. I think most progressive teams have moved away from a sweeper.

    The reasons why a Flat Back 4 is better:
    - No special roles. All the defenders have to tactically play the same way wrt second and third defender roles
    - When not played correctly, more susceptible to the through ball, but always less susceptible to give and goes around the outside backs
    - More width across the back so can cover more space
    - Provides less space to attackers
    - Better for offside traps

    Other opinions?

    #2
    All depends on what you have for personnel as well. If your defenders are not in synch and are slow, attackers have a field day. Not a bad topic to discuss.

    Comment


      #3
      Various systems can also be cyclical or situational. Many flat back 4 teams morph into sweeper stopper or some variation when they have control of the ball, and resemble a flat 4 when the sweeper steps up to trap.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        All depends on what you have for personnel as well. If your defenders are not in synch and are slow, attackers have a field day. Not a bad topic to discuss.
        poster is correct. The available players dictate the system not vice versa.

        Sweeper stopper is much easier to play with less talented players.

        Comment


          #5
          Its also more difficult to learn and it takes more time to coach the flat back. Many coaches arent comfortable coaching it.

          Comment


            #6
            Not that our team plays flat back but it is a stronger method of play all around. Stopper and Sweeper systems are ok as a formation if they are good enough at pulling forward to the mid line when in the attacking 3rd. Often they hang back to far which gives the attack the advantage. without strong defensive players team are often having to resort to the sweep/stop system. It's usually a indication of the defenses knowledge, coachability, skills and speed.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              Not that our team plays flat back but it is a stronger method of play all around. Stopper and Sweeper systems are ok as a formation if they are good enough at pulling forward to the mid line when in the attacking 3rd. Often they hang back to far which gives the attack the advantage. without strong defensive players team are often having to resort to the sweep/stop system. It's usually a indication of the defenses knowledge, coachability, skills and speed.
              Youth "sweepers" are frequently a sign that crappy soccer is being coached. A crude way to kill "long-ball" attacks. Taking your best (most athletic?) defender and dropping him 5-10 yards behind the "defensive line" is just gross (but happens all the time, and not just in the US). The simplest (and equally ugly) tactic to counter it is to put a striker on the sweeper. In the crudest of implementations, this gets quite comical.

              I would argue that most casual fans could not tell the difference between a sweeper/stopper and a flat back when implemented by a high-level team. The "flat back" is ever really "flat" (unless holding the line) and a good sweeper is not "dropped". The major distinction between the two systems is one of communication (decision making) and division of labor, not some sort of static diamond vs. a line.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                poster is correct. The available players dictate the system not vice versa.

                Sweeper stopper is much easier to play with less talented players.
                If you don't have the players, you can't do it. Simple as that but yet you get the know it all posters who think a certain formation should always be played.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  poster is correct. The available players dictate the system not vice versa.

                  Sweeper stopper is much easier to play with less talented players.
                  Talented or trained? Players who play a flat back defense tend to be better trained. Their God given talented isn't much different then that of their opponents.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                    Talented or trained? Players who play a flat back defense tend to be better trained. Their God given talented isn't much different then that of their opponents.
                    I will disagree with that one. Go watch some of these teams play a flat back and notice how many through balls or plays played behind them and an attacker running onto the ball lead to numerous breakaways. If they were trained well, then that wouldn't happen.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      I will disagree with that one. Go watch some of these teams play a flat back and notice how many through balls or plays played behind them and an attacker running onto the ball lead to numerous breakaways. If they were trained well, then that wouldn't happen.
                      And so if they had a sweeper that wouldn't happen, right? Which is the value of playing the sweeper, except playing a sweeper system doesn't tend to develop players, whereas playing a flat back does do a better job in that regard. It also gets the keeper more involved.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        And so if they had a sweeper that wouldn't happen, right? Which is the value of playing the sweeper, except playing a sweeper system doesn't tend to develop players, whereas playing a flat back does do a better job in that regard. It also gets the keeper more involved.
                        Well if they were so well trained, would they keep making the exact same mistake(s) o consistently year after year....think about it. That's not well trained. That is a "coach" throwing out the system because it is "the way it should be played".

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                          Well if they were so well trained, would they keep making the exact same mistake(s) o consistently year after year....think about it. That's not well trained. That is a "coach" throwing out the system because it is "the way it should be played".
                          Then the players on this one team are not well trained, but the exception does not make the rule and coaches that just go to the sweeper/stopper system aren't any different than the coach "throwing out the system because it is 'the way it should be played' ". Coaches should teach the system that best prepares their players to play, the flat back, and then adjust to the simpler sweeper system if and when the game dictates. It should not be used as the primary defensive system for youth teams.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            Youth "sweepers" are frequently a sign that crappy soccer is being coached. A crude way to kill "long-ball" attacks. Taking your best (most athletic?) defender and dropping him 5-10 yards behind the "defensive line" is just gross (but happens all the time, and not just in the US). The simplest (and equally ugly) tactic to counter it is to put a striker on the sweeper. In the crudest of implementations, this gets quite comical.

                            I would argue that most casual fans could not tell the difference between a sweeper/stopper and a flat back when implemented by a high-level team. The "flat back" is ever really "flat" (unless holding the line) and a good sweeper is not "dropped". The major distinction between the two systems is one of communication (decision making) and division of labor, not some sort of static diamond vs. a line.
                            Plymouth North plays a very deep sweeper. When we played them, she never came across the midfield line.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Why not just take your keeper off their line and teach them how to play the sweeper position and then move your defenders up into the attack? Virtually the same thing.

                              Comment

                              Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                              Auto-Saved
                              x
                              Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                              x
                              Working...
                              X