The 8 most used formations in modern football and when to choose each one

A formation is not just a drawing on a whiteboard. It decides how many players are in each zone, who presses, who covers the flanks and where the goal will come from. These are the eight structures you'll see most in professional football today, explained simply.

1. 4-3-3

Four defenders, three midfielders and three forwards. It's the formation of positional play: the wingers give width, the holding midfielder organises and the two central midfielders arrive in the box. Teams like Pep Guardiola's Barcelona made it popular, and many possession-based teams use it today.

Needs: a pivot who can pass, fast wingers and full-backs with stamina. Weak spot: if the opponent beats the first press, there is space behind the central midfielders.

2. 4-2-3-1

Two holding midfielders protect the defence and, ahead of them, an attacking midfielder and two wingers support the striker. It's probably the most common formation of the last fifteen years because it's balanced: it defends with six players behind the ball and attacks with four.

Needs: a creative number 10 and a striker who can play with his back to goal. Weak spot: if the two midfielders don't step up to press, the team can be split in two.

3. 4-4-2

The classic. Two lines of four and two strikers. It's easy to understand, covers the width of the pitch well and lets you press with two forwards. Teams like Diego Simeone's Atlético de Madrid showed that, well drilled, it is still very competitive.

Needs: physically strong midfielders and a complementary pair of strikers. Weak spot: it's outnumbered in central midfield against a 4-3-3.

4. 3-5-2

Three centre-backs, two wing-backs who cover the whole flank, three midfielders and two strikers. It was the base of Antonio Conte's Juventus, which won several Italian league titles in a row from 2012. It's very solid in defence and still attacks with two forwards.

Needs: wing-backs with huge stamina and centre-backs comfortable on the ball. Weak spot: if the wing-backs don't track back, the flanks are exposed.

5. 3-4-3

Similar to the previous one, but with two wingers supporting the striker. Conte's Chelsea won the 2016/17 Premier League with this system. It's aggressive: lots of players in attack and the press can start very high.

Needs: two physical central midfielders and wingers who work defensively. Weak spot: only two players in the centre of midfield.

6. 4-1-4-1

A holding midfielder behind a line of four. It's very compact in defence and turns into a 4-3-3 in attack. It's common for teams facing stronger opponents that want to close the central lanes.

Needs: a very complete pivot and a striker who can hold the ball up alone. Weak spot: the striker is isolated if the midfielders don't join in.

7. 5-3-2 and 5-4-1

The most defensive formations. With five at the back it's very hard for the opponent to find space in the box. They're common for national teams facing favourites at World Cups and tournaments, and for teams protecting a result.

Needs: discipline, good aerial play and quick counter-attacks. Weak spot: when you need to come back, creating chances is hard.

8. 4-3-1-2 (diamond)

Four defenders, a diamond in midfield and two strikers. It packs the centre, ideal for teams with a great playmaker. It was very common in South American and Italian football in the late nineties and early two-thousands.

Needs: full-backs who push forward a lot, because nobody else gives width. Weak spot: the flanks are its big weakness.

Which one should you choose?

No formation is better than all the others. The right question is: which players do I have? If you have fast wingers, a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 gets the most out of them. If you have two good strikers, a 4-4-2 or 3-5-2. If your best players are defenders, a back five.

In GolDraft's Draft Mode you can choose from more than twenty formations before you start. A good tip: choose the formation thinking about the positions where good cards tend to appear, and remember that a player out of position loses rating.