Later on, the Swiss Bolt system was invented to enable a team to outnumber its opponents in both attack and defence. It required extremely fit players able to undertake both attacking and defending roles. A 3-3-4 system was used in attack but on defending the team retreated with one extra player, a central defender, dropping deep to bolt the door by covering any gaps in the defence.

In the 1950s, Hungary revolutionised football combining high standards in passing and control with players constantly interchanging positions. When not in possession, one of the midfielders was dropped back creating a four man defence within the normal 3-3-4 system. The forwards (especially the withdrawn striker) used areas behind markers to devastating effect. This game plan was successfully adopted by Brazil for the 1958 World Cup but using a 4-2-4 system (Fig 3). This system created numerical superiority in both attack and defence with one of the wingers withdrawn back into midfield to defend. The addition of an extra permanent defender was offset by the attacking play of the two full-backs.

The 1950-60s Italian Catenaccio system (Fig 4) was a highly defensive system based on a four man defence combined with a libero (sweeper). This player had a free role behind the defence to cover any forwards who escaped the close marking of the other defenders. The system can be read as 1-4-3-2 or 5-3-2 and had similarities with the Swiss Bolt system due to the addition of an extra covering defender with no marking duties. This system was much criticised as attacking play was seemingly forgotten.

The 4-3-3 system (Fig 5) used by England to win the 1966 World Cup may be regarded as being the successor of the 4-2-4. The importance of not losing and the influence of the Catenaccio led teams to use more defensive formations and to sacrifice wingers. The successful English team used a sweeper playing in front of the back four as well as a slightly withdrawn striker. High work rates were needed to win the ball and to support during attacking play.

This article has demonstrated how soccer systems have changed over the years. The positional roles of players have changed names and players were eventually positioned into different units, defence, midfield and attack. The introduction of new and different playing systems was often the difference between success and failure although gradual increases in player skill and fitness levels over the years have obviously contributed.

Coming soon, a look at examples of modern playing systems and their strengths and weaknesses.

To return to the playing systems section click here.