You know more than Pep Guardiola. Yes, I know, that’s a very bold statement on it’s own.

But not when you add this next bit…

You know more than Pep Guardiola, about the players you coach.

You know who can receive under pressure, who needs time to make a decision and who understands an instruction better than others. You also know who needs another explanation and who loses confidence after a mistake.

That knowledge should influence how you ask your team to play.

It does not give you Guardiola's understanding of elite football (just to make that clear). It gives you information about your own environment that no tactical video, coaching course or famous manager can provide for you.

This is where I think studying the top level can become misleading. We see an impressive solution and try to reproduce it, sometimes before establishing whether our players face the same problem or have what they need to make it work.

There is a great deal to learn from elite coaches (and btw some of their methods I wouldn’t condone in youth environments : | ) The value comes from understanding their decisions well enough to make better decisions of our own.

Football presents the same fundamental challenge at every level: create opportunities to score while preventing the opposition from doing the same.

However, the situations in which teams pursue those objectives vary considerably.

At the top level, a slightly different receiving position can change whether a midfielder is accessible. An opponent may recognise a passing route quickly enough to close it before the ball arrives. A defender moving towards one player can leave another available, with the attacking team prepared to exploit that adjustment.

That helps explain why professional teams work on detailed relationships between players. At this level, everything just moves 100x quicker. And watching a game on the TV doesn’t really do that distinction justice.

Moving a full-back into midfield, rotating a forward into a deeper position or changing who supports behind an attack can each address a specific problem.

Consider a full-back moving inside. This is a funny one because as soon as Pep started doing this, you could see teams trying to do the same at grassroots and youth levels. I’ve been on many touchlines in my career so far and hearing coaches yell “TUCK INSIDE”, “YOU’RE THE FULL BACK, YOU SHOULD BE CENTRAL” (10 year olds btw), when the full back was in a perfectly good position out wide to receive, blew my mind. In fact, it actually meant this player would have less touches of the ball during a game, because guess what? The team didn’t have the technical qualities to build up play through short passes. So the movement is relatively easy to copy yes, but making it useful involves so much more.

Here’s what you should think about other than just the movement:

Does that player create an accessible passing option? Does the winger still provide width? Who protects the space the full-back has left? What happens if the opponent follows them? Does this increase our chances of scoring goals?

The movement only works as intended when those relationships support it.

I think this is the most useful way to understand elite tactical detail. Coaches are trying to give players solutions to an opponent's organisation, their own team's limitations and the changing demands of the game.

Some solutions will be unnecessarily complicated or poorly judged. Elite status does not make every decision correct. But an unfamiliar structure is not automatically an attempt to make football look clever. We need to establish what it is supposed to achieve before deciding whether it is useful.

At his Manchester City unveiling in 2016, Guardiola said:

That is an important statement to carry into our own coaching. He also explained that he could not demand things players were unable to provide. [1]

A coach can have strong beliefs about football while adapting how those beliefs are expressed.

You might believe that controlling possession helps your team create chances. That still leaves decisions about where to retain the ball, when to progress and which risks are appropriate.

You might believe in winning possession high up the pitch. That still requires you to assess whether your players can close the relevant distances together and protect the space behind them.

{Oh just on a quick side note, if you want to start building your own beliefs, this FREE resource might help - Build your Coaching Beliefs}

Even within one squad, different individuals may contribute to the same objective in different ways.

This is why your knowledge of your players matters. A system that relies on a midfielder repeatedly receiving with an opponent behind them will place different demands on that player from a system that allows them to receive facing forward.

Recognising that difference gives you a starting point for development. You can create opportunities to improve the skill, adjust the support around the player or choose a different route while their understanding develops.

Knowing your players should help you challenge them appropriately. It should also prevent you from treating their current limitations as permanent.

‘Adapting an idea to your players does not mean lowering your ambition’.

You can have a demanding objective while changing the route towards it. Your responsibility is to understand what the players can do now, what they need to learn next and how your coaching will help them get there.

Imagine watching an elite team create an extra player in central build-up by moving a full-back inside.

The first question I would ask is what problem that movement solves. Perhaps the opposition have blocked the existing midfielder, leaving the centre-backs with no forward connection.

Then I would look at why the additional player can help. Are they positioned outside an opponent's cover? Can they receive facing forward? Does their movement force a defender to choose between two players?

Only then would I consider how the idea relates to my team.

If our problem is that the player on the ball cannot see a passing option, there may be several ways to address it. A midfielder could adjust their angle slightly. A forward could come short into that area to give the team a route forward. A defender could carry the ball to commit an opponent. A wider player might offer a route around the pressure. Someone might be on over the top.

Moving the full-back inside is one possible answer. It becomes a better choice when it suits the problem, the players involved and the time available to coach the supporting relationships.

The FA actually makes a similar point in its grassroots coaching guidance: coaches should experiment with ideas and adapt them to the group and environment in which they work. [2]

That process asks more of us than reproducing a diagram. We have to understand what makes the idea effective.

Formations do matter. They can help distribute players across the pitch, establish reference positions, correct spacing and influence which areas a team can access or protect.

Changing a formation can also address a real problem. Adding a player to midfield may improve access to central opponents or provide another passing option.

But the numbers leave much of the football unexplained.

Two teams can both play a 4-3-3 while asking their players to behave very differently. One may keep its winger wide while the full-back supports underneath. Another may bring the winger inside and send the full-back beyond.

For the player on the ball, those instructions create different pictures.

At grassroots level, I would therefore be careful about making the formation the main explanation for how the team plays. Saying “we have three midfielders” does not tell those midfielders how to help when a defender is under pressure and needs a passing option. You still need to coach their movement and positioning for their role to be effective.

They still need to recognise whether to move towards the ball, hold a position further ahead or create a different passing angle. The defender still needs to assess whether to pass, carry or retain possession.

FIFA's player-development framework examines these problems at team, unit and individual levels. It recognises that an apparent team problem may involve the relationships between a few players or an individual's ability to recognise and execute an action. [3]

If a player is struggling to receive under pressure, we need to investigate the situation. They might lack information before the pass, receive with unsuitable support or struggle to execute the first touch. Changing the formation could alter those conditions, but it does not automatically teach the missing skill.

A formation can help organise the team but the coaching must help players use that organisation.

Suppose our match analysis shows a recurring problem: a defender receives under pressure while the nearest teammates stand in positions the opponent can easily block.

The immediate priority could be to improve how players offer support.

A useful principle might be: when a teammate is under pressure, move to offer a passing angle they can use.

That is still a tactical idea. It describes a behaviour players can recognise and apply, with wiggle room to decide how best to do it.

I could begin with a directional small-sided game, using the player numbers and space appropriate to the group. The opponent must be able to press and win the ball, while the team in possession has a goal to attack.

Then I would watch what happens when pressure arrives. Can a teammate move into view? Are they far enough from the defender to offer a different route? Can the receiver use that support to continue the attack?

An intervention could focus on one moment: “Where could you move so your teammate can see your feet and the defender cannot block both options?”

The next step would be to let the players try again against opposition. I would judge the intervention by whether they recognise and solve the situation more effectively.

For a team ready for greater detail, we might then connect those decisions to particular units or positional responsibilities. The full-back moving inside could become part of that approach, if it helps us achieve the same objective.

The practice and instructions would grow from the problem we are trying to solve.

Grassroots football covers very different environments. An u9’s team beginning to understand space will need different coaching from a senior side capable of coordinating several tactical responsibilities.

Age can guide us, but the players' experience, understanding and development should determine the detail.

With younger players, I would give greater attention to individual decisions, technical exploration and simple relationships with teammates. They can learn to create space, offer support and recognise opportunities without reproducing a professional team's entire game model.

The FA's youth-development guidance stresses the importance of individual tactics alongside team understanding and cautions against becoming too team-orientated too soon. [4]

As players develop, a more detailed game model can help connect those decisions across the team. That detail becomes useful when the players are ready to understand it, apply it and adapt when the situation changes.

The challenge is to decide what they need next. A less experienced team does not need every relationship explained at once, while a more capable team should not be denied useful detail simply because we want the instructions to sound simple.

The most valuable thing you can take from an elite coach is a better understanding of how football problems can be solved. Because some coaches have some very innovative ideas and it’s interesting to watch them play out.

Study the movement, but also study what it makes possible. Look at the player receiving, the teammates supporting and the opponents whose decisions are being influenced.

Then consider your own team. What are they trying to achieve? What is preventing them? Which idea could help and what would the players need to learn to use it?

Before your next session, choose one idea you have borrowed from the top level and write down why it suits your players. If that explanation depends entirely on the fact that a famous manager uses it, maybe spend more time examining the problem.

You know your players. Use that knowledge to decide what to take, what to adapt and what to develop.

What is one idea you have borrowed from an elite coach and changed to make it work for your team? Hit reply and tell me what you changed.

It’s been good to chat and remember you can refer this Newsletter to other coaches and analyst (and you will win free prizes for doing so). Here’s your personal referral link: {{rp_refer_url}}

Talk soon,

Lucas