Opposed build-up

The vast majority of teams used at least two formations to ensure variation in their play and alternatives for the problems posed by their opponents.

Employing a 3-1 formation to expand the pitch, make it "big" and play more direct in two ways:

The other approach was the 4-0 formation as teams attempted to lure the opponents out of their half and find the trigger to get behind their defensive line and score.

There were once again two main approaches taken by teams when dealing with the press as they looked to build up their play.

Direct approach

Independent of their formation, there were teams that opted for a more direct build-up, taking fewer risks when implementing their approach, although this required a high technical level.

Elaborate approach

Other teams, however, sought longer spells of ball possession, with great control in their system and their aims. It took a high level of technical ability to carry this out but Portugal, Morocco and Spain were some of the teams to adopt this approach.

The problem with such elaborate play for many teams was:

• identifying the trigger, ie. the moment to launch a direct attack; and
• not fully mastering the system, meaning they were often short of support, lost the ball and gave away a scoring opportunity. 

Using the Goalkeeper

A lot of teams in kick-in situations near their goal used the goalkeeper as a “fifth player”, placing him on the opposite flank in order to overcome the opposition’s high press with a numerical advantage.

When the rules allow, we see the goalkeeper acting as the "fifth player", which confirms the tendency to enhance both technique (passing, control, etc.) and tactics (how to pass and to whom) when training goalkeepers.    

Signals

The "tactics board" was also used in build-up play as a way of trying to surprise the opposition with a move that was pre-prepared, quick and precise – be it to score or to get through a high block. It requires a secret "signal" which can be changed from game to game.

Quadruple substitutions

A crucial point to make about the FIFA Futsal World Cup Lithuania 2021™ is that nearly all coaches went with quadruple substitutions, following a timeline of between three and four minutes to change them.

What consequences did this have on their play?

Positive → higher intensity in their play; all the players are fresh and switched on mentally in the game.

Negative → from a tactical and strategic perspective, the requirements of a match (result, number of fouls, rhythm of the game, etc.) may have demanded a certain type of player and attacking system, but the players whose turn it was to play were completely different from what was needed at that time. It is a very important topic for coaches to reflect on if they really want their decision-making to have an impact on a match.

Switching systems

Some teams had a more rigid system during the build-up. Brazil, for example, had a fixed 3-1 system, interchanging their pivots (Ferrão, Vinícius Rocha, Dieguinho). The talent of these players had a marked influence on the coach’s choice of attacking system. There were sides like Morocco who stuck with the same attacking system of 4-0 regardless of how high up the pitch they were attacking.

The rest of the teams switched continually between attacking systems, depending on where the ball was and where on the pitch they were attacking. 

High-risk build-up

One of the highest risk situations when building up involves placing just one player in zone 1 or 2 with a high press on him and the rest in zones 3 and 4. RFU regularly generated such situations when looking to open up deep-sitting defences after going behind.

This raises the question whether situations like these – the 1-3 build-up – could be an alternative for teams instead of the "flying goalkeeper", which mostly proved totally ineffective.