Unopposed build-up

As a general conclusion, almost all the teams based their defence on great intensity and defensive aggression in a high block or a mid-block/mid-press – that is to say, an "opposed build-up", with the consequent need to take decisions more quickly and with greater risk than with the "unopposed build-up".

Having said that, the analysis will focus, in basic terms, on the "unopposed build-up", and follow a similar structure to that used for the "opposed build-up":

• Different types of formation
• Different types of intention: direct or elaborate
• Maximum-risk build-up
• The specific moves that are most common between two or three players when facing defences that do not press

The vast majority of teams employed at least two formations.

The 3-1 formation was employed by many teams with the following objectives in their play

Brazil played with strong pivots employing a fluid 3-1 system, with the pivot shielding the ball and extraordinary mobility off the ball. Is it a risk? Not if you have the right players to do it.

We observed that many teams also opted to play an attacking 4-0 system, which is the most complex one to carry out and which, moreover, demands a high technical level. 

As was the case when the build-up was opposed – and despite the limited pressure on the player with the ball – there seemed to be two main intentions:

Direct approach

Elaborate approach

Maximum-risk build-up

One of the riskiest situations when building up is to place only one player in zone 2 and the rest in zone 4. Russia provided many examples of this in situations where they trailed in games and sought to open up defences that were sitting deep.

The following techniques and tactics were employed by teams when facing an opposing team that did not press the build-up.

• Diagonal
• Parallel
• Overload + step
• One-two 
• Cutting in front
• Lifting + pivot
• Clear for 1v1